HB 149 - PREFER CONSUMPTIVE USE SALMON FISHERIES Number 0096 CHAIRMAN AUSTERMAN announced the committee would continue to hear HB 149, "An Act relating to the management of salmon fisheries; and providing for an effective date." He asked Representative Kohring, the sponsor, to make an opening statement. REPRESENTATIVE VICTOR KOHRING, Sponsor, stated that he talked about the bill's intent at the last meeting and is looking forward to the hearings in the following months. Number 0300 SCOTT JANKE, City Manager, City of Cordova, testified via teleconference from Cordova, that HB 149 would dramatically affect the economic viability of coastal communities such as Cordova, whose economy is conservatively estimated to be 60 percent supported by the commercial fishing industry. He stated that a direct impact to the city is the shared fish tax from the state of Alaska, which equals $500,000 a year. He stated that the community relies on a sales tax which is based on about $33 million in sales annually and is supported by that 60 percent. Mr. Janke continued that the community has existed since 1906. In 1909 the City of Cordova became incorporated as the first city in the territory of Alaska and has always been a commercial fishing industry city. If a 5 percent allocation of the total statewide resource was taken from Prince Williams Sound or the Copper River Delta, there would be no commercial fishing in Cordova at all. He stated that the lives of 3,000 people who reside in Cordova would be affected. Number 0516 REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT OGAN stated that the committee had been hearing consistent testimony on the way the bill is written and he would now like to hear suggestions that might address the needs of the sport fishermen. Number 0552 MR. JANKE replied that if there is going to an allocation for sport fishing of 5 percent, it should be done by fishing districts; otherwise the locations that are more acceptable to the general public are going to be fished out of commercial existence. He continued that guided sport fishing should be identified as a commercial fishing enterprise. Guided sport fishing is not subsistence or sport fishing because people are making a living out of it; therefore, they should be regulated the same way as the commercial fishermen. Number 0636 CHERI SHAW, Executive Director, Cordova Fishermen United, testified via teleconference from Cordova in opposition to HB 149. She stated that giving absolute priority to the sport fishermen by allocating 5 percent of the projected salmon returns is absurd. She stated that HB 149 does not allocate equally by species or area of return. She continued that it will enable an elite set of fishermen to target every king and coho salmon in the state and every sockeye salmon in the Kenai and Copper River without ever reaching the 5 percent goal. She referred to the sponsor's statement that the problem lies in the diminished returns of salmon in the rivers and streams of Cook Inlets Upper Susitna River drainage system, which resulted in restricted sport fishing of that area. She asked if the legislature will penalize the entire commercial industry in the attempt to find a solution to the allocation problems on the Kenai Peninsula. She referred to the 1996 salmon return data; 8.5 million salmon would have been allocated to the sport and personal use fisheries if HB 149 were law. She pointed out that the Alaska Board of Fisheries and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game are more equipped to decide on these tough allocation issues. MS. SHAW continued that the sponsor did not take in account the Alaskan families or coastal and northwest Interior economies, which depend completely on the viability of commercial fishing. She stated that the sponsor ignored the fact that commercial fishing is the second largest revenue-producing industry in the state of Alaska and the largest private sector employer. Number 0822 MS. SHAW stated that HB 149 is not about meeting the needs of Alaskan anglers. The number of Alaskan resident sport licenses have remained constant since 1984. Nonresident licenses, however, have doubled and now account for over 50 percent of all sport fishing licenses sold in Alaska. She stated that overcrowding rivers with people is going to lesson the quality of the sport fishing experience and diminish the Alaskan mystique. Number 0854 MS. SHAW indicated that consumptive use is defined as a "subsistence, personal use and/or sport fishing." She stated that the bill does not ever address the subsistence user and asked if it was a ploy to fool the subsistence users into thinking HB 149 will help them. She stated that HB 149 "was drafted for the lodge owners and sport guides who cater to the nonresident high-ticket fishermen who visit the state each year." Ms. Shaw urged that Alaskans be asked if they were dissatisfied with their sport fishing experiences, and she said she felt that their answers would