Legislature(2013 - 2014)CAPITOL 120
02/05/2013 10:00 AM House FISHERIES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Overview(s): Alaska Department of Fish & Game Presentation of Foregone Harvest of Salmon | |
| HB89 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| *+ | HB 89 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 89-AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES
11:09:10 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 89, "An Act relating to the rapid response to,
and control of, aquatic invasive species and establishing the
aquatic invasive species response fund."
11:09:38 AM
LOUIE FLORA, Staff, Representative Paul Seaton, Alaska State
Legislature, introduced HB 89 stating that the intent is to
address a rapid response to invasive species which may already
or are likely to appear in Alaskan waters. In recent committee
meetings, invasive species, such as the Sitka infestation of
D.vex, commonly called Sea Vomit, have been presented and shown
to be a growing problem. It is important to have the ability to
address these types of outbreaks. Additionally, he said,
immediate attention may be required to address situations such
as unknown species arriving on the Japanese tsunami debris and
what the growing commerce connected to marine traffic may bring
to regions in Alaska. On the books, a long range plan is in
place, but HB 89 is specific for developing a rapid response
capability within, as well as through the coordination of, state
agencies.
11:12:20 AM
DOUGLAS DUNCAN Intern, Representative Paul Seaton, Alaska State
Legislature, paraphrased from the sponsor statement, which read
[original punctuation provided]:
HB 89 provides the Alaska Department of Fish and Game
(ADF&G) with the statutory authority, and a fund, to
swiftly address outbreaks of aquatic invasive species
such as D.vex.
HB 89 requires ADF&G, in coordination with the
Department of Environmental Conservation, the
Department of Natural Resources, and other applicable
agencies, to establish and carry out a rapid response
plan to an incipient aquatic invasive species.
HB 89 gives ADF&G the authority to use chemical,
biological, mechanical, or physical methods to deal
with the outbreak. It allows for expedited review of
plans for dealing with invasive species, and directs
ADF&G staff to prioritize eradication of the invasive
species over other management issues for a specific
area.
HB 89 specifies that affected private property owners
shall be considered, but still allows responding
agencies to be held harmless for damages caused by
their invasive species treatment. Impacts to native
species shall be minimized if possible.
Sea Vomit and other aquatic invasive species have the
potential to seriously impact our lucrative commercial
fishing, mariculture, and recreational fishing
industries. HB 89 gives Alaska the tools to rapidly
combat this threat.
MR. DUNCAN stressed that the sooner response can take place the
better the possibility of success in protecting the aquatic
resources of Alaska; established invasive species are more
difficult to control or eradicate.
11:15:13 AM
MR. FLORA reported that, because of the previous legislation
considered on this subject, the topic has been discussed by, and
opinions contributed from, various interest groups to assist in
the crafting of the bill language. For example, inclusion of
"incipient populations of aquatic invasive species" is helpful
to isolate and trigger a rapid response for targeted action on
an incipient versus an endemic invasive population.
Paraphrasing from the bill, he said private property owners
would be held harmless, as indicated by the language on page 2,
subsection (h), which reads [original punctuation provided]:
(h) In responding under (b) of this section to the
occurrence of an incipient population of an aquatic
invasive species, the department shall consider the
potential effects of its response measures on private
property while selecting the most effective methods to
eradicate or control the aquatic invasive species.
MR. FLORA referred to existing regulatory language that governs
agricultural pests and can require property owners to pay for
mitigation efforts, to underscore the need to include subsection
(h). Also, HB 89 creates a rapid response fund, avoiding the
need to call a special legislative session in order to
appropriate money in the event of an emergency situation due to
an outbreak.
11:18:40 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON asked when the current memorandum of
understanding (MOU), between DNR, ADF&G and DEC, was signed and
whether it is specific to D.vex.
MR. FLORA said he would provide the information to the
committee, regarding the signature date of the MOU, and
clarified that it is specific to aquatic species.
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON inquired why the governors proposed budget
does not include funding for a study/plan for rapid response.
MR. FLORA deferred to a state agency for response.
11:20:30 AM
CHAIR SEATON pointed out that the intent of the bill requires
the creation of a plan, including applicable agency MOUs, and to
establish a fund to support and make capable a rapid response.
