HB 143-COMMERCIAL FISHING CREWMEMBER LICENSES  10:53:24 AM CHAIR SEATON announced that the final order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 143, "An Act relating to crewmember fishing licenses." 10:53:34 AM DOUGLAS DUNCAN, Staff, Representative Paul Seaton, Alaska State Legislature, paraphrased from the sponsor statement, which read: HB 143 increases the cost for a seven-day commercial fishing crewmember license by $30, establishing the cost at $60. This increase in license cost addresses the growing problem of multiple consecutive short-term license purchases. The seven-day license was created by the Legislature as a way for tourists to experience commercial fishing in Alaska. These short-term crew licenses (also known as dude licenses) have been successful in their original intent, but there is concern that fishing crew members who would otherwise purchase an annual license are instead purchasing numerous consecutive short-term licenses. As a trend, this decreases license receipt revenue to the state and impacts the Fishermen's Fund (a fund administered by the Department of Labor and Workforce Development to assist with the medical costs of accidents incurred during commercial fishing operations). As a group, those purchasing short-term licenses may be less experienced on a commercial vessel, and thus more likely to get injured, placing a burden on the Fishermen's Fund without helping to adequately pay for the program. MR. DUNCAN stated that the use of multiple licenses had resulted in a revenue loss to the Fishermen's Fund, as 39 percent of the license fee went to the fund. He estimated the loss of revenue to the state and the Fishermen's Fund to be $285,000 since the implementation of the program in 2005. He reiterated that the proposed bill would increase the cost of the seven-day license to $60, up from $30, to encourage the purchase of an annual license. He stated that the current program was not able to effectively limit the purchase to one temporary license per person per year. 10:56:36 AM CHAIR SEATON reminded the committee that there had been a presentation about this from Alaska Department of Fish & Game and Department of Labor & Workforce Development. He directed attention to the charts from that presentation. [Included in members' packets] 10:56:57 AM CHAIR SEATON opened public testimony. 10:57:05 AM MR. JORDAN stated his support for HB 143, and offered follow-up comments on HB 110. Regarding proposed HB 143, he offered his belief that a problem did exist when it was cheaper to purchase seven-day commercial fishing licenses in succession versus a seasonal license. He suggested that the seven-day commercial licenses be priced at $30.00 for residents and $100.00 for non- residents. Directing attention to page 1, line 7 of the proposed bill, he pointed out that the seven-day commercial license did not allow fishing with a rod and reel while on a commercial fishing vessel. He expressed his support for the proposed bill, with his suggested amendment for a change in the price of the license. CHAIR SEATON asked for clarification about fishing with rod and reel, and whether the proposed $100.00 non-resident fee would cover that aspect. MR. JORDAN, in response, offered his understanding that a seven- day commercial license would not allow fishing with a rod and reel while on a commercial fishing vessel whereas, a full commercial license would allow use of a rod and reel on the commercial vessel. He expressed his support for this aspect. 11:02:48 AM JAMES HERBERT, Commercial Fisherman, opened his comments with three questions: what is the purpose of the seven-day license; who benefits from this license; and, what is fair. He stated that this idea had first been introduced in the Alaska State Legislature in 2004, with an effective date in 2005. He reported that this had been a difficult financial time for commercial fishing in Western Alaska, and that this idea had been to spur tourist interest in commercial fishing. He offered his belief that the implications for licensing, liability, and insurance associated with this had not been considered. He pointed to the data which indicated a rapid increase in the sales of non-resident, seven-day crew licenses, while the number of resident seven-day licenses had decreased. He noted that, although ADF&G did not indicate the districts for these licenses purchases, he conjectured that the majority were for the short, intense seasons in Bristol Bay and Cook Inlet, as multiple shorter licenses were less expensive than an annual license. Referring to the attached fiscal note, [Included in members' packets] he pointed out that the projected revenue from the proposed bill would be appreciably more if it also included the sales of seven-day commercial licenses for only two or three extensions. He offered his support for the seven-day commercial license with "a fair