Legislature(2003 - 2004)
02/12/2003 01:28 PM House RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
February 12, 2003
1:28 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Mike Chenault, Co-Chair
Representative Hugh Fate, Co-Chair
Representative Beverly Masek, Vice Chair
Representative Carl Gatto
Representative Cheryll Heinze
Representative Bob Lynn
Representative Kelly Wolf
Representative David Guttenberg
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Beth Kerttula
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CONFIRMATION HEARINGS
Board of Game
Michael Fleagle - McGrath
- CONFIRMATION(S) ADVANCED
Board of Fisheries
John E. Jensen - Petersburg
Rupert E. Andrews - Juneau
Arthur N. Nelson - Anchorage
Melvan E. Morris, Jr. - Kodiak
- CONFIRMATION(S) ADVANCED
PREVIOUS ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
MICHAEL FLEAGLE, Appointee
to the Board of Game
McGrath, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as an appointee to the Board of
Game; provided background information and answered questions.
JOHN E. JENSEN, Appointee
to the Board of Fisheries
Petersburg, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as an appointee to the Board of
Fisheries; provided background information and answered
questions.
RUPERT E. ANDREWS, Appointee
to the Board of Fisheries
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as an appointee to the Board of
Fisheries; provided background information and answered
questions.
ARTHUR N. NELSON, Appointee
to the Board of Fisheries
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as an appointee to the Board of
Fisheries; provided background information and answered
questions.
MELVAN E. MORRIS, JR., Appointee
to the Board of Fisheries
Kodiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as an appointee to the Board of
Fisheries; provided background information and answered
questions.
DUNCAN FIELDS
Kodiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Encouraged the committee to advance all
four appointees to the BOF to the full body for approval.
ED DERSHAM, Chair
Board of Fisheries
Anchor Point, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Predicted the four appointees to the BOF
would make excellent board members.
STAN BLOOM, Vice President
Chitina Dipnetters Association
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to the appointment
of [Mr. Nelson, Mr. Morris, and Mr. Jensen] to the BOF.
MIKE TINKER, Chair
Fairbanks Fish & Game Advisory Committee
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to the appointment
of [Mr. Nelson, Mr. Morris, and Mr. Jensen] to the BOF, but
characterized Mr. Andrews as an excellent candidate.
VIRGIL UMPHENOUR
North Pole, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified that the [Mr. Nelson, Mr. Morris,
and Mr. Jensen] are going to be advocates for UFA.
ROLAND MAW
Kasilof, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Encouraged the committee to support all
four of the appointees to the BOF.
DREW SPARLIN
Kenai, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Encouraged the committee to advance the
four appointees to the full body for consideration.
PAUL SHADURA, President and Executive Director
Kenai Peninsula Fishermen's Association
Kenai, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Related KPFA's support of the appointees to
the BOF, but expressed the need for active limited entry salmon
permit holders to be on the BOF.
SUE ASPELUND, Executive Director
Cordova District Fishermen United
Cordova, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of the confirmation of
Mr. Nelson, Mr. Morris, and Mr. Jensen to the BOF.
CURT HERSCHLEB
Cordova, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of the confirmation of
all the appointees to the BOF.
JERRY McCUNE, Lobbyist
for the United Fishermen of Alaska
Cordova, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified that the UFA recommends Mr.
Jensen, Mr. Nelson, and Mr. Morris to the BOF.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 03-5, SIDE A
Number 0001
CO-CHAIR HUGH FATE called the House Resources Standing Committee
meeting to order at 1:28 p.m. Representatives Fate, Chenault,
Wolf, Guttenberg, Masek, and Lynn were present at the call to
order. Representatives Heinze, Kerttula, and Gatto arrived as
the meeting was in progress. Representative Paul Seaton was
also present during the meeting.
CONFIRMATION HEARINGS
Board of Game
CO-CHAIR FATE announced that the next order of business would be
the confirmation hearing on the appointment of Michael Fleagle
to the Board of Game.
Number 0086
MICHAEL FLEAGLE, Appointee to the Board of Game (BOG), began by
apologizing for not making the scheduled hearing [February 5],
and explained that "through some technical glitch" he was not
informed of that hearing. Mr. Fleagle said he appreciated the
opportunity to serve the state in this capacity and mentioned
that he had served two terms on the BOG under the Knowles
Administration; his term ended January [2002]. He mentioned
that he was looking forward to [returning to the BOG], and
remarked, "I'm doing it with my eyes wide open; I know that
there's still a lot of politics at play but I do look forward to
a new generation here in game management, where we can maybe see
some changes in active management." Mr. Fleagle indicated
frustration "with the total hands off style of game management
in which the [BOG] and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game
(ADF&G) were -- basically just became caretakers of parceling
out a dwindling resource, further increasing user conflicts both
between nonresident and resident hunters and then rural and
nonrural hunters." He related his belief that the
aforementioned, not mention the subsistence issue, led to a lot
of hard feelings across the state. Mr. Fleagle suggested that
some of those conflicts could begin to be resolved by following
the constitutional mandate and existing statutes [specifying]
the management of game resources for abundance. He offered his
belief that there would be a reduction, if not elimination of
user conflicts, if "we manage to have game," which he believes
includes predator management. Mr. Fleagle remarked "I've always
been a strong supporter of that; I'm not afraid of it, and I
know that there's a lot of people that have a political mind
that would rather not see wolves killed for the benefit of game
species, but I definitely believe that it's both appropriate and
necessary."
