CSHB 547(RES) am MORATORIUM ON S.E. DIVE FISHERIES  CHAIRMAN LEMAN brought CSHB 547(RES) am before the committee as the next order of business. REPRESENTATIVE BILL WILLIAMS , Co-chair of the House Resources Committee, explained the legislation will place a four-year moratorium on entrance into the sea cucumber, sea urchin, geoduck and abalone fisheries in Southeast Alaska. The increased interest and effort in the Southeast Alaska dive fishery has caused the number of divers to be precariously high at the end of 1995. Also, there has been more than a keen interest in the dive fisheries by residents and nonresidents alike. The purpose of the moratorium is to set aside a period of time for examination of each aspect of the Southeast Alaska dive fisheries. The Department of Fish and Game has been gathering assessments and management data on these fisheries. He said a moratorium on the new entry into Southeast Alaska dive fisheries is necessary to allow a proper review analysis of these data to ensure a continuing viable fishery. Representative Williams said the Southeast Alaska sea urchin fishery cannot be open due to a lack of research and management. A large number of new divers interested in this fishery would be difficult to management and may threaten the sustained yield of the sea urchin resource. The moratorium will provide all interested parties the opportunity to develop a long-term management and research plan for this developing fishery. Representative Williams stated these valuable fishery resources need special attention, and HB 547 will provide the mechanism for the development of a sustainable fisheries which will provide economic opportunities for the participants, the southeast communities and the state. He urged the committee's support of the legislation. Number 101 FRANK HOMAN , Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission, Department of Fish & Game, credited Representative Williams, Senator Taylor and Representative Mackie for getting the divers in Southeast Alaska together on this issue. He said it was one of the first times in the Commission's history where a majority of the divers were in agreement on a bill and came to the legislature and the commission for some assistance. Mr. Homan said the need for action this year is try to cap the effort in these dive fisheries, and because of the complex system that the Limited Entry Commission has as subject to moratoriums, they couldn't implement a moratorium within the time frame that's needed. In fact, the commission cannot implement a moratorium on their own initiative; it has to come from the commissioner of fish and game, through the Board of Fisheries, to the commission. Mr. Homan expressed the commission's pleasure at the cohesion amongst the divers and their taking the initiative to come to the Legislature for its assistance. Number 118 CHAIRMAN LEMAN stated the committee would take testimony from individuals waiting to testify on HB 547 at various sites on the Legislative Teleconference Network. JIM DENNIS , testifying from Craig, stated that he and 15 other people in attendance in Craig support the bill and the amendment that was added to it on the House floor. ANDY KITTAMS , testifying from Petersburg and representing the Petersburg Chapter of the Southeast Alaska Harvest Dive Association, stated their support of CSHB 547(RES) am. They believe it is a good thing for the dive fisheries, as well as the fishermen. There has been a substantial increase in the fisheries in the last few years, and this appears to be the only to way cap the level so that the people currently in the fishery have the chance of making some money. LAUREN ROGERS , a Wrangell diver testifying from Petersburg, voiced his support for CSHB 547(RES) am. Although he hates to see limited entry in the fishery, he sees no other choice. He said if something isn't done, the situation is only going to get worse. Of the 533 people that are going to be in this moratorium, 501 are sea cucumber divers. He noted Department of Fish and Game statistics show the average weight of a sea cucumber is decreasing, and the quota for each area that rotates through on a three-year basis is declining. So even if it stays at this number of people, there will continue to be a decline in the economics of this fishery, the department will probably have to come up with a more conservative scheme. MATT DONOHOE , testifying from Sitka, said he has been fishing in that area for the past 20 years, although he does not participate in the dive fishery. He stated he is opposed to language in the bill which preempts an entry into the sea urchin fishery. He said it is a fishery that doesn't exist in any numbers, and to put a limited entry program on a fishery that isn't there yet is setting a dangerous precedent in the state. Number 269 LARRY TRANI , President of the Sitka Chapter of the Alaska Harvest Divers Association testifying from Sitka, stated CSHB 547(RES) am is a compromise bill. The original version of the legislation was accepted by all the divers in Southeast Alaska, as was the language in the current version. He said any further modification to the bill will seriously jeopardize the near unanimous support it now has, and he urged it be passed in its current version. He has