Legislature(2025 - 2026)BARNES 124
03/24/2025 01:00 PM House RESOURCES
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 | |
| Presentation(s): Alaska Resource Education | |
| HB117 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 117 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
March 24, 2025
1:01 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Robyn Niayuq Burke, Co-Chair
Representative Maxine Dibert, Co-Chair
Representative Carolyn Hall
Representative Donna Mears
Representative Zack Fields
Representative Dan Saddler
Representative George Rauscher
Representative Julie Coulombe
Representative Bill Elam
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
PRESENTATION(S): ALASKA RESOURCE EDUCATION
- HEARD
HOUSE BILL NO. 117
"An Act relating to commercial set gillnet fishing; and
providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 117
SHORT TITLE: COMMERCIAL FISHING; SET GILLNET COOP
SPONSOR(s): FISHERIES
02/26/25 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/26/25 (H) FSH, RES
03/01/25 (H) FSH AT 11:00 AM GRUENBERG 120
03/01/25 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
03/04/25 (H) FSH AT 10:30 AM GRUENBERG 120
03/04/25 (H) Heard & Held
03/04/25 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
03/06/25 (H) FSH AT 10:00 AM GRUENBERG 120
03/06/25 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
03/11/25 (H) FSH RPT 6DP 1NR
03/11/25 (H) DP: VANCE, KOPP, HIMSCHOOT, ELAM,
MCCABE, STUTES
03/11/25 (H) NR: EDGMON
03/11/25 (H) FSH AT 10:00 AM GRUENBERG 120
03/11/25 (H) Moved HB 117 Out of Committee
03/11/25 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
03/13/25 (H) FSH AT 10:00 AM GRUENBERG 120
03/13/25 (H) <Bill Hearing Canceled>
03/21/25 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
03/21/25 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
03/24/25 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
WITNESS REGISTER
ELLA EDE, Executive Director
Alaska Resource Education
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Co-presented the Alaska Resource Education
presentation.
TAYLOR BURGH, Operations Manager
Alaska Resource Education
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Co-presented the Alaska Resource Education
presentation.
REPRESENTATIVE LOUISE STUTES
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 117 on behalf of the House
Special Committee on Fisheries, sponsor by request, chaired by
Representative Stutes.
MATT GRUENING
Staff, Representative Stutes
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided information on HB 117 on behalf of
the House Special Committee on Fisheries, sponsor by request,
chaired by Representative Stutes.
ADELIA MYRICK, President
Northwest Setnetters Association
Kodiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Gave invited testimony in support of HB
117.
LOREN LEMAN, representing self
Ninilchik, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Gave invited testimony during the hearing
on HB 117.
ERIK O'BRIEN, representing self
Kodiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Gave invited testimony in support of HB
117.
KEVIN FISCHER, President
Allakaket District Setnetters
Kodiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Gave invited testimony in support of HB
117.
BRYAN BARLOW, Colonel, Director
Division of Alaska Wildlife Troopers
Department of Public Safety
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
117.
ROBERT MURPHY, representing self
Kodiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Gave invited testimony during in support of
HB 117.
TOM ROLLMAN, representing self
Eagle River, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Gave invited testimony in support of HB
117.
THOMAS WISCHER, representing self
Kodiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 117.
ALEXUS KWACHKA, representing self
Kodiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing on HB 117.
RICHARD BLANC, representing self
Mount Vernon, Washington
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 117.
ABBY HAUGHEY, representing self
Kodiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 117.
LAUREN HAUGHEY, representing self
Kodiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 117.
ALFRED HAUGHEY, representing self
Uvalde, Texas
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 117.
SUE JEFFERY, representing self
Kodiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 117.
REBECCA HAUGHEY, representing self
Uvalde, Texas
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 117.
JOE FELKL, Legislative Liaison
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
117.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:01:38 PM
CO-CHAIR ROBYN NIAYUQ BURKE called the House Resources Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:01 p.m. Representatives Dibert,
Hall, Mears, Coulombe, Elam and Burke were present at the call
to order. Representatives Fields, Saddler, and Rauscher arrived
as the meeting was in progress.
^PRESENTATION(S): Alaska Resource Education
PRESENTATION(S): Alaska Resource Education
1:02:19 PM
CO-CHAIR BURKE announced that the first order of business would
be the Alaska Resource Education presentation.