Number 0402
REPRESENTATIVE WOLF noted his appreciation of Mr. Fleagle
"walking into this wide open" and understanding that there are
politics involved. He explained that as a BOG member, Mr.
Fleagle would be selecting names for a new commissioner, which
would then be passed along to the governor. Representative Wolf
asked Mr. Fleagle if he was interested in to filling the
commissioner's position with someone new or with someone from
within the department.
Number 0464
MR. FLEAGLE said he could not provide a clear answer because he
didn't yet know the qualifications of the applicants, but
mentioned that there is a BOG committee that is working on that.
He offered his understanding that there is a real concern and
pressure in the fishing industry that there be a really strong
fishing (indisc. -- coughing) on the fisheries side that would
be commissioner. He noted that he isn't categorically opposed
to that, and if that is the case, then he would try to make
certain there was a very strong "game type of a person" as the
director of the Division of Wildlife Conservation. Whether that
person comes from within the department or not would have to be
determined by the individual's background and philosophy. Mr.
Fleagle told the committee he would support anybody for
commissioner, director, or deputy commissioner that would affirm
the state constitution and statutory mandates to provide for a
maximum abundance on game populations. He reiterated, "Whether
that comes from within the department or without, I just ...
don't know."
CO-CHAIR CHENAULT [moved] to advance the confirmations of the
five Board of Game nominees, including Mr. Fleagle, to the full
body for consideration. There being no objection, it was so
ordered.
[The confirmations of Pete Buist, Sharon McLeod-Everette, Ronald
J. Somerville, Ted H. Spraker, and Clifford P. Judkins, had been
advanced from committee on 02/05/03, so technically only the
confirmation of Mr. Fleagle was advanced on 02/12/03.]
Number 0733
Board of Fisheries
CO-CHAIR FATE announced that the next order of business would be
the confirmation hearing on the appointments of [John E. Jensen,
Rupert E. Andrews, Arthur N. Nelson, and Melvan E. Morris, Jr.]
to the Board of Fisheries.
Number 0765
JOHN E. JENSEN, Appointee to the Board of Fisheries (BOF), said
it was an honor to be considered as an appointee to the BOF.
Mr. Jensen informed the committee that he is a long-time
commercial fisherman and is still participating in that
endeavor.
REPRESENTATIVE WOLF talked about moving forward from the past
eight years and asked Mr. Jensen if he believes a new
commissioner should be selected from within the department or
from outside.
MR. JENSEN remarked that he really likes how the fish management
has been going, especially in Southeast Alaska. Although he
hasn't seen a list of those who have applied for the
commissioner position, he knew that Kevin Duffy is in the
running. He related his belief that Mr. Duffy has been doing a
great job as is the present management.
Number 0948
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG recalled that last week the BOF met in
Cordova and heard much testimony with regard to the Chitina
dipnet fisheries. He asked if Mr. Jensen could expand upon the
reason in the change in status from subsistence to personal use.
MR. JENSEN answered that personally [his decision] was based on
new information that wasn't presented to the board in 1999. He
noted that criterion 8, "pattern of taking use and reliance for
subsistence purposes on a wide diversity of fish and game
resources that provides substantial economic, cultural, and
social nutritional elements of the subsistence way of life" was
difficult with regard to the cultural and social aspects.
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG surmised that now it's an allocation
issue between the Chitina dipnet fishery and the fishery at the
mouth of the river. He inquired as to Mr. Jensen's thoughts
regarding how that location would be balanced.
MR. JENSEN commented that he never realized it was allocation
problem. He said he was mainly concerned with the fish stock
being healthy.
Number 1118
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON highlighted that Mr. Jensen is a small
boat fisherman and he was pleased that he was becoming involved
with the BOF. He then turned to the evolving situation with the
North Pacific Fisheries Management Council and the possibilities
of going forward with processor quota shares and the impact
those would have on coastal communities. He inquired as to Mr.
Jensen's thoughts with regard to the involvement of the board
and its position on allocating fixed shares of the resource to
processors so that fisherman would have to continually deliver
fish to the processors to whom they delivered in the past.
