Legislature(2023 - 2024)GRUENBERG 120
02/06/2024 10:00 AM House FISHERIES
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB195 | |
| Alaska's Hatcheries Updates | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| *+ | HB 295 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 195 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON FISHERIES
February 6, 2024
10:05 a.m.
DRAFT
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Sarah Vance, Chair
Representative Kevin McCabe
Representative Ben Carpenter
Representative Craig Johnson
Representative Louise Stutes
Representative Rebecca Himschoot
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative CJ McCormick
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 195
"An Act relating to the powers of the Alaska Commercial
Fisheries Entry Commission; relating to administrative areas for
regulation of certain commercial set net entry permits;
establishing a buy-back program for certain set net entry
permits; providing for the termination of state set net tract
leases under the buy-back program; closing certain water to
commercial fishing; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
PRESENTATION (S): ALASKA'S HATCHERIES UPDATE
HOUSE BILL NO. 295
"An Act relating to salmon hatchery permits; and authorizing the
sale of salmon to permitted persons for stocking lakes."
- SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 195
SHORT TITLE: COOK INLET: NEW ADMIN AREA;PERMIT BUYBACK
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) RUFFRIDGE
05/08/23 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
05/08/23 (H) FSH, RES
02/06/24 (H) FSH AT 10:00 AM GRUENBERG 120
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE JUSTIN RUFFRIDGE
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: As prime sponsor, introduced HB 195.
SABINA BRAUN, Staff
Representative Justin Ruffridge
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: On behalf of the prime sponsor,
Representative Ruffridge, presented the sectional analysis for
HB 195.
GLENN HAIGHT, Commissioner
Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission (CFEC)
Alaska Department of Fish & Game
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided background on HB 195.
KEN COLEMAN, Member
Eastside Consolidation Association
Kenai, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Gave a PowerPoint presentation regarding HB
195.
LORNA WILSON, Assistant Private Non-Profit (PNP) Coordinator
Division of Commercial Fisheries
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: CO-offered the Alaska's Hatcheries Update
presentation.
BILL TEMPLIN, PhD, Chief of Research for Anadromous Fisheries
Division of Commercial Fisheries
Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Co-offered the Alaska Hatcheries Update
presentation.
KATIE HOWARD, PhD, Lead Scientist
Salmon Ocean Ecology Program
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Co-offered the Alaska Hatcheries Update
presentation.
ACTION NARRATIVE
10:05:17 AM
CHAIR SARAH VANCE called the House Special Committee on
Fisheries meeting to order at 10:05 a.m. Representatives
McCabe, Carpenter, Johnson, Stutes, and Vance were present at
the call to order. Representative Himschoot arrived as the
meeting was in progress.
HB 195-COOK INLET: NEW ADMIN AREA;PERMIT BUYBACK
10:06:32 AM
CHAIR VANCE announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 195, "An Act relating to the powers of the Alaska
Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission; relating to
administrative areas for regulation of certain commercial set
net entry permits; establishing a buy-back program for certain
set net entry permits; providing for the termination of state
set net tract leases under the buy-back program; closing certain
water to commercial fishing; and providing for an effective
date."
10:07:02 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JUSTIN RUFFRIDGE, Alaska State Legislature, as
prime sponsor, introduced HB 195. He explained that fishing,
commercial fishing, and subsistence fishing are a part of an
Alaskan way of life. In his area there is a significant issue
that is starting to be mirrored in other areas of the state.
Decisions are being made to prioritize certain types of fish,
species of fish, or type of fishery. This has been seen in the
Kenai River and other tributaries on the Kenai Peninsula where
the large king salmon run is prioritized, and the set net
fishery has taken a hit. For example, last year the sockeye run
was completely closed to the set netters. There is certainly a
management decision involved, but another component is that
there are a lot of permits that have been issued over the course
of the years, so there are now hundreds of permits. This brings
about the question of how to reduce the number of permits and
nets in the water, and how permit holders can be encouraged to
hand permits back. Waters would then be closed, and those
permits would not be issued again. This would potentially
increase the fish in the river and reduce the bycatch. Versions
of this bill have been seen in the legislature before, but
changes have been made. Previous versions included obligations
for state general funds for the buyback, but this bill is not
intended to cost the state any money.