1:02:38 PM
ELLA EDE, Executive Director, Alaska Resource Education (ARE),
said today's presentation would be focused on workforce
development and ARE's efforts to prepare high school students
for jobs in the resource industries in Alaska. She directed
attention to the PowerPoint presentation, titled "Alaska
Resource Education" [included in the committee file], beginning
with the organization's mission, vision, and values on slide 2.
She stated that ARE's mission is to educate students about
Alaska's natural resources. Slides 3 and 4 displayed ARE's
Board of Directors and core team.
1:05:03 PM
TAYLOR BURGH, Operations Manager, Alaska Resource Education
(ARE), continued the presentation on slide 5, which outlined
ARE's K-12 curriculum: rocks and minerals, renewable energy, and
forestry. The curriculum is taught through classroom visits as
well as youth programs for deeper explorations. Teacher
training is also provided. Slide 6 outlined ARE's three-tiered
program plan as follows: spark interest in learning about
Alaska's resources; ignite passion for understanding connections
to states resources; and launch into the next phase with the
knowledge to make informed decisions. Slide 7 showed a graphic
that tells the story of Alaska's resources from extraction and
development to responsible disposal. In response to a question
from Representative Coulombe, she confirmed that the ARE
curriculum teaches students how to correctly recycle solar
panels and wind turbines.
1:10:13 PM
MS. BURGH resumed the presentation with a discussion on the
mining industry and its contribution to Alaska's economy and
workforce on slide 8. Slides 9-11 depicted employment by major
energy technologies and power generation, as well as
transmission, distribution, and storage employment by sector.
She explained that many students do not have an accurate
perception of what it looks like to work in the natural resource
industries, so ARE spends a lot of time talking about the
different jobs available to them. Slide 12 addressed Alaska's
oil and gas industry, which continues to be a significant source
of jobs, the highest sector of economic impact, and part of
Alaska's future. Slide 13 pointed out that labor shortages,
skills gap, lack of soft skills, and an aging workforce
culminate in a problem that ARE is trying to solve at the K-12
level. To combat this, ARE is creating a pipeline for the next
generation of STEM workforce and bridging the gap between
industry and education, as stated on slides 15-16. Slides 16-17
displayed ARE launch initiatives and slide 18 featured ARE
launch program data via pre/post student survey. Slides 19-20
offered testimonials from students, as well as a video from an
ARE intern who has since graduated and went on to study
engineering at university in Canada. She credits ARE's power
class for her interest in engineering in the natural resource
industry. Slides 21-23 provided statistics on ARE's impact in
2024, as well as a 5-year lookback.
1:27:00 PM
MS. EDE, in response to a series of questions, explained that
ARE works closely with industry partners through student
internships and programs, such as the Rockstar program in
partnership with Northwestern Alaska Career and Technical Center
(NACTEC) in Nome, which introduces students in rural communities
to mining jobs in that region. She confirmed that ARE works
with placer miners to bring students out to smaller sites. She
explained that ARE is funded through a variety of mechanisms:
one-third is corporate and individual donors, one-third is
federal funding, and one third is state funding. She stated
that like many other nonprofits, ARE is facing hurdles on the
federal funding side, as several grants are currently paused due
to executive orders; however, ARE is working with Alaska's
federal delegation to unfreeze those funds.
1:32:39 PM
MS. TAYLOR, in response to Representative Saddler, explained
that ARE fills a much-needed science slot in elementary school.
In addition, ARE teaches an Alaska class, economics, and
sciences classes. They are slotted depending on need and where
it fits into the teacher's curriculum. She said there has been
no pushback and no lack of demand in the classroom, adding that
ARE could easily be twice its size and it would still be busy
with a waitlist.
1:37:12 PM
The committee took a brief at-ease at 1:37 p.m.
HB 117-COMMERCIAL FISHING; SET GILLNET COOP
1:38:12 PM
CO-CHAIR BURKE announced that the final order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 117, "An Act relating to commercial set
gillnet fishing; and providing for an effective date."
1:38:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LOUISE STUTES, Alaska State Legislature, on
behalf of the House Special Committee on Fisheries, sponsor by
request, chaired by Representative Stutes, presented HB 117.
She stated that HB 117 was brought forward in response to
concerns from stakeholders in setnet fisheries regarding a new
interpretation by law enforcement that would no longer allow the
historical cooperative structure for setnetters to take place.
The bill would maintain the traditional model of cooperative
setnet fisheries that has existed since statehood and seeks to
support the livelihoods of many rural residents.
