Legislature(2021 - 2022)GRUENBERG 120
03/11/2021 11:00 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 | |
| HB54 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 54 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 54-INVASIVE SPECIES MANAGEMENT
[Contains discussion of HB 26 and HB 28]
11:05:28 AM
CHAIR TARR announced that the only order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 54, "An Act establishing the Alaska Invasive
Species Council in the Department of Fish and Game; relating to
management of invasive species; relating to invasive species
management decals; and providing for an effective date."
CHAIR TARR remarked that working with all stakeholders results
in the best legislation, and stakeholders have been engaged in
the formation of this bill over the last four years. She
described a Fall 2019 work session that was attended by
scientists, float plane operators, fishing industry members,
staff from the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), staff from
the Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G), representatives
from soil and water conservation districts, and tourism industry
members, among others. She said many threats exist from
changing climate and water conditions, arctic shipping, ballast
water in oil rigs, and visitors to the state.
CHAIR TARR stated that HB 54 would create the Alaska Invasive
Species Council. She stressed the importance of coordinating
[mitigation and management] efforts to provide effective results
and best use of available funding. She encouraged members to
investigate the stakeholder information and committee packet
materials to gain an understanding of the groups involved and
how they coordinate for best results.
11:09:48 AM
DANIELLE VERNA, Secretary, Alaska Invasive Species Partnership
(AKISP), gave a PowerPoint presentation describing the Alaska
Invasive Species Partnership ("the partnership"). She turned to
the first slide and specified that the partnership is an
informal group comprised of individuals from agencies and
organizations throughout Alaska. She said the partnership
recognizes Alaska's vulnerability to invasive species and its
goals of coordination, cooperation, and action aimed to prevent
the introduction of new invasive species and to reduce the
impacts of existing invasive species. She added that the
partnership provides leadership and support to stakeholders,
including members of the public. She explained that invasive
species affect land, freshwater, and marine environments
throughout the state. She relayed that the partnership has
goals to include additional stakeholders to provide input and
coordinated responses.
MS. VERNA showed the second slide which listed the partnership's
board of directors. She said members of the board consist of
individuals from nonprofit, Native, academic, state, and federal
entities, and board members serve two-year terms.
11:12:43 AM
MS. VERNA referred to the third slide which listed the standing
committees within the partnership as follows: Elodea, Northern
Pike, Marine, Government Relations, Workshop Planning, and
Outreach & Education.
MS. VERNA directed attention to the fourth and last slide which
listed the avenues of outreach conducted by the partnership.
She offered to provide additional information to the committee
about the partnership's ongoing activities and outreach and said
all are welcome to participate in the partnership. Ms. Verna
acknowledged the passion and work being done by members and
stakeholders and closed her remarks by adding that invasive
species are a continually evolving, active threat.
11:15:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ORTIZ asked whether the biggest challenges
associated with invasive species are those on land or those in
water.
MS. VERNA answered that the threats are equal among different
biomes, and that terrestrial and aquatic biomes share common
threats, such as that from elodea. She explained that elodea is
an aquatic plant which arrives [in Alaska] by terrestrial
vectors such as boats transported behind vehicles, and elodea
[negatively] affects the invertebrate species in streams, which
can, in turn, affect salmon.
11:17:09 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES asked what invasive species, other than
elodea and northern pike, fall under the marine category.
MS. VERNA replied that there is particular concern with [the
introduction] of European green crabs and other organisms
including algae. She explained that the species can be brought
into the state through marine and terrestrial vectors.
11:18:15 AM
AARON MARTIN, Program Coordinator, Alaska Regional Invasive
Species, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the
Interior, gave a PowerPoint presentation, entitled "Preserving
Alaska's resources by managing invasive species," dated 3/11/21.
