Legislature(2007 - 2008)BARNES 124
02/22/2008 08:30 AM House FISHERIES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Overview: Department of Fish & Game Commercial Fish Division | |
| HB134 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 134 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON FISHERIES
February 22, 2008
8:39 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Paul Seaton, Chair
Representative Kyle Johansen
Representative Craig Johnson
Representative Peggy Wilson
Representative Lindsey Holmes
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Gabrielle LeDoux
Representative Bryce Edgmon
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
OVERVIEW: ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF FISH & GAME COMMERCIAL FISH
DIVISION: SALMON MANAGEMENT, SALMON OVER ESCAPEMENT AND FOREGONE
HARVEST VALUATION
- HEARD
HOUSE BILL NO. 134
"An Act relating to conservation and protection of wild salmon
production in drainages affecting the Bristol Bay Fisheries
Reserve; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 134
SHORT TITLE: PROTECTION OF SALMON SPAWNING WATER
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) EDGMON
02/14/07 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/14/07 (H) FSH, RES
02/28/07 (H) FSH AT 8:30 AM BARNES 124
02/28/07 (H) Heard & Held
02/28/07 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
03/02/07 (H) FSH AT 8:30 AM BARNES 124
03/02/07 (H) Heard & Held
03/02/07 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
03/05/07 (H) FSH AT 8:30 AM BARNES 124
03/05/07 (H) Heard & Held
03/05/07 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
05/09/07 (H) FSH AT 8:30 AM BARNES 124
05/09/07 (H) Heard & Held
05/09/07 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
09/24/07 (H) FSH AT 4:30 PM Newhalen
09/24/07 (H) Heard & Held
09/24/07 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
09/25/07 (H) FSH AT 2:00 PM Naknek
09/25/07 (H) Heard & Held
09/25/07 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
09/26/07 (H) FSH AT 8:30 AM Dillingham
09/26/07 (H) Heard & Held
09/26/07 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
02/18/08 (H) FSH AT 8:30 AM BARNES 124
02/18/08 (H) Heard & Held
02/18/08 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
02/20/08 (H) FSH AT 8:30 AM BARNES 124
02/20/08 (H) Heard & Held
02/20/08 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
02/22/08 (H) FSH AT 8:30 AM BARNES 124
WITNESS REGISTER
PATTI NELSON, Deputy Director
Division of Commercial Fisheries
Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented an overview entitled "Division of
Commercial Fisheries, Salmon Management Overview," and responded
to questions.
GERON BRUCE, Assistant Director
Division of Commercial Fisheries
Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented an overview entitled "Salmon
escapements compared to goals and potential unrealized harvest
and exvessel value," and responded to questions.
VAL ANGASAN
Dillingham, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 134.
WASSILLIE ILUTSIK
Aleknagik, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 134.
STEVEN ANGASAN
Naknek Village Council
Naknek, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 134.
ACTION NARRATIVE
CHAIR PAUL SEATON called the House Special Committee on
Fisheries meeting to order at 8:39:26 AM. Representatives
Seaton, Wilson, Johnson, and Johansen were present at the call
to order. Representative Holmes arrived as the meeting was in
progress.
^OVERVIEW: DEPARTMENT OF FISH & GAME COMMERCIAL FISH DIVISION
CHAIR SEATON announced that the first order of business would be
an overview on salmon management, salmon over escapement, and
foregone harvest valuation by the Alaska Department of Fish &
Game Commercial Fish Division.
8:41:04 AM
PATTI NELSON, Deputy Director, Division of Commercial Fisheries,
Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G), turned the committee's
attention to a Powerpoint presentation entitled "Division of
Commercial Fisheries, Salmon Management Overview." She reported
that the emphasis of this presentation was on escapement-based
management. She explained that her presentation would include:
the importance of commercial salmon fisheries in Alaska, the
relevant policies of escapement goal management, the process of
escapement goal development, the role of Alaska Department of
Fish & Game (ADF&G) and the Board of Fisheries (BOF) in
commercial salmon management, and ADF&G recommendations to
improve the management.
