NONALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE  HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON FISHERIES  February 26, 2026 10:02 a.m. MEMBERS PRESENT Representative Louise Stutes, Chair Representative Bryce Edgmon, Vice Chair Representative Rebecca Himschoot Representative Chuck Kopp Representative Kevin McCabe Representative Sarah Vance Representative Bill Elam MEMBERS ABSENT  All members present COMMITTEE CALENDAR  HOUSE BILL NO. 304 "An Act relating to the duties of the commissioner of fish and game; establishing the sport fishing angler access account; establishing the sport fishing angler access surcharge; and providing for an effective date." - MOVED CSHB 304(FSH) OUT OF COMMITTEE HOUSE BILL NO. 253 "An Act relating to the fisheries enhancement loan program; and providing for an effective date." - HEARD & HELD PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION  BILL: HB 304 SHORT TITLE: SPORT FISH SURCHARGE SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) MCCABE 02/13/26 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS 02/13/26 (H) FSH, FIN 02/19/26 (H) FSH AT 10:00 AM GRUENBERG 120 02/19/26 (H) Heard & Held 02/19/26 (H) MINUTE(FSH) 02/26/26 (H) FSH AT 10:00 AM GRUENBERG 120 BILL: HB 253 SHORT TITLE: FISHERIES ENHANCEMENT LOAN PROGRAM SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) BYNUM 01/20/26 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/16/26 01/20/26 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS 01/20/26 (H) FSH, FIN 02/26/26 (H) FSH AT 10:00 AM GRUENBERG 120 WITNESS REGISTER JANE PIERSON, Staff Representative Louise Stutes Alaska State Legislature Juneau, Alaska POSITION STATEMENT: On behalf of the House Special Committee on Fisheries, presented the CS to HB 304. DOUG VINCENT-LANG, Commissioner Alaska Department of Fish & Game POSITION STATEMENT: Responded to committee questions regarding HB 304 JOE FELKL, Legislative Liaison Alaska Department of Fish & Game Juneau, Alaska POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions pertaining to HB 304. REPRESENTATIVE JEREMY BYNUM Alaska State Legislature Juneau, Alaska POSITION STATEMENT: As prime sponsor, introduced HB 253 to the House Special Committee on Fisheries. TREVOR SHAW, Staff Representative Jeremy Bynum Alaska State Legislature Juneau, Alaska POSITION STATEMENT: On behalf of prime sponsor, Representative Jeremy Bynum, gave an overview of the Fisheries Enhancement Loan Program and read the sectional analysis to HB 253. DOUG VINCENT-LANG, Commissioner Department of Fish & Game Anchorage, Alaska POSITION STATEMENT: Answered committee questions pertaining to HB 253. ALBERT SMITH, Mayor Metlakatla, Alaska POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions and gave invited testimony in support of HB 253. ACTION NARRATIVE 10:02:45 AM CHAIR LOUISE STUTES called the House Special Committee on Fisheries meeting to order at 10:02 a.m. Representatives McCabe, Vance, Elam, Himschoot, and Stutes were present at the call to order. Representatives Edgemon and Kopp arrived as the meeting was in progress. HB 304-SPORT FISH SURCHARGE  10:04:02 AM CHAIR STUTES announced that the first order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 304,"An Act relating to the duties of the commissioner of fish and game; establishing the sport fishing angler access account; establishing the sport fishing angler access surcharge; and providing for an effective date." 10:04:32 AM REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT moved to adopt the proposed Committee Substitute (CS) to HB 304, labeled 34-LS1375\G, Bullard, 2/24/26. 10:04:45 AM CHAIR STUTES objected for the purpose of discussion. 10:05:06 AM JANE PIERSON, Staff, Representative Louise Stutes, Alaska State Legislature, on behalf of the House Special Committee on Fisheries, presented the CS to HB 304. She explained that there were a few changes from Version I to Version G. The changes can be explained as follows [original punctuation provided]: Sec. 2 - AS 16.05.050 (c) (Page 1, Lines 12-13) The biennial report has been changed to a report every four years. Sec. 3 AS 16.05.130 (i) (Page 1, Line 14 Page 2, Lines 1-10) Changes how monies in the sports fishing angler access account shall be disseminated. First to produce the report, with the remainder to be allocated to programs intended to directly benefit license purchasers by developing, improving, and maintaining access, facilities and other infrastructure, and services for nonmotorized sports fishing. Sec. 5 in version I AS 16.05.340(i) is removed, because version G no longer has a sunset date and the subsection is therefore no longer necessary. Sec 5 AS 16.05.340 (Page 2, Line 22- Page 3, Line 11) Changes the angler access surcharge from $1 for sportfish licenses to a specified amount for each sports fishing license type (the new scale can be found on page 3). This section still maintains that residents who are eligible for a low-income resident license or a free military license are exempt from paying a surcharge.   Sec 7 & Sec 10 in version I Are eliminated since version G no longer includes a sunset date. These two sections were in version I and were deleted from version G. Sec. 7 were the repealers for January 1, 2032, sunset date found in section 10 in version I. Sec 7 & 8 (Page 3, Lines 18-19) are conforming amendments to the effective dates in version G of HB 304. 