be no. Number 0940 MARK BUCHNER, Charter Operator, testified via teleconference from Valdez that he is confused as to the intent of HB 149. He stated that he has been a charter operator since 1983, and he has never had a problem with people catching fish. He continued that the taking of 5 percent of the stocks would unnecessarily penalize the coastal communities. He stated that he is against HB 149 and any other bill like it. Number 1130 BOB KINTZELE testified via teleconference from Kenai that he is concerned as to whether the 5 percent is limited to Cook Inlet or if it is a statewide 5 percent. He stated that if it was 5 percent based in Cook Inlet, he thought he would lose his fishing opportunity. He stated that he is sportsman and a personal use fisherman and so far, personal use Alaskan fishermen have been getting more than 5 percent. He stated that personal use Alaskan fishermen have been restricted from fishing coho salmon because of the concerns from the guided fishing industry, which is monopolized by nonresidents. He stated that the issue of sport guides needs to be addressed. Number 1303 JOHN McCOMBS testified via teleconference from Kenai that since 1978, sport fishermen in Cook Inlet have been allocated 100 percent of the early Russian River sockeye, early Kenai River king salmon and late-run Kenai coho salmon; they have also been allocated 50 percent of the late-run Kenai kings and have harvested 6 to 21 percent of late run Kenai River sockeye salmon. He stated that last year the dipnet allocation of Kenai River sockeye salmon was 100,000 fish, which resulted in a harvest of 110,000 fish. He stated that sport fishermen have a wide access to pink and chum salmon, in addition to two halibut a day without size restrictions. He continued that residents of the Kenai Peninsula struggle with unemployment most of the year. He said they "will not tolerate the proposed economic piracy masked by Vic Kohring's fish bill. While the Mat-Su Borough might have stringent set-back requirements on the rivers, none of them are enforced." He stated that Kenai Peninsula residents should not be expected to abstain from fishing in summer, while nonresidents are experiencing guided fishing through spawning habitats and the Northern District setnetters are fishing as usual. Alaska Department of Fish and Game has stated that there is no real problem with the coho and sockeye salmon in the Northern District. He stated that nonresident sport fish licenses have nearly tripled in the past ten years; 64 percent of salmon are caught by nonresidents in the Kenai River. Mr. McCombs stated that a 5 percent limit in Cook Inlet would be fine, but the current wording does not limit it to Cook Inlet. Number 1510 JIM SUMMER testified via teleconference from Anchorage that HB 149 was not put together by the Alaskan sport fishermen but instead by a group of sport fish guides. He stated that it needs to be recognized that sport fish guides are the commercial fishermen of the Kenai River. He stated that if the number of fish have declined due to an overharvest, it is due to the overfishing and increased fishing from the sport fish guide industry. He stated that the bill will reduce the amount of fish for the personal use fishery. He stated that he is a sport, personal use and commercial fisherman, and this bill does not help any of those fisheries; it is only helping the guided fishery. He continued that if the guided industry is allotted 80 or 90 percent of the fish, the river will be overspawned and the returning fish are not going to be able to produce enough smolt due to a lack of food sources. This is the problem the Kenai River has had in the past from overpopulating the river. Mr. Summer stated that the Alaska Department of Fish and Game has been doing a good job of managing the fishery since the statehood of Alaska. MR. SUMMER stated that commercial fishermen used to be able to fish from June to October; this year the season is from July 11 to August 11. He suggested that in order to help the fishery it needs to be determined where the fish are coming from to identify which stocks are coming through and at what times. Number 1838 KEN SVETC testified via teleconference from Anchorage that HB 149 does not address the real problem. The king salmon fishery in Cook Inlet is typical of what is happening to the fishery throughout the state. He stated that in 1985, 51,500 king salmon were sport harvested in the Cook Inlet and Kenai Peninsula areas. In 1992 through 1995, the average yearly sport harvest in Cook Inlet was 102,000 king salmon. He stated that from 1985 to 1995 nonresident sport fishing licenses have increased from 127,000 licenses to 238,000 licenses. He continued that during the same period Alaskan resident sport fishing licenses went from 178,000 to 176,500. He stated that residents' king salmon are being sold by commercial guides to nonresident fishermen. He felt the problem is not an allocation problem and is not