Legislature(2023 - 2024)GRUENBERG 120
02/27/2024 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 | |
| HB295 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 195 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 295 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 329 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 295-SALMON HATCHERY PERMITS
10:20:37 AM
CHAIR VANCE announced that the only order of business would be
BILL NO. 295, "An Act relating to salmon hatchery permits; and
authorizing the sale of salmon to permitted persons for stocking
lakes."
10:20:48 AM
SAM RABUNG, Director, Division of Commercial Fisheries, Alaska
Department of Fish & Game, introduced HB 295 on behalf of the
sponsor, House Rules, by request of the governor. He explained
that HB 295 would allow private nonprofit salmon hatcheries to
sell live salmon to private persons or organizations for the
limited purpose of stocking lakes in Alaska. This would also
include several species of trout, including rainbow trout which
are the primary hatchery product the state hatcheries use to
stock lakes. Unfortunately, at this time, the state hatchery
facilities don't have enough surplus fish to sell because the
current demand for stocking public access lakes exceeds
production capacity. Additionally, state hatcheries are paid
for with sport angler dollars and matched with federal Dingell-
Johnson Act dollars, so the state must limit its stocking
efforts to lakes that have the most benefit to all sport
anglers. We use the publicly developed stocking plan to
determine which lakes to stock. This bill would provide for
additional recreational, food security, and economic
opportunities by allowing the private nonprofit hatcheries to
sell to individuals or groups under the Alaska Department of
Fish & Game (ADF&G) permitting structure. Fish stocking is
stringently regulated in Alaska.
MR. RABUNG continued his explanation by specifying that before
purchasing any fish for stocking, the individual or group would
be required to obtain a fish transport permit from the
department. The requested species, stock, life stage, and
stocking location would be evaluated and approved or denied
through this permitting process. To reduce the potential for
negative impacts on wild fish populations, the department uses
sterile stocking fish when practical, and typically only permits
the use of reproductively viable fish in lakes which are
landlocked and where the fish cannot escape. This is a rigorous
process and will ensure that live fish sold to the public will
not adversely affect Alaska's wild fish population. There is no
requirement for the private nonprofit hatcheries to do so. The
bill could create new economic opportunities for hatchery
operators; encourage Alaskans to engage in additional
recreational activities; and provide greater access to a
resource that is vital for food security. Because hatchery
permitting processes are already in place, the department can
absorb the additional workload for processing the fish transport
permits. New regulations may need to be adopted for the
implementation of this bill.
10:25:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked about the criteria for stocking
lakes and whether the lakes had to have public access.
MR. RABUNG responded that a private lake can be stocked, but the
owner would have to obtain the fish transport permit and pay for
the fish. Currently the state only stocks public access
locations.
10:26:07 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES questioned whether this process is already
being done. She asked if she could get a lake next to her house
stocked.
MR. RABUNG replied that currently private nonprofit hatchery
corporations can only sell to other private nonprofit hatchery
permit holders or the state. The language of this bill would
broaden that to include private lakes.
10:26:55 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT requested information on the oversight
of the stocking program and where in the bill it specifies
landlocked lakes.
MR. RABUNG replied that the oversight is part of the permitting
process and that it would be part of the local area management
biologist or staff. The staff would ascertain that the lake was
landlocked and what species, number, life stage, and other
details are reviewed and put into the permit. He explained that
there are five lake categories, and each category has different
restrictions regarding what can be stocked.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT asked what would be done to prevent the
introduction of invasive species.
MR. RABUNG explained that the fish would be produced in a
hatchery and would be provided to whoever has the permit to
stock the lake. He doesn't see an opportunity for an invasive
species to be introduced under that scenario.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT questioned what happens if the lake has
other property holders, and the neighbors don't want it stocked.
MR. RABUNG responded that the division's definition of "private"
means there is no public access. Part of the permitting process
would be the ability for neighbors to contribute opinions.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT asked what the fish transporter permit
does currently.
