Legislature(2019 - 2020)GRUENBERG 120
03/14/2019 11:00 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): Salmon Hatcheries, the Alaska Hatchery Research Program, and Being a Wise Consumer of Science | |
| 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
March 14, 2019
11:09 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Louise Stutes, Chair
Representative Bryce Edgmon
Representative Chuck Kopp
Representative Geran Tarr
Representative Sarah Vance
Representative Mark Neuman
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins
OTHER LEGISLATORS PRESENT
Representative Sara Hannan
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
PRESENTATION(S): SALMON HATCHERIES~ THE ALASKA HATCHERY
RESEARCH PROGRAM~ AND BEING A WISE CONSUMER OF SCIENCE
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
SAM RABUNG, Director
Division of Commercial Fisheries
Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided a PowerPoint presentation titled
"Salmon Fishery Enhancement in Alaska."
BILL TEMPLIN, Chief Salmon Fisheries Scientist
Division of Commercial Fisheries
Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided a PowerPoint presentation titled
"Enhancement Related Research."
ACTION NARRATIVE
11:09:09 AM
CHAIR LOUISE STUTES called the House Special Committee on
Fisheries meeting to order at 11:09 a.m. Representatives Vance,
Kopp, Neuman, Edgmon, and Stutes were present at the call to
order. Representative Tarr arrived as the meeting was in
progress.
^PRESENTATION(S): Salmon Hatcheries, the Alaska Hatchery
Research Program, and Being a Wise Consumer of Science
PRESENTATION(S): Salmon Hatcheries, the Alaska Hatchery
Research Program, and Being a Wise Consumer of Science
11:10:20 AM
CHAIR LOUISE STUTES announced that the only order of business
would be a presentation on Salmon Hatcheries, The Alaska
Hatchery Research Program, and Being a Wise Consumer of Science
provided by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG).
CHAIR STUTES noted there is a lot of concern and focus on salmon
hatcheries right now on the Board of Fisheries, including the
straying of hatchery fish, what effects that might be having, as
well as how to be a good consumer of the science that is out
there on the issue. As such, she thought it would be useful to
educate the committee on the issue with a series of
presentations. This will be the first segment followed by a
presentation from the different regional aquaculture
associations. Also, there will be a trip to the Douglas Island
Pink and Chum, Inc. (DIPAC), the local hatchery in Juneau.
11:11:40 AM
SAM RABUNG, Director, Division of Commercial Fisheries, Alaska
Department of Fish and Game (ADFG), provided a PowerPoint
presentation titled "Salmon Fishery Enhancement in Alaska."
Addressing slides 2-4, he began his presentation by asking, Why
do we have a fishery enhancement program in Alaska?" He related
that the State of Alaska assumed control of fisheries management
in 1960 and instituted a new system of escapement based in-
season management. Only 21 million salmon were harvested in
1967, down from a peak of about 126.5 million in 1936. Between
1972 and 1975 Alaska experienced the lowest number of
commercially harvested salmon of the century. In 1971 the State
of Alaska initiated its current salmon fishery enhancement
program in response to these severely depressed commercial
salmon fisheries.
MR. RABUNG explained that Alaska took two approaches to address
the weak fisheries. First, commercial fisheries management
changes were made to provide for adequate escapement of
spawners. Second, a new division was formed called the
Fisheries Rehabilitation Enhancement and Development (FRED)
Division. The FRED Division was tasked with developing the
knowledge, infrastructure, and support systems necessary for
rehabilitation and enhancement of Alaska's salmon fisheries
through hatchery production and other means. This integrated
approach to recovering salmon included: using escapement-based
in-season management to ensure enough spawners would make it
back; creating the limited entry program for the commercial
fishery, the first in the nation and which stabilized the number
of fishermen and the amount of gear/fishing power; and beginning
the program of fisheries rehabilitation and enhancement to
recover the depleted runs. In 1972, Article 8, Section 15, of
the state constitution was amended to allow for limited entry
and for "the efficient development of aquaculture" in Alaska.
The 1976 Magnuson-Stevens Act restricted foreign fishing to
outside the 200-mile limit, which no doubt contributed to
improving Alaska's fisheries.
11:14:25 AM
MR. RABUNG moved to slide 5 and reported that the private sector
was allowed to join the effort in 1974 via the Alaska State
Legislature's passage of the "Private Nonprofit Salmon Hatchery
Act." The legislature wanted the state to engage in this
program of fishery rehabilitation as well as to set in place the
mechanism for private nonprofit (PNP) aquaculture corporations
to own and operate salmon hatcheries and contribute to the
common property fishery. Some have said the state began to
adopt a user-pay philosophy at this time. Turning to slide 6,
Mr. Rabung related that the purpose of the PNP salmon fishery
enhancement program is the recovery and support of Alaska's
salmon fisheries and to provide an economic engine to support
and grow coastal communities. This program is not about fish,
he stated, but rather fisheries.
