Legislature(2007 - 2008)CAPITOL 124
01/17/2007 08:30 AM House FISHERIES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Overview: Department of Fish and Game – Division of Sport Fish | |
| Overview: Department of Fish and Game - Division of Commercial Fisheries | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON FISHERIES
January 17, 2007
8:32 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Paul Seaton, Chair
Representative Kyle Johansen
Representative Gabrielle LeDoux
Representative Peggy Wilson
Representative Bryce Edgmon
Representative Lindsey Holmes
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative John Harris
OTHER LEGISLATORS PRESENT
Representative Bill Thomas
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
OVERVIEW(S):
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
- DIVISION OF SPORT FISH
- DIVISION OF COMMERCIAL FISHERIES
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
ROB BENTZ, Deputy Director
Division of Sport Fish
Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented the Division of Sport Fish
overview.
TOM LAWSON, Director
Division of Administrative Services
Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Responded to questions regarding the Alaska
Department of Fish & Game overviews.
LISA EVANS, Assistant Director
Division of Sport Fish
Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Responded to question for the Alaska
Department of Fish & Game, Division of Sport Fish overview.
PATTI NELSON, Acting Director
Division of Commercial Fisheries
Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented the Division of Commercial
Fisheries overview.
ACTION NARRATIVE
CHAIR PAUL SEATON called the House Special Committee on
Fisheries meeting to order at 8:32:02 AM. Present at the call
to order were Representatives Wilson, Johansen, LeDoux, Holmes,
and Edgmon. Representative Harris was excused. Representative
Thomas was also in attendance.
^OVERVIEW: DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME - DIVISION OF SPORT FISH
8:34:59 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced that the only order of business would be
overviews by the Alaska Department of Fish & Game divisions.
Additionally, he outlined the committee meeting schedule for the
session; including specific agenda items for imminent meetings.
8:36:14 AM
MR. BENTZ, Deputy Director, Division of Sport Fish, Alaska
Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G), introduced the department
staff from the testifying divisions. Continuing, he provided a
synopsis for the presentation, highlighting the division's core
services, fiscal year 2008 (FY 08) budget requests, divisional
organizations, legislative targets and measures, identify the
fisheries managed, and the FY 06 accomplishments.
MR. BENTZ directed the committee's attention to the Division of
Sport Fish handout and began with the Alaska Department of Fish
& Game's mission statement, and read the Division of Sport Fish
mission statement: "Protect and improve the State's
recreational fisheries resources." This mission, he explained,
is accomplished via the eight core services provided by the
division. He stated that the first core service is stock
assessment, noting that this work is performed on both
anadromous and resident species important to the sport fisheries
of the state.
8:39:10 AM
CHAIR SEATON invited Representative Thomas to join the committee
at the table.
MR. BENTZ resumed his explanation with the second core service,
the management of the fisheries, which includes the development
and establishment of regulations in conjunction with the Board
of Fisheries. The third core service is hatchery production.
Mr. Bentz described the state operated hatcheries, which produce
king and silver salmon, rainbow and lake trout, Arctic char and
Arctic grayling. Responding to a question, he provided that
these hatcheries are located on the Fort Richardson and
Elmendorf Air Force Bases. Additionally, he said, the
department is in the design process of creating two new
hatcheries to be located in Fairbanks and Anchorage, as
replacement facilities for the existing facilities.
8:40:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX inquired whether the new hatchery, to be
located in Anchorage, would replace the two which now exist in
the area.
MR. BENTZ explained the need for the replacement and demolition
of the existing Anchorage hatcheries. It is expected, he said,
that the planned hatchery will produce twice as many fish as the
two existing hatcheries in a modern, more workable facility.
MR. BENTZ moved to the fourth core service - access,
development, and maintenance. He explained that the division
builds, buys, leases, and maintains physical access to sport
fisheries throughout the state. He followed with habitat
assessment as the fifth core service. The division continually
evaluates the habitat needs for the managed fish populations.
As the sixth core service, information and education, he
explained that the division operates regional outreach programs
to inform and educate the public about sport fishing
opportunities, regulation requirements, and life histories. The
final core services, he stated, are enforcement, and planning
and surveys. The division personnel assist in the enforcement
of the state regulations and monitor the preference of the
public anglers in regard to the sport fisheries.
8:43:10 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked for clarification of how the division staff
enforces fishing regulations.