10:10:25 AM
SABINA BRAUN, Staff, Representative Justin Ruffridge, Alaska
State Legislature, on behalf of Representative Ruffridge, prime
sponsor, presented the sectional analysis for HB 195 [included
in the committee packet], which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
Section 1 Amends the uncodified law of the State of
Alaska by adding a new section which establishes that
this legislation may be known as the East Side of Cook
Inlet Set Net Fleet Reduction Act.
Section 2 Amends the uncodified law of the State of
Alaska by adding new Legislative findings and intent
relating to the bill.
Section 3 Amends AS 16.43.200 by adding 2 new
subsections:
(c) Establishes an area of the Upper Subdistrict of
the Cook Inlet Central District as a distinct
administrative area separate from the Cook Inlet
Central District on December 31, 2023. This area is
made up of the statistical areas identified on January
1, 2023, as 244-21, 244- 22, 244-31, 244-32, 244-41
and 244-42.
(d) Provides that an individual who has a set net
permit for the Cook Inlet Central District on December
31, 2023, is not entitled to set net in the
administrative area created under this section as of
January 1, 2023, unless the permit has been reassigned
to that new administrative area.
Section 4 Amends the uncodified law of the State of
Alaska by adding a new section which provides how the
commission will determine whether an individual who
holds a set net entry permit in the Cook Inlet Central
District on January 1, 2024 is reassigned an entry
permit for the administrative area established under
AS 16.43.200(c) (added by sec. 3 of the bill) or the
portion of the Cook Inlet Central District that was
not assigned into the administrative area established
under AS 16.43.200(c).
Section 5 Amends the uncodified law of the State of
Alaska by adding a new section which defines the
appeals process in the new administrative area. This
section provides that a provisional license will be
issued pending resolution of an appeal, and the
provisional permit holder may cast a provisional
ballot in the election established under section 6.
Section 6 Amends the uncodified law of the State of
Alaska by adding a new section which requires on April
1, 2024, an election be conducted by the commission
among persons holding permits in the new
administrative area, to affirm support or opposition
to a buy-back program. Requires the commission provide
public notice of the election, hold public meetings
concerning the election, and clarify the details of
the buy-back program to those participating in the
election.
Section 7 Amends the uncodified law of the State of
Alaska by adding a new section which establishes the
set net entry permit buy-back program for certain
permits fished in the administrative area established
under AS 16.43.200(c) (added by sec. 3 of the bill).
This section will only take effect if approved in an
election by the set net entry permit holders in the
administrative area established under AS 16.43.200(c).
If it is approved, the buyback program will become law
30 days following notification of the Lt. Governor
(see secs. 9 and 11). Sets qualifications for
participation in the program, provides the buy-back
price for permits, requires that the purchased permits
be cancelled and not re-issued, provides that certain
waters that were fished with permits purchased under
the program will be closed to future commercial salmon
fishing, and specifies other details of the buy-back
program.
Section 8 Amends the uncodified law of the State of
Alaska by adding a new section which requires the
commission to provide a written report to the
Legislature on the status of the program not later
than January 15, 2030.
Section 9 Amends the uncodified law of the State of
Alaska by adding a new section which requires the
chair of the commission to notify the Lieutenant
Governor and the Revisor of Statutes of the outcome of
the election held under section 6.
Section 10 Repeals sections 1, 2, 7 and 8 on June 30,
2030.
Section 11 Amends the uncodified law of the State of
Alaska by adding a new section which provides that
secs. 1, 2, 7, and 8 take effect only if notice is
provided under section 9 that the buy-back program
established under section 7 was approved.
Section 12 Effective Date Clause. Section 4 of the
bill takes effect January 1, 2024.
Section 13 Effective Date Clause. Provides if sections
1, 2, 7 and, 8, take effect under section 11, they
take effect 30 days following the date of the notice
provided in section 9 that the buy-back program was
approved. Rep.justin.ruffridge@akleg.gov
Section 14 Effective Date Clause. Except as provided
in sections 12 and 13, the bill takes effect July 1,
2023.
