Legislature(2015 - 2016)CAPITOL 120
03/24/2015 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 | |
| Presentation(s): State of the Salmon | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON FISHERIES
March 24, 2015
10:08 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Louise Stutes, Chair
Representative Neal Foster
Representative Bob Herron
Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins
Representative Dan Ortiz
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Craig Johnson
Representative Charisse Millett
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
PRESENTATION(S): STATE OF THE SALMON
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
LINDSEY BLOOM
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments during the presentation
on the State of the Salmon.
HEATHER HARDCASTLE, Co-Owner
Taku Renewable Resources, Inc., d.b.a. Taku River Reds
Salmon Beyond Borders
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments during the presentation
on the State of the Salmon.
JULIANNE CURRY, Executive Director
United Fishermen of Alaska (UFA)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments during the presentation
on the State of the Salmon.
STEPHANIE MADSEN, Executive Director
At-Sea Processors Association (APA)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments during the presentation
on the State of the Salmon.
JULIE BONNEY, Executive Director
Alaska Groundfish Data Bank, Inc.
Kodiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments during the presentation
on the State of the Salmon.
RYAN MAKINSTER, Executive Director
Southeast Alaska Guides Organization (SEAGO)
Ketchikan, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments during the presentation
on the State of the Salmon.
RICKY GEASE, Executive Director
Kenai River Sportfishing Association (KRSA)
Soldotna, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments during the presentation
on the State of the Salmon.
BEN STEVENS, Tribal Member
Tanana Chiefs Conference
Stevens Village, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments during the presentation
on the State of the Salmon.
GEORGE PIERCE
Kasilof, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments during the presentation
on the State of the Salmon.
DAN DUNAWAY
Dillingham, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments during the presentation
on the State of the Salmon.
JOHN McCOMBS
Ninilchik, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments during the presentation
on the State of the Salmon.
ACTION NARRATIVE
10:08:13 AM
CHAIR LOUISE STUTES called the House Special Committee on
Fisheries meeting to order at 10:08 a.m. Representatives
Stutes, Foster, Herron, Kreiss-Tomkins, and Ortiz were present
at the call to order.
^PRESENTATION(S): State of the Salmon
PRESENTATION(S): State of the Salmon
10:08:53 AM
CHAIR STUTES announced that the only order of business would be
the State of Salmon presentation.
10:10:05 AM
LINDSEY BLOOM, mentioning that she is a fisheries consultant and
fishes commercially in Bristol Bay, offered her belief that
Alaska is about the last state with wild salmon that is a source
of food and major driver of the state's economy, and that
Alaskans view [this fishery] as a defining characteristic of the
state that provides much opportunity and value to [many]
Alaskans. Indicating a belief that [the salmon fishery in
Alaska] has done very well thus far as a result of [legislative]
decisions and policies engendered by the Alaska State
Constitution, she offered her hope that the presentation today
will engender legislative policies resulting in a bright future
for fisheries management and salmon stewardship. Huge
challenges [for the fishery] lie ahead; however, it will take
forward-thinking and pro-active legislative leadership to meet
the needs of future generations.
10:13:23 AM
HEATHER HARDCASTLE, Co-Owner, Taku Renewable Resources, Inc.,
d.b.a. Taku River Reds, Coordinator, Salmon Beyond Borders,
indicated that she's involved in the commercial fishing
industry, and that Salmon Beyond Borders campaigns
internationally to safeguard transboundary salmon rivers. She
relayed she would be speaking to the issue of salmon and large-
scale mining in transboundary watersheds. People from all
sectors are concerned about the health of the rivers that flow
from British Columbia into Southeast Alaska, as large-scale
mining in British Columbia currently threatens Alaska's salmon
and water quality, and there are no enforceable protections in
place. She referred to a map included within members' packets,
and said it illustrates the transboundary [watershed] region,
containing several watersheds straddling the border between
British Columbia and Southeast Alaska. The map depicts affected
rivers including: the Taku, Whiting, Stikine, [Iskut], and Unuk
Rivers, and the Nass River, although it doesn't cross into
Alaska. She described these watersheds as the lifeblood of the
region that serve as economic powerhouses.
