CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 301(FIN) "An Act relating to the Chitina dip net fishing permit; and providing for an effective date." Co-Chair Therriault provided members with a proposed committee substitute, work draft 1-LS1516\S, dated 4/19/00 (copy on file). SENATOR WILKEN, SPONSOR testified in support of CSSB 301(FIN). The Chitina fishery is one of the largest in the state. Over 10,000 household permits are issued each year, with approximately 20,000 - 30,000 Alaskan residents participating. Last year approximately 118,000 salmon were harvested. In Dec. 1999, the Alaska Board of Fisheries reclassified the Chitina Personal Use fishery to a Subsistence fishery. The designation of the dip net fishery as subsistence will have little impact on the way the fishery is managed and has little to do with the need to secure public access and provide services. Regulations governing the Chitina Fishery require people to have a permit issued by the Department in their possession. This permit serves as the harvest record. AS 10.05.340 (a) (22) sets a fee for a "Chitina Personal Use Dip net Permit" at $10. This fee has been in place since 1990. Proceeds from this fee go the fish and game fund and have been used to pay Chitina & Ahtna Native Corporations for access across their lands and for outhouse and garbage services. An agreement between the Department of Fish and Game and the Corporations determines the percentage distribution and services. Senate Bill 301 amends the existing statute by renaming the "Chitina Personal Use Salmon Dip Net" fishing permit to the "Chitina Dip Net" fishing permit, and increases the permit fee from $10 to $25 dollars. It changes the name of the permit to remove the words "personal use", as it is no longer a "personal use" fishery. The legislation changes the fee to coincide with the new agreement reached between the Corporations and the Department of Fish and Game. This new agreement is intended to provide for maximum legal public access to the dip net fishery while minimizing conflicts between the private landowners and the fishermen at Chitina. The legislation was amended in the Senate to exempt senior citizens. Senator Wilken observed that private property owners are impacted by dip netters crossing their land to access the river. The legislation is an attempt to negotiate a settlement between corporations, private landowners and the state to resolve conflicts of private property and signs and fences. In 2000, dip netters will pay $25 for their permit. Since the fishery is now designated a subsistence fishery there is no requirement for a sport-fishing license to fish there. In 1999, people were required to have a $15 dollar sport fishing license and the $10 dollar Chitina permit, for a total expense of $25 dollars. Under this plan, only the proposed $25 dollar Chitina permit will be required. Since the Chitina permit is a household permit, families could save under this plan. For example a family of two adults paid a total of $40 dollars last year, this year it will only be $25 dollars. Services will be significantly increased and improved over past years. Access to the Native lands is more identified than in previous agreements. The process of obtaining the permit will be available from Department offices in Anchorage, Palmer, Fairbanks, Glennallen and Chitina. This will allow better service to the public, making it easier and faster to obtain the permit, and decreasing the management costs to the Department of Fish & Game. Without a change in the name of the permit, the Department is unable to collect a fee for the permit, because it is not a personal use fishery. Without the permit fee or other provisions, funding for services and access would be unavailable. It is uncertain what the Corporations would do with regard to affecting access to the river, but families going to Chitina this summer could be faced with the potential for conflict. Senator Wilkens noted that the legislation is supported by the Alaska Outdoor Council, Alaska Dip Netters Association, and the Fairbanks Fish and Game Advisory Committee. Vice Chair Bunde observed that the revenue collected by the Department of Fish and Game would be reduced. He pointed out that those that are not trespassing would still need permits. Senator Wilken responded that everyone has the opportunity to trespass. He emphasized that he would not have introduced the legislation if he didn't think that private land was being impacted. Boaters fish from the shore, which can be public or private. Representative J. Davies spoke in support of the legislation and stressed that there is a problem. Representative Phillips spoke in support of the legislation and stressed that there is a similar problem in Homer with hunting in the backcountry. STAN BLOOM, FAIRBANKS testified via teleconference in support of the legislation. He spoke in support of the intent language adopted by the Senate Finance Committee. He stressed that dip netters pay for their services. He observed that state funding is not available to pay for the services. He felt that the legislation would help to reduce conflicts. He pointed out that 30,000 dip netters impact land owned by Native corporations. Co-Chair Therriault clarified that Mr. Bloom supports the intent and findings included in the legislation. Mr. Bloom added that money should be appropriated for services. He added that the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities should be involved and included in the intent language. ALLEN BARRETTE, FAIRBANKS testified via teleconference in opposition to CSSB 301(FIN). He noted that the court ruled that there is a 300-foot easement to