10:15:12 AM
MS. BRAUN began a PowerPoint presentation, titled "HB 195: East
Side of Cook Inlet Set Net Fleet Reduction Act." Slide 1 shows
a map of the Upper Cook Inlet Management Area. She explained
that the Upper Cook Inlet Management Area consists of five
districts, but HB 195 would address only the upper eastside
district. She explained that slides 2 and 3 describe how the
program would work. Permit holders could voluntarily apply for
the program, and 200 permits would be drawn at random to retire
the permit. Those permits would be bought back at $260,000 per
permit. Funding sources the Commercial Fishery Entry Commission
(CFEC) might designate could include federal grants, the NOAA
fishing capacity reduction program, and private sourcing, but
they would not come from general funds.
MS. BRAUN moved to slides 3 and 4, which compared the current
number of permits and nets in the water to the resultant permits
and nets and described how CFEC would manage the buyback. When
a permit is retired, neither the permit nor the waters of the
permit area would be available in the future.
MS. BRAUN presented slide 5 which summarized the buyback
program. She stated that HB 195 would create an optional
program designed to alleviate tension between fisher groups;
preserve Alaska's abundance of salmon; and provide set netters
with flexibility and opportunity.
10:18:38 AM
GLENN HAIGHT, Commissioner, Commercial Fisheries Entry
Commission (CFEC), Alaska Department of Fish & Game, described
the history of HB 195 beginning in 2018. He explained that
implementing the program described in the bill takes away a lot
of the risk because the CFEC would not have to determine the
number of limited entry permits, pick the qualifying years, or
develop a scoring system. In the past, a buyback would be paid
for by a tax on permit holders because external funds would be
used for the buyback. There have been two previous buybacks:
the Southeast salmon purse seine and the Bering Sea and Aleutian
Island crab buybacks. This does create a new administrative
area as per the CFEC statutes, so there is precedent in the
Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G), although this would
create a new subset in the administrative area.
10:22:25 AM
KEN COLEMAN, Member, Eastside Consolidation Association, gave a
PowerPoint presentation related to HB 195, [hardcopy included in
the committee packet], titled "Eastside Consolidation
Association." He said that he has been a set netter for 54
years, and on behalf of the Eastside Consolidation Association,
he requested assistance in moving into the future in a very
difficult situation. The set netters have been fishing
Southcentral Alaska since 1878 and now find themselves in a
larger, more complex user community. The association would like
to reduce the number of nets and permits on Eastside Cook Inlet.
MR. COLEMAN said the association is committed to sustainable
escapement in the rivers, particularly with Chinook salmon. Its
members believe there should be reasonable opportunity for all
the user groups including guided sport fishing, dip net fishing,
sport fishing, and setnetting. The set netters are trying to
find a way to coexist and collaborate regarding the issues for a
sustainable future. Over time the attempts to settle
differences have been referred to as "the fish wars."
MR. COLEMAN explained that the Eastside Consolidation
Association came about in an attempt to ensure all user groups
had a fair and equitable share in the fisheries. The number of
setnet permits increased a number of years ago because of larger
salmon runs, but there are now fewer sockeye in Upper Cook
Inlet, and there are too many permits and user groups.
Currently, the number of fish per permit has been reduced, so it
is no longer sustainable or economically viable. He explained
how the CFEC system for reducing the number of setnet permits is
not applicable in the current situation. Taking out 300
permits, however, would get the eastsiders back to an
economically viable place.
10:29:10 AM
MR. COLEMAN explained the mechanism outlined in HB 195 for a
voluntary fleet reduction and noted that it is widely supported
in the setnet community. As a setnet permit is retired, three
nets would be permanently removed from the eastside waters of
Cook Inlet. The proposed value of the $260,000 permit buyback
was determined by estimating the earnings of a setnet permit
each year over 10 years at $20,000 per year. Eastside fishermen
have been limited to one or two days of fishing for the last
several years. This is a proactive solution for a currently
unsustainable situation. This bill would give a choice to the
set netters and allow a viable fishery for those who choose to
retain their permits.
