Legislature(2019 - 2020)GRUENBERG 120
03/12/2020 10:00 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 | |
| Confirmation Hearing(s):|| Fishermen's Fund Advisory & Appeals Council|| Board of Fisheries | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 247 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON FISHERIES
March 12, 2020
10:05 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Louise Stutes, Chair
Representative Chuck Kopp
Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins
Representative Geran Tarr
Representative Sarah Vance
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Bryce Edgmon
Representative Mark Neuman
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CONFIRMATION HEARING(S):
FISHERMEN'S FUND ADVISORY & APPEALS COUNCIL
Marilyn Charles - Emmonak, Alaska
- CONFIRMATION(S) ADVANCED
BOARD OF FISHERIES
John Wood - Willow, Alaska
- CONFIRMATION(S) ADVANCED
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
MARILYN CHARLES, Appointee
Fishermen's Fund Advisory & Appeals Council
Emmonak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Offered testimony on her appointment to the
Fishermen's Fund Advisory & Appeals Council.
JOHN WOOD, Appointee
Board of Fisheries
Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G)
Willow, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Offered testimony on his appointment to the
Board of Fisheries.
WES HUMBYRD, Fisherman
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to the appointment
of John Wood to the Board of Fisheries.
NANCY HILLSTRAND, Owner/Operator
Pioneer Alaskan Fisheries
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of the appointment of
John Wood to the Board of Fisheries.
JOHN MCCOMBS
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to the appointment
of John Wood to the Board of Fisheries.
GARY HOLLIER
Kenai, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of the appointment of
John Wood to the Board of Fisheries.
MIKE WOOD, Chair
Mat-Su Fish and Wildlife Commission
Chase, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of the appointment of
John Wood to the Board of Fisheries.
RAY DEBARDELABEN, President
Kenai River Professional Guide Association
Soldotna, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of the appointment of
John Wood to the Board of Fisheries.
BEN MOHR, Executive Director
Kenai River Sport Fishing Association (KRSA)
Soldotna, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of the appointment of
John Wood to the Board of Fisheries.
FORREST BRADEN, Executive Director
South East Alaska Guides Organization (SEAGO)
Ketchikan, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of the appointment of
John Wood to the Board of Fisheries.
CHUCK DERRICK, President
Chitina Dipnetters Association
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of the appointment of
John Wood to the Board of Fisheries.
ACTION NARRATIVE
10:05:58 AM
CHAIR LOUISE STUTES called the House Special Committee on
Fisheries meeting to order at 10:05 a.m. Representatives
Stutes, Kopp, Kreiss-Tomkins, Tarr, and Vance were present at
the call to order.
^CONFIRMATION HEARING(S):
^Fishermen's Fund Advisory & Appeals Council
^Board of Fisheries
CONFIRMATION HEARING(S):
Fishermen's Fund Advisory & Appeals Council
Board of Fisheries
10:06:44 AM
CHAIR STUTES announced that the only order of business would be
the confirmation hearings on the Board of Fisheries and the
Fishermens Fund Advisory & Appeals Council.
CHAIR STUTES stated that Marilyn Charles was first appointed on
January 28, 2019, and her term expires on March 1, 2020. She
said that if Ms. Charles is confirmed, then her term would run
through March 1, 2025.
10:08:16 AM
MARILYN CHARLES, Appointee, Fishermen's Fund Advisory & Appeals
Council, offered testimony on her appointment to the Fishermen's
Fund Advisory & Appeals Council. She stated that she is an
administrative assistant for Yukon River Towing and
Construction, based out of Emmonak. She said that she became
interested in the committee because of what she does for her
company. She explained that she started working with insurance
claims for workers compensation and protection and indemnity
(P&I) insurance when she worked for KwikPak Fisheries LLC,
where she had started working as a processor and worked her way
up to Human Resources (HR) management. She expressed that she
is very familiar with the insurance aspect of the Fishermens
Fund and it was easy for her to enter the [council]. She said
that now she is working in the construction field and handles
workers compensation and P&I claims for her current company.
She said that she enjoys the diverse [council], meeting people
from around the state in her field, and is excited that she was
chosen for reappointment.
10:09:57 AM
CHAIR STUTES opened public testimony on the confirmation hearing
for the Fishermens Fund Advisory & Appeals Council. After
ascertaining that there was no one who wished to testify, she
closed public testimony.
10:10:48 AM
CHAIR STUTES remarked that John Wood was appointed to the Board
of Fisheries on May 24, 2019 and has served on the board since
that time; if confirmed his term would run until June 30, 2021.
She stated that this is a somewhat unique situation because Mr.
Wood has served on the board since last spring and there is a
track record to look at. She expressed that the Board of
Fisheries track record the past few meetings has been very
alarming to her, and she offered her understanding that it was
alarming to a great number of Alaskans, as well.
10:12:02 AM
JOHN WOOD, Appointee, Board of Fisheries, Alaska Department of
Fish & Game (ADF&G), offered testimony on his appointment to the
Board of Fisheries. He stated that he grew up in Louisiana
where fishing was the second most popular activity, second only
to football. He said that while going through Louisiana State
University (LSU) law school he worked for legislative councils,
staffing committees and drafting legislation on the floor of the
House, which he said was much more challenging than that of the
Senate. He said that was where he got his first exposure to how
an invasive species could totally wipe out a fishing habitat.