10:07:26 AM REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE commented that he appreciates the help putting the Committee Substitute together and felt that it helps the original bill. He appreciated the sunset date being removed and felt that every four years there was a reasonable timeline for generating a report. Additionally, he felt that supporting the Sportfishing Angler Access Account was good. 10:09:01 AM REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked about the original report in 2007 known as the "Economic Impacts and Contributions of Sportfishing in Alaska." She appreciated that a new report could be prepared every 4 years. She said that no sunset date is a little bit concerning since sunset dates give the legislature an opportunity to review processes. She asked that in 2007, whether the state still had freshwater logs to help ascertain how many fish were removed from rivers and whether this information was tied into the original report. CHAIR STUTES noted that the Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G) Commissioner, Doug Vincent-Lang, and ADF&G Legislative Liaison, Joe Felkl, were available to address these types of questions. 10:10:38 AM DOUG VINCENT-LANG, Commissioner, responded that he was not sure whether freshwater fishing logs were around in 2007. However, he noted that there was statewide harvest survey information that went into the study. He was not sure whether the saltwater logbook program was operational as well. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said that the reason she asked is that a great report is built with great data. She said that there had been provisions in place to have data based on the sportfishing industry and currently there was no freshwater logbook program in place. She inquired how the state would build the economic report moving forward. She noted that support for the proposed legislation included future efforts to acquire data rather than rely on surveys and perceptions. She said that a dollar value needs to be tied into the fish to allow for better Board of Fisheries (BOF) decision making. COMMISSIONER VINCENT-LANG responded that he could follow up with information from 2007 [when the previous economic study was conducted]. He said that for the new survey, there would be statewide saltwater logbook data available. He said that while freshwater logbook data was not available, there are other ways of ascertaining information from freshwater sportfishing operations. He noted that ADF&G is in the process of updating surveys to allow for better in-season reporting. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked whether the freshwater sportfish charters were required to send surveys out like personal use fishery participants are required to fill out. COMMISSIONER VINCENT-LANG responded it depends where you operate in the state. He noted that in some places in the Kenai River, there are still some in-season assessments, whereas other areas there are no logbook requirements. He said that there used to be a requirement for freshwater logbooks, but it was ended by the legislature. 10:15:00 AM JOE FELKL, Legislative Liaison, Alaska Department of Fish & Game, said that there was an evaluation of the CS and ADF&G anticipates the generated revenue at approximately $900,000 annually. He said that this would provide the department with sufficient funds for the current Sportfishing Angler Access Program. He said that projects associated with the program include the construction of trails, fish cleaning stations, land acquisition, camping facilities, restrooms, and a variety of other amenities. CHAIR STUTES noted that the report would take priority. MR. FELKL confirmed that the economic report would take priority over these types of projects. CHAIR STUTES asked whether there was any impact on funds generated from the Dingell-Johnson Act. MR. FELKL noted that the current Sportfishing Angler Access Program uses some Dingell Johnson funds and the proposed bill would provide a dedicated revenue stream for angler access projects, allowing Dingell Johnson funds to be utilized in other areas as well. 10:17:19 AM COMMISSIONER VINCENT-LANG added that there is a federal mandate that 15 percent of these funds need to go into boating access projects. He said that ADF&G has struggled over the last several years regarding how the state can pay for non-boating access projects. He said that this directly competes with other Dingell Johnson funds and the proposed bill would facilitate the completion of other projects. 10:18:24 AM REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE said that he was interested to find out that in 2022 non-resident licenses amounted to 376,022 and the resident licenses amount to 259,517. He said that if someone was involved in tourism, this is the kind of data that could be sought. He noted that Representative Vance and him recently were meeting and there was a discussion of "bare boats." He said that bare boats are where there is a lodge that has dozens of boats, with no guides, therefore no logbooks. He discussed the process that someone would use a bareboat. He said that it is important that the survey covers this kind of activity, and how many bare boats were in operation. He noted that bare boat operations have irritated many Alaskans. 