Legislature(2023 - 2024)GRUENBERG 120
02/14/2023 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 | |
| HJR5 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HJR 5 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HJR 5-ALASKA FISHERIES; TROLL FISHERIES
10:01:13 AM
CHAIR VANCE announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 5, Urging the United States Secretary
of Commerce, the National Marine Fisheries Service, the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game, and other federal and state
agencies to defend the state's fisheries, including the
Southeast Alaska troll fishery.
10:01:47 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT, as prime sponsor, presented HJR 5.
She spoke of the prevalence of trollers in Southeast Alaska,
noting that 85 percent of trollers in the fleet are Alaska
residents. Trollers bring in approximately $85 million to the
Alaska economy. She continued by paraphrasing information from
the sponsor statement, which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
The Southeast Alaska troll salmon fishery is
threatened by a lawsuit filed by the Seattle-based
Wild Fish Conservancy. House Joint Resolution 5 calls
on the Federal Government and State of Alaska to
continue to defend the Southeast Alaska troll fishery
and do everything within their power to keep the
fishery open should the judge rule in the Wild Fish
Conservancy's favor. With overwhelming scientific
evidence to the contrary, this suit seeks to hold the
Southeast Alaska troll fishery responsible for the
decline in southern resident killer whiles, about 1000
miles to the south. While scientists estimate the
trollers may take 3% of the Chinook salmon destined
for rivers important to the southern resident killer
whales, the lawsuit does not take into account threats
from the pollution and habitat degradation in the home
waters of the southern resident killer whales.
Trolling is a low barrier, sustainable fishery where
fishermen from nearly every community in Southeast
Alaska catch each fish with hook and line. With
approximately 1450 trollers contributing over $85
million to the economies of coastal Alaska it is
imperative the state defend this fishery, while
continuing to support the scientific research that is
foundational to good policy and good law. If the Wild
Fish Conservancy is successful with this lawsuit it
will set a dangerous precedent for a broad range of
Alaska's fisheries. House Joint Resolution 5 urges the
State of Alaska and Federal Government to do all they
can to keep our sustainable fisheries in Alaska open.
10:04:37 AM
THATCHER BROUWER, Staff, Representative Rebecca Himschoot,
Alaska State Legislature, on behalf of Representative
Himschoot, prime sponsor of HJR 5, disclosed that during the
legislative interim he works as a troller, and he serves on the
board of the Alaska Trollers Association. He informed the
committee that the Pacific Salmon Treaty is renegotiated every
10 years; the last negotiation took place in 2019. During that
negotiation, the National Marine Fisheries Service is
responsible for giving its biological opinion; it makes an
"incidental take statement," which allows the fishers that are
part of the treaty "to take a few endangered chinook salmon or
chinook salmon that might potentially end up in the mouths of
endangered species, such as the southern resident killer
whales." He continued:
In addition to allowing that, they're also mitigating
measures that are part of that incidental take
statement, and ... one of the mitigating measures ...
the National Marine Fisheries Service proposed was
additional hatchery production of chinook salmon in
Washington.
... In 2020, the Wild Fish Conservancy sued [the]
National Marine Fisheries Service ... to invalidate
the biological opinion. ... Part of that suit was to
halt the production of chinook salmon.
MR. BROUWER explained that this action effected Alaska's
fishery. He said, "Without this infidel take statement, the
troll fishery's not allowed ... to proceed."
MR. BROUWER said that in September 2021, Magistrate Judge
Peterson issued a report recommendation finding the analysis
governing the Columbia River prey increase program was flawed,
and the incidental take statement controlling the troll fishery
was also deficient. In August 2022, Judge Jones adopted that
report recommendation. Mr. Thatcher noted that a press release
was included in the committee packet. He said the National
Marine Fisheries Service is in the process of rewriting the
biological opinion, as it has been asked to do, but that will
take a couple of years to complete. He said since the adoption
of the initial report recommendations, "they" are trying to
figure out "how to account for the flaws in the biological
opinion." In December 2022, Magistrate Judge Peterson again
recommended the report recommendations that would invalidate the
take statement for both the winter and summer troll fisheries.
