Legislature(2005 - 2006)CAPITOL 124
02/08/2006 08:30 AM House FISHERIES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Alaska Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission | |
| Board of Fisheries | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON FISHERIES
February 8, 2006
8:34 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Gabrielle LeDoux, Co-Chair
Representative Bill Thomas, Co-Chair
Representative John Harris
Representative Jim Elkins
Representative Peggy Wilson
Representative Mary Kapsner
Representative Woodie Salmon
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CONFIRMATION HEARING(S)
Alaska Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission
Bruce C. Twomley - Juneau
- CONFIRMATION(S) ADVANCED
Board of Fisheries
Jeremiah D. Campbell - Seward
- CONFIRMATION(S) ADVANCED
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
BRUCE TWOMLEY, Appointee
to the Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission (CFEC)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: As appointee to the CFEC offered a brief
biography, summation of his new duties, and answered questions.
JEREMIAH D. CAMPBELL, Appointee
to the Board of Fisheries
Seward, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: As appointee to the Board of Fisheries
offered a brief biography, summation of his new duties, and
answered questions.
MEL MORRIS, Vice Chairman
Board of Fisheries
Kodiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of Mr. Campbell's
appointment to the Board of Fisheries.
RENEE COOK, Member
Sitka Charter Boat Operators Association;
Board Member, Alaska Conservation Alliance
Sitka, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of Mr. Campbell's
appointment to the Board of Fisheries.
BURNIS SIMS, Member
Alaska Conservation Alliance
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of Mr. Campbell's
appointment to the Board of Fisheries.
DEBORAH SIMMS
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of Mr. Campbell's
appointment to the Board of Fisheries.
PETER KARWOWSKI
Magic Waters Charter
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified that Mr. Campbell is able to see
both sides of an issue.
BRUCE ELKINS
Sea Flight Charters
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified that Mr. Campbell will do a good
job as a member of the Board of Fisheries.
KEITH KALKE
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of Mr. Campbell's
appointment to the Board of Fisheries.
BEAVER NELSON
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of Mr. Campbell's
appointment to the Board of Fisheries.
JAMIE ROSS
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of Mr. Campbell's
appointment to the Board of Fisheries.
DONNA BONDIOLINI
(No address provided)
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of Mr. Campbell's
appointment to the Board of Fisheries.
RICKY GEASE, Executive Director
Kenai River Sport Fishing Association
Soldotna, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of Mr. Campbell's
appointment to the Board of Fisheries.
RON RAINEY, Chairman
Kenai River Sport Fishing Association
Soldotna, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of Mr. Campbell's
appointment to the Board of Fisheries.
VIRGIL UMPHENOUR, Chairman
Fisheries Subcommittee
Fish and Game Advisory Committee
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of Mr. Campbell's
appointment to the Board of Fisheries.
DICK BISHOP
Alaska Outdoor Council
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified that the AOC strongly supports
Mr. Campbell's appointment to the Board of Fisheries.
BOB THORSTENSON, President
United Fishermen of Alaska;
Lobbyist for the Sitka Herring Group, Southeast Alaska Seiners
Association, Armstrong-Keta Inc., and Wrangell Seafood Inc.
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to the confirmation
of Mr. Campbell.
SCOTT MCALLISTER, President
Herring Marketing Association
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comments regarding the Sitka Sound
sac roe fishery.
ACTION NARRATIVE
CO-CHAIR GABRIELLE LEDOUX called the House Special Committee on
Fisheries meeting to order at 8:34:01 AM. Representatives
LeDoux, Thomas, Kapsner, Salmon, Elkins, and Harris were present
at the call to order. Representative Wilson arrived as the
meeting was in progress.
^CONFIRMATION HEARING(S)
^Alaska Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission
8:34:18 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX announced that the first order of business would
be a confirmation hearing for Bruce C. Twomley to the Commercial
Fisheries Entry Commission (CFEC).
8:34:52 AM
BRUCE C. TWOMLEY, Appointee to the Commercial Fisheries Entry
Commission (CFEC), informed the committee that he was first
appointed to the Limited Entry Commission in 1982 and has been
reappointed in successive administrations. He further informed
the committee that prior to serving on CFEC, he was an attorney
for Alaska Legal Service. He suggested that he has experience
being on the receiving end of agency decisions and knows ways in
which to keep an agency out of trouble. Mr. Twomley said that
although serving on CFEC is demanding work, it's especially
strong with the current membership. Therefore, Mr. Twomley
requested the committee's permission to continue sitting on the
CFEC in order to conclude some of the work he began.
