Legislature(2013 - 2014)CAPITOL 120
03/12/2013 10:00 AM House FISHERIES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB110 | |
| HB143 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 110 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 143 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 110-BARBED HOOKS
10:05:06 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 110, "An Act prohibiting the use of barbed hooks
in certain freshwater areas." [Before the committee was Version
28-LS0360\U.]
CHAIR SEATON noted that the committee was also considering a
resolution for the lowering of Chinook salmon by-catch in the
Gulf and Bering Sea troll fisheries.
10:06:34 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 110, labeled 28-LS0360\N, Bullard,
3/11/13, as the working draft.
10:06:52 AM
CHAIR SEATON objected for discussion.
CHAIR SEATON explained that the proposed committee substitute
would move this statutory prohibition on the use of barbed hooks
from AS 16.10 to AS 16.05, which would now include this
restriction with other similar violations.
10:08:09 AM
CHAIR SEATON removed his objection, and there being no further
objection, Version N was adopted as the working draft.
10:08:47 AM
The committee took a brief at-ease.
10:09:22 AM
CHAIR SEATON moved to adopt Amendment 1, labeled 28-LS0360\N.1,
Bullard, 3/11/13, which read:
Page 1, following line 13:
Insert a new subsection to read:
"(d) In this section, "barbed hook" means a hook with
at least one subsidiary point facing in the opposite
direction of the main point of the hook; "barbed hook"
does not include a hook from which all barbs have been
pinched down, filed off, or otherwise removed."
CHAIR SEATON explained that the purpose of the proposed
amendment was to add a definition for barbed hook into the
regulation.
10:10:44 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON objected.
10:11:05 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON removed his objection. There being no
further objection, Amendment 1 was adopted.
10:11:23 AM
CHAIR SEATON moved to adopt Amendment 2, labeled 28-LS0360\N.2,
Bullard, 3/11/13, which read:
Page 1, following line 13:
Insert a new subsection to read:
"(d) In this section,
(1) "freshwater" means all inland water;
(2) "inland water" means water separated from salt
water at the mouths of creeks and streams and rivers
at a line between the extremities of a river's banks
at a mean low tide or at a point to be determined and
adequately marked by the department."
10:12:06 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON objected for discussion.
CHAIR SEATON explained that, as it was necessary to define the
fresh waters affected by the proposed bill, proposed Amendment 2
offered that definition.
10:12:41 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON removed his objection. There being no
further objection, Amendment 2 was adopted.
10:13:21 AM
CHAIR SEATON opened public testimony.
10:14:23 AM
BURKE WALDRON, Captain; Operations Commander, Division of Alaska
Wildlife Troopers, Department of Public Safety, suggested that a
re-wording of the description for barbed hooks in Amendment 1 to
read "a separate or different direction," instead of "the
opposite direction" for the point of the primary hook would lend
greater clarity. He announced that he was still evaluating the
definitions for "fresh water" and "inland water" in Amendment 2,
and that he would comment on this at a later time.
10:15:57 AM
ERIC JORDAN, Commercial Fisherman, stated his support for HB 110
and his support for conservation. He questioned why the House
Special Committee on Fisheries was involved with this, as, he
opined, it was an Alaska Board of Fisheries issue.
CHAIR SEATON explained that both the Alaska Board of Fisheries
and the legislature addressed issues, and that the legislature
had the responsibility to "look out for the resources of the
state."
MR. JORDAN said that he strongly supported the proposed bill.
10:19:34 AM
CHAIR SEATON directed attention to a letter from the United
Fishermen of Alaska (UFA), dated March 11, 2013 [Included in
members' packets] which expressed its support for reducing catch
mortality, but emphasized that this was an issue which should be
addressed by the Alaska Board of Fisheries, and not the Alaska
State Legislature. He introduced an article by Alex Wertheimer,
"Hooking Mortality of Chinook Salmon Released by Commercial
Trollers." [Included in members' packets] He reported that Mr.
Wertheimer worked for the National Marine Fisheries Service at
the Auke Bay Laboratory in Juneau in 1988, when this article was
published. Reading from the Abstract at the top of page 1, he
stated: "The recalculated estimate of total hooking mortality
for legal and sublegal fish, based on wound severity, was 23.5
percent." He reported that the committee had pondered any means
for limiting "all kinds of unintended mortality."