8:43:00 AM
MS. NELSON discussed slide 4 which summarized the statewide
salmon catches and exvessel values for all Alaskan salmon
species from 1878-2007. She reported that the 10 year average
of salmon sold by Alaskan commercial fisherman was almost 173
million fish with an exvessel value of $284 million, while for
2007, the commercial harvest was more than 212 million fish with
an exvessel value of $374 million. She said that exvessel
values have been increasing since 2002. She directed attention
to slides 5-9, which showed the harvest and exvessel value for
each of the Alaska salmon species during the 1878-2007 time
period. On slide 5, Ms. Nelson noted, "Alaska commercial pink
salmon catches and value" shows the 10 year average for pink
salmon to be 112 million fish with an exvessel value of $50
million. She elaborated that the 2007 pink salmon commercial
harvest of 144 million fish was the third highest on record.
She pointed out that the harvest seems to fluctuate, with the
odd years being dominant. She reviewed slide 6, which shows the
"Alaska commercial sockeye catches and value." She reported
that sockeye salmon are the second most numerous commercial
catch, as well as the third most abundant salmon species in the
Pacific Ocean. The 10-year average for the Alaskan sockeye
salmon commercial catch has been 36 million fish with an
exvessel value of $157 million. She added that the 2007
exvessel value of $206 million was the highest since 1999.
8:46:11 AM
MS. NELSON noted that slide 7 reflected the commercial chum
salmon catch and value, adding that chums are the third most
numerous commercial catch species and the second most abundant
species. She stated that the 10-year average for chum salmon
catch has been 18 million, with an exvessel value of $33
million.
8:46:29 AM
MS. NELSON introduced slide 8, "Alaska commercial coho
salmon..." and declared coho salmon to be the fourth most
numerous commercial catch, as well as the fourth most abundant
species. She noted that the 10-year coho catch average is 4.5
million fish, with an average exvessel value of $20 million.
Slide 9 shows the graph for chinook salmon, which are the least
abundant species, and the least numerous commercial catch. The
average for the last 10 years has been 560,000 fish, with an
average exvessel value of $17 million. She relayed that the
magnitude of the commercial salmon fisheries allows ADF&G
biologists to collect extensive information and statistics for
use in managing the fisheries. Since statehood, ADF&G has
implemented an escapement goal based fisheries management system
to ensure adequate and appropriate escapement levels and
sustained yields. Ms. Nelson pointed out that slide 10,
"Providing for sustained yield," explains that the concept for
sustained yield is based in the Alaska State Constitution, and
the commissioner of ADF&G is vested with powers based in
statute, AS 16.05.020(2). She explained that the legislature
created the Alaska Board of Fisheries (BOF) to provide for an
open public process and to give direction to ADF&G. The BOF
develops fishery management plans, allocates resources among the
users, and promulgates regulations to provide for sustained
salmon yield.
8:48:26 AM
MS. NELSON called attention to slide 11, which detailed the
regulations for "Providing for sustained yield." She stated
that these regulations for sustained yield include salmon
fisheries management plans, the Policy for the Management of
Mixed Stock Salmon Fisheries, management of the Sustainable
Salmon Fisheries Policy, and management of the Policy for
Statewide Salmon Escapement Goals.
8:48:54 AM
MS. NELSON referred to slide 12, titled "Escapement Goals," and
explained that the two types of escapement goals are Biological
Escapement Goal (BEG) and Sustainable Escapement Goal (SEG).
She described the BEG as the level of escapement that provides
the greatest potential for a maximum sustained yield, and the
SEG as a level of escapement that is known to provide for a
sustained yield over a 5 to 10 year period. The SEG is
indicated by an index or an escapement estimate and is used in
situations where a BEG cannot be estimated.
8:49:45 AM
MS. NELSON reviewed slide 13, titled "Escapement Goal Review."
She said that it is ADF&G's duty to conserve and develop the
Alaska salmon fisheries on the sustained yield principle, so
ADF&G teams routinely review and develop escapement goals. She
explained that these review teams include staff from the
Division of Commercial Fisheries and the Division of Sport Fish,
and they determine the appropriate goal type, BEG or SEG, for
each management area salmon stock based on the quality and
quantity of available data. Each team determines the
appropriate method to evaluate the escapement goal, estimates
the escapement goal for each stock, and makes a recommendation
to the directors; then, ADF&G discusses the management area
reviews with the BOF.
8:51:23 AM
MS. NELSON turned to slide 14, "Methods", and discussed the
various BEG and SEG methods to attain either of these goals.
She outlined the BEG methods to include spawner-recruit
analysis, yield per recruit analysis, and habitat based models.
The SEG methods included percentile, risk analysis, spawning
habitat, smolts per spawner, and limnology models.