MR. RABUNG explained that ADF&G would not be changing its fish
transport regulations at all for this. What is changing is the
ability for a private nonprofit hatchery corporation to sell to
someone who is not a private nonprofit hatchery permit holder or
to the state. This includes fish or eggs.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT inquired about the process a hatchery
currently has to go through.
MR. RABUNG described the rigorous permitting process that
private nonprofit corporations go through in order to get a
private nonprofit hatchery permit, a process that often takes
two or more years. After they get the hatchery permit, they
must get a transport permit.
10:32:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked about some of the requirements of
transporting fish stock to keep the fish alive and what he would
need if he wanted to stock his lake.
MR. RABUNG said that gets into the specifics of fish transport.
The division stipulates everything including where the effluent
can go. He explained that if someone is going to transport fry
to a private lake, the method of transport depends on such
factors as how many and what size. For example, if an
individual wants to put 500 fingerlings in a lake, that person
can do that with a backpack if the right equipment is being
used. It is determined on a case-by-case basis.
10:34:50 AM
CHAIR VANCE requested clarification regarding whether the same
standards would be applied to these situations as are applied to
all other hatchery permits and asked whether all sales have
oversight by the division.
MR. RABUNG answered that it is the same permit that would be
issued to ADF&G, universities, or private nonprofit hatchery
operators. He stipulated that the private nonprofits have
additional scrutiny.
10:35:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER asked what the impetus is for this
bill.
MR. RABUNG explained that there is much more demand for lake
stocking than the state sport hatchery system has capacity for.
The state hatcheries do contract some of their work out to the
private nonprofit hatcheries. There simply is more demand than
there is product to stock lakes.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER requested clarification regarding
whether both private lakes and lakes with public access would be
affected by HB 295. He was also interested in whether there was
a business model which affected the increased number of lakes
requesting stocked salmon.
MR. RABUNG responded that to his knowledge there was just pent-
up demand. Salmon and trout are both in demand, but ADF&G has
not been able to meet that demand with current resources
especially in regard to private lakes.
10:38:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCORMICK inquired whether these hatcheries have
to go through the regional planning team process.
MR. RABUNG replied in the affirmative.
10:38:46 AM
CHAIR VANCE opened public testimony on HB 295.
10:38:59 AM
NANCY HILLSTRAND, Owner, Pioneer Alaskan Fisheries and Coal
Point Seafood Company, provided background about her experience
in the Alaska seafood business. She explained that she did not
support HB 295 in its current form and expressed concern about
the level of oversight and monitoring. She explained there
should be a more comprehensive approach to make sound policy
decisions and then outlined several points that should be
considered. She urged the committee to hold the bill until the
issues are resolved.
10:42:28 AM
LEONARDO WASSILIE, representing self, explained that salmon is
sacred to the people of Alaska and cautioned against stocking
the lakes. The fisheries need to have really good oversight and
people involved who really care rather than people who make a
profit. He pointed out that the fisheries are currently
stressed and strained, and work must be done to protect these
resources.
10:44:01 AM
CHAIR VANCE, after ascertaining there was no one else who wished
to testify, closed public testimony on HB 295.
10:44:20 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked Mr. Rabung for clarification that
the salmon to be stocked were sterile and the lakes were to be
landlocked.
MR. RABUNG explained that there are five categories of lakes
ranging from unrestricted water where the fish can leave at any
time to lakes which are landlocked. The ADF&G Division of Sport
Fish cannot stock any system where the fish can leave. There
are lakes with intermittent outlets when the water is flooding.
Those would have a higher level of scrutiny and likely would be
stocked with sterile fish which are more expensive. A fully
landlocked lake might not need sterile fish.
10:46:13 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES inquired about the number of requests the
division has had for this type of transport permit.
MR. RABUNG responded that ADF&G issues hundreds of fish
transport permits each year, because anyone who handles fish,
whether it is for research or for production, including ADF&G,
is required to have a transport permit.
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES asked how many transporter permits are
from private individuals wanting to stock their own private
lakes.
MR. RABUNG explained that he did not have that information with
him, but the Division of Sport Fish would have that information.
10:48:14 AM
CHAIR VANCE requested a brief overview regarding the work of the
ADF&G genetics department and its requirements on species as
well as the strictness of the process.