MS. HARDCASTLE noted that for the last four years, Southeast
Alaska has had the largest and most lucrative salmon harvests
[compared to other regions of the state], with the
aforementioned transboundary rivers having been key to that
productivity. Only a small portion of the watersheds are
located in Alaska; Canada controls the major portion of them,
including the salmon spawning and rearing grounds. Alaska has
done a very good job of protecting salmon habitat in Alaska's
portion of these watersheds, and they are surrounded by
[national lands currently unavailable for development]. This is
not the case in Canada, and the aforementioned map also
illustrates the location of various mining projects, in various
stages of development, in British Columbia targeting, for the
most part, low-grade gold and copper ore deposits containing
sulfides, and thus the chance for acid mine drainage from these
open pit and underground mining projects is quite high. These
mining projects will also involve, for the most part, the use of
tailings-storage facilities and water-treatment facilities that
must operate in perpetuity.
10:18:27 AM
MS. HARDCASTLE, referring again to the aforementioned map, drew
attention to the Tulsequah Chief Mine located in the Taku River
watershed, and said it has been leaching acid mine drainage into
the Tulsequah River - a Taku River tributary - since its
abandonment in 1957, and no clean-up measures have been
undertaken. She next drew attention to the [Kerr-Sulphurets-
Mitchell (KSM) mining project] located in the Unuk River
watershed, and said that if developed as proposed, it would
become the largest gold and copper mine in North America. Last
year, she relayed, Representative Kreiss-Tomkins, Alaska's
congressional delegation, the State of Alaska, thousands of
Alaskans, and thousands of Canadians requested that the Canadian
government conduct a strict environmental review of that
[project] - currently in the permitting process - but were
denied. She then drew attention to the Red Chris Mine located
in the [Stikine and Iskut Rivers watersheds], and said it's
currently filling its tailings-storage facility and trucking
copper ore concentrate to Stewart, British Columbia, for
shipment to markets. This mine is owned by Imperial Metals
Corporation, the same company that owns the Mount Polley Mine,
which recently suffered a catastrophic breach of its tailings-
storage facility.
MS. HARDCASTLE relayed that the people involved in the issue are
gravely concerned about the irreparable damage that these mining
projects pose to water quality and salmon habitat, and although
these projects might not experience breaches of the type that
occurred at the Mount Polley Mine, experts from British Columbia
state that when watered-tailings-facility technology is used -
as will be used at the Red Chris Mine, for example - the chances
of tailings spills are very high, with perhaps as many as two
such spills possibly occurring every ten years. People are
concerned about the cumulative impacts of all these projects
over such a broad landscape, and what it will truly mean for the
health of these transboundary rivers. People are also concerned
about the chronic issues that will arise with having so many
large mining projects in an area: for example, the acid mine
drainage from open-pit walls and waste-rock piles in such a wet,
seismically-active part of the world. It's hard to see how such
clear damage to downstream interests isn't inevitable.
10:21:55 AM
MS. HARDCASTLE emphasized that currently, neither Alaska nor the
United States has a seat at the table, so to speak, to discuss
how these watersheds are managed in Canada. What she and many
others see as the solution, she relayed, is to first have a
forum that provides an equal opportunity for Alaska and the U.S.
Department of State to engage in such discussions with British
Columbia and Canada, and to then establish enforceable
protections for salmon and water quality in this region.
Research indicates that the International Joint Commission
(IJC), established under the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909,
could provide [for a forum at which equal numbers of experts
from both countries could address] the potential cumulative
effects of multiple mining projects on these watersheds. [Thus
far at least] 11 municipalities and 14 tribes in Southeast
Alaska, as well as the Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN), the
Alaska Native Brotherhood (ANB) and the Alaska Native Sisterhood
(ANS), Alaska's congressional delegation, [and others] are in
support of [invoking] an IJC process.
