Legislature(2023 - 2024)DAVIS 106
04/13/2023 06:00 PM 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 | |
| Board of Fisheries | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
JOINT MEETING
HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON FISHERIES
HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
April 13, 2023
6:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON FISHERIES
Representative Sarah Vance, Chair
Representative Kevin McCabe
Representative CJ McCormick
Representative Louise Stutes
Representative Rebecca Himschoot
HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
Representative Tom McKay, Chair
Representative George Rauscher, Vice Chair
Representative Stanley Wright
Representative Jennie Armstrong
Representative Donna Mears
MEMBERS ABSENT
HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON FISHERIES
Representative Ben Carpenter
Representative Craig Johnson
HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
Representative Josiah Patkotak
Representative Dan Saddler
Representative Maxine Dibert
OTHER LEGISLATORS PRESENT
Representative Mike Cronk
Representative Julie Coulombe
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CONFIRMATION HEARING(S):
Board of Fisheries
Greg Svendsen - Anchorage
Mike Wood - Talkeetna
Gerad Godfrey - Eagle River
Stanley Zuray - Tanana
- CONFIRMATION(S) ADVANCED
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
GREG SVENDSEN, Appointee
Board of Fisheries
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as an appointee to the Board of
Fisheries.
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE CRONK
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Asked questions during the confirmation
hearing for appointees to the Board of Fisheries.
GERAD GODFREY, Appointee
Board of Fisheries
Eagle River, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as an appointee to the Board of
Fisheries.
STANLEY ZURAY, Appointee
Board of Fisheries
Tanana, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as an appointee to the Board of
Fisheries.
FORREST BRADEN, Executive Director
Southeast Alaska Guides Organization
Ketchikan, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of Greg Svendsen, Mike
Wood, Gerad Godfrey, and Stanley Zuray, appointees to the Board
of Fisheries.
PAUL A. SHADURA II, representing self
Kalifornsky, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of Mike Wood, Gerad
Godfrey, and Stanley Zuray, appointees to the Board of
Fisheries.
GARY HOLLIER, representing self
Kenai, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of Greg Svendsen, Mike
Wood, Gerad Godfrey, and Stanley Zuray, appointees to the Board
of Fisheries.
TAD FUJIOKA, representing self
Sitka Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified that a coastal region be
represented on the board.
ACTION NARRATIVE
6:00:57 PM
CHAIR SARAH VANCE called the joint meeting of the House Special
Committee on Fisheries and the House Resources Standing
Committee to order at 5:57 p.m. Representatives McCabe,
Armstrong, Rauscher, and McKay from the House Resources Standing
Committee and Representatives Himschoot, Stutes, McCormick, and
Vance from the House Special Committee on Fisheries were present
at the call to order. Representatives Wright and Mears from the
House Resources Standing Committee and Representative Carpenter
from the House Special Committee on Fisheries arrived as the
meeting was in progress. Also present were Representatives
Cronk and Coulombe.
^CONFIRMATION HEARING(S):
CONFIRMATION HEARING(S):
^Board of Fisheries
Board of Fisheries
6:02:16 PM
CHAIR VANCE announced that the only order of business would be
the confirmation hearings on the governor's appointees to the
Board of Fisheries.
6:03:23 PM
GREG SVENDSEN, Appointee, Board of Fisheries, testified as an
appointee to the Board of Fisheries. He stated he is a lifelong
Alaskan, a graduate of what is now Alaska Pacific University
(APU) with a master's degree in teaching. He stated that he
taught for 13 years in Anchorage, and then he became involved in
building and developing. He said he has an airplane, is a
pilot, and has fished in streams throughout Alaska. He related
that he was asked to submit his name for the Board of Fisheries
and decided he would do so to give back to Alaska. He noted
that he has had over 50 articles published on fishing and other
issues. He submitted that the most important thing he sees for
the Board of Fisheries is to conserve and develop the resource
for all Alaskans.
MR. SVENDSEN specified that another reason for his application
to the board is to urge that regulations be written simply, so
people can understand them. He disclosed that in 1996, while
hunting caribou in [Game Management Unit (GMU)] 9B, he harvested
a bear, but he had misread the regulations. After taking the
bear to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), he was
informed that [the bear season] in GMU 9B was open for
subsistence but not regular hunting. He stated that this
information had been written in the regulations for GMU 9A,
which he had not read. He stated that he had never committed a
violation before, and the judge had understood his confusion.
He noted that the next year ADF&G changed the regulation and
called it the "Greg Svendsen Amendment." He expressed the
belief that the violation is still on his record even though it
should have been expunged after a year with no violations.
