Legislature(1995 - 1996)
03/13/1996 03:50 PM Senate RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 285 DISCRETE SALMON STOCK MANAGMNT & ASSESSMT
SENATOR HALFORD, sponsor, explained that the fish initiative is on
the ballot and there are continuous allocation battles that often
center in Cook Inlet. It seems like it's been managed based on
someone trying to find moral high ground in allocation arguments
that are mostly economic between commercial fishing and commercial
fishing with a hook and a line and a tourist.
He said that over the past decade or so is that some of the minor
streams, particularly in the Upper Susitna Drainages, have lost
their basic stocks. If you look at the overall escapement even by
major drainages, the goals have only been met in only three or four
out of the last 10 years. He thought the arguments over allocation
have been detrimental to the constitutional obligation to maintain
sustained yield.
He said he felt that if we are going to harvest mixed stocks, we
absolutely have to know where the stocks are going. He thought it
was the obligation of those who advocate the harvest of mixed
stocks to at some point participate in a real identification that
gets us to discrete stock management.
If there's any logical solution, any long term goal, it's to meet
our constitutional obligation for sustained yield by specific
stock, by specific drainage, by every component of the run, etc.
We can't do that unless we are willing to spend the money and know
where the fish are going. The bill sets out discrete stock
management as the long term goal and applies a 15-year phase in by
species and by drainage to get from here to there. He said that
unless we get to this kind of management, we'll continue to destroy
subspecies in some areas and will possibly use court cases on the
mandate of sustained yield going into a season shut down fisheries
that are unnecessary.
Number 340
SENATOR HOFFMAN noted that three years ago they passed legislation
directing the Board to develop mixed stock policies. He knew they
hadn't done that, but he asked what would be the difference between
mixed stocks and discrete stocks. SENATOR HALFORD explained that
the legislation they passed three years ago was just putting into
statute what their own policy and regulations said and the Board
wasn't following it then. He explained he didn't intend this to be
an attack on any side of the allocation battle.
Number 353
SENATOR HOFFMAN asked if many sports fishermen benefit from this
and why does the burden fall on the commercial fisherman. SENATOR
HALFORD answered that the majority of the mixed stock users are in
the commercial fisheries. He didn't think any of the users would
necessarily object to the kind of surcharge it would take to get
the kind of management necessary to have truly discrete stock
understanding.
SENATOR TAYLOR asked how effective this would be if the subsistence
management protocols currently being developed by the federal
departments of agriculture and interior are implemented this
spring. SENATOR HALFORD replied that somewhere along the line they
have to use some kind of biological data and information as a
weapon in the first battle which is defense of the sustained yield
of the resource.
Number 373
BOB CLASBY, Director, Commercial Fisheries, said the administration
had not developed a position on this bill. It is complex and needs
clarification of some terms and issues.
On page 1, line 14 he asked if they are to target only those
defined as discrete stocks in D (1) or are they being asked to
identify every possible sockeye salmon stock that might be found in
a mixed stock fishery.
SENATOR HALFORD replied that it would be nice to have every segment
of every stock and every substock in every drainage, but there is
enough work to do with the 24.
MR. CLASBY said they want the division to determine the stock
composition by river of origin of each existing mixed stock salmon
fishery. He assumed the mixed stock salmon fisheries are those
that are listed in sections 1 - 3.
SENATOR HALFORD asked if he had any further refinements of the
lists they have missed on how the stocks actually break up, the
committee would like their recommendations on those as well.
MR. CLASBY asked if the sponsor wants escapement objectives
developed, would he want systems in place to annually measure
those? SENATOR HALFORD answered yes.
MR. CLASBY noted the second line of subparagraph 18 said the
objectives were to be based on spawning and rearing habitat and
average production and he recommended instead of limiting
themselves, that phrase be deleted and insert something like best
available information. SENATOR HALFORD said he would like to leave
the language there, but add something that allows the expansion
beyond that.
Number 459
MR. CLASBY said he assumed the sponsor wants escapements accurately
measured. There was also a question in paragraph C, computing the
cost. It was the division's assumption that the cost of the
projects that are conducted in the area would be born by that
area's fisheries. All the stocks that make up the composite would
have to be known so the cost would be spread over a number of
fisheries.
SENATOR HALFORD said that sounded like it was too complicated and
he didn't intend it to be that complex.
Number 534
SENATOR TAYLOR asked if the division is now doing some discrete
stock inventory. MR. CLASBY said they are definitely doing that -
particularly on sockeyes.
SENATOR TAYLOR said he was concerned that a study like this would
show that there are non-Alaskan fish in our fisheries. MR. CLASBY
agreed.
