Legislature(2007 - 2008)CAPITOL 124
01/22/2007 08:00 AM House FISHERIES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Overview: Alaska Hatchery Issues and Operations | |
| Overview: Northern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association (nsraa) | |
| Overview: Douglas Island Pink and Chum (dipac) | |
| Overview: Cook Inlet Aquaculture Association (ciaa) | |
| Overview: Prince William Sound Aquaculture Corporation (pwsac) | |
| Overview: Southern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association (ssraa) | |
| 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
January 22, 2007
8:14 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Paul Seaton, Chair
Representative Kyle Johansen
Representative Gabrielle LeDoux
Representative Peggy Wilson
Representative Bryce Edgmon
Representative Lindsey Holmes
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative John Harris
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
OVERVIEW(S):
ALASKA HATCHERY ISSUES AND OPERATIONS
- HEARD
NORTHERN SOUTHEAST REGIONAL AQUACULTURE ASSOCIATION (NSRAA)
- HEARD
DOUGLAS ISLAND PINK AND CHUM (DIPAC)
- HEARD
COOK INLET AQUACULTURE ASSOCIATION (CIAA)
- HEARD
PRINCE WILLIAM SOUND AQUACULTURE CORPORATION (PWSAC)
- HEARD
SOUTHERN SOUTHEAST REGIONAL AQUACULTURE ASSOCIATION (NSRAA)
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to report
WITNESS REGISTER
ERIC PRESTEGARD, Executive Director
Douglas Island Pink and Chum (DIPAC)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided an introduction to the regional
enhancement associations and the private non-profit (PNP)
hatcheries throughout Alaska, presented an overview of the DIPAC
hatcheries, and responded to questions.
PETE ESQUIRO, General Manager
Northern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association (NSRAA)
Sitka, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented an overview of NSRAA hatcheries,
and responded to questions.
GARY FANDREI, Executive Director
Cook Inlet Aquaculture Association (CIAA)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented an overview of CIAA hatcheries,
and responded to questions.
DAVID REGGIANI, General Manager
Prince William Sound Aquaculture Corporation (PWSAC)
Cordova, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented an overview of PWSAC hatcheries,
and responded to questions.
JOHN BURKE, General Manager
Southern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association (SSRAA)
Ketchikan, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented an overview of SSRAA hatcheries,
and responded to questions.
ACTION NARRATIVE
CHAIR PAUL SEATON called the House Special Committee on
Fisheries meeting to order at 8:14:12 AM. Representatives
Wilson, LeDoux, Holmes, and Edgmon were present at the call to
order. Representative Johansen arrived as the meeting was in
progress.
^OVERVIEW: ALASKA HATCHERY ISSUES AND OPERATIONS
8:14:22 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced that the first order of business would be
to hear an overview of the regional aquaculture associations and
non-profit hatcheries located throughout the Gulf of Alaska.
8:14:46 AM
ERIC PRESTEGARD, Executive Director, Douglas Island Pink and
Chum (DIPAC) provided an introduction to the private non-profit
(PNP) hatcheries located throughout the state. He named the
various regions and the association representatives from each
region who would be addressing the committee.
8:17:07 AM
MR. PRESTEGARD explained how the state was divided into regions
for the purpose of fishery enhancement, and projected a slide to
illustrate the regional boundaries. He followed with a series
of graphs beginning with Start of the Hatchery Program in Alaska
- Commercial Salmon Harvest, which illustrated the commercial
fisheries catch from 1884-2004, and the effect of hatchery
enhancement on the catch. A downturn of wild stocks occurred,
in the late 1960's, creating the catalyst for stock enhancement
that began in 1971. The graph indicated the contrast of the
enhanced vs. wild production, since that time.
MR. PRESTEGARD presented the next graph illustrating hatchery
development, and indicating the peak of that development in the
1980's. He said that some state built facilities are now
operated by the private non-profit sector or the aquaculture
associations.
8:18:18 AM
MR. PRESTEGARD provided the next graph in the series entitled
Alaska Hatchery Production, to indicate egg takes and fish
releases from 1975 to current. He pointed out that these
numbers have been consistent and stable since 1990 at
approximately 1.5 (million) fish released. A graph, entitled
Total Hatchery Returns illustrated the stabilization of the fish
returns at the 50,000 fish level, with slight variation. The
subsequent slide, Harvest of Alaskan Wild and Enhanced Salmon,
provided a breakout indicating the enhanced vs. wild stocks to
be approximately 20-25 percent of the total. The slide
Contributions to the Commercial Common Property Harvest -
Composition of Commercial Salmon Harvest, represented an
analysis of the same data to indicate the hatcheries cost
recovery on the reported catch returns. He reminded the
committee that all cost recovery funds are used to pay for the
enhancement programs. He introduced the next slide, Value of
Alaska's Hatcheries, again utilizing the same data to highlight
the economic value that the hatcheries have contributed to the
common property commercial harvest, $874 million, contrasted
with the cost recovery harvest, $292 million, over the span of
years 1984-2005. He underscored that this $292 million pays for
the loans and other costs related to building the enhancement
programs.