MR. JENSEN said he hasn't given that much thought. He related
his initial feeling that [processors] don't deserve a share
because they aren't participating in the fishery. However, [the
processors] have been stakeholders in the fishery and should be
allowed to have part of the fish delivered to them.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON clarified that he was specifically
speaking to the processor quota shares that designate a certain
percentage of the catch would have to be delivered to those
processors. He asked if that happened in the federal fisheries,
would [the board] follow suit in the state water fisheries.
MR. JENSEN related his personal opinion that the BOF shouldn't
be allowed to make allocations to the processors.
Number 1298
CO-CHAIR FATE remarked that Mr. Jensen seems to have had about
30 years of great experience with commercial fishing history.
He inquired as to how Mr. Jensen would react to sport fishing
and its issues as it relates to the commercial fishing industry.
MR. JENSEN said this matter of the sports fishing industry
growing larger and taking more fish is problematic in terms of
keeping the commercial catch at a level such that the commercial
fishermen make money too. He said he didn't have a solution to
offer other than more hatchery fish.
CO-CHAIR FATE asked if Mr. Jensen will vote to maintain a
balance between the two fisheries.
MR. JENSEN related that his philosophy is to allow everyone
their fair share of the resource. There are answers other than
strict allocations, he remarked. For instance, enhancements to
create more fish could help alleviate the problems between the
two user groups.
Number 1440
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO posed a situation in which there is no
increase in fish and inquired as to Mr. Jensen's idea of the
proper balance.
MR. JENSEN replied that he didn't know all the options. He
reiterated that he hated to see one user group suffer because of
another user group. Therefore, he guessed there would have to
be some give-and-take.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO requested that Mr. Jensen shed some light
on his concerns with regard to sport fishermen versus commercial
fishermen. He asked Mr. Jensen if there were no more fish,
would he stick with the current allocation.
MR. JENSEN responded that he didn't believe the current
allocation would be satisfactory for him. Mr. Jensen related
his belief that the sport fishing industry will end up with more
fish than the commercial fishing industry because of its larger
voice.
Number 1669
RUPERT ANDREWS, Appointee to the Board of Fisheries, turned to
the fax sent to the appointees regarding the committee's
questions. In response to the inquiry regarding the appointees'
view of the mission or future of Alaska's fisheries, Mr. Andrews
provided the following statement:
First and foremost my vision is to see that product
quality is improved and enhanced in all commercial
fisheries; high recreational resource experience
values are preserved; and fish stocks are maintained
for those subsistence and personal use through the
sustained yield principle. Although the Bureau of
Fisheries cannot solve the core issue for improved
salmon market prices, they can help in creating the
framework for improving the quality of products
harvested. Through the regulatory process the board
can explore new concepts of cooperative marketing and
harvesting and reducing industry's overhead cost by
streamlining management procedures and policies.
For over 40 years, the Alaska Department of Fish &
Game and the Board of Fisheries have penalized the
efficient fishermen and the use of efficient
technology as necessary tools of management. World
globalization has defined a new competitive economy
that Alaskans must recognize to participate and
compete with other nations for a share of the world
market. Many Alaskans rely on fish and fish products
for their nutritional, social, economic, and cultural
well being. Whether the use is subsistence, personal,
commercial, or recreational, the responsibility of
orderly harvest and allocations to meet all of these
needs is the mission of the Board of Fisheries. Being
a member of the Board of Fisheries is a constant
learning process and can be both terrifying and
rewarding at the same time. Terrifying, as we all
know, in that allocation decisions impact a great
number of Alaskans.
There is no other state in the Union that has as equal
a democratic system for fisheries resource use and
allocation as Alaska. It is this system that requires
large time segments for board members, user public,
and the professional staff to satisfy human needs
along with the needs of other critters that rely on
fish stocks. I've had a lifetime career in Alaska's
fisheries, both as a biologist and administrator. And
I concur with the concept of orderly and wise
management process. Most importantly, prudent
application where these animals live and reproduce.
Public renewable resources, by their very nature,
evoke political rhetoric over allocation. ... There
are no simple answers to difficult allocation
questions, but there are rules, Mr. Chairman. In
other words, be fair to all concerned, gather and use
the best information and data available, and be guided
by sound judgment values. My commitment to you, the
administration, and all Alaskans includes my promise
to listen carefully and respectfully to all the
members of the public, even those from other states or
the federal agencies. The federal agencies may be
hard for me for making a decision. To the best of my
ability, my decision will always be based on sound
management and the need for conservation and sustained
yield management. Once those concerns have been
addressed, I will do my best to make fair allocation
decisions that are in the best interest of the State
of Alaska.