SENATOR TAYLOR asked if it was intended to have Canadians
participate in this study. SENATOR HALFORD said there was no
intention to manage for the benefit of Canada, but if we're going
to win in the argument right now, having information about where
they really are going could be used.
TAPE 96-28, SIDE B
SENATOR TAYLOR said it didn't do any good to study the heck out of
an area if it's locked up as a wilderness area. He was concerned
that not only would we be able to use the information, but it might
be used against us.
SENATOR HALFORD said the information could be used for escapement
and propagation. He thought if we had enough data we would
probably be able to get more timber and more fish, but it's blanket
rules because you don't have data that costs us both timber and
fish.
SENATOR TAYLOR said he hated to see our adversaries saying we're
taking too many fish. When they actually look at their own
streams, it isn't because Alaskans are taking their fish. The
problem is that they have just about destroyed the habitat, damned
every river that fish wanted to run up. Now that they've destroyed
the runs, they want to come back and say well, you're taking too
much of a limited amount of stock that's returning.
SENATOR HALFORD said he agreed with most of what Senator Taylor
said, but he concluded that that's why we need to do the study.
JOE MAKINKO, Kodiak fisherman, said he didn't think anyone had any
idea of the cost of this. He thought the questions they were
asking were only politically correct and not biologically correct
ones. He thought the proposal was physically impossible to do.
CHRIS BERNS, Kodiak fisherman, said he agreed that this was a set
up and biologically was "goofy stuff." He thought Republicans were
supposed to be unburdening an industry from goofy regulations.
Number 511
BRUCE SCHACTLER said this has all been said before, but this bill
has a different agenda than what is really being said. It's
advocating terminal fisheries which can cause real damage to a
fishery. He said this is cost prohibitive; it's absolutely absurd.
What the Department is doing now is just fantastic.
Bob Penny, Cook Inlet Sportfishing Caucus, said he represents sport
fishing associations in Kenai, Southcentral, and Mat-Su. They
support SB 285 because they didn't see how fishing was going to
last into the future without something like it. He thought there
would be a shut down of certain species in the Upper Susitna
because legislation like this isn't in place.
ROBERT HALL, Houston Chamber of Commerce, said they strongly
support this bill. He said there is a growing concern about the
health of our salmon catch. There are a lot of stories about large
and small streams where there used to be salmon runs, but they are
now weak or no longer there.
He said the mixed stock fishery clearly has the most potential
problems since fishing technology has become much more efficient.
Number 420
JUDE HINZLER, Bering Sea Fishing Association, said they wanted chum
salmon to be included in the waters north of the Kuskokwim River.
Existing fishery management areas are often superficial and are not
comprehensive because they don't include the Northern Interior
spawners as part of the management area. He said the formula for
how the study gets paid for bothers them because it is hard to
understand.
DEAN PADDOCK, Bristol Bay Driftnetters Association, supported SB
285. He said it would supply much needed direction and intent to
management of our salmon fisheries. He said he was a salmon
biologist before he was a salmon fisherman and he didn't think this
would cost as much as Senator Halford thinks and the technology is
there. It doesn't need to take 15 years if the staff is committed
to it.
Number 345
ROBIN SAMUELSEN said he is a past member of the Board of Fisheries
and a commercial fisherman all his life and he supported SB 285
conceptually.
JOE MCGILL, Bristol Bay Herring Marketing Coop., said he has
questions about the bill. He knows that work has to be done not
only in the streams, but out on the high seas which he thinks is
most important. He said fishermen are already paying taxes for
enhancement and he wanted to know how much money this would take
and how would the assessment work.
Number 330
JAMES EVENSON, commercial fisherman in Cook Inlet, opposed SB 285
because it's unnecessary and misguided. Alaska has the most
successful wild salmon management in the world and our runs are
basically in good shape. He speaks from the perspective of a Cook
Inlet Drifter. In Cook Inlet the rivers are managed for the
specific stocks that are in them. A great deal of effort has been
put into identifying and protecting the separate stocks. All the
stocks seems to be healthy and meeting their escapement goals.
He noted that this bill was not motivated by ADF&G or on any
biological basis. It's for a reallocation of salmon away from the
commercial fisheries.
BEN ELLIS, Executive Director, Kenai River Sportfishing
Association, supported SB 285. It will give the direction and
funding needed to uphold our constitutional mandate to provide for
sustained yield of wild salmon.
This bill provides the framework where science may be gathered in
an organized manner so we can move toward management of genetic
diversity of discrete stocks in a timely fashion with a minimum
amount of disruption to commercial fisheries.