MR. RABUNG addressed slides 7-12 and explained there is guidance
in the state constitution, Alaska statute, regulations, and
policy. He pointed out that the FRED division was established
under Alaska Statute (AS) 16.05.092. The primary regulation for
private nonprofit salmon hatcheries is in the chapter for
commercial fisheries regulations, 5 AAC 40.005-990. The
genetics policy, promulgated in 1985, is a primary guidance of
the program, and all the other policies that were developed to
guide the program have been adopted into regulation.
MR. RABUNG turned to slide 13 and said the hatchery program, by
design, is stakeholder driven and the users of the resource
determine what fishery enhancement is desirable in their area
while ADF&G determines what is appropriate within its mandate to
sustain natural production. The mechanism for this cooperative
effort is the Regional Aquaculture Association (RAA) working
with ADF&G within the Regional Planning Team (RPT) process to
develop a regional salmon plan. He said the map on slide 14
shows the different salmon fishery enhancement planning regions
in Alaska. Not all of them have active programs. Only southern
Southeast Alaska, northern Southeast Alaska, Prince William
Sound, Cook Inlet, and Kodiak have active programs.
11:17:26 AM
MR. RABUNG displayed slide 15 and pointed out that the primary
responsibility of the RPTs is regional comprehensive salmon
planning. The RPTs are advisory to the ADF&G commissioner on
salmon fisheries enhancement planning and permitting within
their regions. He said he likes to use the analogy that the
[fish and game] advisory committees are advisory to the Board of
Fisheries and the RPTs are advisory to the commissioner.
MR. RABUNG moved to slides 16-17 and stated that the RPT is
comprised of three voting members from the regional aquaculture
association, three voting members from ADF&G, and the public is
invited and encouraged to participate. There are often ex-
officio non-voting seats that represent other user groups. All
those things come together to provide recommendations to the
commissioner. The primary duty of an RPT, he reiterated, is
developing a regional comprehensive salmon plan. That plan is
supposed to document historic harvests and production and
document the desired harvest goals by species, area, and time,
as well as to identify any project opportunities to fulfill
these plan goals and objects. Not every region chooses to have
a salmon fishery enhancement program and that is by design.
Every region gets to make its own decisions on what is desirable
within its area.
MR. RABUNG explained that the graph on slide 18 shows production
in the North Pacific of all nations - Canada, Japan, Korea,
Russia, and the U.S. - for all salmon species for the years
1952-2017. The release numbers have been stable since about
1988 at about 5 billion juvenile salmon released annually. Chum
salmon is by far the predominant species, followed by pink
salmon. Responding to Chair Stutes, he said Cherry salmon occur
in Asia and is similar to a Chum salmon.
11:19:54 AM
MR. RABUNG stated that the maps on slide 19 show the location of
the active hatcheries in Alaska. They are primarily located in
Southeast Alaska and Prince William Sound area, with two in the
Kodiak area and a few in the Cook Inlet area. He noted that
slide 20 is a graph of Alaska's hatchery production from 1973-
2018. The bars on the graph represent all species stacked and
all regions combined. Prince William Sound releases the most in
terms of numbers, primarily pink salmon, followed by Southeast
Alaska which releases primarily chum salmon. Since 1995 the
annual smolt releases have ranged from about 1.4 to 1.8 billion,
with the highest number released in 2018 at over 1.8 billion.
MR. RABUNG discussed the graph on slide 21 depicting the Alaska
commercial wild stock salmon harvest from 1900-2018 along with
the graph on slide 22 showing the hatchery harvest on top of the
wild stock harvest. The hatchery program didn't begin until
1974, he noted, so all production prior to that time was wild
stock. This graph, he pointed out, demonstrates that increased
wild salmon harvest levels occurred alongside Alaska's robust
fishery enhancement program that began in the mid-1970s. The
enhancement program is designed to supplement the harvest
without having a negative effect on wild productivity. Mr.
Rabung concluded with slide 23, which stated: "Alaska's
contemporary salmon fishery enhancement program has operated
since the mid-1970s, and through 2018 has provided over 1.8
billion salmon to the fisheries of the State, resulting in
substantial economic value without any obvious negative effects
on natural salmon production."