8:20:06 AM
MR. PRESTEGARD responding to a question from Representative
Wilson, stated that, as the original loans are paid off, the
amount of cost recovery fish taken by the hatcheries is
decreased, and additional fish are allowed to be taken in the
common property catch. He also clarified that the cost recovery
harvest benefits the hatchery, and the common property harvest
benefits all other user groups. He pointed out that a hatchery
return does not occur for a number of years following release,
depending on the species. During these years, on-going
operational costs are incurred by the hatchery; making cost
recovery an important aspect of the fish return harvest.
MR. PRESTEGARD responding to a follow-up question, he confirmed
that user tax fees exist, and explained that the individual
regions establish this tax as a percentage of the catch. In the
Southeast region a 3 percent tax exists on the common property
catch, to benefit enhancement activities of the Northern and
Southern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Associations (NSRAA and
SSRAA).
8:22:53 AM
CHAIR SEATON underscored that the common property fishery refers
to the returned fish which are in excess of what is needed for
hatchery cost recovery.
MR. PRESTEGARD directed the committee's attention to the slide
entitled Contributions to the Commercial Common Property Harvest
- Composition of Commercial Salmon Harvest, and pointed out the
cost recovery average indication of 33 percent. The remaining
67 percent of the returning fish caught were common property.
For clarity, he stated that this figure represents a count of
fish caught, not the commercial value of the fish.
8:23:50 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN inquired what the level of debt for the
existing enhancement organizations would approximate.
MR. PRESTEGARD estimated that $124 million in loans have been
provided over the last 25 years and suggested that the Division
of Investments could best approximate the current outstanding
debt.
8:24:37AM
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES asked if the common property tax varies
between regions.
MR. PRESTEGARD responded that in the Southeast it is 3 percent,
but in Prince William Sound and Cook Inlet it is 2 percent.
CHAIR SEATON interjected that these assessment rates were
established by vote in each region, in conjunction with the
establishment of the aquaculture associations. This fund and
the cost recovery catch support the enhancement facilities.
^OVERVIEW: NORTHERN SOUTHEAST REGIONAL AQUACULTURE ASSOCIATION
(NSRAA)
8:25:04 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced that the next order of business would be
an overview of the Northern Southeast Regional Aquaculture
Association (NSRAA).
8:25:18 AM
PETE ESQUIRO, General Manager, Northern Southeast Regional
Aquaculture Association (NSRAA), described the area which his
district encompasses: the inside and outside waters of District
16 ranging from the south end of Baranof Island to Skagway. He
proclaimed that he is a pioneer in the private sector of
fisheries enhancement in Alaska, having entered his 25th year of
service, and being an elder to others in the field.
8:26:49 AM
MR. ESQUIRO stated that NSRAA operates two primary hatcheries:
one at Hidden Falls, and one at Medvejie Creek. Hidden Falls
began as a state hatchery, operated by the Fisheries
Rehabilitation and Enhancement Division (FRED), Alaska
Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G). When FRED was being scaled
back, NSRAA obtained a twenty year contract to operate this
facility. At the time of the change over from state to private
hatchery, the capacity for the hatchery was 20 million fed chum
fry, and 20 million unfed chum fry. Today, he reported, Hidden
Falls is producing over 100 million fry. He described this as
being a successful hatchery producing cohos, kings, and chum.
The Sitka, Medvejie Creek hatchery was built in 1984 by NSRAA,
and is half the size of the Hidden Falls facility. Medvejie
hatchery provides fish for the Deep Inlet fishery. This fishery
is a productive rotational fishery, involving seiners,
gillnetters, and trollers. Further, he stated that this
hatchery is the largest king salmon hatchery project operated by
NSRAA, collecting between 3-4 million king salmon eggs for
rearing and release. Marine survival varies but this has been a
consistent fishery over the years. Experimental programs are
conducted out of NSRAA hatcheries in attempts to be more
efficient with feed, and other steps which may prove helpful to
the industry as a whole.