He noted that AIS, the acronym for Alaska Invasive Species,
would be used frequently. He drew attention to the second
slide, which read:
? Infrastructure:
o Hydropower facilities:
21% of the state's power
o Watercraft:
68,616 registered watercraft (1/every 9
Alaskans)
$587M annual economic impact
o Floatplanes:
114 floatplane bases (40% of all towns)
Lake Hood floatplane base
$56 Million (labor + economic activity)
Food security and industries
o Sport fishing - $2.4B
o Salmon commercial fisheries - $4.2B
o 229 Federally recognized tribes, 12 ANCs
o Hunting and wildlife viewing - $7.5B
MR. MARTIN explained that elodea and zebra mussels can have an
economic impact and restrict access to lakes and river systems.
MR. MARTIN referred to the map of Alaska on the third slide
which depicted the density, distribution, and diversity of
invasive species. He explained that Alaska is on the low end of
aquatic and terrestrial invasive species and suggested it [is in
the state's best interest] to keep the numbers of AIS low and be
able to eradicate new AIS quickly.
MR. MARTIN turned to the graph on the fourth slide and explained
that Alaska enjoys its position further left [relative to other
states] on the "invasion curve" related to freshwater and marine
environments. He credited the partnership with being able to
act quickly to take measures to eradicate new AIS. He suggested
that the key takeaway from the slide is the illustration that as
AIS becomes more established and moves up the invasion curve,
the cost of eradication along with the costs to ecosystems and
economies rises significantly.
11:21:28 AM
MR. MARTIN spoke to the photographs of zebra mussels and quagga
mussels on the fifth slide. He stated that these species foul
infrastructures, including water distribution systems, and said
utilities can be seriously impacted. He added that recreational
activities and property values may also suffer as a result,
which has occurred in the Great Lakes. He cautioned that salmon
and trout can also be affected.
MR. MARTIN displayed the sixth slide which depicted a map of the
U.S. illustrating the spread and establishment of zebra and
quagga mussels via commercial shipping routes. He next referred
to the seventh slide and explained that containment efforts have
been made by state, tribal, and federal entities along with
marina operators and other industry members. He said the area
outlined in red shows the Columbia Basin Watershed boundary and
the markers within the boundary show inspection sites and
decontamination sites. He stated that these inspection and
decontamination sites do not extend to Alaska, though
coordination and communication to that end is taking place.
11:24:57 AM
MR. MARTIN drew attention to the eighth slide, which read:
Results
? Research suggests high habitat suitability for
invasive mollusks.
? No confirmed reports of invasive mollusks in
the wild.
o Smith et al. 2005
o D. Bogan 2012 AKISP presentation Kodiak
2012
MR. MARTIN continued to the ninth slide regarding boat
inspections for quagga and zebra mussels, which read:
? Alaska has 3 native mussels and 21% of state's power
comes from hydropower facilities.
226 watercraft inspected (2017-19) at Alcan Port of
Entry:
o 70% not inspected in route, 30% inspected in-
route
o 38% coming from a state with Q/Z mussels, 62%
coming from states without
? No live mussels detected yet, but?
? Currently assessing other critical control points in
BC, WA, and OR.
MR. MARTIN drew attention to the second bullet point on the
ninth slide and said no live mussels have been found. However,
he continued, in 2019 a watercraft from the Great Lakes was
found covered in dead zebra mussels and it required mitigation
measures that included a high-pressure rinse with 120-degree
water and intricate cleaning. He said the service would be
offered May through August this year.
11:27:36 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked whether the inspections include
looking at both boats and trailers.
MR. MARTIN answered yes, boats and trailers are inspected for
zebra and quagga mussels as well as other AIS, inside and out.
11:28:24 AM
MR. MARTIN addressed the tenth slide which illustrated a Public
Service Announcement (PSA) issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) regarding zebra mussels found in moss balls sold
at pet stores. He explained that the USFWS has coordinated with
state agencies, pet store industries, and other federal agencies
to ascertain how long this may have been happening and how many
items have been sold. He noted that zebra mussels have been
found in moss balls in Alaska, and that all moss balls have been
collected through efforts by staff at DNR and ADF&G.