8:51:42 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked which method, the BEG or the SEG, is most
often used.
MS. NELSON responded that the majority are SEG.
CHAIR SEATON asked her to discuss the composition of the inter-
department teams.
MS. NELSON explained that when the Sustainable Salmon Fisheries
Policy was implemented in 2000, one of the directives was for
ADF&G to document and review all of the existing escapement
goals. After compiling the information, ADF&G spent three years
reviewing each of the goals, comparing the data, and analyzing
its quality to determine either a BEG or an SEG. These 10-
person teams are comprised of management biologists from the
Division of Sport Fish, the Division of Commercial Fisheries,
and the office of the Chief Fisheries Scientist. The teams meet
at least seven times in preparation for their analysis and
report. She mentioned that the report is sent to the regional
supervisors and then forwarded to the directors for evaluation
and approval.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN raised a question regarding a personal
use fishery near Ketchikan which is in conflict with a future
commercial fishery and asked if this is a type of issue the
teams would discuss.
MS. NELSON explained that the teams are formed to evaluate and
estimate escapement goals.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN opined that there is a lot of
misinformation about the decision-making process responding to
conflicts between commercial and personal use fisheries.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked for a designation of the areas
covered by the team decisions.
MS. NELSON explained that in most cases, the decisions for
sockeye and coho are made for individual streams or systems,
while district and area-wide management goals are made for pink
and chum salmon.
9:00:31 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked what the ratio is for BEG managed
to SEG managed areas.
MS. NELSON replied that it is difficult and costly to collect
all the necessary data for BEG, but that the SEG is still
scientifically based with good data. She allowed that the ratio
is less than 50:50.
9:02:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked if there is a comparison of BEG to
SEG when both are available for an area.
MS. NELSON stated that when an escapement goal is established it
is either biological or sustainable, based on the available
data. She explained that if there is enough data to estimate
for a BEG, that is the escapement goal they recommend and manage
for. She said the department is continually reviewing and
refining these goals.
9:05:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked if there is a list of area
management by type.
MS. NELSON said that she will get the committee that list.
CHAIR SEATON posed that when there is a stream with enough yield
per recruit data, would ADF&G use that information as opposed to
doing a spawning habitat or a smolts per spawner analysis.
MS. NELSON said that ADF&G tries to use all the available data.
She stated that if there is data to support a BEG, and data to
support an SEG, then the department will run analyses to see if
these corroborate each other. She noted that if the analyses
are very different, then ADF&G will review the reason, and
conduct more research.
9:06:53 AM
MS. NELSON turned the committee's attention back to slide 15,
"Salmon Escapement Enumeration," and described the enumeration
methods to monitor escapement goals. These methods include
aerial surveys, weirs, counting towers, sonar, and foot surveys.
9:08:00 AM
MS. NELSON referred to slide 16, "Harvest Management" and
explained that ADF&G manages and monitors the commercial
harvest. She reported that the management is done in the field,
not from the central office, and that local fishery managers are
given the authority to open and close fisheries to ensure the
adequate escapement of spawning stocks and the allocation of
fish to various user groups based on the BOF management plans.
9:08:37 AM
MS. NELSON referred to slide 17, "Alaska Board of Fisheries,"
and said that the main role of the BOF is to conserve and
develop the state fishery resources. She said that this
involves setting seasons, bag limits, and methods and means for
the subsistence, commercial, sport, guided sport, and personal
use fisheries. The BOF establishes policy, direction, and
allocation for the state's fishery resources and these become
the responsibility of ADF&G for management.
9:09:02 AM
MS. NELSON explained that the BOF develops the management plans
during open public meetings, after considering public testimony
and advice from the various scientists, advisors, fisherman, and
user interest groups. She allowed that the objective is to
improve the regulations to better meet the escapement and
allocation goals. She pointed to slide 18, "Recent Regulatory
Intent Language," which reflected modification to an existing
regulation.
9:12:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked for an explanation of the process
to get information to the commissioner, when a quick response is
necessary.
MS. NELSON explained that during the season, an area manager
works with assistants and researchers to maintain daily
estimates for escapement and harvest. If an area manager feels
the necessity to alter the existing plan, they will meet with
the regional supervisor and staff, who can then bring it to the
attention of the directors and the commissioner. The
commissioner has weekly meetings on specific fisheries
throughout the season and can have teleconference meetings with
the area managers and the regional staff, as often as necessary.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked for the location of the area and
regional managers.