11:23:00 AM
BILL TEMPLIN, Chief Salmon Fisheries Scientist, Division of
Commercial Fisheries, Alaska Department of Fish and Game
(ADF&G), provided a PowerPoint presentation titled Enhancement
Related Research. He noted there might be some concern around
hatcheries, so he will address what ADF&G is doing about that
concern in terms of research and how ADF&G plans to interpret
the information it receives from the research.
MR. TEMPLIN displayed slide 2 and said Alaska's constitution was
revised with a provision that required the state's resources be
utilized, developed, and maintained on the sustained yield
principle, subject to preferences among uses. He said the
sustained yield principle was intended to provide continued
production from the state's natural resources.
MR. TEMPLIN turned to slide 3 and related that ADF&G's mission
statement requires the department to protect, maintain, improve,
and manage the use and development of the state's fish, game,
and aquatic plant resources. These four requirements, he
pointed out, are a balancing act for managing these resources.
He further related that the mission statement says that these
resources are to be managed in the best interest of the economy
and the well-being of the people of the state, consistent with
the sustained yield principle. He read a quote from R.A.
Cooley, which states, "It must be recognized that the welfare of
people and not fish is the reason for a management program, and
that if maximum sustained yield has any validity, it is as a
means to important human ends rather than as an end itself."
11:26:30 AM
MR. TEMPLIN moved to slide 4 and reviewed the United Nations'
definition of sustainable development, which is: "Sustainable
development is development that meets the needs of the present
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet
their own needs." He said "fishery" could be substituted for
"development" in that definition and it would then become a
definition for sustainable fisheries.
MR. TEMPLIN showed slide 6 and advised that policy includes
statements about how to do sustainable management. Addressing
the policy for the management of sustainable salmon fisheries
under 5 AAC 39.222(c), he noted that paragraph (5) recognizes
there is uncertainty in salmon stocks, fisheries, artificial
propagation, and habitat; so, in the face of that uncertainty,
management must be conservative. This means that the approach
must be precautionary - thinking ahead and understanding the
potential risks even when not having all the information.
MR. TEMPLIN discussed the working definitions of precautionary
principle and precautionary approach outlined on slide 6. He
defined "precautionary principle" as the rule or standard that
is applied "when human activities may lead to morally
unacceptable harm that is scientifically plausible but
uncertain, actions shall be taken to avoid or diminish that
harm." He defined "precautionary approach" as the method that
should be applied: "A set of agreed cost-effective measures and
actions, including future courses of action, which ensures
prudent foresight, reduces or avoids risk to the resources, the
environment, and the people, to the extent possible, taking
explicitly into account existing uncertainties and the potential
consequences of being wrong."
11:28:57 AM
MR. TEMPLIN turned to slides 7-8 and continued discussing
precautionary approach as defined in SSFP 5 AAC 39.222(c)(5)(A),
which states: "a precautionary approach, involving the
application of prudent foresight that takes into account the
uncertainties in salmon fisheries and habitat management, the
biological, social, cultural, and economic risks, and the need
to take action with incomplete knowledge, should be applied to
the regulation and control of harvest and other human-induced
sources of salmon mortality; a precautionary approach requires".
He pointed out that action is often needed in the face of
incomplete knowledge, and that currently this is where things
are at with enhancement related activities. [Managers] must act
in a precautionary manner, they don't have all the information
but are working to gain it, and [managers] need to think about
the risks - biological, social, cultural, and economic.
MR. TEMPLIN displayed slide 9 and asked, "Why are we doing this?
Why is it an issue that potentially hatchery fish stray?" He
noted that there are a variety of opinions in answer to these
questions. These questions are faced because Alaska has taken
on hatcheries and salmon enhancement as a means to economic
benefit. But in the face of that production, there is also the
requirement to sustain the natural production of salmon.
MR. TEMPLIN explained that straying and homing are part of the
natural life cycle of Pacific salmon. He said some species home
more than others and that the benefits of homing include:
allowing the salmon to develop local adaptations; leading to
greater differences between populations; and leading to improved
survivals of the offspring when they come back because they fit
the environment better and can then be more production. But, he
continued, there are also benefits from straying, which include:
accessing new habitats, like Glacier Bay; increasing diversity
within populations, because having some interaction between
separate groups maintains a large amount of genetic diversity
within the population; and buffering temporal variation in
habitat quality, such as a flood event wiping out one
population. Therefore, homing and straying act in balance in
different salmon populations and species.
11:32:20 AM
MR. TEMPLIN provided examples of homing and straying. Showing
slide 11 he stated that sockeye salmon have strong homing.