11:30:02 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ORTIZ observed the PSA states that zebra mussels
are the most destructive invasive species in North America. He
asked where zebra mussels originated, if not North America.
MR. MARTIN answered that zebra and quagga mussels are native to
the Black Sea and Caspian Sea in Eastern Europe, and the moss
balls imported to the U.S. had originated from that region. He
added that other invasive species may also exist in the moss
balls, and efforts are underway to identify and destroy them.
11:31:09 AM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked whether there existed any regulation
to control or prevent the shipping of online purchases of
contaminated moss balls to Alaska.
MR. MARTIN explained that the USFWS is working with online
retailers such as Amazon, Etsy, Petco, and PetSmart and that the
retailers have taken the items off their online catalogues or
should have. He added that the state has been working to
identify and quarantine merchandise that may contain elodea or
other invasive aquatic plants, and to prohibit future sales.
11:32:13 AM
MR. MARTIN resumed his presentation and brought attention to the
eleventh slide entitled, "Originating locations of watercraft
crossing into AK, summer 2017-2019." He explained that the
slide illustrates the interconnectedness of infested waterbodies
and that AIS may arrive via boats, fishing gear, and waders,
having traveled from other states to Alaska.
MR. MARTIN directed attention to the twelfth and thirteenth
slides entitled, "Prevention and Eradication: Elodea," which
read:
? Background:
o Alaska's 1st submerged aquatic invasive plant
Native to the Pacific Northwest and New
England
o Introduced through aquarium dumps
? Impacts:
o Habitat degradation/ loss for fish and wetland
obligate species
o Reduced biodiversity, fishing opportunities,
floatplane and watercraft safety
o Increased sedimentation
? Economic analysis:
o Impact Potential: Annual loss of $159M to the
sockeye salmon fisheries if not stopped (Schwoerer et
al 2019).
o Ship-borne AIS impacts in the Great Lakes:
Annual cumulative loss of $138M/year to sportfishing,
commercial fishing and water use. (Rothlisberger et al
2019).
MR. Martin turned to the map of Alaska on the fourteenth slide
entitled, "Known Elodea Infestations in Alaska." He explained
where eradication processes are taking place in the state.
11:36:31 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS asked what entities and to what
proportion each entity is involved in eradicating AIS.
MR. MARTIN answered that the USFWS provides financial and "boots
on the ground" efforts, the soil and water conservation
districts provides leadership in the Interior and on the Kenai
Peninsula, and DNR and ADF&G contribute to eradication efforts.
He said all parties contribute equitably. He pointed out that
additional resources are needed because elodea is costly and
difficult to locate and has been found in new areas. He further
added that Cook Inlet Aquaculture Association, Tyonek Tribal
Conservation District, and Manley Hot Springs Village are other
examples of participants.
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS surmised that each effort is
coordinated on an ad-hoc basis. He asked whether the USFWS has
a dedicated budget for invasive eradication.
MR. MARTIN answered that there is no dedicated USFWS budget for
eradication. He said allocated funds are received from
headquarters for the prevention, early detection, and rapid
response activities that have been identified by working closely
with partners throughout Alaska. He advised that a federal
rapid response fund and a state rapid response fund are
necessary because taking funding from one critical project to
address an infestation before it gets too much bigger leaves
[his agency] with less. He added that moving forward on the
other critical pieces cannot happen because of being reactionary
on this other side.
11:39:16 AM
CHAIR TARR noted HB 54 would also create a response fund,
although the bill would not fund it. She requested Mr. Martin
to describe a year-by-year example of an elodea infestation.