He stated that immediately after finishing law school in 1971,
he moved to Anchorage, Alaska, and worked for the Alaska Court
System as court attorney, standing master, and acting probate
master for the Alaska Superior Court.
MR. WOOD stated that he entered private practice in 1973 and
practiced law until the early 1990s. He said that he
reactivated his license after that solely to help a young boy,
who was being manipulated by the system, in a sad situation
where his mother was tried and convicted of the murder of a
foster child in that home. He stated that he was elected to the
Anchorage Assembly in 1980 and served three terms before being
termed out in 1990. He said that it was there that assemblyman,
and later Senator, Fred Dyson taught him the lesson that Board
of Fisheries actions have an impact across the state, and
certainly in Anchorage. He explained that Senator Dyson
sponsored a resolution before the assembly relating to a Board
of Fisheries meeting, at which time he said that he asked
Senator Dyson why the assembly should get involved; after
Senator Dyson finished explaining, the assembly unanimously
agreed it is a subject which the assembly should comment on.
MR. WOOD stated that in [2013] he accompanied then Senator
Dunleavy to Juneau as staff and was assigned to get to the
bottom of the fish wars in Cook Inlet, and advise him on the
best avenue to follow for a result of fish returning to streams
in both numbers and size. He said that the whole focus then was
on the fish, and that remains his focus to this day. He stated
that in the summer of 2013 he took it upon himself to travel to
Kenai and visit some of the setnet sites, as well as two
processors, to hear their perspectives; he expressed that he
learned a lot. He said that in fall of 2013 he attended a Board
of Fisheries workshop where he met Roland Maw, then executive
director of the United Cook Inlet Drift Association (UCIDA). He
expressed that he is sure if Mr. Maw were asked, he would recall
the encounter, as it led to sitting down with some of the
[Matanuska-Susitna] (Mat-Su) folks, and resulted in a signed
agreement by all parties as to some of the issues where they
could find common ground, which he said was something that had
never been done before, and dialogue was opened.
MR. WOOD stated that this past summer he was appointed to the
Board of Fisheries and took it upon himself to actively seek out
some of the stakeholders to learn their take on the upcoming
Board of Fisheries meetings. He said that on my nickel and my
personal time, he drove to Homer to observe the salmon
subcommittee of the council in action and ran into Mr. Maw and
was introduced to several commercial fishermen. He stated that
he met with several seine netters who explained their concerns
to him, which he said was very helpful at the Lower Cook Inlet
(LCI) meeting that fall. He said that he went to Soldotna and
Kenai and met with East Side set netters, Chris Every, Gary
Hollier, and Ken Coleman, about their proposal coming before the
Board of Fisheries, as well as their current legislative efforts
to put in place a buyout program for permits and Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) leases. He expressed that their
arguments were persuasive, and he spoke out strongly in favor
of, and voted for, their proposal which provided the back-fill
provisions that are key components of the buyout program. He
said that on that same trip he met at UCIDAs office, where he
was given his first opportunity to read its federal Ninth
Circuit Court of Appeals lawsuit, which if successful would have
a dramatic impact on all the fisheries of Cook Inlet. He
expressed that the ramifications of that lawsuit should concern
all who are interested in Cook Inlet Fisheries.
10:16:20 AM
MR. WOOD continued that at the LCI meetings in Seward, the issue
of hatchery operations and cost recovery efforts became the
centerpiece of several proposals that would have effectively
crippled the ability of the hatcheries to continue operations.
He said that the vote record, as well as his press comments,
clearly show that he vigorously opposed those efforts. He
expressed that Dean Day, Executive Director, Cook Inlet
Aquaculture Association, would confirm that statement. He
stated that during the Upper Cook Inlet (UCI) meetings, he made
it a point to meet with anybody that asked, in order to gain
their perspective. He expressed that virtually everyone,
regardless of their stance, agreed that the last UCI meeting was
more civil and less confrontational than any in recent memory;
he attributed much of that to encouragement given to the
stakeholders to work out solutions among themselves, rather than
stonewalling and hoping for the best from the board.
MR. WOOD said that he spoke with several of those groups
individually and called several to the table to get the dialogue
started, and he said that it worked much like it had in Girdwood
several years earlier. He stated that as a result the guides,
Kenai River Sportfishing Association (KRSA), and many East Side
set netters were able to come to an agreement, which all sides
signed off on and was adopted by the board. He asked for anyone
familiar with UCI meetings in the past to let that thought sink
in and reemphasized that KRSA and East Side set netters sat down
and came to an agreement. He said that additionally, the North
Side set netters and the Mat-Su Commission also negotiated and
reached an agreement, which was presented to the board and
approved. He stated that he believes he was consistent in his
actions and that his efforts to bring parties together were
successful beyond expectations. He explained that there were
proposals, such as a new Susitna fishery, which is incidentally
in his backyard, that he spoke out and voted against, because
they were not consistent; he said it was not an easy decision,
but it was the right decision, and he has no regrets.
MR. WOOD summarized that he has the ability to bring parties
together, the training to objectively make decisions between
conflicting users, and the legal experience to understand the
consequences of pending lawsuits and international agreements.
He stated that he welcomes an opportunity to continue serving on
the Board of Fisheries.