MR. BROUWER said currently, Judge Jones is deliberating on the
report recommendation put forward by Magistrate Judge Peterson,
and Judge Jones' ruling is expected "any day now." Mr. Thatcher
explained that there is no more room to appeal; the opportunity
for interveners, such as the Alaska State Legislature and the
Alaska Trollers Association, to submit comments on the report
recommendations ended 1/25/23. Following Judge Jones' decision,
the next step would be to appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals. He added, "Whoever appeals the case would be able to
request a stay that would allow the fishery to continue to be
prosecuted while the Ninth Circuit Court considers the appeal."
10:10:11 AM
CHAIR VANCE proffered that this is a complicated issue, but
synopsized that "the 3 percent of the chinook that might
possibly result in a meal for a southern resident killer whale
is what we're fighting for right now, and the rights of our
1,500 trollers to continue their livelihood." She said the
State of Alaska has "joined in as an intervener of the suit,"
and there are resolutions in the committee packet from many
Southeast communities. She remarked on the fundraisers that
have taken place to support the trollers during this lawsuit.
Additionally, "there have been a lot of private dollars flowing
in to support the trollers." She noted there would be invited
testimony.
10:11:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked how many of the 1,500 trollers are
home ported in Seattle, Washington.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT said she does not know how many are in
Seattle, but 85 percent are home ported in Southeast Alaska.
She added that 100 percent of the catch of these 1,500 trollers
is caught in Alaska, regardless of where each fisher is home
ported.
10:12:37 AM
MR. BROUWER, in response to Representative McCabe, said the Wild
Fish Conservancy is located in Seattle.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked if HJR 5 is "all we're doing."
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT said HJR 5 encourages the actions
already undertaken by the State of Alaska. She indicated there
may be more lawsuits forthcoming.
10:13:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES asked whether the troll fishery in
Southeast Alaska is a limited entry fishery.
MR. BROUWER answered yes. In response to a follow-up question,
he estimated the permit value is $10,000 for a hand troll permit
and $30,000 for a power troll permit.
10:14:17 AM
CHAIR VANCE announced the committee would hear invited
testimony.
10:14:41 AM
AMY DAUGHERTY, Executive Director, Alaska Trollers Association,
first gave a brief description of trolling and emphasized the
dependence of trollers on chinook salmon, with some coho caught,
and a chum fishery developing. She discussed the background of
the lawsuit against the fishery, noting that the Alaska Trollers
Association was named in the lawsuit. She commended the efforts
of the community and fishers in raising awareness and funds in
response to the lawsuit. She said most of the trolling
businesses are family run; trollers run slowly with minimal, if
any, impact to orcas [aka killer whales]. She said the board of
the association has 13 members. She offered to answer
questions.
10:16:50 AM
CHAIR VANCE asked how long the fishery has been in existence.
MS. DAUGHERTY offered her understanding that the fishery goes
back to 1924, and troll data dates back to 1911. There have
been three treaties that have reduced the chinook harvest;
however, the fishery supports conservation measures.
CHAIR VANCE asked whether there have been concerns regarding the
orcas prior to this.
MS. DAUGHERTY answered, "Never." She offered her understanding
that every other orca population "up and down the coast" is
healthy and increasing, with the exception of "this localized
Puget Sound population." In response to a follow-up question,
she said this morning she saw a bill proposed in the State of
Washington that seeks to expand "the distance between whale
watching ... vessels" in the area in order to protect the orcas.
She saw that as a recognition that [whale watching vessels] are
a factor in [adverse effects on the orca population]. She said,
"We don't believe that any commercial fishing up and down the
coast is really what's impacting the orca population; we believe
that it's largely a toxicity issue. There's a lot of population
down there; there's a lot of run-off."
