Legislature(2015 - 2016)BUTROVICH 205

04/01/2015 03:30 PM RESOURCES

Note: the audio and video recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.

Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as

* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
Heard & Held
-- Testimony <Invitation Only> --
Heard & Held
-- Public Testimony --
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
              SB  42-PERSONAL USE FISHING PRIORITY                                                                          
4:05:36 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR GIESSEL announced consideration of SB 42.                                                                                 
SENATOR   BILL  STOLTZE,   sponsor   of  SB   42,  Alaska   State                                                               
Legislature, Juneau,  Alaska, said  this measure has  been called                                                               
the Alaskans  First Fisheries Act  and it  has been muted  by the                                                               
legislative process since  1999. He explained that  there are two                                                               
fisheries  within  Alaska  that  are for  Alaska  resident  only:                                                               
subsistence  and personal  use (PU).  It is  surprising how  many                                                               
people  say  personal use  fisheries  are  an important  part  of                                                               
Alaskans'  food security,  but  SB  42 simply  says  in times  of                                                               
shortage, the Board  of Fisheries can set a  priority for average                                                               
citizens that is reflected in the Alaska Constitution.                                                                          
He is excited that the  ADF&G commissioner has a neutral position                                                               
on SB  42, because  if it  was a  bad bill,  he would  oppose it.                                                               
Senator  Stoltze said  this only  affects a  small percentage  of                                                               
fish that are commonly owned by  all Alaskans. It would not trump                                                               
Pacific  salmon treaties  or Canadian  agreements, and  the board                                                               
itself  is  trumped  by  other   higher  authorities  within  the                                                               
department  and international  treaties  all the  way  up to  the                                                               
federal government.                                                                                                             
SENATOR STOLTZE  said this  is not just  about salmon;  there are                                                               
about  80  PU  fisheries  in  the state,  but  the  bulk  of  the                                                               
contention has been  in the Kasilof and Kenai  Rivers. Some argue                                                               
that  people can  buy their  salmon  at the  store, but  catching                                                               
one's own salmon what an Alaskan values.                                                                                        
4:12:28 PM                                                                                                                    
United Fishermen of Alaska (UFA)  mentioned excessive use by some                                                               
Alaskan families  and it has been  suggested to limit them  to 10                                                               
per  year, but  that  is  not enough  to  share  with family  and                                                               
friends, which is another Alaskan value.                                                                                        
4:13:52 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR GIESSEL  noted the many  emails the committee  had received                                                               
on this issue and opened public testimony.                                                                                      
4:14:36 PM                                                                                                                    
STEVE VANEK, representing himself,  Ninilchik, Alaska, opposed SB
42.  It is  an innocent  idea with  unintended bad  consequences.                                                               
Like  the book  and movie  called "Bridge  Over the  River Kwai,"                                                               
this is a  situation in which a short term  goal disguises a much                                                               
larger long term evil. This  bill has many long term consequences                                                               
that  affect ADF&G  management,  many that  affect  the board  of                                                               
Fisheries process and private businesses.                                                                                       
4:16:47 PM                                                                                                                    
DAVID  HILLSTRAND, representing  himself, Homer,  Alaska, opposed                                                               
SB 42.  He is a commercial  fisherman in Upper Cook  Inlet and is                                                               
against  personal  use  fisheries  over  commercial  fishing.  He                                                               
supports  personal use  in rural  areas that  are defined  by the                                                               
federal  government  as  subsistence  areas.  He  explained  that                                                               
because  of  Alaska's  continued  population  growth,  especially                                                               
since 1972  and Limited  Entry, an  allocation issue  has arisen.                                                               
Some people have applied the  constitution's "common use" concept                                                               
to  all 700,000  residents receiving  six fish  a piece  from the                                                               
Kenai River.  But in his view,  limited entry is the  way for the                                                               
public to  participate in common  use; just like the  oil, timber                                                               
and mining industries  have a chance to lease  land. Once limited                                                               
entry was created, participation was  limited to a certain number                                                               
of people  and the way  the public can participate  in harvesting                                                               
fish is by  purchasing a limited entry permit.  Courts have ruled                                                               
against compensating fishermen for the limited entry process.                                                                   
4:19:31 PM                                                                                                                    
