Legislature(2021 - 2022)ADAMS 519
04/13/2021 09:00 AM House FINANCE
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 | |
| HB79 | |
| HB80 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 79 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 80 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE BILL NO. 79
"An Act relating to salt water sport fishing operators
and salt water sport fishing guides; and providing for
an effective date."
9:03:12 AM
DOUG VINCENT-LANG, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND
GAME (via teleconference), introduced the legislation. He
stated that the bill had come before the committee the
previous year but due to the pandemic it had not moved
forward. He read from prepared remarks:
With this bill the department would like to reinstate
the saltwater licensing and reporting requirements.
Before an amendment in House Fisheries, it did not
reinstate freshwater licensing and reporting
requirements because the department does not see
immediate need for this kind of reporting in
freshwater at this time, which is what initially
caused some of the contention with this bill. However,
in House Fisheries the bill was amended to require
licensure of freshwater operators and guides, but not
require reporting by them. This is accompanied by
reductions in licensure fees for both freshwater and
saltwater guides. This change has caused some concern
with freshwater operators and guides. However, before
I go any further, let me provide you with some
legislative background with respect to this issue.
The sportfish guide and operator licenses were first
adopted in the 2003 and 2004 legislative session and
took effect in 2005 and remained in effect through
December 31, 2014, when they expired due to a sunset
clause. This legislation was passed based on the
urging of both fresh and saltwater guides at the time
who were looking to professionalize their industries.
During the 2015/2016 legislative session, only the
saltwater licensing and reporting requirements were
reinstated and included a sunset of 2018.
The legislature stripped the freshwater piece from
this legislation and the department supported this as
we were not using freshwater information for in season
management assessment of fisheries, and we were seeing
minor logbook violations. For example, an error in the
reporting of the number of grayling released resulted
in loss of concession permits, notably on federal
lands. This legislation sunset in 2018. The
legislature provided some bridge funding through UGF,
but that has since gone away. As such, we have no
legislation in place to collect fees to pay for the
marine logbook program. Logbook data has been
collected by the department from saltwater
sportfishing businesses and guides since 1998 and is
critical to upholding the state's U.S./Canada Pacific
Salmon Treaty obligations, providing data to the
International Pacific Halibut Commission crucial to
making allocation decisions. It is also critical for
the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council (IPHC)
for managing federal fisheries, avoiding duplicative
reporting mechanisms and undue burden in the charter
fishing industry.
Logbook data also supports a myriad of additional
critical uses, including but not limited to state
fisheries monitoring and management, advisory
announcements and emergency orders, the Alaska Board
of Fisheries process, advisory committees, external
communication, statewide harvest survey estimation
verification, fisheries disaster declarations, federal
subsistence board processes, land use and permitting,
operational planning and exemptions from NOAA
saltwater registry, all of which are included in the
logbook use summary provided in your packet.
9:06:29 AM
Commissioner Vincent-Lang continued to read from prepared
remarks:
Let me give you an example of the utility of this
information in the management of saltwater fisheries.
Last year we saw significant decreases in tourism
across Alaska, which resulted in significant reduction
in saltwater charter boat fishing. We use data from
the logbook program to show that we would be
significantly below our quotas for halibut and were
able to use this data to relax the regulations enacted
by the IPHC. This resulted in additional opportunity
participation for halibut charter fisheries, most of
which helped Alaskans. This provided a needed economic
boost to the charter fisheries and the local
economies, as well as an opportunity for Alaskans to
put some food in their freezers.
Fees collected as part of this bill would provide data
necessary to manage marine charter fisheries of
Alaska. These fisheries support somewhere in the
neighborhood of 250,000 angler days of effort and
contributed over $1.5 million to the state's economy.
In sum, the department supports this bill and sees it
as a necessary tool to fund and manage saltwater
charter fisheries. We urge your support in moving this
bill out of committee. Thank you. If the committee
would like, Ms. Hanke can walk you through a sectional
analysis of the bill and I am more than happy to try
to answer any questions you may have.
9:07:39 AM
Co-Chair Merrick asked for a review of the sectional
analysis.
RACHEL HANKE, LEGISLATIVE LIAISON, DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND
GAME (via teleconference), reviewed a sectional analysis
for the bill.
Section 1
Establishes license fees for sport fishing guides and
operators.
