Legislature(1999 - 2000)
04/21/1999 01:11 PM House RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 104 - ENTRY MORATORIA ON PARTICIPANTS/VESSELS Number 1036 CO-CHAIR OGAN announced that the final item of business would be House Bill No. 104, "An Act revising the procedures and authority of the Alaska Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission, the Board of Fisheries, and the Department of Fish and Game to establish a moratorium on participants or vessels, or both, participating in certain fisheries; and providing for an effective date." The bill had been heard previously. [Before the committee was CSHB 104(FSH).] Number 0996 BRENNON EAGLE testified via teleconference from Wrangell. Noting that he has testified in support of this legislation over the past couple of years, he emphasized the importance of giving this power to the Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission (CFEC). He has been through a convoluted entry process with the Southeast pot shrimp fishery, he advised members, which ended up with quite a few more people in the fishery than had historically participated, because the CFEC had to announce limited entry for the fishery prior to closing it. Anyone who participated during that small window of time was eventually allowed into the fishery, he noted, although since limited entry, those people have not participated. He believes the CFEC has been stuck with a poor process, which the power to do a moratorium would have alleviated. MR. EAGLE noted that this allows the CFEC to choose different dates, which he believes is a very good addition. However, he believes it would be a poor decision to disallow transferability of permits. He explained, "I make my living by fishing, and not allowing me to enter a fishery after it's been limited would greatly restrict how I could run my business; and I don't think it would be beneficial to the commercial fishermen in the state of Alaska, or to the other people that depend on us, as support industry." Mr. Eagle urged passage of HB 101. Number 0848 RAY CAMPBELL testified via teleconference from Ketchikan. Referring to previous hearings, he said there is an impression that this bill is directed at Bering Sea scallop and Korean hair crab fisheries. However, in looking at files, especially for the Korean hair crab fishery, it seems that the majority of permits in 1998 were held by nonresidents, on the gear license. On the vessel license, it appears that although many declare themselves residents, the vessel owners' addresses are out of state. He expressed hope that a CFEC representative could explain that. MR. CAMPBELL said he had asked previously how many other fisheries have been requested to be placed under this moratorium; he would like an answer to that, as well. He referred to the question of transferability of moratorium permits in the Southeast dive fishery. He told members that in looking at the transfers, it appears there is a tendency for medical transfers to go from residents to nonresidents; he suggested that committee members get numbers from the CFEC regarding that. Number 0643 CO-CHAIR OGAN noted that Liz Cabrera had provided a synopsis, dated April 20, 1999, of changes to the current moratorium statute under CSHB 104(FSH). He asked her to explain what is being repealed. Number 0567 LIZ CABRERA, Researcher for Representative Bill Hudson [sponsor] and Committee Aide, House Special Committee on Fisheries, Alaska State Legislature, mentioned that the memorandum was in response to Co-Chair Ogan's request regarding the repealed section. The synopsis goes through the entire bill, she indicated, showing the affected statutes and the applicable bill sections. Number 0443 CO-CHAIR OGAN asked Ms. McDowell whether any permits under moratoriums would be transferable. MARY McDOWELL, Commissioner, Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, answered that permits issued under a moratorium are temporary permits for the length of the moratorium. The only transferability is if somebody has already, in a given year, demonstrated intent and ability to fish that year, has renewed the interim use permit for the year, and then has some medical condition occur, such as a broken leg. Then that person can apply for an "emergency transfer of their ability to fish" for that one year. The process requires filling out an application for emergency transfer, which comes to the CFEC, as well as submittal of forms from doctors, and so forth. Those are the only transfers allowed for a moratorium permit. Number 0334 CO-CHAIR OGAN stated his understanding that this bill is a departure from previous legislation: It not only establishes a moratorium on use permits but also creates a vessel permit system. He asked Ms. McDowell to explain that. MS. McDOWELL explained that HB 104 doesn't create a vessel limitation program, but it allows a moratorium to be put on entry of new vessels into a fishery. Another piece of legislation speaks to the issue of creating vessel permits, she noted. This bill, HB 104, allows this process to be used in the same way that the legislature, in the last few years, has enacted vessel moratoriums on the scallop and hair crab fisheries. MS. McDOWELL pointed out that a vessel moratorium would only be used in a fishery where a moratorium on participants doesn't work. For example, in the scallop and hair crab fisheries, vessels tend to be large and to fish the outside waters; the vessels are often owned by someone who hires skippers, and there may be several skippers throughout a year. In that case, the legislature chose to limit the number of vessels, to avoid multiplying the number of vessels by giving a license to each skipper. In some fisheries, that system better gets to the purposes of the Limited Entry Act, which are conservation of the resource and avoidance of economic distress in the fishery. This moratorium bill would give the CFEC the ability to implement a moratorium on participants or vessels, or both, to get a lid on that fishery during the moratorium, while the CFEC assesses the situation and decides about a course for the future. Number 0103 CO-CHAIR OGAN referred to page 3, line 24, which says, "A permit issued under this section is a use privilege that may be modified or revoked by law without compensation." He asked Ms. McDowell to address that issue, as it relates to other limited entry permits. MS. McDOWELL said her understanding is that it just repeats what is under the law now for limited entry permits. The legislature had reserved to itself the ability to alter it, without compensation, at any time. CO-CHAIR OGAN asked whether Ms. McDowell considers it a property right. MS. McDOWELL responded that it is not, under law, considered a property right; it is considered a use privilege. She briefly discussed the repealer sections, noting that Sections 8, 9 and 10 simply adjust the sunset dates on the existing hair crab and scallop moratoriums, depending on whether the CFEC [testimony cut off by change of tape]. TAPE 99-28, SIDE A Number 0001 MS. McDOWELL said [Section 11] repeals the three sections in current law that are the old system of doing moratoriums, where someone petitions the commissioner of ADF&G, who then goes to the board, which then goes comes back to the commissioner, who then comes to the CFEC. It repeals those sections and replaces them with this new system. Number 0067 CO-CHAIR OGAN commented that this is an important issue, and he would like to deal with it when all members are present. He announced that HB 104 would be held over.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|