MS. HARDCASTLE said people are currently feeling threatened by
the aforementioned upstream mining activity; therefore, the end
goal is to have enforceable protections for salmon and water
quality in the region in that there is an opportunity to create
something wholly new [internationally] that truly safeguards
[Alaska's globally-significant] resources. In conclusion, she
noted the recent introduction of a resolution [sponsored and co-
sponsored by Representatives Ortiz and Kreiss-Tomkins,
respectively, requesting IJC's involvement], and asked members
to consider taking [further] action to address these
transboundary watershed issues.
The committee took an at-ease from 10:26 a.m. to 10:28 a.m.
10:28:06 AM
JULIANNE CURRY, Executive Director, United Fishermen of Alaska
(UFA), referring to a PowerPoint presentation, explained that
there are five species of salmon in Alaska: chinook or "king"
salmon being the most iconic; sockeye or "red" salmon - the most
plentiful in the Bristol Bay fisheries; coho or "silver" salmon;
[humpback or] "pink" or "humpy" salmon - [producing] by far the
largest commercial harvest every year; and chum or "keta" [or
"dog"] salmon - an underrated species bolstered by successful
fish hatchery operations. There are four Alaska Department of
Fish & Game (ADF&G) management areas in Alaska: the Southeast
Region spans the area from Ketchikan to Yakutat; the Central
Region includes Prince William Sound, Cook Inlet, and Bristol
Bay; the Westward Region includes Kodiak Island and the Aleutian
Islands; and the Arctic-Yukon-Kuskokwim (AYK) Region [includes]
the rest of the state. There are various methods and vessel-
types used to harvest salmon in Alaska waters: seine vessels,
which have a maximum length of 58 feet; gillnetters, which are
typically 30-40 feet in length; setnets, which are set via
skiff; and troll vessels, which range in size but are allowed to
troll only in Southeast Alaska.
MS. CURRY said Alaska's commercial salmon fisheries extend from
Ketchikan to Kotzebue, and deep into the Interior via the Yukon
and Kuskokwim Rivers, and more Alaskans are employed in
harvesting and processing salmon than in any other commercial
fishery [in Alaska]. Salmon is the most valuable commercial
fishery managed by the State of Alaska, with an average [yearly]
ex-vessel value [for the years 2008 through 2012] of $544
million - ex-vessel value being the price paid to the permit
holder at the dock. In 2014, the total [ex-vessel] value of
salmon harvested in Alaska was estimated to be [over] $576.6
million, involving the harvesting of [more than] 5.78 million
pounds of chinook salmon, [more than] 245 million pounds of
sockeye salmon, [more than] 43.4 million pounds of coho salmon,
[more than] 329 million pounds of [humpback] salmon, and [more
than] 93.6 million pounds of chum salmon.
10:32:33 AM
MS. CURRY said salmon are iconic in Alaska, and nearly every
Alaskan is in some way impacted by salmon; Alaska residents
harvest salmon through personal-use, sport, commercial, and
subsistence [fishing] methods, and are able to access salmon in
grocery stores and restaurants throughout Alaska. In addition
to having a love for salmon, Alaskans are also proud of Alaska's
long history as a state where salmon are harvested commercially.
Such harvests that have been recorded since 1878, were [key] to
Alaska becoming a state, and have resulted in a thriving
industry today. Once statehood was achieved, Alaska took
control of salmon management [in its waters] - thereby
protecting Alaskans' dependence upon this most-prized of
resources - and since then has worked hard to develop a
reputation of having the best-managed fisheries in the world.
According to a study conducted by the McDowell Group, in 2013
approximately 20,000 people participated in commercial salmon-
fisheries as either permit holders or crewmembers. Furthermore,
[approximately] 38,000 people were directly employed by Alaska's
commercial salmon-harvesting industry, and Alaska's commercial
salmon-harvesters live in over 160 of Alaska's communities.