CLAY  BEZENEK, representing  himself, Ketchikan,  Alaska, opposed                                                               
SB 42.  He is a  coastal guy who  survives on salmon  and doesn't                                                               
have the  benefit of any other  income in his community.  If they                                                               
are going  to reallocate the  resource, it should  be reallocated                                                               
in  a way  that benefits  someone whose  life isn't  on the  line                                                               
because of it. "It's a cavalier regard for coastal economies."                                                                  
4:23:17 PM                                                                                                                    
ALEXIS   COOPER,  Cordova   District  Fishermen   United  (CDFU),                                                               
Cordova,  Alaska,  opposed SB  42.  Cordova  is a  small  coastal                                                               
community   whose  economy   depends  almost   entirely  on   the                                                               
commercial salmon industry. She said  SB 42 doesn't represent all                                                               
Alaskans  or  promote  a  sense  of  responsibility  amongst  all                                                               
Alaskans to insure the sustainability of the salmon resource.                                                                   
She  said  Alaska  has  set the  gold  standard  for  sustainable                                                               
fisheries  by establishing  a system  where management  decisions                                                               
are based on  the highest standards of  scientific integrity, and                                                               
that  commitment maximizes  opportunities that  has afforded  all                                                               
Alaskans relatively unfettered access  to the state's rich salmon                                                               
resources  and provides  residents  a multitude  of options  from                                                               
which  to   choose  to  harvest   or  access  salmon   for  their                                                               
households. The  subsistence, personal use, sport  and commercial                                                               
opportunities, are all vitally important  in providing Alaska and                                                               
its resident economic opportunity and food security.                                                                            
MS. COOPER said that SB 42  would establish a further priority in                                                               
an  already  complex  system of  allocation  and  management  for                                                               
salmon,  which already  includes  a resident  only priority,  and                                                               
rather than uniting all Alaskans  to ensure the sustainability of                                                               
the  salmon   resource,  SB  42  perpetuates   a  vision  amongst                                                               
residents at times of diminished  run strengths when conservation                                                               
most needs to be a collaborative effort.                                                                                        
4:25:19 PM                                                                                                                    
GRANT KLOTZ,  representing himself, Anchorage,  Alaska, supported                                                               
SB 42. As  the population in Alaska grows, so  does the demand on                                                               
the Kenai  fishery, he  said, and this  bill ensures  that Alaska                                                               
residents will have  access to their fair share  of this commonly                                                               
owned  fishery.  Unfortunately,  this pits  commercial  fishermen                                                               
against  personal  use  fishermen,  but not  having  enough  fish                                                               
return to the rivers has been a long standing issue.                                                                            
4:27:09 PM                                                                                                                    
BRIAN  MERRITT, representing  himself, Wrangell,  Alaska, opposed                                                               
SB  42. This  bill  could  tie the  BOF's  hands.  He found  some                                                               
interesting  information  about  the Copper  River  situation  in                                                               
2013. In that  2013, 135,000 sockeye were caught  by personal use                                                               
fishermen,  and  most  of  them  came out  of  urban  areas  like                                                               
Fairbanks,  Anchorage, Eielson  Air Force  Base, Delta  Junction,                                                               
and  Eagle   River.  The  personal  use   fishery  enables  rural                                                               
residents to  get the  food they  need for  the winter,  and they                                                               
depend on  ADF&G to  control this resource  through the  Board of                                                               
Fisheries process.                                                                                                              
4:29:02 PM                                                                                                                    
BOB LINVILLE,  representing himself,  Seward, Alaska,  opposed SB
42.  He  had  commercial  and  personal-use  fished  for  several                                                               
decades on  the Kenai and Kasilof  Rivers. He said the  board had                                                               
evolved  over the  years to  include all  personal use  and sport                                                               
fishing representation  and asked  if the legislature  thought it                                                               
could do  that balanced  analysis. He  concluded saying  that all                                                               
users need to share in resource conservation.                                                                                   
4:31:26 PM                                                                                                                    
CHUCK   DERRICK,  President,   Chitina  Dipnetters   Association,                                                               
Fairbanks,  Alaska, supported  SB 42.  The association  feels the                                                               
best use of Alaska's food  resources is to feed Alaskan families.                                                               
He  explained  that  prior  to  creation  of  the  criteria  that                                                               
identified   customary   and   traditional  uses,   the   Chitina                                                               