6:10:58 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES noted that there has been legislation
proposed [SB 128] to reverse a decision made by the Board of
Fisheries on the Area M situation. She invited any comments on
this.
MR. SVENDSEN replied that he does not quite understand the legal
process behind this and cannot comment. He expressed the
understanding that the board's job is to make decisions, but it
is the legislature's prerogative to overrule the board. He said
if he were on the board, he would look at all the information
before making any decision.
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES asked whether the threat of the
legislature overriding a Board of Fisheries decision sends up a
red flag to Mr. Svendsen.
MR. SVENDSEN expressed understanding; however, he conceded that
this is a difficult question, as it is a "slippery slope." He
stated that he does not know the legal implications, such as
whether the legislature is allowed to do this, or whether these
decisions should be left to the board.
6:13:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked about Mr. Svendsen's understanding
of the board's policy on "intercept fisheries."
MR. SVENDSEN answered that his understanding is that the fish
return to where they were spawned. He opined that the fish
should be allowed to return and not be intercepted by some other
fishery. He said he could not second guess the board's decision
in [Area] M because he was not privy to the information. He
continued that when these kinds of decisions come up, he will
take everything into account to make the best decision.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked who Mr. Svendsen would say owns
Alaska's salmon.
MR. SVENDSEN replied, "The people."
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE [requested Mr. Svendsen's thoughts] about
the importance of subsistence to Native Alaskans.
MR. SVENDSEN expressed the importance of this as their food and
subsistence.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE noted that some people say hatcheries are
important and some say hatcheries are damaging. He inquired
about Mr. Svendsen's position and understanding of this.
MR. SVENDSEN answered that if Alaska has hatcheries, they should
be on the streams and the hatchery fish should come only from
those streams. According to studies, he related, if fish from
other areas are pushed into a stream it would not take much time
before the wild fish are bred out of the whole pool. Hatcheries
are a good idea if the stock fish of that river are used, he
continued, because over time it will build up and be all wild
fish. He said he is concerned about the dumping of fish into
Prince William Sound because the silver and king salmon eat the
bait fish. He expressed the understanding that red salmon, he
continued, eat zooplankton, and the warming of the lakes and
ocean is producing more zooplankton which allows more production
of sockeye without competition to the [silver and king salmon].
6:17:08 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked whether food security should be
considered as a factor when the board is making decisions.
MR. SVENDSEN replied that food security comes right along with
subsistence, and this is the number one thing the board should
be considering in the allocation of the fish.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked how Mr. Svendsen would interpret
Alaska's sustainable salmon policy.
MR. SVENDSEN responded that maximum sustainability is the
maximum number of fish taken without depleting the resource. If
the resource goes down, too many are being taken, and if [the
resource goes up] then more can be taken, he said.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked whether the salmon policy applies
to all Alaskans. In other words, he questioned the importance
of getting the salmon to all Alaskans who traditionally use
them.
MR. SVENDSEN answered that the fish belong to the people. He
stated that [the board] must decide on allocation and some of
these other things by subsistence, personal use, sport fish, and
commercial fish, as they all have their purpose, and they all
have a right to their portion of the fish.
6:19:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT questioned who gets the fish when there
are not enough fish to go around.
MR. SVENDSEN replied that everybody must share in the
allocation. He suggested that it should start with subsistence
and then personal use, sport fish, and then commercial fish. He
continued that if there is a problem with the number of fish,
everybody must come into consideration and "take their hit."
The number one thing is to protect this resource, he stressed,
because once it is gone, it is gone. He recounted that from
1960-1980 the Upper Cook Inlet was closed to king salmon fishing
because ADF&G had allowed too many fish to be taken, and it took
20 years to build up the run again. He expressed his hope that
[resource management] can continue, although there are lots of
things going on in the ocean which are not understood.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT asked whether Mr. Svendsen considers
himself a sport, subsistence, or commercial fisherman.
MR. SVENDSEN responded that he would fall under the category of
a sport fisherman; however, he stressed that he would not make
all his decisions [in favor of] sport fishing. He stated that
he would consider the question and the allocation and make an
informed decision on the information available.
MS. HIMSCHOOT noted that in August [2022] Mr. Svendsen wrote an
article which related the opinion that because half of the
state's population lives in Southcentral, the Cook Inlet fishery
should be a sport fishery as it would be economically the best
use of the resource. She pointed out Mr. Svendsen's ranking of
subsistence, sport, and commercial and asked whether commercial
fishing should be ranked behind sport fishing.
MR. SVENDSEN expressed the opinion that all these uses have a
right to fish. He reasoned that half the state's population
lives in Southcentral; therefore, sport fishing would bring in
more money to the industry there. He qualified the statement by
saying that commercial fishermen, subsistence, and personal use
do deserve their fair share, but it is an allocation issue, and
it is a complicated issue.