MR. BENTZ responded that all of the field technicians and
permanent staff undergo a week long training course specific
for regulatory enforcement. He explained that the focus is on
non-confrontational, information gathering, which may lead to
involving the appropriate wildlife enforcement officials. In
further response, he clarified that although trained division
staff have the authority to write violation and citation
tickets, it is not a common practice.
The committee took an at-ease from 8:46:01 AM to 8:47:58 AM.
8:47:58 AM
MR. BENTZ continued, directing the committee's attention to a
pie chart illustrating the FY 08 projections for each of the
core services. He pointed out that over 50 percent of the
budget is devoted to fishery stock assessment and management,
and specified that these are the cornerstones of the division.
CHAIR SEATON requested further detail on stock assessment
techniques.
MR. BENTZ explained that the techniques are species and location
specific and underscored that there is no standard research
template.
CHAIR SEATON asked whether the majority of stock assessment work
is performed on fresh water species.
MR. BENTZ stock answered that assessment work is done on various
saltwater species save halibut which is a federally managed. He
clarified that the work is targeted on resident and anadromous
species.
8:50:15 AM
MR. BENTZ proceeded to the FY 08 budget request page. He
explained that the $3 million increase is on par with the FY 07
request, and stated that this represents general funds used to
cover the cost of the Public Employee Retirement System (PERS).
MR. BENTZ introduced the four funding sources, and stated that
the majority of the division's funding is derived from user
fees; making it unique to other state agencies. He reported
that the federal sport fish restoration program provides an
excise tax on boating fuels, as well as fishing equipment,
outboard motors, and other sport fishing needs. These federal
receipts provide 46 percent of the division's budget. The fish
and game fund provides an additional [29 percent]. These are
dedicated funds which include all sport fish license and tag
fees, as well as the sport fishing guide and business license
fees. Further, he stated that the fish and game funds are used
to offset the federal matching funds. The general funds,
provided by the state, represent 10 percent of the budget and
are utilized solely to cover personnel benefits such as PERS,
health insurance, and risk management issues. The final 15
percent of the budget is comprised of other funds received
through various programs including inter agency receipts via
reimbursable services agreements (RSAs), designated program
receipts, capital improvement projects (CIPs), and statutory
designated program receipts (SDPRs).
8:52:56 AM
CHAIR SEATON confirmed that a typical example of an RSA would be
the Division of Sport Fish performing an assessment for the
Department of Natural Resources.
8:54:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN directed attention to the FY 08 budget
funding source page and the line item identified as 1036 -
commercial fish loan fund. He asked how the $5.9 thousand
indicated would be used.
TOM LAWSON, Director, Division of Administrative Services,
Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G), responded that this
funding source came about due to a general fund shortfall
experienced in past years. The legislature authorized the
commercial fishing loan funds, managed by the Department of
Commerce, Community, & Economic Development (DCCED), Division of
Investments to provide these funds to the Alaska Department of
Fish & Game, at that time. This figure represents a remnant
from that disbursement. He will provide further details to the
committee chair.
8:56:25 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON commented that over the years these funds
have been made available to the general fund, due to the
successful fisherman's loan program.
CHAIR SEATON pointed out that this is a proposed budget for FY
08, and proposed funding sources for that budget. He commented
that the Commercial Fish Loan Fund may be a funding source which
is no longer needed.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON clarified for the committee's benefit that
the total amount of funding disbursed to the Alaska Department
of Fish & Game is not represented in the $5.9 thousand figure
indicated in the Division of Sport Fish FY 08 budget request.
CHAIR SEATON requested that the full amount of funds received by
the Alaska Department of Fish & Game, from the Division of
Investments, be disclosed to the committee. He also requested
that future presentation handouts be marked with page numbers
for everyone's convenience.
8:59:11 AM
MR. BENTZ directed attention to the next page in the packet,
which provided sport fishing statistics by anglers, licenses
sold, angler days, and angler expenditures, as reported in the
2005 statewide harvest survey completed by the U.S. Fish &
Wildlife Service.
8:59:55 AM
REPRESENTATIVE THOMAS asked whether there has been a fluctuation
in the number of licenses issued.
MR. BENTZ responded that the license numbers have been
consistent and increasing at an expected rate of 1-3 percent.
However, resident license sales have declined slightly.