• Guide license - $100
• Operator license - $200
• Operator and guide combined license - $200
Section 2
Adds new Article to AS 16.40 that
• AS 16.40.262 provides stipulations for the
sport fishing operator license and defines the
license type
o Includes requirements such as a business
license and general liability insurance
• AS 16.40.272 provides stipulations for the
sport fishing guide license and combined operator
guide license, defines both license types
o Includes requirements such as a current
sport fishing license and first aid
certification
• AS 16.40.282 establishes the logbook reporting
requirements for saltwater guides and operators
• AS 16.40.292 establishes penalties for
violations the of the chapter
• AS 16.40.301 defines "sport fishing guide" and
"sport fishing guide services".
Section 3
Adds salt sportfishing operator and guide license to
AS 25.27.244(s)(2) which defines "license" in
statutes regarding the Child Support Services Agency.
Section 4
Uncodified law directing the Department of Fish and
Game to prepare a report for the legislature
proposing solutions to gathering harvest data for the
saltwater rental and unguided fishing
industry, due December 1, 2022.
Section 5
Effective date of January 1, 2022.
9:09:40 AM
Representative Josephson was trying to understand what the
absence of the logbook data looked like. He thought there
must have been some reporting requirement for the
department to know how the guides were performing and what
they were taking. He thought there was some obligation for
guides to report success and failure.
Commissioner Vincent-Lang answered that when the logbook
program had sunset and funding had gone away, the
department recognized the necessity of trying to collect
the information and had adopted companion regulations
through the Board of Fisheries. The department had been
funding the collection of the information with internal
dollars. It was the department's goal to get back to a
user-pay system from the logbook program. He relayed that
in the past year, the Sport Fish Division had taken a large
hit in license fees going into the Fish and Game Fund due
to the COVID-19 pandemic and loss of tourism across the
state. The department was looking for a way to fund the
unfunded mandate it had to collect the information through
a treaty and licensing program, which was generally
supported by the marine sportfishing industry in Alaska.
Representative Josephson asked about the lost federal
concession. He thought it sounded bad. He was familiar with
a federal concession related to hunting, but less so with
fishing. He asked for detail.
Commissioner Vincent-Lang answered there had been minor
violations occurring with freshwater fishing some areas of
freshwater occupied by federal land. He explained that when
there were two to three violations, even if they were
minor, it set the state up to potentially lose its
concession program on federal lands. He remarked that it
was probably a good thing to have happen if the violations
were major; however, some of the cases had been very minor
such as the number of grayling released by an angler or
failure to account for the number of rainbow trout
released. He explained that the department had been in a
position where its logbook program (that freshwater guides
were required to use) was used by federal officers to cite
guides. He explained that the citations had been used
against the guides in terms of concession programs on
federal lands.
Commissioner Vincent-Lang reported that the department was
also seeing issues in state waters such as the Kenai River,
where minor violations were being used by the Department of
Natural Resources to effect business operations. He
clarified that if DFG needed the information it would be
one thing, but it had not been using the information in
freshwater for in-season management purposes.
9:13:01 AM
Representative Thompson asked for verification that the
state had been providing the logbooks at its own expense.
Commissioner Vincent-Lang answered in the affirmative. He
relayed that DFG was seeking some additional federal
funding and may be successful in the future, but it was
currently uncertain how much the federal government would
continue to contribute to the programs.
Representative Thompson asked for verification that the
department was providing the logbooks in FY 21, which was
the reason for the January 1, 2022 effective date (when new
licenses would come out).
Commissioner Vincent-Lang replied in the affirmative. He
elaborated that DFG was trying to streamline the program to
be as cost efficient as possible by making the logbooks
electronic.
Representative Carpenter asked where the funding for the
program was currently coming from. He asked about the
current cost to the state.
Commissioner Vincent-Lang answered that the funds were
coming from the Fish and Game Fund matched by [federal] DJ
[Dingle Johnson] funds. He reported that the bill would not
cover the entire cost of the logbook program. He believed
the program cost about $500,000. He clarified that the
total cost of the freshwater component to run the logbook
program was about $650,000.
Representative Carpenter asked about alternatives available
that would provide the funds necessary to address the
problem.