Sockeye have long freshwater residency, so they need to be in a
lake system that is good for their offspring to grow in. That
leads to higher variability in habitat because in a lake system
the salmon can spawn along the shore, the stream that comes into
the lake, or a stream that goes out of the lake. Lake systems
tend to have higher stability in habitat, which leads to
variable-year life cycles such that sockeye could return at ages
anywhere between two and five years old. Mr. Templin moved to
slide 12 to discuss Pink salmon as a counter example, which have
a short freshwater residency. As soon as emerging from the
gravel, pink salmon tend to go right out to the ocean, whereas
sockeye can stay from zero to three years in a lake system.
Streams have lower variability in habitat as well as lower
stability in habitat. Because of this, pink salmon tend to have
a one-year life cycle, meaning two years - from the time that
they emerge they will return a year later. In some ways, this
can lead to lower selection for homing, so pink salmon will
stray more as a species than sockeye salmon.
11:34:15 AM
MR. TEMPLIN turned to slide 13 and said stray rates can mean
different things to different people. He explained that "stray
in rate or "recipient stray rate" is the proportion of fish in
a spawning location that were not born in that location. The
"stray-out rate" or the "donor stray rate" is the proportion of
fish from a spawning location that did not return to that
location, they went somewhere else. Therefore, thinking about
straying depends on the perspective of whether it is straying in
or straying out. He advised that for the rest of his
presentation he will be talking about the stray in rate, because
that is what many people are concerned about - hatchery fish in
wild fish spawning streams.
MR. TEMPLIN displayed slide 15 and said Special Publication No.
18-12 is ADF&G's review of Alaska's precautionary approach. He
said there are structures in place - policies, plans, permits -
that recognize the risks and try to control those risks so
Alaskans can receive the benefit. As part of these policies,
there are directions for management, for maintaining fish
health, and for maintaining genetics. This report provides two
case studies, he noted, one for Southeast Alaska king salmon and
the other for Prince William Sound pink salmon.
11:36:13 AM
MR. TEMPLIN showed slide 16 and discussed the policy elements
that are dealt with in the management policy, fish health
policy, and genetics policy. For management it is established
that wild stock conservation is the priority; that management
must be for sustained yield; and that management recognizes that
hatchery and wild fish stocks do interact and that wild fish
stocks interact and there must be management accordingly. For
fish health there is a recognition that there can be health
concerns with bringing fish into a hatchery. So, there is a
robust pathology lab and program and there are inspections to
ensure that the release of hatchery fish doesn't add a disease
load to the wild populations. The genetics policy describes
things like using appropriate local stocks. Local stocks are
used so that if there is an interaction, if hatchery fish do
stray out of the hatchery and into the local rivers that they
originated from that river and so more likely to be genetically
benign. Also, significant or unique wild stocks were identified
as well as wild stock sanctuaries. Additionally, there is
assessment of hatchery and wild stock interaction and impacts.
11:38:09 AM
MR. TEMPLIN turned to slide 17 and stated there needs to be
assessment of hatchery and wild salmon stock interaction and
impacts. Studies done in the past decade or so document that
there are hatchery fish in wild systems. He explained that the
otolith in hatchery fish is marked with a banding pattern, so by
collecting carcasses in a stream the otoliths can be read to
determine whether the fish originated from a hatchery or the
wild. Based on those observations, he continued, ADF&G has two
ongoing studies. One study is in the Lower Cook Inlet looking
at the contributions of hatchery pink salmon to harvests as well
as the escapement. The other is a much larger long-term study
called the Alaska Hatchery Research Program, which is looking at
pink and chum salmon in the Prince William Sound region and the
Southeast Alaska region. This study has shrunk down all the
potential research that could be done to three questions that
have a reasonable chance of being answered.
MR. TEMPLIN moved to slide 18 and elaborated on the Lower Cook
Inlet pink salmon study. He said this study is being conducted
in Homer by biologists Ted Otis and Glenn Hollowell. The Tutka
Bay Lagoon Hatchery and the Port Graham Hatchery had produced
pink salmon a decade ago but were shut down; they have now been
restarted. The purpose of this study is to gather baseline data
on the hatchery-wild composition of harvests and escapements in
Lower Cook Inlet now that these two recently reopened hatcheries
are releasing marked fry.