MR. RABUNG explained that when a fish transport permit
application is processed, there is a review by local area
management biologists to see whether there is going to be an
impact on fisheries. In certain areas, the information is
reviewed by subsistence users. In addition to the reviews by
the geneticists, the application is reviewed by the state fish
pathology laboratory. There is not a genetic concern when it is
sterile stock because they can't pass on any genes. The main
purpose is to make sure foreign genomes are not being introduced
into the stock.
10:49:52 AM
JOSEPH FELKL, Legislative Liaison, Alaska Department of Fish &
Game, explained that in addition to the stocking policy, ADF&G
has a genetic policy. The genetic policy comes into play with
the transporter requests. He emphasized that these requests go
through the same level of scrutiny as the current permits. They
also have a fish health policy which he can provide to the
committee.
10:50:32 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER questioned where the demand for
stocking lakes comes from and whether the Division of Sport Fish
can speak to the demand. In a follow-up question, he asked how
much demand there is for stocking private lakes.
MR. RABUNG answered that the division can speak to what the
demand is. It puts together the statewide fish stocking each
year through the public process. There are always more lakes
nominated for fish stocking than the division has the capacity
for. Not everything makes the list every year. Certainly, any
body of water that does not have public access will not make the
list.
10:52:24 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE reiterated his understanding that HB 295
doesn't have anything to do with state hatcheries. What it does
is allow private hatcheries to sell fish stock to someone with a
private lake. For example, the Kodiak Regional Aquaculture
Association would be able to sell to private individuals who
have a private landlocked lake in addition to selling to its
members.
MR. RABUNG agreed that all lake stocking is done either by the
Division of Sport Fish using the William Jack Hernandez Sport
Fish Hatchery or the Ruth Burnett Sport Fish Hatchery. The
state can contract with private nonprofits (PNP) such as the
Kodiak Regional Aquaculture Association to stock lakes on Kodiak
Island as part of the statewide stocking program. The existing
statute allows PNP hatcheries to do that for the state or for
other PNP permit holders. Under HB 295 lakes that do not make
the stocking list, or which are privately owned could contract
with private fisheries.
10:54:11 AM
MR. FELKL said he would contact the Division of Sport Fish to
get information for the committee regarding what and how many
stocking requests are not being met.
10:54:28 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT inquired about the process for public
input when there are multiple landholders on a lake.
MR. RABUNG explained that he wasn't positive, but comments on
stocking fish in a private lake would probably mimic the
existing process used for a public body of water.
10:55:46 AM
CHAIR VANCE asked what the interface would be with the
Department of Natural Resources (DNR).
MR. RABUNG replied that the fish stocking programs are not
coordinated with DNR. He also commented that once the fish are
released, they become common property and are not owned by the
person who had the lake stocked. If there is public access, any
member of the public has access to the fish as well.
CHAIR VANCE responded that it was an important clarification.
10:56:52 AM
MR. RABUNG, in response to a question from Representative
Carpenter, described the process used by the Division of Sport
Fish for stocking a lake. The process includes the work of the
regional planning team, permitting, public comment, and
oversight. The permit must be approved before the fish are
produced. He did not think a public review process was in place
for transporting the fish.
10:59:13 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE discussed the issue of who owns a lake and
how it is common property. When the state owns the lake, it has
common use. In terms of stocking fish, it is most likely the
same scenario.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT requested clarification about stocking
a lake and whether a PNP could stock a private lake if it was in
its plan. If ADF&G is unable to meet a person's request, a PNP
could fulfill a contract for the fish.
MR. RABUNG answered that currently the answer is no, but HB 295
would allow a private pond or lake to be stocked.
11:01:53 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER questioned where the unmet demand is
which is driving the request for a policy change. He added that
he could not imagine anyone being against a lake being stocked,
but the legislators will get the calls if people are unhappy
with increased traffic on a lake.
MR. RABUNG responded that the alternative would be to build
another state hatchery, so HB 295 is viewed as a way to meet the
demand for fish to stock lakes.
