Legislature(2023 - 2024)BARNES 124
01/17/2024 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 | |
| HB169 | |
| HB177 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 177 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 169 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 169-FISHERIES REHABILITATION PERMIT/PROJECT
1:03:33 PM
CHAIR MCKAY announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 169, "An Act relating to certain fish; and
establishing a fisheries rehabilitation permit." [Before the
committee was CSHB 169(FSH).]
1:04:19 PM
MIKE CRONK, Alaska State Legislature, as prime sponsor, read the
sponsor statement for HB 169 [included in the committee packet],
which read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
This legislation would allow individuals, Alaskan
corporations, school districts or other organizations
to apply for a fish rehabilitation permit through the
Dept. Fish & Game. If the commissioner grants a
permit, the individuals, Alaskan corporations, school
districts or other organizations would be allowed to
collect a limited number of fish, fertilize and hatch
the eggs and then place the un-fed natural fish back
into the water where they were taken. This will boost
the survival rate of the fertilized eggs to emergent
fry stage from around 5 percent to roughly 90 percent.
Similar types of fish rehabilitation permits are
already allowed by the department for scientific
research or other educational purposes, but these
purposes are limited and thus the data collection,
fish rehabilitation projects and fish population
information is limited. This bill allows the private
sector and the department to work together in a
responsible collaborative effort to increase the
natural salmon populations and scientific data
collection throughout the state.
This legislation will be one more tool that can be
used to ensure that we both today and, in the future,
maximize our resources as stated in our state
constitution. Thus, Alaskans will benefit from
Alaska's natural fish resources to help feed our
families.
1:06:32 PM
DAVE STANCLIFF, Staff, Representative Mike Cronk, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Representative Cronk, prime sponsor,
offered the sectional analysis for HB 169 [included in the
committee packet]. He said Section 1 would create a new section
[in AS 16.05] to create a fisheries enhancement permit. It
would create [subsection (a)] for the activities that would be
allowed under the new permit; [subsection (b)] that would
prescribe an application form created by the department for
those interested in gaining a permit; [subsection (c)] that
would allow the Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G)
commissioner to issue a permit under certain determinations;
[subsection (d)] regarding factors that the commissioner would
consider when deciding whether permit will be issued;
[subsection (e)] that would require a permittee to collect and
provide project data and reports requested by the department and
to reasonably communicate with individuals affected by the
project; [subsection (f)] that would set the timeline for when
ADF&G must act on a permit; [subsection (g)] to enact
requirements of a permittee to collect no more than 500,000 eggs
[for fertilization], implement controls to avoid the
introduction of nonindigenous pathogens; [subsection (h)] that
would ensure that any fish released in state water with an
enhancement project permit under this section would be available
for common use, as are wild fish; [subsection (i)] that would
specify the duration of a permit and how to extend a permit; and
[subsection (j)] that would create definitions for the bill.
MR. STANCLIFF said Section 2, [related to AS 16.05.871], would
add a new subsection to state that fisheries enhancement
projects under AS 16.05.855 shall be considered by the
commissioner as outlined in AS 16.05.872(d) because precautions
in subsection (d) will not damage a fish enhancement project.
He explained that Section 3, [related to AS 16.10.375], would
amend this section to allow enhancement projects created through
this Act to be included in regional comprehensive salmon plans.
MR. STANCLIFF reviewed the changes that had been made under CSHB
169(FSH), the version before the committee. He said some of the
changes were recommended by people in the fishing industry while
other changes were put forth by the department. The first
change, on page 3, line 1, was the addition of the term "local
wild" to the species of salmon. On page 4, line 5, the
following words were deleted: "If the commissioner fails to act
within that period, the application is approved and the
department shall issue a permit." Another change was on page 4,
line 18, where the following was added: "The commissioner may
modify, suspend, or revoke a permit issued under this section
for cause. If a permittee violates this section, the
commissioner may, after providing the permittee notice and an
opportunity to be heard, suspend or revoke a permit issued under
this section." Finally, the "tribe" was added to page 4, line
24, as an entity to be considered in the issuing of permits.
1:10:02 PM
MR. STANCLIFF, in response to Representative Saddler, said this
new program would not conflict with existing programs. He added
that CSHB 169(FSH) would enhance salmon reproduction by 85
percent. In response to Representative Rauscher, he said the
plan would be fluid in terms of maximizing returns [of fish].
Further, he noted that schools districts would be involved in
teaching students where salmon come from and how to increase the
salmon populations.
1:14:49 PM
FLIP PRYOR, Aquaculture Section Chief, Division of Commercial
Fisheries, Alaska Department of Fish & Game, directed the
committee to the last page of CSHB 169(FSH), which describes how
existing regional hatcheries would continue with current
management plans and incorporate local knowledge into the plan.