10:18:37 AM
CHAIR STUTES remarked that she had reviewed the minutes from the
2019 Mat-Su Fish and Wildlife Commission, of which Mr. Wood was
a board member, and expressed that they are quite telling. She
encouraged the public to read the minutes from March, April,
May, September, October, and December of those meetings. She
asked Mr. Wood whether he believes there is a conflict in being
a board member of the Mat-Su Fish and Wildlife Commission,
developing strategies and proposals, and then voting on those
same proposals as a [member] on the Board of Fisheries.
MR. WOOD replied that he resigned the very day that he was
appointed to the Board of Fisheries in May 2019, and he said
that he could not comment on any minutes past May, as he was not
there and participating. He expressed that there would be no
financial conflict if he were to continue serving on the board,
but he did not think it was appropriate, which is why he
resigned from that advisory commission immediately once the
appointment was made.
CHAIR STUTES remarked that she had the minutes right in front of
her, and the December 19, 2019, board meeting minutes show he
was in attendance.
MR. WOOD replied that he had attended the meeting but could not
participate, as he was not a member. He remarked that he
attends a lot of meetings, like the council meeting in Homer.
CHAIR STUTES remarked that Mr. Wood did participate, according
to the minutes in front of her, and she expressed that that is
of great concern to her.
MR. WOOD responded that he asked a question of a person who was
present at the meeting, he thinks it was the commissioner, and
if Chair Stutes calls that participation then he did
participate. He stated that he was not able to vote or do
anything of that nature.
CHAIR STUTES asked whether Mr. Wood was involved, during his
comments, in creating a strategy for the Board of Fisheries
meeting that would take place in Kodiak.
MR. WOOD replied that he was not involved in creating a strategy
and, like every board meeting, especially the UCI meeting, he
encourages participation by the members to let their positions
be known.
CHAIR STUTES commented that it appears to her that Mr. Wood, as
a board member, on April 4, 2019, was reviewing management plans
and talking about being stepped up to the Board of Fisheries,
and was concerned about the Mat-Su situation as a Board of
Fisheries member.
MR. WOOD remarked that he was not appointed until May.
CHAIR STUTES replied that she is aware of that. She asked Mr.
Wood whether he would consider it a conflict to have
participated in motions that were going to be presented to the
Board of Fisheries, and then vote on those same motions.
MR. WOOD answered that it would not be a conflict of Title 39,
which puts forward the conflict of interest. He stated that he
disclosed his prior membership at the time of the Board of
Fisheries meetings.
CHAIR STUTES commented that she was only present at the meetings
in Kodiak and Anchorage, and she was not a participant in that
meeting.
10:23:07 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS pointed out that Mr. Wood had
noted that, prior to his appointment on the Board of Fisheries,
he had worked with Governor Dunleavy in assessing UCI salmon
stocks and had mentioned both abundance and size, and he asked
Mr. Wood what his hypothesis was as to why the size of the
salmon is decreasing, specifically in UCI.
10:23:42 AM
MR. WOOD replied that he doesnt think it can be restricted to
UCI, as he concluded after looking at the situation for a long
time. He said that there is something taking place throughout
the entire state that the size of King salmon, as well as other
species, has decreased over the years. He remarked that he
could not say exactly why that is happening, but he suspects it
has something to do with what is occurring in the blue waters,
over which the state has very little control. He expressed that
he thinks the state needs to stop pressure, as much as possible,
on the interception of the big King salmon in the river systems.
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS commented that he recognizes that
what is happening in the blue water is not within the
jurisdiction of the Board of Fisheries, and he sees that Mr.
Wood is clearly interested in it personally and has attended
council meetings. He asked Mr. Wood what his view, given
available information, is on what is likely driving the
phenomenon of the decreasing size of Alaskas salmon.
MR. WOOD answered that he had spoken with a researcher at the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) on that
topic recently, and he said that he suspects it pertains to
environmental concerns, whether that be the blob thats
occurred out there or loss of feeding, and that he thinks it
has to do with water temperature, habitat, and feed. He said
that NOAA has an ongoing national project that he thinks will
add a lot of data to what is known, which is currently not much,
and he encouraged the state to participate in that effort.
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS asked whether the Board of
Fisheries has engaged itself from an advocacy or stewardship of
Alaskas stocks perspective on issues of bycatch in the blue
water and federally managed fisheries.
MR. WOOD replied that it has not. He said that he has only been
on the board for the past year, so he could not speak beyond
that. He stated that he does not know what avenues might be
available to the board to accomplish that other than as an
advisory body by resolution, suggesting that the research be
done. He remarked that there is clearly an issue out there,
and the question is who has the jurisdiction.
10:26:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR remarked that Mr. Wood had pointed out a
long career with his legal background in his resume, but not any
background in biology. She expressed that she is concerned
about the decision pertaining to the creation of the personal
use fishery, which comes on the heels of a board decision to
delist Susitna River Sockeye salmon as a stock of concern;
although, ADF&G biologists were neutral to the proposal. In
response to a question from Mr. Wood she stated that she is not
sure which proposal specifically was being referenced. She
asked whether Mr. Wood could comment on the topic, and she
expressed that it seems the boards decisions are becoming
increasingly political and moving farther away from science.
MR. WOOD replied that the stock of concern was advocated by
ADF&G itself, and he had initially expressed that he was not
comfortable with that decision, because the minimum threshold
had only recently been reached for a stock of concern to be
removed. He explained that while a stock of concern designation
on a species exists, there is an action plan that requires
certain actions be taken; when the designation is removed, the
action plan no longer exists. He said that there was discussion
and he had advised that he would be voting against removing the
designation, but ADF&G spoke up and said it had similar concerns
and would monitor while continuing with a conservative approach.
