Legislature(2015 - 2016)CAPITOL 120
02/04/2016 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 | |
| Presentation: the Role of Seafood in the Southcentral Economy - Alaska Salmon Alliance | |
| HJR28 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| *+ | HJR 28 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HJR 28-OPPOSING GM SALMON
10:32:53 AM
CHAIR STUTES announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 28, Opposing the United States Food
and Drug Administration's approval of AquaBounty AquAdvantage
genetically engineered salmon; urging the United States Congress
to enact legislation that requires prominently labeling
genetically engineered products with the words "Genetically
Modified" on the product's packaging; and encouraging the
restoration of wild, native populations of salmon in areas where
development has negatively affected salmon.
10:34:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GERAN TARR, Alaska State Legislature, said an
effort was mounted, in 2013, to oppose the federal government's
approval of genetically modified (GM) salmon. However, the
Federal Drug Administration (FDA) ruling, dated 11/19/15,
announcing its decision for approval of GM salmon products,
created the impetus for introducing HJR 28. The monumental
decision marks the first time a genetically modified animal has
received FDA approval for human consumption. The fish is
modified by utilizing combined genetics from the Atlantic
Chinook salmon and the ocean pout. The chinook lends size and
type, while the pout provides a continuous growth hormone for
rapid maturity. She provided a series of slides to illustrate
the physical differences between the GM Atlantic salmon and
other farmed salmon. The sole motivation for GM enhancement is
economic gain for those involved, she opined, which casts a
shadow of extreme contrast on Alaska's focus for sustainable
wild salmon harvests. She paraphrased a statement from the
AquaBounty website, which states [original punctuation
provided]:
The AquaBounty founding idea - modern genetics + land-
based aquaculture.
In 1993, AquaBounty's CEO had the idea of pairing the
two revolutionary technologies. The innovative faster
growing AquAdvantage Salmon, which would shorten
production cycles by half and drastically reduce feed
costs, could finally make land-based fish farming
economically viable.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR said Alaska is a leader in resource
management and represents a model for healthy, sustainable
fisheries. Concerns continue to exist about GM salmon, which
include: threats to wild salmon, risks to human health, and a
risk to Alaska's economy. She pointed out that these are the
same concerns that initially arose, when the discussion began,
and which the FDA has still not addressed. Despite safeguards,
she said escapement does occur from holding pens. The
escapement factor was a noted concern by both the U.S.
Department of Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), during
risk assessment studies.
10:39:18 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR explained that the genetically modified eggs
would be produced in a facility on Prince Edward Island (PEI),
shipped to Panama for rearing, harvested, and imported for sale
in the United States; fully involving three countries. In 2013,
her visit to Prince Edward Island, provided a firsthand look at,
and understanding of, the project. The PEI facility is close to
a large bay, Bay Fortune, which provides a direct outlet to the
Atlantic Ocean. She reported meeting with the Premier of Prince
Edward Island, as well as speaking with residents, many of whom
objected to the facilities GM project. The primary industry on
PEI is tourism, which is being supplanted by its identification
with the "frankenfish" facility, a direct result of the budding
industry.
10:40:49 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR said GM salmon pose additional threats to
wild salmon, which include: spread of disease, similar to what
occurs with hatchery fish; food chain competition, due to the
aggressive behavior of the GM salmon; and cross breeding.
Multiple scientific journals and papers, have been published,
regarding the ability to cross breed, she reported, and provided
headline illustrations for a number of articles regarding GM
salmon hybridizing with trout. Further, the studies confirmed
that the GM fish could out-compete both the trout and the
Atlantic salmon for food, also a major concern. Expanding on
the risk to human health, she said the approval was handled
under FDA veterinary rules and standards, bringing into question
the appropriateness of the ruling. The AquaAdvantage salmon
represent a trademarked product and, as such, AquaBounty is able
to restrict, and is legally protected against, unfettered
research conducted by outside agencies. Although motivated by
economic gain, the company can be selective in choosing to share
its information.
10:42:49 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR recalled the depressive effect on Alaska's
economy when farmed salmon were introduced on the world market.
Due to major efforts, undertaken by Alaska Seafood Marketing
Institute (ASMI), the Wild Alaska Salmon brand is widely
recognized as an industry standard. However, there could be
confusion among consumers, if GM salmon products enter the
market without appropriate labeling.
10:43:33 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR said Alaska's congressional delegation
supports pushback on the GM salmon ruling. She reported that
U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski has been holding up the confirmation
of an FDA official in an effort to leverage control for labeling
requirements and marketing standards on GM salmon products.