MR. MARTIN responded that a good example is the Alexander Lake
infestation. He explained the eradication project was initially
estimated to cost $90,000 per year for three years, but due to
planning processes and the lack of partnership, compounded by
staff turnover in multiple agencies, the project slipped for
over a year and a half. He said the project has now amplified
and is a multi-million-dollar eradication project, plus it
possibly led to the infestation of nearby Sucker Lake. In
Interior Alaska, he added, three new infestations were found
last year; one being Harding Lake with elodea estimated to be
present in 40 of the lake's 800 acres. He advised that now is
the time to address it with early intervention efforts at a cost
of a few hundred thousand dollars, thereby averting a whole
lake, multi-million-dollar eradication effort.
11:41:03 AM
MR. MARTIN resumed his presentation. He moved to the fifteenth
slide and explained the map illustrates current habitat
suitability across Alaska for elodea. The "hotter" the color,
he said, the more suitable the environment for elodea to become
established. He added that if the models are correct the water
systems in Alaska will be warming up and [elodea will spread].
MR. MARTIN stated that the sixteenth slide entitled, "Freshwater
Vectors - Floatplanes," is tied to the floatplane risk
assessment by Dr. Schwoerer et al. He said the slide shows how
connected Alaska is through the floatplane industry. He noted
that the "hotter" the color of each line, the more frequent that
travel point. He explained that these vector analyses help with
prioritizing where prevention efforts should be focused as well
as area protection efforts. Efforts have been expanded around
the Bristol Bay area, he continued, in recognition of how much
traffic there is from Anchorage and the Kenai Peninsula to Wood-
Tikchik [State Park], Togiak National Wildlife Refuge, and other
lake systems near Bristol Bay.
11:42:32 AM
MR. MARTIN addressed the seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth
slides all entitled, "Prevention and Preparedness: European
Green Crabs." Speaking to the seventeenth slide, he pointed out
that European green crabs, native to Western Europe, are
categorized among the top 100 worst marine invasive species in
the world. He explained that this crab harms native crustaceans
by eating and outcompeting them and this crab damages estuaries
by eroding and digging into mudbanks, which are a delicate
environment used by freshwater and marine juvenile fish. He
said this crab has become established throughout the western
coastline [of the U.S.] and is moving north.
MR. MARTIN spoke to the eighteenth slide and specified that the
USFWS has coordinated with multiple agencies and industry to
conduct a risk analysis to understand how ships move and the
level of risk for introduction [of European green crabs] through
human-created pathways. He stated that the "hotter" the color
or the hotter the area the more frequently [the shipping route]
is used. He pointed out that Dutch Harbor is among the busiest
ports in North America with boats coming directly from Southeast
Asia and North Asia, as well as some of the most infested ports
and bays in North America like San Francisco Bay, Tacoma, and
the Seattle area.
MR. MARTIN showed the nineteenth slide and explained that these
marine shipping pathways bring ballast water as well as critters
living on the hulls of the boats. He directed attention to the
illustrations and said that Alaskan ports are above the dashed
line and below the line are the ports from which these boats are
coming - the bigger the line the more frequent the traffic. He
pointed out that Alaska is hyper-connected to places that are
highly infested for marine invaders.
11:44:51 AM
MR. MARTIN moved to the twentieth slide entitled, "Key
Takeaways," and stated that Alaska's way of life and its
industries are at risk from the arrival of invasive species. He
said the goal is to keep the distribution, density, and
diversity of invasive species low so there is a chance to
eradicate them before they become so hyper-established that it
is unfeasible. He said it is essential to solidify this
foundation of the existing partnership to increase awareness and
prevention about the issue and to build on the organization and
capacity among this partnership. Each entity has one or two
people fully dedicated to this, he advised, and oftentimes the
partnership gets pulled from one house fire to another, which is
not a sustainable way to operate on such an important topic.
11:46:14 AM
CHAIR TARR complimented the research and presentations. She
invited the next witness to begin.