1:40:02 PM
MATT GRUENING, Staff, Representative Stutes, Alaska State
Legislature, said this legislation would preserve the
traditional model for salmon setnet operations by continuing to
allow small groups (often families in rural Alaska) to work
cooperatively, comingle their fish, and allow one permit holder
to deliver fish on behalf of their group. He said this bill was
brought forward by concerned stakeholders to address a newly
applied legal interpretation by law enforcement that has
disrupted the way setnet operators have functioned since pre-
statehood. The current legal interpretation requires that fish
are not comingled and are delivered by each individual permit
holder; this legislation would address this interpretation. He
remarked that setnetting is unique in Alaska and was Alaska's
only commercial shore-based fishery. Historically, fisherman
have delivered their fish cooperatively, picked their nets
cooperatively, comingled fish, and operated as a group. He said
this model of fishing has existed since statehood. He explained
that every set net fishery is different depending on the region,
and that the new legal interpretation would be particularly
burdensome to offroad, rural fishermen. He said HB 117 aims to
allow setnet operations to participate in the fishery as they
always have. He said that language was left intentionally broad
to allow law enforcement, the Commercial Fisheries Entry
Commission (CFEC), the Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G),
and other stakeholders to have maximum input into how the fish
would be delineated. He said that this bill is not only about
maintaining the status quo but to support fishing operations in
rural communities. He concluded by reiterating that setnetters
should be able to work together and maintain their operating
methods.
1:44:27 PM
CO-CHAIR BURKE announced that the committee would hear invited
testimony on HB 117.
1:44:35 PM
ADELIA MYRICK, President, Northwest Setnetters Association, gave
invited testimony in support of HB 117. She said that she is a
second generation setnetter and currently raising the third
generation. She said that the Northwest Setnetters Association
supports the bill. Setnetters operate in a fashion that their
elders and forefathers taught them, this means mingling fish and
operating as a cooperative and often a family unit. She said
that the bill would provide the necessary clarification and
support setnetters. She said that many setnetters are
multigenerational and have a long family history and the bill
would allow both youth and elderly alike to participate in the
industry. She remarked that keeping youth in the fishery is
imperative. She raised concerns about permits exiting the
communities and less opportunities overall. She emphasized that
Alaska setnetters have among the highest proportions of Alaska
resident fishermen and supporting their ability to continue is
very healthy for the state. She said that given the current
market conditions, setnetters are at the highest risk of
extinction. She said that one by one all the smaller processors
have shut down and tendering boats are the only option to
offload the catch. She remarked that comingling fish can help
provide incentives for tendering vessels to continue the
purchase and acquisition of setnetter caught fish and a
struggling fishery would struggle to attract purchasers. She
said that many people who purchase sites often know nothing
about setnetting, are "well off" out-of-town folks, and often
just look for a remote property to purchase. In conclusion, Ms.
Myrick reiterated that the Northwest Setnetter Association
supports the bill and the preservation of the status quo.
1:49:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER sought to better understand comingling
and what it allows for.
MR. GRUENING said comingling refers to how fish are stored and
reported on a fish ticket. Instead of writing a fish ticket for
each person, comingling allows one permit holder to deliver on
behalf of a four-or five-member cooperative with the fish
comingled, rather than individual nets.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER shared his understanding that all the
fish would be delivered in one tub.
MR. GRUENING said, essentially, yes. He said it's a matter of
transporting the fish from the fisheries location and getting
them to the tender. Current statutes require that the weight
and number of fish be delineated on each fish ticket, which is
difficult to do with four or five family operated open skiffs.
This would allow communal storage of fish, and delivery on
behalf of the group. He reminded the committee that the
cooperative would have to pre-register with the department and
the regulation process would define how to delineate the fish
for each permit when registering.
1:53:20 PM
LOREN LEMAN, representing self, former lieutenant governor, gave
invited testimony on HB 117 from written testimony [included in
the committee file], which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
Our family has operated a setnet fishery in Cook Inlet
near Ninilchik as a family unit since statehood. We
have delivered and accounted for our fish by
consolidating them by following our understanding of
Board of Fisheries and Commercial Fisheries Entry
Commission rules.
Although the setnet fishery from Ninilchik to Nikiski
has been shutdown in 2023 and 2024, and will again be
closed for the 2025 season, we understand that upon
advice from the Department of Law, Department of
Public Safety officers have started citing fishermen
in other areas who deliver fish the same way we have
with multiple permits. Fortunately, we haven't been
cited. There's not much reason for an enforcement
officer to visit our site these days.