CHAIR SEATON stated that the permanent identification card
(PID), as issued by Alaska Department of Fish & Game to
residents over the age of 65 will need to be reviewed. He
reported that that the issuance and monitoring of these cards,
and receipt of replacement cards, is being abused on the Kenai
Peninsula. This abuse translates to limits on salmon to be
harvested as well as other conflicts. He requested that the
Division of Sport Fish examine how the regions are responding to
these concerns and be prepared to report the results to the
committee. He underscored that these cards were created to
serve residents of the state and the department needs to
establish means to monitor and assure proper usage; perhaps in
conjunction with the Permanent Fund (PFD) records.
9:04:31 AM
MR. BENTZ introduced the six regions of the divisions
organization: Region I (Southeast), Region II (Southcentral),
and Region III (Interior), Research & Technical Services,
Research and Restoration, and the department Headquarters
located in Juneau. In the three regional offices and the 22
area offices, the Division employs 245 permanent and 216
seasonal employees. This allows for the division to maintain a
high quality of in-season service.
9:06:41 AM
MR. BENTZ explained that, in order to provide a means to measure
the division's ability to fulfill its mission, the legislature
approved an overall outcome for the division, as attained
through three targets and measures. The first target is to
provide 2.5 million angler days and sell 450,000 licenses. This
target has been exceeded during the past two years. Target 2 is
to show a positive trend in trip related expenditures as
measured by the National Survey of Hunting and Fishing. He
reported that a survey is due out in the next year, however,
past survey trends show that the division is on track for
meeting this goal. The third target is to increase to at least
75 percent the number of anglers that are satisfied with the
variety of recreational fisheries experiences available. The
information, which he is able to report, is based on 1997 data.
At that time the resident target was at the 65 percent level,
and the nonresident target was exceeded at just over 80 percent.
9:09:16 AM
MR. BENTZ, responding to a question, pointed out that the
surveys which provided the statistics to measure these goals are
not current. However, he reiterated that a survey is currently
being designed for use this year. He offered to make the
specifics of that survey available to the committee.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN asked how the 450,000 target for license
sales was arrived at, and whether there is a yearly percentage
increase on this number.
9:11:00 AM
MR. BENTZ replied that this is not a "rolling average." He
explained that the previous goal of 450,000 was reached, and
questioned whether this amount should be raised.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN commented that it would be good to have
a reference point for this figure.
LISA EVANS, Assistant Director, Division of Sport Fish, Alaska
Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G), explained that the number of
resident and non-resident anglers have remained the same, while
the population has increased. Therefore, the percentage of
resident anglers is lower than in past years. The focus of the
angler satisfaction survey is to determine the reason for this.
In addition, the [information and education core service] would
focus its efforts on encouraging resident anglers to fish in
overcrowded areas.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN clarified that the percentage of
resident anglers is decreasing.
MS. EVANS replied that this is correct.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX, in regard to increased expenditures,
questioned whether this might result in a decrease in resident
anglers.
MR. BENTZ replied that he is unable to speak to the specifics of
this issue, although the percentage of non-resident anglers is
higher than in previous years.
CHAIR SEATON surmised that the aforementioned survey would
provide these answers.
MR. BENTZ went on to discuss the types of fisheries managed by
the division. These include sport, personal, and educational
fisheries. In regard to educational fisheries, he stated that
in 2006, 13 existed statewide.
CHAIR SEATON inquired as to who holds the educational fisheries
permits.
MR. BENTZ replied these are given to tribal and community
organizations that are not in subsistence areas and therefore
are unable to "hand down" traditional harvest and preservation
methods.
9:16:44 AM
MR. BENTZ moved on to discuss fisheries diversity. The various
types of fisheries include: high-use road-accessible, remote,
freshwater, saltwater, resident fish species, shellfish, winter,
guided, and youth-only. In regard to guided fisheries, he
explained that these have increased in both freshwater and
saltwater. Youth-only fisheries, he said, were established for
youth under 16 years of age.
9:18:18 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX inquired as to where the youth only
fisheries are located.
MR. BENTZ replied that these are located in Anchorage and Homer.
Youth-only fisheries are "very popular," he said.
9:19:19 AM
MR. BENTZ then discussed the FY 06 accomplishments. The largest
accomplishment, he said, was the sale of $68 million in bonds,
to construct two new fish hatcheries. In addition, the
department challenged unnecessary expansion of the federal
subsistence program, along with licensing all sport fishing
guides and businesses. He explained that the department has
implemented a more detailed logbook data collection system.