10:21:13 AM
DAN DUNAWAY expressed his objection that the legislature was
"encroaching into the, what I see as, the realm of the Board of
Fish, that's the whole reason we have a Board of Fish." He
opined that a major reason for statehood had been for more
public involvement, and to remove some of these issues from "the
political arena." He offered his belief that the Alaska Board
of Fisheries was a more appropriate assemblage. He referenced
numerous fresh water studies that showed "a minimum biological
gain for a significant social cost." He said that the
definition of "barbless" often brought inadvertent violations
and "squabbles" that alienated an otherwise supportive public.
He offered his belief that there was not a significant gain from
these regulations. He reported that Idaho was in the process of
repealing its "barbless" rules and that Montana had also decided
not to adopt "barbless" regulations.
10:23:54 AM
CHAIR SEATON closed public testimony.
10:24:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON offered his belief that, although Chinook
Salmon fisheries required a triage treatment to specific
drainages, this was similar to applying a "Band-Aid to a very
severe injury."
CHAIR SEATON, in response, stated that all aspects of the low
stock returns of Chinook Salmon were being reviewed. He
reflected that the committee had agreed to sponsor a resolution
to lower the troll by-catch limits. He referenced testimony
from commercial fishermen that the release of wounded by-catch
had a significant, though unintended, mortality. He reported on
the studies from Washington and Oregon which indicated a need to
change fish harvesting operations in order to protect Chinook
Salmon from unintended mortalities. He reflected that the
problem was complex with many pieces, including species
interactions and habitats, and that one solution would not fix
the problem. He suggested that the purpose of the proposed bill
was to address one piece of the many problems.
10:27:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON questioned whether the legislature should
be involved and reduce the number of catch and release per day.
CHAIR SEATON replied that even a small reduction in the
mortality rate could be important, and that it was an idea
worthy of further discussion.
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON asked about the positions of Alaska
Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G) and the Alaska Board of
Fisheries on this legislation.
10:29:19 AM
CHARLES SWANTON, Director, Division of Sport Fish, Alaska
Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G), stated that ADF&G had a
neutral stance on the proposed bill. He announced that the
Alaska Board of Fisheries, amidst a lot of public input, had
dealt with similar issues in past years.
10:30:16 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON asked if the Alaska Board of Fisheries had
taken a position on any similar legislation.
MR. SWANTON replied that he did not recall that it had taken a
position on any legislation. In response to Representative
Herron, he opined that the board was "generally silent or
neutral." In response to an earlier question from
Representative Herron, he stated that some fisheries which
potentially had an issue with mortality, had options for
restrictions, including a prohibition for removal of the fish
from the water.
10:31:54 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked for a definition to "significant
probability."
MR. SWANTON surmised that, as referenced in the proposed
legislation, there would be a discussion between ADF&G and the
Alaska Board of Fisheries for what would constitute significant
probability. He acknowledged that, although he had given this
significant thought, he had not arrived at a simple answer. He
offered that significant would constitute greater than 50
percent, but, dependent on the situation, it could be as high as
95 percent.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked if one fish would be significant in
any stock of concern. He questioned whether this would vary by
stream, or by management of an area, and asked how this would be
designated.
MR. SWANTON acknowledged that it would need to be situational.
He explained that the answer became more complex when
contrasting Chinook Salmon escapement goals with other species
involved.
10:34:23 AM
CHAIR SEATON referred to Version N, page 1, line 7, and read:
"a person may not use a barbed hook when participating in a
freshwater fishery in which more than one species is present if
there is a significant probability of catching a species that
may not be retained under a regulation adopted by the Board of
Fisheries." He asked which would make the determination, the
significant probability or the Alaska Board of Fisheries.
MR. SWANTON agreed that this would require a conversation with
the Alaska Board of Fisheries.
CHAIR SEATON clarified that the intention of the proposed bill
was not to stipulate an absolute, but to allow the Alaska Board
of Fisheries the latitude to make a determination.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON offered a different interpretation for
the language of the proposed bill.
CHAIR SEATON expressed his agreement for the necessity to
clarify the intention, as stated in Version N, page 1, lines 11
- 13.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON expressed his understanding that the
Alaska Board of Fisheries would determine the need for action,
but he questioned what defined the significant probability and
how that would be managed.
10:38:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON, noting that commercial fishermen had
mentioned significant mortality for Chinook Salmon, asked
whether the commercial fishermen were using barbless hooks.
CHAIR SEATON referenced a previous proposal for the commercial
fishery to use barbless hooks which had not been adopted.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON suggested that HB 110 could be amended to
include barbless hooks for fisheries in both salt and fresh
water.
CHAIR SEATON agreed that it was possible to expand the bill for
recreational and commercial fisheries, as well. He pointed out
that the legislature had also imposed a 58 foot limit on
seiners, and that additional legislative action had determined
allowable types of fishing gear.