dipnetters were  always managed as  a subsistence fishery,  but a                                                               
clause  about  "local" turned  the  Chitina  dipnet fishery  into                                                               
personal use.  The clause was  later ruled  unconstitutional, but                                                               
the  dipnet   fishery  remained  personal  use.   In  1999,  they                                                               
succeeded in convincing  the BOF that the  Chitina dipnet fishery                                                               
did meet customary and traditional  criteria. Then it got changed                                                               
back to subsistence until 2002 when that decision was rescinded.                                                                
MR.  DERRICK stated  that the  board  used to  always be  heavily                                                               
weighted  with commercial  interests and  Chitina dipnetters  had                                                               
never won  a proposal that he  could remember with that  make up.                                                               
But using their  data, they were able to convince  the 2014 board                                                               
to increase the bag limit - the fist win he could remember.                                                                     
4:34:11 PM                                                                                                                    
RICHARD  DAVIS,  Seafood  Producer's Cooperative  (SPC),  Juneau,                                                               
Alaska,  opposed  SB  42.  The  SPC is  the  oldest  and  largest                                                               
vertically  integrated,  entirely  fisherman  owned,  harvesting,                                                               
processing, and marketing association  on the continent, he said.                                                               
They  began  in  1944,  and today  560  fishermen  member  owners                                                               
process  10-15 million  pounds of  Alaskan seafood  annually. The                                                               
cooperative  employs 30-140  people and  paid $1  million to  the                                                               
State of Alaska in fisheries business taxes last year.                                                                          
He  urged them  to resist  designating personal  use fisheries  a                                                               
priority.  SPC's experience  is that  personal use  fisheries are                                                               
designated because of limited quantities,  or availability, or an                                                               
excessive  number  of citizens  vying  for  finite quantities  of                                                               
certain  fish.   "Personal  use"  to  them   means  residents  in                                                               
possession of a  sport fishing license, sometimes  with a permit,                                                               
involved in  a harvest  reserved for  Alaskan residents  only. If                                                               
lawmakers feel compelled  to favor personal use  fisheries with a                                                               
priority distinction  and this legislation  passes, he  warned to                                                               
expect other efforts  by Alaskan citizens to  use the legislature                                                               
to  manipulate the  Board of  Fisheries  or make  a priority  for                                                               
their particular pet fishery.                                                                                                   
4:36:40 PM                                                                                                                    
JOHN  MCCOMBS, representing  himself, Ninilchik,  Alaska, opposed                                                               
SB  42. He  commented  that currently  the  personal use  fishery                                                               
occurs before  escapement takes  place in  front of  the counters                                                               
and it's never  been closed. Expanding a  fully allocated fishery                                                               
- there are 80 PU fisheries  statewide - has never been explained                                                               
or rationalized.  There are  no guarantees  in fishing.  But when                                                               
thoroughly scrutinized,  the PU fishery  has a priority  based on                                                               
management defaults and BOF reallocations.                                                                                      
GARLAND BLANCHARD,  representing himself, Homer,  Alaska, opposed                                                               
SB  42. He  is  a Cook  Inlet fisherman  and  said that  everyone                                                               
agrees that  all residents  of this state  are entitled  to fish.                                                               
But, he said, apparently  no one on the board had  ever been to a                                                               
Kenai City  Council meeting  when they are  trying to  figure out                                                               
the  mess at  the  Kenai. First  of all,  according  to the  City                                                               
Council, 17 percent of the fish  caught on the Kenai River are by                                                               
local  people  and 83  percent  are  caught  by people  from  the                                                               
Valley.   According  to  ADF&G records,  8,000  permits were  not                                                               
returned from  this fishery, so nobody  has any idea of  how many                                                               
fish  have been  taken out  of  this fishery.  Combined with  the                                                               
Copper  River fishery,  it's possible  that over  half a  million                                                               
sockeye are being taken.                                                                                                        
The  issues  that  the  Kenai  Council  hears  are  about  people                                                               
defecating in  their backyards, people partying  all night, piles                                                               
of  garbage and  rotten carcasses,  and zero  enforcement because                                                               
the Division  of Parks  doesn't have the  authority to  write any                                                               
tickets. Troopers don't do anything, either.                                                                                    
4:40:21 PM                                                                                                                    
MARTIN WEISER, Chief Development  Officer, Copper River Seafoods,                                                               