caused by the commercial fishermen or resident sport fishermen. He asked when the real problem of the expanding commercial nonresident sport fishery, is going to be addressed. He that urged HB 149 not be passed. Number 2308 DEE DEE PEARSON, Commercial Fisherman, testified via teleconference from Kodiak that it appears the commercial fishermen are being blamed unfairly for the problems in Cook Inlet. She stated that it is frightening that the commercial fishermen's destiny could be decided by people in the Mat-Su area. Ms. Pearson stated that the coastal communities are dependant on the commercial harvest. She stated that the commercial fisheries have a limited fishery and suggested that be considered for the commercial sport fishery. She hoped that people will realize that the coastal communities do not have a diversity of ways to make a living to offer people, as in the Anchorage-Matanuska area. She stated that Kodiak is just dependant on commercial salmon fishing in the summer. Number 2458 REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING stated that he hoped somebody would testify in favor of HB 149. Number 2464 BRENNON EAGLE, Commercial and Sport Fisherman, testified via teleconference from Wrangell that he has fished for the past twenty years and HB 149, if law, would cause a real serious problem. He stated that it would result in the federal government's taking the fisheries, since subsistence will no longer be a priority use under this bill. He stated that if this bill was passed, it would be taking power from the Board of Fisheries. The Board of Fisheries already has the power to do what HB 149 mandates. He stated that the bill would have a devastating effect on commercial fisheries throughout Alaska. He continued that commercial and sport fishing should be of equal importance, as they are now. The enactment of HB 149 would potentially close commercial fisheries without a guarantee that the fish will be harvested by other users. He stated that the present system of allocation works well and should not be burdened with this legislation. Number 2663 KRIS NOROSZ, Employee, Icicle Seafoods, testified via teleconference from Petersburg that if HB 149 were adopted, it would be highly disruptive to Alaska's commercial salmon industry. She stated that its impact would be felt by fishermen; processing workers; supporting industries, such as fuel distributors, insurance brokers and grocery stores; and the state of Alaska. Ms. Norosz stated that although the bill was meant to target South Central Alaska, it will also impact Southeast Alaska. Southeast Alaska meets the 500,000-angler-day threshold. She stated that with the increase in road access slated for Prince William Sound, this area will soon meet the criteria as well. Number 2766 MS. NOROSZ continued that the statewide catch of king and coho salmon is less then 5 percent of the total statewide salmon harvest. The commercial fleet could lose all access to these very important species. She stated that members of the public who purchase these species would also lose access to these wild fish. She stated that most Alaskans enjoy eating these species, but they may not have the ability to harvest their own. Commercial fishermen and salmon processors provide fish for these consumers. Ms. Norosz stated that the bill would allow any commercial salmon fishery that harvested even a small portion of fish destined for the designated common consumptive use areas to be closed until the priority users get all they want. She continued that closing areas along salmon migratory paths to commercial fishermen until sport, subsistence and personal users get all they want will result in a substantive delay in harvest for commercial fishermen. This will affect the quality of the fish commercially harvested, which is of most importance in salmon marketing. She stated that with the massive quantity of farmed salmon on the market today, the only way wild salmon competes is by being of the highest quality possible. Number 2965 MS. NOROSZ stated that this bill does not take into account the fishing experience that would be provided to the sport and personal use harvesters. She stated that it focuses strictly on increasing the number of fish available in the Kenai River, regardless of whether or not they would be harvested. She stated that due to the disruption this legislation would cause to Alaska's commercial salmon industry and the state's economy, Icicle Seafoods can not support HB 149. Number 3058 LIZ CABRERA, Representative, Petersburg Vessel Owners' Association, testified via teleconference from Petersburg against HB 149. She stated that allocating 5 percent of the statewide salmon production is deceiving, unless the total percent of statewide salmon production is looked at. Last year the total was over 204 million salmon, which would allocate over 10 million salmon for sport and personal use harvesters. She stated that is it unlikely that there would be much