MS CURRY, in concluding her PowerPoint presentation, said
Alaska's salmon harvest is vital to both the health of Alaska
and to employment in Alaska. Virtually every business in Alaska
benefits from commercial salmon fishing dollars, including
restaurants, supermarkets, and shipyards; suppliers of hardware,
marine supplies, fuel, air and water transportation, shipping
services, accounting services; and those involving educators,
scientists, boat builders, and administrators. Furthermore,
activity by the salmon-fishing industry provides benefits to
fishing communities in that economies of scale can be achieved
thereby lowering the costs of utilities, shipping, fuel,
[transportation], and taxes for year-round residents. The UFA
has produced a set of "commercial-fishing facts" sheets, she
relayed, detailing the importance of Alaska's seafood industry,
and containing a breakdown of the taxes and fees paid by the
industry; these facts sheets will be distributed to members, and
are available on the UFA web site.
The committee took an at-ease from 10:35 a.m. to 10:36 a.m.
10:36:29 AM
STEPHANIE MADSEN, Executive Director, At-Sea Processors
Association (APA), mentioning that the APA and the Pollock
Conservation Cooperative are one and the same, referred to a
PowerPoint presentation entitled in part, "Reducing Chinook
Salmon Bycatch in the Bering Sea," and indicated that there are
"prohibited species" catch limits for chinook salmon, and the
exceeding of which will result in a "shutdown," and thus efforts
are made to avoid catching chinook salmon [when fishing for
pollock]. To that end, Incentive Plan Agreements (IPAs) -
intended to encourage the avoidance of chinook salmon bycatch in
the pollock fishery - are submitted to the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) for approval, and require annual
reports. With regard to the aforementioned prohibited species
catch limits, she mentioned that "60,000" is an "upper cap";
that there is also what she called a "performance standard"
limit that members of her organization live within; and that
[members of her organization] are required to demonstrate that
they can do so.
MS. MADSEN indicated that members of her organization focus on
avoiding areas where salmon bycatch is reported to be an issue,
since failure to stay under prohibited species catch limits will
result in vessels being precluded from fishing for pollock in
certain areas. She offered her understanding that there is an
automated alert system in place that sends an alert to everyone
in the industry whenever 10 or more salmon are caught in "a
tow," and that information about where those salmon were
encountered is available on the Internet. [Chinook salmon
bycatch] avoidance areas are identified based upon the number of
salmon being caught with the pollock. Being precluded from
fishing for pollock in certain areas provides members of her
organization with the incentive to avoid areas where chinook
salmon bycatch exceeds certain thresholds. She mentioned that
one particular chinook salmon bycatch avoidance area is closed
[to all pollock fishing] throughout what she referred to as the
"A" season, and indicated that closures of certain bycatch
avoidance areas during what she referred to as the "B" season is
based upon "September performance."
10:44:43 AM
MS. MADSEN relayed that in 2014, 5,254 chinook salmon were
caught with 573,726 metric tons of pollock, resulting in a
"bycatch ratio of 0.009." Any chinook salmon bycatch is counted
on board, and thus information about which areas must then be
avoided is obtained at that point. "Bycatch performance," she
remarked, has improved during the last four years, since what
she called "the program" was instituted; the "incentive program"
is designed to work regardless of how abundant either salmon or
pollock are, all salmon caught are retained and then [donated]
and every 10th salmon is "sampled" for genetic information. She
indicated that [her organization's] IPA was changed in 2015,
thereby increasing communications; requiring the use of salmon-
excluder equipment during all of the "A" season and during two
months of the "B" season; and addressing, via penalties, vessels
that engage in what she called "outlier" behavior wherein the
vessels exceeded certain [chinook salmon] bycatch rates.
Furthermore, chinook salmon bycatch limits might be reduced in
the future during times of low abundance.
The committee took an at-ease from 10:48 a.m. to 10:49 a.m.