8:30:14 AM
MR. ESQUIRO described the Deer Lake, coho salmon hatchery,
operated on Southeast Baranof Island. He explained that eggs
are collected from natural run coho, at the base of a 300 foot
waterfall out flowing from the lake. The waterfall prohibits
fish from entering Deer Lake, making it essentially a fishless
lake, although the limnology of the lake easily supports the
rearing of coho fry to smolt age. The collected eggs are
spawned at Medveje Creek hatchery, then transported back to Deer
Lake via plan, and are reared in the lake under natural
conditions, with no food enhancements. Through a bypass system
they are recollected and "pipelined" back to sea level,
saltwater net pens where they imprint for 24 hours prior to
release into the wild. This has proven to be a workable
operation, involving 15 years of research and support in
cooperation with FRED. Despite its success and benefits to the
fishery, without the support of FRED, this operation has had to
be scaled back.
8:32:21 AM
MR. ESQUIRO stated that NSRAA maintains a field office in
Haines, manned by a biologist, temporary, and seasonal staff.
Primarily, he said, incubation boxes are the focus of the
operation. Chum salmon eggs are collected and incubated in the
boxes, keeping them safe from adverse winter conditions. The
eggs are then hatched and released in the spring. This provides
protection for 5-6 million eggs in the Haines area. Spawning
channels are also utilized in the Haines area. These projects
are possible due to the favorable ground water sources unique to
Haines. Through excavation, high quality spawning channels are
created for chum salmon. Responding to Representative Wilson,
he explained that this spawning channel technology is not
possible in all areas due to the ground water quality and
sources. Haines is the only area in Northern Southeast which is
capable of sustaining this type of enhanced habitat. With
appropriations obtained by Representative Thomas, of Haines, an
expanded spawning channel system is being funded this year.
8:35:04 AM
MR. ESQUIRO reported that NSRAA works cooperatively with state
and federal agencies to build fish ladders, supply fry for
enhancement projects, and other improvements to "jump start"
fisheries. The Division of Sport Fish (SF), ADF&G, projects are
also recipients of fish stocks for the division's projects.
MR. ESQUIRO pointed out that the goal of NSRAA has been to
provide a contribution of 70 percent of the return catch for the
common property fishery, and take 30 percent for hatchery cost
recovery and brood stock needs. Until recently, NSRAA has
actually averaged a credible 80:20 ratio. Although the goal has
not changed, during the last couple of years NSRAA has not been
able to maintain the higher contribution to the common property
fishery.
MR. ESQUIRO informed the committee that the original debt
carried by NSRAA has been repaid. Currently, however, a new
debt of 2.8 million was incurred for operational purposes to
establish a new hatchery for coho salmon, in the Sitka area.
The physical structure will be funded by a federal grant, he
reported.
8:39:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN requested an explanation of the
enhancement tax, imposed on the commercial fleet, and whether a
hatcheries indebtedness effects the tax rate.
MR. ESQUIRO responded that the enhancement tax remains the same;
3 percent for NSRAA. He further explained that three quarters
of the association's operating budget is supported by a cost
recovery fishery, with the remaining one quarter being supplied
by the enhancement tax. To a follow-up question, he responded
that coming out of debt allows the hatchery to reduce the number
of fish taken for cost recovery and increase the number of fish
available for the common property fishery. He pointed out that
since 1980, the enhancement tax received by NSRAA has been
approximately $28 million, and the common property harvest catch
has been approximately $148 million; a cost effective ratio.
8:41:30 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked if the hatcheries cost recovery sales
influence the ground price received by the fishermen for their
catch.
MR. ESQUIRO opined that the cost recovery sales provide a
positive influence on the price which the fishermen are paid for
their catch. He further described the cost recovery bid system
that NSRAA uses to maintain a diversified portfolio for fund
receipts. This encompasses all of the species which NSRAA
enhances and the various hatchery and freshwater/saltwater
enhancement projects that the association undertakes. He noted
that not every program will be cost effective every year,
however, barring a total project failure, the diversification
has allowed NSRAA to maintained a workable budget. Bids for the
cost recovery catch are established early in the season and are
awarded to the highest bidder; overall commanding respectable
prices. He described the positive relationship which NSRAA has
maintained with the fish processors over the years. Further, he
offered an example of how the price for cost recovery fish can
increase the price paid for the common property catch.
8:46:01 AM
CHAIR SEATON referred to the permit buy back program and asked
if NSRAA anticipates any repercussions due to this program.
MR. ESQUIRO responded that there should not be any effects. To
a follow-up question he responded that chum salmon are the
primary focus of NSRAA.
8:47:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked if the other regional associations
have been able to maintain similarly successful operations.
MR. ESQUIRO refrained from responding for the other
associations.