the river. There is a right-of-way provision included in state law. He maintained that there is plenty of public land available without trespassing. He expressed concern that the legislation would encourage other large property owners to negotiate trespassing taxs with the Department of Fish and Game. He noted that sportsmen and subsistence users use a state trail though his private property. He questioned if the Department of Fish and Game would collect a trespass fee for other areas. He asserted that other groups are not being charged an access fee. LISA HARBO, FAIRBANKS testified via teleconference in opposition to CSSB 301(FIN). She did not feel that she should pay an access fee to the state for fishing on the railroad right-of-way, which belongs to the state. She stressed that the state should establish where public access exists instead of requiring a fee. MARK HEM, FAIRBANKS testified via teleconference in opposition to the legislation. He pointed out that the Native Corporation is a conglomerate of landowners operating for profit. He suggested that money be set aside to survey the land and determine the problem. He acknowledged that there is no agreement and that there may be problems in Chitina, but emphasized that it is not a good reason to pass a law. He stressed that the state would be guilty of discrimination if it refused an access tax on other private land used to access state land. He noted that the fee was charged 10 years ago, but pointed out that the fishery has increased. He maintained that most people do not know that they are paying a trespass fee, but think they are paying a fishing permit. He asserted that there are objections to paying a fee to a private corporation. Co-Chair Therriault asked if Mr. Hem had seen the proposed committee substitute, which would provide funding to identify public lands within the Copper River Railroad right-of-way. Mr. Hem responded that he had reviewed the proposed committee substitute. He acknowledged that the proposal is a good attempt to try to reconcile something for the up coming year. He expressed concern that the state would give public money to survey private property. Co-Chair Therriault pointed out that when he surveyed his property that his neighbors also benefited. He stressed that the state's right-of-way is being surveyed. Mr. Hem noted that the corporations are putting forth the allegations of trespass. GREG MACHACEK, FAIRBANKS testified via teleconference in support of the legislation. He recommended that the problem be put to rest. He acknowledged that corporations may benefit from marking the right-of-way, but emphasized that it needs to be addressed. He felt that the fee was on the high end. He maintained that if the legislation does not pass that more people would access the fishery from boats. TOM SCARBOROUGH, FAIRBANKS testified via teleconference. He stressed that the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities is the manager of the right-of-way. He emphasized the need for a physical survey to establish the right-of- way. He felt that the Department of Natural Resources should manage the area as a state campground and that the Department of Fish and Game should manage the fishery. He did not think the legislation is a long-term solution. He estimated that it would take $100 thousand dollars to survey the land and recommended that the state purchase the land, He suggested a sunset clause. He questioned if the current Administration would address the situation. JOSEPH HART, ATTORNEY, AHTNA, GLENNALLEN testified via teleconference in support of the legislation. He noted that he represents the corporations that negotiated the agreement with the state. He pointed out that the mean high watermark has never been established. The private property owners provided the toilets that are present. He noted that other states require a fee for private property access. He observed that the agreement has been in place for more than ten years. He maintained that money should be put aside to pay for services. He noted that the Native Corporation pays people to pick up trash from those that are using their land to access the fishery. He observed that the corporation owns the land beneath the right-of-way. He maintained that the land is not for sale or trade. (TAPE CHANGE, HFC 00 - 127, SIDE 2) In response to a question by Co-Chair Therriault, Mr. Hart acknowledged that it would be good to establish the right- of-way. He felt that establishment of the right-of-way would strengthen their arguments that the public is going outside the right-of-way. He maintained that there are safety concerns with parking. The original fee request was $25 dollars and would make public money available for services. Representative Austerman pointed out that other private landowners establish and collect their own fees. Mr. Hart responded that the Department of Fish and Game agreed to work with private landowners and the public to collect fees. JOE BALASH, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT provided information on the legislation. He explained that the Department of Natural Resources was included since they manage state land. There was not a conscious decision to exclude the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities. Co-Chair Therriault suggested that the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities be included. He pointed out that the Corporation technically owns all the land within the right-of-way. DICK BISHOP, VICE-PRESIDENT, ALASKA OUTDOOR COUNCIL (AOC) testified in support of the legislation. He observed that the intent language reflects concerns and maintained that it is appropriate. The legislation