8:36:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS inquired as to what CFEC does.
MR. TWOMLEY explained that the notion is that in order to manage
the fisheries in the state one must gain control of the
variables. One of the large variables is the number of
participants and the pressure they exert on the fisheries. For
quite some time, Alaska failed in its efforts to limit entry in
its salmon fisheries, which lead to the establishment of the
current limited entry commission. He specified that CFEC will
limit entry if it will serve conservation and prevent economic
distress among fishermen. The statute requires that CFEC rank
each applicant and award permits based on who has demonstrated
the most dependence on the fishery.
8:38:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS asked if CFEC supports the state buying
back limited entry permits under certain conditions.
MR. TWOMLEY answered that he is supportive of reducing the
fleets, particularly in the salmon fishery, in situations in
which it can improve the situation. He expressed the need to
perform a fishery-by-fishery analysis in order to determine
whether it's a good investment in a particular area.
8:38:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS recalled mention that in some cases there
are more permit holders than [permit holders who] actually fish
and asked if that's a problem for the state or the fishery in
the future.
MR. TWOMLEY opined that it's a major issue. Such a situation
may improve the economics for those who are active in a fishery.
However, it's a large factor when considering any type of fleet
reduction remedies because the question becomes whether it would
be a good investment [for the state] to purchase permits that
aren't being fished.
8:39:55 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS recollected discussion of taking back
permits because, in some cases, the state gave permits at no
cost.
MR. TWOMLEY related that the nature of limited entry permits is
that they are privileges. Statute is explicit that the state
has the power to take back or modify those permits without
compensation. However, that principle is being challenged in
court in a case in the Kenai fishery. In that case, the claim
is that the limited entry permits are more than privileges and
they represent a property right that should be compensated if
taken. In further response to Representative Harris, Mr.
Twomley related his belief that limited entry permits are
clearly a privilege under the law. The aforementioned has been
very important in dealing with other entities, such as the
Internal Revenue Service (IRS), that would like to seize and
force the sale of limited entry permits.
8:41:36 AM
CO-CHAIR THOMAS directed attention to the shrimp fishery, which
CFEC is attempting to limit now. He related his understanding
that there will be a lottery to give out the last permits.
MR. TWOMLEY explained that statute instructs the CFEC to award
the permits to those who need it the most and move down the
point level. The shrimp fishery is reaching a point level at
which there are more people than permits. In that instance, the
statute specifies that there be a lottery confined to those at a
specific point level.
8:42:53 AM
CO-CHAIR THOMAS surmised then that the dependency basis will be
dropped when a lottery is implemented.
MR. TWOMLEY pointed out that this process was set by the
legislature and thus is modifiable. "It is the case that all
the people in that category have measured up in terms of
dependence under the system. So, they all at least look the
same when it comes to the standard measures for dependence," he
explained. He acknowledged that there may be other things to
consider.
8:44:25 AM
MR. TWOMLEY, in response to Co-Chair Thomas, explained that
dependence is measured by the point system that measures all
applicants. The dependence measure doesn't include
consideration of who is currently fishing and who isn't.
8:44:58 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX inquired as to how the log of the CFEC is doing.
MR. TWOMLEY opined that the CFEC has made progress in the last
decades. He reminded the committee that there was a difficult
confluence of events in the 1980s during which the supreme court
held up many cases while waiting for the decision in Ostrosky
because some speculated that it would eliminate [the limited
entry system] entirely. However, when Ostrosky upheld the
decision, all the supreme court decisions came in a flood and
many reversed past CFEC decisions. Furthermore, it was
determined that reversal of a CFEC decision can be applied
retroactively and could basically undo a fishery. The
aforementioned was coupled with several fisheries under pressure
that had to be limited in the late 1980s and [the CFEC] decided
to settle the Wassillie case, which provided an entire class of
plaintiffs an opportunity to apply for the original salmon
fisheries. Therefore, a flood of new applications came forward
and under the settlement the Wassillie applicants couldn't fish
until and unless a permanent permit was received from the CFEC.
This all led to the CFEC facing some 900 cases in the 1990s and
since that time at least 26 additional fisheries have been
limited. To date, the total number of cases before the hearing
officers and CFEC is 230.