He stated that he then reluctantly agreed to go along, and the
Personal Use (PU) came up and he voted against it, because of
earlier attempts to pass Sockeye into the rivers, and the fact
that the proposal would create a PU fishery that would target
Sockeye and other species. He said that he put in an amendment,
which failed, to have Sockeye excluded from the PU fishery; as a
result of all those factors, he voted against the establishment
of the PU.
10:29:18 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP asked Mr. Wood what his view as a board
member is for priority of fisheries management, looking at LCI
and moving up to UCI, and asked how priority could change
regarding sport fish, commercial fish, personal use, and
subsistence fisheries.
MR. WOOD answered that the number one priority for any fishery
is to enhance getting fish into the rivers and back to their
native breeding grounds so that stocks can be built in the
future in both numbers and size. He said that that remains
constant throughout any decision he makes. He stated that going
back from the point of breeding through the system
Representative Kopp had just described, it is only when there is
a clear abundance that he would go into the next order of
priorities, which to him number one would be subsistence. He
stated that number two would be an allocation that would ensure
all participants throughout the region - whether drift netters,
set netters, personal use fisheries, or seiners - would be able
to participate with a good chance of being successful at
harvesting. He said that number three, and then clarified that
it would be number two because it would come before allocation,
would be to ensure that stocks of concern are not jeopardized
anywhere in the system, whether that be in Kodiak Cook Inlet.
He expressed that he would be careful not to harvest stocks with
a stock of concern designation to the point of extinction.
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP asked Mr. Wood how he would respond to the
critiques of former lead biologists with ADF&G, who say that the
Board of Fisheries has promoted over-escapement to the detriment
of fisheries and the river systems.
MR. WOOD answered that over-escapement is an issue, there is no
question of it, but at the same time, particularly in Cook
Inlet, when dealing with the fish that constitute the over-
escapement, mixed therein are the fish that are from stocks that
are in serious trouble. He explained that there must be a way
to harvest selectively, to the extent possible, to avoid hitting
the jeopardized stocks. He expressed that he wants to see the
fish that are in excess of the abundance harvested, but it must
be done in a way that does not damage other stocks.
10:33:08 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS asked whether Mr. Wood could
comment on his general outlook on the matter of enhancement and
the interaction between hatchery stocks and wild stocks.
MR. WOOD asked whether Representative Kreiss-Tomkins wanted him
to restrict his answer to the enhancement pertaining to
hatcheries, or enhancement overall.
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS replied that he isnt immediately
sure what kind of enhancement they would be talking about
outside of hatcheries and said that he would like to hear about
enhancement overall.
MR. WOOD answered that he had heard discussion from a previous
committee meeting pertaining to misting, a Native practice from
the Pacific Northwest. He explained that misting enhances stock
right in the streams so that there wont be the problems
associated with predator avoidance and other issues inherent
with a hatchery approach. He expressed that he thinks the state
would benefit from exploring that further and should try some
pilot programs that would see how effective misting is in
Alaska. He said that he suspects it would be highly effective
and a program which he would embrace. He stated that focusing
on hatcheries themselves, there was a focused effort at the LCI
meeting to attack the underbelly of the hatcheries, which he
said that he resisted entirely. He said that the hatcheries
have a valid place since the legislature acted in 1979, and the
intent is clear that the hatcheries were established to create
an economic engine, which he said has been successful in his
opinion. He pointed out that every vote he has taken, and every
comment he has made, reflects what he had just stated.
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS asked Mr. Wood to what extent he
has identified other factors that may be, in his estimation,
responsible for diminished return in the Mat-Su and UCI.
MR. WOOD replied that he did not mean to insinuate that
intercept was the only concern - far from it. He said there are
issues with culverts, past bad practices, and invasive species,
such as pike. As an example, he said that in the past, in some
rivers, people have fished right on top of the breeding grounds,
which he said he thinks should not be allowed. He added that
another issue has been a focus on intercepting the large fish in
the inlet and river, which are the fish that should be
continuing to breed.
10:37:21 AM
CHAIR STUTES asked Mr. Wood, if the board adopts a proposal and
it is later determined that one or more of the board members had
a conflict of interest, what the board should do to remedy the
perception that the board did not conduct a fair and transparent
deliberation.
MR. WOOD offered his initial reaction would be, like with open
meetings in law, that the board should go back and reconsider
the proposal; however, he said that he has not thought it
through enough to say that that would be his final answer.
CHAIR STUTES asked whether Mr. Wood participated at all in any
of the proposals created during the Mat-Su Wildlife meeting in
December for the Board of Fisheries meeting that took place in
January.
MR. WOOD answered that he did not recall participating in any
proposals and said that he thinks he left the meeting after the
commissioner left.
10:39:02 AM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked Mr. Wood what his interpretation is
of maximum sustained yield.
MR. WOOD replied that it is the mathematical point at which a
return is replacing itself so that the stock is not diminished.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE remarked that she had heard that Mr. Wood
is one who does his homework, and she saw him at the Halibut
Commission in Homer and appreciated that he took the time to
talk to fishermen. She expressed concern that he neglected to
connect with the people who would be voting to confirm his
appointment. She asked Mr. Wood how many legislators he had
spoken to directly during the year awaiting his confirmation.
