Legislature(2007 - 2008)HOUSE FINANCE 519
04/06/2008 04:00 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB254 | |
| HB314 | |
| HB106 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 106 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 422 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 314 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 254 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SENATE BILL NO. 254
"An Act extending the termination date of the Alaska
regional economic assistance program; and providing for
an effective date."
Vice-Chair Stoltze MOVED to ADOPT HCS SB 254(FIN), labeled
25-LS1367\E, as the work draft before the Committee. There
being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
Representative Nelson informed the Committee that there was
a change in the bill to include hair crab fisheries.
FRANK HOMAN, COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL FISHERIES ENTRY
COMMISSION, offered to provide additional information about
the bill.
Representative Nelson reported that the addition to the bill
would extend the life of the hair crab fisheries along the
west coast of Alaska. Mr. Homan said that was correct. In
addition, it extends the scallop fisheries. The two
fisheries are unique in that they are vessel based license
systems.
Representative Nelson said her understanding is that those
two fisheries alone have 4 out of 18 permit holders that are
owned by Community Development Quota (CDQ) groups. Mr.
Homen thought that was correct.
Representative Nelson asked how many permit holders from
Alaska are in the limited entry system. Mr. Homen responded
that there are about 15,000 limited entry permits and 78
percent are from Alaska. Representative Nelson asked if
there were about 10,000. Mr. Homan thought it was more like
11,000.
Representative Nelson estimated that from the two CDQ's that
are owners in the hair crab and scallops fisheries, the
Coastal Village Region Fund has about 20 villages and about
9,000 people, and Norton Sound has fewer villages but about
8,500 people. Just in those 4 permit holders, the owners of
the permits total about 17,000 residents of Alaska. She
stated that the CDQ's are not Native programs. She saw the
CDQ's with their community shareholders as positive for
communities.
4:47:21 PM
Representative Thomas asked how corporations can hold
permits when it is prohibited throughout the whole limited
entry permit system. Mr. Homan clarified that the vessel-
based program is unique. In 2002, the legislature passed a
bill allowing the two fisheries to have different systems.
The limited entry system was designed around the salmon
fisheries with an individual owner. Vessel-based limited
entry fisheries are managed differently. They are large
boats with multiple crews and skippers. The traditional
method could not be used. Sometimes the vessels are owned
by corporations made up by two or three individuals, due to
the expense of getting into these two fisheries. They
require a different financial structure. There is no
intention of moving the vessel-based system to any other
fishery.
Representative Thomas thought the doors would be opened when
the rules change. He voiced concern about the process. He
related that he fought the limited entry program so that no
corporation would ever own the permits. Mr. Homan related
that the legislature in 2002 made that allowance and it
would require legislation to change it. Representative
Thomas reiterated his concerns. He suggested consolidating
or releasing more permits. He said the usual route is
through the Board of Fish.
Mr. Homan recalled that in 2002 the legislature did
recognize consolidation. No vessel owner could own more
than two permits.
4:53:21 PM
Vice-Chair Stoltze pointed out that the bill would extend
the termination date of the Alaska Regional Economic
Assistance Program.
Representative Nelson said in addition to extending the
termination date, there are 18 hair crab permits and 19
scallop permits. In the 18 crab permits, there are 250
quota holders. She inquired if the fishery were abolished,
if all of those quota holders would be able to come in and
fish that resource. Mr. Homan confirmed that to be true for
both fisheries; both would return to open access.
Representative Nelson said that is of great concern because
of the potential loss of revenue to Alaskan permit holders.
Representative Nelson commented that the fishery is also
needed to prevent over fishing. Mr. Homan added that the
resource is fragile and the fishery very small. If it is
opened to unlimited harvest, restrictions will need to be
applied.
Representative Nelson asked if the other 14 permit holders
are from across the state, in addition to the 4 CDQ's. Mr.
Homan replied that it is a mixture of Alaskans and non-
residents. Representative Nelson thought there were permit
holders from Southeast Alaska as well as from the Interior
and South Central Alaska. Mr. Homan said that was correct.
4:57:05 PM
Representative Gara asked for an explanation of the hair
crab and scallop fisheries. Mr. Homan explained the history
of the two fisheries. The Department of Fish and Game put
restrictions on the fisheries, requiring a vessel license,
in 2002.