8:48:13 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX asked if there is any effort to look back and
determine whether there are cases that have fallen through the
cracks.
MR. TWOMLEY replied yes. He explained that the first priority
is for cases in which the immediate right to fish is at stake
and then the oldest cases are taken next unless there is a
particular fishery that's under pressure and requiring
attention. The Wassillie case was a priority and those cases
were completed in the fall of 2000. In the 1990s there were
also fisheries that were under pressure and requiring attention.
In 1997 when the bottom fell out from under the salmon
fisheries, everything changed.
8:49:30 AM
MR. TWOMLEY, in further response to Co-Chair LeDoux, highlighted
that sometimes it appears that a fishery can wait when, for
example, it is healthy and wealthy. He emphasized the need to
prioritize.
8:50:53 AM
CO-CHAIR THOMAS inquired as to whether the sport charter fleet
could petition the CFEC to be limited under state law.
MR. TWOMLEY related his understanding that it would take
legislation to do so because he didn't believe that the CFEC has
such authority.
8:51:47 AM
The committee took a brief at-ease.
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX, upon determining that no one else wished to
testify, closed public testimony.
8:53:07 AM
CO-CHAIR THOMAS moved that the committee forward Bruce Twomley's
name to the full body for consideration in joint session. There
being no objection, Mr. Twomley's name was advanced.
^Board of Fisheries
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX announced that the next order of business would
be a confirmation hearing for Jeremiah D. Campbell to the Board
of Fisheries.
8:53:43 AM
JEREMIAH D. CAMPBELL, Appointee to the Board of Fisheries,
introduced himself.
8:54:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS inquired as to Mr. Campbell's background
noting that he is in receipt of letters from the United
Fishermen of Alaska (UFA) who aren't very supportive of Mr.
Campbell's nomination.
8:54:39 AM
MR. CAMPBELL informed the committee that he was born and raised
in Seward and has commercial fished in various types of
fisheries. He noted that his family started a custom seafood
processing shop and as of three years ago started a sport
fishing charter business. That business also does sightseeing
and with the purchase of a 100-foot commercial fishing tender
the [charter business] will also do salmon and herring
tendering. In further response to Representative Harris, Mr.
Campbell confirmed that he is actively participating in both the
sport and commercial fishing industries.
8:56:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS asked if Mr. Campbell felt that he has the
experience and knowledge to address the allocation issues and
other complicated state issues of the various fisheries.
MR. CAMPBELL replied yes, and related that by growing up in a
small fishing community he has been allowed to experience the
various commercial fisheries, sport fishing, tendering, and
seafood [processing]. The aforementioned experience, he said,
affords him the ability and qualities to reach decisions that
are consistent with good fishery management. Furthermore, Mr.
Campbell said that he has good people skills and has always made
himself available to those on all sides of an issue. Moreover,
he related that he believes in the board process and trying to
keep an open mind when trying to reach tough decisions that
impact the livelihood of many.
8:58:35 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS asked if Mr. Campbell has sat in on a
board meeting.
MR. CAMPBELL replied yes, adding that he just completed sitting
in on his third or fourth meeting. In fact, he noted, he
chaired his first committee, the Southeast King Salmon
Management Plans for Districts 8 and 11. The aforementioned
committee had to address many tough issues. He noted that he
received many compliments with regard to how he handled himself
and thus the opposition from the UFA was a setback, which he
characterized as unfair and unwarranted. Mr. Campbell explained
that the opposition from the UFA was in response to his vote in
opposition to the equal split herring fishery.
9:00:16 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS asked if Mr. Campbell's testimony before
the House Resources Standing Committee referred to investment
fisheries.
MR. CAMPBELL replied yes. He recalled that his reference to
investment fisheries was in the context of rationalization. He
explained that he didn't want the state's fisheries to turn into
investment fisheries such as has been the case with some of the
federal fisheries in which the actual permit holder doesn't
actively participate in the fishery and in essence leases
his/her permit.
9:01:27 AM
MR. CAMPBELL, in further response to Representative Harris,
clarified that he doesn't support the lack of active
participation [by the permit holder]. Mr. Campbell opined that
he didn't want the little guys to be squeezed out by those who
are buying up as many permits and individual fishery quotas
(IFQs) as possible in order to simply have an investment.
9:02:24 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS recalled Mr. Campbell's mention of
chairing a committee on the board and asked if it dealt with
equal split harvest proposal.