CHAIR SEATON inquired as to whether this new system contains
penalties to prevent "padding" of the logbook.
MR. BENTZ replied that logbooks are required to be turned in on
a weekly basis, and effort has been made to report any
discrepancies. Class A misdemeanors may be involved.
9:21:32 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked if the information collected may be
used in regard to charter fishermen.
MR. BENTZ replied yes.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON requested addition details regarding the
bonds used to construct the new fisheries.
MR. BENTZ replied that the bonds were sold through Merrill
Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated (MLPF&S). He stated
that he does not know the financial details, and offered to get
this information.
CHAIR SEATON commented that this would be helpful. He clarified
that these were revenue bonds, adding that the increase in the
sport fisheries licenses is intended to "pay off" these bonds.
MR. BENTZ agreed. He went on to say that in FY 06, five access
projects were completed, while 23 new projects were initiated.
The department also initiated three major stock assessment
projects for sockeye salmon in the Cook Inlet. When these are
complete, he said, the department will be able to provide the
commercial and sport fish managers with additional information
regarding the aforementioned stocks. He stated that permits
were issued for special use areas and wildlife habitat research
and restoration was implemented.
CHAIR SEATON stated that the researchers would need to come
before the committee at a later date to discuss the
aforementioned assessment projects.
9:25:04 AM
MR. BENTZ then outlined the FY 08 key challenges: to construct
new hatcheries; maintain existing hatcheries until new
hatcheries are completed; increase satisfaction among resident
anglers; increase staff recruitment and retention; work with
federal agencies on sport halibut issues; maintain access to
hunting and fishing areas; assure resource development minimizes
effects on fish and wildlife habitat.
9:27:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked whether there have been pay
increases to encourage staff retention.
MR. LAWSON replied no.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON, in regard to sport fishing statistics,
inquired as to whether this takes into consideration sport
fishing lodges and commercial economic activity.
MR. BENTZ replied yes.
9:28:55 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES asked for more detail regarding sport
halibut issues.
MR. BENTZ explained that the department has provided the North
Pacific Council with information, including the number of
charter vessels, businesses, amount of fish harvested by charter
clients, average weight of fish, and ports of entry. He stated
that the department works with the council to analyze the
potential impacts of the restrictions currently being reviewed.
CHAIR SEATON asked for information regarding the department's
analysis of the International Pacific Halibut Commission's
(IPHC) ability to detail the catch per day allowance.
9:31:38 AM
MR. BENTZ replied that the bag limits are established by the
IPHC. These limits are set based on the biological parameters
of the halibut stock. He stated that the department does not
believe the IPHC has the authority to restrict one angler type
over another in order to achieve the aforementioned allocations.
CHAIR SEATON asked if a legal opinion to this affect is
available.
MR. BENTZ replied that he would get this information to the
committee.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON surmised that a new opinion may be
necessary.
The committee took an at-ease from 9:34:23 AM to 9:40:41 AM.
^OVERVIEW: DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME - DIVISION OF COMMERCIAL
FISHERIES
9:40:41 AM
PATTI NELSON, Acting Director, Division of Commercial Fisheries,
Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G), began her presentation
by reading from the Division of Commercial Fisheries mission
statement. Referring to a handout titled "Overview of the
Division of Commercial Fisheries," she explained the primary
responsibilities of the division, which include managing
commercial and personal use, and subsistence fisheries within
state waters. The commercial fisheries, she said, are
"incredibly diverse," ranging from small boat "near shore"
fisheries, to larger, off-shore fisheries. Moving on, she
pointed out a graph titled "Exvessel Value of Alaska's
Commercial Fisheries (Adjusted to Constant 1977 Dollars)," and
explained that this shows the exvessel value of Alaska's
commercial fisheries from 1977 to 2006. The term "exvessel
value" refers to the post-season adjusted value that is received
by the commercial permit holder. She pointed out that each bar
is divided into the various types of fisheries.
CHAIR SEATON inquired as to whether mariculture hatcheries are
included in the commercial fisheries managed by the department.
9:44:16 AM
MS. NELSON replied that they are included; however, she stated
that she is unsure whether the aforementioned graph reflects
this.
MS. NELSON, in response to a question from Representative
LeDoux, explained that "mariculture" refers to fish-farming in
saltwater. In the state of Alaska, she said, mariculture for
shellfish is allowed, although "fin-fish farming" is not
allowed.