10:40:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE RUFFRIDGE stated that the issue concerns what
people or groups in Alaska have access to fish and how many fish
can be caught. The state of Alaska management practices have
prioritized one species of fish, and as a result, the Cook Inlet
eastsiders are being shut out. There is a real need to
recognize the issue and move forward with a solution-oriented
approach rather than simply consider the eastsiders some sort of
relic of the past and have them go away.
10:42:52 AM
CHAIR VANCE announced that HB 195 was held over.
10:43:16 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 10:43 a.m. to 10:45 a.m.
^Alaska's Hatcheries Updates
Alaska's Hatcheries Updates
10:45:30 AM
CHAIR VANCE announced that the final order of business would be
the Alaska Hatcheries Update presentations.
10:45:58 AM
LORNA WILSON, Assistant Private Non-Profit (PNP) Coordinator,
Division of Commercial Fisheries, Alaska Department of Fish and
Game (ADF&G), co-offered the Alaska's Hatcheries Update
presentation. She began a PowerPoint presentation, titled
"Literature on Hatcheries & Alaska's Hatchery Program." She
quoted recent peer-reviewed research by John R. McMillan which
said there is a "preponderance of adverse effects across time,
space, and species" on wild stocks. She sought to clear up a
misconception that 3 percent of hatcheries globally were found
to benefit wild populations. She said that McMillan's work
reviews scientific literature, not hatcheries as a whole.
MS. WILSON quoted a scientific article, titled "From diatoms to
killer whales: impacts of pink salmon on North Pacific
ecosystems," which read: "Large-scale hatchery production (~40%
of the total adult and immature salmon biomass) likely has
unintended consequences for wild salmon." She said that this
quote leads the reader to a false logic that hatchery pink
salmon are 40 percent of the total salmon biomass. She
explained that this paper has been cited in proposals to the
Alaska Board of Fisheries to cut Alaska hatchery pink salmon
permit capacity. She explained that the biomass of pink salmon
in the North Pacific, hatchery and wild, will be clarified by
the next presenter.
MS. WILSON stated that in 1971, the legislature created the
Fisheries Rehabilitation, Enhancement and Development (FRED)
Division and in 1974 passed the Private Nonprofit Hatchery Act,
which authorized the private ownership of salmon hatcheries by
qualified nonprofit corporations for the purpose of contributing
by artificial means to the rehabilitation of the state's
depleted and depressed salmon fishery. The program was intended
to operate without adversely affecting natural stocks of fish in
the state and under a policy of management that allows
reasonable segregation of returning hatchery-reared salmon from
naturally occurring stocks.
MS. WILSON explained that fisheries management includes the
establishment of terminal areas where returns have reasonable
segregation from wild stocks, which allows fisheries managers to
target fisheries and achieve wild stock escapement goals. She
described genetic and fish health policies under fisheries
management.
10:49:16 AM
MS. WILSON explained that Alaska's salmon hatchery production is
meant to supplement fisheries, not replace wild stock
production, and could be thought of as fisheries enhancement.
She exemplified the Hidden Falls Hatchery. She explained that
the purpose of hatcheries in the Lower 48 and Canada are to
compensate for lost spawning areas and reestablish lost
populations. She provided a map that showed the spawning areas
along the West Coast of California which have been lost to dams.
Another map showed the Coleman National Fish Hatchery (CNFH) in
the upper Sacramento River in California. She explained that in
2022, the CNFH had the highest number of Chinook Salmon
released, 12 million.
10:50:31 AM
MS. WILSON moved to slide 9, which showed bar graphs comparing
hatchery releases in 2022 for Alaska, British Columbia, and
Pacific Northwest states, including Washington, Oregon, Idaho,
and California. She said that most of Alaska's releases were of
pink and chum salmon into salt water. In contrast to Alaska,
British Columbia released mostly into freshwater rivers and
lakes and utilized mostly sockeye salmon. Similar to British
Columbia, releases in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and California
were into lakes and rivers, and were made up in large part by
chinook salmon. She explained that Alaska's hatchery program is
unique, and policies are in place that ensure fish are released
in terminal areas where marine fisheries can target returns.