The suggestion that we segregate fish from each net
and assign that specific catch to be delivered by the
fisherman whose registration numbers are on its buoys
is impractical, and perhaps impossible. HB 117
corrects the misguided attempt to change how fishermen
have been reporting their catch for decades-a change
that provides no benefit to the State of Alaska.
I offer an amendment that will help the Board of
Fisheries as it adopts regulations. Revise the last
sentence in Sec. 2 to read: "Fish harvested
collectively by the cooperative may be sold by a
single or multiple permit holder members of the
cooperative or by a transporter acting as the
cooperative's agent."
The reason for this is that we, and likely many
others, often spread our catch over multiple permits
if each permit holder is present when the delivery is
made. We do not want this practice to be disallowed.
However, we do want it clear that as few as one permit
holder (or transporter) could make the delivery.
1:58:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE COULOMBE asked for clarification on the suggested
amendment.
MR. LEMAN said he was proposing an amendment that would insert
"or multiple permit holders" after "single" on page 2, line 5 of
the bill to allow more than one permit holder to deliver and
sign for the fish.
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES said she would consider that a friendly
amendment and would be happy to incorporate the suggested
language into the bill.
2:01:11 PM
ERIK O'BRIEN, representing self, gave invited testimony in
support of HB 117. He said that he echoes the previous
testifier's comments and concerns. He said that he is part of a
multi-generational fishing family. He said the first permit was
purchased in 1977 and the second in 1988. He said that his
brothers and extended family have always been part of fishing
operations. He said in 2002 his parents transferred their
permits to the children, and more were purchased later. He said
that there were seven permits in total, shared by three grown
brothers and three elderly parents. He said they maintain a
single-family fishing operation. He said family members all work
on the permits. He said that they could not operate without
full family support and that shore-based support allows
participation in the fishery. He said that it is a physically
hard season and doesn't always fit with concurrent schedules in
the setnet fishery. He said it is not feasible to consider each
permit as a separate business, especially given the age of some
permit holders. In closing, Mr. O'Brian stated that HB 117
would correct a misinterpretation and allow setnetters to
operate as they always have, as a cooperative business venture
primarily executed along family lines.
2:04:59 PM
KEVIN FISCHER, President, Allakaket District Setnetters, gave
invited testimony in support of HB 117. He said that he has
been a setnet fishermen for 35 years and for the entire time
set-net fisherman have comingled fish. He said it is his
understanding that setnetting has been this way even before
statehood. He did not understand the current upheaval in
setnetting practice and the lack of communication with fishermen
on this issue. He said HB 117 would allow setnetters to fish as
they always have. He said if the new legal interpretation that
prevents comingling fish remains then it would negatively impact
Alaska fishermen, particularly the small family operations. He
said that last year one of the fishermen in his district was
issued a felony level citation; the officer did not know the
issue; nor did the judge understand the issue well either. He
said the court offered a plea deal and dropped it to a
misdemeanor and issued a $500 fine. He said that this caused a
great deal of concern amongst fishermen in his district. He
asked why only one citation was issued when everyone practiced
this way and why it was suddenly being enforced now. He asked
what happened to warnings prior to citations, he said it feels
like an attack on small fishing operations. He said that he was
100 percent confident that if someone said there was an issue
then fishermen could have solved it. Issuing a felony level
charge is not acceptable and none of his neighbors want to do
anything illegal. He said it simply is not viable to separate
fish by permit when fishing as a coop. He said that someone,
for some reason, thinks that setnet fishing should be different
than it has been.
2:07:53 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked whether there had been an effort to
address this issue with the Board of Fisheries.
MR. FISCHER explained that a change request was submitted in
September/October, but access was denied by the board and a
legislative fix was recommended.
2:09:03 PM
MR. GRUENING recalled that when the sponsor first approached
ADF&G about this change, a regulation fix was being considered.
However, through discussions with the department, it became
clear that there were a variety of conflicting statutes;
specifically: AS 16.43.990(11), AS 16.05.680(b), and AS
16.05.670(a). He said the issue turned out to be a larger issue
than the first carveout, which was an attempt by stakeholders to
have it addressed on the Board of Fisheries level. The
department advised the legislative route due to conflicting
statutes and specifically, the definition of "unit of gear" in
AS 16.43.990(11). The mix of statutory and regulatory issues
that conflict with the interpretation made a legislative fix the
best option.
