Legislature(1997 - 1998)
02/25/1998 05:03 PM House FSH
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HJR 54 - ALASKA MARITIME BOUNDARY WITH CANADA
Number 0033
VICE-CHAIR IVAN indicated that the committee would hear HJR 54,
Relating to establishing maritime boundaries with Canada. He asked
Representative Vezey, sponsor, to present the bill.
Number 0048
REPRESENTATIVE AL VEZEY stated that the U.S. and Canada do not have
a maritime boundary. He explained that it goes back to the Russia-
America Agreement of 1825. Russia and Great Britain drew up a
convention line for Alaska and the British interests Canada. It
was precipitated by Russian American company action in 1821, that
banned foreign vessels for a distance of about 40 leagues offshore
of Russian Territory. He stated that it did not work but it
precipitated the Russia-American agreement which we adopted when we
purchased Alaska. He stated that at the time no one gave any
consideration to maritime boundaries and Exclusive Economic Zones
(EEZ).
Number 0227
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY stated that in 1976 the United States
unilaterally expanded its territorial waters from the 12-mile
traditional limit to the 200-mile EEZ, the world then followed
suit. The issue that is before Alaska is the Portland Channel and
Dixon Entrance area of Alaska near Saxman and Ketchikan. He
declared that the bigger issue is the extension of the maritime
boundary from the line of demarcation following the 141st meridian.
That is the line from the Northern Coast of Alaska going up to the
limit of the EEZ. He stated that it is an area that is unresolved
and HJR 54 is prodding the federal government to recognize that
under the U.S. law, Alaska has a right to have a representative
present at those negotiations.
Number 0367
CAPTAIN VINCE O'SHEA, Chief, Maritime and Operations Plans and
Policy Division, 17th Coast Guard District, stated that he was
prepared to present the issues involving the U.S. Canada Maritime
boundary or answer any questions that the committee may have. He
asked the committee what their preference is.
Number 0480
VICE-CHAIR IVAN stated that the committee wishes to ask questions.
Number 0484
REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS questioned why this issue was in the
fisheries committee and he asked if there is a concern from the
Coast Guard's standpoint to carry forward with the resolution.
CAPTAIN O'SHEA replied that there is an issue in Dixon Entrance
between the A/B line which Canada maintains is a maritime boundary.
The U.S. believes that was simply a line to separate the land
masses between Dixon Entrance. The U.S. claims that the boundary
is the equidistant line between the two maritime boundaries,
creating the disputed areas. He stated that the U.S. has had an
agreement with Canada since 1977, as to how operation would occur
in the disputed area. He stated that one part of that agreement
was in the form of diplomatic notes between the two countries,
saying that each country would enforce its fishing rules on its own
vessels in the disputed area.
Number 0581
CAPTAIN O'SHEA stated that in 1980, Canadian enforcement took law
enforcement action against U.S. trollers that were operating in the
disputed area. He stated that they claimed that the agreement did
not apply to nontraditional fisheries in the area. He declared
that this point has been debated back and forth between the two
countries over the years. The two countries have agreed to
disagree on that interpretation. He stated to answer
Representative Hodgins' question, it is an a potential area of
friction between the two countries, that if a clearly agreed to
maritime boundary was established, the conflict would not exist.
Number 0629
CAPTAIN O'SHEA stated that the coast guard does not have an
official position as to whether or not this resolution ought to go
forward. It is consistent with the position that the U.S. State
Department has taken in years past in urging the government of
Canada to sit down, negotiate and agree to a maritime boundary.
Number 0655
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY asked if he could clarify that the boundary
of the landmass starts of Prince of Wales Island.
CAPTAIN O'SHEA, put up a chart of the area. He stated that the
northern most line is the A/B line and the lower line would be the
equidistant line and the difference is about 15 miles wide.
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY stated that he did not mean to cut the
testimony off but the committee is going to lose their quorum soon.
Number 0786
REPRESENTATIVE IVAN stated that he would like to take some brief
testimony from people on teleconference.
Number 0835
DAN LEATLERS, Charter Operator, testified via teleconference from
Ketchikan that the charter operators have been pushed by the
Canadian trollers fishing the north edge of the A/B line. There
have also been several charter boats that have been harassed by
Canadian parole vessels. He stated that it is unfortunate that
there is a "binary" to fish within a days run from Ketchikan, but
they have to worry about being part of an international incident
especially since there has been a treaty in existence since 1976,
that states the border is about 15 miles further to the south. He
asserted that they are intimated to go down to the northern edge of
the A/B line.
Number 0942
DAVE OTTE, Troller, testified via teleconference from Ketchikan,
that he mostly fishes at Cape Muzon, the area near Dixon Entrance.
He stated that a border needs to be established because it is very
vague, as to who is allowed to fish there. In the past couple of
years the Canadians have pushed the line and are now claiming it is
their border. He explained that this past summer the Canadian
coast guard told them that they could not fish there and the U.S.
coast guard told them not to cause an incident, therefore the U.S.
trollers left.
Number 1007
SONNY CAMPBELL, Charter Operator, testified via teleconference from
Ketchikan that he fishes around the Cape Chackon and Cape Muzon
along the A/B line and over in the equidistant part of the U.S.
boundary. He explained that they are constantly being harassed by
the Canadian fishermen. It has gotten worse as the Canadian coast
guard has warned them and have tried to board U.S. Boats. He
stated that this causes the Canadian fishermen to get braver with
their harassment. He stated that if there is fog and the coast
guard is not there the Canadian fishermen will fish across the A/B
line and into U.S. waters. He asserted that he has witnessed this
numerous times. He stated that at night they enter into U.S.
harbors and continue to fish again the next day. He stated that
the line runs very close to Alaska and the Canadian fishermen could
cut off a lot of the fishery in Southeast Alaska.
Number 1130
BILL FOSTER, Member, Northern Panel Pacific Salmon Commission,
testified via teleconference from Sitka, that the Dixon Entrance
line is a real problem in the treaty process. He explained that
last year in the stake holder process the boundary line was a
constant issue. He stated that he would like to state that if
there was a historical interest in the boundary there is a book
called The Boundary Hunters that gives an interesting Canadian
perspective.
Number 1190
DEBRA LYONS, Troll Industry Representative, Northern Panel Pacific
Salmon Commission, testified via teleconference from Sitka, urging
passage of HJR 54, as it would flag how important the fishery is to
the state. She stated that the Canadian boats are fishing within
three miles of the Alaska shoreline. It is then a federal water
issue and a state waters issue. She pointed out that it used to be
just the Alaska trollers who were harassed but it has now extended
to the sport fishery and the long line fishery. She stated that
the vessels are anchoring in U.S. waters.
Number 1279
DENNIS WATSON, Mayor, City of Craig, testified via teleconference
from Craig in favor of HJR 54. He stated that he is also
commercial salmon troller and has fished around the Dixon Entrance
area since 1978. He stated that it has gotten ugly and impossible
to fish down there due to the amount of harassment that occurs. He
stated that he has discussed this issue with the U.S. State
Department. The boundary needs to be moved out to the equidistant
line to eliminate the current situation.
Number 1356
REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS made a motion to move HJR 54 with individual
recommendations and the attached fiscal note out of committee.
Number 1382
VICE-CHAIR IVAN asked if there was an objection. Hearing none, HJR
54 was moved out of the House Special Committee on Fisheries.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|