MS. HIMSCHOOT requested a description of the Board of Fisheries
process and what Mr. Svendsen likes and dislikes about the
process.
MR. SVENDSEN replied that, since he is new, he cannot say there
is anything he dislikes about the board's process, and he
expressed the opinion that it is a great process. He allowed he
has disagreed with some of the board's decisions. He stated
that it is easy to complain about the process, so one reason he
volunteered is to help by using his ideas.
6:23:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE CRONK, Alaska State Legislature, noted that
his district includes most of the Yukon River as well as the
upper Kuskokwim River. He noted that these are the two main
rivers with a lack of chinook and chum salmon. He related that
people have been unable to subsistence fish for several years,
and the devastated fish runs are harming the people because the
smokehouses [are not running], the mental health aspect is
coming into play, and the culture is not being passed on. He
asked whether Mr. Svendsen was willing to make the hard
decisions to ensure fish could return to the rivers.
MR. SVENDSEN stressed that he is willing to make these tough
decisions. He reiterated that subsistence is very important.
As a terminal fishery, he said, he would like to see the fish
that spawn in a stream, get back to the stream. For an
intercept fishery, he continued, it is great when there is extra
fish and everybody can share, but the most important issue is
for people in the Interior to get enough fish to eat.
REPRESENTATIVE CRONK stated that the important issue is when a
resource has been depleted in one area, the focus is shifted to
another area. People in the Interior, he said, are shifting
from one resource to another resource, which could be the Copper
River. He continued that ignoring certain situations, and not
making these hard decisions, could set up another river for the
exact same failure.
MR. SVENDSEN expressed the opinion that it is a great idea to
have the hatcheries, but he qualified this by saying that only
the stocks of these rivers should be taken; the stocks from
other rivers should be disallowed because then the wild fish
will be lost.
6:27:27 PM
MIKE WOOD, Appointee, Board of Fisheries, testified as an
appointee to the Board of Fisheries. He related that since
coming to Alaska in 1989 he has participated in mountain
climbing, guiding, commercial fishing, and, currently, carpentry
work. He stated that he has a commercial setnet permit in Cook
Inlet. He added that he serves on various boards, including the
Mat-Su Fish and Wildlife Commission, the Upper Susitna Advisory
Committee, the Chase Community Council, and the Susitna River
Coalition. He noted he has been through two rounds of
representing the Mat-Su Fish and Wildlife Commission in the Cook
Inlet board cycle. He stated that he has attended hatchery
committee meetings and the most current Bristol Bay finfish
meeting.
MR. WOOD expressed the opinion that ADF&G has a democratic
process in hearing from the public, especially when the Board of
Fisheries has made difficult decisions regarding the health of
Alaska fisheries. He said he is aware of the hard work and
commitment involved in speaking to fishermen, reading ADF&G
reports, and traveling to witness fisheries firsthand. He
discussed how the fisheries bring Alaskans together. He
continued that, regrettably, Alaska is facing a scarcity of fish
because the resource is impacted by many critical issues. He
expressed the understanding that it will be a hard task to
understand the issues and how the Board of Fisheries can help.
He discussed the critical issues of ocean health, habitat,
bycatch, and allocation. He stated that understanding these
while balancing the economic need is important. He expressed
dedication to listening to all who care deeply for sustaining
the Alaskan way of life. He offered his appreciation for being
nominated and allowed that it will be daunting to understand the
whole spectrum of issues.
6:32:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE noted that the current administration is
pushing to open the West Susitna Access Road, which the Susitna
River Coalition is against. He questioned his opinion on
whether fish habitat can be protected during road and bridge
construction. He further asked whether Mr. Wood is willing to
be impartial when weighing cost versus benefit.
MR. WOOD replied that the Susitna River Coalition was created in
response to the Susitna Hydroelectric Project. He expressed the
understanding that the coalition has always been concerned with
habitat issues, which are major elements that the Board of
Fisheries takes into consideration. He suggested fish culverts
and bridges can be built to not overly impact the fish. He
expressed the hope that proceeds from development would be given
to the cost of "doing it right the first time," rather than
having to retrofit so fish resources are not lost.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE expressed the hope that Mr. Wood can be
impartial in regard to the cost versus benefit issue of the West
Susitna Access. He acknowledged that Mr. Wood is associated
with the Susitna River Coalition, and the coalition is strongly
opposed to the project, which causes concern.
MR. WOOD responded that he considers himself more of a "habitat
guy" than a fisherman. He remarked that he is not opposed when
things are done correctly. He added that he will recuse himself
if necessary.