The purpose of the fund is not for planning purposes. Citing
the Whiting Harbor D.vex infestation, he said it has taken three
years for the department to formulate a request for proposal
(RFP) in order to handle the outbreak; putting economic
fisheries in jeopardy. He pointed out that the purpose of the
fund is described within the bill, at the bottom of page 2
[subsection (i)]. Finally, he offered that ADF&G is not only
working with DEC and DNR but is collaborating with other state,
federal and private entities as well, to develop an effective
plan.
11:24:14 AM
CHARLIE SWANTON, Director, Division of Sport Fish, Alaska
Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G), referred to Representative
Herron's question regarding the MOU to state that it was signed
in mid-January. He declined to offer a definitive reason for
the lack of a rapid response to the Sitka D.vex infestation, and
said some confusion existed over statutory responsibility, which
required review by the Department of Law (DOL). He then
reviewed the fiscal note, prepared by ADF&G, for HB 89, and said
it includes the cost for a staff of three to attend to the
administrative procedures required in the bill, over the next 18
months. The first phase would be to update the Aquatic Nuisance
Species Management Plan, an eleven year old document, as well as
establish a comprehensive outline and finally, create a detailed
rapid response plan for the five identified species, which are:
Northern pike, D.vex, European green crab, Spartina cordgrass
and crayfish.
11:27:18 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON acknowledged that the MOU was signed on
January 15, [2013], and said it appears to only cover the
freshwater invasive plant Elodea. Referring to the MOU, he
noted that the directional language states, "Responses must be
thorough and shared by all three agencies." He opined that
critics could interpret this to mean a slow response; something
to bear in mind. Further, he conjectured whether the sponsor
should take heart that the 18 month fiscal note will be
adequate. Referring to the previously mentioned 2002 ADF&G
statewide management plan for aquatic species considered to be
the highest threat, he asked whether the plan is being
implemented in relation to today's subject matter.
11:28:41 AM
MR. SWANTON responded, yes, and cited the ADF&G legislative
report [presented to this committee on 1/29/13]. Although not
considered a rapid response to the D.vex infestation, the report
also included discussion of the Northern pike issue, which has
been an on-going ADF&G concern. The department has met these
challenges utilizing the resources that have been available.
11:29:38 AM
CHAIR SEATON agreed that the agencies were attempting to respond
to the D.vex appropriately, and said the legislature may have
had other expectations; revealing the need to revisit the
statutory authority. He stated his understanding for the major
delay, regarding the response to D.vex in Sitka, were the
liability issues that arose around the private mariculture
facility in Whiting Harbor. He asked if HB 89 would alleviate
repetition of a similar legal situation, with the inclusion of
the hold harmless language.
11:31:14 AM
MR. SWANTON noted that the bill offers comfort regarding
liability concerns; however, statute may apply differently on a
situational basis.
CHAIR SEATON requested that the bill be reviewed by ADF&G legal
counsel to ensure appropriate language and announced that the
bill would be held for further study and response.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| FMS12-03 Salmon Escapements and Goals 2003-2011.pdf |
HFSH 2/5/2013 10:00:00 AM |
ADFG Escapement Goals |
| Report to House Fisheries Committee Salmon Escapements Above Goals 5 Years Running.pdf |
HFSH 2/5/2013 10:00:00 AM |
ADFG Escapement Goals |
| HB0089A.pdf |
HFSH 2/5/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/12/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 89 |
| HB 89 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HFSH 2/5/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/12/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 89 |
| HB 89 Aquatic Invasive Species Background Information.pdf |
HFSH 2/5/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/12/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 89 |
| HB089-DEC-SWM-01-30-13.pdf |
HFSH 2/5/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 89 |
| HB089-DEC-WQ-01-31-13.pdf |
HFSH 2/5/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 89 |
| HB089-DFG-SFD-02-01-13.pdf |
HFSH 2/5/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 89 |
| HB089-DNR-AGR-2-2-13.pdf |
HFSH 2/5/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 89 |
| HB089-DOR-TRS-2-1-13.pdf |
HFSH 2/5/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 89 |