2:11:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked whether family setnetters have been
operating illegally with their traditional practices.
MR. GRUENING said they have been operating according to
enforcement and interpretation of statutes. Further, in looking
at the plain wording, there is some ambiguity. He added that
the bill is an attempt to bring things back to the status quo of
operation.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER sought to better understand the
background of why this has changed.
2:13:17 PM
BRYAN BARLOW, Colonel, Director, Division of Alaska Wildlife
Troopers, Department of Public Safety (DPS), shared his belief
that the change was triggered by an uptick in the types of
behaviors that were in conflict with the requirements of
currents statutes. He added that he is not aware of any
felonies associated with this particular fishery, noting that a
lot of education is provided ahead of any enforcement
mechanisms.
2:15:18 PM
ROBERT MURPHY, representing self, provided invited testimony in
support of HB 117. He offered remarks from his written
testimony [included in the committee file], which read as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
Madam Chair and members of the committee, my name is
Bob Murphy, and I live in Kodiak and am representing
myself. I am a set gillnet fisherman where I fish in
Port Moller located on the Bering Sea side of Alaska
Peninsula. I am in support of HB 117. This bill will
allow set gillnet permit holders that fish as family
groups, which many set gillnet operators are, to
continue doing what they have been doing since
statehood or even prior. Adoption of this bill into
law will have no change to long-standing practices.
As you know the commercial fishing industry has been
through some difficult times in the last few years.
Long-time seafood processors going out of business or
large-scale consolidation is occurring. Commercial
seafood processors and fishermen are struggling with
high costs to run their businesses, and the volume of
fish and inflation are not helping matters. I have
concern that if this bill is not adopted and under the
current interpretation of how set gillnet salmon
fisheries are to be conducted with multiple permit
holders in a family setting, that it may negatively
disrupt the way these operations have occurred for
decades. If the current regulations are not changed,
it very well may break up or eliminate some of these
family fishing groups which may force some to no
longer find it financially worthwhile to fish which
will impact local communities through lost income to
individuals and lost tax revenue to local
municipalities as well as the state. I think we could
all agree that this is not in anyone's best interest
for this to occur.
Without HB 117, there are issues such as safety by
trying to keep fish separate in small skiffs by adding
additional fish totes which may have ice or slush ice
and the added weight of the totes if space is even
available which it isn't on many skiffs is a concern,
and significant additional time spent completing fish
tickets often in difficult sea conditions while tied
alongside a large tender vessel can be dangerous.
There is no biological concern to the resource the way
fisheries have been managed in the past and the state
will still manage fisheries the same way. These are
just a few reasons that support the passage of HB 117.
There are some family groups in the area which fish
around where I fish in the Village of Nelson Lagoon.
Set gillnet fishing is prominent in Nelson Lagoon and
extremely important to the community as salmon fishing
is the main source of income for the community and
HB117 would help them practice the way they have
fished for many years.
For 35 years I have been involved in the commercial
fisheries in this area and most of that was as a
biologist working for the Alaska Department of Fish
and Game until I retired. I am truly thankful for how
this process has worked so far. Where a group of
stakeholders were told what they were doing for a very
long time is no longer legal, the stakeholders then
working with the Departments of Fish and Game and
Public Safety to help write the language that would
fix the issue, and then the State Legislature seeking
to correct the issue. This is a great example of how
the government works for the people and I sincerely
thank all those involved with this issue to this point
and in the near future to get it corrected prior to
the 2025 commercial salmon fishing season.
I appreciate the opportunity to testify and hope you
will support HB 117. Thank you all for your service,
and I would be happy to answer any questions.
2:19:08 PM
TOM ROLLMAN, representing self, gave invited testimony in
support of HB 117. He shared that his family has been
setnetting since the 1970, while now operating several family
businesses in Cook Inlet, Nushagak, and Bristol Bay. He said
setnetting has always been about family. He explained that HB
117 would not change operations or business, it would simply
allow setnetters to fish traditionally and legally as they
always have. Traditionally, family setnet operations consist of
multiple permits and fish multiple nets in order to be
profitable. One or more skiffs tend to pick the nets and
deliver the fish to the beach or tender where they are
comingled, and the proceeds are pooled to pay everyone in the
group. He pointed out that to effectively tend to nets and
provide a quality product, crews are necessary to monitor and
work the nets around the clock. He said it's very difficult for
a permit holder to get enough sleep and deliver every fish
caught from their net without pulling their gear periodically.