MR. CAMPBELL replied no. In further response to Representative
Harris, Mr. Campbell said that he did make comments on the split
harvest relating his belief that the fishery was a healthy,
competitive fishery that was doing well under the current
management plan given the current conservation statistics. The
issue for him, he related, was in relation to the public
ownership and the means of production. He opined that there
were just too many unknowns in regard to the loss of jobs and
small businesses that depend upon the sac roe fishery for part
of their income. At the time, he said he didn't believe it was
warranted to choose that route. However, he acknowledged that
in the future such an option may be warranted. Furthermore, it
didn't seem fair to penalize those who bought into limited
entry.
9:05:59 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS inquired as to the difference between a
rationalized and a restructured fishery.
MR. CAMPBELL related his belief that Chignik probably qualifies
as a restructured fishery and thus it's being tweaked to make it
a more viable fishery. A restructured fishery changes the
policies in order to allow progressive opportunities such that a
long-term sustainable fishery is created while the limited entry
aspect of that fishery is maintained. The board has provided
options such that fishermen can be competitive or enter the
cooperative. On the other hand, a rationalized fishery is when,
due to conservation or economic concerns, the state or the
federal government enters the scene and divides up the shares.
In such a situation there are not many choices, there is no
competitiveness, and many people don't qualify, he opined.
9:10:12 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS inquired as to what Mr. Campbell views as
the most important issues facing the Board of Fisheries in the
next couple of years. He also inquired as to how Mr. Campbell
believes allocation amounts should be determined.
MR. CAMPBELL opined that probably some of the most important
issues will be the following: restructuring of the salmon
industry around the state; the rationalization of the Gulf of
Alaska; and the charter IFQ. With regard to the allocative
decisions, those are based on various things, including history,
length of participation in a fishery, et cetera. As a board
member, Mr. Campbell said that during deliberations and
committee work regarding allocation amounts much information can
be extracted and one can decide what is the best for the overall
health of a fishery. He highlighted the need to be cautious
when allocation amounts are moved from one sector to another.
9:14:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON recalled Mr. Campbell's support of the
reduction of the Copper River King salmon fishery, which many
people believed was too drastic of a reduction.
MR. CAMPBELL characterized the aforementioned decision as
difficult. He explained that the purpose of the reduction of
the Copper River King salmon fishery was to restrict access
inside the barrier islands of the Copper River Delta to
commercial fisheries. He recalled that under the original
proposal no more than one 12-hour opening for the first three
weeks of the Copper River fishing season was allowed. The
majority of that meeting dealt with the lack of King salmon in
the upper river areas. Mr. Campbell pointed out that ultimately
the openings in the Copper River area were restricted in the
first two weeks. He explained that the first amendment
restricted the Copper River fishery to a 12-hour opening in the
first two weeks of the fishery. The second amendment, which Mr.
Campbell offered, changed the language "12-hour opening" to "one
commercial fishing period". Mr. Campbell said he made it clear
that if the run was large, the period could be extended by
emergency order. He opined that the board was trying to balance
the needs of all the users in the Upper Copper River.
9:18:35 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked if Mr. Campbell, a nonqualifying
halibut chart owner, can remain neutral through the discussions
regarding IFQs.
MR. CAMPBELL replied yes and emphasized that he doesn't bring
any agenda to the board. He opined that the board needs to do
what is right for the resource and the fleet. He noted that he
does oppose IFQs as currently written. Although the IFQ is a
great tool for the commercial fishing industry, he opined, it
isn't appropriate for the sport fishing charter sector.
However, he said that he does support limitations on the charter
fleet because something needs to be done to check the growth of
the charter fleet, otherwise the guideline harvest levels will
be exceeded. He discussed the various options that need to be
reviewed. The charter fleet is stuck because it's not an actual
user of the resource as it is a service industry that provides
access. Therefore, the question becomes how access can be
limited for the hundreds of thousands of people who use the
resource. In further response to Representative Wilson, Mr.
Campbell said that his sport fishing and sightseeing businesses
wouldn't qualify for any [IFQs] because they weren't in
existence during the qualifying years.
9:23:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON returned to the equal split proposal for
the herring sac roe fishery and pointed out that over 80 percent
of the permit holders were agreeable and 90 percent of the
processors were agreeable. She requested explanation of the
decision.
MR. CAMPBELL opined that the Board of Fisheries took all sides
into account on that decision. He reiterated the huge unknowns
in changing the management scheme and emphasized that he didn't
believe the time was right for the equal split proposal.