10:49:06 AM
JULIE BONNEY, Executive Director, Alaska Groundfish Data Bank,
Inc., referring to a PowerPoint presentation entitled in part,
"Chinook Salmon Bycatch in the Gulf of Alaska (GOA) Trawl
Fisheries", mentioned that her organization represents trawl
vessels and shoreside processors [operating] in the Gulf of
Alaska (GOA), and that the GOA trawl fisheries are still managed
under a limited access system wherein there is "a race" for the
[targeted] fish. This limited access system results in both
fishers and processors competing for access to "a common quota
pool," thereby creating a number of problems [in terms of
chinook salmon bycatch; for example, both catch and bycatch are
managed at the fleet level, there's no individual accountablity
for either processors or vessels, and the ability to address
bycatch is limited.
MS. BONNEY said that regardless of these problems, the North
Pacific Fishery Management Council (NPFMC) has implemented
chinook salmon bycatch limits for the GOA trawl-fishing industry
in response to high numbers of bycatch in the Western GOA
pollock fishery in 2010. Specifically, there are now chinook
salmon bycatch limits of [6,684] in the Western GOA, and
[18,316] in the Central GOA, for a total chinook salmon bycatch
limit of 25,000 for the entire GOA pollock fishery. These
limits were [based in part] by calculating the chinook salmon
bycatch compared to the pollock quota between the years 2001 and
2011 - that being about 40,000 [metric] tons of pollock for the
Central GOA, for example. Since then, however, the pollock
quota in the Central GOA has increased to over 150,000 [metric]
tons, but the chinook salmon bycatch limit has not seen a
similar increase, and this has put stress on the industry as it
attempts to catch nearly four times the amount of pollock while
having to comply with unchanged chinook salmon bycatch limits.
MS. BONNEY explained that the NPFMC has also implemented a total
chinook salmon bycatch limit of 7,500 in the non-pollock [GOA
trawl] fisheries - cod, flatfish, and rockfish fisheries -
involving a limit of 1,200 in the Central GOA catcher vessel
rockfish fishery, a limit of 3,600 in the GOA catcher/processor
cod, flatfish, and rockfish fisheries, and a limit of 2,700 in
the GOA catcher vessel cod and flatfish fisheries. These limits
have created a lot of challenges for the industry. One such
challenge involves how chinook salmon bycatch is counted in
these fisheries; currently, bycatch estimates are derived from
observer data rather than from fish tickets, and are based
solely on a basket sample - a random sample of about 600 pounds
from the catch at sea. This is much less precise than counting
each salmon at the dock, as occurs in the pollock fishery, and
doesn't reflect individual vessel [bycatch] performance.
10:59:20 AM
MS. BONNEY said that another challenge for the non-pollock GOA
trawl fisheries, in this first year of operating under the
aforementioned chinook salmon bycatch limits, is that the limit
of 2,700 chinook salmon for the GOA catcher vessel cod and
flatfish fisheries is already proving to be problematic just two
months into the season, in that 1,056 chinook salmon have
already been [caught] in the Western GOA catcher vessel cod
fishery, but once the limit of 2,700 chinook salmon is reached,
all the GOA catcher vessel cod and flatfish fisheries will close
for the rest of the year. Ms. Bonney pointed out that when the
aforementioned GOA bycatch limits of 25,000 and 7,500 chinook
salmon were set, it was not yet known that [almost] 97 percent
of GOA chinook salmon bycatch consists of salmon from the
Pacific Coast, British Columbia, and Southeast Alaska [rather
than from the Gulf of Alaska]. Furthermore, according to the
North Pacific Anadromous Fish Commission (NPAFC), hatcheries
release approximately 250 million chinook salmon each year; in
2013, for example, hatcheries in Canada released [over] 39
million chinook salmon, and hatcheries in the U.S. released over
200 million chinook salmon, though only about 5 percent of those
fish came from Alaska hatcheries.
MS. BONNEY, in concluding her PowerPoint presentation, indicated
that the GOA trawl-fisheries industry is trying to be proactive
[with regard to chinook salmon bycatch]. For example,
voluntarily instituting measures whereby catch and bycatch [can
be] allocated to individual vessels; voluntarily reporting "hot
spots" of chinook salmon bycatch; donating food-grade bycatch to
food banks; researching better salmon excluder technologies; and
funding chinook salmon bycatch stock-of-origin data. Also, the
NPFMC is researching trawl bycatch tools.