10:19:54 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked Ms. Daugherty, "Why did they pick
you?"
MS. DAUGHERTY mentioned "low-hanging fruit" and said, "We have
little means besides ... our will to defend ourselves." She
remarked that bigger fisheries have more money and lobbyists.
She added, "It's really just incomprehensible, ... the fact that
such a low-impact fishery would be the target of this group."
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE said every fishery has by-catch issues.
He asked about the meaning of "low-impact" as used by Ms.
Dougherty.
MS. DAUGHERTY responded that the fishery has by-catch limits.
Trollers, in general, have a conservationist mindset; they are
aware that a fish that lives will come back [to be caught
another day].
10:22:27 AM
CASEY MAPES, Commercial Fisher, began his invited testimony by
stating that he has been a gillnetter, troller, and longliner
for over 50 years. He said in Yakutat, after summer when the
lodges are shut down, the only thing left to support the economy
in winter is fishing. Trolling makes up two-thirds of his
income. He said he is encouraged to see all the entities in his
community stepping up to address this matter. He talked about
chinook being part of the lifeblood of Native Alaskans. He gave
the example of the spotted oil controversy in the Lower 48
starting with good intention but being reused "as a weapon," and
he warned that if this current lawsuit is not squashed, the same
bad precedent could be set. Referring to the previous question
of "Why trollers?," he said it is because "we're sort of the
weak link of the fleet." He warned that this lawsuit is the
start to something that could grow. He expressed concern that
"we're going to be regulating out of the courthouse from now
on." He concluded by stating that he is thankful that [the
committee/legislature] is "considering helping us out."
10:28:04 AM
TIM O'CONNER, Mayor, City of Craig;, Vice President, Alaska
Trollers Association, began his invited testimony by sharing
that he has been a troller and longliner since 2008. He noted
the City of Craig has a population of just under 1,000, with 500
people living just outside the city. Prince of Wales Island has
a population of approximately 4,000. He said the 21 million
pounds of fish that enter the port in Craig are valued at $22.7
million. Fishing is the mainstay of the City of Craig's
economy. He said, "We stand to lose all of this if this Wild
Fish Conservancy lawsuit is successful." He indicated the
lawsuit could set a precedent that would end up effecting not
only the trollers, but the subsistence fishers and the sport
fishing industry. He said the Alaska Trollers Association and
the City of Craig need the state's help and resources to stop
the lawsuit and challenge the state's right to manage its own
fisheries. He asked the committee to support HJR 5.
10:31:05 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE noted that the lawsuit makes frequent use
of the term "unsustainable." He asked Mr. O'Connor for his
opinion whether the state is actually managing the resource for
sustainability.
MR. O'CONNER opined that the fishery is being managed for
sustainability. To illustrate this, he talked about hatchery
efforts. He added that the City of Craig would "shut down"
without the troll fishery. In response to a follow-up question,
he stated his assumption that orcas would eat hatchery fish "the
same as they eat the wild fish." Regarding migration of fish,
he remarked, "Our fish would be feeding their orcas."
10:34:26 AM
TAD FUJIOKA, Fisher, began his invited testimony by noting that
although he is the chair of the board of his local cooperative,
he was speaking on behalf of himself. He noted that he had
provided handouts to the committee [included in the committee
packet]. He said he has fished King salmon for the last 43
years, and became a commercial troller in 2010. Chinook
effects this livelihood in his community. He spoke about the
style of trolling allowing for fish to be caught one at a time
and for bycatch to be thrown back. He noted the history of
trolling in Alaska is shown on handout "A." He offered further
history of the aforementioned treaties. He echoed the
statements of previous speakers regarding the importance of
troll fishing and the positive impact it has on the economy, and
he warned that the fishery is threatened by the Washington-based
Wild Fish Conservancy, which sued the National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS) [within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA)], claiming that the 423 biological opinion
pertaining to the treaty was insufficient, that the southern
resident killer whales are not getting enough to eat, and that
Alaska's [trolling] fishery 700 miles away is to blame. He
said the fish most important to the southern resident orcas are
the Puget Sound fall chinook, of which Alaska catches only 100
per year. He noted further information on a map on handout "B."