9:24:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER referred to Bob Tkacz's journal "Laws for
the Sea" in which Mr. Campbell was quoted, in reference to the
sac roe herring issue, as saying that perhaps UFA was using this
as a smoke screen. If that's the case, Representative Kapsner
inquired as to the reason Mr. Campbell believes UFA opposes his
nomination to the Board of Fisheries.
MR. CAMPBELL opined that it appears the UFA president who was
hired for the Sitka Herring Group was upset when this vote came
down. Within 12 hours of the vote, hundreds of e-mails were
submitted from the president of UFA requesting that UFA members
withdraw support for his nomination. He opined, "My vote is my
vote." Mr. Campbell then pointed out that three other people
voted the same as he did. The issue is that the equal split
didn't occur. However, he highlighted that this is only one
issue and that he has received positive feedback from various
sectors of the fishing industry. Mr. Campbell specified that he
views each issue on its own merits.
9:27:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SALMON inquired as to Mr. Campbell's views on
subsistence fishing and where it falls in terms of priority with
sport and commercial fishing. He further inquired as to which
fishery takes priority when the runs are low.
MR. CAMPBELL opined that subsistence is a vital part of Alaska's
heritage and economies in rural areas. However, the law
specifies that is no longer a rural/urban preference and all
Alaskans have to be considered equal with regard to subsistence
use. When runs are low subsistence should have the first
priority, which is the way the law is set up. If runs are too
low to support subsistence, then the matter moves to Tier II and
where the individual lives and the importance of subsistence
fishing to that individual's survival comes into plan when
determining priority.
REPRESENTATIVE ELKINS asked if Mr. Campbell's opinion of the
president of UFA is that he is a paid lobbyist. He then asked
if the president of UFA is listed as a paid lobbyist by the
Alaska Public Offices Commission (APOC).
9:30:44 AM
MR. CAMPBELL said that he was told that the president of the UFA
was a lobbyist by members at the Southeast meeting. He said
that he could neither confirm or deny that. He mentioned that
the president of UFA was hard core on his views.
9:32:13 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ELKINS recommended that Mr. Campbell find out if
the individual in question is a paid lobbyist before making a
statement to that effect.
MR. CAMPBELL said that if he's speaking out of turn he would
apologize.
9:32:56 AM
CO-CHAIR THOMAS asked if Mr. Campbell believes that sport fish
operators should pay a raw fish tax.
MR. CAMPBELL answered that he would probably say no, adding that
he didn't know how it would be paid.
CO-CHAIR THOMAS explained that the raw fish tax is similar to
what loggers pay to harvest timber. Co-Chair Thomas related his
belief that whomever harvests the fish should pay the state for
doing so. He then asked if Mr. Campbell believes that sport
charters should pay an enhancement tax to hatcheries that
produce fish for those who fish.
MR. CAMPBELL opined that much of the sport fishing interests
have paid for certain amounts of releases and operational costs
at some of the hatcheries in Southeast. Mr. Campbell emphasized
that if the sport fishing fleet wants to have access to those
hatchery fish, then the fleet should pay its share.
9:35:39 AM
CO-CHAIR THOMAS noted that he represents Cordova and opined that
with the board has driven another nail in the coffin of a
struggling community. He said he understood the need for fish
"Up River," but taking fish out of one spawning area
consistently for a few years results in the fish not returning.
He related his belief that the management techniques should have
been decided by the managers, who are difficult to recruit,
particularly when the Board of Fisheries usurps his/her power.
He then turned attention to the Sitka co-op that is based on
safety and noted that Sitka has done that before. He then
recalled Mr. Campbell's comments about handing down IFQs to
[family members] to which he opined that if one works hard
he/she deserve to reap the rewards. He then questioned why Mr.
Campbell entered the commercial tender business when everyone
else is leaving it. He questioned whether Mr. Campbell knew
something he didn't or is co-oped/partnered with someone who got
Mr. Campbell a contract. If the aforementioned is the case, Co-
Chair Thomas opined that Mr. Campbell would have a conflict of
interest. Co-Chair Thomas related that he would like Mr.
Campbell to use his influence to obtain a 32-inch limit for
halibut for sport fish, sport charters, and subsistence
fisheries. Co-Chair Thomas concluded by saying that he's not
totally pleased with Mr. Campbell's nomination, and inquired as
to why he decided to serve. However, he commended him for
stepping forward.