watched the dive industry grow since 1970, and it is now to the point where few people can make any meaningful amount of money and the number of participants has the potential of threatening the stocks. He added that the dive industry has done everything it can to slow the fisheries down, as is apparent by the self-imposed regulations they are now diving under. JAMES LECRONE of Sitka stated his support for CSHB 547(RES) am and urged its passage. He also stated this is a moratorium, not a limited entry program. It will allow the state a period of time to examine the fishery without new entries. JANUSE KUNAT of Sitka voiced his agreement with Mr. Trani's testimony. He added that the bill is for Alaskan divers to protect the resources. He urged of HB 547 in its current form. [TESTIMONY BY RAYMOND CAMPBELL HAS BEEN TRANSCRIBED VERBATIM] RAYMOND CAMPBELL : My name is Raymond Campbell. I've been an Alaskan resident for 19 years, and I've been a harvest diver for eight years. I oppose Bill 547; the way it stands it right now there's a lot of problems with it. Excuse the pun, but it smells fishy. I've been diving urchins for three years. I've participated in the test fishery down in Metlakatla, and I'm going to be excluded from diving in the moratorium so a group of guys who have never touched an urchin before are going to be allowed to fish in the moratorium. You know, its put me out in the cold, and I see no reason for it. My permit says "statewide" on it. I've fished all over the state, and the way this thing is written, I'm out in the cold. I've come down here and I've bought a boat specifically to be a diver in southeast, and there's just some real problems with it. I'm getting cut out so that a bunch of people can get in with this amendment that they put to the bill. With this participating five consecutive years, there is going to be people participating in the abalone, or there are going to be people allowed to participate in the abalone fishery that have never done so in the past, in the geoduck fishy that have never done so in the past, and in the urchin fishery that have never done so in the past. And people like me who have got landings in abalone, cucumbers and the dive urchins and have pioneered the fishery are going to be out. I thinks it's a pretty all for one group of fishermen kind of bill, and like I said, I oppose it. With the way it stands now, I oppose it. Now, I do understand there are problems, but it seems like there's been a lot of people that are managing these fisheries that have been dragging their feet on the way they've been managing it, and I think there's other ways of managing it. CHAIRMAN LEMAN : Where have you been diving? RAYMOND CAMPBELL : I've dived in Kodiak, and in the late eighties I started diving urchins in Kodiak. I've dived in Southeast in the early nineties for cucumbers. I've dived in Southeast in '95 for dungeness. I've dived in this urchin fishery, in the test fishery down in Metlakatla. I've even dived in Florida for sponges, but I am an Alaskan resident for the last 20 years. Like I say, I'm out in the cold, and I feel like I've pioneered this urchin fishery, and to have me out in the cold so a group of guys who have never touched an urchin can have it to themselves for four years is rotten. I also don't like the way this has gone through. It got proposed on the 25th of March and it went through the House lickety split. Like I said, I can understand the problems with this fishery and I can understand that a lot of people want to do something with it, but the way this bill is now, there's too many problems with it. What they're doing -- by doing it only with Southeast, they're going to take all the problems that they have in Southeast and they're going to move them north and west, and the problems that they have down here are just going to move to Kodiak and Cook Inlet and the small dive fisheries they have up there. So like I said, I'm against this bill. CHAIRMAN LEMAN : I think this question is probably better directed to Representative Williams. Is it true that, as Mr. Campbell is saying, that if you--and it looks like on top of page three--if you have commercially harvested sea cucumber, abalone, geoduck or sea urchin, any of those, then you qualify for the permit in all of them? Is that correct? REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS : That's the way it was read, yeah. During the five-year calendars of '91... REPRESENTATIVE MACKIE : That particular section means that if you have participated in each of the years, which means in five consecutive years, and that was the question that I was going to ask the witness. He stated that he has been fishing the last eight years, and the way this bill is that if you fished either in the sea cucumber, abalone, geoduck or urchin fishery in the last five years, then you would qualify under the bill. RAYMOND CAMPBELL : In Southeast. Some of my deliveries have been in Kodiak and the Kodiak cucumber fishery. The years that I fished Southeast were '91 and '92. Then in '93 I fished crab most of the year, and the only harvest diving I did in '93 was in Florida for sponges for a short trip down there. So although I did participate in harvest diving in the year '93, I didn't harvest dive in the state of Alaska