He echoed the comments of a previous speaker that if the
plaintiff wins this lawsuit, then no fishery will be safe. He
pointed out that if Alaska's fishery was the reason orcas were
in trouble, then there wouldn't be the steady rise in the number
of orcas in the Alaska and British Columbia orca pods. He
stated the real problem for the southern resident orcas is
pollution in the Puget Sound. He noted that Governor Mike
Dunleavy has said Alaska will appeal any adverse ruling. He
said he appreciates that support and the support of the
legislature for the fishery.
10:41:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER pointed to the handout showing a graph
and asked for the origin of that data.
MR. PUGIOKA answered that the Pacific Salmon Commission's
Chinook Technical Committee has compiled the "abundance index"
of chinook in Southeast Alaska annually since 1979.
10:43:00 AM
CHAIR VANCE inquired why the state chose to intervene in this
lawsuit and invited the person representing the Department of
Law (DOL) to speak to this matter.
AARON PETERSON, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Natural
Resources Section, Civil Division (Anchorage), Department of
Law, stated that his office has been dealing with this issue for
a long time. The state intervened, he reported, because it is
critical to defend the state's fisheries. He said the
Department of Law's (DOL's) actions in fighting this lawsuit
reflect a commitment from the state to protect its industries,
including commercial fishing. He pointed out that DOL has been
litigating this case since the beginning and that it has been
working with a Washington state firm that is very familiar with
litigating similar issues. He indicated that the involvement of
outside resources attests to the importance of this matter.
10:45:00 AM
CHAIR VANCE questioned the impact to the state if Alaska lost
the case in court.
MR. PETERSON defined the concept of "lose" for this case to mean
that the Article 3 judge adopts the report and recommendation on
remedy as written. He said that there are opportunities to
appeal this decision, which the governor has supported. He
suggested that the worst-case scenario is the winter and summer
troll fishery would be closed for a period of time. However,
there are several steps that would have to happen to get to that
point.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked if this case is similar to the Lower
Kuskokwim fishery litigation, which deals with federal takeover
of Alaska fishery management.
MR. PETERSON explained that it is not the same kind of
litigation. The Lower Kuskokwim litigation is based on
subsistence issues and deals with jurisdiction, while this
current case deals with federal environmental law. He continued
to detail specifics of the case and went into the history of the
plaintiff, which shows that they usually target hatcheries
rather than specific fisheries.
10:48:47 AM
REPRESENTATIVE C. JOHNSON inquired if this was a public interest
litigation and asked who would be paying for it.
MR. PETERSON answered that it was not a public interest case.
MR. BROUWER added his belief that the Wild Fish Conservancy has
been able to be reimbursed for similar suits regarding the Equal
Access of Justice Act and that they could potentially be
reimbursed this time as well.
REPRESENTATIVE C. JOHNSON responded that Mr. Brouwer answered
his initial question, that the State of Alaska could be "on the
hook" for the Wild Fish Conservancy's legal fees.
10:50:08 AM
CHAIR VANCE opened public testimony on HJR 5.
10:50:50 AM
MARK ROBERTS, said he has been a troller from Petersburg for 45
years. He responded to Representative McCabe's question about
the proper releasing of fish by mentioning that most trollers
have new ways of "shaking and releasing" unwanted fish that keep
the fish alive. He detailed an underwater method of shaking the
fish that keeps them from ever breaking the surface. He closed
his testimony by emphasizing that [the Wild Fish Conservancy] is
going after Section 7, and if it were to succeed, it would hurt
the entire state of Alaska.