interest in sport fishing for 10 million pink salmon; rather, the interest is in the king and coho salmon species. Last year's harvest for those species was around 4.5 million salmon, which would result in sport fishermen getting 100 percent of the entire statewide commercial harvest of king and coho salmon, still not reaching the 5 percent cap of 10 million fish. She stated that the 5 percent really translates into 100 percent of the resource, which discriminates against the other users. Number 3198 MS. CABRERA stated that in order for the 5 percent sport preference to occur, the Board of Fisheries would have to delay the commercial fishery. This bill would apply to Southeast Alaska because they had a recorded 530,000 angler days in 1995. Therefore, if the Southeast Alaska commercial fisheries were delayed, the fleet would be fishing in terminal areas for dark and unmarketable salmon. Last year, when Petersburg was faced with a similar threat under the Fairness In Salmon Harvest (F.I.S.H.) Initiative, the city passed resolutions opposing it. She stated that HB 149 is not fair, it does not provide a better way to manage the fisheries resource and it hurts Alaska's economy. HB 149 does not make sense for Alaska. Number 3261 DOUG CARROLL, Commercial Fisherman, testified via teleconference from Cordova that he is 27 years old and has been commercial fishing for 15 years. He stated that HB 149 is a result of what Representative Kohring perceives as inaction by the Board of Fisheries, although he has never attended a Board of Fisheries meeting. He stated he has attended nine days, in December of Board of Fisheries meetings in Cordova and three days in February of meetings in Ketchikan, and he has a new found respect for the Board of Fisheries' process. They face the impossible task of trying to make all users happy. He stated that the consensus among the commercial and sport fishermen at these meetings was that the board's decisions were fair. Number 3301 MR. CARROLL stated that he was insulted by Representative Kohring's statement that HB 149 is not a reflection of any opposition to the commercial fishing industry. There is no other way to perceive HB 149, which exhibits animosity to the commercial fishing industry. He reiterated what one of Representative Kohring's constituents said: "Why don't all you commercial fishermen all just roll over and die? You're all going to be extinct anyway in ten." He stated that HB 149 represents this kind of attitude and not the attitude of the average Alaskan. Number 3522 BOB MARTINSON, Co-Chair, Cordova Fishermen United, Gillnet Division, testified via teleconference from Cordova. He stated that he has lived in the Mat-Su valley for over 10 years and wanted to point out to Representatives Kohring and Masek that they are not representing him or his fellow limited entry permit holders of the Mat-Su valley. There are more than 200 limited entry permit holders and more than 2,000 crew license holders residing in the Mat-Su valley. He stated that in Anchorage, there are more than 1,200 permit holders and 5,500 crew members. He stated that HB 149 is a rewrite of the F.I.S.H. Initiative. He stated that lodge owners and river boat guides are the people backing the bill, not the sport fishermen. These sport businesses are unrestricted, and they do not have to report their catches. He stated that commercial fishermen have escapement levels that have to be met or they are not able to fish. He stated that with growing demand for salmon, it must be remembered that the bottom line should be the health of each fishery and addressing its problems. He suggested that there needs to be more enforcement and catch reporting on the Kenai River. He stated having the Alaska Department of Fish and Game managing the fisheries and the Board of Fisheries allocating the fisheries is the only fair and scientific way to deal with the issues involved. He stated that allocation should not be done by ballot boxes or special legislation but by the combined group of scientists and fishermen in an open forum, such as the Board of Fisheries. He stated that HB 149 is a bad idea. Number 3766 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN stated that he agreed that allocation should not be done by the way of the ballot box, as it sets a dangerous precedent. He stated that the legislature has delegated the authority to the Board of Fisheries to allocate the fisheries, but it is appropriate that the legislature take this issue up. Number 3910 DALE BONDURANT testified via teleconference from Kenai that he is in support of HB 149. He believed that it complies with Article VIII, Sections 1, 2, 3, 13, 15 and 17, as well as Article I, Section 1, of the Alaska Constitution. He stated that Article III states, "The fish, wildlife and waters are reserved to the people for common use." He stated that this establishes the equal right for all persons to enjoy the opportunity to participate in the personal consumptive