6:35:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES noted that there has been legislation
proposed [SB 128] to reverse a decision made by the Board of
Fisheries on the Area M situation. She invited any comments on
this.
MR. WOOD answered that he cannot comment on a decision without
knowing the details. In order to come up with the best decision
for everybody, if possible, he expressed the opinion that the
board is there to understand the different sides and talk to all
stakeholders. He expressed doubt that the legislature should
weigh in on every decision the Board of Fisheries makes.
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES questioned Mr. Wood's opinion on whether
halibut individual fishing quotas (IFQs) should be required for
sport charter fisherman.
MR. WOOD expressed uncertainty, as he currently does not
understand this topic.
6:37:44 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked whether Mr. Wood has ever
advocated for or against any positions before the Board of
Fisheries.
MR. WOOD responded that a few years ago he joined in on
testimony via telephone, but he does not remember the details of
the conversation.
6:38:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCORMICK, regarding the dialogue on the Area M
situation and the role the legislature plays, noted that he
represents a group of people whose identity and livelihood are
connected to fish. Furthermore, he said that he represents
people who do not have access to grocery stores and must pay
around $30 for a gallon of milk. Subsistence fishing, he
stressed, offers these communities the opportunity to support
themselves. He expressed appreciation for the importance of the
board's autonomy; however, his constituents feel ignored, as the
subsistence way of life is not being given precedence. He
explained that this is a matter of identity and survival for
some communities. He questioned what weight should be given to
food security when making board decisions.
MR. WOOD expressed the understanding that subsistence is a
priority, as it is the law. He further stated that there cannot
be any allocation before there is conservation, and everybody
should bear the burden of conservation equally.
6:41:22 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CRONK asked whether Mr. Wood agrees with the
statement: "The fish on the table is the most important fish."
MR. WOOD responded in the affirmative. He said fish on the
table has kept many people alive.
6:41:53 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE questioned whether the resources or the
stakeholders are the most important factor in fisheries
management.
MR. WOOD responded that the resource is the most important. He
stated that without the resource, there would be no allocation.
He stated that he supports habitat because it is intertwined
with the resource.
6:43:13 PM
GERAD GODFREY, Appointee, Board of Fisheries, stated he is an
Alaskan Native, and because of his father's job as a state
trooper, he has lived in many places in the state. He added
that he has commercially fished, worked on the North Slope, and
worked on the Trans Alaska Pipeline System. He said he has not
commercially fished for about 10 years, but he has had a sport
fishing license for the last 20 years. He noted he has never
been a permit owner or owned a business in the fishing industry.
MR. GODFREY related that his history and involvement with the
Board of Fisheries goes back to serving in Governor Bill
Walker's administration as the Senior Advisor for Rural Business
and Intergovernmental Affairs. As needed, he had attended the
Board of Fisheries meetings in the lieutenant governor's stead.
He continued that after a new administration came in, he served
a full term of three years on the Board of Fisheries. He
explained that he did not seek reappointment because of a family
commitment. He continued that now is a good time for "throwing
his name back into the hat."
MR. GODFREY expressed support of fish hatcheries because this
fills a gap when returns do not come back. He expressed
uncertainty about the science around "straying," and this being
a major concern. He added that currently he considers himself a
sport fisherman, and his family members are personal use
fishermen.
6:48:04 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked whether Mr. Godfrey is familiar with
the controversy surrounding the intercept fisheries in Area M
and requested his opinion about the recent rejection of the
[board's decision].
MR. GODFREY confirmed he is familiar with the issue; however,
because he was not on the board at the time and did not hear the
public testimony or see the data, he cannot give an opinion. In
these situations, he continued, science and data are of utmost
importance, as is public testimony. He stated he is sympathetic
to the challenges in the Kuskokwim and Yukon Rivers, as he had
gone there for fish camp as a child and as an adult.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE inquired about Mr. Godfrey's approach to
mixed stock fisheries management.
MR. GODFREY replied that he is open minded except on proposals
to shut down hatcheries. He stated that, per [mixed stock]
discussions, he leans on the biologists' reports and data, as
well as public testimony on all sides of the issue. He can be
persuaded with compelling data and information, he said, because
he is not a participant in most fisheries with mixed stock;
therefore, he is not an authority. He continued that he asks
lots of questions to glean more information when he does not
feel he has enough information to decide.
6:50:42 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER requested Mr. Godfrey's opinion on
whether the bycatch problem is being tackled in the right way.