Governor Murkowski has yet to develop his mission for
the administration of Alaska's fisheries. [Although]
some are self-evident when examining both his personal
and political career in and for Alaska. Mr. Chairman,
I, along with other members of the board, look forward
to working with Governor Murkowski and other
administration officials to further ensure their
vision for the future of Alaska's fisheries.
Number 1964
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA inquired as to the goals Mr. Andrews had
in mind for the BOF this coming year.
MR. ANDREWS, speaking only for himself, said that he would like
to see the process become shorter, easier, more manageable, and
more understandable to the Alaska public. He recalled when he
first came to Alaska in 1959, when the Division of Sport Fish
had a regulation booklet that fit in a shirt pocket. However,
now there's 44 pages for Cook Inlet alone. Something has to be
done about that, he said. Furthermore, Mr. Andrews felt that
Alaska has an opportunity because Alaska has the trademark on
"wild", which he believes the state should promote. Alaska's
harvest is a great source of protein that should be out in the
world market.
Number 2079
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON returned to the subject of processing
quota shares. In relation to the commercial fisheries,
Representative Seaton asked if Mr. Andrews felt that the BOF
should contemplate establishing processing quota shares for the
Alaskan fishery. Representative Seaton clarified that he was
referring to fishermen being required to deliver their catch to
a certain a processor to whom they have delivered in the past.
MR. ANDREWS answered that he didn't believe that fishermen
should be forced to deliver to a certain processor; that's not
the free market economy he understands.
Number 2170
REPRESENTATIVE HEINZE highlighted that Mr. Andrews has spent
many years in ADF&G. She inquired as to what Mr. Andrews'
thought is Alaska's greatest problem and challenge in sports
fisheries and how it can be overcome.
MR. ANDREWS replied, "The fishing hole is getting smaller."
This state has a tourist industry that, to a large extent, is
based on recreational fishing. Frankly, [the state] has brought
this on itself, he said. Alaska fishing has become an important
industry that has brought millions of dollars to the state.
Recreational fishing is important to a great many Alaskans in a
great many communities and that must be recognized as a fact.
Mr. Andrews specified that he wasn't saying he was partial one
way or the other, but only that it's economics.
REPRESENTATIVE HEINZE pointed out that there are blatant
violations in which overseas fishermen come over, spend a lot of
money, go over the limit, and pay the $1,000 fine.
Representative Heinze viewed the aforementioned as one of the
greatest problems. She asked Mr. Andrews had any solutions to
offer.
MR. ANDREWS informed the committee that after he retired he was
a guide in Bristol Bay for a couple of years and the lodge that
he worked for had its own rules which were more restrictive than
the state's rules. The client knew the rules beforehand.
Therefore, Mr. Andrews related his belief that many lodge owners
recognize [the need for the rules] because it takes 8-10 years
to replace a trophy-size trout. Mr. Andrews said that education
and working with the industry is the way to [address] this. Mr.
Andrews related that personally he never let the individuals he
guided kill fish, which he views as the professionalism the
industry should look toward.
Number 2348
REPRESENTATIVE WOLF turned to Mr. Andrews' comments with regard
to sport fishing and tourism. He recalled the former lieutenant
governor's statement that [Alaska] is killing its rivers with
hundreds of thousands of people. Representative Wolf expressed
concern with regard to the direction the state is going.
Although a good job has been done with marketing Alaska, the
previous administration decimated an economy in the Cook Inlet
Region while allowing another economy to grow. Representative
Wolf said that he didn't have any objections to promoting the
economic [growth] of any region of the state. However, he
expressed the need to not promote from within the current
department, [which operates under] the previous administration's
understanding. He reiterated the need to look for new
participants. Representative Wolf noted his concern with regard
to enhancement and inquired as to Mr. Andrews' views on that.
MR. ANDREWS remarked that when there is someone from within the
department that can be promoted, it illustrates that there is a
well-functioning department. Still, [the position] should be
open to the rest of the country. He noted that [the
commissioner's position] has been advertised nationally [via]
the Internet, and although there are talented people outside of
Alaska, those individuals don't have the hands-on experience of
being in Alaska. Speaking for himself, Mr. Andrews related his
belief that whoever has the best qualifications [will be hired].
Hopefully, someone in the department can fill this position.
MR. ANDREWS emphasized that resources with worldwide importance
are involved. As stewards of the resources, [the board] has a
responsibility to the planet to protect the wise use of these
resources. Therefore, the best talent is desired. Mr. Andrews
also emphasized that the current ADF&G is a great department
with great talent and it deserves all the support it can get.
Mr. Andrews mentioned that he is one of the individuals hired by
the first Commissioner of ADF&G, C. L. Anderson. He has seen
the department grow and [develop] a good reputation throughout
the country and the world. "None of the biologists represent
the user groups, we represent the resource," he stated.
