Legislature(2005 - 2006)HOUSE FINANCE 519
04/27/2005 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB67 | |
| HB13 | |
| HB257 | |
| HB53 | |
| HB218 | |
| HB279 | |
| HB243 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | HB 257 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 243 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 103 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 218 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 279 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | SB 67 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 13 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 53 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HOUSE BILL NO. 218
"An Act relating to cost recovery fisheries for private
nonprofit hatchery facilities."
Co-Chair Meyer MOVED to ADOPT the work draft for HB 218,
labeled 24-LS0544\X, Utermohle, 4/26/05. There being NO
OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
3:46:06 PM
IAN FISK, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE BILL THOMAS, spoke in
support of HB 218. He maintained that the hatchery system is
a great success as an economic development program. He
observed that 25 percent of the salmon value is produced by
hatcheries. Hatchery operators contract with bid processors
through a bid process every spring for product harvest. The
commercial fishing industry would like to see that
hatcheries maximize the amount of fish that return to the
hatchery in the common property fishery. He maintained that
those that are intended to benefit from the hatchery program
should have the most fish possible. The legislation is an
optional bill. He pointed out that the sponsor is a
supporter of hatcheries. The legislation would provide
sufficient revenue by increasing the assessment to 40
percent.
3:50:03 PM
Representative Hawker asked how the bill relates to
corporations organized under the state's Aquaculture Act vs.
the Salmon Farming Act. Mr. Fisk explained that the state
hatchery program has helped the system develop, which is
basically ocean ranching as wild fish are protected from
predation and returned to the ocean. Representative Hawker
noted that it is not salmon farming.
3:51:31 PM
Representative Hawker observed that the legislation is a
complex implementation of a way to pay for the cost of
operating hatcheries. He referred to Page 3, line 20. He
noted that once the Department of Revenue has the funds the
legislature "may" appropriate the funds. He questioned if
the legislature has to appropriate the money in order for
the hatchery to receive operating funds. Mr. Fisk
acknowledged that the legislature would have to make the
decision and stated that he confidence [that the
appropriation would be made] based on other pass through
taxes. He noted that the intent is very clear, though there
are some in the hatchery business who are uncomfortable
about giving up control. Representative Hawker summarized
that the intent is that the hatchery would make the
ultimately decision to pursue the venue for funding. He
wanted to assurance that the interests of the investors were
protected.
3:55:01 PM
Representative Weyhrauch referred to Page 3, line 28, and
questioned if "is" should be changed to "may be". Mr. Fisks
stressed that the intent is that people be held accountable.
A misdemeanor under the section is a step above a regular
class A misdemeanor and could result in the loss of a
vessel, fishing gear or fish on board at the time of
violation. The intent is to maintain a strong penalty.
Representative Weyhrauch asked if there is intent to
interfere with the cost recovery program of private non-
profit hatcheries. Mr. Fisk noted that the issue would come
under subsection (1) on Page 1, which is existing statute.
There is no intent to interfere; the intent is to leave it
up to hatcheries. Representative Weyhrauch emphasized that
cost recovery and management of the fisheries would remain
with the Department of Fish and Game. Mr. Fisk agreed.
3:58:37 PM
Representative Croft observed that currently hatcheries
contract with fishermen for enough to sell for the cost of
operations and close the fisheries to anyone other than the
hatchery authorized contract fisherman. Mr. Fisk agreed and
added that the procedure has been in place for a while and
is part of the genesis of the bill.
Representative Croft observed that if enough fish are not
harvested the opening would be extended. He acknowledged the
difficulty of extending the opening, but asked why someone
might switch to a system where a fish assessment would be
taken on every opening. Mr. Fisk pointed out that there is
variability in every system measuring wild stock and
periodic adjustments are needed. The Southeast Alaska
fishing fleet has shown the most interest in the option.
4:01:53 PM
JASON WELLS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, VALDEZ FISHERIES
DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION (VFDA), testified via teleconference
against HB 218. He maintained that the legislation would
inhibit the hatcheries ability to make processors compete to
purchase salmon. He asserted that the ability of hatcheries
to negotiate price has saved fishermen millions of dollars
over the years. He suggested that if direct sales must be
minimized, as contained in the findings section, that
hatcheries would be open to legal action annually by any
processor that feels they have sold to many fish or should
have sold him the fish. He maintained that if the findings
in the bill are passed, that the hatchery would lose its
ability to set budgets. He observed that hatcheries are the
last vestige of upward pressure on the pink salmon price by
competition. If the ability to bid salmon is lost,
hatcheries would be at the mercy of the processor to set
grounds prices. He expressed concern that the legislation
could be made mandatory, which would result in a loss of the
revenue stream and an inability to repay state loans. He
asked that the findings section be eliminated.
4:05:49 PM
PETER ESQUIRO, NSSRAA, SITKA, testified via teleconference.
He suggested changes to the legislation (version S). The
first suggestion was to add "if not a qualified regional
aquaculture association" on Page 2, line 16 and on Page 3,
line 8". On Page 3, line 9, he suggested elimination of "to
the state", which refers to covered debt service to the
state of Alaska. He added that Page 3, line 11 should
include "operational" and spoke in support of a new line
stating: "a corporation board of directors may create other
funds as deemed appropriate to carrying out its fiduciary
responsibilities". He also asked that "the amount of
existing reserve" be changed "to undesignated reserve" on
Page 3, line 14.
Representative Weyhrauch stated that he would work with Mr.
Esquerro and discuss his suggestions with the sponsor.
4:10:32 PM
CORA CROME, PETERSBURG VESSEL OWNERS ASSOCIATION,
PETERSBURG, Alaska Salmon Fisheries, testified via
teleconference in support of the legislation. She maintained
that the bill would allow another option for operational
cost recovery. She maintained that the legislation is
permissive.
4:11:28 PM
RUSSELL COCKRUM, KETCHIKAN, Salmon Seiner, spoke in support
of HB 218. He maintained that the legislation would increase
the value, quality production timing of the harvest. He
observed that cost recovery fish receive a higher price. He
suggested that the program be mandatory.
4:14:01 PM
Representative Weyhrauch MOVED to ADOPT Conceptual Amendment
1, to remove Section 1, delete the findings section (section
1).
Co-Chair Meyer OBJECTED for discussion purposes.
Mr. Fisk stated that the amendment would be acceptable to
the sponsor.
4:16:10 PM
At ease.
4:20:23 PM
HB 218 was HELD in Committee for further consideration.
4:21:17 PM
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|