CHAIR SEATON asked for further clarification regarding the use
of "aquaculture" and "mariculture."
MS. NELSON explained that "mariculture" focuses on shellfish and
plant species, while "aquaculture" focuses on salmon hatcheries.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON, in regard to the Marine Aquaculture Task
Force, offered his understanding that the division monitored the
meetings, but did not play an active roll. He inquired as to
whether this is correct.
MS. NELSON replied that while the division may have had
representation at the aforementioned meetings, it is not
directly involved in the decisions made by the task force, as
this is a federal group.
9:46:52 AM
MS. NELSON returned to the graph, pointing out that the exvessel
value of salmon fisheries has declined over recent years, while
groundfish values have remained constant. She explained that
the decline in exvessel value of salmon is a result of lower
prices and increased inflation. Exvessel value, she said, shows
the amount received by the fisherman for their catch. However,
in order to measure the total economic impact of commercial
fisheries, a broader perspective must be taken.
MS. NELSON moved on to the next slide, titled "Economic Impact
of Seafood Industry on Alaska's Economy in 2001 (Source:
Northern Economics, Inc. 2003). This shows the impact of the
Alaskan seafood industry on the state's economy. These impacts
include: Generating 36,900 full-time jobs, approximately 23,100
of which were held by Alaskans; generating $932 million in
direct payments to labor, with $370 million going to Alaska
residents; a total of $3 billion in sales generated within the
state; more taxes paid to state general fund than any other
industry, with the exception of oil and gas.
9:48:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX inquired as to the meaning of "full-time
equivalent" job.
CHAIR SEATON offered his understanding that this term refers to
individuals working half-time, explaining that two of these
positions would add up to one full-time position. He added that
this also refers to year-round employment.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON commented that this information would be
important during budget discussions.
CHAIR SEATON said "this is ... a standard measure for looking at
jobs in the private sector."
9:50:13 AM
MR. LAWSON agreed that this is correct.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX said "I ... think it's ... interesting
that ... two-thirds of the jobs were going to ... Alaskans, and
yet, it looks like less than one-half of the money was going to
Alaskans."
CHAIR SEATON asked for more information regarding this.
MS. NELSON offered to provide this information.
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES inquired as to whether information
regarding seasonal employment is available.
MS. NELSON replied that she does not have this information;
however, she would provide it to the committee.
CHAIR SEATON requested that the full study be distributed to the
committee.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX commented that it would be "interesting to
know" whether this has any connection to the privatization of
the industry.
9:52:16 AM
MS. NELSON went on to explain the core services provided by the
division. These are: stock assessment and applied research,
harvest management, laboratory services, aquaculture permitting,
data processing, and information services and public
participation. In regard to stock assessment and applied
research, she explained that this includes ongoing programs
designed for enumeration and understanding of salmon, herring,
groundfish, and shellfish stocks. She then explained the
various programs and surveys and gave a brief description of
pictures showing the various salmon enumeration and sampling
projects around the state.
MS. NELSON moved on to discuss harvest management. This
includes: assisting the Board of Fisheries in establishing
regulations and management plans, opening and closing fishing
areas and setting fishing time, collecting harvest and
biological data, and writing annual management reports. She
stated that the area managers work 24 hours per day when the
fisheries are underway, and opined that this is one of the
department's strengths. Moving on to the next slide, she
discussed laboratory services. The laboratories available are:
pathology, coded-wire tag and otolith aging, and genetic stock
identification.
9:57:39 AM
MS. NELSON explained that the fish pathology laboratory monitors
and controls finfish and shellfish diseases statewide,
conducting over 14,000 diagnostic tests annually. The coded-
wire tag and otolith aging laboratory tracks salmon populations
using thermal marks induced on fish otoliths, and uses a
detailed database to quantify the survival of fish groups, and
is part of a standardized salmon measurement program. Other
states involved in this program are: Oregon, Washington, Idaho,
and British Colombia. The genetic stock identification
laboratory, she said, uses genetic markers to identify
population units, and is among the worlds top fishery genetics
labs.
CHAIR SEATON pointed out a recent disaster in Cook Inlet, and
inquired as to the divisions' position on over-escapement, and
whether the division would utilize its emergency order authority
to prevent this.