8:48:10 AM
CHAIR SEATON inquired which agency sets the Deep Inlet fishery
allocations.
MR. ESQUIRO answered that NSRAA operates under the Southeast
Enhanced Allocation Permit, a plan approved by the Alaska Board
of Fisheries. Allocation permits are based on historical catch
formulas and effects all of the Southeast fisheries; although
the Deep Inlet fishery was begun before this scheme was in
place.
8:49:37 AM
CHAIR SEATON requested further information on the egg box
operation taking place in Haines, and how successful the program
is for enhancement to the area.
MR. ESQUIRO responded that approximately 65-75 percent of the
return catch is possibly from these egg box releases. However,
he said it is not easy to accurately enumerate releases from out
of these boxes, and stated this project is "just ... helping
Mother Nature along." He clarified that this program utilizes
the same egg collection and spawning techniques as are used at
the hatchery operations. In further response, he pointed out
that a wild spawn return averages only 22 percent.
8:52:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked for clarification on the difference
between what NSRAA does by rearing fish vs. salmon farming.
MR. ESQUIRO responded that a comparison could be drawn between
this type of enhancement and a free range rancher. These salmon
are considered wild reared fish.
CHAIR SEATON pointed out that the brood stocks are all wild
salmon and not continuous pen-reared fish.
8:53:24 AM
MR. ESQUIRO closed by stating that it would be helpful to NSRAA
for the committee to consider providing a means of support
similar to that which was being provided by FRED. The research
and development expertise was essential, and a
knowledge/resource vacuum has been left in the wake of this
division's closure. He stated, that this lack of support has
stifled the scope and level of enhancement projects conducted by
NSRAA. Having been in the field of enhancement in Alaska since
its inception, he underscored that this credible program has
proven its value to the coastal communities, which it serves.
He stressed the need for further fisheries enhancement support
from ADF&G.
CHAIR SEATON requested that written recommendations be submitted
to the committee specifying the areas of support that would be
helpful for NSRAA.
^OVERVIEW: DOUGLAS ISLAND PINK AND CHUM (DIPAC)
8:58:30 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced that the next order of business would be
a presentation of the Douglas Island Pink and Chum (DIPAC)
private non-profit (PNP) hatchery.
ERIC PRESTEGARD, Executive Director, Douglas Island Pink and
Chum (DIPAC) echoed Mr. Esquiro's request for departmental
support to benefit all of the PNP hatcheries and the aquaculture
associations. He then provided a brief history of the DIPAC
organization from it's inception in 1976 as a pilot hatchery at
Kowee Creek, Douglas Island, and expanding to the Sheep Creek
Hatchery, Thane, the Macaulay Hatchery, three mile Glacier
Highway, Juneau, and finally the assumption of operations at the
state built hatchery in Snettisham, Stephens Passage.
9:00:12 AM
MR. PRESTEGARD reported that DIPAC has a 32 member board of
directors, providing a diverse representation from the
community. The Macaulay hatchery produces approximately 116
million chum salmon, 800,000 king salmon, and 600,000 coho
salmon annually. The coho are targeted for the troll and sport
fishing fleets, and the king salmon are released in a number of
locations throughout the Juneau area to enhance the roadside
fishery. In a joint project with the City of Skagway and the
Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G), 200,000 king salmon
are also released in Skagway. The chum salmon are released in
Gastineau Channel, in Stephens Passage at Limestone Inlet, and
in Lynn Canal at Amalga Harbor and Boat Harbor.
9:01:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked for further information regarding
the release of king salmon by DIPAC in the Skagway area.
MR. PRESTEGARD responded that this is a ten year project which
involves a brood stock exchange, and does not conflict with
Northern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association (NSRAA)
operations.
9:02:34 AM
MR. PRESTEGARD responding to Chair Seaton, stated that, as a
PNP, DIPAC does not receive a portion of the 3 percent
enhancement tax available to the regional associations. He
explained that DIPAC cost recovery rates fluctuate, from taking
40-60 percent of the returned catch, and added that the wild
stock returns influence this figure.
MR. PRESTEGARD provided a slide showing a contribution of 1.5
million chum, in 2006, to the gillnet harvest. An overall
contribution of 43 percent, or $3 million, of the gillnet catch
throughout the region was realized due to DIPAC returns.
9:04:42 AM
MR. PRESTEGARD presented a slide of the Snettisham Hatchery
annual release statistics, which illustrated that 9 million
sockeye smolts are released directly from the hatchery, and 12
million fry are distributed in lakes. The distribution program
is in conjunction with the Pacific Salmon Treaty; working
cooperatively with the Canadian government to stock lakes in the
Taku and Stikine River systems. For the benefit of the
committee he defined fry as an egg that is incubated and hatched
at the facility then transported to a lake where they rear for
one year prior to migrating out to sea. Smolt are reared and
fed for the first year of maturity in the hatchery, and are
released directly from the facility to the sea.