Commissioner Vincent-Lang answered that DFG was seeking
additional funding through the halibut commission or the
North Pacific Fisheries Management Council because some of
the information collected was used for those fisheries;
however, DFG could not rely on the organizations to cover
all of the funding because some of the information on
rockfish and other species was not necessarily covered by
the halibut treaty or the Pacific Salmon Treaty. He
reiterated that DGF was trying to seek additional funding
to minimize the impact to the industry; however, the
department was never certain whether the federal funding
commitments would be followed through on an annual basis.
Representative Carpenter asked about the other funding
alternatives aside from taxing sport fish guides.
Commissioner Vincent-Lang replied that they would likely
have to fund the program with the Fish and Game Fund
matched with DJ funds.
9:16:31 AM
Representative Josephson asked if the bill would not fully
fund the logbook program because the previous committee had
reduced the license fees.
Commissioner Vincent-Lang replied that it was part of the
answer. Additionally, DFG was trying to absorb some money
out of the federal government to pay for the treaty
obligations on halibut and salmon treaty. The department
expected to recover some of the fees; therefore, the fee
increase in the bill had been reduced to what the
department believed was non-recoverable, but still
necessary for state management.
9:17:16 AM
Representative Carpenter observed that the proposal would
require a registration or licensing fee for sportfish
guides only, which reflected a tax on one user group. He
highlighted an alternative way to raise the money that
would be spread across all users. He suggested a $1
increase across all fish licenses to generate the $650,000
needed. He believed it was an alternative way to arrive at
the same conclusion. He stated that as written, the bill
did not generate the needed amount. He asked if the
department had explored other ways to fund the program with
state dollars.
Commissioner Vincent-Lang answered that the department had
considered raising license fees in general; however, it
presented a situation where people who never saltwater
fished would have to pay for the saltwater fishing
requirements. The department had received general
acceptance of the proposal to increase license fees to pay
for the program as it was impacting guides' industry and
clients. He noted there were a few people who were opposed
to the proposal. He remarked that the fee could be broader,
but at that point there started to be opposition from
people who never went fishing in saltwater. He explained
that DFG tried to make the fee as user-based as possible.
Representative Carpenter asked if the bill charged a
license fee to freshwater guides.
Commissioner Vincent-Lang answered that the bill had been
amended in the House Fisheries Committee to require
licensure of both freshwater and saltwater guides and
operators, but it would not require the reporting by
freshwater guides. He explained that it had not been the
governor's intent with the bill to only have licensure of
saltwater guides.
Representative Carpenter thought there was a disparity or
unfairness in the bill where it forced people to pay a tax
who would not benefit. He referenced an argument that a
smaller tax on a broader audience should not be considered
for a similar reason. He thought the topic should be given
further consideration.
9:20:26 AM
Representative Rasmussen thought the direction the
department had taken was appropriate. She shared that she
had only fished in saltwater a handful of times, and she
regularly fished on the Kenai River in the summer. She did
not think it made sense to have Alaskans who were not using
the fishing areas to pay anything. She asked if saltwater
sportfish operators typically served mostly tourists or
Alaska residents as well.
Commissioner Vincent-Lang answered that it varied by
region. He elaborated that in Southeast Alaska there were a
lot of locals using guides to fish, whereas in Southcentral
the percentage was about 50/50 residents versus
nonresidents. He added that in areas such as Valdez, the
clients were primarily residents.
Representative Carpenter asked about the percentage of
revenue raised by resident and nonresident fishing
licenses.
Commissioner Vincent-Lang answered that about 80 percent of
the incoming fees to the Fish and Game Fund were from
nonresidents and 20 percent were from residents. The
license fees under the bill would be identical regardless
of residency because the responsibility of paying for the
reporting was placed on the business and operators.
Representative Carpenter stated his understanding that the
administration wanted to charge a few operators a license
fee of $100 to $200, which would fall completely on
Alaskans versus a broader fee where 80 percent of the money
would be generated by out-of-state residents.
Commissioner Vincent-Lang answered that the bill would
place the licensing requirements equally on the industry
for residents and nonresidents, as opposed to placing the
licensing fee or fee for the logbook program across the
broad spectrum of Alaskan fishermen where most of the fees
would be collected by nonresidents who may or may not be
fishing in saltwater.
HB 79 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 80 Public Testimony as of 041221.pdf |
HFIN 4/13/2021 9:00:00 AM |
HB 80 |