Number 2539
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG returned to the issue of the Chitina
dipnetters. He inquired as what Mr. Andrews thought the board
could do to alleviate the perceived imbalance between sport
fishing, personal use fishing, dipnetting, and commercial
fishing.
MR. ANDREWS pointed out that per state statute, subsistence is a
priority. Personal use requires a license and requires the
individual to be a resident of Alaska and there is no priority.
Mr. Andrews noted that this question was recently faced in
Cordova and he was one of the three board members that voted not
to change the customary and traditional use (C&T). He explained
that he voted against it based on advice from the legal
department, which said that there are only two ways this C&T can
be reversed. According to the law the bar is raised when there
is a change from C&T to personal use. Furthermore, the egg
criteria must be reviewed for any new information. Mr. Andrews
said that he didn't see any new information and thus he voted to
maintain the C&T.
MR. ANDREWS, in regard to alleviating the perception of
imbalance, highlighted that all people in Alaska own the
resources, although everyone can't use them in the same way.
All the fisheries are necessary, and therefore he suggested that
human understanding will be requested. Mr. Andrews explained
that he was concerned that lowering the bar by changing a C&T
finding may create some long-term problems such as lowering C&T
findings already on the books without much work.
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG inquired as to whether the board made
a decision with regard to the number of king salmon that can be
taken in Chitina in the personal use fishery.
MR. ANDREWS replied yes, one king for the personal use fishery.
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG recalled that to be the same as when
under subsistence. However, he recalled that the previous
personal use limit was three of four kings.
MR. ANDREWS explained that it had been five and then it was
changed to one. He recalled that the allocation range for
sockeye is between 100,000-150,000.
Number 2819
MELVAN E. MORRIS, JR., Appointee to the Board of Fisheries,
noted that he grew up in Alaska and worked for BOF as an
assistant biologist in the Anderson days. He informed the
committee that he has been involved in hunting, fishing, sport
fishing, trapping, and commercial fishing as well as processing
and marketing. Currently, he is selling seafood at his company,
M&M Marketing. With regard to his vision of the fishing
industry in the future, Mr. Morris related his belief that much
of it will have to come from the political process. There are
many people with good information who will work through the
board's process. He echoed Mr. Andrews' sentiment with regard
to the good staff [of the department/board]. As a new member,
Mr. Morris said that he is still learning and hopes to become a
valuable board member.
Number 2942
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON turned to new commercial fisheries for
unutilized species and asked if Mr. Morris was willing to allow
those to develop under a commissioner's permit in order to
generate the biological data necessary to manage the fishery or
does he believe that all of the data has to be available before
the fishery starts.
MR. MORRIS remarked that research is always good.
TAPE 03-5, SIDE B
MR. MORRIS mentioned the test fishery in Prince William Sound
that ADF&G controls while being a restrictive permit fishery
that allows evaluation of the resource.
Number 2847
REPRESENTATIVE WOLF reiterated his earlier question regarding
putting forth names for the commissioner.
MR. MORRIS recalled [working] in ADF&G and related his feeling
that whenever someone can rise through the department to become
the commissioner it's good for morale. Such a commissioner is
good for the state and the department because the individual is
familiar with the issues. However, he acknowledged that there
are good [applicants] throughout the country who will apply for
the job. Mr. Morris said he believes the process will work.
The committee [selecting the commissioner] consists of three
people from the BOF and three from the BOG. The committee
[selecting the commissioner] will be given questions for the
applicants, the answers to which can be discussed with the board
members. He agreed with Mr. Andrews that ultimately the most
qualified person will be chosen. If that individual has been in
the state for awhile and worked in the department, he said he
would be especially pleased.
Number 2745
ARTHUR NELSON, Appointee to the Board of Fisheries, informed the
committee that most of his life he has been involved in fishing
to various degrees. He noted that he spent a number of summers
working on his parents' fishing boats in Prince William Sound.
He reviewed his work history which included summers on
gillnetters and commercial trollers as well as a position with
ADF&G and a position involved in the cleanup of the Exxon Valdez
oil spill. He noted that he has also done work in Western
Alaska on subsistence and small boat fishery issues as well as a
fair amount of field biology for various projects. Furthermore,
he spends every moment he can sport fish on his own boat.
MR. NELSON, in response to Representative Wolf's question, said
that he plans on keeping an open mind with regard to the
commissioner's position. He noted that he is one of the three
members of the BOF on the [selection] committee. He echoed
earlier testimony that the department has some very excellent
people within the department and it's important to promote from
within when possible. However, he reiterated his plan to keep
an open mind.
Number 2597
REPRESENTATIVE HEINZE pointed out that of the four [appointees
to the BOF], three have backgrounds in commercial fisheries.
She expressed that her constituency is sport fisheries and thus
she hoped that Mr. Nelson would make his decisions while keeping
in mind sport fisheries.