MR. WOOD answered that he purposely had not spoken to any
legislators concerning his confirmation because he does not feel
that he should be lobbying the legislators themselves; if they
have any questions, he would be happy to respond. He said that
he would change his mind and come down and visit with you
folks, if the committee thought it was something that would be
beneficial in coming to a decision. He said that he was down
there when some appointments went through, and some of the
appointees really thrust themselves upon the legislators, and
he said that he was not going to do that.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE remarked that she understood Mr. Woods
concern. She said that she has heard rumors that Mr. Wood has
made comments that his number one goal is to get fish up in the
valley, and she asked him whether this was true.
MR. WOOD amended, Up in the rivers. He said that he does not
care whether it is rivers in the valley, or rivers in the
Kenai, or rivers in the Kodiak.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked how that would support maximum
sustained yield.
MR. WOOD replied that if the numbers were to go up in the rivers
for breeding, and some of the predators currently keeping
numbers down were minimized or eliminated, then the figure could
be reached quickly and easily, whereas now, if the fish arent
up there, it will be a continuous battle at the minimum
levels. He pointed out that it takes a combination of things
and there is not one simple answer. He expressed that it is not
a rumor that he strongly supports getting the fish up into the
rivers for breeding purposes, and he said he is not bashful
about it.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE remarked that there seems to be a bias
towards one area of the inlet, and she said that while she
admires that Mr. Wood had done his homework and stood out from
other board members for taking the time to get to know fishermen
and the issues, which garners great respect, she cannot ignore
the appearance of a bias. She expressed that what she is
looking for in her district is someone who can do no harm,
saying her district is the Lower Kenai Peninsula, but there are
fishermen who fish all over Alaska, and there needs to be a fine
balance between the commercial, sport, personal use, and
subsistence fisheries. She remarked that she would be looking
at Mr. Woods decisions and this bias with great care, because
the board needs members who are looking out for the fisheries
and all the users. She encouraged Mr. Wood to do that as a
sitting board member.
10:43:48 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS asked Mr. Wood whether he thinks
there is a balance on the Board of Fisheries currently, between
sport fish and commercial fish.
10:44:03 AM
MR. WOOD replied that he does not classify himself as [either].
He said that Godfrey is commercial fish, Carlson-Van Dort is
commercial fish, Jensen and Johnson are commercial fish, Morisky
is sport fish, and Payton is primarily subsistence but has done
commercial and sport fish, as well. He expressed that that was
his take on each of the members.
10:44:47 AM
CHAIR STUTES opened public testimony on the confirmation hearing
for the Board of Fisheries.
10:45:23 AM
WES HUMBYRD, Fisherman, stated that he had been a fisherman in
Cook Inlet since 1966 and moved to Homer in 1971 because he knew
that the salmon fishery there was what he wanted to do for a
livelihood. He said that he met with Mr. Wood at the salmon
committee meeting in Homer, and Mr. Wood asked a lot of
questions, which he said was nice, but stated that after he asks
a question he doesnt seem to follow the suit hes talking
about. He said that Mr. Wood did not even know where the
Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) was in federal waters. He stated
that when it came time to vote at the Board of Fisheries
meetings, the board did something against the federal law, which
was to move out of the federal waters as mandated by the North
Pacific Fisheries Management Council. He said that the board
members do not stop to realize that commercial fishing is one of
the best renewable resources in Alaska. He expressed that he
thinks Mr. Wood listens, but when it comes time to vote, he
votes along with the Kenai River Sportfishing Association. He
said that he hopes Mr. Wood would not be confirmed to be on the
board again.
10:46:36 AM
NANCY HILLSTRAND, Owner/Operator, Pioneer Alaskan Fisheries,
stated that she is a seafood processor who has commercial,
sport, and personal use clients; therefore, she has no
allocation issues or affiliations. She said that after 45 years
in the fishing industry and as a processor, she realizes that it
is important to have people on the Board of Fisheries who are
thoughtful and willing to face the tough questions. She said
that Alaska has lost species, and it has to do with ADF&G and
the Board of Fisheries. She expressed that she thinks that Mr.
Wood should be confirmed to his appointment. She said that he
votes against a lot of the things that she believes in, but she
said that she believes he is a thoughtful and persistent person
because he asks a lot of questions at the board meetings. She
explained that she has attended a lot of the Board of Fisheries
meetings since 1982 and has seen the different types of board
members; some are silent, some dont really care, and some are
very allocative to one side or the other. She stated that what
she sees with Mr. Woods performance is that he is extremely
thoughtful and trying to learn and get answers, and she said
everyone learns from him asking those questions. She summarized
that the board needs a member who can see all sides and make the
hard decisions to ensure that Alaskas fish are sustainable,
because species are currently being lost. She said that she
thinks Mr. Wood would do that, that his half-a-century
experience in Alaska is needed, and she asked that his
appointment be confirmed.
10:48:35 AM
JOHN MCCOMBS stated that he has been attending the Board of
Fisheries meetings for 34 years. He said that regarding the
confirmation of Mr. Wood, the composition of the board is
lopsided with two guys from the valley. He said that Mr. Wood
voted for a dipnet fishery where there are no fish, closed areas
where fish are plentiful, voted for hook-and-release where Kenai
King salmon spawn, and raised escapement in the Kenai River. He
expressed that Mr. Wood came to the Board of Fisheries with a
prejudice, bias, and personal agenda. He said that Mr. Wood
voted at a recent UCI meeting before he was confirmed, and he
said that he wonders what kind of protocol or process that is.