11:03:04 AM
CHAIR VANCE inquired about the process for a person who wishes
to stock a lake.
MR. RABUNG explained that the process starts by a person getting
a fish transport permit application which identifies where they
want to stock, the purpose, and what kind of stock. The
transport application is evaluated by the division, adding any
"sideboards" that are needed, and either denied or approved.
Then the person needs to go to a PNP salmon hatchery permit
holder and ask if they will produce the stock. If the parties
agree, the PNP will update its management plan and put it in the
production planning where it will go into the public review
process. After those steps are completed, the hatchery can
produce the fish and transport them when they are the correct
size and age.
CHAIR VANCE commented that the onus was on the person rather
than the hatchery and followed with a question about who was
responsible for the fish after the lake had been stocked.
MR. RABUNG explained that after the fish are released into the
lake, they become common property fish, and they are subject to
any sport fishing regulations in the area including the need for
a sport fishing license and adherence to limits.
11:05:36 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER asked Mr. Rabung to clarify whether a
landlocked lake could be stocked with trout that can reproduce.
MR. RABUNG replied that would be the case unless the lake was
subject to occasional flooding, in which case it would be a
category 4 lake and would be stocked with sterile fish.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER discussed the concept of food security,
commenting that an individual might wish to stock a private lake
with fish as a food source.
MR. RABUNG reminded the committee that state policy currently
does not allow an individual to stock a private lake because
they would not match the qualifications for the statewide
stocking plan. The provisions of HB 295 would enable private
lake owners to stock fish.
11:07:07 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT reiterated the steps for stocking a
lake, emphasizing that only someone with a fish transport permit
could contract with a PNP hatchery to stock their lake. With
the transport permit, the PNP can agree to sell fish stock to an
individual. However, currently even if a person has a transport
permit, they cannot stock a private lake.
MR. RABUNG clarified that the fish cannot be moved without a
transport permit. The hatchery operator has their program in
place, so if they are going to do something extra, they must
plan for it. The person who is purchasing fish must be vetted
and have a fish transport permit in hand, and then the PNP will
build that request into its program. He reiterated that
currently a person with a private lake will not be able to
purchase fish stock from an Alaska hatchery.
11:09:33 AM
MR. FELKL pointed out that other statutes are also at play here
that are not included in this bill. For example, the hatchery
permit statutes and statutes that outline how fish, game, and
marine products can be sold. He also reviewed how "person" is
defined in statute to include corporations and organizations as
well as individuals.
11:10:50 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT referred to AS 16.05.671(g) which seems
to say that the commissioner of ADF&G can make determinations
about lake stocking. She asked whether the statute change in HB
295 is actually something that can currently be done by the
commissioner.
MR. RABUNG explained that when the Department of Law drafted
this update, it made an error and cited the wrong statute. That
is for the transporter permit which is for fish that are
harvested. He said what he is actually referring to is fish
transport permits which are under Board of Fish authority, AS
16.05.251.
MR. FELKL said they did work with the Department of Law to draft
an amendment.
11:12:28 AM
CHAIR VANCE expressed appreciation for the dialogue which is
necessary to give the public an understanding of the purpose and
intent of the legislation.
11:12:47 AM
CHAIR VANCE announced that HB 295 was held over.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 295 - Transmittal Letter v.A (01.24.24).pdf |
HFSH 2/6/2024 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/27/2024 10:00:00 AM SRES 5/10/2024 3:30:00 PM |
HB 295 |
| HB 295 - v.A.pdf |
HFSH 2/6/2024 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/27/2024 10:00:00 AM |
HB 295 |
| HB 295 - Sectional Analysis v.A (01.31.24).pdf |
HFSH 2/6/2024 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/27/2024 10:00:00 AM |
HB 295 |
| HB 295 - Comm Fish-ADFG Fiscal Notes (01-23-24).pdf |
HFSH 2/6/2024 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/27/2024 10:00:00 AM |
HB 295 |
| HB 295 - Nancy Hillstrand Testimony.pdf |
HFSH 2/27/2024 10:00:00 AM |
HB 295 |