10:40:02 AM
MR. SWANTON added that in some high use, low retention
fisheries, a large number of lodges and guiding operations had
voluntarily required the use of barbless hooks by the guides and
guests. He clarified that there was a low percentage of
difference for mortality between a barbed and barbless hook. He
pointed out that the measuring for fisheries management was not
so refined to discern the difference between two and three
percent mortality. He stated that the department would,
instead, close the fishery rather than "shoulder the risk of
trying to deal with small percentages."
CHAIR SEATON stated that, as the decline of king salmon had
become an extensive problem for much of the state, the question
was whether or not to wait for more research or to search for a
solution. He said that it would continue to be difficult,
especially given the data for unintended mortality. He shared
his encouragement for the number of guides who required the use
of barbless hooks. He pointed out that the impetus for the
proposed bill had come from fly fishermen on the Kenai River.
10:45:04 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS expressed that there was a difference for
fishing guides using barbless hooks and fishermen "putting food
in the freezer." She asked for clarification that this
additional dimension to fisheries would not have any fiscal
implication. She declared that she would not fish "for catch
and release."
MR. SWANTON explained that ADF&G worked with the Alaska Board of
Fisheries, and would bring it up at a statewide meeting.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS opined that, as this would add another
duty, if it did not have an additional cost, then "something's
gonna be spread thinner."
MR. SWANTON replied that this would depend on the meeting time
and comprehensiveness for the amount of additional work during
the regulatory meeting. He said that although there would be
more focus on those specific fisheries issues, they would not
really be "spread thinner."
10:48:54 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS explained that she was addressing the cost
of enforcement that should be reflected in a fiscal note.
MR. SWANTON deferred.
10:49:49 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked to clarify if this would require more
enforcement with this regulation.
CAPTAIN WALDRON replied that the fiscal impacts could not be
determined until the language of the proposed bill was
completed.
[HB 110 was held over.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 143 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HFSH 3/12/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/19/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 143 |
| HB0143A.pdf |
HFSH 3/12/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 143 |
| HB143-DFG-DAS-03-08-13.pdf |
HFSH 3/12/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/19/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 143 |
| HB143-DOLWD-FF-3-8-13.pdf |
HFSH 3/12/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/19/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 143 |
| Copy of 7 day crew licenses sold-Res and NonRes.pdf |
HFSH 3/12/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/19/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 143 |
| Copy of 7-DayCrew_2005-2012_By-LicYr-Name.pdf |
HFSH 3/12/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/19/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 143 |
| Fish Fund license permit revenue (2).pdf |
HFSH 3/12/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/19/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 143 |
| Juneau Empire article on 7-day crew license.pdf |
HFSH 3/12/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 143 |
| HB0110A.pdf |
HFSH 2/21/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/26/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/12/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/21/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 110 |
| HB 110 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HFSH 2/21/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/26/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/12/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/21/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 110 |
| Barbed and Barbless Hooks and their effect on Juvenile and Adult Salmonoid Mortality.pdf |
HFSH 2/21/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/26/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/12/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/21/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 110 |
| Washington State News Release Barbless Hooks on Colombia River.pdf |
HFSH 2/21/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/26/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/12/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/21/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 110 |
| ADF&G Notice - Recommended use of Barbless Hooks Susitna River.pdf |
HFSH 2/21/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/26/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/12/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/21/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 110 |
| ADF&G Notice - Recommended use of Barbless Hooks Chitna, Copper, Gakona, Gulkana.pdf |
HFSH 2/21/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/26/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/12/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/21/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 110 |
| Mortality of coho salmon caught and released using sport tackle in the Little Susitna River, Alaska.pdf |
HFSH 2/21/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 2/26/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/12/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/21/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 110 |
| Bendock and Alexandersdottir 1993.pdf |
HFSH 2/26/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/12/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/21/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 110 |
| Please be advised I oppose HB 110.pdf |
HFSH 2/26/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/12/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/21/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 110 |
| PVOA_HB 110_Comments.pdf |
HFSH 2/26/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/12/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/21/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 110 |
| Wertheimer 1988_Chinook discard mort (2).pdf |
HFSH 3/12/2013 10:00:00 AM HFSH 3/21/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 110 |
| HB 110 CS Work Draft Version N.pdf |
HFSH 3/12/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 110 |
| HB 110 Version N Amendments.pdf |
HFSH 3/12/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 110 |
| HB 143 Version A Amendment 1.pdf |
HFSH 3/12/2013 10:00:00 AM |
HB 143 |