10:52:25 AM
MATT DONAHOE, President, Board of Directors, Alaska Trollers
Association, spoke on several different points related to the
lawsuit. He brought up hiring issues in the processing plants
due to the uncertainty caused by this suit. In relation to why
the Wild Fish Conservancy is targeting trollers, he described
them as "serial litigators" and insisted that they were making a
lot of money off of the current suit. He addressed the issue of
net harvest and referenced the Alaska Department of Fish &
Game's (ADFG's) data that there are fewer than 600 Puget Sound
King salmon caught in Alaska in a year. He said he attributes
this to the path migration for most of these salmon not entering
Alaska waters.
10:54:59 AM
ERIC JORDAN, Salmon Troller, testified in support of HJR 5 and
relayed that he has been a salmon troller for decades, a
profession passed down from his grandparents and on to his own
grandchildren. He stated that he has been an activist to
conserve, sustain, and enhance Alaska salmon runs for all of his
career. He characterized the litigation against the trollers as
the most vicious attack on Southeast Alaska fisheries he has
witnessed since beginning as a fisheries activist. He echoed
Mr. Donahoe's concern that uncertainty caused by this lawsuit is
making it extremely difficult to hire and plan for the season.
He asked the committee to join the individuals, businesses, and
communities that have rallied in support of this resolution.
10:56:33 AM
DAVID RICHY, Commercial Troller, reminded the committee about
the biological opinion ("bio-op") issued by NMFS that he
believed put all Alaska fisheries in legal jeopardy, and he
agreed with a previous testifier, Ms. Dougherty, that the troll
fishery was targeted because it was "low-hanging fruit." He
emphasized that if the lawsuit prevails, it sets a precedent
that makes every other King salmon fishery vulnerable to legal
action. He commended the state's legal statements about the
case and highlighted its argument that the Pacific Salmon Treaty
supersedes any bio-op made by NMFS. In closing, he refenced the
fact that there has been a continuous, uninterrupted, chinook
run in Southeast Alaska for over 100 years to argue that the
troll fishery is sustainable, contrary to the Wild Fish
Conservatory's claims.
10:58:47 AM
CHARLES "CHARLIE" DIERCY responded to some of the committee's
questions from earlier in the discussion. He reported that
about 15 percent of [trolling] permits are from other states
like Washington and California. He opined that Alaska King
salmon, and specifically King salmon caught by trollers, is the
best fish in the world, which this lawsuit [obliterate]. He
emphasized the long history of data collection the trolling
fishery has, especially in comparison to other fisheries. He
continued with anecdotal information about the increase of the
orca population in Ketchikan from his experience living there
since the '70s, which he indicated proved that the decline in
the Puget Sound orcas must be caused by other factors. To
address the question of sustainability, he referenced the
state's constitution and his belief that [trollers] have not
violated it by having an unsustainable fishery. He wrapped up
his testimony by calling the whole issue a "snow ball" that
needs to be stopped before it gets too big.
11:01:41 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ORTIZ thanked Mr. Dersey for his testimony and
longtime experience in the trolling industry.
11:02:09 AM
JEFF FARVOUR, Board Member, Alaska Longline Fishermen's
Association, stated that trolling is in the top three of the
most valuable commercial fisheries in Alaska. He explained that
trolling provides year round employment, and other community
benefits such as the raw fish tax. This tax goes to fishing
communities and helps them with harbor upkeep and maintaining
their working waterfronts. He referenced the broad support for
HJR 5 he has seen in letters and other community-based
resolutions. He emphasized that the range of both killer whales
and their food is limited. In conclusion, he declared the
lawsuit a publicity stunt by the Wild Fish Conservatory meant to
further "eliminate marine fisheries."
11:04:33 AM
MICHAEL KOHAN, Science and Policy Director, Sitka Salmon Share,
testified in support of HJR 5 based on her experience working
with local fishers and processors in Alaska. Her company
supplies Alaska seafood, including troll-caught King salmon,
directly to home cooks across the country, and she shared that
closing the chinook trolling fishery not only would impact
fishing communities, but would have great economic impact to a
variety businesses in Alaska. She maintained that her company
supports efforts toward sustainability in the management of
Alaska's resources and the impacted ecosystems but disagreed
with the merits of the lawsuit, characterizing it as "lacking
scientific basis, irresponsible, and likely irreversibly
detrimental to the troll fleet."