MS. NELSON, in regard to the aforementioned Cook Inlet disaster,
stated that the department met with the Board of Fisheries to
discuss the current management plans, which at times are
conflicting. It is difficult, she said, for managers to meet
the management objectives, adding that the foremost objective is
to meet escapement goals. Over the past two years, she said,
managers have been "in quite a quandary," and meetings have been
held to decide the next step, based on the regulations. The
Board of Fisheries formed a three-member subcommittee, which
tasked the department with creating a list of areas which cause
difficulties. This list was then returned to the subcommittee,
which will then request information from the public in order to
initiate proposals prior to the next meeting. She stated that
achieving escapement goals is the divisions "primary
responsibility." In regard to the Commissioner's ability to "go
outside the management plan," she said that this authority was
used during the previous season.
10:04:51 AM
CHAIR SEATON expressed concern with the department's ability to
accomplish its primary objective. He stated that in the past,
the department has considered meeting minimum escapement goals
to be successful. However, he said, while last year this amount
was 80 percent, less than half of the runs within this range
were maintained. He opined that simply closing fisheries and
allowing the systems go beyond the escapement range is not
fulfilling the goal.
MS. NELSON stated that a discussion regarding the measurement of
escapement goals in various situations would be welcome.
10:08:27 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN, in regard to area biologists, commented
that this is a hard position to fill, due to an inability to
replace outgoing staff with individuals of equal knowledge. He
inquired as to whether there is a proactive management plan for
recruitment within the department, in order to allow the
aforementioned individuals to retire.
MS. NELSON replied that this is a major concern within the
department. Compensation for employees is not competitive when
compared to with private sector and federal jobs. The
department has created mentoring programs and job training, in
order to allow area managers to give specific goals regarding
information that should be transferred before retirement.
Additionally, she said, the division has received an increment
from its Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission (CFEC), to create
a career development program. The focus of this program is to
develop mentoring programs for youth and working relationships
with Universities, in order to increase interest.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked if a survey to gather information on
more competitive employers would help with employee retention.
MS. NELSON deferred to Mr. Lawson.
10:14:08 AM
MR. LAWSON explained that over the past year, the state has been
utilizing "market based pay guidelines." However, these
guidelines were based on 2005 data, which did not produce the
desired results. He surmised that the 2006 data will show the
divisions inability to compete with private sector and federal
jobs. He opined that this is a "band-aid" over the larger issue
of the states salary schedule.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked what an entry level biologist
working for the state would make, in comparison to the same
position working for the federal government. In addition, she
inquired about a biologist after ten years of employment.
MR. LAWSON replied that the details are not available at this
time; however, he surmised that an entry level biologist is a
Range 15, which is around $30,000-$40,000 per year. The
division does exit surveys of those individuals leaving to work
in federal jobs. Generally, these individuals are able to make
20-40 percent more with a comparable level of responsibility.
10:17:17 AM
CHAIR SEATON offered his understanding that the data from 2005
did not show a difference.
MR. LAWSON replied that the division prefers to find individuals
with experience within the state, therefore, not all of the
rules were applied. The 2006 data will, he said, hopefully lead
to a salary increase.
CHAIR SEATON stated that this is "very important," and requested
additional information explaining the vacancies and any problems
with filling them. He opined that if only one individual is
knowledgeable, this is "not a good situation for the state."
10:20:23 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN asked if the biologist salary for
different divisions is comparable. He opined that the workload
is different for the various departments.
MR. LAWSON replied that he does not have this information.
Generally, he said, a Fisheries Biologist IV must meet certain
specifications, regardless of the division, and therefore should
have a comparable workload.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN commented that this might come up in
future budget discussions.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked how the salaries are decided upon.
MR. LAWSON replied that when the union contracts expire, the
state works with the unions to decide on the terms for the new
contracts.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked if the Department of Administration
does this.
MR. LAWSON replied that this is correct.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON related her experience with a different
department, in which the employees were unable to receive a
raise unless this was extended to all employees in the same
class. The survey, she said, is "very important."
10:25:55 AM
MR. LAWSON stated that the job classes are grouped as
"families," and the department is attempting to find data that
will support the necessary changes. The fundamental issue, he
said, is that the salary schedule is inadequate.
CHAIR SEATON requested a listing of ADF&G employees who are in
the "retire/rehire" program, along with an explanation of why
the position was unable to be filled using the usual hiring
process.
MS. NELSON continued with her presentation by discussing
Aquaculture Permitting. The division provides technical
assistance and permits 30 private non-profit salmon hatcheries,
one aquatic shellfish hatchery, and several shellfish farms.