MS. WILSON described a literature review project through the
North Pacific Anadromous Fish Commission that she is involved
with that seeks to synthesize recent knowledge about stocking
and hatchery programs for wild salmon in the Pacific and
Atlantic basins. The project is titled, "Hatching Plans," and
the key research question read as follows: "In the context of
climate and the Anthropocene, what role will hatcheries play in
conserving wild populations and supporting fisheries?" She
compared McMillan's literature review methods to the goals of
Hatching Plans. She noted that Hatching Plans covers a shorter
time span, excludes resident salmon and trout, and covers more
literature databases. She noted the different research
questions and stated that McMillan's question was, "What
proportion of publications report adverse effects on wild
salmonids?"
10:55:13 AM
MS. WILSON detailed the rebuttals to McMillan's analysis. She
explained that asking whether hatcheries benefit wild
populations is unfair in Alaska because hatchery releases and
returns are segregated from wild populations. She provided
critiques to McMillan's review as it pertains to Alaska salmon
hatcheries. She explained that McMillan's review may be more
useful outside of Alaska; it is an accounting of papers and not
an analysis of the risks that hatcheries pose to wild stocks; it
includes fish in the review that are not utilized in Alaska
hatcheries, such as trout.
MS. WILSON provided a quote from McMillan, who wrote that
"despite an overwhelming body of research showing most
hatcheries programs hurt wild fish populations, it's often
controversial to criticize such programs." She provided a
response to McMillan's assertions on slide 15, which read as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
It is problematic to criticize all hatchery programs
as one because of the many approaches to managing
hatcheries, let alone understand implications of
results given the complex interactions between salmon
and their environments, such as in ocean ecology.
Alaska's statutes and policies are safeguards.
Critical oversight of Alaska's hatcheries ensures
protection of wild-stock salmon populations into the
future. ADF&G is continuously critical of hatchery
programs.
Also, Alaska is investing in research to better
understand salmon ocean ecology.
10:59:57 AM
MS. WILSON, in response to Representative Stutes, said that John
McMillan is located in Washington state and works for Trout
Unlimited. She explained that there were other authors who
collaborated on the review alongside Mr. McMillan.
11:01:40 AM
BILL TEMPLIN, PhD, Chief of Research for Anadromous Fisheries,
Division of Commercial Fisheries, Alaska Department of Fish and
Game, continued the Alaska Hatcheries Update presentation. He
described the various labs and study programs under the
division. He explained that the Salmon Ocean Ecology program is
new and driven by questions about competition at sea. He noted
the lower productivity of Alaska's salmon stocks.
11:03:09 AM
KATIE HOWARD, PhD, Lead Scientist, Salmon Ocean Ecology Program,
Alaska Department of Fish and Game, began her portion of the
Alaska Hatcheries update presentation. She introduced a
PowerPoint presentation, titled "Understanding Potential
Contribution of Alaska Salmon Hatchery Production to Competition
at Sea," outlining the three sections that would be covered.
DR. HOWARD stepped in to explain that the topic of salmon
competition at sea lacks clear scientific advice because of the
many diverse perspectives throughout the scientific community
and literature. She made note of polarized opinions on the
topic. Evidence for interspecific salmon competition at sea
falls into four categories: diet overlap and shifts; species
abundance reactions; competitor abundance associated with growth
patterns; and competitor abundance associated with age at
return.
DR. HOWARD said that the primary arguments on both sides of the
debate are scientifically backed. Those who are convinced that
the observed patterns seen in Pacific salmon abundance,
survival, and size are due to competition at sea between salmon
species argue that indirect assessments or experimental studies
of large marine ecosystems are difficult and so indirect
evidence is necessary and can be considered sufficient. She
noted the emphasis on pink salmon due to its life history. She
also said that the scientific interpretations are based on
research written in English and mentioned that there are
Japanese and Russian scientists who research the same topic.
Those who are not convinced that research successfully
demonstrates that observed patterns of Pacific salmon are caused
by competition at sea between salmon species point to the
reliance on indirect evidence as a weakness. She commented that
evidence of a lack of relationship is often ignored and not
published. She made note of confirmation bias. She explained
that those who are not convinced argue that more should be done
to rule out alternative explanations for the observed
correlation.