11:40:15 AM
MR. TEMPLIN spoke to slide 19. He said the study's first
objective is to estimate hatchery-wild composition of the
commercial harvest to evaluate any benefits to fishermen. The
second objective is to monitory escapement of hatchery fish to
pink salmon streams and to see if in the presence of hatchery
fish and harvest directed on hatchery fish that escapement goals
within those streams could be met. Addressing slide 20, he
stated that the cost recovery harvest in Tutka Lagoon and Port
Graham is largely composed of pink salmon generated from those
hatcheries. As well, good portions of pink salmon from these
hatcheries are contributing to the common property harvest.
MR. TEMPLIN moved to slide 21 and noted that escapement has
generated a lot of public interest because local hatchery strays
are being found in Lower Cook Inlet streams, along with some
Prince William Sound pink salmon, which wasn't expected. As
shown on the map, he explained, opportunistic samples have been
collected on 10 streams over four or five years. Numbers are
depicted for each stream - the top number being the average
proportion in those samples of Prince William Sound fish and the
lower number being the Lower Cook Inlet origin hatchery fish.
He drew attention to the numbers for Barbara Creek and noted
that on average of the samples collected, 3.5 percent were from
Lower Cook Inlet hatcheries and [27.4] percent were from Prince
William Sound.
11:43:26 AM
MR. TEMPLIN addressed the six conclusions presented on slide 22
for the Lower Cook Inlet pink salmon study. He explained that
the biologists are collecting information but that a long-term,
well-designed study needs to happen to start addressing the
observations that are being seen. Therefore, he advised, the
conclusions must be relatively weakened because the samples are
not from a designed study, they are opportunistic. That doesn't
mean that these observations are unimportant. One conclusion,
he pointed out, was that the pink salmon index streams still
meet their escapement goals just about as often as they normally
would - about 80 percent of them over the five years have been
met and that is about what the department average is. So,
escapement is being met even in the presence of fishing on the
hatchery fish. Another conclusion was that Lower Cook Inlet
hatchery-produced pink salmon present in the stream samples can
range from 0 percent to 87 percent. Mr. Templin qualified that
while 87 percent seems large, the 87 percent was a one-time
occurrence in one location. An additional conclusion was that
interpretation of current data is limited given the few years of
sampling and that there is not a designed study here. It is
important for ADF&G to be able to use information from this
project and to push ahead and develop a program to answer how
much of the actual escapement in Lower Cook Inlet or in these
streams is from hatchery fish. These numbers cannot be used to
generate that, it can only be said that on a given visit, of the
carcasses that were sampled, X amount were from a hatchery.
11:45:40 AM
MR. TEMPLIN displayed slide 23 and elaborated on the Alaska
Hatchery Research Program (AHRP). He explained that AHRP is a
collaborative research program between ADF&G and private
nonprofit hatchery operators, processors, and other entities.
This program was designed to come up with some information that
will help interpret observations of [hatchery] stray fish in
wild streams. Skipping to slide 25 he related that these large-
scale salmon releases have raised concerns for wild stock
impacts. Hatchery fish have been observed in wild escapements,
it's a concern, and the question is what to do about it. He
said a question asked is: "Do hatchery fish detrimentally
affect productivity and sustainability of wild stocks?"
Generally, it is data limited, he continued. Studies have
demonstrated that there are hatchery fish and sometimes larger
than expected or from a location that is not expected in these
escapements. He pointed out that Alaska's policy mandates there
be sustainable productivity from wild stocks and so this
question must be answered. It is not a new concern, he stated.
Even when the hatchery program was being developed, Alaska at
about the same time was developing the very first genetics
policy in the U.S. and this policy was finalized in 1985.
11:47:50 AM
MR. TEMPLIN moved to slide 26 and continued elaborating on the
Alaska Hatchery Research Program. He explained that in
recognition of the need to examine the extent and impact of
hatchery strays on wild stock fitness and productivity, PNP
hatchery operators proposed that ADF&G organize a science panel
of experts to design and implement a long-term research project
to inform future resource management decisions with funding from
a partnership of the state, operators, and industry. The
science panel developed fundamental questions aimed at examining
the extent and potential impacts of hatchery fish straying on
fitness of wild stocks focusing on pink and chum salmon in
Prince William Sound and chum salmon in Southeast Alaska. The
charge to the science panel was to identify priority research
questions and develop a framework for research that could be
used to address these questions. The panel was made up of 13
members from ADF&G, the National Marine Fisheries Service, the
University of Alaska, and aquaculture associations.
MR. TEMPLIN turned to slide 28 and outlined the three questions
that were generated by the science panel, the first question
being, "What is the genetic stock structure of pink and chum in
Prince William Sound and Southeast Alaska?" He said this is
important to understand because it provides the background of
genetic structure that the results could be measured against to
be able to understand the results in context. He related that
the panel's second question was, "What is the extent and annual
variability of straying?" He said the intent here was to design
a program to get answers in a structured way that would then
help in understanding how much straying is happening from pink
salmon hatcheries into the streams of Prince William Sound.