use of these common properties. He stated that Section 4 sets out that these resources must be maintained on a sustained yield principle and the harvestable surplus is subject to preference among beneficial users. He stated that all users should have the same right of consideration for common use. All Alaskans have the right to participate according to the regulations. He continued that limited entry makes commercial fishing a restricted class of fishing with a limited number of participants and should not have priority or preference of use. He stated that his only question is about the 5 percent cap and the 500,000 angler day trigger. He stated that as long as these parameters are a management projection tool, for providing the reasonable opportunity for common consumptive users, they are acceptable and valid. As long as they remain as honest management guidelines and are not politically driven, they will remain valid. MR.BONDURANT said, "If they become political decisions that impinges upon the open access of the public trust doctrine of resources, these parameters must be reassessed as changes in demand dictate. To excuse an action because it claims to be for a greater public benefit can not be justified when it impinges on the public's right of common use." He stated that Alaska's constitutional common use provision has been recognized by the supreme court and is an equal protection of public trust that can not be advocated by the legislature, the Administration, the courts or by the vote of the people. He stated that HB 149 is timely and meets the inherent equal right obligation of the people and the state under Alaska's constitution. He said, "HB 149 meets the true common consumptive subsistence needs for all Alaskans; well, maybe not certain needs for those few who will continue to demand their self interest immunity as a specially restricted class of privileged losers." House Bill 149 meets the common open access provisions of Alaska's Constitution and the equal footing provision of the United States Constitution. Number 4262 BRENT JOHNSON, President, Kenai Peninsula Fishermen's Association, testified via teleconference from Kenai, against HB 149. He stated that his organization is a group of setnetters that has over 400 members. He stated that there is no argument that the legislature has the authority to allocate fish. However, just because the authority is there does not mean that the legislature is the best skilled body to do so. He pointed out that at the last Board of Fisheries meeting, the setnetters near the mouth of the Kenai River lost a significant portion of their season: 12 days or 25 percent of their 45-day season. He stated that driftnetters last year had their season, shortened to August 9, instead of having an unrestricted end to their season and they were required to move from the central inlet to the east side corridor. These were significant changes made to put more fish into the river for sport availability. He stated that dipnetting was liberalized along the Kenai River, and the result was a significant increase in salmon harvested in the Kenai River. He stated that 5 percent of the statewide harvest projection of 200 million would equal 10 million fish. These fish would most likely be harvested in Cook Inlet, leaving no fishery for the 750 setnetters or 600 driftnetters of Cook Inlet, and causing significant hardship to them and their families. He stated that he has only been a fishermen and did not get an education; without fishing, he would be hard-pressed to try to make a living. NO RECORDING WAS DONE ON TAPE 97-21, SIDE B; BRUCE GABRYS' TESTIMONY WAS NOT RECORDED DUE TO TAPE CHANGE. TAPE 97-22, SIDE A Number 0001 EUGENE SVETC testified via teleconference from Anchorage against HB 149. He stated that the budget should be increased in the Board of Fisheries and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. He stated that biological escapement goals are of no value if the eggs are not hatching. Habitat control is paramount in the success of a larger and healthier salmon resource. He stated that the seafood industry is the second biggest private employer in Alaska, the oil industry being the first. He asked that the trained personnel in the Alaska Department of Fish and Game and the Board of Fisheries do their job. Number 0053 LARRY MALLOY, Representative, Kodiak Regional Aquaculture Association, testified via teleconference from Kodiak against HB 149. He stated that this bill would allocate through legislative mandate the use of Alaska's salmon resources. He stated that the association feels that informed salmon allocation responsibility should remain exclusively within the state's Board of Fisheries process. He stated that this process has yielded the sustainable high level of salmon production that Alaska is experiencing statewide. He stated that for the situations where negative salmon production trends have developed, most informed people feel that more