MR. GODFREY responded that most of the bycatch is occurring in
federally managed waters. He expressed frustration that the
state's hands are tied in managing this, as it is Alaska's
resource that is being subject to bycatch. He suggested that
the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council is not tackling
it the way it should, as there should be live observers or real-
time unalterable cameras aboard every vessel to monitor the
bycatch. He stated that while he was on the Board of Fisheries,
photos of the trolling fleet were sent to him which showed
bycatch occurring in state waters. The fishermen who sent the
photos were told by the Alaska State Troopers that troopers
cannot do anything unless the incident is caught at the time.
He offered his belief that for federally managed waters, bycatch
is beyond the scope and authority of the Board of Fisheries. He
stated that for state waters he is a proponent of using
technology.
6:53:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES noted that there has been legislation
proposed [SB 128] to reverse a decision made by the Board of
Fisheries on the Area M situation. She invited any comments on
this.
MR. GODFREY answered that when the legislature seeks to
circumvent or override a decision made by a board, regulatory
entity, or management entity that was created by the
legislature, it starts to negate the value and purpose of the
body. He suggested it could become a "tit-for-tat" when user
groups lobby their legislators to try to counter board
decisions. He suggested that, if board decisions can be
overturned after members have reviewed thousands of pages of
data and attended multiple meetings a year, there could be the
unintended consequence of not being able to find qualified
Alaskans to serve on the board. Another unintended consequence,
he added, is that the Board of Fisheries has the ability to call
a meeting and quickly respond to an emergency petition, such as
an escapement issue, whereas the legislature cannot quickly call
a session during the summer.
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES questioned Mr. Godfrey's opinion on
whether halibut IFQs should be required for sport charter
fisherman.
MR. GODFREY replied that he does not have an opinion. He
related that he has listened to people make these arguments over
the past few years. However, he said, he has not heard both
sides of the argument and does not like to make a decision
without being fully armed with information.
6:57:58 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT questioned the last time that Mr.
Godfrey fished commercially.
MR. GODFREY responded that it was the summer of 2013 in Bristol
Bay.
6:58:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCORMICK recounted that during the March 30,
2022, meeting on the reconsideration of the Upper Cook Inlet
King Salmon Management Plan, Mr. Godfrey had described the idea
of slowing commercial activities to conserve king salmon as
being akin to "stepping over dollars to pick up pennies." He
asked whether Mr. Godfrey plans to employ this philosophy when
making decisions across the state.
MR. GODFREY responded in the negative. He explained that he and
another board member had made the request for an emergency
meeting to provide release to the upper eastside Cook Inlet
setnetters. This was because ADF&G's data showed that 34,000-
plus sockeye salmon had made escapement in excess of what was
necessary. He continued that only 11 king salmon were observed
within these sockeye salmon. He argued that because this was
within the margin of error, it could have been 22 kings or 0
kings. He suggested that these setnetters were unable to fish
because the entire fishery and all the user groups were being
managed for one specific species. He expressed the opinion that
it makes no sense to not harvest 34,000 sockeyes to save
potentially 11 kings. He continued that there is also the
potential for over escapement, with some of these 34,000
sockeyes dying before spawning because the spawning grounds are
full, and the king salmon could die before spawning for this
same reason. He further argued that setnetters constantly pull
their nets, so the king salmon would not necessarily die; if
caught they could be released to go upriver.
7:00:58 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CRONK stated he represents most of the Yukon
River and the upper Kuskokwim River. He pointed out that
"sympathy" is one word the people of this area hear, but
sympathy does not put fish back in the river. He continued that
Area M is a mixed stock fishery, and this is important for the
people of his district, as genetic testing shows some of these
fish are being caught. He stressed that he does not want
sympathy, he wants decisions made which ensure these fish get up
the rivers because [right now] there is absolutely no
subsistence fishing.
MR. GODFREY responded that he said he is sympathetic because he
is. He stated that subsistence is at the top of the pyramid, so
if there is only enough fish for one user group, then it is
subsistence. He explained that this issue was not on the table
during his prior three-year term on the board. He acknowledged
that he is completely moveable on the issue of subsistence
because it concerns food security.
REPRESENTATIVE CRONK noted that currently there are not enough
fish for subsistence, and even if fish are allowed up the
rivers, it will take some time to rebuild [the stocks] before a
subsistence harvest can happen again.
7:04:16 PM
STANLEY ZURAY, Appointee, Board of Fisheries, testified as an
appointee to the Board of Fisheries. He stated he is originally
from Massachusetts where, starting at age 14, he worked as a
mechanic. He stated that he then attended university as a
zoology major before relocating to Alaska in 1973. He said his
occupations in Alaska have included fishing, trapping, and
running a chum salmon instream incubation program. He stated
that on this stream he designed pumps and incubation boxes which
eventually made the runs bigger. After moving to the Yukon
River village of Tanana, he stated that he divided his time
between trapping and fishing, and he eventually bought a
commercial fishing fishwheel permit. He stated that in 1996, he
began working as a fishwheel contractor for the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service's chum salmon counting project, where he
jointly developed a video counting fishwheel and other fish
friendly ways of enumerating passing salmon and whitefish.