DALE BONDURANT supported SB 285 and said this bill is vital to the
integrity of the survival of Alaskan salmon fisheries. He read
from a 1988 ADF&G memo that said the commercial fisheries are
currently managed only for the sockeye escapement goals with coho
and chinook harvest incidental to sockeye. He just sat for 15 days
at a Board of Fisheries meeting and he is convinced they will fail
to address discrete salmon stock management that is absolutely
necessary.
DENNIS RANDA, Trout Unlimited, said that the national organization
of Trout Unlimited opposes mixed stock fisheries because they
result in decline of weak stocks all across the West Coast. In the
face of increasing public demand when the Board drafted their mixed
stock policy they admitted that the burden of conservation of the
resource was disproportionately shared and he agreed with them. He
sees an ulterior motive in terms of reallocation.
Number 154
MR. RANDA read an article by a biologist named Hilburn that said
that few salmon fisheries operate on single stocks. Stock
recruitment analysis will usually underestimate the optimum
escapement and overestimate the optimum harvest rate when mixed
stocks are stated as a single stock. These conclusions will be
true for any mixed stock fishery with different productivities of
the stocks. They support SB 285.
THEO MATTHEWS, United Cook Inlet Drift Association, said the first
part of the bill makes the assertion the discrete stock management
is necessary to preserve our salmon runs or we will lose them. The
second part talks about the need for more information. UCIDA is
absolutely opposed to the concept that mixed stock fisheries are
going to lead to the loss of our fisheries. They do not agree with
the sponsor statement that current management centers around heavy
exploitation of mixed stock fisheries and disregards the negative
effects of this policy on discrete stocks of all salmon species.
He said that sound State management has rebuilt salmon runs from
the dismal runs inherited with statehood. Existing data does not
support the fact that the world's fisheries are in trouble.
MR. MATTHEWS commended Lieutenant Governor Ulmer and ASMI for their
educational efforts to promote Alaska's plentiful salmon. Finally,
we need to get to the real issue, he said, that recreational
advocates will not seriously address. The problem is not with the
commercial fisheries; the problem as noted in an article he read is
that overfishing, entering new species, and dams have devastated
native fish populations. He said there is overfishing in rivers by
recreational anglers.
Number 75
KARL KIRCHER, President, Kenai Peninsula Fisherman's Association,
opposed SB 285 and agreed with most of the opposition to the bill.
He thought this bill represented taxation without understanding.
He asked if we were after better data from mixed stock management
or are we after weak stock management which could lead us to a
spotted owl type situation or some type of abuse in river which
makes the stock diminish. Do we put the burden of conservation on
the mixed stock fisheries, he asked. The terms, like genetic
diversity, are being unevenly applied in mixed stock commercial
fisheries. Genetic diversity of fish stocks is being destroyed in
river sport fisheries.
MEL ERICKSON, Vice President, Kenai River Guides Association, said
they have 150 members who are sportfish guides in the Deep Creek
Marine Waters and the Kasilof and Kenai Rivers. They support SB
285. He said there is a lot of enhancement going on and they are
wiping out the wild runs.
SENATOR HALFORD commented that he didn't think there was any moral
evil in mixed stock fisheries and he didn't think the bill intended
to say that. The question is one of management difficulty because
when you harvest commingled stocks, you affect the weaker stock.
TAPE 96-29, SIDE A
Number 001
His intent is to ensure that wherever we fish stocks that are mixed
we can prove and manage where they are going.
MELANIE GUNDERSON, President, Peninsula Marketing Association,
opposed SB 285 because she was sure this bill targets some of the
conflicts going on in Area M. She noted that there are no river
systems from her area listed in the bill and they at least have
some major red streams.
SENATOR TAYLOR commented that allocation seems to be at least a
fear - commercial on one side and recreational on the other. If
you look at the legislation without that thought, it appears to be
an information collection and management tool. He asked if
allocation was part of the process and how did it fit in.
SENATOR HALFORD answered that it was not his intent to get into the
allocation fights. He believes that the propagation, escapement,
and maintaining sustained yield is moral high ground. The area he
represents in Upper Cook Inlet has not been meeting escapement
goals and they have endangered at least some subspecies in
drainages to the point that you can't find them anymore.
He said that interception questions come up in all fisheries where
there are mixed stocks. He said he thought everyone looked at
every management structure for its potential advantage and often
that applies to the allocative affects.
GERALD MCCUNE, United Fishermen of Alaska, said the reason there is
a lot of problems with this bill is because it is very allocative.
He said he didn't want to see them get into weak stock management.
He said he wanted the true picture. He wanted to know how much it
would cost.
Number 195
SENATOR HALFORD responded that he hoped both commercial and sport
interests would keep an open mind because he thought we would
eventually have to go to this kind of database for management.
SENATOR PEARCE said they would set SB 285 aside for further work.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|