HFSH-260505-1000

Good morning. The meeting of the House Special Committee on Fisheries will come to order. The time is 10:05 on Tuesday, May 5th. 2026. Members present are Vice Chair Edmond, Representative Himschute, Representative Vance, and myself, Chair Stutes.

We do have a quorum to conduct business. I'm going to ask everyone to please silence your phones and do not approach the table here. If you want to get a message to one of us, um, please get a hold of my committee aide, Jane Pearson, and she will be delighted to help you out. We also have Representative Elam joining us. I'd like to thank Andrew Magnuson, House Fisheries Committee Secretary, and Kyla Tupou from Majuno LIO.

Oh no, it's— pardon? Oh, we have the wrong person here. So we have Chloe. So no wonder you looked so funny. Welcome.

We appreciate Thank you for your teleconferencing support, Chloe. Um, at today's meeting, we will be considering the governor's appointment of Tracy Welch as commissioner of the Commercial Fishery Entry Commission and 3 appointees to the Board of Fish: Paul Cyr, Blair Hickson, and the reappointment of Mike Wood. So first up today, we will have the governor's appointment of the second commissioner of the Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission. Tracey Welch. Ms. Welch has a long history in Alaska's commercial fisheries.

I'm sure the members are familiar with, uh, Ms. Welch in her role as the Executive Director of the United Fishermen of Alaska. Tracey has a long history in commercial fisheries as well as a law degree from the University of Oregon. I am delighted to see you here, and I believe you are an excellent candidate for our new commissioner at the CFEC. So with that, if you could tell us a little bit about yourself, Ms. Welch, we would love to hear it and why you think you'll make a good commissioner. And we also have Representative McCabe joining us.

Good morning. Thank you for the warm welcome, Chair Stutes, members of the House Fisheries Committee. Thank you for the invitation to be here today and to share a little bit more about my background. For the record, my name is Tracy Welch and I'm a lifelong resident of Southeast Alaska. I grew up in Petersburg, a small fishing community south of here, located in House District 2.

I've been a— I've been a participant in the commercial fishing industry now for over 30 years. I began participating in commercial fisheries at the age of 3, fishing with my dad and alongside a number of my uncles and cousins. Over the years, I participated in Southeast salmon and herring gillnet fisheries and the IFQ halibut fishery. Like many other rural residents in the state, I've also been an active subsistence and sport fisherman. I graduated from Petersburg High School and went on to attend the University of Notre Dame, where I double majored in political science and German.

Following college, I wanted to move a little bit closer to home, and so I chose to attend the University of Oregon School of Law. In 2012, I sat for and was admitted to the Oregon Bar. Post-law school, I spent a number of years serving as the president of Petersburg Indian Association. To the best of my knowledge, I was the youngest person to have held that position in the history of the tribe. I later went on to serve as the association's tribal administrator, where I led a team of approximately 20 staff and provided oversight of tribal operations and programs.

A few highlights from my time at PIA includes leading the tribe through clean audits, expanding the tribe's residential and commercial real estate portfolio, creating a transit service for community elders, building a working natural resources career development path program for high school students, And during COVID I'd note that PIA was the only tribe in the state to be awarded a half-million-dollar grant for subsistence harvest impact mitigation. For the last 4 and a half years, I've had the honor of representing commercial fishermen throughout the state of Alaska, serving as United Fishermen of Alaska's executive director. And as many of you know, UFA is a statewide commercial fishing trade association and represents both fishermen fishing in the state as well as federal fisheries off Alaska's coast. Through.

My role at UFA, I've had the opportunity to get to know not only fishermen and policymakers throughout the state, but I've also learned a little bit about various management structures and entities. In my time at UFA, I've built a strong relationship with CFEC and the current executive director, and I'm familiar with the important work that the agency does to support the fishing industry. I'm excited to work with the team at CFEC and to continue the good work that they're doing in serving the commercial fishing industry as well as the state of Alaska, and I'm happy to take any questions that you may have today. Thank you, Ms. Welch. Well, let me start off by saying again, I'm delighted to see you here.

It's really great to have somebody with such a wide knowledge of the fisheries and of the process, and a little law degree helps as well. So I'm really grateful. And as the speaker was called out, he said, make sure you let her know that I'm a huge supporter. So with that, questions? Representative Himsche.

It's not a question. I just want to echo your comments, Chair Suits, and through the chair, I wanted to just extend my condolences to UFA. I don't know what they're going to do. So good luck to them as you move on to a different role. But also thank you for your willingness to serve and for the talents and skills that you bring.

And I had no idea you have German in your background. So we'll have a follow-up conversation later. But thank you for your willingness to do this job. Are there other comments from the committee?

Representative Vance. Thank you. I too, after hearing Tracy's full resume, I feel like an underachiever.

But more than knowing your resume, we've seen what you've done for the fishery and just interacting with the fishermen. And so I want to ask, have you— what's been your your interface directly with CFEC? [FOREIGN LANGUAGE] So that we can— the public can hear, you know, what you're bringing to that area of expertise as a commissioner. Through the chair, thank you, Representative Vance. Over the last 4 and a half years at United Fishermen of Alaska, I've had the opportunity to interface with the commissioners at CFEC as well as the executive director through my role at UFA.

We invite them to our spring and fall meeting, and so we provide an update and they provide an update update back to us. So we've had that interaction with concerns coming from the industry and then hearing the response coming back from the agency as to what they're planning to do to, to address the concerns coming from the commercial fishing industry. So in that respect, there's been a back and forth amongst myself and UFA and the Commission itself. Thank you. Follow-up?

Certainly. Representative Vance, we know that the value of having more than one CPC Commissioner is to provide a balance. They, they have to make kind of judicious decisions. Uh, have you, has your family, uh, you know, had to utilize, um, you know, emergency, you know, permits or anything like that that can give you insight? Can you, can you just kind of help, um, help us understand how you're going to approach that side of the commissioner's responsibilities in providing that support?

Through the chair, Representative Vance. Thankfully, my family has not had to do a number of emergency transfers. People stayed healthy over the years, but there have been instances of injuries on board, and we have had to utilize the emergency transfer program. So I am familiar. It's been quite a few years.

Thankfully, I haven't had to use it myself, but I'm familiar enough with a number of fishermen who have either permanent transfers or emergency transfers and have heard their stories through various channels of the appeals process that they've undergone. And so while I'm not intimately familiar with the process, I do have a tangential relationship to it. Thank you. Great, thank you. Thank you.

Other comments? Ms. Welch, thank you. Um, we really appreciate it. And if you would want to just have a seat, we're going to take some public comment, and we will see if there are any questions for you. From the public.

Is there anyone— so let me open up public testimony. Is there anyone in the room that would like to testify on behalf of Ms. Welch?

If you would come forward, state your name and your affiliation for the record.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I signed up as a, as a testifier on your list. You'll probably— I don't know if that was incorrect of me raising my hand. Perfect. Thank you, Madam Chair and members of the House Fisheries Committee.