9:06:29 AM
MR. PRESTEGARD projected a graph to illustrate the hatchery
contributions to the various fisheries at the goal level of 60
percent. Chum salmon make up the heart of the DIPAC program
with king, coho, and sockeye as supplemental species. Since
operations began, DIPAC has contributed $42 million to the
common property fishery. Finally, he invited the committee
members to visit the Macaulay Hatchery. He pointed out that
being located in the city, this facility maintains a high
profile visitor center with a strong educational component.
^OVERVIEW: COOK INLET AQUACULTURE ASSOCIATION (CIAA)
9:09:51 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced that the next order of business would be
a presentation by the Cook Inlet Aquaculture Association CIAA.
9:10:19 AM
GARY FANDREI, Executive Director, Cook Inlet Aquaculture
Association (CIAA) introduced this association as having been
created through state legislation. At the time of inception,
the Cook Inlet fishermen voted to provide a 2 percent tax, on
their catch, to support CIAA fishery enhancement.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked if this tax is voted on yearly.
GARY FANDREI explained that this tax is initially established by
a one time vote, however, there is a procedure for making a
change.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON interjected that an effect on the cost
recovery harvest, along with other ramifications, will occur, if
a harvest tax undergoes change.
CHAIR SEATON stated that the 2006 Legislature passed a bill
which allowed for abolishment of a cost recovery harvest by an
association, but allowed for incremental increases of the tax on
the common property catch to be paid for enhancement support.
This opportunity has not been acted upon to date, but it
represents an option to the cost recovery mechanism for
enhancement facilities. Apparently, he stated, some fishermen
believed that it would be advantageous to have sole harvest
access to the returning stocks and pay a higher percentage of
their total catch to the association.
9:15:26 AM
MR. FANDREI stated the mission of CIAA as being: "To protect
self perpetuating salmon stocks and the habitats upon which they
depend." Rehabilitation of salmon stocks to be self
perpetuating populations is also an emphasis. The key issue for
CIAA is to maximize the value of the Cook Inlet common property
resource through the application of science and technology. For
CIAA the Anchorage bowl area fishery is the focus. Due to the
concentration of Alaska's population being in this area, many of
the statewide habitat issues which arise tend to stem from this
region.
9:17:19 AM
MR. FANDREI named Kenai as home of the association's regional
headquarters. The Eklutna hatchery was built and is owned by
CIAA as a primary facility. This hatchery is currently operated
on a part-time basis as a back-up to the Trail Lakes hatchery.
Trail Lakes is located at Moose Pass, in central Kenai
Peninsula. Trail Lakes is a state owned hatchery leased to CIAA
for twenty years; currently in the seventeenth year. In the
lower part of the Kenai Peninsula is the Tutka Bay hatchery. He
said that this pink salmon facility is no longer in operation,
having released fish for the last time in 2004. The 5-6 cent
per pound market price of pink salmon forced the closure of this
hatchery. The area is, however, being used as a remote release
site for a CIAA sockeye program.
9:18:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON inquired what debt CIAA is carrying.
MR. FANDREI responded that loans originally totaled
approximately $4.5 million, with the current debt at $2 million.
He reported that the repayment has not been an undue burden.
9:19:04 AM
MR. FANDREI drew attention to a slide illustrating secondary,
non-hatchery facilities operated by CIAA. In the Seward area a
weir site provides a small raceway complex, and on the lower
west side of Cook Inlet is the Paint River fish ladder. This
ladder was built by CIAA but to date has not been put into
operation due to funding priorities being directed to other
projects. Also present in the Cook Inlet area are two state
operated hatcheries, as well as a facility at Port Graham.
Additionally, the state hatcheries at Crooked Creek and Big Lake
were closed and have subsequently been utilized by CIAA.
9:20:31 AM
MR. FANDREI said CIAA operates stocking projects for sockeye and
coho salmon. Annually, 18-20 million sockeye and 1.5 million
coho, smolts and fry, are released. Additional coho releases
have been made in the communities of Seward, Homer, and
Seldovia, where the municipalities have provided funding to CIAA
for enhancement.
9:21:18 AM
MR. FANDREI stated that CIAA also operates a number of flow
control structures that assist wild fish to achieve their
spawning grounds in low water years. Responding to
Representative Wilson, he clarified that this is accomplished on
small creeks by creating dams to increase water levels.