allocation," for the benefit of Alaska residents, while non-residents should be fairly assessed for participation in commercial fishing. Offering some guidance for pricing, he reminded the committee that the current price for a seven-day non-resident sport fishing license was more than twice the cost of a resident sport fishing license. He stated that the limit for a claim to the Fishermen's Fund had been increased to $10,000. He reported that 39 percent from the sale of each fishing license was allocated to the fund. He offered his belief that an increase to the non-resident seven-day permits would lead to a decrease in revenue, with the possibility of more injuries to less experienced, non-resident fishermen, and a greater burden on the Fishermen's Fund. He expressed his support for the proposed bill. 11:09:25 AM REPRESENTATIVE HERRON asked if there could be a limit of two to the number of consecutive licenses purchased. MR. HERBERT offered his belief that the points of sale through the large number of vendors would make it difficult to track and to enforce. 11:10:33 AM REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS shared that he had also explored this possibility and had determined that, although it was a great idea, it was "just not logistically feasible." 11:11:18 AM CHAIR SEATON closed public testimony. 11:11:50 AM CHAIR SEATON moved to adopt Amendment 1, labeled 28-LS0520\A.1, Bullard, 3/11/13, which read: Page 1, line 1, following "licenses": Insert "; and providing for an effective date" Page 1, following line 10: Insert a new bill section to read:  "* Sec. 2. This Act takes effect January 1, 2014." 11:12:36 AM REPRESENTATIVE HERRON objected for discussion. CHAIR SEATON reviewed the need to coincide the effective date with the publication of the ADF&G permit books. 11:13:35 AM REPRESENTATIVE HERRON removed his objection. There being no further objection, Amendment 1 was adopted. 11:13:50 AM REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS suggested that the rate of the commercial license remain at $30 for residents and be raised to a rate of $60.00 for non-residents. He opined that it was the non-residents who were "gaming the system, right now, to get these multiple permits, instead of getting the year-long commercial fishing license." He stated that this also kept the seven-day price lower than a seasonal permit for an in-state family member. 11:15:09 AM KEVIN BROOKS, Deputy Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner, Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G), in response, said that the statutes would need to be reviewed, as there was an annual resident fee with a differential, currently $140, for the annual non-resident fee. He suggested that, for fee construct, it was easier for a proposed bill to have the same fee for residents and non-residents, as the specified differential for non- residents already existed. He pointed out that this differential was reviewed every three years; therefore the price point would also change every three years. He reported that the new annual differential rate would be $190. He expressed agreement for the lower residential seven-day commercial permit, as the records indicated that only 17 seven-day residential permits were purchased for a second period. He pointed out that the cost for two of these residential seven-day permits was equal to the cost for an annual license. He suggested that the cost for a seven-day commercial license for both residents and non-residents be equal to half of the cost for an annual commercial license. REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS stated his disagreement with the increase of the non-resident commercial license, and suggested that a non-resident commercial license cost equal to one-third of an annual commercial license would be more equitable, and would be "pegged to that changing price point." MR. BROOKS stated that analysis had indicated that the price point could change the behavior of the buyer, and that the fiscal note reflected an annual price which would be less expensive than buying more than three seven-day permits. He explained that the fiscal note would be revised if the prices in the proposed bill were changed. CHAIR SEATON asked if the committee wanted to work with ADF&G to further investigate an option for the differential in license price between residents and non-residents. 11:20:53 AM REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS expressed her agreement with a price differential between resident and non-resident licenses, and she commented that the seven-day licenses were not always "gamed." 11:21:46 AM CHAIR SEATON reviewed the rate proposals that had been considered as a result from public comment. He asked ADF&G to consider the differential, and suggest an appropriate rate that would be optimally effective for a seven-day license. [HB 143 was held over.]