My name is Richard Davis. I live here in Juneau and I'm a lifelong commercial fisherman. United Fishermen of Alaska has given me the privilege today to represent their interest in promoting Tracy's appointment and confirmation to the Limited Entry Commission. UFA supports her confirmation. She'd make a great commissioner as Alaska's Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission addition.

Tracy's long participation in commercial fisheries and her work these past 5 years as UFA's executive director have bolstered her skill set and her very thorough understanding of how essential the Alaska Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission is to the continued sustainable management of Alaska's commercial fisheries. Her knowledge of the limited entry permit system, Alaska's fishing industry regulatory process, our state's fisheries history, and today's challenges in fisheries, their complexities and other difficulties, make Tracy an ideal candidate for confirmation to the Entry Commission. Thank you for this opportunity to testify and take UFA's strong support for Tracy to your, to your committee, and we urge you to support her confirmation. Thank you very much. Thank you.

Do we have any questions? Thank you, Mr. Davis. We appreciate your testimony. Thank you, Madam Chair. I know we have several people online.

I do not know who each of them would like to testify for. So if you are online and you would like to testify on behalf of Ms. Welch, would you please let me know your name?

No one online to testify for Ms. Welch. Okay, with that, I will close public testimony for public— for Ms. Welch. Thank you kindly for coming. We will move your name forward for confirmation. Thank you, Tracy.

With that, up next we will have Paul Cyr. Mr. Cyr is joining us telephonically. Mr. Cyr, if you— oh, there you are. If you would, um, good morning. Good morning.

If you would state your name and affiliation for the record, please.

Good morning, my name is Paul Cyr. And tell us a little bit about you yourself and why you think you would be a good Board of Fisheries member.

Well, thank you, Madam Chair and members of the House. First, I'd like to thank Governor Dunleavy for the confidence he's shown in nominating me. I also want to thank this committee and the legislature for taking the time to be here today. I appreciate the seriousness of this process, and I'm grateful for the opportunity to speak with you about my background in how I would approach service on the Board of Fisheries. I've spent the last 20 years of my life working in positions that rely on Alaska's waters.

I currently serve as the general manager of Seagrove Alaska, where we work closely with oyster and kelp farms in the growing mariculture sector. Before that, I spent 16 years as general manager of E.C. Phillips and Son, a medium-sized fish processor here in Ketchikan. And prior to that, I owned and operated a sport fishing lodge with approximately 15 charter boats for 3 years.

Outside of work, I'm an outdoors person. Whether I'm on a boat or standing in a river with a fly rod, I understand the connection— [FOREIGN LANGUAGE] —Alaskans have to our fisheries. These experiences have given me a broad perspective. I believe first and foremost we must ensure the sustainability of the resource before it can be used for the benefit of the people of Alaska. And I'm very familiar with the business realities facing commercial fishing fleets as well as the expectations of sport anglers who fish in Alaska waters.

If confirmed, my approach to the Board of Fisheries would come down to 3 things: process, people, and science. The board's public process is one of the strongest examples of an open government we have in Alaska. I believe it's critical to show up prepared and truly listen to subsistence users, sport anglers, and commercial.

Fishermen alike. Even when decisions are difficult, they are stronger when people feel as though they've been heard. But listening is only part of the job. The other part is making decisions grounded in science. I have a great deal of respect for the professionals at the Alaska Department of Fish and Game.

And for decisions to hold up over time, to be durable, they must be rooted in the best available data. Conservation has to come first. If the resource isn't healthy, nothing else works.

I also want to say that I understand the commitment that this position requires. Serving on the Board of Fisheries means long hours reviewing proposals, reading staff analysis, and engaging in the public. I accept this nomination knowing exactly what the responsibility entails. And I'm prepared to dedicate the time and effort to do the job the right way. Thank you again for the opportunity to be here today.

I appreciate your consideration, and I'm open to any questions. Thank you, Mr. Seere, and I will start with one question and then pass it around, um, to any further questions I might have. But many Alaskans myself included, have been increasingly concerned with what appears to be an erosion of the public process in the Board of Fish proceedings. If you're confirmed to the board, what will you do to help restore the public trust?

Well, I will follow the procedures laid before me by the Board of Fish in terms of having the— I'm reaching for the word here— so that I'm consistent in my decisions and I follow the requirements so that there's no conflict of interest involved in any of the decisions that I make, listening to all available science, listening to all the stakeholders, and doing the very best I can to be sure that any decision I make can passed the test of time and really the red-faced test. Thank you. Um, thank you for that. Do we have questions from this committee? Representative Vance.

Madam Chairman, allow me to be more specific to your question. Please do. Uh, thank you, Mr. Seer. We have seen a consistent pattern with the Board of Fish of, of making out-of-cycle decisions. Specifically in my district, it has been the Cook Inlet year after year, and they feel greatly ignored.

There have been board proposals that have been introduced last minute and moved out of cycle, and I want to know If you were, uh, if that decision comes before the board, how will you choose to proceed on an out-of-cycle decision that is a board proposal that has not been thoroughly vetted by the public? What is going to be your approach when being pressured by other board members to make that decision to proceed forward?

I will follow the rules that are set forth for me by the charter for the Alaska Board of Fish.

The—. As far as the out-of-state cycle actions. I think it's important that if, if there's not enough time to properly vet the decision, then it should not be made. It needs to be looked into and done in the proper fashion. Thank you for that.

Follow-up. Follow-up. Representative Antz. Thank you, Mr. Seer. I represent every type of fishermen in my district, but I ask the same question to every Board of Fish member, and that is, what is your view on the Cook Inlet?

I don't have a lot of knowledge about the Cook Inlet. I'm from Southeast Alaska. I've been involved in fisheries in the Southeast. There is going to be things that I need to learn about. I— and the Cook Inlet is one of them.

I appreciate that answer, but I would like to inform you that the term fish wars came from the Cook Inlet and came specifically from my district and my fishermen, and I encourage you to get to know them and know that that is a lot of the point of the contention. And so I look forward to talking to you further about a lot of the concerns in the Cook Inlet. Thank you. Representative Himschoot, did you have a question? Not a question, Madam Chair, just a comment.

Certainly. Thank you. So through the chair, Mr. Seere, I very much celebrate the fact that you're from Southeast Alaska. I am from Sitka. I will not hold it against you that you are from Ketchikan.

At the end of the day, you are from Southeast. I just wanted to read a little bit here from the statute regarding Boards of Fisheries and Game. And on subsection A, it talks about the creation for the purposes of conservation and development of the fishery resources of our Board of Fisheries. And in that section, subsection A, it talks about maintaining a view to providing diversity of interest and points of view in the membership. And you are going to bring a point of view that I feel has been missing from the board for a few years now in terms of your knowledge of Southeast and Southeast fisheries.