11:12:46 AM
DR. HOWARD, in response to Representative Himschoot, confirmed
that Russian and Japanese studies are published in peer reviewed
journals. She said that some abstracts are translated into
English and made available to ADF&G. She explained that
scientists from Russia and Japan take a different approach to
understanding competition at sea. She said that because North
American countries lack long-term ecological studies, scientists
tend to rely on modeling indirect evidence based on estimated
abundances of fish. She explained that there has been more
investment in freshwater monitoring for salmon in North America
relative to the other side of the Pacific. More investments in
marine research have been initiated by the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) as well as ADF&G to understand
salmon stocks.
11:17:51 AM
DR. HOWARD stated that the reliance on different kinds of
information has led to different interpretations and
perspectives throughout the scientific community. She said that
correlative evidence is strongest when correlation is high,
found consistently across multiple situations, with no competing
explanations, and the correlation is consistent with mechanistic
explanations that can be supported by experimental evidence.
DR. HOWARD provided a proposed rationale for a decline in wild
salmon stocks. She suggested mechanistic studies to support
that the conclusions are an appropriate interpretation of the
observations. Mechanistic studies help to show that
correlations are indicative of a causative effect. Mechanistic
evidence is necessary to advance the understanding of
relationships.
11:24:13 AM
DR. HOWARD, in response to Representative Vance, said that to
answer mechanistic questions, support for the continuation of
data collection throughout the department is essential. Time,
money, and effort are important.
11:27:33 AM
DR. HOWARD explained that the idea that hatchery fish are
responsible for problems seen in wild salmon stocks is a
polarizing issue, even among scientists. There are several
considerations to understand to reduce impacts to wild salmon.
Identifying the intended outcome is important to measure
success. She asked if the intended outcome is to reduce
competition for food on the high seas where many species and
stocks are co-mingling or reduce competitive interactions
between wild and hatchery stocks in local areas where hatchery
fish are concentrated. She discussed the importance of
understanding the costs and benefits.
DR. HOWARD described a study which is the foundation of analysis
that is the most comprehensive assessment of available data.
11:32:03 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT asked about the impact of warming
oceans and whether it is an area of investigation for the
department.
DR. HOWARD confirmed that warming oceans are a necessary
component to understand wild salmon and hatchery salmon. She
said that scientists have different interpretations. She noted
major changes due to marine heat waves.
11:34:36 AM
CHAIR VANCE noted that the data on the next few slides is dated
and asked why more recent data is not available for salmon
biomass.
DR. HOWARD answered that the data has been compiled from other
countries and is a significant undertaking. She discussed how a
working group compiled of member countries is working on keeping
estimates updated every year through the North Pacific
Anadromous Fish Commission (NPAFC).
CHAIR VANCE asked about an estimate timeline of when newer
information will be made available. She made note of the
significant changes that have occurred in the last nine years
for the fishery.
DR. HOWARD suspected that action moves slowly when interacting
in an international arena.
DR. TEMPLIN explained the difficulties in acquiring recent
accurate estimates about the fishery because thus far, no
government agency has taken on the task. Extrapolations have
been utilized based on the data from 2015, and those become less
accurate over time. The NPAFC is made up of five salmon-
producing nations: Japan, Korea, Canada, Russia, and the United
States.
11:40:11 AM
CHAIR VANCE asked if the current data is available to managers
to make decisions.
DR. TEMPLIN explained that best estimates for numbers and
biomass are presented in the 2015 paper. Other data that is
collected through surveys is made available to the public as
projects are completed.
11:41:44 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER asked if the State of Alaska scientists
have a recommendation for policy makers to work toward improving
wild salmon stocks. He emphasized that there are Alaskans who
rely on salmon and don't have years to wait for a scientific
consensus.
11:43:29 AM
DR. TEMPLIN explained that ADF&G has a constitutional
responsibility to manage resources for the benefit of Alaskans.
He emphasized the care with which data is collected,
interpreted, and communicated. He demonstrated his
understanding that data collected by ADF&G is urgent for
Alaskans. The department travels to communities to provide the
latest information.