Eventually he took over the project and ran it until 2015.
MR. ZURAY stated that in the early 1990s he also became involved
in fishermen's concerns and research efforts into the declining
size and numbers of Chinook salmon and Ichthyophonus disease on
the Yukon [River], which was showing up in very troubling
numbers and severity. He related that in 2001, with help from
concerned fishermen, state and federal biologists, and fisheries
researchers, he formed the Rapids Research Center. Over the
next 18 years, he said, the center's camp included hundreds of
students who came and collected size, sex, and disease data from
over 10,000 king salmon taken in the upper river. He added that
this included important data on all other species present. He
specified that until his Board of Fisheries appointment, he was
chairman of the ADF&G Tanana Rampart Manley Advisory Committee
since 1998, and he was the secretary of the Yukon River Drainage
Fisheries Association since 1993. He related that since the
Yukon River's salmon collapse, he has been working as a mechanic
and equipment operator in Tanana and spends one month in the
summer with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service looking into
Ichthyophonus disease. He said his desire to be on the Board of
Fisheries stems from requests from several people and
organizations, along with his desire to do something good for
the fisheries.
7:09:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES noted that there has been legislation
proposed [SB 128] to reverse a decision made by the Board of
Fisheries on the Area M situation. She invited any comments on
this.
MR. ZURAY responded he is not aware of this. He suggested that
there needs to be a very good reason for the legislature to do
this; however, he is not familiar with this specific situation.
7:11:00 PM
The committees took an at-ease from 7:11 p.m. to 7:15 p.m.
7:15:10 PM
CHAIR VANCE called the meeting back to order.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE related that the current administration is
pushing to open recreation and development access in Alaska, and
one of these pushes involves the West Susitna Access Road. He
explained that this would go about 80 miles west of Big Lake and
into the mountains by Rainy Pass. He questioned Mr. Zuray
whether roads can be built with fish culverts and bridges while
protecting fish habitat. He further asked whether he has taken
a position on this road.
MR. ZURAY replied he has not taken a position, and he is
unfamiliar with this issue. He expressed the belief that from
his 11 years of living on a spawning stream, there would be no
problem, as long as bridges and obstacles are built properly to
allow the salmon to pass. He expressed the understanding that
the issue would be seeing that the road is built in the right
way.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE requested that he rank the importance of
Alaska's five salmon species from a cultural and subsistence
standpoint.
MR. ZURAY answered that coming from the upper Yukon River, there
is no question that king salmon is the most important, then fall
chum salmon. He stated that fishing 40 miles downriver in
Tanana, coho salmon would be the third.
7:18:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER requested that he rank the importance of
commercial, sport, and subsistence salmon harvest.
MR. ZURAY replied that personally he ranks the subsistence
harvest as number one, with commercial next, and then sport. He
recognized that many people put sport fish before commercial,
but he said he is looking from the viewpoint of food for the
people and then the economy for the villages on the Yukon. He
pointed out that where he is from, sport fish is not an issue.
7:19:41 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CRONK requested a discussion on the in-river
hatchery work to build up the run.
MR. ZURAY responded that big hatcheries put fish into the ocean
in the beginning, and then the fish return to a bay where they
are harvested; however, he took eggs and sperm from the fish he
caught in the river. About 50 percent of the [female] fish he
caught had runny eggs, meaning the eggs were ready to be
fertilized. He stated that a 99 percent fertilization rate can
be achieved with these eggs using running sperm from the males
he caught. He then used hand pumps to put the fertilized eggs
back into the river's gravel, which resulted in an incredible
increase in the number of fish which normally hatched out of the
gravel. He stated that from observations he learned that with
live spawning salmon, half the eggs do not make it into the
gravel and another quarter go into the mouths of graylings. He
said this gravel method does not change the genetic variability
of the salmon because it uses salmon from a particular stream to
produce more salmon for the stream. He suggested that
incubating the eggs in trays away from the stream will narrow
the genetic variability over time. He related that in
correspondence with an "old timer" who had worked at the fish
hatchery in Auke Bay, he had learned that putting a guy with a
five-gallon bucket on a salmon spawning stream could do better
than a multi-million-dollar hatchery. He conceded that
politicians are the ones with the money, and they want to build
big hatcheries. He said the method he used is no longer legal,
but if it were legal it would work.
7:26:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT asked whether there was an issue with
Mr. Zuray's application for the board because the committee does
not have it.