So I welcome you to the board, and I'm grateful for that diversity of viewpoint that you will bring to the board. That's all I have. Thank you. Other questions? I think I will follow up with that very same thing.

It's, it's pretty exciting to see someone from Southeast with an appointment to the to the board. We've needed that. It's been quite a while, and it just kind of expands the Board of Fish in a positive direction. So I'm really happy to see that. I'm going to now open up public testimony.

Is there anyone in the room who would like to testify for Paul Cyr? Please come forward. Testimony. Come, please come forward.

And I'm going to ask you once again to state your name and affiliation for the record and then begin. Davis. I live in Juneau, Alaska. I'm representing United Fishermen of Alaska today, and it's my privilege to make testimony for two of the candidates for the Board of Fish. And I could take care of that in one.

Why don't we start with Mr. Seere. Have him separated with a—. Problem is we have them separated. Should have asked first. Let me see what I can do.

Is there a chance I could make UFA's support for Mike Wood simultaneous here? You certainly can, but we will give you an opportunity to verbalize that support for Mr. Wood when we see him. I think I could take care of both of those fellows with one testimony. Certainly, you're free to do that. Thank you, Madam Chair and members of the House Fisheries Committee.

As I stated, it's my privilege to represent United Fishermen of Alaska here today and support the reappointment of Mike Wood and the new appointment of Paul Seere to the Alaska Board of Fisheries. Mike Wood has served a full board cycle and demonstrates dedication, commitment, and understanding of the complex elements that form Alaska's regulations and policies. Mike works with stakeholders, prepares thoroughly, listens well to the social, economic, and scientific aspects of proposed fisheries management changes. Paul Seear has expertise with sport and commercial fisheries, aquaculture, mariculture background, and seafood processing. He's worked with state and federal regulators— let me get a page change here— in the complex water use permitting process.

His diverse work history make him a favorable Board of Fisheries appointee. His geographic connection to Southeast is long overdue, and UFA asks your support for confirmation of these two highly capable Board of Fish and Pointees. Thank you. Appreciate it. Any questions?

Thank you, Mr. Davis. We have online Mr. Murray, John Murray.

If you would state your name and affiliation for the record, please, and begin your testimony for Paul Sears. John Murray here, Sitka. Can you hear me fine? We can hear you loud and clear. Thank you.

Okay. I'd like to do the same thing as the last participant and cover Mike Woods and Paul Sears. I'll start with Paul Sears.

I've been visiting with some fleetmates in Southeast, and from what we can come up with, he seems to be well qualified and educated and fully qualified for the seat. And as you pointed out, Chair, we haven't had a Southeast seat since 2023, and we have the Southeast cycle coming up and probably in Sitka in 2028. So, pretty imperative to get some southeast expertise back on the Board of Fish again. So I'm fully supportive of Mr. Cyr. As far as Mike Woods go, um, Mike Wood, I've worked with him at Board of Fish.

I've seen him in action at the Board of Fish. He seems to be very balanced, very, uh, in tune. Um, I, I don't know, I just think he's, he's one of the better, uh, Board of Fish members we have on the board currently. And I think he's also well qualified and he definitely should be reappointed. So, appreciate the time.

Thank you very much. Next we have Kim Landeen. If you'd state your name and affiliation for the record and begin your testimony, please.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Kim Landeen with Southeast Alaska Guides Organization. I'm one of the co-directors. I'm going to comment on all three of them, but I'll keep my comments specifically to Paul this round. And like many of you, we just want to express our excitement and our gratitude for Paul's appointment to the Board of Fish.

Having a Southeast seat, especially one with such diverse experience across multiple sectors of the fishing industry, including sport fishing services, seafood processing, and now mariculture, is going to bring, in our perspective, a very needed voice to the board and one that we are excited to work with. And so with that, I'll keep my comments short, but We are excited to welcome Paul and work with him here at Southeast. Thank you, Madam Chair. Wonderful. Thank you.

Comments from the board? Next we have Malcolm Milne.

Malcolm, if you would state your name and affiliation for the record, please.

Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. My name is Malcolm Milne and I'm with the North Pacific Fisheries Association. Of Homer, Alaska. We're a commercial fishing organization representing about 65 commercial fishing operations here, and I'm here to speak, in this case, in favor of Mr. Seere. We appreciate the experience he has and would welcome the background in commercial fishing as well.

I think it's great that he has the lodge experience so he can see the sport fishing and how we can coexist as industries. Um, which I think is a very important open mind to have for a Board of Fish member. And I am confident that unlike another Board of Fish member who at the Homer meeting was confusing trawlers and trawlers and had to be explained on the record what the difference was, I'm sure Mr. Seher knows the difference in that as well as many other nuances that are involved in that job. So we wholeheartedly support his appointment. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Yes, sir. Madam Chair. Yes. Yeah, with your indulgence, I couldn't get recognized to speak on behalf of Ms. Welch.

So, can I just give a brief, just thumbs up for her as well? Absolutely. Please feel free. She's still here waiting to hear the good words. Okay, excellent.

Well, we as a member group of United Fishermen of Alaska, we've had a lot of experience with Ms. Welch. I think you're going to find that she's an intelligent, professional, and gregarious— I'm sure all of you have interacted with her in her current role anyway as the CFA director. So we wholeheartedly support her for this position. She has a legal background and the fisheries background, which makes her greatly qualified for that job. We're looking forward to having a second commissioner, and the only small drawback From my point of view, I hate to see, to lose her as UFA director, but I can understand how hurting a bunch of Wildcats has grown old for her.

So MPFA gives her a solid thumbs up. Thank you. Thank you. I think you have a lot of people that agree with you that UFA is— we're all sorry to see her leaving, but we'll have her around in a different capacity. So thank you very much for your testimony.

Any comments? Seeing none, appreciate it. Next we have, um, Nels Evans. Nels, if you'd state your name and affiliation for the record, please. Hi, this is Nels Evans, Executive Director of Petersburg Vessel Owners Association, based out of Petersburg.

I'd like to, if possible— I was also having tech issues during Tracy's portion— just want to voice our Support for Tracy as well. Mirror a lot of what has been said already. I've been fortunate enough to work with Tracy on the UFA board. I, and believe that she is more than highly qualified to take over at CFEC, but sad to see her leave at UFA. Moving on to Paul Sears' confirmation here, obviously we are biased as a southeast-based group, we are very happy to see someone from southeast in the confirmation process.

We, in the region, we have over 40 CFEC permits. We're one of, if not the most diverse fisheries region in the state. Having a board member from a coastal community within the region is really a benefit to the Board of Fish as a whole. Someone that has seen and experienced and worked with the diverse user groups that Mr. Steere has between the trollers, gillnetters, shrimpers, working in the sport industry, now working in the mariculture industry. We believe that he's coming in with a huge amount of background knowledge on not just the user groups but the different gear types and the interactions between them.