9:15:33 AM
MS. NELSON explained that the area manager and staff for the
upper Cook Inlet sport and commercial fisheries are in Soldotna,
and they are in the field everyday during the season. She
relayed that the regional supervisor and the management
coordinator are in Anchorage, but they spend a lot of time in
the specific fisheries, including Bristol Bay, Soldotna, and
Prince William Sound. The commissioner is located in Juneau,
but is travelling a lot during the peak season. She explained
that the director of the Division of Commercial Fisheries is in
Anchorage, and she, the deputy director, is in Juneau. She
reported that all the management staff visit the various
fisheries during the peak season. She pointed out that an
emergency order is approved by the commissioner and the news is
released by the area manager.
9:18:25 AM
MS. NELSON said that ADF&G is always looking for ways to improve
management capabilities, as noted on slide 19:
"Recommendations." She explained that they look forward to
developing and validating methods to determine carrying capacity
of salmon stocks, especially stocks with high harvest rates.
They can then better determine the effects of over escapement.
She observed that they are working to improve the tools for
preseason and in-season forecasting of run strength to allow
timely decisions to avoid foregone harvests. She said the
continued health of the salmon fishing industry in Alaska is
somewhat dependent on external forces. She stated that ADF&G
continues to improve their research and management because
Alaska's economy, culture, and identity are shaped by salmon.
9:20:53 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON commented that the populations of
Southeast Alaska and the Cook Inlet areas are growing, and this
is going to put a greater pressure on the decisions affecting
sport fishing.
MS. NELSON responded that the BOF will make the allocative
decisions.
9:22:33 AM
GERON BRUCE, Assistant Director, Division of Commercial
Fisheries, Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G), said that his
presentation is a follow up to Ms. Nelson, and will allow for a
better understanding of the ADF&G process.
9:23:13 AM
MR. BRUCE explained that ADF&G is continually evaluating its
program to measure success and improvement. He said that the
development of performance goals, specifically escapement goals,
is a way for the legislature and the general public to measure
the success and benefits of the commercial fisheries. He
reported that there are many variables, some natural, some
economic, some information based, which restrict perfection in
the attainment of the escapement goals.
9:24:27 AM
MR. BRUCE turned the committee's attention to slide 2 of his
Powerpoint presentation, "Salmon escapements compared to
goals...Statewide". He mentioned that ADF&G cannot monitor all
of the salmon systems, so they have carefully chosen the 250-300
systems which ADF&G feel will serve as indices for the larger
production areas. He directed attention to the chart,
explaining that the data shows that during the years 2001-2007
ADF&G has met the escapement goals in all but 9-17 percent of
the measured systems. He pointed out that he would like to
focus on the "above upper goal" figures which reflect the
potential unrealized values.
9:26:30 AM
MR. BRUCE pointed to slide 3, "Salmon escapements compared to
goals... Region 1: Southeast," explaining that these graph
levels will vary from region to region because of the
differences with salmon species and management information in
each region. In Southeast Alaska, pink salmon are the
predominant species, and the escapement goals are generally
managed as a unit and not individually.
9:28:00 AM
MR. BRUCE identified the sockeye and pink salmon tables on slide
4, "Potential unrealized harvest and exvessel value Region 1:
Southeast," which reflect the number of fish and exvessel value
above the escapement goals. In a 2007 comparison of harvest
value to unrealized value, the sockeye harvest value was $10
million with an unrealized value of $421,000, while the pink
salmon harvest value was $30 million and the unrealized value
was $1.8 million.
9:30:32 AM
MR. BRUCE noted that slide 5, "Salmon escapements compared to
goals... Region 2: Central," reflects the three major areas,
Prince William Sound, Cook Inlet, and Bristol Bay. These areas
monitor 90-100 stocks, with 6-16 percent falling below the
minimum goals for escapement.
9:31:25 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN asked if there are areas that are
consistently below minimum goals.
MR. BRUCE replied that the department does identify those areas
and bring them to the attention of the managers for a
determination as to why this is happening. If necessary, ADF&G
will go to the BOF for regulatory action, as the Sustainable
Salmon Fisheries Policy specifically addresses failure to reach
minimum escapement goals.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN asked if there are any areas with
consistent problems.