10:20:36 AM REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT asked for Commissioner Vincent-Lang's perspective on bare boats. COMMISSIONER VINCENT-LANG said that the issue of bare boat charters is a growing issue. He said that there are two points that the department would like to evaluate. One, how many bare boats are in operation and being rented. Two, what the harvest totals are coming from bare boat operations. He said that harvest totals are more difficult to ascertain since on a charter vessel, a guide is responsible for logging a catch. He said that when redesigning the harvest survey, the question would be whether someone participated in a fishery while using a bare boat. 10:21:44 AM REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked what the intent was regarding distribution of the report. She asked about what type of format the report might take and what the intent might be. COMMISSIONER VINCENT-LANG responded that he would hope that ADF&G would get a report back from whatever consultant would get hired and the report would be used to develop both a paper and electronic report. He did not envision printing hundreds of copies of a large report. 10:23:12 AM The committee took an at-ease from 10:23 a.m. to 10:27 a.m. 10:27:09 AM CHAIR STUTES opened public testimony on HB 304. After ascertaining that nobody wished to testify, closed public testimony. 10:27:55 AM REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT moved to report HB 301 out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSBH 301 (FSH), Version 34- LS1375\G, Bullard, 2/24/26 was moved from the House Special Committee on Fisheries. 10:28:41 AM The committee took a brief at-ease. HB 253-FISHERIES ENHANCEMENT LOAN PROGRAM  10:32:23 AM CHAIR STUTES announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 253, "An Act relating to the fisheries enhancement loan program; and providing for an effective date." 10:32:53 AM REPRESENTATIVE JEREMY BYNUM, Alaska State Legislature, as prime sponsor, introduced HB 253 to the House Special Committee on Fisheries. He noted that HB 253 pertains to the Fisheries Enhancement Loan Program and it has long played a vital role in sustaining commercial, sport, and subsistence related fisheries in Alaska by providing critical access to capital. He noted that this capital supports infrastructure improvements that strengthen both fish stocks and coastal economies. He explained that under current law, loan eligibility is limited to qualified regional associations and approved nonprofit corporations. He said that HB 253 would extend eligibility to include federally recognized tribal organizations that operate fish hatcheries. He said that the proposed legislation would make a few conforming changes to the authority of the commissioner to include the eligibility for tribal organizations and maintain the existing loan caps. He noted that by incorporating federally recognized tribal organizations in the Fisheries Enhancement Loan Program, it would strengthen collaboration and reinforce the long-term sustainability of fisheries in Alaska. 10:35:42 AM TREVOR SHAW, Staff, Representative Jeremy Bynum, Alaska State Legislature, on behalf of prime sponsor, Representative Jeremy Bynum, gave an overview of the Fisheries Enhancement Loan Program and read the sectional analysis to HB 253. He explained that the program was established in 1976 and prior to 1981, loans were presold to the Department of Revenue for funding. He said that in 1981, the fisheries revolving loan fund became an official fund. He said that loans are available for planning, construction, and operations of a fish hatchery facility. He said that loans can also support pre-construction operations necessary to obtain a permit. He explained that the maximum loan amount is $10 million with a maximum loan term of 30 years; the first 6-10 years of the loan do not accrue interest. Noted that in recent fiscal years (FYs), from FY21 to FY25 there was a total of $22,108,000 in loans issued He said that in FY21, the fund was the largest of the five years with loan totals at $10.8 million and FY22 was the smallest with only $1.6 million in loans issued. He said that of the 13 loans over the last fiscal years, the average amount was $1.7 million dollars. MR. SHAW noted that HB 253 would amend AS 16.10.500 which relates to the declaration of policy for the Fisheries Enhancement Loan Program. MR. SHAW proceeded to read the sectional analysis to HB 253 [original punctuation provided]: Section 1. Amends AS 16.10.500 relating to the declaration of policy for the fisheries enhancement loan program. This section updates and clarifies the state's policy governing the fisheries enhancement loan program. The section expands loan eligibility to include federally recognized tribal organizations that operate fish hatcheries on an Indian reservation or under a federal permit, in addition to qualified regional associations. Section 2. Amends AS 16.10.510 relating to the powers and duties of the commissioner. This section updates the commissioner's authority under the fisheries enhancement loan program to explicitly include eligible tribal organizations alongside qualified regional associations and approved local nonprofit corporations. Conforming changes ensure tribal organizations are treated consistently throughout the statute, while retaining existing provisions. Section 3. Amends AS 16.10.520(a) relating to loan limits. This section updates the loan limit provisions of the fisheries enhancement loan program to reflect the inclusion of eligible tribal organizations as borrowers. The section further clarifies that loans for other nonprofit hatchery corporation or tribal organization projects remain capped at $1,000,000. Section 4. Establishes an effective date of July 1, 2026. 