11:46:46 AM
LISA KA'AIHUE, Special Projects Manager, Cook Inlet Aquaculture
Association, stated she serves as the chair of the board of
directors for the Alaska Invasive Species Partnership. She
thanked Ms. Verna for describing the partnership and Mr. Martin
for describing the invasive species issues facing Alaska and
what is at stake for the state. She said she will focus on why
the partnership supports HB 54 and will address the two main
pieces of the bill - establishment of an Alaska Invasive Species
Council and a rapid response fund.
MS. KA'AIHUE stated that the proposed council is needed because
the partnership is informal and dependent on volunteers to push
forward with invasive species initiatives. She said the
partnership has been successful but can only do so much to move
forward with invasive species issues and cannot compel agencies
and stakeholders to participate. She specified that an advisory
council to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G),
comprised of members from state, federal, local, regional, and
tribal governments, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs)
and industry, would provide a venue for regular communication.
The result, she continued, would be consistent statewide
priorities, efficient management approaches, and common
messaging to prevent the introduction and spread of invasive
species in Alaska.
MS. KA'AIHUE allowed a council may seem like another level of
bureaucracy but said it would ensure resources and funds are
used in a coordinated fashion across governmental agencies and
departments. A council, she stated, would break organizational
silos that are inherent when organizations have their own
missions combined with limited resources. Staying proactive by
creating this broad council, she continued, would ensure that
limited resources are used efficiently and with a high
probability of success against the potentially devasting
invasive species that Alaska is facing. The Alaska Invasive
Species Partnership will do everything it can as volunteers to
support the council, she advised, and will offer its experience
with input on strategic planning along with providing issue-
specific expertise.
MS. KA'AIHUE expressed the partnership's support for a rapid
response fund as outlined in HB 54. She said this would allow
ADF&G to make appropriations to the fund in the future. She
added that prevention is the best strategy for stopping harmful
invasive species, but that preventing introduction is not always
possible. She stated that a rapid response fund would increase
the likelihood of successful eradication of invasive species so
that Alaska would not be dealing with multi-million-dollar
management problems later.
MS. KA'AIHUE stated she is partial to salmon given the industry
she works in. She drew attention to the only slide in her
presentation, which depicted a northern pike from Alexander
Creek with a "belly full of salmon fry." She advised that
wherever invasive pike are found in Southcentral Alaska, the
pike's bellies are full of salmon or whatever resident species
are left over after the favored food of salmon has been
consumed. "Can you imagine Southcentral Alaska without salmon?"
she asked. She said this is a critical example of why HB 54 is
needed since Alaska defines itself by its natural resources.
11:51:08 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS expressed his surprise at learning
from the committee packet information that pike are native to
many Bristol Bay watersheds. He asked what it is about
Southcentral watersheds that pike are so destructive whereas
there seems to be equilibrium in the ecosystem with salmon in
Bristol Bay watersheds.
MS. KA'AIHUE offered her understanding that pike and salmon
evolved together north of the Alaska Range, but when pike were
introduced to Southcentral it was a totally new inland species
and because the pike and salmon did not evolve together there,
the predatory pike took over. She deferred to the next witness,
Ms. Davis, to address the topic further.
11:52:41 AM
TAMMY DAVIS, Coordinator, Alaska Invasive Species Program,
Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), during the hearing
on HB 54, gave a PowerPoint presentation, entitled "Department
of Fish and Game Invasive Species Program Report: 2021," dated
3/11/21. She displayed slide 2, "Invasive Species Costs," and
this slide reiterates the points brought up by the previous
speakers to instill the grave threats that invasive species pose
to Alaska's fisheries, recreation, means of transportation, and
to Alaska's economies that rely on healthy fisheries, clean
water, and environmental resources.