11:05:52 AM
RYAN MAKINSTER, Executive Director, SouthEast Alaska Guides
Organization (SEAGO), referring to a PowerPoint presentation
that included an illustration of Pacific salmon migration
patterns on the West Coast, noted that salmon are important to
his industry and serve as an "economic driver." He relayed that
there is a [chinook] salmon fishery management plan in place
that [provides] what he referred to as an "Abundance Index."
The Abundance Index dictates the total number of salmon [that
can be harvested] by his industry in a given year, with the
Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G) then allocating
specific amounts [to the individual user groups]. He said the
2014 Abundance Index was 2.57, which he characterized as
possibly being a record high, allowing his industry to [harvest]
more [salmon] during the season; indicators are pointing to
there being a [similarly-high] Abundance Index for 2015, he
added, and mentioned that members of his industry are actively
promoting salmon fishing.
11:11:24 AM
RICKY GEASE, Executive Director, Kenai River Sportfishing
Association (KRSA), referred to a PowerPoint presentation titled
in part, "2012 Cook Inlet Salmon Emergency Relief Program"; and
relayed that the Pacific States Marine Fishery Commission
(PSMFC) would be administering the emergency relief program
related to the 2012 declaration that the Cook Inlet and the
Kuskokwim and Yukon [Rivers] were what he called a "salmon
disaster area." Also, according to the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA's) National Marine Fisheries
Service (NOAA Fisheries), $75 million in federal appropriations
were allocated in 2014 to six different fisheries that had been
declared by the U.S. Department of Commerce to have suffered
fishery [resource] disasters. Alaska received $20.8 million of
that funding for the "chinook salmon failures" that occurred in
2012, with direct payments being made to commercial salmon
fishers in the Cook Inlet and the Yukon and Kuskokwim Rivers, to
the "recreational sector" in various areas of the Cook Inlet via
[payments to] various types of businesses in and involved with
the sport fishing industry, and to upper Cook Inlet commercial
salmon fisheries' buying stations and processors; remaining
funds are to be focused on primarily on research, but also on
restoration, education, gear replacement/modification, and
outreach.
MR. GEASE noted that last winter the KRSA worked with the
Matanuska-Susitna Borough, the Kenai Peninsula Borough, and
various user groups to develop the application forms for the
aforementioned businesses qualified to seek such funding;
outlined some of the various qualifications that those
businesses needed in order to receive such funding; and
indicated that the application period would end May 29, with
funds being distributed to qualified businesses by July 1. With
regard to funds for research, he explained that plans are in
place to address bottlenecks of chinook salmon.
11:19:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ORTIZ asked for clarification regarding the
United States' lack of a seat at the table regarding the
transboundary fishing and mining issues in that, according to
Ms. Hardcastle's testimony, the United States has the support of
its federal delegation and, he presumed, the U.S. State
Department. He questioned what is preventing that seat at the
table.
MS. HARDCASTLE responded that the International Joint Commission
(IJC) is the only existing mechanism to bring the table to front
and center, and allow an equal seat at that table with Canada.
She explained there are numerous roadblocks in obtaining an IJC
investigation, and although the federal delegation is in support
together with many Southeast Alaska residents within interests
groups, and local governments, they do not yet have the formal
support from the State of Alaska stating it supports an
International Joint Commission (IJC) investigation, but the
state is taking this seriously. She pointed out that the U.S.
State Department isn't outright in support of this, but it is
the diplomat for the United States and has the tough
conversations with neighbors, such as Canada. She said, it
appears the State of Alaska, legislators, and the majority of
residents, want the IJC to "go to bat for us and ask the tough
questions of Canada." Pragmatically, she said Canada's support
is needed to activate the IJC to study this issue, and it is not
necessarily excited to do that. That being said, she works
closely with a number of experts who previously worked on the
IJC, who have advised that both countries are hyper-aware there
will be a situation where "they" want the IJC to be involved.