Additionally, another 40 members of congress also oppose the
FDA's actions. Over 2 million public comments have been
submitted to the FDA and 65 retailers have stated their intent
to refuse to shelve the product when it becomes available in the
market place. Furthermore, international opposition is strong.
The local PEI protest efforts have resulted in restrictions
being placed on egg production and isolating the activity to one
facility. Finally she said that the AquaBounty efforts are not
isolated to salmon. Information regarding its interest in
applying GM technology to other seafood/shellfish products, and
establishing facilities in other locales, has been outlined and
available on its website; some information has recently been
removed.
10:46:53 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HJR 28, Version 29-LS1213\W, Nauman, 2/3/16.
CHAIR STUTES objected for discussion.
10:47:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS stated support for HJR 28, and
lauded the well drafted resolution.
10:47:41 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON noted the sponsor's comment regarding the
blocked congressional confirmation of the FDA official who
authorized the GM salmon. He asked about amending the
resolution to including another whereas to support U.S. Senator
Lisa Murkowski's efforts to holdup the confirmation.
10:49:32 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR said an amendment would be welcomed, and
forwarded her understanding that the senator would appreciate
the support.
10:49:46 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON opined that innovation for profit is not
inherently a bad motivator; however, in this specific instance
it creates an issue regarding the profitability of Alaskans. He
asked whether state statutes exist that apply to identification
of genetically modified fish.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR said that Alaska's labeling statute was
passed in 2006; however, it's now out of step with the federal
requirements and it remains unclear whether state law could be
enforced given the federal overrides in place.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON inquired about modification requirements
for state law.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR stated her understanding and assurance
received from legislative legal services that the laws can be
synchronized.
10:52:00 AM
CHAIR STUTES removed her objection. There being no further
objection, Version W was before the committee.
CHAIR STUTES opened public testimony.
10:52:25 AM
LOUIE FLORA, Alaska Center for the Environment (ACE) and Alaska
Conservation Voters (ACV), testified in support of HJR 28,
speaking as follows:
I'm working here in Juneau ... speaking today on
behalf of Alaska Center for the Environment (ACE) and
Alaska Conservation Voters ACV), and also on behalf of
myself as a Bristol Bay drift fisherman. Alaska
Center for the Environment and Conservation Voters are
working to protect Alaska wild salmon and Alaska wild
salmon habitat. And they work to promote positive,
clean energy, [and] job creating, solutions to the
climate change issue. And they also are supporting a
reinvigoration of local and public comment in Alaska
on resource permitting issues.
Alaska Center for the Environment supports HJR 28.
Their concerns with GMO [genetically modified organism
(GMO)] salmon are justifiably based on the unknown
risks to our wild ocean stocks. The impact of GMO
cross pollination, unintentional or not, and
[weakening] of wild genetics is well documented in
American agriculture. Alaska wild salmon is unique as
a thriving and genetically varied population. Wild
stock, genetic variance, and diversity is one of the
hallmarks of the survival of the different salmon
species. The potential that genetic diversity could
be compromised by the introduction of GMO fish is not
some farfetched notion. If this GMO fish takes off in
the market, anything is possible.
That was my testimony on behalf of [ACE], but I wanted
to speak directly as a gillnet fishermen who has ...
seen what the market changes have been since 1983.
And my fear with genetically modified salmon on the
market is that there would be a problem of market
perception, which could drive the price down. And a
problem of market saturation of new species, which
could drive the price down. We saw the problem of
market perception in 1989-90, following the [oil
tanker] Exxon Valdez spill. ... Fishermen have a lot
of opinions on why markets are changing, so this may
be apocryphal. ... One of the opinions out there was
that the market perception that all Alaska salmon were
tainted, had the ability to leverage a decrease in our
Bristol Bay price ..., which was at $2.35 per pound at
that point; [the price] has fallen ever since. ...
That a genetically modified salmon could ... instill
fear in the global salmon markets, I think could be a
real potential and ... have long term economic
implications for all of Alaska.
As far as market saturation: We got $.50 per pound
this year for our price. ... One of the [price]
factors is the increased resurgence of the Chilean
farmed, and other farmed, salmon populations. I think
that there's a potential that if this genetically
modified salmon can be produced cheaply, can flood the
market ... that in combination with the global farmed
salmon populations could have a further compounding
effect on our price. ... For the reasons of
perception and market saturation, as a drift
fisherman, I would really, really encourage our
congressional delegation, and congress as a whole, to
enact whatever labeling, and whatever market
mechanisms they can apply, to differentiate wild ...