11:46:27 AM
DR. HOWARD described different hatchery and wild measurements on
slide 10. She explained that 2.1 percent of total biomass of
pink, chum, and sockeye salmon is Alaska hatchery pink salmon.
11:53:29 AM
DR. HOWARD, in response to Representative McCabe, explained that
hatcheries, marine harvest, bycatch, and illegal and unreported
fisheries in the high seas are other levels to consider.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asserted that the Alaska State Legislature
does not have the authority to impact what happens on the high
seas. He said that many are focused less on the resources and
more on the stakeholders.
11:56:31 AM
DR. HOWARD, in response to Representative Carpenter, answered
that the diet of salmon at sea depends on the species, life
stage, and habitat they are in. She explained that they are
generalist predators. Juvenile chinook and coho eat small and
larval fish. Pink chum and sockeye eat a lot of zooplankton.
As salmon mature, coho and chinook feed on fish and squid.
Pink, chum, and sockeye have diverse diets. She noted that prey
availability changed as a result of marine heat waves. Dr.
Howard said that according to scientific studies, the Western
North Pacific has abundant prey for salmon. The Eastern North
Pacific lacks compatible detailed studies. Food availability
and survivability of young salmon is heavily influenced by
oceanographic conditions, such as a marine heat wave.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER stated that studying salmon is complex
and not completely understood. He asked for an understanding of
whether state funded research is accomplishing the goal of
eliminating various factors that impact salmon.
12:03:30 PM
CHAIR VANCE discussed research presentations from the previous
year. She made note of the lack of expediency of the scientific
process. She thanked the presenters.
12:05:26 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Special Committee on Fisheries meeting was adjourned at 12:05
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 195 - Sponsor Statement v.A.pdf |
HFSH 2/6/2024 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/13/2024 10:00:00 AM |
HB 195 |
| HB 195 - v.A.PDF |
HFSH 2/6/2024 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/13/2024 10:00:00 AM |
HB 195 |
| HB 195 - Sectional Analysis v.A.pdf |
HFSH 2/6/2024 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/13/2024 10:00:00 AM |
HB 195 |
| HB 195 - ECA Presentation.pdf |
HFSH 2/6/2024 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/13/2024 10:00:00 AM |
HB 195 |
| HB 195 - Presentation for House Fisheries.pdf |
HFSH 2/6/2024 10:00:00 AM |
HB 195 |
| HB 195 - Supporting Document-ADFG Season Summary.pdf |
HFSH 2/6/2024 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/13/2024 10:00:00 AM |
HB 195 |
| HB 195 - Supporting Document-CFEC Annual Report 2022.pdf |
HFSH 2/6/2024 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/13/2024 10:00:00 AM |
HB 195 |
| HB 195 - Supporting Document-CFEC Set Gillnet Report.pdf |
HFSH 2/6/2024 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/13/2024 10:00:00 AM |
HB 195 |
| HB 195 - Supporting Document - CFEC Optimum Numbers Study.pdf |
HFSH 2/6/2024 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/13/2024 10:00:00 AM |
HB 195 |
| HB 195 - Fiscal Notes (1-3).pdf |
HFSH 2/6/2024 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/13/2024 10:00:00 AM |
HB 195 |
| HB 295 - Transmittal Letter v.A (01.24.24).pdf |
HFSH 2/6/2024 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/27/2024 10:00:00 AM |
HB 295 |
| HB 295 - v.A.pdf |
HFSH 2/6/2024 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/27/2024 10:00:00 AM |
HB 295 |
| HB 295 - Sectional Analysis v.A (01.31.24).pdf |
HFSH 2/6/2024 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/27/2024 10:00:00 AM |
HB 295 |
| HB 295 - Comm Fish-ADFG Fiscal Notes (01-23-24).pdf |
HFSH 2/6/2024 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/27/2024 10:00:00 AM |
HB 295 |
| HFSH ADFG Hatchery Literature Presentation 02.06.24.pdf |
HFSH 2/6/2024 10:00:00 AM |
Alaska's Hatcheries Presentation 1/2 |
| HFSH ADFG Hatchery Competition Presentation 02.06.24.pdf |
HFSH 2/6/2024 10:00:00 AM |
Alaska's Hatcheries Presentation 2/2 |