10:38:45 AM REPRESENTATIVE BYNUM thanked the committee, staff, and department for addressing some of the prior concerns with the bill and the opportunity to collaborate on it. He said that there were initial concerns bringing the idea forward but noted that work has been done to address some of the concerns. Specifically, one concern had to do with loans issued to tribal organizations that there may not be a requirement that they would participate in fish tracking requirements like others. He said that working with his districts communities and after consultation, they are willing and wanting to work alongside other industry partners. He said that there would be a committee substitute (CS) that would address this concern in law. He noted that another concern was collateral on a loan. He noted that legislative legal services and others were consulted and there were already guardrails in place. 10:41:37 AM REPRESENTATIVE KOPP believed there may have been litigation between the Metlakatla Tribe and the State of Alaska (SOA) that went to federal court. He said that this pertained to jurisdiction of fisheries and the waters off the reservation, and whether fish stocks were tribal or were publicly accessible state fish. He said that he was unsure of the outcome of the court case. He wanted to ensure that using state money for a tribal hatchery operation would allow the public to access those fish stocks in state waters. He noted that there was significant litigation in the courts regarding this issue. REPRESENTATIVE BYNUM responded that he did not believe that this issue was specifically related to the proposed bill, but he would follow up with the committee. He understood that there is a permitting program with the tribe that allows fishing accessibility. 10:44:17 AM DOUG VINCENT-LANG, Commissioner, Department of Fish & Game, answered committee questions pertaining to HB 253. Commented that there is an ongoing lawsuit with the Metlakatla Tribe centered around whether the tribe has traditional fishing rights outside of their reservation. He noted that they were asking to fish a few districts around the reserve without needing a Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission (CFEC) permit. He said that the litigation was heard once at a Federal District Court and was elevated to an Appellate Court with later return to a District Court where the case continues deliberations. He said that his understanding with the proposed bill is that if the tribe received state money, the fish would become common property resources outside of the reservation. Furthermore, any funds used to produce fish would be done under the state permitting system. He said that the state needs to ascertain how many fish go out and what the composition would be, as this ties into treaty agreements. He noted that certain procedures would need to be followed. 10:45:55 AM REPRESENTATIVE KOPP asked how far from the shoreline does the reservation go into navigable waters. COMMISSIONER VINCENT-LANG responded that he read the lawsuit about two weeks ago and he could not recall. He thought it was around one or two miles. 10:46:33 AM REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT said that the memo talks about not being able to collateralize unless tribal immunity is waived, she asked whether this was addressed in the proposed bill. REPRESENATIVE BYNUM responded that initially it was thought that the bill needed an amendment to address this issue. However, he said that there is no amendment necessary to ensure that this legal requirement occurs. He said that the memo points directly to statute with what requirements are in place for the loan. The memo also highlights specific information on the Metlakatla requirements when accepting a loan regarding immunity. REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT asked whether this could be done in regulation rather than being a part of the proposed regulation. REPRESENATIVE BYNUM responded that this is correct. 10:48:07 AM CHAIR STUTES announced that the committee would hear invited testimony. 