She pointed out that it is not a case of "just being able to say
no," and offered that the current stage is trying to raise a
"stink" that a forum to address the issue is desired.
11:23:45 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON asked whether it is currently active.
MS. HARDCASTLE explained that the International Joint Commission
(IJC) becomes "activated" when it reviews an issue such as the
cumulative effect of multiple mining projects on the
transboundary watersheds. She explained that it requires the
joint referral by the Canadian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and
the U.S. State Department - which requires notifications to the
U.S. State Department by the State of Alaska, legislators,
elected officials, fishermen and tribes. She advised that
Senators Murkowski and Sullivan are closely tracking this issue,
and subsequent to Ms. Hardcastle's meeting with Senator
Murkowski, Senator Murkowski met with Secretary of State John
Kerry the next day. She offered that the legislature could
continue that type of pressure by stating this is not anti-
mining, or anti-permitting process existing in Canada, as it is
simply "let's get to the table and talk about a shared resource
with another country."
11:25:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON asked whether she had specifically
requested a resolution from the legislature.
MS. HARDCASTLE replied that a formal request has not been
requested, although over the years they have been in close
connect with the Southeast legislative delegation due to
concerns related to the Tulsequah Chief mine in the Taku River
watershed. She opined that Representative Ortiz supports the
involvement of the IJC, recognizing it is the only current forum
available so he took the leadership role in creating HJR 16,
which is possibly scheduled for a hearing soon, she offered.
CHAIR STUTES opened public testimony.
11:26:42 AM
BEN STEVENS, Tribal Member, Tanana Chiefs Conference, offered
his considerable experience as a subsistence fisherman
throughout his life, and said that economic strategies are a
concern. Officially, he described, he works with the Tanana
Chiefs Conference in coordinating the hunting and fishing task
force strategy relating to the rights of the people it serves.
With regard to subsistence, in relation to the state of the
salmon, he offered the economy of the rural life style in that
fish go directly from the water to the plate. The Alaska
residents living subsistence life styles of cultural and
spiritual wellbeing are currently in a dire situation and when
fish are not able to be taken for food purposes, it is
unnerving, he said. He reminded the committee that salmon
declines have continued since 1998, that 2000 was a particularly
difficult year, and in 2014 fisheries were closed to subsistence
given the stark reality of the disappearance of salmon stocks.
He said a lack of action has been observed on the part of state
and federal officials; therefore, tribal leaders are taking
action. He referred to the 2014 moratorium on fishing, and said
"Giving that many fish to the spawning grounds would not have
been possible had it not been for the involvement that unified
(indisc.) from tribes." That was a tremendous sign from tribes,
he opined, that they are "all in" on the restoration and
conservation of the stocks. He said a drastic effort on the
part of tribes was to seek the support of the federal government
to prioritize subsistence use.
11:33:03 AM
MR. STEVENS continued that the Kuskokwim River and Yukon River
watershed people are involved in planning for fish commissions
and will attempt to make substantive efforts in this regard. He
reported that the tribes are seeking a voice in management
actions, which should receive serious consideration in that the
tribes are calling for all with the ability to affect the salmon
restoration and conservation to take action. Currently, they
are working with the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council
to lower the by-catch, and do the right thing. The tribes of
the Yukon River are working with the First Nations in Canada and
the government of the Yukon and building bridges.
11:35:54 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ORTIZ referred to the "dire situation" in that
this is a critical time for subsistence, and asked whether this
relates solely to king salmon and whether this is the only fish
targeted for subsistence, or includes other species of salmon as
well.
MR. STEVENS responded that the king salmon is targeted due to
the quality of the nutrients, and "other reasons." However, he
said, they are concerned as to how the disappearance of the
chinook will impact other salmon stocks in the Yukon River as
everything is in a perilous state currently, and expressed
concern for all species of salmon.