is essential to allow people to fish in the coming summer. A long-term solution would still be needed. He agreed that the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities would need to be consulted. He pointed out that the intent is to assure that the fishery can begin at the start of the season. He acknowledged that not all of the members agree with the Council's position. Representative Austerman questioned if the state should be responsible for the collection of fees charged by other private property owners that imposed an access fee for hunting. Mr. Bishop responded that the ideal situation would be for the private landowner to take responsibility for the collection of fees. He stressed that it is not possible to address the issue in the context of the bill. He added the issue should not preclude resolution that would allow dip netters to have access in the current season. Vice Chair Bunde observed that a sport fishing license fee cannot be assessed, since it is no longer a sport fishery. He felt that there should be some cost associated with the use of the resource. He noted that the state would retain $7 dollars of each trespass fee that it collects. He questioned the financial impact on the Department of Fish and Game. KEVIN BROOKS, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME acknowledged that the change in designation has created problems. The entire amount would come to the state. The state would pay the corporations $18 dollars of the $25 dollar fee. The department will work to maintain efforts to manage the fishery. He noted that the legislation would be a solution for the upcoming season, while they continue to work on a long-term solution. Vice Chair Bunde questioned the cost of collecting the fee and stated that he would like to see the activity pay for itself. Mr. Brooks responded that the $7 dollars would cover the provision of services that have been described, such as bathrooms. The management cost would be born by the department. He noted that cost would not be under the Division of Sport Fish. He observed that it would be hard to quantify the cost of the collection because there is already an ongoing effort. He stressed that the fee is to cover access. In response to a question by Representative Austerman, Mr. Brooks confirmed that a portion of the $10 fee that was charged before it became a subsistence fishery covered access fees to the private landowner. Representative Austerman asked if there is a regulation to institute an agreement between the landowners and the fees that were collected. Mr. Brook responded that the department has statutory authority to enter into cooperative agreements under Title 16. He noted discussions are occurring regarding the collection of fees. Co-Chair Therriault amended the proposed committee substitute to read: Department of Natural Resources and the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities to identify the portion of the Copper River Railroad right-of- way, associated with the Chitina dip net fishery, to carry out this intent. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. Co-Chair Mulder MOVED to ADOPT work draft 1-LS1516\S, dated 4/19/00 as amended. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. Senator Wilken expressed his appreciation for the amendments to the legislation, but questioned if the change from a 5- year to a 3-year negotiated agreement would be of concern to the Department of Fish and Game. Representative J. Davies suggested that the sunset be on June 1, 2001. Co-Chair Therriault noted that there is a contract for the current year and that the next negotiation would be for three years. Senator Wilken noted that the legislation only fixes the fee. Negotiations on the agreement can occur without changing the fee or requiring additional legislation. Representative J. Davies responded that the sunset date would require the legislature to review the issues. Representative J. Davies MOVED to ADOPT a sunset date of on June 1, 2001. Co-Chair Mulder OBJECTED. KARA MORIARTY, STAFF, SENATOR WILKEN explained that the department expressed concern that a sunset would be detrimental to negotiations. Representative J. Davies WITHDREW his motion. Representative Austerman questioned the fee structure. Mr. Brooks explained that there would be a new fiscal note of $150 thousand dollars in contractual: $130 fish and game funds and $20 general funds from the senior exemption. Representative Austerman observed that the legislation specifies that the survey would be paid from the fee collected. Mr. Brooks noted that there is $100 thousand dollars from the $10 dollar that was collected. Co-Chair Therriault observed that the cost of the survey would be negotiated; it would not preclude the department from requesting general fund support from a future legislature. Mr. Brooks clarified that the revenue estimate is based on 10,000 permits resulting at $150 thousand dollars. This money would be fully allocated for the current year. Co-Chair Mulder MOVED to report HCS CSSB 301 (FIN) out of Committee with the accompanying fiscal note. Representative J. Davies OBJECTED for the purpose of discussion. Mr. Brooks explained that the amount collected, which goes to the department is the existing $100 thousand dollars. Co-Chair Therriault noted that there is enough authorization to reflect the portion of the money that is retained by the department. Representative Austerman noted that the survey would not be done until the next year. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. HCS CSSB 301(FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with a new fiscal impact note by the Department of Fish and Game.