MR. NELSON replied that he intended to do his best to balance
out those areas in which there are allocation battles between
the user groups.
Number 2545
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO inquired as to Mr. Nelson's opinion as to
whether the Atlantic salmon, which has been caught in the
Pacific fishery, is likely to thrive in this environment and
become integrated in it.
MR. NELSON responded that he wouldn't know the answer. However,
he related his belief that it's a distinct possibility that
Atlantic salmon could establish themselves in Alaska's river
systems. He wasn't sure to what extent the Atlantic salmon
would thrive in Alaska. He noted that some escaped Atlantic
salmon have already been caught in Alaska's saltwater fisheries,
sighted in Alaskan rivers, and documented successfully spawning
in rivers in British Columbia, Canada. Therefore, he said this
shouldn't be disregarded.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO asked if the concern is such that action
should be taken or is action beyond our ability.
MR. NELSON said at this point, it's almost like a needle in a
haystack situation. However, people should be encouraged to
retain these fish and not release them back into the wild.
Everything that can be done to pull out Atlantic salmon from our
rivers should be done. Beyond that, he wasn't sure what could
be done to stop the influx.
Number 2418
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA recalled that last year federally and
locally via resolutions in the Alaska State Legislature there
was opposition to salmon farming. Therefore, she questioned
whether work should be done on a national level to stop fish
farming in the U.S. and then internationally with treaties.
MR. NELSON agreed with Representative Kerttula's approach. "I
certainly believe that we should be doing everything we can to
either try and stop fish farming or at least, if we can't stop
it in other countries particularly, we should exert every
pressure we can to make sure that they're doing it the best they
can to limit escapes and eliminate many of the other biological
problems that can be associated with it," he said.
Number 2355
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG remarked that his constituents in
Fairbanks have pretty strong words for the actions of the board,
some of which are directed at Mr. Nelson. Therefore,
Representative Guttenberg requested that in the future Mr.
Nelson should represent a broad spectrum of interests when
making decisions. Representative Guttenberg said that some
people felt that not only was there a decision that they didn't
like, they weren't treated fairly. He mentioned his hope that
the board would consider all the interests in the state.
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG turned to the hatchery situation in
the Interior and asked if Mr. Nelson was aware of the decaying
ability of the hatcheries to produce the variety of fish
necessary in the sport fisheries. There is special concern for
stocking the lakes in the Interior. He asked if there is a plan
or proposal to deal with the aforementioned.
MR. NELSON noted that he is relatively new to the board and
isn't immediately familiar with [a plan or proposal] for the
Interior.
Number 2247
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON returned to the processor quota shares
issue and asked if, under the Alaska Constitution and state
statutes, it would be appropriate for the BOF to contemplate
processor quota shares for Alaskan fisheries such that fishermen
would be required to deliver set amounts of their catch to
certain processors.
MR. NELSON answered that from his understanding, he didn't
believe the board would have the authority to do the
aforementioned.
Number 2186
REPRESENTATIVE WOLF commented that the past administration
included a dark force that actively promoted the mission of
making the administration the liaison between the BOF, the BOG
and ADF&G to promote an agenda that viewed commercial fishermen
as dinosaurs that should "lay down and die." He expressed
concern that individuals in the department agreed with the
previous administration's "dark force" and thus drawing from
within the department to fill the commissioner's position [could
be problematic].
CHAIR FATE turned to public comments.
Number 2084
DUNCAN FIELDS informed the committee that he represents some
rural communities in Kodiak, which have commercial, sport, and
subsistence fishermen. Therefore, he has worked closely with
the BOF and its process over the last 10 years or so. He noted
that lawmakers and the public hear about a few controversial BOF
decisions, although he has seen many positive and progressive
BOF decisions. For instance, a few years ago the BOF developed
a state water's cod fish fishery, which has proven to be very
valuable to the state. Mr. Fields said that he generally
supports the board process. He noted that he looks for board
members who are willing to work hard, learn about fisheries with
which they're unfamiliar, open to different perspectives, and
willing to provide access to stakeholders. Furthermore, user
group balance is important. With regard to the appointees
before the committee today, the aforementioned qualities [are
satisfied]. Mr. Fields encouraged the committee to advance all
four appointees to the BOF to the full body for approval.
Number 1917
ED DERSHAM, Chair, Board of Fisheries, informed the committee
that he has worked with the four appointees through two
regulatory meetings. The appointees came to the board only two
days before their regulatory meeting and it was very difficult,
but they all got to work quickly. Mr. Dersham said that he was
impressed with the work ethic and diverse experience of the
appointees. So far, the appointees have had to deal with three
very difficult issues. From what he has seen so far, he
predicted the four would make excellent board members.