Continuing, he said the third question generated was, "What is
the impact of these hatchery fish on the fitness of natural pink
and chum salmon?" He noted that "fitness" here is defined as
productivity because productivity of the natural system is what
is being looked for here.
11:50:13 AM
MR. TEMPLIN explained that due to time constraints he will not
elaborate on the first question. Showing slide 29, he
elaborated on the second question about the extent and amount of
straying. He explained the graphic depicts straying results for
pink and chum in Prince William Sound (PWS) for the years 2013-
2015. He explained that each box represents district-wide
estimates, not steam estimates, and that each box has three
bars, one bar for each year - 2013, 2014, and 2015. The blue
portion of each bar depicts the relative proportion of fish from
natural production and the red portion is the proportion of the
escapement that came from hatchery strays. He pointed out that
there are patterns in pink salmon straying, with more straying
in the southwest corner of PWS and less straying in the east
side of PWS. A similar pattern is also seen in chum salmon
straying, with the most straying of chum in the Montague Island
area. There is a large release of chum salmon in that area, he
said, and this area was specifically chosen because the streams
in that area have not been productive for chum salmon since
changes from the [1964] earthquake. For both species the stray
proportion of the escapement ranges from almost zero percent to
as high as 85 percent [for chum] and 90 percent [for pink]. Of
the total escapement for pink salmon overall for PWS, 4.4
percent, 14.8 percent, and 9.5 percent were estimated to be from
hatchery origin for the years 2013, 2014, and 2015,
respectively. Of the total escapement for chum salmon overall
for PWS, 2.8 percent, 3.2 percent, and 3.1 percent were
estimated to be from hatchery origin for the years 2013, 2014,
and 2015, respectively.
11:52:41 AM
MR. TEMPLIN brought attention to the graphic on slide 30
depicting the straying results for chum salmon in Southeast
Alaska for the years 2013-2015. He explained that three regions
in Southeast Alaska were estimated. The district-wide hatchery
proportion in the escapement for a district ranged from 1.5
percent to as high as [12.7] percent, but overall in Southeast
Alaska the total proportion of hatchery fish adding to the
escapement of wild fish ranged from 5.5 percent to 9 percent.
So, he continued, the distribution, the extent, and the amount
of straying is known for these three years in these two regions.
MR. TEMPLIN spoke to the tables on slide 31, explaining that
this information can now, for the first time, be used to
estimate the actual natural run and actual hatchery run. Before
this, he noted, it was very difficult or impossible to estimate
how many hatchery fish were in wild escapement. Drawing
attention to the lower box on slide 31, he explained that from
this total amount, the harvest rate can be estimated. He said
that in 2013, "We harvested, or accounted for, 99 percent of the
hatchery fish ... and managers were able to do that while only
having a 53 percent harvest rate on the ... natural stocks
within Prince William Sound." An interesting result from this
study, he continued, is that "our current management systems
allow us to direct our harvest on hatchery stocks, which are
intended to be for harvest, and at the same time maintain
reasonable harvest rates on the natural stocks."
11:54:51 AM
MR. TEMPLIN displayed slide 32 and elaborated on question three
regarding fitness and whether productivity of the natural system
is being hurt. He explained that paternity is being looked at
to answer this question. Offspring are being traced back to
their parents and this is being done in the wild, which has
never been done before. The parents are collected in one year
and then two years later the fish sampled from that same stream
should be the offspring of the parents sampled earlier, and then
genetics can be used to do a paternity test and match offspring
back to their parents. Otoliths were pulled from those parents
to determine whether a parent came from a hatchery or from the
natural. Using the otoliths and the offspring, researchers can
go back to see what is the relative productivity of a hatchery
fish in the wild and what is the relative productivity of a
natural fish in the wild and whether they are the same or
different. Mr. Templin further explained that five streams were
sampled for seven years, 2013-2019. He pointed out that pink
salmon are odd and even, so there are two separate lines. There
are four observations for the odd years of 2013, 2015, 2017, and
2019, and [three observations] for the even years of 2014, 2016,
and 2014. Researchers will be looking not just at children, but
hopefully also the grandchildren of the original parents, which
will help in understanding how much is potentially environmental
and how much is genetic. He noted that this is a large project
with an expected 150,000 fish to analyze.