MS. DAVIS moved to slide 3, "Invasive Species," and defined
invasive species as a non-native organism that is introduced
into an ecosystem where it can cause harm to the environment,
economies, and human health. She related that ADF&G's invasive
species program strives for high caliber invasive species
management based on the best available science and technology to
protect, maintain, and improve the native fish, game, and
aquatic plant resources of the state and their habitats, along
with the economic and well-being interests of Alaskans. She
said the department does this through collaboration with an
array of partners, and added that work and investment continue,
most notably the strategic and successful eradication of
northern pike in Southcentral Alaska. The department has
outstanding biologists, she continued, and ADF&G supports and
grows its community-based early detection monitoring work with
citizen scientists and agency staff, including marine monitoring
for European green crabs. That model, she noted, has been
expanded to fresh water to find what has yet to be detected and
to prepare for what may be coming. She said strong
relationships have been established with stakeholders. She
pointed out that reporting and strategic planning are essential
for success, and strategic plans are being actively updated.
MS. DAVIS showed slide 4, "Timeline of Invasive Species Events,"
and reported that in the past 11 years the number and diversity
of non-indigenous species released into [Alaska's] waters has
more than doubled compared to the past 40 years. This was
expected to be a growing problem, she said, because invasive
species are spread to Alaska through expanding transportation
pathways, such as more vessels and people into the Arctic, and
through the global distribution of goods. She said projects to
eradicate invasive species infestations that originated from
illegal release require expertise, collaboration with other
agencies and landowners, and reallocation of staff time and
financial resources over years. These projects are costly, she
advised, but necessary to reduce the chance of further spread,
to restore valuable habitats, and to reestablish or improve
fishing opportunities. She stressed that to efficiently use
funds and avoid environmental and economic impacts, rapid
response and preventing new introductions is crucial.
11:56:53 AM
MS. DAVIS provided a review of some of the infestation projects
that ADF&G has addressed. She stated that northern pike, slides
5 and 6, were first released into the Yentna River drainage
during the 1950s, with drastic impacts on native fish. She said
ADF&G has had successful projects over the years and is still
working hard to protect salmon fisheries in Southcentral Alaska.
She explained that response decisions differ within the region
based on what is feasible for specific water bodies. She noted
that Anchorage and Kenai Peninsula waters were prioritized for
early eradication projects over the past 10 years because those
lakes were accessible and eradication possible. Ms. Davis
reported that application of the aquatic pesticide rotenone has
eradicated pike from 23 water bodies. She noted that
infestations in the Matanuska-Susitna (Mat-Sue) Valley are
widespread, especially in the west side tributary drainages like
Alexander Creek where salmon populations have been decimated.
She explained that preventing new introductions, eradication
where possible, and suppression via targeted gillnetting is
being used in this case to reduce pike populations and increase
survival potential for juvenile salmonids. She said research
includes collaboration with universities and federal agencies to
prevent pike from moving into new waters, to understand pike
movements and predation impacts, and to determine where
populations originated.
MS. DAVIS moved to slide 7 and reported that yellow perch are
found in an unnamed lake on the Kenai Peninsula in 2000, the
first fish introduced to Alaska waters that were not native to
the state. She related that ADF&G used rotenone, with help from
the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, to remove all
yellow perch and that none have been found since that removal.
MS. DAVIS, in reference to the earlier question about northern
pike from Representative Kreiss-Tomkins, confirmed that northern
pike were native to most of Alaska but were introduced into the
Southcentral region where they were not native.
11:59:22 AM
MS. DAVIS spoke to slide 8, "Dvex." She said Didemnum vexillum
(Dvex), an invasive colonial sea squirt, was found at an oyster
farm in Sitka's Whiting Harbor during the inaugural Marine
Invasive Species Bioblitz in 2010. The oyster farm was visited,
she explained, because aquaculture is both negatively affected
by invasive species and a common pathway for spread. The entire
oyster farm was infested, as was the Whiting Harbor seabed, she
reported. Despite removal of all infrastructure from the area
and ADF&G's collaboration with partners in novel research to
eliminate and control the tunicate, it remains established on
the seafloor. She added that Whiting Harbor would be surveyed
again this year.