1:15:43 PM
JOE FELKL, Legislative Liaison, Alaska Department of Fish & Game
described the last section of CSHB 169(FSH) as a conforming
amendment to existing regional salmon plans and rehabilitation
plans already in place.
1:16:17 PM
MR. PRYOR, in response to questions from Representative Mears,
indicated that each application is judged on its own merit and
multiple applications in the same spot would be analyzed
according to the annual brood-stock of returning salmon. He
said these factors would be taken into consideration during
permit review. He reiterated that CSHB 169(FSH) would be an
extension of the current aquatic resources and the same
processes for evaluation.
1:18:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE observed that the plan proposed under CSHB
169(FSH) differed from a regular hatchery. He understood the
genesis of the legislation arose from an individual with a five-
gallon bucket that began stocking their own stream with
fertilized salmon eggs in gravel bars. He reassured the members
that CSHB 169(FSH) would work in concert with the existing
hatcheries around the state and would not serve as a mechanism
to release too many eggs into a spawning system.
1:19:52 PM
MR. PRYOR affirmed each regional hatchery has a plan for salmon
enhancement that would fall under the same umbrella as the
proposed legislation. In response to follow-up comments from
Representative McCabe, he maintained that another level of
oversight is a permit for fish transport and where they go. He
said the difference is that a permit is not necessary for the
program proposed under CSHB 169(FSH). He confirmed
Representative McCabe's observation that the "bucket plan" was
closer to nature with the limit of 500,000 eggs per person
instead of releasing eggs from all over the place into different
rivers.
1:23:15 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked for a primer on the different kinds
of permits for fish hatcheries.
1:23:46 PM
MR. PRYOR, in response to Representative Saddler, spoke about
different types of permits for fish hatcheries. He said CSHB
169(FSH) would assess rehabilitation projects which aren't
currently the focus of ADF&G. In response to a follow-up
question, he spoke about incubation boxes.
1:26:00 PM
MR. FELKL, in response to Representative Mears, affirmed that
the fiscal note would allow for one part-time biologist to be
stationed in Juneau.
1:26:31 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MEARS had a science question and asked if there
are other things to consider on a small-scale with HB 169.
1:26:59 PM
MR. PRYOR replied, HB 169 is addressing egg and fry survival;
most places in Alaska where salmon are struggling are not due to
a habitat issue similar to the south, HB 169 would increase the
number of fry into the spawning system to enhance habitat.
1:27:54 PM
REPRESENTATIVE BAKER followed Representative Mears' comment
regarding the fiscal note that was coming out of the
unrestricted general fund. He wondered if the position could be
repurposed into an existing position at Alaska Department of
Fish & Game due to staff shortages in recent years.
1:28:21 PM
MR. FELKL said the statewide aquaculture permitting and planning
section has been reduced in past years. He said the Alaska
Department of Fish & Game has looked at other options and it was
determined that a part-time position is needed to do the
additional work.
1:28:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DIBERT said she was curious if this [program] was
happening elsewhere and if we can learn from other states across
the nation.
1:29:05 PM
MR. PRYOR was unfamiliar with other states but said it was
similar to aquatic resource permits that have been issued to the
Auke Bay Laboratory that produced fish over a 3-year period.
1:29:44 PM
CHAIR MCKAY invited Representative Cronk back to the testifiers
table to answer further questions.
1:30:08 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked Representative Cronk to elaborate on
how far salmon have to travel up the Yukon River to spawn and
why HB 169 is necessary for the Alaska Native community
subsistence, culture, and day-to-day existence. He used another
example from the Salcha River in the Interior that has one of
the highest Chinook salmon returns.
1:30:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CRONK said the Yukon River is a really long river
with a lot of obstacles for salmon. He reported the Yukon River
is noticing the lowest returns of salmon in history and
fisherman haven't been able to subsistence-fish for Chinook in
three years with only a little fishing for Chum salmon. He
reemphasized the program design in HB 169 would essentially
double the salmon returns that are happening today. He insisted
in years past he had seen pictures of 40-60 lbs. Female Chinook
in Eagle with a substantial amount of eggs; however, the fish
returning in the last few years have been much smaller with
fewer eggs. He said the essence of HB 169 is to return more fry
to the rivers. He said the most important fish is the fish on
the table and HB 169 aims to continue that "lifeway."
REPRESENTATIVE CRONK used the Gulkana Hatchery as a global
example that has produced millions of salmon in the Gulkana and
Copper Rivers that have reached the international market.
1:33:29 PM
CHAIR MCKAY invited closing comments.
1:33:35 PM
REPRESENATIVE CRONK stated that Alaska is at a crossroads and
needs to do something - anything that can benefit the fishery.
1:34:15 PM
CHAIR MCKAY thanked staff and set an amendment deadline for
January 22, 2024.
CHAIR MCKAY announced that HB 169 was held over.