10:48:28 AM ALBERT SMITH, Mayor, answered questions and gave invited testimony in support of HB 253. He asked whether there were questions in which he could answer. REPRESENTATIVE KOPP asked Mr. Smith how far from the shoreline the reservation extends and how it pertains to tribal control of the fisheries. MR. SMITH noted that the reservation had its own Metlakatla Indian Community Fish & Wildlife Department and it was a hardworking and outstanding group. He said that the reserve shares a lot of their information with the state, including tagging reports and marking fish. He said that the community currently has 25 million chum salmon fry that are 100 percent marked. MR. SMITH responded that tribal waters extend 3000 feet from the low water mark, which equates to just over a half mile. 10:50:47 AM MR. SMITH proceeded with his invited testimony and noted that he was excited about the proposed bill. He said that it is something that the tribe has been working on for some time. He said that four years ago the tribe worked with Jim Anderson and details had been "ironed out" regarding collateral, payments, and other mechanisms. He said that the tribal hatchery was built around the same timeframe that the loan program had started and currently much of the hatchery infrastructure on the reservation is aging. He noted that Metlakatla was part of the only reserve in Alaska and contained a federally recognized fishery and hatchery. He said that in the last ten years, the tribe has worked on modernizing and expanding. He understood that the fish that get released migrate like all salmon. He said that what is good for Metlakatla is good for the region, and what is good for the region is good for the state. He understood that many coho salmon that originate from Metlakatla are caught in coastal waters, including near Sitka before they return inland. He said that the tribe is all for being good partners to the region and would love to Southeast and the rest of Alaska thrive. He said that the proposed bill could help with this. MR. SMITH had also noted that he heard Commissioner Vincent-Lang discussed needing a hatchery permit. He said that the bill to his knowledge would help with this process. He said that this was a hangup with previous discussions. He said that Metlakatla is a federally recognized and sovereign nation. He noted that Metlakatla was currently doing coded wire tags for Chinook, and coho at the same level as the state. He noted that chum salmon were marked slightly differently than other salmon varieties and was done by changing water temperatures to create otolith marks. He said that the bottom line is that in the last years, the tribe has appropriately marked fish and follows the same regulations as the state. He said that the tribe also participates in the Pacific Salmon Treaty meetings and were following Chinook salmon procedures. 10:56:41 AM REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT asked whether other tribes in Southeast Alaska support the proposed legislation. MR. SMITH responded that he recommends that she check with the other tribes since he cannot speak for them and has not asked. 10:57:21 AM REPRESENTATIVE BYNUM said that his office did some research and outreach with other tribes and he has not received any negative feedback regarding the proposed legislation. He noted that he would continue outreach efforts and share any insights with the committee. 10:57:48 AM REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked for clarification regarding a sponsor substitute or any changes to the proposed bill. REPRESENATIVE BYNUM responded that there would be a change made to specifically address bill language to align with requirements for marking fish and ensuring compliance. He said that the current bill currently does not have this conforming language. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said that the bill looks prescriptive to Metlakatla, she asked what potential is for other federally recognized tribes. She asked why it was prescriptive rather than permissive. REPRESENATIVE BYNUM responded that the bill should be identifying an Indian reservation and/or a Federally Recognized Tribe. 10:59:30 AM MR. SHAW added that the wording in the bill talks about an Indian reservation or operating with a federal permit. He said that any additional tribal organizations in the future that obtain a federal or state permit. He said that a future Committee Substitute could provide a provision that any tribal organization could meet criteria for an Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G) under state statute. He said that the bill was written this way because there are provisions in federal law that allow Metlakatla to operate their own hatchery without even technically needing a federal permit. He said that the proposed bill was written to be broad. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said that this is about the loan program, and she knows that with it being a tribe, they can access loans that other Alaska organizations cannot since they are a federally recognized tribe. She asked if he could describe the need for why the bill was brought forward. 11:01:35 AM REPRESENATIVE BYNUM responded that the proposed bill was brought forward was so that it could be ensured that the Metlakatla Indian Community has the same equal access that other Alaskans have. 11:02:36 AM CHAIR STUTES noted that an amendment deadline would be set once a Committee Substitute was heard. 11:02:57 AM The committee took a brief at ease. 11:03:14 AM CHAIR STUTES closed invited testimony to HB 253. 11:03:53 AM ADJOURNMENT  There being no further business before the committee, the House Special Committee on Fisheries meeting was adjourned at 11:04 a.m.