MS. DAVIS displayed slide 9 and said muskellunge, also known as
muskies, are in the same family as northern pike. She related
that in 2018 during a pike eradication treatment on the Kenai
Peninsula, eight unusual looking pike were recovered, and DNA
testing confirmed the fish to be muskies. Based on the age of
the fish and anecdotal information, she continued, the fish were
likely released in 2012. She added that this species could have
dire impacts to salmon fisheries and stocked fish populations.
MS. DAVIS addressed slide 10, "Largemouth Bass." She stated
that in 2018 a Sand Lake angler caught a fish he couldn't
identify; DNA identified the fish as a largemouth bass. She
pointed out that largemouth bass are native to northern Midwest
states and Canadian provinces and are voracious predators that
have led to local extinction of several fish populations where
they have been introduced.
MS. DAVIS turned to slide 11 and said another surprise in 2018
was the illegal introduction of fathead minnows to a small water
body on the Kenai Peninsula. The pond was drained and treated
with rotenone in 2019, she related, and ADF&G's pathologist
found that the minnows were carrying a parasite that could be
harmful to native fish.
12:02:10 PM
MS. DAVIS showed slide 12, "GOLDFISH," and noted that 2018 was a
big year for invasive species detections; goldfish were also
reported that year in Cuddy Pond in Midtown Anchorage. She
related that manual methods were not effective in controlling
the problem, so ADF&G requested and received an emergency
exemption from the Department of Environmental Conservation
(DEC) to apply rotenone, removing over 10,000 goldfish.
MS. DAVIS referred to slide 13, "RAINBOW TROUT," and stated that
last year rainbow trout were illegally imported from a hatchery
in Oregon and released. Unlike most illegal introductions, she
noted, the release of those trout into a Kenai water body
resulted in a law enforcement citation from a successful
partnership between ADF&G and Alaska Wildlife Troopers.
MS. DAVIS discussed slide 14, "ZEBRA MUSSELS." She specified
that Alaska is facing a considerable threat from this species,
and it was unexpected to find that the aquatic plant trade is a
pathway for zebra mussels. According to the Pacific States
Marine Fisheries Commission (PSMFC), she related, the estimated
cost of failing to prevent an invasion of zebra mussels and
quagga mussels into the Columbia River Basin, which includes
waters located in the Pacific Northwest states and British
Columbia, would exceed $500 million. She added that states in
the region are currently spending $13.2 million per year on
prevention efforts, including watercraft inspections.
MS. DAVIS concluded her presentation with slide 15, "INVASIVE
SPECIES REPORTING." She said ADF&G hosts online smartphone and
telephonic options for reporting invasive species. She pointed
out that when an organism is reported for which ADF&G does not
have jurisdiction, the department shares that report with its
identified partners.
12:04:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS asked whether Ms. Davis is still
ADF&G's only staff exclusively dedicated to invasive species.
MS. DAVIS replied, "Yes, with a caveat," and noted that ADF&G's
Region 2 office has staff who are focused on northern pike.
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS asked why northern pike are so
much more of a malevolent ecosystem force in Southcentral Alaska
relevant to the rest of Alaska.
MS. DAVIS responded that salmon and northern pike evolved
together where the pike are native. In addition, she continued,
Southcentral has much shallower and slower moving systems and
many side water sloughs where vegetation is perfect for northern
pike reproduction.
12:06:01 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS inquired about the extent to which
ADF&G could ascertain the source of an invasive species
introduction down to a specific person or event.
MS. DAVIS answered that because of new technology, particularly
environmental DNA, fish can be tied back to home waters. For
example, she said, the rainbow trout were tied back to Oregon.
In another introduction, she continued, it was determined that
the fish originated in the Midwest but in that situation ADF&G
was unable to work with the troopers to follow through on any
sort of citation.