11:57:11 AM
MR. TEMPLIN turned to slide 33 and stated that researchers have
results from one year from one stream, meaning one generation
from one stream. He said having these results proves that doing
pedigrees in nature is possible. He reported that out of 1,000
fish sampled in the even-year lineage, researchers were able to
trace 451 offspring back to 184 parents, which is an offspring
assignment rate of 11 percent. The relative return per spawner
(RRS) for female hatchery fish productivity compared to wild
fish productivity, is about [0.47] for this one year in this one
location, so 47 percent hatchery fish. So, he explained, in
this sample, hatchery fish are about half as effective as wild
fish in the wild. He cautioned that is only one data point and
that there are five streams to analyze and there are going to be
multiple generations in each of those streams, and therefore it
doesn't settle the question yet because there are still a lot of
data points to look at. For male hatchery fish, he continued,
the RRS is 87 percent, which is not statistically different than
equal. Mr. Templin reported that for the odd-year lineage, 48
offspring were traced back to 20 parents, which is a very small
sample size. Only 2.5 percent of the individuals could be
traced back to a parent. He stated that under-representation of
offspring assigned to hatchery-origin parents is a problem in
the studies of both lineages.
11:59:10 AM
MR. TEMPLIN moved to slide 34 and reviewed the conclusions from
this study in Hogan Bay: Hatchery-origin fish did spawn and did
produce adult offspring; Hatchery-origin fish spawned with wild-
origin fish and other hatchery-origin fish, and those matings
produced adult natural-origin fish; On average, hatchery-origin
fish produced fewer adult offspring that returned to Hogan Bay
and were sampled than their natural-origin conspecifics; There
are potentially important differences in relative return per
spawner between male and female hatchery-origin fish. He
stressed that this is what is known now and that a lot of work
is yet to be done.
MR. TEMPLIN addressed how ADF&G interprets the information after
it is gathered. Turning to slide 36, he advised that certain
questions won't be answered by the Alaska Hatchery Research
Program (AHRP). He said these questions include: What are the
competition and predation effects of hatchery fish? Do hatchery
fish reduce the genetic resilience of wild populations? If
changes in productivity are observed, what mechanisms could be
driving these differences? How will findings affect policy?
[How do these hatchery fish in wild systems affect assessment of
escapement?]
MR. TEMPLIN showed slide 37 and advised that ADF&G is assessing
the risk. He said information is currently had on wild system
productivity and hatchery proportions, and information is being
collected on genetic background and relative productivity of
hatchery and wild. Once the study is completed and the results
are had, it will be time to interpret those results and to
understand the implications for management.
12:02:30 PM
MR. TEMPLIN turned to a set of graphs on slide 38 and discussed
a study done on the relative return per spawner (RRS) for
steelhead on the Hood River. He said the orange dots on the
graphs represent a hatchery female, the blue triangles a
hatchery male, and the [solid] black line represents 1.0, so if
the dots or triangles are on the solid line, then the [hatchery]
fish were equally productive as wild steelhead. He explained
the graphs show that [in 1995] the hatchery fish were only about
80 percent as effective as the wild steelhead, [in 1996] the
hatchery fish were equally productive as the wild fish, but that
lots of variation occurred [during the years 1997-2000]. He
therefore pointed out that for Alaska's Hogan Bay there is only
the one piece of information, and with a couple more years of
information a broader picture of what the RRS means will be had.
MR. TEMPLIN spoke to the mechanisms outlined on slide 39 that
drive relative productivity. He pointed out that these effects
can last one generation on one side or they can last for many
generations. Thought must be given, he advised, as to what are
the potential sources of potential risk to wild populations.
Displaying slide 40, he discussed the graphic of a conceptual
model for assessing risk, explaining that the X axis represents
from low to high the probability of something happening and the
Y axis represents from low to high the severity of an event.
Moving to slide 41, he explained that if the reduction of
productivity is about 50 percent, it is in the medium risk range
no matter the severity. He said this is one way to start
getting an idea and forming the conversation about the risk that
hatchery fish might pose.
12:04:36 PM
MR. TEMPLIN drew attention to slide 42 and stated, "It is
important for us to be wise consumers of the science." Turning
to slide 43 he discussed scientific method, which starts with
making observations, then thinking of interesting questions,
then formulating hypotheses, and so on. The principles behind
the scientific method are to make careful observations;
formulate and test hypotheses and those hypotheses must be able
to be proven false; refine the hypotheses; and remain skeptical
while going through the process to ensure not being fooled.
From this process, he explained, theories are then developed and
there is a return to making observations.