Anchorage,  Alaska, opposed  SB  42. "Calling  this the  Alaskans                                                               
first  fishing bill  is misleading,"  he said.  According to  the                                                               
Resource Development  Council's most recent  published statistics                                                               
the revenues  generated by the  fishing industry in  2012 totaled                                                               
more than  $100 million in  state and  local taxes. And  with the                                                               
current  fiscal  challenges  facing  the  state,  Alaskans  can't                                                               
afford to  reduce income to  it. This industry pays  for services                                                               
that all Alaskans  benefit from and actually  provides a majority                                                               
of Alaskans with their seafood.                                                                                                 
Copper  River Seafoods  does not  support any  single user  group                                                               
getting  priority over  any other.  The ADF&G  and BOF  currently                                                               
ensure fair allocation of the  state's fisheries based on science                                                               
and  not  politics,  he  said,  but SB  42  will  restrict  their                                                               
abilities  to do  so by  prioritizing one  single user  group. He                                                               
said  the  PU fisheries  are  healthy  and  no Alaskan  is  being                                                               
limited in  these fisheries  as a result  of commercial  or sport                                                               
MALCOLM  VANCE, representing  himself, McCarthy,  Alaska, opposed                                                               
SB  42. He  had lived  in McCarthy  for 33  years and  commercial                                                               
fished for the  past 35 years. He qualifies for  both federal and                                                               
state  subsistence use  and  is also  an  avid sports  fisherman.                                                               
There is  no good reason to  put PU fishing above  all other user                                                               
groups.   All   harvesters   should    share   the   burden   and                                                               
responsibility  of  harvesting   and  conservation  equally.  The                                                               
regulatory process  that meets  the needs and  wants of  all user                                                               
groups is  already being used. SB  42 is another way  of creating                                                               
chaos in the ever widening gap between the user groups.                                                                         
4:44:33 PM                                                                                                                    
GARY  STEVENS, Alaska  Outdoor  Council  (AOC), Chugiak,  Alaska,                                                               
strongly supported  SB 42. He  said a  2012 study by  the ADF&G's                                                               
Division  of Subsistence  found  that  recreational, PU  fishing,                                                               
subsistence and  recreational hunting  combined amounted  to less                                                               
than 2 percent of the total  fish and game harvested in the State                                                               
of Alaska. Commercial fishermen harvested  over 98 percent of the                                                               
total poundage of fish and game.  He said 75 percent of residents                                                               
live in non-subsistence areas and  the PU fishery for all intents                                                               
and purposes is  a subsistence fishery for people that  live in a                                                               
non-subsistence area. If fish were  returning to other streams in                                                               
Cook Inlet  the pressure could  be spread  out from the  mouth of                                                               
the  Kenai  River.  Personal  use should  have  a  priority  over                                                               
commercial fishing.                                                                                                             
AL BARRETTE,  representing himself, Fairbanks,  Alaska, supported                                                               
SB  42. All  the statutory  definitions  that pertain  to PU  and                                                               
subsistence and the intent language found  in 5 AAC 77.01 make it                                                               
clear that  the PU fishery has  a priority. PU was  recognized in                                                               
the days  of rural  priority, but the  McDowell decision  in 1989                                                               
removed that  rural priority  and made  all Alaskans  eligible to                                                               
participate. Then  the legislature  and joint boards  created the                                                               
non-subsistence  areas,  which  is  a  perfect  fit  for  the  PU                                                               
fisheries now.  PU fisheries  are not  only for  dip nets,  as he                                                               
personally fishes with a gillnet in the Tanana River.                                                                           
MR. BARRETTE stated  also that at least the PU  fisheries are not                                                               
subsidized by the state like  the commercial fisheries are to the                                                               
tune of $60 million.                                                                                                            
JULIANNE CURRY,  Executive Director,  United Fishermen  of Alaska                                                               
(UFA),  Juneau,  Alaska,  opposed  SB  42.  UFA  care  about  the                                                               
sustainability  of Alaska's  fishing  resources  above all  else.                                                               
They   have   four  primary   concerns   regarding   SB  42.   It                                                               
unnecessarily   pits  Alaskans   against  Alaskans   and  further                                                               
complicates fisheries  management and BOF decisions.  It does not                                                               
establish   reasonable  expectations   for  the   harvest  of   a                                                               
fluctuating biomass nor does it ensure food security.                                                                           
She  said  most Alaskans  don't  have  the time,  resources,  the                                                               