Additionally, CIAA uses helicopters for access to remote
locations to breach beaver dams and provide water flow for the
returning salmon. In the last couple of years this has been
critical and many fish have died during low water conditions
despite efforts, he said.
9:23:18 AM
MR. FANDREI presented a slide which indicated the sites for fish
monitoring activities. This is a joint effort with Alaska
Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G) to collect information for
fisheries management. He provided examples of how the
monitoring projects can provide critical assessment data to the
department, assisting the process of making in-season management
decisions. The CIAA habitat projects include: correcting low
dams, replacing culverts, and installing temporary fish ladders.
These habitat projects are primarily accomplished in cooperation
with local community groups.
9:25:33 AM
MR. FANDREI reported that CIAA initiated an intern program in
2005. Universities and students throughout the continental
Unites States responded to a web site posting, which resulted in
5 interns participated from 3 states. This program provides
needed manpower for projects, and is also a means to cultivate
potential employees. The program was expanded to receive 26
students from six states, in 2006. The expectation for 2007 is
that 40 interns will be arriving from the lower states, Canada,
and Australia. It is also valuable a bonus to have access to
the professors who are attached to the interns. In response to
a question from Representative Wilson, he reported that interest
from the University of Alaska has not been present via the
current website announcement, however, plans call for direct
contact efforts at in-state campuses to encourage local
participation.
9:28:33 AM
MR. FANDREI presented the current major needs and issues of
CIAA. This includes improving the public perception/outreach.
The CIAA has experienced the presence of misconceptions in the
Anchorage bowl area, of the role which the aquaculture
association plays in the community. He opined that this is a
statewide issue, and expressed hope that a facet of the
internship program will address this somewhat. Additionally,
the loss of the Fisheries Rehabilitation and Enhancement
Division (FRED), ADF&G, has had a critical impact on CIAA, as
with the other regional associations. To offset this loss, CIAA
has entered into cooperative agreements with private companies,
such as the Sea Life Center, located in Seward, as well as an
East Coast company with an expertise in smolt production. He
underscored the loss of FRED, as having been a valuable support
from ADF&G.
9:29:58 AM
MR. FANDREI finished by describing the association's base
funding issue. The need for consistency in a budget is
important, he stressed, and the enhancement tax has fluctuated
from a $1.5 million floating average to the current average of
$190 thousand. This change is a especially difficult for CIAA,
as production is targeted at sockeye salmon. The long life
cycle of the sockeye salmon, 5-6 years, means that CIAA must
make budget adjustments six years out; not an easy task in a
volatile market. In response to Representative LeDoux, he
explained that not all of the association's projects allow for
cost recovery activities. When enhancing wild stocks, cost
recovery is difficult as the stocks can not be separated at
harvest. However, certain projects provide a more segregated
return making cost recovery possible. The CIAA has managed a 60
percent recovery some years, but the fluctuation and
availability of the harvest has proven inconsistent. A diverse
funding portfolio is being developed.
9:33:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON asked that, given the amount of industry
located in the Cook Inlet watershed area, and the need to
emphasize habitat protection, if CIAA has discussed, or possibly
advocated for, the relocation of the Office of Habitat
Management & Permitting (OHM&P) from the Department of Natural
Resources (DNR) and back to ADF&G.
MR. FANDREI answered that the association has not taken a
position on this issue.
9:33:45 AM
CHAIR SEATON further inquired whether having OHM&P within DNR
effects the permitting process for CIAA enhancement projects.
MR. FANDREI clarified that, because of the joint projects, CIAA
is not necessarily involved in permitting issues. However, he
expressed a preference for working with ADF&G over DNR due to
the user fee system attached to each permit request submitted to
DNR. To a follow-up question, he responded that specific
services which FRED provided to CIAA included limnological
studies and sample analysis. He explained that the imminent
closure of the states limnology lab, in Soldotna, will pose a
serious problem. For the benefit of the committee he defined
limnology as the study of lakes including: nutrient levels for
the food chain, physical measurements of temperature
fluctuation, and food sources needed for aquatic life support.
9:36:31 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON referred to the natural rearing situation
described in the Northern Southeast Aquaculture Association
(NSRAA) presentation, and asked whether CIAA is able to take
advantage of similar conditions.
MR. FANDREI explained that because CIAA does a significant
amount of natural rearing in lakes, such as Hidden Lake, the
association's ability to do cost recovery is effected. Natural
rearing in Tustumena Lake has been suspended, after 30 years of
operation, due to the enactment of federal regulations
prohibiting this activity, despite the resource benefits which
this project provided to the central Cook Inlet fisheries.