That's often the largest hurdle for new board members. We believe that this will greatly benefit the diversity of the board. Bringing in different regional viewsets is important. I think it spreads that viewset of the whole board throughout, throughout the state, having someone all the way from the southern end of the state, and we have members all the way up on the Yukon, so it really helps with that diversity of thought and fisheries understanding, and we fully support Paul Seehoerdt for Cook Inlet Fish. Thank you very much for your testimony.

Comments from this committee? Seeing none, next we will go to Robert Murphy. If you would state your name and affiliation, Mr. Murphy, for the record. Thank you, Representative Stutes and House Fisheries Committee, for the opportunity. My name is Bob Murphy.

I live in Kodiak and represent myself. I am in support of Paul Seehoerdt to the Alaska Board of Fisheries. I have participated in Board of Fisheries meetings 36 years. Paul will represent the sport, commercial, subsistence fisheries throughout the state with his extensive experience, and I am very supportive of having an individual with his experience from Southeast Alaska, which is currently not represented on the Board of Fish and clearly should be. And I'll also be commenting on the other appointments as we get to them, but thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you for your testimony, Mr. Murphy. And lastly, we have Gary Hollier. Mr. Hollier, if you would state your name and affiliation for the record.

Yeah, thank you, Madam Chairman. My name is Gary Hollier. I represent myself, a 72-year-old lifelong resident of Kenai. Didn't comment on Ms. Welch, but she'd make a good CFPB director. There's some things like that have to cook in that I'm a sportsman, subsistence person— not subsistence, personal use, but a commercial fisherman.

The Board of Fish just changed our gear type from, took away gillnets into setnets and implemented bead seine. So it's imperative that sometimes you have to work pretty fast and I'm sure she's going to get put to the fire pretty fast in her position, but I certainly would like to see her nomination. As far as Mr. Cyr, I don't know anything about him, but I like his credentials. There was one thing I will say, I've attended every Upper Cook Inlet meeting since 1986, numerous statewide meetings, numerous workshops. Jobs.

You hear people come to the confirmations and they say, we're gonna, we're gonna follow science. Well, I would hope that this Mr. Scheer would follow the science. At this last statewide meeting, when Proposal 92 eliminated set gillnets and put in beat stains, that was, I believe, 280-some comments all against that, one comment to pass beat stains, and on a 4-2 vote, beat stains wiped out a 140-year-old fishery in Cook Inlet. I heard people testify a year ago, talk about how when they were for confirmation, they're going to follow science. Science was not followed.

The process was not followed. I hope that Mr. Scheer will follow the science and, uh, and the process and.

I support his nomination. Thank you. Thank you. I think you have a committee here all nodding their head up and down. So, um, are there questions?

Seeing none, thank you for your testimony. And seeing no others to testify for Mr. Sear, are there any comments from this committee? I will close public comment for Mr. Sear. Mr. Sear, we want to thank you, appreciate you, uh, testifying before the committee this morning, and we will pass your name on, um, for the confirmation process. Thank you.

Next up, we will have Mr. Blair Hickson. Mr. Hickson is here in person today. If you would come to the table, um, put your name and any affiliation you might have on the record and tell us why you think You will be a good board member. Yes, Blair Hickson from Wasilla. First, good morning and thank you to the chair for hosting this meeting, as well as the members of the Fishery Committee being here.

Thank you to Governor Dunleavy for appointing me for this position on the board. A little background about me, I'm originally from the community of Bethel on the Kuskokwim River, where my family was deeply involved in the local community. My earliest days out in the woods involved being out on the river participating in subsistence fisheries.

I learned through this process the importance of respecting and responsibly stewarding our natural resources, values that continue to guide me to this day. At 6 years old, my family began operating the Anvik River Lodge on the Anvik River in western Alaska. We take guests out for 5-night trips sport fishing for all several species of salmon— or not salmon, but also resident pike, grayling, char, and salmon if they're open. I've had the opportunity to observe firsthand the cycles and behavior of the fish in the region, gaining a practical long-term perspective on the resource. Having lived in Alaska throughout my life, I've built relationships with individuals across many sectors of the state's fisheries, whether they be subsistence, sport, personal use, or commercial.

I personally participated in sport, personal use, and subsistence fisheries, and while I have not held a commercial permit, I have seen the economic importance of commercial fishing in communities on the Alaska Peninsula as well as Bristol Bay. And I spent time down there working as an assistant hunting guide, which is what my experience led me down there. During the off-season, I reside in Wasilla, where I focus on promoting our family's business and supporting our lodge operations while also taking time to attend Board of Fish meetings and stay informed and engaged in current issues. I value the opportunity to better understand the nuances of Alaska's fisheries and am here and open for any questions you may have. Thank you.

Well, I'll start us off like I have with the other, um, individuals. So in 2023, you testified in support of Senate Bill 128 before the Senate Judiciary Committee. In your capacity as a lodge owner on Anvik River. You spoke about the decline of the chum returns in the Anvik River, and this act would temporarily close the Alaska Pacific Management Area (APMA) to commercial salmon fishing. You emphasized that every salmon that swims up these rivers and spawns counts, and I must say I have to agree with you on that.

However, the Board of Fisheries has just considered and rejected this proposal in February. Do you believe that the legislature belongs in allocative decisions, and are those— or are those best left to the Board of Fisheries?

I would say that the allocation is the Board of Fisheries.

So let me follow up then with, as a member of the Board of Fisheries and as a lodge owner who directly benefits from increased salmon runs in the YK, do you believe you should recuse yourself from voting on Area M issues or any other proposal that could impact salmon runs in the region since you have a direct financial benefit?

I would refer to the ethics oversight and law and see what their decision would be. If they deemed it necessary, I would recuse myself.

I, I'm asking you, if you have a direct financial benefit from these decisions that affect Area M, where you would benefit financially, would you recuse yourself? Knowing that, if I benefited financially, I would recuse myself. Okay, are there other questions? Representative Vance. Thank you, Mr. Hickson.

And again, I'll ask you the question what your perspective is on the Cook Inlet. Yes, Cook Inlet is a very contentious fishery with a lot of different users in that area. I know a little bit about it, but I know there's a lot more information I have to learn. Reaching out to stakeholders in the area, getting their input would be very, very important for me in order to get an oversight of that area. Follow-up, please.

Follow-up, Representative Vance. Thank you. You heard, uh, one of the testifiers, Mr. Hollier, talk about a recent decision that was made last Friday, uh, in an out-of-cycle online meeting, by the way, about completely changing the gear type of this historical fishery is set gillnet to beach seine. Are you familiar with that? A little bit.

I'm not very familiar with it compared to what the board has for their own personal information on that. So I'm not gonna ask you super detailed question. I'm just trying to get your perspective on what— how do you think that you would have approached that decision with the details. Broadly speaking, I know it's not fair to ask you— obviously you wouldn't have more information before you— but this is a historical fishery that has had a complete gear type changed, and now a large percentage of those fishermen will not be able to use beach seines. What would be your approach to that decision knowing that that's the potential impact, but the goal, the stated goal, is to preserve the king salmon in the Cook Inlet?