Other cooper members need to be able to legally pick all the
nets in the group and legally deliver them to the tender. The
bill would allow them to continue to do this. An unintended
consequence of this new interpretation, he said, is that it
devalues the contribution of the shore support folk, because it
makes it illegal to own and fish their limited entry permits
without picking their gear and making deliveries. These people
are absolutely essential to the success of setnet operations.
He reiterated the importance of the bill as it would maintain
the status quo and allow family setnet operations across Alaska
to operate as they have for generations.
2:22:40 PM
CO-CHAIR BURKE opened public testimony on HB 117.
2:23:07 PM
THOMAS WISCHER, representing self, gave public testimony in
support of HB 117. He said that he has been a setnet permit
holder on Kodiak since 1976. He said his family operation
currently has three active permits. He said HB 117 would make
statute and regulations consistent with the way set netting has
always been done. He said the fisheries were struggling right
now and the Kodiak setnet fishery was especially challenged. He
said that fishermen are not asking for anything new and if the
current interpretation remains, it would destroy the family set
net fishery. He said many families would be forced out of the
fishery.
2:26:31 PM
ALEXUS KWACHKA, representing self, testified during the hearing
on HB 117. He said he neutral on the bill and described himself
as a skeptic. He opined that if up to 10 permits are allowed,
the transfers and any associated litigation need to be tracked.
He said he has no problem with the bill as proposed, but he took
exception with further consolidation. If that's the reality of
the bill, he said there needs to be solid trends provided on the
impact of the bill.
2:28:33 PM
RICHARD BLANC, representing self, testified in support of HB
117. He stated that he runs a family operation and would not be
able to continue to fish if the bill is not enacted.
2:30:00 PM
ABBY HAUGHEY, representing self, testified in support of HB 117.
She said the bill would write traditional practices into state
law. For family operations, comingling is essential and helps
keep operating costs at a level that enables them to continue
setnetting, she said. Additionally, setnetting is a shore-
based operation that encourages lasting family business and
relationships. She reiterated her strong support for HB 117
because it preserves the status quo for her family's operations
and allows them to continue to work together as they have for 60
years and share the viability of their livelihood for future
generations.
2:31:59 PM
LAUREN HAUGHEY, representing self, testified in support of HB
117. She said the bill would ensure her family's setnet
operations can continue to operate as they have for the past 60
years. Growing up, her mother, a permit holder in her family's
multi-permit operations, spent the majority of time onshore
raising the next generation of salmon setnetters while also
providing the onshore support that the on-water fishing crew
required to function safely and efficiently. With her serving
in this role, her parents would have had to hire a nanny or
forfeit the fishing that provides income to support her family.
She spoke more to this dynamic and said the bill would help them
continue this way of life and enable her to give her future
family the same opportunities.
2:33:43 PM
The committee took a brief at-ease at 2:33 p.m.
2:34:31 PM
ALFRED HAUGHEY, representing self, gave public testimony in
support of HB 117. He said that he has fished on the west side
of Kodiak since 1965. He said that there is always someone
trying to change something to the detriment of setnetters. He
said that four permits are in operation with his group. He
explained the team dynamic associated with setnet fishing. He
echoed the testimonies of the previous testifiers and stated
that HB 117 would reduce hardships for setnetters.
2:37:48 PM
SUE JEFFERY, representing self, gave public testimony in support
of HB 117. She said that she and her husband are both full-time
Kodiak residents and the family has been fishing at their setnet
site since 1987 and that they have run their setnet operation
like a family. She echoed previous testifiers by stating that
the comingling of fish has been done since before statehood.
She said that the status quo has never caused any conservation
or other concerns. She opined that requiring a setnet operation
with more than one permit to separate fish would generate
additional expenses. She concluded that the new interpretation
would make many families unable to make it.
2:40:30 PM
REBECCA HAUGHEY, representing self, testified in support of HB
117. She shared her personal experience as part of the beach
crew in her family's setnet business. She said she supports HB
117 because it supports small family agriculture and families
that are the future of Alaska. She asked the legislature to
allow these operations to operate as they always have.
2:41:54 PM
CO-CHAIR BURKE closed public testimony on HB 117.
2:42:24 PM
REPRESENTATIVE COULOMBE sought clarity on current limits placed
on comingling.