9:37:59 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked for an overview of the problems currently
effecting CIAA projects, such as the Paint River.
MR. FANDREI described that the Paint River project is a fish
ladder to accommodate salmon making their way over a 35 foot
falls into a lake that will support their natural
spawning/rearing cycle. Although CIAA managed the $2.9 million
construction cost it has been unable to fund the operation other
than on an ad hoc basis. He clarified that permitting has not
been the issue, but the $900,000 needed to operate has not been
available to start this system. A federal request has been
submitted for this purpose. He assured the committee that
having this type of facility in that area will make a
significant impact by providing a fishery in an area currently
experiencing low fish levels, as well as providing a potential
cost recovery fishery for CIAA. He will provide further
information on this project to the committee.
9:41:16 AM
CHAIR SEATON referred to the halted Tustumena and Kasilof Lake
projects and asked what percentage of the fishery was supplied
by these projects.
MR. FANDREI stated that the stocking ended in 2004, at Kasilof
Lake. The returns for the last couple of years have been 30-40
percent enhanced, prior to the that it was 10 percent. Returns
to Tustumena Lake have been strong and, he speculated, probably
made up a significant percent of the central Cook Inlet harvest,
possibly as much as one third.
9:42:22 AM
CHAIR SEATON requested further clarity on the federal regulation
prohibiting the use of Tustumena Lake.
MR. FANDREI answered that the lake is in a refuge and a
designated federal wilderness area. The waters are also
designated wilderness, however boats, planes, and snow machines
are allowed. Environmental groups objected to the hatchery
operations, the objection was upheld by the courts, and the
permit held by CIAA was suspended. Following-up, he said, that
an exception to the wilderness designation would allow the
operation to go forward. Clarifying his earlier statement, he
noted that Tustumena Lake returns provide approximately one
third of the central Cook Inlet salmon catch, and one third of
the catch are enhanced stocks.
9:44:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked if all of the regional associations
are allowed to perform cost recovery activities on mixed stock
returns, or does a unique by-law provide CIAA the opportunity.
MR. FANDREI responded that generally the returns to the Cook
Inlet area are 10 percent enhanced. When the enhanced percent
of the return is that low a cost recovery harvest takes
advantage of wild stocks. This is what often creates a conflict
issue that results in CIAA having cost recovery permits denied.
^OVERVIEW: PRINCE WILLIAM SOUND AQUACULTURE CORPORATION (PWSAC)
9:45:54 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced that the next order of business would be
a teleconference presentation by the Prince William Sound
Aquaculture Association (PWSAC).
9:46:26 AM
DAVID REGGIANI, General Manager, Prince William Sound
Aquaculture Corporation (PWSAC), outlined the history and scope
of PWSAC. Founded in 1974, the first facility built was the
Armin F. Koernig hatchery, Southwest Prince William Sound,
followed by the Wally M. Norenberg hatchery, Esther Island.
Additionally, PWSAC contracted with the state to operate three
hatcheries in the area, those being Main Bay, Cannery Creek, and
the Gulkana facility at Paxson. The Solomon Gulch Hatchery is a
private non-profit (PNP) facility. Continuing, he said, that
together these five hatcheries release approximately 578 million
fry and smolt annually. Of these, 400 million are pink salmon
fry, 148 million are chum salmon fry, 32 million are sockeye fry
and smolts, and 1 million are coho smolts. He reported that,
from 1990 to 2004, the economic impact to the commercial harvest
has been $189 million. During this time, the commercial fleet
has paid an approximate total of $10 million to PWSAC in
enhancement taxes. He stated that the value of PWSAC salmon
contributions to the seafood processing industry, to date, has
been $736 million, with an annual average of $49 million.
Additionally, the sport fishing, subsistence, and personal use
fisheries each benefit from the coho salmon enhancement program.
Approximately 100,000 coho smolts are released into Cordova and
Whittier, with an additional 50,000 released into Chenega. Two
sport fisheries have also been developing in recent years: one
at the Main Bay hatchery with the sockeye salmon return; and one
at the Wally M. Norenberg hatchery, focused on the chum salmon
return.
9:50:47 AM
MR. REGGIANI underscored the economic impacts that PWSAC salmon
returns contributed to the 2006 harvest. He reported that 5.1
million PWSAC pink salmon contributed to the commercial catch.