access  or  the  ability  to  harvest  their  own  fish  and  the                                                               
commercial harvesting  sector provides them with  critical access                                                               
to the resource  in fish markets, grocery  stores and restaurants                                                               
throughout  the state.  A PU  priority would  trump the  existing                                                               
sport  and commercial  fisheries  that resident  Alaskans use  to                                                               
help feed their families.                                                                                                       
MS.  CURRY  said that  according  to  Commercial Fisheries  Entry                                                               
Commission (CFEC)  data, Alaskans hold  nearly 77 percent  of all                                                               
limited  entry permits.  This  bill  further complicates  complex                                                               
fisheries management plans and reduces  flexibility. It creates a                                                               
one-size  fits all  approach, whereas  these  type of  allocation                                                               
decisions are best  left to the BOF that has  the ability to take                                                               
significant public and  scientific input and make  decisions on a                                                               
fishery by fishery and region by region basis.                                                                                  
Sustainability relies on the premise  that resources have limits,                                                               
and  setting  reasonable   expectations  help  perpetuate  users'                                                               
commitment  to  sustainability,  she   said.  Establishing  a  PU                                                               
priority will not ensure that  salmon run upstream on the weekend                                                               
when most  individuals choose  to participate  in the  three most                                                               
popular salmon dip net fisheries.                                                                                               
4:50:27 PM                                                                                                                    
BRENT JOHNSON, representing himself,  Clam Gulch, Alaska, opposed                                                               
SB 42. He put  in 49 seasons into the Cook  Inlet set net fishery                                                               
and the  biggest difference  he found  between living  in Chugiak                                                               
and  living in  Clam Gulch  is that  nobody in  Clam Gulch  is in                                                               
favor of this bill. The reason  is that people in Clam Gulch fish                                                               
in the summer  and have to sustain themselves all  year around to                                                               
live  there. Not  one  time between  1882 and  1982  was there  a                                                               
harvest  of 3  million sockeye  salmon in  Cook Inlet,  but since                                                               
1982, there  has been 21 times  when over 3 million  sockeye were                                                               
harvested.  The sockeye  fishery is  in real  good shape.  The PU                                                               
fishery has been harvesting hundreds  of thousands of sockeyes in                                                               
recent years,  so it seems like  the PU people are  getting a lot                                                               
of fish. This bill must want  to change something. So, what is it                                                               
going to change?   The change could  put him and his  wife out of                                                               
He also  related that a  number of  years ago their  fish opening                                                               
was rescheduled  for Mondays and Thursdays  to accommodate people                                                               
from Chugiak  and Anchorage  who wanted to  fish on  the weekends                                                               
and to give the fish one day in between to repopulate the river.                                                                
WES HUMBYRD, representing himself,  Homer, Alaska, opposed SB 42.                                                               
He had  fished in  Cook Inlet  since 1966  and raised  his family                                                               
there.  He  felt this bill would  open up a can  of worms. Anyone                                                               
in Anchorage who doesn't get enough  fish with a dip net can come                                                               
to his boat, the Knife's Edge,  and he will make "damn sure" they                                                               
don't starve.  There has to  be enough fish (millions  of pounds)                                                               
for people without having a law.                                                                                                
RICHARD   BISHOP,   representing  himself,   Fairbanks,   Alaska,                                                               
supported SB  42. He lives in  a subsistence use area  and fished                                                               
in the  personal use fishery even  before it was called  that; it                                                               
has  been a  major source  of  food for  his family  for over  50                                                               
years, and their experience is not unique.                                                                                      
He  said the  Alaska  Constitution outlines  sustained yield  and                                                               
common  use for  the maximum  benefit  of Alaskans.  That is  how                                                               
subsistence fishing has  been classified in the  past. The Alaska                                                               
Constitution also  allows for resident preferences.  Personal use                                                               
fishing is for  residents and it should have  priority over sport                                                               
and commercial fishing when harvestable surplus is low.                                                                         
MIKE  MICKELSON, representing  himself, Cordova,  Alaska, opposed                                                               
SB 42.  He is a  lifelong resident  of Cordova and  a subsistence                                                               
and commercial fisherman. This is  a very allocative proposal and                                                               
allocation is what the Board of  Fisheries does, he said. The BOF                                                               
created the PU fisheries in  1982 so that Alaskan residents could                                                               