He remarked, Do not vote for a prejudiced politician, vote for
fish. Do not confirm John Wood. He said that there were no
agreements with Mr. Wood when he was at the meeting, and Mr.
Wood was untruthful.
10:49:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR remarked that it is unfortunate that Mr.
Woods appointment happened in May, and this allowed for someone
who had not yet been confirmed to participate in some very
important decisions. She asked Mr. McCombs, in his 34 years of
experience, how unusual that seemed.
MR. MCCOMBS replied that it was unusual. He remarked, Lets
back up a minute and talk about process and protocol. He
stated that Chair Morisky was found guilty of violating the Open
Meetings Act and was still allowed to chair the entire Cook
Inlet meeting. He said that the commissioner put a muzzle on
the ADF&G guys. He remarked that he counts how many state
employees are at every Board of Fisheries meetings that he goes
to, and there were 50 state employees at that meeting. He said,
They were all there to make rules so I couldnt go fishing.
He opined that this was disgusting and shameful.
10:51:12 AM
GARY HOLLIER said that he has lived in Kenai for 66 years and
has been involved with the Board of Fisheries meetings since
1986 in UCI. He said that he has been to every annual Board of
Fisheries meeting since then. He said that he is an East Side
set netter and that three different Board of Fisheries members
have come to his fish sites: Tom Kluberton, Robert Ruffner, and
John Wood. He said that Mr. Wood asked articulate questions to
get educated on the fishery and made himself available many
hours of the day at the Board of Fisheries. He expressed that
he does not agree with all of Mr. Woods decisions, but as a
stakeholder who has seen multiple Board of Fisheries members who
come with a bias, or dont come with a bias, and try to do a
good job, he said that he thinks Mr. Wood did a fair job for his
first UCI meeting. He said that he supports passing Mr. Woods
name on for confirmation.
10:52:23 AM
MIKE WOOD, Chair, Mat-Su Fish and Wildlife Commission, offered
testimony during the confirmation hearing for the Board of
Fisheries. He stated that he was calling on behalf of himself
as a Northern District set netter, but, for the sake of full
disclosure, he said that he is also the Chair of the Mat-Su Fish
and Wildlife Commission. He said that his priority is to help
with the Susitna River and its habitat. He remarked that he has
known Mr. Wood for over 10 years, and that he knows Mr. Wood to
be as familiar with the Upper Susitna area as he is, and said
that Mr. Wood has always asked good questions about the health
of the river and the fish returning to it, the Mat-Su River, and
all of the Cook Inlet streams. He said that he thinks it
unusual to have a person who looks inland to the habitat, and
not just to the waters, in catching and allocation, which he
said he appreciates. He attested to Mr. Wood's pulling together
the Northern District set netters, who have never wanted to talk
to the Mat-Su Fish and Wildlife Commission, and he said that Mr.
Wood was instrumental in coming up with an agreement. He stated
that he respects Mr. Wood, has worked with him over the past 10
years, and hopes that the legislature will vote to confirm his
appointment.
10:54:22 AM
RAY DEBARDELABEN, President, Kenai River Professional Guide
Association, stated that he represents hundreds of sport-
fishermen and guides on the Kenai Peninsula. He said that he
attended the Board of Fisheries meetings every day in UCI, and
he spent 8 to 10 hours a day there. He pointed out that some of
that time was spent with Mr. Wood, as he had made himself
available to all user groups, including commercial, sport, and
personal use. He stated that he was part of the team that got
together on the sidelines to meet with commercial fishermen,
which was put together by Mr. Wood and other board members. He
expressed that he supports Mr. Wood, thinks he is an upstanding
citizen, and that he did a great job for the Board of Fisheries
and would continue to do so.
10:55:51 AM
BEN MOHR, Executive Director, Kenai River Sport Fishing
Association (KRSA), stated that KRSA is a 501(c)(3) charitable
non-profit organization dedicated to ensuring the sustainability
of the worlds premier sport-fishing region: Alaska. He
expressed that KRSA would like to register its full support for
the confirmation of Mr. Wood to the Board of Fisheries. He
stated that Mr. Woods professional training as a lawyer gives
him a remarkable ability to take up an idea, proposal, or
perceived conflict, and evaluate it objectively from all angles.
He expressed that this capacity has proven important in Mr.
Woods work on the Board of Fisheries, where his analysis of a
situation has led to collaboration between user groups who have
historically been in conflict, and the results have been
decisions that responsibly guide management of the fisheries in
Alaska. He remarked that Mr. Wood has demonstrated an
understanding that service on the Board of Fisheries is a public
trust responsibility, and that his decisions are answerable to
all Alaskans.
MR. MOHR expressed that Mr. Wood is thorough in his research and
questioning and has taken his responsibility seriously. He
attested to what Mr. Wood had said earlier about working with
multiple stakeholder groups and emphasized that one of Mr.
Woods most significant character traits is his desire for
equity and inclusiveness. He said that at the recent UCI board
meeting, it was common to see multiple stakeholders promoting
proposals or amendments that were before the board, and Mr. Wood
proved to be accessible to the public and circulated amongst all
members of the public during the breaks. He stated that Mr.