Mm-hmm. Where's your priority? Resource is the priority for me.

Follow-up? Follow-up, Representative Vance. So with that approach, which resource and for whom?

So the resource would be, for instance, um, I'm not sure how to answer that because— are you speaking to the allocation of those fish?

Let's pull back to a broader— yes, a broader— the whole— all of the decisions that come before you, before the Board of Fish, are going to be determined, and you're going to have to make decisions on the allocation, the resource, and the users, and weigh all of the benefits. Yes. In line with the Constitution. Yes. What is your approach on how you are going to prioritize those decisions, whatever fishery, whatever region that you are making?

Help us understand your perspective on how you're going to come to those decisions. Yes, so first and foremost, look at the resource, see how the resource is, and then speak to the stakeholders in the area. That's one of the One of the biggest things for me is being able to outreach and speak with the local users, getting the insight of the people that are on the ground using it.

When it comes to figuring out, you know, how that would be played out, it's going to be an area-by-area issue. Some areas are going to obviously have more commercial interest, where others will probably be more personal use or sport. So it's going to vary. Follow-up. Follow-up, Representative Vance.

Well, the great dynamic of the Cook Inlet is that it involves all of them. Yes.

And so with that, I would not be able to answer that question today because I don't have all the information I would need to answer that. Thank you. As the previous board member, I encourage you to get to know the issues in the Cook Inlet. Because they are the— there's great contention. But it also— my fishermen fish Area M as well, and it seems that that is the whole hairball of a lot of the fishery issues.

So I encourage you to get to know the fishermen in that entire region. Thank you. Representative McCabe. Thanks.

Mr. Hickson, so welcome to Juneau. Welcome to the party, pal. So I'm interested to explore this Area M idea more. You mentioned something about focusing on the resource, and I know that the lodge, you know, the Anvik Lodge, the fish would pretty much come from Area M, or what do they call that, a bypass? Not bypass, but—.

Every fishery is a bypass. Intercept fishery. Yeah, right. So So if we had to close down Area M, would you support closing down the fishery for the lodges as well? So, I mean, your sport fishery, that would make sense.

I mean, we've seen issues in Cook Inlet where they've closed rivers to sport fishermen but not closed it to drifters, hence the fish war that we're talking about. So I'm wondering if you support the resource, the resource itself or stakeholders? That's always been my thing— stakeholders, resource, which is more important? Yes, thank you for the question.

In particular, us, we get shut down all the time for salmon, so that's an ongoing issue. We've taken it upon ourselves on our river to manage it for the resource as opposed to stakeholders. For instance, during times when we are allowed to harvest salmon, We only take male salmon, only take a maximum of 2 per person, way below the state limits, things like that. So I am willing to shoulder the burden of conservation for long-term gains. Follow-up.

Follow-up. Representative McCabe. Thank you. My pleasure. Stutes.

My pleasure. So what I'm curious of, we've had some discussion about what we call bear boats in lodges here, especially in southeast. And being a lodge owner, I wonder what your ideas with about bear boats are. So you just mentioned that you limit your, your clients and you limit the fish, so obviously you have guides that are watching them. Yes.

Some of the bear boats in other areas do not have guides. They just send a boat out with a GPS and say, go fish here. And so I wonder what you think about the the whole bareboat issue? And, uh, I'm not very familiar with that particular issue at this point in time, um, but I assume the issue has to do with, you know, folks that are out unobserved, maybe, um, not following the letter of the law while I was there. Um, definitely would be worth looking into.

I need to look into that. Follow-up? Follow-up, Representative? Thanks. So I think what, what, what I'm hearing you saying is that the resource is important to you enough that as a lodge owner, you have guides that watch your people that are fishing to make sure they're not overfishing, fishing only for males, and furthering the, helping to grow the resource or to at least husband the resource a little bit.

Would that be a fair statement? Absolutely. Even so far as our guides handle all the fish for our guests, so there's no potential of injury upon release. Majority of what we do is catch and release. Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr. Hickson, in 2023, in a Facebook discussion about Bycatch Utilization Resolution— a Bycatch Utilization Resolution which was in the legislature— you wrote about declines in salmon runs, and your statement was, quote, We can't use climate change as the scapegoat because I know on the Anvik River there is plenty of good habitat for spawning. In light of that, and notwithstanding how you feel about your home river, what impact do you think climate change is having on salmon populations or fisheries more broadly in our state? Out in the ocean is definitely warming the waters and creating lower production. That would be the primary, I would say.

Okay, Representative Elam. Thank you, uh, appreciate you coming out and, uh, doing the questions and answers. Uh, I guess my, my question is, as I'm sure you are seeing, there's kind of a tension sometimes between different user groups and, and competing interests throughout the fisheries. How do you thread that needle a little bit so that you can give a good, you know, decision on what's going to ultimately, you know, benefit Alaska, Alaskans, the resources, and balance that out? Yes, so there's many things you have to weigh in making those decisions.

Input from the users being a large one and trying to find a workable compromise. It would depend on the proposals that are put forward. As, you know, sitting on the board, you work on the proposals that are put forward. So does that answer your question properly? Follow-up?

Follow-up?

Kind of, but, you know, I mean, there's definitely some contention. I mean, I have felt it myself. And specifically, you know, when you're— when you have commercial areas and commercial interests, right, you, you clearly make a decision that can shut down a business, right? But then if you're in, say, like the lodge area, you still have more of a diverse interest, you know. So the lodge stays open, you're selling kind of the experience side of it, not necessarily allocations.

And so how do you, how do you balance the, you know, so like in the Cook Inlet where we're at, uh, we have a direct resource contention. We have an abundance of reds and a decline in kings. And so, um, we're unable to harvest the reds in the saltwater because, uh, gear type. Versus, you know, being in the rivers. And so it gets very contentious, very contentious, very quick.

And so, yeah, how do you, how do you balance that even though you got the information? Yeah, but you may not— it may not be an easy conversation. Yeah. Um, so in those situations, I'll always lean on the resource, what's going to work best for the resource at that point in time. Um, I know this board deals with very contentious issues And a lot of the times people walk away not very happy with— for any user group of what happened.

But in those situations, I would definitely have to give it a lot of thought, weigh the options, gather the information, speak with the stakeholders, look at the resource, and it would have to be specific to that particular situation. So thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I just have a couple more questions myself, Mr. Um, sport fishing and upriver interests are already well represented on the Board of Fish, and as a lifelong sport fishing guide, what new experience, expertise, or perspective do you think you will bring to the board?

So I think my perspective and experience is just having lived on a river since I was about 6 years old, growing up with that. And even to a point, just my personal background— when you work in the lodge industry, you have to, you host people from around the world. So being able to network, work with people, find, you know, workable compromises, things like that, those would be my strong suits. Information-wise, it's hard to put into words the experiences I've had out in the wilds of Alaska observing the fish and learning you know, that whole process. So my experience is what I bring to the table.