because I was crab fishing. I fished king crab and salmon and barradie crab and opies. I'd also like to say that commercial fishing has been 90 percent of my income. I've been doing it for 19 years except for about a six-month stint in the mid eighties that I worked on a tug boat, but commercial fishing is my livelihood and I've been getting cut out on these moratoriums and limited entry permits ever since I've been fishing. I did get a big 150 pound halibut IFQ, although in the 80's sometimes the halibut fishing was the majority of my income, now I'm allowed to go catch a 150 pound halibut. That halibut IFQ program was a shaft for the Alaskans, the same with other things. I've started out getting cut out of a hand troll permit down here in Southeast; I've gotten cut out of numerous fisheries, and I'm a full-time fisherman. The other thing I see is I see people fishing not to catch fish, but to get permits, and I thinks that's one of the reasons you've got so many divers down here. People are saying, "Well, it's not economically feasible to dive, but if I don't dive, I'll miss a year and I'll get cut out of a permit." When they changed the laws in southeast, changed the seasons from three days to one day, I decided to fish in Kodiak, and now it turns out I should have come down here and hit a resource that was already hurting, simply not because I needed to make a living, simply because for the permit and for the right to be able to fish on it in this moratorium. Like I said, I understand the problems, but I think this bill stinks. It smells like rotten fish. CHAIRMAN LEMAN : How many other divers from other areas of Alaska who have harvested in all five of those years do you think would be similarly situated to you. RAYMOND CAMPBELL : I don't have those particular numbers with me, but I do know there are people in the room that... CHAIRMAN LEMAN : Mr. Homan, do you have any idea? FRANK HOMAN : I don't have the answer, but we have the data to get the answer. CHAIRMAN LEMAN : Okay, I'd like to see that, you know, if there are some who maybe went somewhere else in Alaska because of the resource and would get cut out, but who have a consistent pattern of harvest. It may be worth looking at. Is that something you discussed, Representative Williams in the other committee? REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS : Yes, we've been trying to work with the fishermen on this bill. I do sympathize with the witness right now, and I think we were trying to work something out for people like him on this, and hopefully we'll get it taken care of by the time it gets to the next committee. CHAIRMAN LEMAN : Maybe we can take care of it in this committee. It's probably where we want to do the work on this. RAYMOND CAMPBELL : The other point I'd like to make is there are some divers that participated in the past fishery that are going to be cut out, and I feel those guys are the guys that were pioneering this urchin fishery. I'm participating in the test fishery and we had to sign a release that said participating in the test fishery will exclude us from -- well, not being any criteria for being included in any moratorium or limited entry scheme. I signed that when it was time to go fishing. I didn't even have any understanding that that was part of the deal when I came down, and I really wonder about the wisdom of cutting people out who pioneer a fishery from the fishery, in one that doesn't even exist. [END OF VERBATIM TESTIMONY] Number 425 PAT CASSIN , a licensed sea urchin diver testifying from Ketchikan, said under the current version of HB 547, he will qualify to dive for sea urchins because of participation in the Sitka fisheries. Also, under HB 547, participants in three other fisheries will qualify to dive for sea urchins. He questioned if it was the intent of the Legislature that through this bill the participants who qualify under the three separate fisheries be given a higher priority classification for entry permits than those who have actually fished for sea urchins. TIM FOLEY , testifying from Ketchikan, stated he has a statewide Alaska sea urchin permit. He is currently in the test fishery, and he pointed out that he and others put all of their time and effort in that test fishery, not participating much in the other dive fisheries in Southeast Alaska, and through this legislation they are not being recognized as doing so. JEFF MARTIN , a diver in the test fishery testifying from Ketchikan, stated he dives for sea urchins professionally for a living. He believes that he has done a lot in this test fishery to make it happen, and he wants the chance to be a part of the moratorium and be licensed for the fishery. He said CSHB 547(RES) am is leaving him out because he did not fish the other fisheries. He estimated there are approximately 15 divers in the test fishery who will not qualify under the language in the bill. He requested that the bill be rewritten so that the people who have made this sea urchin fishery happen have a chance to stay here and make a living at it. CLAY BEZENEK , testifying from Ketchikan, stated he supports CSHB 547(RES) am. He said it is a fairly complex issue, but it basically all comes down to dollars and cents. The participation level for all the fisheries has