Representative Gara asked how long the extension is for.
Mr. Homan said 5 years. Representative Gara asked if, when
it lapses, it becomes a permit fishery again. Mr. Homan
explained that the sunset allows revisiting the issue.
Representative Gara asked if the bill would limit additional
vessels. Mr. Homan said that is correct. He recalled
testimony by Fish and Game that regulation of the fisheries
would be increased if the bill does not pass.
5:01:11 PM
Representative Thomas recalled during the time of statehood
and the intent to abolish fish traps owned by non-Alaskan
corporations back then. Limited entry was developed very
carefully to ensure that corporations were not able to own
permits.
Representative Nelson thought that if there was open and
unlimited access to the fisheries, it would be more
expensive to manage them. She reported that there was also
a possibility that they would be managed by the federal
government. One of the purposes of statehood was to ensure
state management of fish and game resources. Alaska has
already lost management of resources on federal land.
Losing limited entry will make Alaska vulnerable to more
federal management.
Mr. Homan related that the federal government also limits
these fisheries in the federal fishery zone; however, the
state manages both fisheries in all waters. If it goes back
to open access there would be two management systems.
Representative Nelson noted support for the bill from the
Department of Fish and Game and from United Fishermen of
Alaska. North Pacific Management Council and the Commercial
Fisheries Entry Commission (CFEC) also support this
legislation. Mr. Homan concurred that all prominent
fisheries support the bill.
Representative Kelly asked if the sunset date was expected
to be extended. Mr. Homan said it was, and he related the
history of another bill that was supposed to extend the
termination date, but failed. Representative Kelly asked if
everyone in the area supports the bill. Mr. Homan reported
that it is generally supported. A few oppose it because
they think it is going to do something else. They are
uneasy with consolidation. Representative Kelly asked what
would happen to protect the resource if it was not extended.
Mr. Homan replied that Department of Fish and Game said they
would initiate more restrictive policies toward the two
fisheries. He said the Commission would not be able to
extend any limitation if the bill does not pass.
5:09:05 PM
Vice-Chair Stoltze wondered if a five-year sunset was long
enough or if a sunset was even needed. Representative
Nelson thought a sunset was not needed. She noted that it
has been proven that the resources are rebounding and the
fisheries are bringing dollars to Alaska's coffers. She
worried that a new chairman of fisheries might change the
termination date of the sunset in the future.
Mr. Homan related that the original intention of the bill
was to not have a sunset date.
Representative Gara thought the conservation aspect was
working.
Representative Thomas said he does not like the bill but
also did not think it needed a sunset.
Vice-Chair Stoltze noted the title restrictions. He
suggested a 10-year extension.
5:14:05 PM
Representative Kelly said he was uncomfortable with changing
the sunset date, but liked the bill.
Representative Gara thought there was not a good option
surrounding the sunset issue. He did not think that getting
rid of the sunset was any worse a solution.
Vice-Chair Stoltze said eliminating the sunset is not an
option in this bill. Representative Kelly thought he could
agree to the 10-year option.
5:16:40 PM
Vice-Chair Stoltze MOVED to ADOPT Conceptual Amendment 1 to
extend the vessel permit portion of the bill to 2018.
Representative Hawker OBJECTED. He clarified that the
amendment would apply to Section 2 of the bill.
Representative Gara requested that Representative Nelson be
added as a sponsor of the bill. Representative Nelson was
added as a sponsor.
Representative Hawker WITHDREW his OBJECTION to Conceptual
Amendment 1. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
Co-Chair Chenault reviewed the fiscal notes. He noted a
need for a new fiscal note from the Department of Fish and
Game.
Mr. Homan said a new zero fiscal note from the Commercial
Fisheries Entry Commission would be forthcoming.
5:20:19 PM
Representative Foster MOVED to REPORT HCS SB 254(FIN), as
amended, out of Committee with individual recommendations, a
title change resolution, and the accompanying fiscal notes.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
HCS SB 254(FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do
pass" recommendation, a title change resolution, a new zero
fiscal note by the Department of Fish and Game, and with two
previously published fiscal notes by the Department of
Commerce, Community and Economic Development.
AT-EASE: 5:21:41 PM
RECONVENED: 5:37:28 PM
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|