CHAIR SEATON announced that there would be an additional
overview on salmon hatcheries and shellfish hatcheries and
requested that ADF&G be present at those overviews.
10:29:20 AM
MS. NELSON went on to discuss data processing. There are eight
database systems utilized and maintained by the division. These
are: fish tickets systems, e-landing electronic catch reporting
system, internet accessible in season catch and escapement
databases, geographical information systems databases, internet
accessible news release database, and seafood processor/buyer
intent to operate system.
MS. NELSON moved on to discuss the final core service,
information services and public information. This includes:
design and maintenance of the division web site, publishing
brochures and other informational materials on division
programs, producing custom reports from fish ticket and
Commercial Operators Annual Report (COAR) databases,
administering divisional confidentiality policies, and
developing and administering divisional publication policies and
procedures.
CHAIR SEATON asked if there have been any problems with
reporting and enforcement related to direct market vessels.
MS. NELSON replied that to her knowledge, there have not been.
She offered to look into this.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN asked if there is a public information
officer (PIO) working in the department.
MS. NELSON replied that Geron Bruce, assistant director of the
ADF&G performs the aforementioned tasks. She then listed the
organization of the division, as follows: Southeast Fisheries
Management Region - Douglas, Central Fisheries Management Region
- Anchorage, Arctic-Yukon-Kuskokwim Fisheries Management Region
- Anchorage, Westward Fisheries Management Region - Kodiak,
Divisional Headquarters - Juneau. There are numerous offices
within each region.
10:34:50 AM
CHAIR SEATON, in regard to the Togiak Herring Fishery, commented
that the value of the fishery has greatly decreased, with a
catch rate which is being determined by the processors, rather
than ADF&G. He commented that in the past, a large amount of
resources were put into the aforementioned fishery. He asked if
the Commercial Fisheries Division has reassessed where the
resources are being allocated, in order to be more consistent
with the requirements of the fishery.
MS. NELSON replied that the division is currently working to
determine ways to reach goals using less funding. The herring
fisheries, she said, are being taken into consideration.
Returning to her presentation, she explained that during FY 07,
the division employed 306 permanent staff and 499 seasonal
staff, which were located in 20 permanent offices, 84 seasonal
office or field camps, and four large research vessels.
10:37:10 AM
MS. NELSON moved on to discuss a graph titled "General Fund
Appropriations for the Division of Commercial Fisheries - Fiscal
Years 1977-2007." She explained that the red line on the graph
shows actual dollars, while the yellow line shows these dollars
adjusted to 2004 dollars. She pointed out an increase in the
mid-1990s, following which is a steady decline.
CHAIR SEATON inquired as to whether the decrease in 2001-2002
was related to the "Habitat Division."
MS. NELSON replied that this was a separate division. She then
moved on to a graph titled "Year to Year Change in
Appropriations to Division of Commercial Fisheries - Fiscal
Years 1977 to 2007." She pointed out the sharp variations, and
stated that it is "very difficult to run ongoing programs in the
face of this type of variability."
10:40:45 AM
MS. NELSON, referring to a graph titled "Percentage of Total
Expenditures for Core Services," she pointed out that 57 percent
of the total expenditures utilized were for stock assessment and
applied research. 38 percent was for harvest management, 3
percent was for information services, 2 percent for aquaculture
permitting. She commented that the amount of expenditures used
for management and research is similar to the Division of Sport
Fish. Pointing out that several core services are not listed,
she said that these are directly involved with other core
services, and therefore are included.
MS. NELSON moved on to the Missions and Measures of the
division. The four targets are: exvessel value of commercial
harvests and mariculture production above $1 billion;
reproductive goals achieved for more than 80 percent of
monitored stocks; develop genetic baselines for Alaskan Chinook
chum, and sockeye stocks that will include 100 stocks in each
baseline; all aquatic farms operating with current permits.
Referring to a graph titled "Exvessel value of commercial
harvests and mariculture production about $1 billion annually,"
she pointed that that for 2001 - 2005, this target was achieved.
The next graph, titled "Reproductive goals achieved for more
than 80 percent of monitored stocks," shows the achievement of
this goal from 2001-2005. She noted that this includes all
species monitored.
CHAIR SEATON reiterated his earlier request for additional
information.
10:44:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX, in regard to the exvessel value measure,
asked how much of the total amount went to Alaskan residents.