reached a saturation level and the legislation was well written to deal with this situation. He supports the bill, as written, and he believes the other problems can be dealt with by the Limited Entry Commission at a later date. Number 483 SCOTT THOMAS , representing the Southeast Alaska Harvest Divers Association and testifying from Ketchikan, stated the organization took a vote and approximately 90 percent of its membership supports CSHB 547(RES) am. He said commercial fishing is his sole source of income, and for the past 10 years he has been the owner/operator of a southeast seine operation and has fished in numerous fisheries, including the dive harvest of sea cucumbers and geoducks. In the three years he has been involved in the dive fishery, he has seen the participation increase dramatically, and the past year's participation has reached a level to where these fisheries are no longer feasible. Passage of the legislation will enable the effective management of the fishery, and it will provide the opportunity to the fishermen who have already made commitments to the industry. DUANE KING , testifying from Ketchikan, said he basically supports the legislation although he sees a problem with it. Many of the persons who would qualify for a sea urchin permit under the bill have never participated in a sea urchin fishery in Southeast Alaska. If everyone who ends up with one of the other dive permits also receives a sea urchin license, the number of participants will be unmanageable. He believes many of these persons will only pursue the sea urchin license just to sell out as soon as they can to the highest bidder. He suggested a fair and manageable fix would be to give Limited Entry Commission the option of using participation in the sea urchin fishery during the moratorium. ERIC HAMILTON , testifying from Ketchikan, stated he built his boat specifically for the dive fisheries and focused on sea urchin. He is presently diving in the sea urchin test fishery, and he believes sea urchin divers should be recognized for the contribution to starting a fishery. He noted that under the current language of the bill, a minimal landing of cucumbers, geoducks or abalone entitles the purchase of a sea urchin permit, thus, even a two- pound landing of cucumbers or geoducks, entitles the diver to a sea urchin permit, but it offers no recognition of the thousands of dive hours during the sea urchin test fishery. Number 553 ERIC WOELFEL , a life-long Alaskan fisherman testifying from Ketchikan, stated he participates exclusively in dive fisheries, and he has fished in Southeast Alaska, Cook Inlet and Kodiak for cucumbers. He, too, is currently participating in the sea urchin test fishery. He has not always worked in southeast; because of the limited number of days he often found it more financially lucrative to participate in the fisheries up north. He would like to see those landings count towards qualifying for a southeast permit. He also supports the participation in the test fishery as qualifying individuals for the urchin moratorium. MS. BOBBIE IVANOFF , testifying from Kodiak, voiced her objection to the current version of HB 547 because she thinks it is only beneficial to an exclusive group of divers. If there is a moratorium, it should include all of the Alaska divers. She questioned how a moratorium can be put on a fishery that really isn't existing yet. Number 576 NORM DEGNER , testifying from Wrangell, said he can see the point of the Ketchikan divers who have been diving for sea urchin, but Ocean Fresh had the right to pick who they wanted. He noted there are several divers in Wrangell, including himself, that ran up large phone bills calling Ocean Fresh to try to be part of the test fishery. If that was counted for qualification into the moratorium, then there would be a lot of divers who were left out, not because they didn't want to dive, but because there just wasn't a place for them. He said the members of the divers association in Wrangell would like to see HB 547 passed in its current form. ED GRAY , testifying from Sitka, voiced his support for CSHB 547(RES) am. He has been a diver in that area for six years, and he got into the other fisheries because of the decreasing in dive time. He recognizes the need for a moratorium for a more controlled situation. He also noted that he and several other divers made an effort to be part of the test fishery, but they were excluded from that contract. He said those people involved in that program were aware that it was a private contract and it would not qualify them in the future for a moratorium. TAPE 92-52, SIDE B Number 001 STEVE LACROIX , a member of the Board of Directors for the Southeast Alaska Dive Harvest Association testifying in Juneau, stated the organization has over 50 active harvest divers, as well as many associate members from the Ketchikan business community who are helping promote the dive industry for their community. A poll was taken of the membership on their support for CSHB 547(RES) am and they had almost unanimous support for it. He said the few divers who have expressed opposition to the bill are primarily not Alaskans who have come here and participated in a test urchin fishery and have taken opportunities away from Alaskans. He