aggressive actions by the Department of Fish and Game, such as using their regulatory authority and by operating within the framework of the finely tuned Board of Fisheries' management plans, will correct those trends. In addition, user group concerns identified in HB 149 will be addressed. He stated that the association believes that allocation must be done where there is a clear overriding consideration for a conservation priority and where there exists clear understanding and identification of allocation criteria. He stated that HB 149 is contrary to this with its emphasis on harvest needs without a true escapement priority. He stated that the use of percentages as an allocative tool requires that in-season harvest data by a user group be accurate and reasonably available. Currently, only the commercial net fisheries yield that information. He stated that HB 149 is not practical or necessary. Number 0311 SCOTT EARSLEY, Employee, Inlet Salmon Processors, testified via teleconference from Kenai against HB 149. He stated that if the 5 percent were taken, it would eliminate his job as a commercial seafood processor as well as his co-workers' job. He estimated the processor has $16 million to $20 million in annual payroll, with 50 percent going to Alaskan residents. Number 0527 THEO MATTHEWS, Executive Director, United Cook Inlet Drift Association, testified via teleconference from Kenai against HB 149. He stated that the association represents over 600 salmon drift permit holders in Cook Inlet. He stated that the only closures and restrictions for sport fishermen in the Mat-Su valley have occurred on early-run June king salmon. He stated that there has not been a commercial fishery for these salmon since 1953. The setnet fishery has also been nearly totally restricted. He stated that the problem is not stemming from the commercial fisheries. Number 0700 MR. MATTHEWS stated that in order to have 4,500 more sport caught coho in the Mat-Su valley, the drift fishery had to lose access to 28,000 coho salmon, 18,000 pink salmon, 500,000 chum salmon and 190,000 sockeye salmon. He stated that this was passed by the Board of Fisheries under the Northern District Coho Plan. It cost the drift fishermen 10 percent of their average gross income. He stated that HB 149 is not fair and has a dramatic impact on the drift fishery. Number 0841 CHRIS GARCIA, Commercial Fishermen, testified via teleconference from Kenai against HB 149. He stated that in the 1970s the commercial fisherman of Cook Inlet volunteered a tax to enhance the fishery, which started the aquaculture association. He stated that it appears to be working because each year there are more fish coming into the inlet, resulting in bills trying to take the fish away from the commercial fishermen. He stated that the problem the legislature should be looking at is the increase in commercial guiding on all the river systems in Alaska. He stated that he grew up in the Mat-Su valley and now people are complaining about the amount of fish available, but the problem is the increasing amount of people. As a result, roads are being built across the streams and the spawning beds are being polluted; the increased population is what is killing the fish. Number 1247 JAMES JOHNSON, Owner, Sport Fish Guide Operation, testified via teleconference from Kenai that HB 149 is not a very good attempt by the sport fish interests to get better access to the resource. He stated that the 5 percent portion of the bill does not make a lot of sense. He stated that the fish are supposed to be a common resource property. Therefore, Alaskans should be able to have the fish they need for personal use and the surplus should go to commercial fishing. He stated that there are problems when the Department of Fish and Game does not know what the escapement level is on certain species due to lack of funds. His concerns are whether there will be enough fish for future stocks and that the fish be allocated to its users. He stated that HB 149 falls short of that. Number 1435 GERALD McQUEEN testified via teleconference from Kenai that last year all subsistence fishermen were required to fish on a 4-mile run from his house, between the Kasilof River and the Kenai River. He stated that the beach was flooded for that one-week opening. He stated that there were about 300 people with "net sets" scrounging for fish during that one-week opening. Allocation of days for subsistence fishing is not fair. If five days are to be allocated, then residents should be able to pick the five days they are able to fish. The present way is causing a lot of discontent. Number 1700 HERMAN FANDEL, Owner, Sport Fishing Business, testified via teleconference from Kenai in support of HB 149. He stated that he owns two sport fishing businesses. Mr. Fandel felt that the fish belong to all of the people of Alaska and the commercial fishermen take all of the fish and pay nothing for them. He stated that a fish caught by a tourist is