MS. NELSON replied that she does not currently have this
information; however, she will provide it.
CHAIR SEATON clarified that the question was referring to how
much of the aggregate amount went to out-of-state permit holders
versus in-state.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX agreed that this is correct.
MS. NELSON moved on to discuss the third measure "Develop
generic baselines for Alaskan Chinook, chum, and sockeye stocks
that will include 100 stocks in each baseline."
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked for an explanation as to why 100
stocks are included in each baseline.
MS. NELSON replied that this "does seem like an arbitrary
number." While she was not involved in the development of this
particular target, she was involved in developing the baseline
collections. She explained that, in order to do stock
separation, every fish involved must be included in the
baseline. Due to budget constraints, the division focused on
the primary 100 stocks statewide, using regional input. The
project was started in 2002, and has received "very little
dedicated funding." She stated that the progress has been a
result of "opportunistic sampling and piggy-backing on other
projects, and just doing what we can, so we can get this
baseline up and running." Pointing out the availability of
genetic techniques to assist in the stock assessment, she
commented that a proportion would be "more informative" than a
number.
10:48:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN, in regard to the 100 stocks, stressed
the importance of having a comparison number in order to have a
better understanding.
MS. NELSON agreed that this information should be evaluated
differently. In response to questions from Chair Seaton, she
explained that the genetic results are cumulative, while the
scale samples need to be collected on a yearly basis. She
explained that scales represent "stages of life-history," while
genetic samples show an evolutionary time scale.
CHAIR SEATON, for the benefit of the committee, explained that
"scale analysis" is a growth ring, similar to that of trees.
This must be done yearly, he said, due to environmental changes.
MS. NELSON, in response to further comments from Chair Seaton,
stated that several methods are used by the department during
stock separation studies. These include scale pattern analysis,
age marker analysis, coded wire tags, parasite analysis, egg
size, and genetics. In addition, single-nucleotide
polymorphisms (SNPs) will be utilized.
CHAIR SEATON inquired as to the timeframe of the analysis.
10:55:38 AM
MS. NELSON replied that it is possible to perform the
aforementioned technique "in-season." However, the department
does not intend to utilize this technique for in-season analysis
in the near future. Instead, it will be used to determine long-
term trends in order to assist the Board of Fisheries during its
decision making process. In addition, she said, this will help
to improve the forecasts, productivity, and understanding of
stocks.
MS. NELSON then discussed a graph titled "All aquatic farms
operating with current permits." She stated that in 2003, less
than [50 percent] of the aquatic farms in the state were
operating with current permits. This was a result of staffing
changes and backlog. She pointed out that in 2005, over 80
percent are operating with current permits, and surmised that
the 2006 data would show over 90 percent.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX inquired as to the status of those farms
without current permits.
MS. NELSON offered her understanding that the permits were
submitted; however, the permits go through the ADF&G and the
[Department of Natural Resources (DNR)], which results in a
backlog. The farms, she said, were operating with the
understanding that the permits were in place, although they were
not.
10:58:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES inquired as to the steps involved in
permitting an aquatic farm.
MS. NELSON replied that she does not currently have this
information; however, she would get this to the committee. It
is, she said, a multi-agency process that the department would
like to "streamline."
MS. NELSON, in response to a question from Representative
Wilson, explained that during the most recent permit application
period, a large number of permits were applied for, the majority
of which were from a non-resident. While she is unsure of the
aforementioned individuals intentions, she said, many steps are
involved in applying for a permit. She offered her
understanding that none of the aforementioned permits have been
approved.
11:01:44 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked if the Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
oversees site leases.
MS. NELSON replied yes.
CHAIR SEATON pointed out that the aquatic farm application
process is currently open, and a number of sites are available.
He reiterated that additional information is needed, and
commented that several issues have been identified.
MS. NELSON brought members attention to the final page of the
handout, titled "Major Issues." She offered to meet with
members privately to answer any questions that they might have,
regarding the issues listed. In addition, she said, the ADF&G
governor's transition report is now available.
CHAIR SEATON requested that copies of the report be given to the
members. He stated that he is a member of the [Pacific
Fisheries Legislative Task Force] which will meet on January
th
26, 2007. He suggested that questions or concerns be submitted
to his office, prior to this date.
11:06:02 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Special Committee on Fisheries meeting was adjourned at 11:06:11
AM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|