11:06:31 AM
LINDA BEHNKEN, Executive Director, Alaska Longline Fishermen's
Association, emphasized that the longevity of the 100-year-old
troll fishery is a testament to its sustainability. She
underscored previous comments about the economic impact of
closing the fishery by mentioning the communities and members of
her association that it would negatively affect without any real
benefit to the orcas [in Puget Sound]. She referenced a study
her association worked on to discover "what the real threats
are" to the orcas in Puget Sound, which revealed that these
killer whales are exposed to some of the highest concentration
of industrial toxins of any marine mammal in the world. Among
other threats to these whales, she listed noise pollution and
general water pollution, but not commercial fishing. In
comparison to Alaska's efforts to protect salmon habitats, she
described the rest of the Pacific Northwest as "making
compromises" in these efforts since they lean towards
industrialization by building dams and other infrastructure to
support the "nearly 5 million people" now living in the [Puget
Sound] area. She claimed that when it comes to salmon
conservation, "Alaska has done their part and it is time for
Washington to do theirs."
11:09:40 AM
CHAIR VANCE, after ascertaining that there was no one else who
wished to testify, closed public testimony on HJR 5. She
announced that those who were unable to testify during the
meeting could submit written testimony to the committee's e-
mail.
11:10:53 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 11:10 a.m. to 11:13 a.m.
11:13:38 AM
CHAIR VANCE invited discussion of amendments.
11:13:55 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT moved to adopt [Conceptual] Amendment 1
to HJR 5, as follows:
Page 2, line 16:
Between "and" and "Columbia River"
Insert "lower"
11:14:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT explained the proposed amendment more
accurately describes a physical area in the resolution by adding
the word "lower" to "Columbia River".
11:14:31 AM
[REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER] objected for the purpose of
discussion.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT maintained that the purpose of the
amendment is to give the utmost clarity as to which fish the
resolution is referencing.
11:15:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER removed his objection. There being no
further objection, [Conceptual] Amendment 1 to HJR 5 was
adopted.
11:15:25 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 11:15 a.m. to 11:16 a.m.
11:15:59 AM
CHAIR VANCE ascertained there were no other amendments to be
offered.
11:16:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE moved to report HJR 5, as amended, out of
committee with individual recommendations and the attached
fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSHJR 5(FSH) was
reported out of the House Special Committee on Fisheries.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HJR 5 - Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HFSH 2/14/2023 10:00:00 AM |
HJR 5 |
| HJR 5 - v.S.PDF |
HFSH 2/14/2023 10:00:00 AM |
HJR 5 |
| HJR 5 - Testimony - Received as of 2.12.23.pdf |
HFSH 2/14/2023 10:00:00 AM |
HJR 5 |
| HJR 5 - Presentation - Fujioka 2.14.23.pdf |
HFSH 2/14/2023 10:00:00 AM |
HJR 5 |
| HJR 5 - Research KCAW Article 2.1.23.pdf |
HFSH 2/14/2023 10:00:00 AM |
HJR 5 |
| HJR 5 - Research ATA and ALFA Letter to Delegation 1.8.23.pdf |
HFSH 2/14/2023 10:00:00 AM |
HJR 5 |
| HJR 5 - Research ADFG Press Release 8.8.22.pdf |
HFSH 2/14/2023 10:00:00 AM |
HJR 5 |
| HJR 5 - Research - ATA and ALFA Orca White Paper Handout 12.7.22.pdf |
HFSH 2/14/2023 10:00:00 AM |
HJR 5 |
| HJR 5 - Research - ATA Troll Fishery 101 January 2023.pdf |
HFSH 2/14/2023 10:00:00 AM |
HJR 5 |