MR. BRUCE allowed that the department will generally find a
solution and this can result in a harvest reduction. He
expressed his belief that there is not an area where the
escapement goal is not attained, though he allowed this can take
a while with the longer-living salmon species.
CHAIR SEATON directed attention to the "Success in Achieving
Salmon Escapement Goals in Monitored Systems" report for 2001-
2007, which is included in the members' packets.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN noted that slide 5 illustrates that
about 10 percent of the stocks are below the minimum goal for
escapement.
MR. BRUCE explained that there is natural variability on the
salmon returns. He allowed that this is not so much a problem
as a feature of the variability, and the management system needs
to be flexible and sensitive enough to identify and respond to
these. He offered his belief that the ADF&G system has had a
high level of success with this.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN agreed that the ADF&G management plan is
flexible, and he asked if Mr. Bruce saw any chronic problem.
MR. BRUCE said that this is not a chronic problem, but a feature
of salmon variability for which the management system adjusts.
He elaborated that this is responding to circumstances. He
noted that there can be systems that remain depressed for a
time, and these require action to reduce the harvest and
determine what is affecting the productivity. He mentioned some
examples from prior years.
9:36:53 AM
CHAIR SEATON commented that the trend reflects that the above
escapement range percentage is moving toward inclusion within
the escapement goal percentage.
9:37:49 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked if there is a correlation between
the below minimum escapement and the above goal escapement
percentages in each year.
MR. BRUCE offered his belief that the relationship of below and
above goal percentages is reflective of large versus small
salmon runs.
9:41:01 AM
MR. BRUCE directed attention to slide 6, "Potential unrealized
harvest and exvessel value Region 2: Central," which revealed
values for sockeye salmon in Copper River, Prince William Sound,
Cook Inlet, and Bristol Bay. He explained that neither Copper
River nor Prince William Sound reflected large exvessel value
loss, but that Bristol Bay has shown a larger exvessel value
loss in the last three years, as there were much larger salmon
runs during those years. He reported that the complexity of the
Cook Inlet system allowed a significant exvessel loss from 2004-
2006. He pointed out the decrease in exvessel value lost in
2007, and he offered his belief that this is the beginning of
the trend.
9:43:57 AM
MR. BRUCE referred to slide 7, "Potential unrealized harvest and
exvessel value (continued) Region 2: Central," and pointed out
that pink salmon in Prince William Sound only had one year,
2005, in which there was a significant above goal escapement,
although the percentage of this exvessel value loss to the catch
was small. He directed attention to the graph of Lower Cook
Inlet, and offered his belief that it was the difficulty with
access to remote areas as opposed to management constraint which
allowed for a higher exvessel value loss.
9:44:45 AM
MR. BRUCE called attention to slide 8, "Salmon escapements
compared to goals... Region 3: AYK," and explained that the
systems are now moving into ranges of acceptability. He
examined slide 9, "Potential unrealized harvest and exvessel
value Region 3: AYK," and opined that due to remoteness, high
operating cost, and recent low productivity, only the last few
years has reflected a decrease in exvessel value loss.
CHAIR SEATON asked if this was due to either market or
regulatory constraints.
MR. BRUCE opined that this was mainly due to market constraints,
and the high cost of operation.
9:48:18 AM
MR. BRUCE commented that the region in slide 10, "Salmon
escapements compared to goals... Region 4: WESTWARD,"
encompasses a very large area, including Kodiak, the north and
south side of the Alaska Peninsula, and the Aleutian Islands.
9:48:52 AM
MR. BRUCE reviewed slide 11, "Potential unrealized harvest and
exvessel value Region 4: WESTWARD," and commented that the
exvessel value loss in each of the areas is decreasing.
9:50:41 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN asked how to determine no-market value.
MR. BRUCE responded that this is a hypothetical calculation
based on multiplying the average weight for a non-harvested fish
times the average price paid for that salmon species in the
region. However, if there is no market, then there is only the
theoretical value based on creating a market.
CHAIR SEATON explained that theoretical value is calculated to
help the management determine if either regulatory constraint or
market constraint is creating the non use.
9:53:20 AM
MR. BRUCE pointed out that the final slide, "Alaska Commercial
Salmon Catches and Value 1878-2007 (all species combined)" shows
that the last 20 years of salmon catch and value have been the
best ever. He offered his belief that the people of Alaska
receive a good benefit from the management of the salmon
resource.