harvest salmon when there was an available surplus.                                                                             
There  are  lots of  opportunities  for  PU  fishermen; it  is  a                                                               
valuable opportunity that  Alaskans are lucky to  have when extra                                                               
fish are  there. It is not  subsistence. Most of his  points have                                                               
already been brought  up by people who are against  SB 42, but he                                                               
added, if this  proposal is really about  putting Alaskans first,                                                               
you can't believe  it. If you are actually out  there fishing all                                                               
the  time  you  can  actually   see  what  is  happening  in  the                                                               
ecosystems. Commercial  fishermen have a very  vested interest in                                                               
keeping these fisheries around, because  that is their income. He                                                               
suggested expanding the loan programs  instead of doing the BOF's                                                               
job, which is what this proposal attempts to do.                                                                                
4:58:22 PM                                                                                                                    
ARNI  THOMSON,  Alaska  Salmon   Alliance,  Kenai  Peninsula  and                                                               
Anchorage Seafood  Processors, Anchorage, Alaska, opposed  SB 42.                                                               
PU  salmon needs  of Alaska  residents are  already provided  for                                                               
upfront  when the  ADF&G calculates  its annual  harvest forecast                                                               
for commercial, PU  and subsistence fisheries based  on Kenai and                                                               
Kasilof  River  stocks.  Thus,  it is  not  necessary  to  create                                                               
legislation  unless  the  goal   is  to  further  exacerbate  the                                                               
divisiveness between user groups, he said.                                                                                      
5:00:41 PM                                                                                                                    
JERRY MCCUNE,  representing himself,  Juneau, Alaska,  opposed SB
42.  He said  PU fisheries  were  created for  people who  didn't                                                               
qualify for  subsistence. All kinds  of fishing are  important to                                                               
Alaskans, but this bill seems to shut down commercial fishing.                                                                  
CHAIR  GIESSEL  apologized  to  the 26  people  left  wanting  to                                                               
testify  and  invited  them  to   send  their  testimony  to  the                                                               
committee in writing.                                                                                                           
5:03:27 PM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR STOLTZE thanked  her for this opportunity  to present his                                                               
bill and said his goal is to represent Alaskans' interest.                                                                      
CHAIR GIESSEL  said she welcomed written  testimony and announced                                                               
she would hold SB 42 in committee.                                                                                              

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
SB 68 version W.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 68
SB 68 Sponsor Statement.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 68
SB 68 Sectional.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 68
SB 68 Fiscal Note.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 68
SB 68 Legal - Clarification on Emergency Closures.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 68
SB 68 Letter of Support - Ermold.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 68
SB 68 Letter of Support - Ted Spraker.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 68
SB42 ver H.PDF SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB42 Sponsor Statement.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB42 Fiscal Note - DFG-CO 3-6-15.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB42 ADF&G Brief on Personal Use Fishing.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB42 ADF&G Provided - Res and Nonres Commercial Fishing Statistics.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB42 Support Document - ADF&G Personal Use Statewide Regulations.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB42 Support Documents - Emails 3-17-15.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB42 Support Document - Letter Chitina Dipnetters Association 3-15-15.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB42 Supporting Document - Regulations of the Board of Fisheries.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB42 Opposition UFA.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB42 Opposition Documents - Emails & Written Testimony 3-16-15.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB42 Opposition CDFU.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB42 Opposition ATA.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB 42 Opposition UCIDA.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB 42 Opposition SEAFA.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB 42 Opposition PVOA.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB 42 Opposition Copper River Seafoods.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB 42 Opposition Carter Hughes.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB 42 Opposition ASA.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB 42 Opposition ALFA.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB 42 Assorted Support Letter.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB 42 Assorted Opposition Letters.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB 68 List of Testifiers.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 68
SB42 Support Documents -Emails of Support 3-17-15 to 3-31-15.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB42 Opposition Document -Emails of Opposition 3-17-15 to 3-31-15.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB42 Opposition Emails-03-31 to 04-02 2015.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB42 Support Emails-03-31 to 04-02 2015.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
S42 opposition-NPFA.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB42 Opposition-Sitka LIO Public Testimony.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB42 Opposition-Taku Smokeries.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB42 Opposition-Eyak Village.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB42 Opposition-BBEDC.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB42 Opposition Emails-04-02-2015 to 04-06-2015.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42
SB42 Support Emails-04-02-2015 to 04-06-2015.pdf SRES 4/1/2015 3:30:00 PM
SB 42