MR. GRUENING said there's no limit right now. He added hat in
discussions with ADF&G, there are some groups as large as 12,
but 10 people seemed like an appropriate average. He offered to
share the statistics of these groups across the state.
REPRESENTATIVE COULOMBE shared her understanding that statute
and regulation do not match. She asked whether this would
create a problem for "populating" regulations.
MR. GRUENING answered no, this is typical for this type of
legislation and would allow stakeholders to discuss group size,
as it differs by area and economics of each fishery. He opined
that public input would provide the best result.
2:45:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked whether the department is looking
at these regulations differently now that more fish are being
caught in an effort to slow the process down.
2:46:00 PM
JOE FELKL, Legislative Liaison, Alaska Department of Fish and
Game (ADF&G), said that is not a consideration from the
department's perspective. Further, he clarified that
enforcement actions are the responsibility of the Division of
Alaska Wildlife Troopers, not ADF&G.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER sought to confirm whether there is
communication between DPS and ADF&G on this matter.
MR. FELKL answered no, discussions have been had with DPS. He
added that when the bill was proposed, fishery managers were not
aware of enforcement actions taken by DPS.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked whether this breakdown in
communication would be addressed.
MR. FELKL said ADF&G is always open to discussions with the
troopers if its expertise is needed.
2:48:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES, in response to Representative Rauscher,
stated that his seems to be a new interpretation by DPS, so
legislation would be the best way to address it for clarity and
the avoidance of misinterpretation.
2:49:06 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER opined that the problem needs to be more
thoroughly understood before determining a solution. He
questioned the legal parameters of the traditional practice of
cooperatives in setnet fishing.
MR. GRUENING reiterated that as described in the testimony,
cooperatives involve multiple permit holders fishing together on
a site with multiple skiffs. The fish sometimes go back and
forth between the skiff and there are beach crews that support
the operation. In summary, he said, there are multiple permit
holders working together to execute the fishery.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER sought to confirm that there is no legal
construct or definition for "cooperative."
MR. GRUENING answered no, not in this context. He noted that
there is joint venture permit, which involves two permits that
fish together, but its more about the type and configuration of
the gear. In response to a series of follow up questions from
Representative Saddler, he confirmed that venture permits are an
option for setnetters; however, it would require that groups of
15, for example, would have to split into 5 separate joint
venture permits and lose the nature of the traditional
cooperative model.
2:52:38 PM
CO-CHAIR DIBERT asked whether there is an established timeline.
MR. GRUENING referred to page 1, lines 12-13, which addresses
the regulation process and the registration requirements,
including time limits.
2:53:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE COULOMBE asked whether the bill sponsor would
support a limit of 3-5 groups, rather than 10.
MR. GRUENING acknowledged that there are different opinions on
the correct limit, adding that 10 was a suggestion from ADF&G.
He said there has been a consideration to establish adaptive
limits based on the administrative area in which the fisheries
are located.
2:55:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked why the interpretation changed and
what law is at issue.
COLONEL BARLOW stated that from an enforcement standpoint,
nothing has changed. He added that long-terms practice can be
difficult to enforce, and the comingling can make it difficult
to track and enforce reasonably. He said the troopers are
always interested in education garnering compliance, but when
there's an uptick in a type of behavior, there has to be some
enforcement action to be in compliance.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER questioned the meaning of uptick.
COLONEL BARLOW clarified that he's speaking in broad
generalities based on input from troopers in the affected areas.
He added that he would need more time to report on quantities
and speak to the specific types of issues that are being
encountered.
3:00:20 PM
CO-CHAIR BURKE announced that HB 117 would be held over.
3:00:34 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Resources Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 3:00 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 117 Letter of Support 3.22.25.pdf |
HRES 3/24/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HB 117 |
| HB 117 supporting docs 3.21 H RES.pdf |
HRES 3/24/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HB 117 |
| ARE Presentation for Mar 2025 House Resources Comm.pdf |
HRES 3/24/2025 1:00:00 PM |
Alaska Resource Education |
| HB 117 written testimony received 3.24_Redacted.pdf |
HRES 3/24/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HB 117 |
| Rep. Stutes' Responses to Committee Questions 3.24.25.pdf |
HRES 3/24/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HB 117 |
| HRES DPS Responses HB 117 Hearing 3-24-25.pdf |
HRES 3/24/2025 1:00:00 PM |
HB 117 |