11:37:30 AM
GEORGE PIERCE, said he is representing subsistence users and
that they are being trumped by non-residents over fishing rights
as guides are destroying the Kenai River by taking all of the
kings out of the river by continuous fishing over 20 years over
the spawning beds. He pointed out that the personal use
priority is supplanting subsistence first. He noted that from
1993-1995 there was a dispute over rural and non-rural, and the
Board of Fisheries decided on personal use and eliminated the
word "subsistence." This decision was challenged in state court
and the result was that subsistence is to be prioritized, he
said. An illegal personal use fishery was created and,
currently, if there is a shortage of fish the subsistence users
are denied fish first, yet the commercial fishermen and sport
fishing guides are allowed to continually fish. He pointed out
that the sport fishing guides cater to non-residents, which is
contrary to law in that subsistence users are entitled to the
fish first. The personal use fishery is allowed into areas that
subsistence users never were, and for longer periods of time, he
stressed. He said no one is stepping up to this "because of the
money," and asked the committee to investigate the illegal
personal use fishery and stand up for Alaskans. He stated that
the legislature gave the [Department of] Fish & Game permission
to implement the personal use fishery, which is against the
constitution.
11:43:29 AM
DAN DUNAWAY, testified that he sits as a secretary on the Fish
and Game Advisory Committee, and is a member of the Federal
Bristol Bay Rural Advisory Council for subsistence, but is
testifying solely as a subsistence user. He advised that
advisory committees are in the process of sending letters of
concern regarding funding for fish and game management tools
used in the Nushagak and Togiak area. He noted he would like to
see Nushagak sonar salmon enumeration project funded
sufficiently to run through August of the pink and coho salmon
fisheries, as it would assist in sorting out the management plan
allocation among commercial, sport, and subsistence users.
Also, he stated, there are rumors the Togiak salmon counting
tower could be eliminated with the severe budget cuts, except
that is the sole management tool for the run of 700,000 to over
800,000 sockeye salmon that normally produces approximately
550,000 fish harvest in the commercial and subsistence fishery.
He expressed another concern, within the advisory councils, is
the short funding issue in that there is the requirement of a
minimum of one meeting per year is required in order to be
considered an active advisory committee, but if funds are cut
much more it will be hard to maintain the active status. He
described tele-conferences as having limited utility. Finally,
with regard to the by-catch topic, Bristol Bay was pleased to
have the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council present
their work on controlling and managing by-catch beings it is a
large concern. He reported on a new technique by Dr. Dan
Schlinder, Professor, University of Washington, which may be
helpful in identifying stocks of origin in the by-catch.
11:48:27 AM
JOHN McCOMBS, regarding HB 110 and SB 42, expressed that there
are currently 80 personal use fisheries statewide.
Ramifications of these bills are not explained or rationalized,
he said, and it is premature and misguided to initiate a
dialogue about who gets to catch the last fish. Therefore, he
advised he cannot support the above-bills. With regard to HB
103, in 2014 the Board of Fisheries passed two board generated
proposals during the last two hours of a two-week long meeting
and both contained contentious re-allocations of the fishery.
He explained that board generated proposals take the public out
of an open public process and undermines the advisory committee
process.
CHAIR STUTES advised Mr. McCombs that the presentation is on the
State of the Salmon, and noted the testimony today is confined
to salmon issues.
MR. McCOMBS said he supports HB 103.
CHAIR STUTES closed public testimony after ascertaining that no
one further wished to testify.
11:51:06 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Special Committee on Fisheries meeting was adjourned at 11:51
a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| 2012 Cook Inlet Sport Fishing Salmon Disaster Relief.pdf |
HFSH 3/24/2015 10:00:00 AM |
|
| At-Sea Processors Assoc.pdf |
HFSH 3/24/2015 10:00:00 AM |
|
| House Fish Committee PowerPoint GOA Chinook.pdf |
HFSH 3/24/2015 10:00:00 AM |
|
| SEAGO Salmon Presentation.pdf |
HFSH 3/24/2015 10:00:00 AM |
|
| United Fishermen of Alaska.pdf |
HFSH 3/24/2015 10:00:00 AM |
|
| ATA State of the Salmon Testimony, 032415.pdf |
HFSH 3/24/2015 10:00:00 AM |