In light of that, do you think you'll be able to put yourself in the shoes of others such as commercial fisheries or subsistence other than just the sport fish? Absolutely. And then my last question, I'll tell you that in advance, and it's the question that I ask previously, but I think it's an important question.

As I stated, many Alaskans, including myself, have been increasingly concerned about what appears to be the erosion of the public process by the Board of Fisheries. If you are confirmed to the board, what will you do to try and restore the public faith and trust in the Board of Fisheries and the process? I think one of the largest things is having debates on the public record in a form that everybody understands where you're coming from and why you've come to that conclusion. That's massively important, as well as fully complying with the executive— the Ethics Act.

When in doubt, if I think I have an issue with this, with a conflict disclosing it. And when in doubt, disclose. So following those different forms to create public trust, because public trust is imperative for this board to function. Have you been following the Board of Fish meetings? Yes.

So you saw the most recent Board of Fish meeting on Friday? I caught— yeah, I got a portion of it, not the full. Do you believe that that was building confidence in the public and public trust? That particular meeting, I only caught the first probably 45 minutes or an hour of it because I had.

To take care of my nephew afterwards. So I didn't see the full meeting. Okay, other questions? Representative—. Thanks.

Um, and, uh, so Mr. Hickson, I'm wondering, uh, so childhood in Bethel, subsistence fishing, uh, knowledge of the upper— the Yukon especially, which is— we know the upper Yukon villages especially up there are suffering. Maybe you could flesh out a little bit what you think your experience in that area would bring to the board. So the subsistence experience as well as the— I think I would call it historical or cultural fishing that some of the native villages in the Upper Yukon are experiencing right now, not having fish for, what, 8 years? 5 Years? 8 Years?

I can't remember what the Upper Yukon is, but it's been a while. Yes, thank you for the question. So growing up in those, you know, because growing up in Bethel and then also over on the Yukon, having the hands-on experience of seeing what the fish are doing but also relying on, you know, the traditional knowledge or local knowledge of the people, I really feel like that colors a lot of the black and white data that we get from Fish and Game on the numbers-wise. You know, Fish and Game might say, okay, the data is showing this, but the story of the local knowledge kind of weaves that together for you to see where it goes from A to B. Follow-up?

Follow-up. Representative McCabe. Thanks. So I think what I'm trying to get to is I'd like to know, being as how you are kind of out there and you grew up in or had a childhood in Bethel, How you think the importance of fish and fishing is to the communities that are on those, uh, in those areas that are being highly impacted by lack of salmon right now? It is the lifeblood of those communities.

Without fish, those communities struggle in a way that it's hard to comprehend, not only from a food security standpoint but from a cultural standpoint. And, um, yeah, so that area needs fish. Thanks. Thank you. Further questions?

Representative Edgeman. Yes, thank you, uh, Madam Chair. I was going to say co-chair, but Madam Chair. And sorry for having to step away. I've not had the opportunity to meet you, Mr. Hickson, and appreciate you stepping forward and putting your name into the mix and of course going before the joint confirmation process.

But, um, so Growing up in Bethel, it'd be really interesting to get your take on subsistence fishing, for example. And, you know, I'm born and raised in Dillingham, part Alaska Native, so of course my affinity is with, you know, my Alaska Native roots. But I would imagine spending time in both the Kuskokwim watershed area and the Yukon River as well, that you have some affinity and some deep appreciation for, you the way of life, as you were just talking about, fish is lifeblood. But could you just expand on that? And again, I apologize for not being able to be here earlier.

Yes. So my earliest days on the water were taking part in subsistence activities with my family.

It has a very near and dear place in my heart. From the local people I know in the area, understanding the culture, learning, and it gave us the opportunity to get outside into the woods and learn. So subsistence from the process of actually catching the fish to cutting it, hanging it up, drying it, all of that, to see the whole picture. To me, that's some of my earliest childhood memories. So hopefully that answers your question.

Mr. Madam Co-chair, firing on all cylinders this morning. Yeah, so the issue of how to deal with things during a time of shortage, and there's been some sort of faint talk about tackling the subsistence issue. We all know we're out of compliance with ANILCA. I don't see that happening this session. I don't know if that ever comes to fruition here in the next couple of years or not, but the Board of Fishes game is, you know, the Board of Fishes role is, you know, maybe indirectly involved in all that, but you may have to make some decisions as a board member one of 7 members, but I'm not sure I get— I'm not sure I'm getting a read on where you would be on the issue of subsistence if it came down to shortages and local use and where your predisposition might be, if any exists.

Yeah, there's a subsistence priority.

And that's, you know, when it comes to the people that are closest to the resource, I guess you could say. So I personally feel that there's a subsistence priority, and also I believe in our Constitution it is laid out like that.

Okay, I'll leave it at that. Thank you. Other questions? Representative Vance. Thank you.

The last comment that you made about subsistence priority in our Constitution, could you explain further what— how you see that? The resources being managed for the people of Alaska. And the local users first, I believe.

Follow-up, Representative Vance. And could you explain where in the—. So the— there's other provisions for a resource in the Constitution. Could you expand on that? I can't really.

I need to look into it more. Thank you.

Other questions?

Seeing none, I will open up public testimony. We have several testifiers, and due to the time restraints, I'm going to ask that testifiers keep their testimony to 2 minutes or less. So with that, we will go to Sharon Martin. If you'd state your name and your affiliation for the record, please.

Good morning, Chair Stutes and committee members. My name is Shannon Martin, and I'm the Executive Director for Kenai River Sport Fishing Association. Kenai River Sport Fishing Association would like to express our support for Blair Hickson to serve on the Alaska Board of Fish. KRSA is the leading sport fishing and personal use advocacy group in Alaska, and as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, our mission is to ensure the sustainability of the Kenai and Alaska's fish resources. Blair Hickson brings a unique and valuable perspective shaped by a lifetime of experience across Alaska's fisheries.

Raised along the Kuskokwim River in Bethel, he grew up participating in subsistence fishing and fish camp life, developing a deep respect for Alaska's resources and rural communities. He spent nearly 20 years as a licensed sport fishing guide and currently operates the remote lodge on Anvik River, giving him a direct stake in sustainable fisheries management. In addition to his professional experience, Blair has participated in subsistence, personal use, and sport fisheries and has witnessed firsthand the economic importance of commercial fisheries in communities like Bristol Bay. This broad exposure provides him with a well-rounded understanding of Alaska's diverse user groups and the need for balanced decision makers. Mr. Blair represents a hardworking next-generation Alaskan whose livelihood and way of life depends on healthy fisheries.

His practical experience, strong work ethic, and respect for all users make him well suited to serve on the Board of Fish. Thank you for the opportunity to provide input. Thank you. Are there any questions for Ms. Martin?

Seeing none, we will go to Rod Arno. Mr. Arno, if you could state your name and affiliation for the record, please.