9:40:41 AM
MR. CAMPBELL said that he has had a desire to be in public
service and fisheries seemed to be appropriate since he has been
involved in it for most of his life. Mr. Campbell opined that
he can help make a difference in the future of Alaska's
fisheries by making good decisions within the board process. He
further opined that board members must have an open mind and a
willingness to learn. He mentioned that some individuals in the
sport fishing industry encouraged him to look into the Board of
Fisheries.
9:43:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON recalled that Mr. Campbell is connected
with sport and commercial fishing. She highlighted that
currently if one is involved with commercial fishing, that
individual is conflicted out, but that's not the case if one is
involved with sport fishing. She asked if Mr. Campbell believes
that's appropriate.
MR. CAMPBELL related his understanding that any issue before the
board that provides a direct financial interest for the member
or his/her family, regardless of whether it was sport or
commercial fishing, could lead to the member having a conflict
of interest [and being unable to participate on that issue]. He
said he would review whether the conflict of interest provision
applies to sport fishing interests.
9:45:37 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX then turned to public testimony.
9:45:52 AM
MEL MORRIS, Vice Chairman, Board of Fisheries, informed the
committee that he has been on the board for three years. After
working with Mr. Campbell over the last four months, Mr. Morris
said he has been extremely impressed with Mr. Campbell's ability
to work hard and chair the Southeast Committee. Furthermore,
Mr. Campbell is articulate regarding his views and accepts the
outcome, Mr. Morris related. He concluded by opining that Mr.
Campbell will make an excellent member of the Board of
Fisheries.
9:47:25 AM
RENEE COOK, Member, Sitka Charter Boat Operators Association;
Board Member, Alaska Conservation Alliance, related her support
of Mr. Campbell, which she opined is open minded enough to make
the proper decisions. She said that thus far Mr. Campbell has
done a great job.
9:47:59 AM
BURNIS SIMS, Member, Alaska Conservation Alliance, informed the
committee that he runs a charter boat out of Homer. He related
his belief that Mr. Campbell would make a good member of the
Board of Fisheries.
9:48:28 AM
DEBORAH SIMMS informed the committee that she is also a charter
boat owner. She opined that Mr. Campbell will be a good
representative on the Board of Fisheries because he has worked
hard and has worked on both sides. She noted that Mr. Campbell
has been a vice president of the Seward Charter Boat Association
and Seward Fish & Game Advisory Committee. She related her
support for Mr. Campbell.
9:49:07 AM
PETER KARWOWSKI, Magic Waters Charter, opined that Mr. Campbell
will be open minded and able to see both sides of an issue.
9:49:37 AM
BRUCE ELKINS, Sea Flight Charters, said that he believes Mr.
Campbell will do a good job.
9:49:48 AM
KEITH KALKE stated support for Mr. Campbell and applauded his
participation.
9:50:01 AM
BEAVER NELSON informed the committee that he has commercial
fished since 1969. He related that he is an avid sport
fisherman and hunter and is a member of the UFA. He further
related that he fished the Sitka sac roe herring and personally
attended the Board of Fisheries deliberations in Valdez and
Ketchikan during which the board addressed very contentious
allocative issues. During both meetings, Mr. Campbell acted in
a responsible and thoughtful manner to all issues presented. He
said that he saw no evidence to support that Mr. Campbell is a
single-issue board member. Furthermore, members of the public
who worked with Mr. Campbell at the committee level provided
comments in regard to how well Mr. Campbell handled himself.
Mr. Nelson said that he particularly values that Mr. Campbell
has hands-on experience in a variety of Alaska outdoor endeavors
because these experiences and his ability to ask pertinent
questions have enabled Mr. Campbell to quickly come up to speed
on complicated issues. In conclusion, Mr. Nelson opined that
Mr. Campbell has done a good job on the Board of Fisheries and
will do so in the future.
9:50:53 AM
JAMIE ROSS informed the committee that he has been a commercial
fisherman for 25 years and has been involved in some of the most
controversial fisheries in Alaska, including fishing in False
Pass and Chignik and participating in the Sitka sac roe fishery.
In fact, he estimated that he has been before two to three Board
of Fisheries meetings a year for the past 20 years. He related
his belief that a board member should be judged just like any
other man and that is based on whether he has honesty,
integrity, and is willing to perform hard work. Mr. Campbell
exhibits all of those qualities, he opined. He further opined
that Mr. Campbell will be one of the best Board of Fisheries
members of the board.