said this bill will stop them and will stop hundreds of other people like them from taking these opportunities away from Alaskans. He noted the new participation in these fisheries comes primarily from non fishermen, out-of-state professionals, permit hunters, and, in this case, sport divers, which is bad for the industry. He said this bill doesn't just help a few fishermen get permits; it creates a platform for the development of a $25 million a year potential industry in Southeast Alaska that these communities need. Number 075 LARRY COTTER , testified in Juneau on behalf of Ocean Fresh Seafoods, which is the company that has been conducting the test fishery for urchins in Southeast Alaska out of Metlakatla. He said there is no question that a moratorium is appropriate and necessary in the geoduck, sea cumber and abalone fisheries. One might raise the question of whether or not a moratorium is necessary in urchins, and, Ocean Fresh Seafoods, at first, questioned whether there might be better ways to address the furor or over participation in that fishery as it develops during the next few years. However, Ocean Fresh Seafoods is willing to go forth and support the moratorium in the urchin fisheries and to move forward and start trying to focus on an appropriate way to manage these fisheries so that they be operated on a year-round basis so that the true social and economic benefits can be returned to all Alaskans. He said this has been the goal of Ocean Fresh Seafoods from the beginning. Mr. Cotter said that after listening to the testimony, he believes the bill should take into account those participants in the test fishery who otherwise do not qualify. There are about 15 of those individuals who do not qualify for a moratorium permit, and about half of those individuals are Alaskan residents. The total number of people that would receive a license under HB 547 is in excess of 500, so he fails to see how 15 people, seven or eight of them who are Alaskans, will have any meaningful adverse impact upon this industry or the other Alaskans and non Alaskans who are going to be participating. Mr. Cotter said the test fishery was the result of three years of effort by Ocean Fresh Seafoods to try and convince the state to begin to open a commercial sea urchin fishery in Southeast Alaska. Finally the Alaska Department of Fish & Game went out to public bid to seek a company that was willing to pay the state's cost up front in exchange for the right to harvest urchins so that the state could assess the resource and determine the life history perimeters and other things necessary to allow a commercial fishery to occur. The company has established for the very first time that a sea urchin fishery in Southeast Alaska can be economically viable. Number 125 REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS asked if the 15 individuals in the test fishery have participated in any other dive fishery in the state. LARRY COTTER responded that he knows one of them has, but he is not sure about the rest of them. He added that the company encouraged those divers not to participate in the other dive fisheries because they felt they shouldn't be doing that as long as they were participating in the test fishery. REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS related that he has information that of those individuals who participated in the test fishery, 16 were non residents and two were residents. CHAIRMAN LEMAN commented that what the bill is trying to do is show a history of participation over several years, and there may be other individuals like Mr. Campbell who have had a long history of participation. Number 200 REPRESENTATIVE MACKIE said he, too, was concerned about Mr. Campbell's testimony because he has been an Alaskan and he has participated in some of the fisheries, and he thinks that needs to be looked at. However, that also opens up the question of what the numbers would be if other people who have participated in other parts of the state are allowed into the fishery. This dive fishery is continuing to expand and, unless the state stops it at 500 at this point in time, next year there could be 800 people involved. The question is whether or not the resource can withstand that sort of assault by more divers coming, whether they are from out of state or they are residents of the state. LARRY COTTER emphasized that Ocean Fresh Seafoods supports the moratorium, whether or not the divers from the test fishery are included. There being no further witnesses to testify on CSHB 547(RES) am, CHAIRMAN LEMAN closed the public hearing, and stated the bill would be set aside for further work to see if some of the concerns can be resolved.  CSHB 547(RES) am MORATORIUM ON S.E. DIVE FISHERIES  CHAIRMAN LEMAN brought CSHB 547(RES) am back before the committee. He noted that Michael Byrer, Caley McCay and Andy Kittams of Petersburg were standing by on the teleconference network waiting to testify on the bill. He then asked the three gentlemen if they were in favor of the legislation, because it was his intent to move the bill as soon as a quorum was established. It was acknowledged that the three men are in support of CSHB 547(RES) am. CSHB 546(RES) am was set aside until a quorum of the committee could be established.