MR. ZURAY answered that he did not receive the information until
a couple of days ago, and he had included his resume with his
application for the board position; therefore, he had presumed
the committee would have both.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT asked whether Mr. Zuray had any
conflicts of interest which affected service on the board.
MR. ZURAY replied that he has recused himself at a board meeting
because of his and his son's commercial fishing licenses. He
stated that after the meeting he had obtained his and his son's
sales records and found that over a 32-year period he averaged
about $1,900 a year and over a 12-year period his son averaged
between $100 and $200 a year. Once this information was out, he
continued, he no longer had to recuse himself from issues
because it was a meaningless amount of money; therefore, he does
not see this being an issue any longer.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT expressed appreciation that randomly
spawning salmon is no longer legal. She noted that she had to
do a lot of permitting to have an in-classroom salmon tank with
100 eggs.
7:30:19 PM
CHAIR VANCE opened public testimony on the four appointees to
the Board of Fisheries.
7:30:47 PM
FORREST BRADEN, Executive Director, Southeast Alaska Guides
Organization (SEAGO), testified in support of Greg Svendsen,
Mike Wood, Gerad Godfrey, and Stanley Zuray, appointees to the
Board of Fisheries. He noted that SEAGO represents about half
of Alaska's saltwater guided sportfishing businesses. He stated
SEAGO has engaged in the Board of Fisheries process many times
and is aware of the importance of a well-functioning board, and
the role it plays in the industries and user groups. He said
SEAGO has worked directly with Gerad Godfrey at one meeting and
found him approachable and willing to listen to SEAGO's needs
concerning a high-profile salmon management issue. He expressed
the opinion that Mr. Godfrey was engaged and even-handed. He
related that SEAGO had a short call with Greg Svendsen to get to
know him, and he sounded committed to trying to serve. He said
membership on the Board of Fisheries is a heavy load and SEAGO
trusts that Mr. Svendsen will lean on his academic background to
prepare himself on the issues. He concluded by saying that
SEAGO supports advancing [and confirming] each of the four
appointees to the Board of Fisheries.
7:32:29 PM
PAUL A. SHADURA II, representing self, testified in support of
Mike Wood, Gerad Godfrey, and Stanley Zuray, appointees to the
Board of Fisheries. He stated he is a long-time participant of
the eastside setnet fishery in Cook Inlet and commends any
individual who is willing to serve on Alaska's Board of
Fisheries. He expressed his hope that each of the appointees
will remain open minded in the process and will consider the
diverse views of other Alaskans in their decision-making
process. He reported that the Kenai/Soldotna Fish and Game
Advisory Committee voted unanimously to request the Board of
Fisheries to meet in the Kenai/Soldotna area for the upcoming
Upper Cook Inlet Regulatory Meeting. He said he supports the
confirmations of Mike Wood, Gerad Godfrey, and Stanley Zuray.
He stated that not yet having met Greg Svendsen, he does not
have an opinion for his confirmation; however, he expressed the
opinion that Mr. Svendsen's knowledge and experiences within
Alaska should be of benefit to the Board of Fisheries process.
7:34:00 PM
GARY HOLLIER, representing self, testified in support of Greg
Svendsen, Mike Wood, Gerad Godfrey, and Stanley Zuray,
appointees to the Board of Fisheries. He stated he has been
involved in the Board of Fisheries process for five decades. He
said he met Greg Svendsen playing basketball back in the 1970s
and expressed the opinion that Mr. Svendsen would be a fine
member of the board. He related that he has interacted many
times at the board level with Mike Wood and expressed the
opinion Mr. Wood would be a fine board member because he has
high energy, commitment, and puts in many hours. He submitted
that it takes a full term on the Board of Fisheries to really
become knowledgeable, and Gerad Godfrey has been a "top shelf"
board member, as he has made himself available, looked at the
data, and voted accordingly. He noted that he has not always
supported the way Mr. Godfrey has voted, but he was fully
available to the public. He acknowledged that Stanley Zuray was
"thrown into a firestorm" at the Area M meeting and the Bristol
Bay meeting, and he commended Mr. Zuray for his stances and
positions. He stated that Area M is as contentious as Upper
Cook Inlet and Mr. Zuray did an admirable job being a [first-
time] appointee. He expressed his hope that all four appointees
will be advanced from the committee.
7:35:54 PM
TAD FUJIOKA, representing self, urged that someone be nominated
from a coastal region currently without representation on the
board. He stated that fishing is an extremely important part of
his life. He pointed out that should all four nominees be
confirmed, the board's members would be geographically
concentrated such that most coastal regions would be left
without representation, including Southeast, Kodiak, and Bristol
Bay. He further pointed out that more than three-quarters of
last year's salmon catch came from regions that would not have
any board members. He urged the committee not to allow this to
happen.
