Legislature(1993 - 1994)
03/24/1993 03:45 PM Senate RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATOR MILLER announced SB 153 EXCHANGE OF RAW FISH FOR SEAFOOD PRODUCT to be up for consideration. JOE AMBROSE, Staff for Senator Robin Taylor, read Senator Taylor's statement on SB 153. SENATOR LEMAN said his concern was with the volume of seafood product that was being shipped out of state and the potential of that entering some commercial market. He said that tourists ship their fish out of state and then sell it in the winter to pay for their trip up here. This is contrary to state law and it is very hard to prosecute them. MR. AMBROSE said Senator Taylor was aware of his concerns and didn't think SB 153 was the proper vehicle for some export limit. He suggested inserting on page 4, line 15 after the word "exchange" insert "during a 24-hour period a person who may exchange seafood products for raw fish under the ..." TAPE 17, SIDE B Number 580 "...section, may not accept or exchange more than one possession limit of each species of raw fish from that same person. Possession limit is determined according to regulation in effect on the date applicable to the fishery where the raw fish was taken." Senator Taylor is willing to restrict the amount of raw product that can be exchanged, he added. SENTOR ADAMS asked the definition of "wholesome." MR. AMBROSE said it meant food that was not spoiled. This is language that was suggested last year when they were discussing quality control. SENATOR ADAMS asked him to define "small-scale manufacturing." MR. AMBROSE said the intent was to address the mom and pop type operations and encourage their growth. SENATOR ZHAROFF asked on page 4, lines 8 - 9, how "sport use" was being defined. MR. AMBROSE said this would be someone with a sport fishing license in his possession whether they are in a charter boat or a dinghy of their own. SENATOR ZHAROFF asked if the fishing guides were excluded from this bill. MR. AMBROSE said the intent of that language was not to include the services provided by a charter operator. He explained that folks coming in on the cruise ships, go out fishing. The custom processing that is available in some areas is time consuming. They have to keep the fish separated throughout the entire process, so you get the same fish back. The fish has to be shipped back to the customer which is very expensive. A lot of people do not use that service because of the expense. What they want to offer is the chance to get an Alaskan processed product in exchange for the raw fish. Number 470 JANICE ADAIR, Department of Environmental Conservation, said the seafood inspection program is within their department. She said their first amendment is on page 2, line 18 after "exchanging" adding "thermally processed, vacuum packaged, smoked, cured, or pickled" to clarify what kinds of seafood products might be exchanged for raw fish. The next two amendments relate to the definition of raw fish and seafood products to exclude bivalve molluscan shellfish. SENATOR FRANK asked if she would have problems if the legislature determined what the ratios would properly be? MS. ADAIR answered that wouldn't be a problem. Number 434 MICHELLE BUGNI, Alaska Troller's Association, opposed SB 164 as written. If it is amended to include provisions which limit the amount of raw and processed seafood that can be transported from Alaska to an angler's permanent place of residence, they will endorse it. If they are pressed to compromise on the language, she suggested using, "The export of raw and processed sport-caught seafood transported to an individual's permanent place of residence be limited to one possession limit for each species harvested." They would like the Board of Fisheries to address this matter and provide an effective date after it has made a ruling on export limitations. SENATOR ZHAROFF said he wanted clarification on the definition of one possession limit as opposed to bag limit. MS. BUGNI said there is a difference between bag limits and possession limits. It is per area. SENATOR LEMAN said they were dealing with two limits - one was the bag limit and the other was the export limit. SENATOR ZHAROFF asked how this would be monitored and enforced and what would the penalties be for a processor who knowingly takes in more than an individual is allowed. MS. BUGNI said the intent of the bill would not be to encourage anglers to go out and catch more fish, but she thought they might be tempted to take more, because the whole process would be a lot easier. Number 325 RICHARD PEIFER, HIRA Fisheries Joint Venture, Klawock, said they are interested in adding value processing. There is an inequity in enforcement in current statutes that prohibits the exchange of sport caught fish. Basically, he said, it costs the tourist way too much money to process their fish in-state. Aside from the fact that many fish are shipped out of state before they are processed, he pointed out that many people throw away their catch that is too small to consider for shipping or processing and that is throwing away a resource. We lose the opportunity in these cases to expose them to value-added Alaskan products. If 30 - 50 people bring their fish in to have it processed as one normal production batch, he can do that very efficiently and pass the savings on to them, plus save the cost of transportation and shipping. MR. PEIFER added that processors are very experienced at recognizing contaminated or decomposing fish. He said that wholesome means fit for human consumption. The negative issues revolve around how many fish people are taking out of this state. This is a management issue. It doesn't change the jobs that are going to create the additional revenues we are going to keep in the state. Custom processing is one of the ways small business can get started and grow. He discussed the product recovery rates due to differences in individual processing techniques. Number 117 RICK LAUBER, Pacific Seafood Processors Association, asked them to not put the product recovery rate in statute, because it is very hard to change a statute. One of the things he likes about this bill is that it is going to bring custom processors under DEC, because one of the fears established processors have is that someone could get sick from eating salmon processed in a new uninspected mom and pop operation which would hurt the whole industry. SENATOR LEMAN asked if he thought this was the right vehicle for export limits and whether this would encourage abuses which may or may not conflict with commercial fisheries. MR. LAUBER said he wasn't sure that issue needed to be addressed. If it does, then it needs more study. In the mean time, this bill could pass. TAPE 93-18, SIDE A Number 001 SENATOR ZHAROFF said processors are very possessive of their records and wouldn't make them available to just anybody. In the bill it just says an "employee of the Department" so he thought that needed to be made tighter. He also thought the Department of Revenue should be added to the list since that is where a lot of the licensing and bonding is put together for the licensing of the processing. SENATOR MILLER said it was his intent to put this bill into a subcommittee of one, Senator Leman, and have him get it ready for Monday and pass it out at that time.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|