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS, in relation to going forward with
HB 54, inquired about whether criminal penalties exist for the
introduction of invasive species. He further inquired about
whether there is a way to get some revenue in the bill given it
is a classic "ounce of prevention is a pound of cure" situation.
CHAIR TARR responded that there is some good news to report but
in the interest of time she is saving it until the next meeting.
12:08:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY noted that when children learn something
they pass it on to their parents. She asked about efforts that
the partnership and ADF&G are undertaking to reach young kids.
MS. DAVIS replied that direct interaction with children is
occurring in the Kachemak Bay area where the Kachemak Bay
National Estuarine Research Reserve does early detection
monitoring with students, and it is also occurring in Sitka. A
challenge, she pointed out, is that kids are out of school
during the period in which most of the trapping events occur.
MR. MARTIN added that the partnership developed a communication
strategy in which key audiences were identified, and one of
those main audiences is teachers, educators, and students. He
said current efforts include the development of educational
toolkits for distribution in classrooms and visitor centers
throughout the state.
12:11:00 PM
CHAIR TARR thanked the speakers for their presentations. [HB 54
was held over.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 54 Sponsor Statement - Version W 1.28.21.pdf |
HFSH 3/11/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 3/18/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 4/6/2021 10:00:00 AM HRES 4/16/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 54 |
| HB 54 Version W 1.15.21.PDF |
HFSH 3/11/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 3/18/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 4/6/2021 10:00:00 AM HRES 4/16/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 54 |
| HB 54 Sectional Analysis - Version W 1.20.21.pdf |
HFSH 3/11/2021 11:00:00 AM |
|
| HB 54 Fiscal Note - DEC-CO 3.5.21.pdf |
HFSH 3/11/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 3/18/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 4/6/2021 10:00:00 AM |
HB 54 |
| HB 54 Fiscal Note - DFG-DSF 3.5.21.pdf |
HFSH 3/11/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 3/18/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 4/6/2021 10:00:00 AM |
HB 54 |
| HB 54 Supporting Document - ADFG Invasive Species Presentation 3.11.21.pdf |
HFSH 3/11/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 3/18/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 4/6/2021 10:00:00 AM |
HB 54 |
| HB 54 Supporting Document - Alaska Invasive Species Partnership Presentation 3.11.21.pdf |
HFSH 3/11/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 3/18/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 4/6/2021 10:00:00 AM |
HB 54 |
| HB 54 Supporting Document - USFWS Alaska Invasive Species Presentation 3.11.21.pdf |
HFSH 3/11/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 3/18/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 4/6/2021 10:00:00 AM |
HB 54 |
| HB 54 Supporting Document - Ka'aihue Presentation - 3.11.21.pdf |
HFSH 3/11/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 3/18/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 4/6/2021 10:00:00 AM |
HB 54 |
| HB 54 Supporting Document - ADFG Newsletter - Invasive Species 4.2021.pdf |
HFSH 3/11/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 3/18/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 4/6/2021 10:00:00 AM |
HB 54 |
| HB 54 Supporting Document - Cost of Managing Invasive Species in Alaska 7.2012.pdf |
HFSH 3/11/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 3/18/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 4/6/2021 10:00:00 AM |
HB 54 |
| HB 54 Supporting Document - Cost of Invasive Species in US 1.2012.pdf |
HFSH 3/11/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 3/18/2021 11:00:00 AM |
HB 54 |
| HB 54 Supporting Document - States with Invasive Species Fees or Stickers 7.24.20.pdf |
HFSH 3/11/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 3/18/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 4/6/2021 10:00:00 AM |
HB 54 |
| HB 54 Supporting Document - WA Invasive Species Council Fact Sheet 1.2017.pdf |
HFSH 3/11/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 3/18/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 4/6/2021 10:00:00 AM |
HB 54 |
| HB 54 Letters of Support 3.10.21.pdf |
HFSH 3/11/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 3/18/2021 11:00:00 AM HFSH 4/6/2021 10:00:00 AM |
HB 54 |