Yes, my name is Rod Arno, Palmer, Alaska. I'm the public policy director for the Alaska Outdoor Council, and my first Board of Fisheries meeting was with Dale Bonderath, Stan McDowell, back in the '80s. The Outdoor Council supports the confirmation of Blair Fixing to the Board of Fisheries. Clearly consistent with the statutes that the legislature passed in 1605.251E, the board allocates between 4 user groups. Of those 4 user groups, 2 of them are ones that Mr. Hickson participates in and has a long history, sport and guided sport.

Right now, the comment was made about the qualifications required in 1605.225 on boards of fisheries and game. And one of the first thing is that the candidates should, that are appointed and confirmed, should have an interest in public affairs, and Mr. Hickson sure does that. And that's something that we're certainly short of with the next generation of Alaskans having representatives who are familiar with the process. The Outdoor Council supports passing his name on for full confirmation. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Do we have any questions for Mr. Arno? Seeing none, we will go to Gail Vick.

If you would state your name and affiliation for the record, please.

Yes, good morning, and thank you for this opportunity. My name is Gail Vick, and I live in Fairbanks. I chair the Fisheries Subcommittee of the Fairbanks AC, but this is my personal support for Blair Hickson to the Alaska Board of Fisheries. I've been involved in Alaska fisheries at many levels for decades and fully recognize the kind of people that will contribute to the health and well-being of our Alaskan wild stock. Alaska is in a wild salmon crisis.

We particularly need people who have a holistic and comprehensive understanding of Alaska's wild salmon. Mr. Hickson is definitely one of those people. I have complete confidence in Mr. Hickson's ability to navigate the complexity of fisheries intersections across sectors at the Board of Fish and to be thoughtful, fair, and knowledgeable. His personal experience and educational background make him an excellent candidate for the board. Please support his nomination.

Thank you. Thank you. Questions? Seeing none, um, we'll go to Kim Landean. Kim, if you would state your name and affiliation for the record, please.

Thank you, Madam Chair. For the record, Kim Landean, co-executive director of SEGO. SEGO just wants to offer our support for the appointment of Blair. While he brings a broad and diverse perspective, we are especially encouraged by his direct experience as a sportfishing service provider. It is a sector that we believe currently lacks representation on the board alongside strong subsistence and commercial representation.

As many of you know, tourism is now the number one economic driver in Southeast Alaska, and sportfishing providers play a critical role in that economy. A board member who understands firsthand the full scope of running a sportfishing service business All from marketing and booking trips, often happening a year in advance, to delivering a high-quality experience while making real-time decisions that balance client expectations, safety, and conservation, all while working within a complex and changing regulatory and environmental landscape, provides Blair an opportunity to bring these essential and practical insights to this board process. That perspective, in our mind, matters, particularly when speaking for a fishery that uses a relatively small portion of the state's resource while driving significant economic stability and often possibilities in our remote coastal communities across Southeast. We are excited to have his perspective, and we offer our full support under Blair's appointment and respectfully urge your confirmation. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Questions? Seeing none, we will go to John Murray— no, we will go to Robert Murphy from Kodiak. Mr. Murphy, state your name and affiliation for the record, please. Thank you, Madam Chair.

My name is Bob Murphy and represent myself. I live in Kodiak. I've participated in the Board of Fish for 36 years, uh, and I am not in support of Mr. Hickson. It's nothing personal about him. I don't personally know him.

I did look at his application online, and I've heard what was been said here. I'm also an area and fisherman, and I'm concerned about how appointment to him would actually skew the board for further towards 3 interior votes and without any commercial fishermen on the board of FISH except for one who doesn't do— get most of his revenue from commercial fishermen.

Commercial fishing is one of the largest industries in the state, supports tens of thousands of jobs and the coastal communities that survive off these fisheries. For years, the, the lack of a board of fisheries member who makes the bulk of their income from commercial fishing is unacceptable. And for that reason, I just did not support Mr. Hickson. There needs to be more full-time commercial fisheries appointments to the 7-member board. Kodiak, Dutch Harbor, Homer, Seward, to name a few, are large seafood ports that are the backbone of coastal communities in the state.

And some of these locations are often some of the largest seafood ports in the United States, and it has been decades since some of these locations have have seen representative representation on the Board of Fish. It's time to change this and appoint full-time commercial fishermen to the board, as this will be a small attempt to put some balance on the Board of Fisheries. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. Questions?

Seeing none, thank you. Next we have Gary Hollier. Mr. Hollier, if you'd state your name and affiliation for the record, please. Yeah, thank you, Madam Chairman, members of the board. Panel here.

My name is Gary Hollier, representing myself. Uh, I don't know anything about Mr. Hickson. I listened to him talk. I'm a little concerned about this voting the party line. After going to many, many board officials, I see some representatives, some people on the board for 9 years will vote the exact same way.

Their eyes are closed. I would hope that Mr. Hickson would come up with that with an open, open mind and, and look at all the participants that are dealing with a certain proposal, deal with the science. This Board of Fish in the last little bit has done these board-generated proposals completely out of cycle, cutting out the people that we're supposed to be involved in. At this last proposal, they cut out Upper Cook Inlet setnetters and turned it into a beach aid. Every Advisory Committee voted against that, but this still passed our Board of Fish.

Alaska Board of Fish went against 86% of Alaska resident permit holders, setnetters, and 80% live in the area. I just hope that Mr. Hickson— and I'm pretty sure he's going to get nominated, and at this point I will, uh, push for his, uh, approval. And I'm, if God willing, at 73, I'll try to make and meet him next year at the Board of Fish. But I'm hoping that he comes in with an open mind because a lot of people on this Board of Fish in the last decade are very closed-minded. So I hope he's listening to what I'm saying, and I look forward to meeting him.

Thank you. Thank you. Questions? Seeing none. And finally, we have Virgil Umpenauer in Fairbanks.

Welcome, Virgil. If you'd state your name and affiliation for the record.

Good morning, Madam Chair. My name is Virgil Umpenauer. I live in North Pole, Alaska. I have served 3 terms on the Board of Fish in the past. I came to Alaska right after— not too long after I came back from Vietnam the last time.

I've been here for 55 years. I serve on the Pacific Salmon Commission as a member of the Yukon River Panel, and I've been on this since 1988. I'm also on the Fairbanks Fishery Advisory Committee. But I'm speaking strictly for myself. I am a— the last few years I've had the opportunity to talk with Blair Hitchin at Board of Fish meetings.

And one thing about him, and it's a little bit different, is he has seen what used to be and what we have now. And when I say that, I'm speaking about the Androok River. The Hanwick River's minimum escapement goal of chum salmon is 450,000. They got less than 50,000 last year, but in his lifetime, he's seen it where they've had a million and a half go up that river. He knows exactly, he's seen exactly what happens when we have things beyond our control happening.