Alaska salmon from the rest of the world markets. ...
I know a lot of good work has gone into the
differentiating process by the Alaska Seafood
Marketing Institute (ASMI), and other marketers, but I
think labeling on a national scale is paramount for
the health of our fisheries.
10:57:38 AM
ARNI THOMPSON, Representative, Alaska Salmon Alliance (ASA),
stated support for HJR 28 and said ASA adds its name to all who
support HJR 28 and who oppose the development of genetically
modified salmon products. Additionally, ASA supports the
congressional mandates for labeling of genetically modified food
products, including salmon.
10:59:10 AM
MATT ALWARD, Representative, United Fishermen of Alaska (UFA),
testified in support of HJR 28 citing the UFA's long standing
position to oppose genetically modified salmon production. The
organization also supports the requirement to have any
genetically modified seafood to be clearly labeled for the
market place.
CHAIR STUTES closed public testimony after ascertain no one
further wished to testify.
11:00:15 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 11:00 a.m. to 11:02 a.m.
11:02:37 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 1,
provided to the committee in handwritten form, which read as
follows:
Page 3, Line 5, Insert:
FURTHER RESOLVED that the Alaska State Legislature
fully supports our Congressional delegation in their
efforts to hold up the confirmation of a new [Food and
Drug Administration (FDA)] Commissioner until the
agency agrees to require labeling for [genetically
engineered] salmon.
CHAIR STUTES objected for discussion.
11:02:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS stated support for the amendment
and said a thorough understanding of how the confirmation
process is handled by congress would be good knowledge to have
when making this type of request.
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON acknowledged the member's concern and
commented that the action of approving the GE salmon carries a
huge potential for harming Alaska.
11:04:56 AM
CHAIR STUTES removed her objection. With no further objection,
Conceptual Amendment 1 was adopted.
11:05:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS moved to report the proposed CS
for HJR 28, Version 29-LS1213\W, Nauman, 2/3/16, as amended,
from committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes. Without objection, CSHJR 28(FSH) was
reported from the House Special Committee on Fisheries.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| Seafood in Southcentral - McDowell Study, Arni Thompson.pdf |
HFSH 2/4/2016 10:00:00 AM |
Arni Thompson Alaska Salmon Alliance |
| HJR 28 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HFSH 2/4/2016 10:00:00 AM |
HJR 28 |
| HJR 28 Explanation of Changes between Version W and Version A.pdf |
HFSH 2/4/2016 10:00:00 AM |
HJR 28 |
| HJR 28 Version W (CS).pdf |
HFSH 2/4/2016 10:00:00 AM |
HJR 28 |
| HJR 28 Version A.PDF |
HFSH 2/4/2016 10:00:00 AM |
HJR 28 |
| HJR 28 Support Alaska Dispatch News Article.pdf |
HFSH 2/4/2016 10:00:00 AM |
HJR 28 |
| HJR 28 Support Reps. Young and Defazio.pdf |
HFSH 2/4/2016 10:00:00 AM |
HJR 28 |
| HJR 28 Support NY Times Article.pdf |
HFSH 2/4/2016 10:00:00 AM |
HJR 28 |
| HJR 28 Support Sen. Murkowski.pdf |
HFSH 2/4/2016 10:00:00 AM |
HJR 28 |
| HJR 28 Support Tarr Frankenfish.pdf |
HFSH 2/4/2016 10:00:00 AM |
HJR 28 |
| HJR 28 Support PVOA.pdf |
HFSH 2/4/2016 10:00:00 AM |
HJR 28 |
| HJR 28 Support USAG.pdf |
HFSH 2/4/2016 10:00:00 AM |
HJR 28 |
| HJR 28 Support UFA.pdf |
HFSH 2/4/2016 10:00:00 AM |
HJR 28 |
| HJR 28 Oppose ITIF.pdf |
HFSH 2/4/2016 10:00:00 AM |
HJR 28 |
| HJR 28 Oppose AquaBounty Testimony.pdf |
HFSH 2/4/2016 10:00:00 AM |
HJR 28 |
| HJR 28-Fiscal Note LAA.pdf |
HFSH 2/4/2016 10:00:00 AM |
HJR 28 Fiscal Note |
| HJR 28 Support Weathers.pdf |
HFSH 2/4/2016 10:00:00 AM |
HJR 28 |
| HJR 28 Support SAFA.pdf |
HFSH 2/4/2016 10:00:00 AM |