Number 1803
STAN BLOOM, Vice President, Chitina Dipnetters Association,
began by saying that three of the appointees to the BOF denied
30,000-plus Alaskans in only 20 days of service. "Think how
many Alaskans they can deny if you confirm them for 30 years,"
he remarked. Mr. Bloom highlighted that Mr. Nelson led the
board through a repeal of a C&T. However, Mr. Bloom said he
didn't believe that the board could repeal a positive C&T.
There was no mention of fish stocks, rather [the meeting] was
hung up on users. This [repeal of a C&T involving Chitina] was
passed on the basis that dipnetters have only been using [the
resource in Chitina] for less than 20 years. However, he
highlighted that dipnetting has been practiced for over 100
years. This was the most gross mistake he has ever seen.
Therefore, Mr. Bloom recommended that the committee shouldn't
approve any of the three commercial fishermen appointed to the
BOF. These appointees didn't care about state law or supreme
court decisions; they didn't care that on the House Floor
Representative Charlie Parr was promised that the C&T language
would protect dipnetters from Fairbanks when the law was passed.
Number 1656
MIKE TINKER, Chair, Fairbanks Fish & Game Advisory Committee,
informed the committee that he is representing 90,000
constituents in the Interior. He agreed with Mr. Bloom in the
sense that the constituents in Cordova were shafted. The
arrogance of these three commercial fishermen was obvious
because before the meeting, these three appointees said they had
come to repeal the C&T. These appointees voted commercial
fishing down the line because they see [the issue] as
allocative. The idea that the state's business would be
conducted by the BOF in that manner was upsetting, he remarked.
Mr. Tinker related that it would be a travesty for the committee
to advance the names of Mr. Nelson, Mr. Morris, and Mr. Jensen
to the full body. On the other hand, Mr. Andrews is an
excellent candidate who didn't participate in the debate in an
aggressive manner, especially with regard to the subsistence
C&T. Therefore, he felt that Mr. Andrews will serve all of the
interests of Alaska while the other three will be self-serving.
Number 1551
VIRGIL UMPHENOUR, a former member of the BOF, informed the
committee that the names of [Mr. Nelson, Mr. Morris, and Mr.
Jensen] were put forward by United Fishermen of Alaska (UFA).
The UFA represent blue water fishermen, although muddy water
fishermen refer to them as intercept fishermen. He informed the
committee that there are about 4,500 terminal fishermen in
Bristol Bay and 2,200 in the Arctic-Yukon-Kuskokwim region. The
UFA has approximately 450 members, of which more than 50 percent
don't live in the state. He said that UFA represents the
commercial fishing interest of Seattle, Washington, as well as
the intercept fishing interest. Mr. Umphenour recalled Mr.
Jensen's answer to the conflict between sport fish and
commercial fish to be more hatchery fish. Currently, there are
1.6 billion hatchery smolt dumped into the ocean every year.
For example, the Taku River in Juneau has 110 million chum
salmon smolt dumped in the estuary two weeks before the [wild
stock] arrive. Between 1990 and 2000 the Taku River wild chum
stocks have decreased by 81 percent. However, the statutes
specify that wild fish take priority. Mr. Umphenour said that
these appointees aren't worried about the wild fish but rather
the dollar and protecting the blue water fisheries that fish on
hatchery stocks.
MR. UMPHENOUR informed the committee that he was on the board
and led the charge with the positive C&T. In the recent meeting
there was absolutely no new information, he charged. Therefore,
Mr. Umphenour stressed that [the appointees] should be held
accountable for their actions. He predicted that the [three
appointees] are going to be advocates for UFA, and therefore the
priority is going to be for the intercept fishermen not the
terminal users.
Number 1292
ROLAND MAW began by informing the committee that he first came
to Alaska in 1970 and has commercial fished since 1974 and for
five years he has guided and sport fished out of Seward and
Homer. He informed the committee that he went to the BOF
meeting in Cordova during which he watched the meeting and even
had discussions with the four appointees. Mr. Maw said he found
all of the appointees to be approachable. He characterized them
as an interesting group with diverse backgrounds. Mr. Maw
encouraged the committee to support all four of the appointees
to the BOF.
Number 1210
DREW SPARLIN noted that he has lived in Kenai for 37 years and
is very interested in the actions of the BOF and the BOG. Mr.
Sparlin related that he is very happy with the caliber and
qualifications of the appointees. Mr. Sparlin said that he has
felt it necessary to make changes to the direction at the board
level. Furthermore, it is necessary to make similar changes in
the policy within the department. The aforementioned could be
accomplished with the appointment of a qualified commissioner
from outside the department. Mr. Sparlin encouraged the
committee to advance the four appointees to the full body for
consideration.