Woods hallmark during this time was to encourage stakeholders
to work together, and Mr. Wood would regularly ask stakeholders
if they had talked to other affected parties and had been able
to reach an agreement of some sort. He said that Mr. Wood
constantly encouraged collaboration across sectors in order to
reach the goal of the Board of Fisheries, which is to conserve
and develop the resources of Alaska. He summarized that KRSA
applauds Mr. Woods willingness to serve Alaska on the Board of
Fisheries and encourages a positive confirmation vote by the
committee and the legislature.
10:58:09 AM
CHAIR STUTES asked Mr. Mohr whether Mr. Wood had helped him in
authoring the UCI roadmap for the meeting.
MR. MOHR responded as follows:
Well, I spoke to a number of different stakeholders
about what a proposed roadmap would look like. The
proposal that I moved, that I submitted, that has my
name on it, was not the ... final proposal that was
adopted by the board.
CHAIR STUTES asked whether Mr. Wood was involved in the creation
of [the proposal]. She stated, "This is a yes or a no question,
Mr. Mohr."
MR. MOHR said he was having trouble recalling, but said he
believed he had spoken to Mr. Wood about "what my proposal would
look like."
CHAIR STUTES thanked Mr. Mohr for his testimony.
10:59:22 AM
FORREST BRADEN, Executive Director, South East Alaska Guides
Organization (SEAGO), stated that SEAGO would like to show its
support for the confirmation of Mr. Woods. He said that he was
sent to a couple of the Board of Fisheries meetings this cycle
and attended the LCI and UCI meetings. He expressed that SEAGO
did not have a specific agenda, and he attended primarily to
watch the board to observe how members interacted with the
public and each other, and how they voted. He remarked that he
is the type of person that wants to see what is right and
equitable and does not want to see a bias. He expressed that
his estimation of Mr. Wood is that he is a man without pretense,
which he said he thinks comes across when Mr. Wood provides
testimony and serves on the board. He said that he thinks Mr.
Wood wants to get to the root of a problem, and he watched Mr.
Wood dig information out of people testifying and department
staff to feather out what he needed to know to make a clear
decision.
MR. BRADEN expressed that he did not see a track record of
biases in the decision that Mr. Wood made in the meetings, and
it seemed to him that Mr. Wood was very equitable. He pointed
out that at one point Mr. Wood started out with one course of
action on a proposal, received new information, and changed his
mind. He observed that Mr. Wood was not embarrassed about it
and seems to make his decisions based on principle. He
expressed that he found Mr. Wood to be approachable, but that he
did not have a one-on-one conversation with him. He said that
he did see him mingle and heard him in conversation with a drift
netter, which he said attests to Mr. Woods testimony that he
approaches all user groups. He said that he thinks Mr. Wood is
trying to get to what is right and fair, and that he thinks this
is needed on the Board of Fisheries. He remarked that bias, one
way or the other, is a bad thing, and in the end he said that
he thinks all user groups need to work together to make a living
and make everything work for everyone. He expressed that SEAGO
sees Mr. Wood as the person to do this, recommends Mr. Woods
name be forwarded for confirmation, and hopes to work with him
on the Board of Fisheries in the future.
11:02:10 AM
CHUCK DERRICK, President, Chitina Dipnetters Association, stated
that the Chitina Dipnetters Association is the voice for
thousands of Alaska residents who dipnet salmon in the Chitina
personal use dipnet fishery on the Copper River. He said that
the Chitina Dipnetters Association is in support of the
confirmation of Mr. Wood to the Board of Fisheries. He remarked
that the association thinks Mr. Wood understands the high value
of consumptive uses of Alaska fisheries by Alaska residents in
the Copper River.
11:02:56 AM
CHAIR STUTES remarked that she has some serious issues with the
Board of Fisheries behavior in the Kodiak and Cook Inlet
meetings, of which Mr. Wood had been a part. She stated that
the entire commercial sector is under attack, and that people
are rightly concerned that the Board of Fisheries is not
following the public process, is not listening to all user
groups, and is prioritizing one user group over all others. She
said that regarding the nomination of Mr. Wood, she would
preface the following remarks with the statement, There is
nothing personal intended in what I am about to say. She
pointed out that she has been chair of the House Special
Committee on Fisheries, and she represents a fishing district.
She expressed that she deeply cares about an honest,
transparent, and fair Board of Fisheries process, and it is from
that lens, and that of a concerned Alaskan, that she would make
the following statements.
CHAIR STUTES stated that in the minutes she referenced earlier,
it was clear to her that there was a perceived outcome for the
Kodiak and Cook Inlet meetings. She added that the back-and-
forth between the Mat-Su Fish and Wildlife Commission, Mr. Wood,
and the commissioner of ADF&G, painted a clear picture of a
blatant bias for one region and one user group taking priority
over the public process. She said that based on his actions so
far on the Board of Fisheries, Mr. Wood seems to have carried
forward that bias to his Board of Fisheries seat. She explained
that the Board of Fisheries process is meant to be one of the
most public and transparent processes the state has. She said
that she had personally attended the Kodiak and Cook Inlet
meetings and expressed that what is happening on the Board of
Fisheries currently is something that all Alaskans should mourn,
regardless of whether they are commercial, sport, subsistence,
or personal use fishermen. She stated that as chair of the
committee, she does not have the option to hold the confirmation
in committee, but she said with certainty that on the floor she
would be voting for the public process, and against the
confirmation of Mr. Wood.