worth over 200 times more to the local economy than the same fish caught in a commercial net. Number 1928 IRENE FANDEL, Owner, Sport Fish Business, testified via teleconference from Kenai in support of HB 149. She stated she owns two sport fishing businesses and her businesses rely on sport- caught fish. Number 2016 JOHN EFTA testified via teleconference from Kenai against HB 149. He stated that he was infuriated with the legislature's economic analysis of the Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER) study, which declared the study "a wash". He stated that the state has done a good job of crowding the rivers to their full potential; by putting more fish in, the resource will be destroyed. He stated that results of the study indicated that a nonresident sport fisherman was worth more than a resident sport fisherman, and this is about going after the bigger buck. Number 2202 CLIFF SKILLINGS, Representative, Southeast Alaskan Seiners Association, testified via teleconference from Ketchikan against HB 149. He stated that HB 149 is allocative in nature and should be taken up before the Board of Fisheries. He stated that in Southeast Alaska the seine fleet harvested 52 million pink salmon last year. Noncommercial harvesters would have to catch 2.6 million pink salmon in order to make 5 percent. The 5 percent would equal 100 percent of the king salmon and coho salmon stock and a large percentage of the sockeye salmon stock. He stated that HB 149 would eliminate the commercial troll fleet and place severe harvest restrictions on the commercial seine and gillnet fleets. MR. SKILLINGS stated that when the seine fleet is allowed to fish after the 5 percent is met, the quality of salmon will be very poor. This will lower the quality of the Alaskan fisheries' resource products as well as the economic values to the fishermen and coastal municipalities that depend on the generation of raw fish taxes. Number 2408 MR. SKILLINGS stated that HB 149 also supersedes the ongoing Pacific Salmon Treaty negotiations, which affect conservation for the entire Pacific Northwest. Under this agreement, trollers have taken a severe decline in harvestable king salmon to provide for a long-term king salmon conservation. Number 2423 MR. SKILLINGS asked that when deliberating on HB 149 the committee keep in mind that it will result in a lower-quality product at a time when Alaska has made a commitment to higher quality Alaska salmon products. It will eliminate the Department of Fish and Game management practices by pushing commercial harvests closer to the terminal harvest areas. He stated that Alaskans support protecting the salmon runs, preserving commercial fishing jobs, and recognizing the socioeconomic benefit to rural and coastal Alaskan communities derived from the commercial fishing industry. He asked that commercial fishing not be punished. Number 2603 HUGH MALONE, Representative, Kenai Peninsula Fishermen's Association, stated that he wanted to draw the committee's attention to their May 7th letter pertaining to the ISER study. He stated that it is important to understand that the study was not conclusionary because of the relatively small percentage of salmon available, 20,000 sockeye salmon, for the study. The study did point out that if it had been a larger amount of salmon, the overall effects on the economy would have been strongly negative. He felt it is important to use the information in the context of the study. Number 2729 GERON BRUCE, Legislative Liaison, Office of the Commissioner, Department of Fish and Game, stated that the department does not support HB 149. He stated that the legislature did delegate their authority to the Board of Fisheries, for salmon allocation, 35 years ago. He stated that in making fisheries management decisions, there are a lot of details involved which have to be considered in order to reach the goal. He stated that this resource is constantly changing, which is why the board meets so often. He stated the Board of Fisheries is the best venue to deal with these kind of issues. He reiterated the changes the Board of Fisheries made in the shorting of the season in the commercial fisheries, in order to re-allocate the fish to the sport fish industry in the Northern Cook Inlet. Number 3326 CHAIRMAN AUSTERMAN stated that there are enough salmon coming into the Kenai River that the Board of Fisheries would be able solve the allocation issue. He asked how the issues of the upper river problems are being addressed. Number 3433 MR. BRUCE replied that the Division of Sport Fish is going to do further surveys on coho salmon, in addition to the $1 million of Exxon Valdez settlement money that will go towards work in Cook Inlet and the Susitna River, to determine escapement levels. He stated that their assessment of the cohos overall is that the resource is healthy, although particular streams are on the low side. Number 3718 REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING stated that many streams and rivers in the Mat-Su are experiencing diminished coho salmon runs, according to the Department of Fish and Game's information. He stated that Fish Creek had 2,078 salmon in 1993 compared to 682 in 1996. He continued that there does seem to be a lot of fish in Cook Inlet, but the decreasingly small runs in the Mat-Su is what prompted him to file this legislation. Number 4020 MR. BRUCE responded that he understood that his constituents are situated at the end of a long area that the fish have to pass through. He stated that he is assuming that the statistic that he quoted was based on aerial and foot counts, which are not the most accurate ways to count the fish, because of the cloudy water conditions. He stated that the catches of cohos by recreational fishermen have been fairly stable, indicating a stable resource. He stated that he asked the regional supervisor of sport fisheries about the escapement counts, and the regional supervisor confirmed that there is a problem with the numbers due to the level of visibility. Mr. Bruce stated that a weir was put in to check the numbers compared to the visual count and there were significantly more fish counted with the weir in place. He assured Representative Kohring that if there was a conservation concern, they would be serious about addressing it. He stated that answers to problems are not easy to come by due to the many factors, such as environmental, climatic and habitat conditions and the different fisheries operating on them. Number 4330 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN asked if he thought it was enough of a problem that there could be a finding under the Endangered Species Act of an endangered species in some areas. Number 4501 MR. BRUCE replied that in order to be listed as an endangered species, a number of criteria have to be met, in addition to low numbers, and those low numbers would have to be so low that the runs could not be able to sustain themselves. He stated that even with the statistic that Representative Kohring cited, it would still be a sustainable run. TAPE 97-22, SIDE B Number 0004 MR. BRUCE stated that the Department of Fish and Game would take action before it reached an endangered species level; that is the whole point of their management. He continued that a river system like the Susitna is difficult and expensive to assess because it covers such a large area. He stated that they do have plans and projects that would help the department better monitor the river system. He stated that if the legislature really feels strongly about this area, they could help the Department of Fish and Game, by allocating resources. Number 0150 CHAIRMAN AUSTERMAN asked Mr. Bruce whether he could give his office list of the projects that the Department of Fish and Game is interested in using the million dollars for. Number 0159 MR. BRUCE stated that the list was prepared in association with SB 40. He stated that the department would be interested in talking with the legislature on what would be the best use of that money, in terms of which projects would give the best information on those problems. He stated that the projects have to last at least through one cycle of the species in order to be effective and accurate. Number 0424 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN referred to the failure of the bar coding effort. He suggested that maybe sport fish guides should be looked at as a commercial entity, and he asked how the Board of Fisheries looks at the guides. Number 0532 MR. BRUCE replied that guides fall under the sport fish user group, but the Board of Fisheries does have the authority to treat the guided anglers separately, such as by issuing different bag limits. He stated that it might be premature to decide that the coded bar tagging of fish did not work; however, it is possible that the technique can still be refined. NUMBER 0750 CHAIRMAN AUSTERMAN stated that there will be a series of meetings held this fall, and he does want the Department of Fish and Game to be involved in those meetings. Number 0800 MR. BRUCE stated that the Department of Fish and Game would be eager to participate. JERRY McCUNE, Representative, United Fishermen of Alaska, stated that when studying escapement, the goals can not be the only factor that is looked at. He stated that users, out-migration in the spring and catch records are extremely important. He stated that since 1982 to the present, the coho salmon catch in the Mat-Su valley has tripled, which must be factored into the numbers. He suggested that education might be needed for the general public. He stated that this is an emotional issue for everyone involved and maybe the bill needs to be put aside in order to address the problem. Number 1057 CHAIRMAN AUSTERMAN stated that HB 149 will be held over. This is the last meeting of the session and a series of meetings will be held this fall after the commercial and sport fishing seasons have closed.