MR. FUJIOKA submitted that while members of the Board of
Fisheries are supposed to represent all Alaskans, members of the
board should not be just political appointees but subject matter
experts on the fish and fisheries in their home region. Without
first-hand knowledge from a respected peer, he asserted, other
board members struggle to understand the complex relationships
between fish and fishermen that are unique to each area.
Furthermore, he said, the best board members of the past have
recognized their responsibility to represent not just fishermen
but also to speak for the fish. Unless a board member has a
strong personal understanding of specific fish populations, he
continued, they cannot adequately speak for the fish.
MR. FUJIOKA said the issue here is the overall composition of
the proposed board, not a glaring defect in any specific
individual. He suggested that the question is how to determine
which nominee to single out for replacement. He proposed that
the committees consider each nominee's experience with the Board
of Fisheries and with advisory committees. He stated that
advisory committee members learn how boards work and get a
comprehensive education on all hunting and fishing activities in
their area. A lack of this experience, he maintained, puts at
risk the fish resources in Alaska. Of the Board of Fisheries
nominees before the committees, he continued, only one has a
resume that lacks extensive experience as either a former board
member or long-time advisory committee member. He urged that
this individual is not confirmed, and instead the governor finds
a more experienced nominee from a currently unrepresented
coastal region.
7:39:02 PM
MR. SVENDSEN promised to put in the time to work hard and do a
good job.
7:39:52 PM
MR. GODFREY revisited and reframed the comment he made regarding
stepping over dollars to pick up pennies. He said that when
approaching the different stakeholders and geographic fishery
areas, he looks at whether the net benefit is far outweighed by
the net detriment. He stated that concerning the eastside
setnetters in Cook Inlet, the numbers were so disproportionate,
it was a detriment to let 34,000-plus salmon go unharvested for
the benefit of 11 kings.
7:40:53 PM
MR. WOOD stated that being a member of the Board of Fisheries is
a huge responsibility, and he will work as hard as possible.
7:41:29 PM
MR. ZURAY allowed it is a struggle to learn other areas of
Alaska and learn the fisheries, and he agreed that knowledge is
needed. He said he understands the Yukon River and subsistence
because this is where he has lived. His approach as a Board of
Fisheries member would be to listen, no matter how much he may
disagree, because this person would educate him more than with
someone whom he agrees with.
7:43:23 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 7:43 p.m. to 7:46 p.m.
7:46:18 PM
CHAIR VANCE apologized to anyone calling in for public testimony
and unable to get through. She explained that an overwhelming
number of people are calling in for another meeting which is
occurring at this same time. She asked people to send in
written testimony by email.
7:46:56 PM
CHAIR MCKAY stated that in accordance with AS 39.05.080, the
House Resources Standing Committee has reviewed the following
and recommends the appointments be forwarded to a joint session
for consideration: Alaska Board of Fisheries Greg Svendsen,
Mike Wood, Gerad Godfrey, and Stan Zuray. He advised that this
does not reflect an intent by any of the members to vote for or
against the confirmation of any individual during any further
sessions.
7:47:45 PM
CHAIR VANCE stated that in accordance with AS 39.05.080, the
House Special Committee on Fisheries has reviewed the following
and recommends the appointments be forwarded to a joint session
for consideration: Alaska Board of Fisheries Greg Svendsen,
Mike Wood, Gerad Godfrey, and Stan Zuray. She advised that this
does not reflect an intent by any of the members to vote for or
against the confirmation of any individual during any further
sessions.
7:48:28 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committees, the joint
House Special Committee on Fisheries and House Resources
Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 7:48 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| 3.31.23 Michael Wood BOF App_Redacted.pdf |
HFSH 4/13/2023 6:00:00 PM |
|
| 3.31.23 Greg Svendsen BOF App_Redacted.pdf |
HFSH 4/13/2023 6:00:00 PM |
|
| 3.31.23 Gerad Godfrey BOF App_Redacted.pdf |
HFSH 4/13/2023 6:00:00 PM |
|
| 3.31.23 Gerad Godfrey BOF Resume_Redacted.pdf |
HFSH 4/13/2023 6:00:00 PM |
|
| 1.31.23 Stanley Zuray BOF App_Redacted.pdf |
HFSH 4/13/2023 6:00:00 PM |
|
| KRSA BOF letter of support 2023 House.pdf |
HFSH 4/13/2023 6:00:00 PM |
|
| Alaska Outdoor Council BOF Letter (04-13-23).pdf |
HFSH 4/13/2023 6:00:00 PM |