MR. TEMPLIN reviewed the example of scientific method in
practice outlined on slide 44. He said the example is a
critical-period hypothesis, which is a theory that is not proven
but it is following the scientific process. Observations from
ocean surveys and looking at salmon returns indicated something
was happening in the marine environment. Researchers started
asking interesting questions: When does that happen? When
juveniles first enter the marine environment or after they are
coming back? Hypotheses were formulated and then the process is
to test the hypothesis, gather data, refine the hypothesis and
go around and around in a cycle. Mr. Templin pointed out that
the debate in this cycle elevates the science and is part of the
scientific method, and this is done before moving to developing
grand theories. He said the ramifications of an incomplete
scientific process are not always negative, but sometimes it
places on the reader the burden to understand the limitations of
what the research is telling the reader. He explained that
science is stuck in the cycle until some sort of resolution can
be made and then at that point the science can move forward.
12:06:50 PM
MR. TEMPLIN moved to slide 45 and related that a recent paper
came out describing pink salmon effects on orca in Puget Sound.
Researchers started with observations that the southern resident
killer whale population was declining in Puget Sound, there was
a two-year pattern [in mortality] for a portion of that, and it
was noted that pink salmon have a two-year life cycle. So, the
question was asked, Are pink salmon responsible for this pattern
[in mortality]? Two hypotheses were presented, the first being
that odd-year pink salmon interfere and hurt the [orcas' ability
to feed on co-migrating Chinook]; and the second being that
because there aren't many even-year pink salmon it helps the
orca somehow. The problem with both of those hypotheses, he
continued, is that neither one is falsifiable at this point in
time. Also, he advised, the second hypothesis is very difficult
to distinguish as it is hard to prove that there is no effect.
MR. TEMPLIN displayed slide 46 and noted that the authors of
this paper recognized that and wrote: "We recognize the need
for additional analyses and rationale to explain this pattern
but we wish to facilitate rapid communications of these unique
findings because a greater understanding of SRKW [southern
resident killer whale] demography enhances the likelihood for
advancing their recovery." However, he pointed out, that wasn't
the sentence that most people read when reading this paper.
12:08:20 PM
MR. TEMPLIN moved to slide 47 and continued. He related that
what was instead picked up by the news from this paper was that
pink salmon had been found to be the new reason for the decline
of killer whales. He stressed this is bad because "we've jumped
right from the scientific method, skipped all that bit about
refining the hypotheses, collecting information, and gone
straight to publication." Showing slide 48, he pointed out that
when a word search is done on this paper about whales, the term
whale or SRKW comes up multiple times in the various sections of
the paper. But when a word search is done for pink, chinook, or
salmon, those terms are absent in the introduction, methods, and
results sections of the paper, and salmon is in the discussion
section of the paper. So, Mr. Templin advised, this paper
presents hypotheses but does nothing to advance that and then it
was picked up by the news.
MR. TEMPLIN turned to slide 49 and concluded his presentation.
He said the responsibility for scientists is to communicate
research clearly and effectively. The responsibility for
readers is to evaluate the strength of the research paper or of
the newspaper article. Mr. Templin pointed out that the peer
review process is not perfect. He said the review of
manuscripts is voluntary on scientists, reviewers evaluate for
science but not for the "splash" factor; publication does not
imply full acceptance by the science community; and there are
incentives on authors as well as journals to publish papers that
make a good news story because it helps generate reputations.
12:10:42 PM
CHAIR STUTES thanked the presenters and said the information in
these presentations will serve as the foundation for coming
meetings. She noted that hatcheries have a tremendous effect
economically on Alaska, the state's fishermen, and the food
supply. The information in these presentations is timely given
the discussion at the Board of Fisheries. It is known that
straying is occurring, but it isn't known what the effects are.
Is straying also occurring within natural populations? Does
straying of hatchery fish have any negative effects on wild
populations? In certain samples from other studies, she said,
reproductive productivity is higher in hatchery fish. Why is
that? "The bottom line is we don't know," she continued. "We
need more data because there is a lot of open questions and not
enough answers. We need to conduct more studies and then be a
wise consumer of that science before we jump to conclusions."
She stated that this debate needs to be governed by good science
and she is pleased that ADF&G and the Board of Fisheries have
that same stance and are looking hard at this through that lens.
12:12:22 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Special Committee on Fisheries meeting was adjourned at 12:12
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| (H)FSH Hatchery Statutes & Regs Overview 3.14.19.pdf |
HFSH 3/14/2019 11:00:00 AM |
|
| (H)FSH Overview of Hatchery Related Research 3.14.19.pdf |
HFSH 3/14/2019 11:00:00 AM |