This represents 43 percent of all pink salmon taken in that
fishery. When combined with the local PNP contributions, the
total enhanced catch jumps to 10 million, or 83 percent of the
contribution. The chum contribution was 1.2 million, 88
percent; the sockeye contribution was 832 thousand, 38 percent
when including the Gulkana returns, or 74 percent when
considering only the returns of hatcheries in Prince William
Sound; and enhancement fish represent nearly 100 percent of the
coho salmon catch. Addressing the operations of the facilities,
he stated that, similar to the other regions, PWSAC is evolving
to become more cost effective, and has developed cooperative
agreements with Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G) for
project monitoring and evaluation.
9:54:09 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked if there has been discussion with PWSAC to
offset cost recovery funds by receiving a gross of the
fishermen's return vs. having a dedicated cost recovery system
conducted by the association.
MR. REGGIANI responded that it may come up at a cost recovery
committee meeting, but no discussion has occurred at the board
level to date.
9:54:54 AM
CHAIR SEATON inquired whether there has been resolution between
PWSAC and ADF&G regarding the management of combined wild and
enhanced stock.
MR. REGGIANI stated that an action plan is being developed with
ADF&G to outline this concern and address the issue. He will
forward material to apprise the committee of the progress being
made on this front.
^OVERVIEW: SOUTHERN SOUTHEAST REGIONAL AQUACULTURE ASSOCIATION
(SSRAA)
9:56:42 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced final order of business would be a
teleconference presentation by the Southern Southeast Regional
Aquaculture Association (SSRAA).
9:57:03 AM
JOHN BURKE, General Manager, Southern Southeast Aquaculture
Association (SSRAA) described the 21 member board of SSRAA with
13 being seats dedicated for fishermen: 4 seiners, 4
gillnetters, 4 power trollers, and 1 hand troller. These
positions are held by members who were selected from their
respective fishing fleets. The board then makes the policy,
budget, and philosophical decisions for SSRAA, as do the other
regional boards for their associations.
9:58:33 AM
MR. BURKE explained the route which the fish follow when
returning to the SSRAA enhancement sites. The path circuits
through several common property fisheries in Northern Southeast,
prior to arriving at the SSRAA waters. Because of this route,
the SSRAA enhancement projects are designed to provide catch for
these traditional fisheries vs. terminal special harvest area
fisheries. Four hatcheries are operated by SSRAA, with the
primary two being Whitman Lake and Neets Bay, which provide the
eggs and fry for the other facilities. The primary release
sites are: Nakat Inlet, 16 million chum salmon; Kendrick Bay,
20 million chum salmon; and Anita Bay, 22 million chum salmon.
Additionally, 2 million coho salmon are released at Neck Lake.
He pointed out that these areas all represent remote release
sites. All of the brood stock and cost recovery catch
activities are performed at Neets Bay, and the cost recovery
catch is processed by the hatchery. This is to minimize the
pressure on the Ketchikan market.
10:01:08 AM
MR. BURKE referred to the debt repayment accomplishments of
SSRAA and explained that the original loan of $22 million
principal has been retired, but the association is still paying
down the accrued interest of approximately $8.5 million.
10:01:35 AM
MR. BURKE continued, describing the chinook project operated in
conjunction with the Division of Sport Fish, Alaska Department
of Fish & Game (ADF&G). The Crystal Lake hatchery is owned by
ADF&G, which provides funds for SSRAA to operate that facility.
The final hatchery is at Burnett Inlet, a "summer" coho salmon
facility. He described this fish as "a little coho that thinks
it's a sockeye." It represents a valuable early return fishery,
during June and July. The fall coho project releases 6 million
fish per year, providing a fishery for the trollers, with catch
rates of 90-95 percent.
10:02:32 AM
MR. BURKE reported that for cost recovery purposes 30 percent
of the chum salmon returns were taken at Neets Bay. Only 5
percent of the coho can be expected to return, and no king
salmon. Thus, the primary cost recovery is made through the
chum harvest, and the king salmon project costs are covered via
contracts with ADF&G.
10:03:23 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked if there has been discussion with SSRAA to
offset cost recovery funds by receiving a gross of the
fishermen's return vs. having a dedicated cost recovery system
conducted by the association.
MR. BURKE responded that the discussion has not occurred.
Primarily, he stated, given the circumstances of the local
harvest as previously outlined, such a program would be
difficult to implement.
10:04:28 AM
CHAIR SEATON inquired whether straying wild stocks have been an
issue at any of the SSRAA remote release sites.
MR. BURKE answered that nothing of significance has occurred,
and that the chum returns do not represent a direct conflict
with the local runs. He added that the sockeye, coho, and king
salmon do not tend to stray when they return.
10:06:16 AM
MR. BURKE suggested that the committee look for the forthcoming
ADF&G report to provide further details and data on the SSRAA
enhancement projects.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Special Committee on Fisheries meeting was adjourned at 10:07
a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|