9:52:03 AM
DONNA BONDIOLINI stated her support the appointment of Mr.
Campbell to the Board of Fisheries. She suggested that Mr.
Campbell's diversified background will be an asset for the Board
of Fisheries. Furthermore, she didn't believe that Mr. Campbell
has an agenda, which is how it should be for the Board of
Fisheries members.
9:52:45 AM
RICKY GEASE, Executive Director, Kenai River Sport Fishing
Association, related the association's support of Mr. Campbell's
appointment to the Board of Fisheries. After watching him
during two Board of Fisheries meetings, Mr. Gease said that Mr.
Campbell works hard to seek solutions that will work for all
user groups. Furthermore, Mr. Gease opined that Mr. Campbell is
articulate, meticulous in planning and decision making, and is a
great addition to the Board of Fisheries. Therefore, Mr. Gease
encouraged the committee to confirm Mr. Campbell.
9:53:43 AM
RON RAINEY, Chairman, Kenai River Sport Fishing Association,
reiterated the association's support of Mr. Campbell's
appointment. He noted that he was impressed with Mr. Campbell's
commercial and sport fishing background. He indicated that he
was also impressed with the way in which Mr. Campbell seeks in-
depth information on the issues. Furthermore, Mr. Campbell
seems to be fair and willing to make tough decisions.
Therefore, Mr. Rainey encouraged the committee to confirm Mr.
Campbell, which he characterized as the right thing to do for
the state.
9:54:27 AM
VIRGIL UMPHENOUR, Chairman, Fisheries Subcommittee, Fairbanks
Fish and Game Advisory Committee, said he is in favor of the
confirmation of Mr. Campbell. He recalled that during the
Valdez Board of Fisheries meeting, he ascertained that Mr.
Campbell reads the various staff reports, listens to all the
user groups, and does his homework. Mr. Umphenhour concluded by
strongly urging the committee to confirm Mr. Campbell.
9:56:13 AM
DICK BISHOP, Alaska Outdoor Council (AOC), reminded the
committee that the AOC is the state's largest outdoor user
group, summing 12,000 strong. The AOC, he related, strongly
supports Mr. Campbell's appointment to the Board of Fisheries as
he has an impressive resume, great experience, and performed a
good job during his short tenure with the board. Mr. Bishop
opined that Mr. Campbell has handled the issues fairly and with
an open mind. He highlighted Mr. Campbell's earlier comment
that he attempts to do what is right for the resource, which Mr.
Bishop said is of most importance.
9:57:43 AM
BOB THORSTENSON, President, United Fishermen of Alaska; Lobbyist
for the Sitka Herring Group, Southeast Alaska Seiners
Association, Armstrong-Keta Inc., and Wrangell Seafood Inc.,
began by saying that he could think of no higher calling than to
be paid to work for commercial fishermen. Mr. Thorstenson
pointed out that although his vote may have been influenced by
the recent Board of Fisheries meeting, 16 other organizations
within UFA voted to oppose the confirmation of Mr. Campbell. He
noted that none of those 16 groups had anything to do with the
Sitka sac roe, but rather have an interest in what happens in
the halibut fishery, the fishery in Prince William Sound, and
the issues in Cook Inlet. Therefore, he related that the UFA
vigorously opposes the confirmation of Mr. Campbell, who the
organization believes is inexperienced. Furthermore, the three
meetings during the five months of his service indicate that Mr.
Campbell will be a poor board member for both commercial and
sport fishermen.
9:59:17 AM
SCOTT MCALLISTER, President, Herring Marketing Association,
explained that the Herring Marketing Association represents the
marketing interests of the Sitka Sound sac roe group in which he
is a fishermen. He informed the committee that he has never
qualified for one pound of IFQ or been awarded any permit
through the permit process but rather has been vested as a
businessman in commercial fisheries. He explained that the
Ketchikan meeting regarding the Sitka Sound sac roe fishery was
a plea from fellow businessmen in that industry to change the
paradigm of the Sitka sac roe fishery to a more cooperative
effort for biological concerns, subsistence, and to secure a
foothold in the Japanese market for roe.
10:00:57 AM
CO-CHAIR LEDOUX announced that Mr. Campbell's name would be
forwarded to the full body for consideration.
10:01:07 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Special Committee on Fisheries meeting was adjourned at 10:01:15
AM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|