CHAIR STUTES expressed that she was appalled at the Kodiak Board
of Fisheries meeting and added that the Cook Inlet meetings are
typically standing room only, and when she asked several of
the 30 to 40 people present where everyone was, the uniform
response was, We all know the decisions already been made
before this meeting happened. She said that this is a sad
statement, and it doesnt matter what fishing sector an
individual is in, when the public process is so skewed, changes
need to be made.
11:05:57 AM
CHAIR STUTES stated that the House Special Committee on
Fisheries had reviewed the qualifications of the governors
appointees, Marilyn Charles to the Fishermens Fund Advisory &
Appeals Council and John Wood to the Board of Fisheries and
recommends that the names be forwarded to a joint session of the
House and Senate for consideration. She said that this does not
reflect intent by any member to vote for or against an
individual during any further sessions for the purposes of
confirmation.
11:06:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR remarked that it is unfortunate the way this
nomination was playing out, because a lot of the testimony at
the meeting was in favor, based on what people have seen at the
last couple of meetings. She said that Mr. Wood probably knew
that people would be paying close attention to what happened
over the period prior to his confirmation and said that it feels
like it has undue influence over the way the situation is
playing out. She explained that this person is being evaluated
in a different way, from her experience, than typical board
appointments, because generally they are considered before they
have attended meetings and been involved in significant
decisions. She stated that the most disappointing thing to her
is that some of the testimonies pointed out a user group
conflict, and things will not be successful if that is how the
board is going to operate, particularly when some of the
fisheries might be impacted by factors happening outside of
Alaskas waters. She said that user groups need to be working
together to understand what is happening. She opined that it is
unfortunate that even if this person is not confirmed, he still
had the ability to participate in big decisions with lasting
impacts.
11:08:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE commented that it would be easy to assume
that this appointee is getting swept into current affairs, and
she pointed out that he has a track record of writing proposals
that directly impact the Cook Inlet. She said that there is a
history to look at of Mr. Wood, prior to his appointment to the
board, which is challenging when considering the fishery
overall. She said that this is something that has been brought
up as a great concern, and the recent actions on the Board of
Fisheries confirm concerns that there appears to be a bias
toward the Mat-Su Valley specifically. She expressed that this
is concerning to her, as she wants someone who will look out for
the fishery, the resource, and all users. She said that she
admires the fact that Mr. Wood is learning and doing homework,
which she said is obviously not a common trait amongst all board
members, and she said this speaks to a broken process which she
would like to address through legislation.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE explained that there is a loophole allowing
for an appointee to serve on a board without being confirmed for
nearly a year and make decisions that affect a resource. She
asked where else so much leniency in accountability is allowed
when someone has not been technically given the authority of the
legislature. She expressed that this is concerning to her but
said she does not want Mr. Wood to be swept up in the process
that the legislature needs to address. She said that she would
be weighing heavily as to what the right thing to do is
concerning Mr. Woods appointment, because he appears to be a
good board member in connecting with people, and she said that
she hopes Mr. Wood will be able to counter a lot of the rumors
and concerns by helping to create a better public process. She
expressed that Alaskas fisheries have one of the greatest
impacts on the states economy and sustaining life, and that is
something that the committee takes very seriously.
11:11:16 AM
CHAIR STUTES remarked that she would be delighted to work with
Representative Vance on legislation to close the loophole in the
appointment process.
[The confirmations of Marilyn Charles, appointee to the
Fishermen's Fund Advisory & Appeals Council and John Wood,
appointee to the Board of Fisheries, were treated as advanced to
the joint session for consideration. Although not stated on the
record, signing the reports regarding appointments to boards and
commissions in no way reflects the individual members' approval
or disapproval of the appointees, and the nominations are merely
forwarded to the full legislature for confirmation or
rejection.]
11:11:30 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Special Committee on Fisheries meeting was adjourned at 11:12
a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| John Wood Board Application_Redacted.pdf |
HFSH 3/12/2020 10:00:00 AM |
|
| Marilyn Charles Board Application_Redacted.pdf |
HFSH 3/12/2020 10:00:00 AM |
|
| HB 247 Sectional Analysis - v. A 2.12.20.pdf |
HFSH 3/12/2020 10:00:00 AM |
HB 247 |
| HB 247 Hearing Request Memo 2.12.20.pdf |
HFSH 3/12/2020 10:00:00 AM |
HB 247 |
| HB 247 Fiscal Note ADF&G 2.12.20.pdf |
HFSH 3/12/2020 10:00:00 AM |
HB 247 |
| HB 247 Support Doc - Stocking FAQ 2.19.2.pdf |
HFSH 3/12/2020 10:00:00 AM |
HB 247 |
| HB 247 Support Doc - Surcharge Revenue Breakdown 2.12.20.pdf |
HFSH 3/12/2020 10:00:00 AM |
HB 247 |
| HB 247 Transmittal Letter ver. A 2.12.20.pdf |
HFSH 3/12/2020 10:00:00 AM |
HB 247 |
| HB 247 v. 2.12.20.PDF |
HFSH 3/12/2020 10:00:00 AM |
HB 247 |
| Confirmation of John Wood-Opposition.pdf |
HFSH 3/12/2020 10:00:00 AM |
|
| Confirmation of John Wood-Support.pdf |
HFSH 3/12/2020 10:00:00 AM |