9:54:23 AM
CHAIR SEATON requested an analysis of the foregone value for
major streams. He noted that this analysis will help explain
whether this loss is due to a market or a regulatory decision.
All of this information will generate better economic decisions
for each region and help Alaska receive the maximum value of the
resource.
9:56:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked if there is anything in the ADF&G
formula to indicate that catching an increased number of fish
will bring down the price.
MR. BRUCE responded that there is not an attempt to adjust the
price per pound based on an increased harvest. He expressed his
belief that the exvessel value is such a small percentage of
both the Alaska salmon catch and the worldwide farmed salmon
market that he does not take this into consideration.
9:58:49 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked if there is any regional adjustment
for price.
MR. BRUCE said that he does take regional prices into account.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked what price value is used for the
statewide average.
MR. BRUCE explained that the department does a calculation for
the average price per pound of each species in each region.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON offered his belief that the number of
fish lost to escapement does not necessarily correlate to a
comparable lost amount of revenue. He said that he did not want
management decisions to be based on an economic model for
projected lost revenue.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN agreed that he would prefer not to take
into account economic projections without all the factors.
10:03:43 AM
CHAIR SEATON referred to the report in the members' packages
titled, "Success in Achieving Salmon Escapement Goals in
Monitored Systems-," which discusses each individual river
system and the ADF&G appraisal of the constraints on the
developments. He suggested that the committee members research
any of the salmon regions for which they are concerned. He
requested a follow up on the projected processing capacity
report. He opined that this will allow the committee to
identify any foregone harvests that are ongoing and need to be
addressed.
10:05:41 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON expressed concern with using lost
economic opportunity instead of science and sustainability as a
primary management factor.
MR. BRUCE responded that ADF&G does not use economic values as a
tool. The department makes this information available for
public input to the BOF, and the board may evaluate all of the
input to construct their management plans.
10:08:20 AM
CHAIR SEATON pointed out that although there is a constitutional
obligation for the maximum benefit of resources, it is not
limited to economic benefit, but also includes sport and other
beneficial uses. He allowed that all of these factors need to
be brought to the BOF when they establish the allocation
policies because the ADF&G cannot override the allocation
decisions.
HB 134-PROTECTION OF SALMON SPAWNING WATER
10:11:02 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 134, "An Act relating to conservation and
protection of wild salmon production in drainages affecting the
Bristol Bay Fisheries Reserve; and providing for an effective
date."
[The motion to adopt CSHB 134, Version 25-LS0381\M, Kane,
2/22/07, was left pending at the 2/28/07 meeting.]
[The motion to adopt CSHB 134, Version 25-LS0381\O, Kane,
1/22/08 was left pending at the February 18, 2008 meeting.]
10:11:22 AM
VAL ANGASAN said that he opposes Version O, as it attempts to
change land-use permits that date back to the Alaska Native
Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA). He asked that the committee not
adopt measures which would impede, restrict, or prohibit current
legal mining developments in Southwestern Alaska. He explained
that the land selections in Alaska are premised on the economic
value, including mineral deposits. He asked that the committee
consult with the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to assure
that the constituents concerns are addressed.
10:14:42 AM
WASSILLIE ILUTSIK said that he opposed HB 134 because it will
put restrictions on the village corporations, and on private
landowners, for any kind of economic development. He explained
that there is very high unemployment in the villages. He
related a story of his drinking the river water, with the water
tasting like gasoline, and realized how many sport fishing boats
are on the river.
10:18:23 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked Mr. Ilutsik if he would support the
bill if it banned all water pollutants, including outboard
motors.
MR. ILUTSIK said he would like to see all water pollutants,
including the outboard motors, eliminated.
10:19:31 AM
STEVEN ANGASAN, Naknek Village Council, said that Naknek is
against HB 134. This bill would lead to "division in an already
divided region." He asked if the legislature could pass
regional-specific legislation. He explained that the economy of
the area is in trouble, and HB 134 would ban economic
opportunities. He relayed that seven to eight mines are in the
development stages in the Bristol Bay region. He inquired if
passage of the bill would exempt the mines already in
development, or would the state pay compensation for the loss of
economic development. He asked if there were studies as to the
constitutionality of the laws.
10:24:01 AM
CHAIR SEATON closed public testimony.
[HB 134 was held over.]
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Special Committee on Fisheries meeting was adjourned at 10:24
a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|