Number 1154
PAUL SHADURA, President and Executive Director, Kenai Peninsula
Fishermen's Association (KPFA), clarified that the association
[represents] muddy water fisheries. Although the association is
affiliated with UFA, the association respects and reserves the
right to its own opinions. Mr. Shadura related KPFA's support
of the appointees to the BOF. Although it seems that the
governor's office has attempted to fill the board's vacancies
with new blood, KPFA adamantly believes that active limited
entry salmon permit holders should be on the BOF. He pointed
out that there hasn't been a commercial setnet permit holder or
a commercial permit holder from the Cook Inlet region for
decades. If there is to be a worthwhile attempt to balance the
BOF and assist the state in revitalizing the state's salmon
fishing industry, it's imperative that the Cook Inlet be allowed
a regional perspective. Furthermore, the remaining currently
seated BOF members should be reevaluated for their past and
future agendas. "No productive changes to fishery management
can occur with the concept of business as usual," he remarked.
The committee took an at-ease from 2:50 p.m. to 2:51 p.m.
Number 1001
SUE ASPELUND, Executive Director, Cordova District Fishermen
United, spoke in support of the confirmation of Mr. Nelson, Mr.
Morris, and Mr. Jensen to the BOF. She related the belief that
it's extremely important for some members of the BOF to have
experience with Alaska's private sector employer, commercial
fisheries. Much of the board's work involves complex commercial
fisheries management issues. She noted that [she] had the
opportunity to watch the new board in action and the three
candidates actively engaged in Cordova. It was clear from the
questions and statements, that the three candidates had examined
and considered the background materials and public input. The
decisions in Cordova reflect their commitment to place the
resource first and, if and when the harvestable surplus exists,
to provide opportunities for utilization of that resource to all
resource users. She concluded as follows: "We believe that the
knowledge, diligence, and desire to serve that was demonstrated
by Mr. Nelson, Mr. Morris, and Mr. Jensen will prove beneficial
to Alaskans and to its fisheries resources, and urge your
support for confirmation of these gentlemen."
Number 0900
CURT HERSCHLEB informed the committee that he is a gillnetter
and longliner and supports the confirmation of all the BOF
appointees. He noted that this was the third BOF cycle that he
participated in and compared to the first two, he found this
board to be strikingly unbiased. Mr. Herschleb said that it's
unfortunate that much of the focus is on the Chitina dipnet
issue. Of all the issues before the board, the Chitina dipnet
issue may have the least bearing on user groups. Mr. Herschleb
suggested that those focusing on the Chitina issue should get
inside the deliberations and the discussions of the criteria.
Number 0782
JERRY McCUNE, Lobbyist for the United Fishermen of Alaska (UFA),
informed the committee that UFA recommends Mr. Jensen, Mr.
Nelson, and Mr. Morris to the BOF. Mr. McCune pointed out that
there are 33 groups with UFA and all have to be licensed to do
business in Alaska. These 33 groups represent a variety of
different fisheries. The UFA respects the opportunity of
Alaskans to take the resource through personal use, subsistence,
sport, or commercial. Those needs have to be balanced. The UFA
believes that all Alaskans should have the opportunity to gather
the resources.
Number 0689
CO-CHAIR FATE highlighted that the last few testifiers from
commercial fishing [groups] only passed judgment on three of the
four appointees. He asked if there is a connotation of
commercialism in that.
MR. McCUNE replied no and noted that many groups support Mr.
Andrews. Mr. McCune said that the UFA is still debating the
fourth appointee [Mr. Andrews]. Furthermore, a lot of UFA's
groups haven't seen the board at work or know Mr. Andrews.
Number 0583
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO returned to the comments regarding the need
for balance and inquired as to the meaning of the word "balance"
to Mr. McCune.
MR. McCUNE said that there has been a lot of balancing in the
past, such as in the Copper River and the Cook Inlet. He noted
that the river systems are a bit different than the open sea
fisheries. He explained that the number one [priority] is the
resource. When there is a problem with the resource, the first
user group to be shut down is commercial fishing, then there is
an attempt to balance the resource for personal use,
subsistence, and sport fishing. Although there could be a
problem large enough to close subsistence, Mr. McCune has only
recalled that occurring in the Kuskokwim [River]. Mr. McCune
specified that balance is 2 million sockeye on the Copper River
and 650,000 for escapement and that is used to fill the needs of
personal use, subsistence, and the streams. Often the
escapement is over 650,000, such as last year, and that results
in commercial fishing being shut down for a period. However,
such a situation doesn't shut down personal use or subsistence.
Mr. McCune remarked that if one looks around the state at the
river systems, one would find that balance has been achieved.
Number 0282
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA moved that the committee advance the
names of John E. Jensen, Rupert E. Andrews, Arthur N. Nelson,
and Melvan E. Morris, Jr., to the Board of Fish to the full body
for consideration. There being no objection, the names were
advanced.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Resources Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 3:31 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|