The Board of Fish has to address those type of issues. They're not easy to address. An example being what the Yukon River Panel is doing currently, trying to build a rebuilding plan for Chinook salmon. On the chair, Madam Chair there, you have two rivers in your area on Kodiak that used to have 4,000, 5,000, 6,000 king salmon. Now they've got less than 100 king salmon returning.

Those are some of the problems that have to be addressed by the board. But I'm totally in favor of Mr. Hickson being on the board. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Mr. Umpenauer. Any questions?

Seeing none, I see no further— I see no further testifiers, so I will close public testimony. Mr. Hickson, we appreciate you coming in person. We appreciate you taking the grilling that we have all given you, and we look forward to moving your name forward for confirmation. Thank you very much. Thank you.

With that, we will go to last but not least, Mr. Wood, and Mr. Wood is joining us by Teams or on the phone? Is he going to be on the phone? Oh, he's going to be on the phone today. Welcome, Mr. Wood. Um, please give us your name and tell us why you're going to be continuing as a great board member for the Board of Fish.

Hello. I think she liked that statement, right?

Is he there?

Mr. Wood? Hello, can you hear me? Oh, we can hear you now, Mr. Wood. Tell us a little bit about yourself and why you want to be reappointed to the Board of Fish. Okay, sorry, I'm remotely off-grid here, so my reception's often pretty bad.

No worries. Why do I want to do this all over again? Well, I came to Alaska in '89. I started out as a mountain guide on Denali. I've lived in Talkeetna and Chase.

For the last 30-some years, and I served on the Mat-Su Fish and Wildlife Commission for about 10, and then I've had a commercial setnet permit and cook inlet for— this will be my 11th year, and it's been an honor and a privilege to be on this board. I have learned so much from the people of Alaska, the subsistence users, commercial and sport anglers. It's It's been awesome. And then having access to the department and the science and the people that are committed to this resource is another— been an honor to participate. So I've learned a lot.

I probably come in with some preconceived notions of things, and I've had the opportunity to educate myself and learn some things and see things a little differently than I'd originally intended. It's an ongoing process and it's been a lot of fun and I've really enjoyed engaging with the people of Alaska.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Wood. I'll start off with my standard question. Mr. Wood, many Alaskans, including myself, have been greatly concerned with what appears to be an erosion—. This call will be recorded.

Is he still there? You there, Mr. Wood? I am. Okay. Um, we've been— I've been here as well as the public.

It's— are very concerned about the erosion of the public process in the Board of Fish proceedings. This call is no longer being recorded. As a board member, um, what can you do to help steer the ship back towards a clear transparent and public process.

Um, Chairwoman, I, I think I heard most of that, and, um, I'll respond, um, as, as diplomatically as possible. First of all, I really want to say I appreciate House Bill 33, having the opportunity to be able to deliberate on issues that are near and dear to me is important. I think it's important to the other board members in the process for people to understand that. So my hat's off to the legislature for passing that. Um, this committee thanks you for that, Mr. Wood.

Thank you. I said this committee thanks you. Okay, I'm sorry for interrupting.

I came into this thinking that the board process was probably the most diplomatic process in the state of Alaska and have held it in really high regard. And I think fishermen have held it in high regard. I think it's visionary that the legislature doesn't make the rules and regulations, that it is left up to a board still. And so having board confidence is super important to the public so that they feel like they've been heard.

[Speaker:JOHN] I do believe that the timing of things have happened in such a way recently that oftentimes deliberations on very important issues aren't public long enough for the public to actually have an opinion or voice their concerns for the topic that's being voted on. And sometimes that day. That gets me really frustrated. With how that comes about sometimes. Nonetheless, I've seen it change in my 3 years there depending on who the chair is.

I think there's room for it to be— for the process to work better for the people.

And so, I guess I'll leave it at that. I feel really strongly that the people need to know what the issue is and debate it openly so that board members can have the most You know, so that they have the opportunity to learn the impacts that the decisions we make have on the public.

Thank you. Thank you. Representative McCabe, you have a question for Mr. Wood. Thanks. Good to hear your voice, Mike.

I'm wondering if the Board of Fish has affected you because you sound so diplomatic on the phone.

I'm trying to be on my best behavior, Rep. McCabe. You have a question? No, no. Okay, I just want to let him know I was listening. A constituent.

Thank you for that, Representative McCabe. Representative Vance. Thank you, Mr. Wood. Uh, you're a— you have a set net permit in Cook Inlet. How do you feel about the most recent Board of Fish decision on, uh, that happened on Friday.

Um, Representative Vance, I, um, I love Cook Inlet. I love Cook Inlet because it's really messy, it's really difficult, it's muddy, it's like got massive tides, and I like to fish right in the middle of it, like just groveling in the mud 2 days a week. Um, I, I've learned about the contention of this through the Massou Fish and Wildlife Commission, which was predominantly a sport fish representation, but also, you know, commercial as well. I believe that there is criteria around a lot of these issues, whether it's subsistence, whether it's agenda change requests, board-generated proposals, you name it. And I personally didn't believe that the criteria was met for a board-generated proposal this last time.

I did not vote— I would not have voted in favor of that. I did not vote in favor of that. And I also believe that with the cycle happening next year, it would have given everybody, including Commercial Fishing Entry Commission, the lawyers, the state attorneys, fishermen, a much better opportunity to learn about the effects of this decision down the road and the impact it'll have on them. As it is now, I did not argue in favor of the decision that was made. I tried to point out a lot of reasons why, but ultimately could not, could not vote on it.

But, and so I hope that answers your question. Follow-up, follow-up, Representative Vance. I sent a letter to the Board of Fish about decisions that were made and specifically asking the board to outline their justification for making out-of-cycle decisions and have never received a reply. What do you say to me and the other members sitting on this committee who signed their name to that letter who has not received any communication back from the Board of Fish?

You absolutely deserve a response. I mean, that's why we put ourselves there front and center to listen to the public and be told things whether you like it or not and respond, you know. So, I think you— the response is warranted. And especially given the fact that, I mean, it's you that appoint us to this position and you oversee us. And luckily, the way the state of Alaska is set up, you— that's a huge honor to have and to not blow it is important.

So, nonetheless, you deserve the response. Follow up. Follow up. Thank you, Mr. Wood. I appreciate you— your humility in this, but it— this is not the first time that the board has completely ignored a letter from me about ignoring the public process.

What are you going to do to encourage a now very, very late response to a sitting legislator? Make that plural— legislators. Yes. Legislators. Okay, I'm gonna try to respect Mr. McCain's opinion of me right now.

But, um, listen, I— you guys deserve— everybody there deserves a response. And, um, I think that's the same reason why, you know, a lot of things remain in hiding until the very last minute, and then decisions are made. I, I, I, I don't think it's open and transparent. And, um, I, I believe that in the future that can be done by just having some ground rules regarding the process. And I think that's really important so that the strings aren't being pulled from behind, that everybody is on a level playing field, and that there's time and opportunity for people to direct— to directly answer the issue at hand.

And that is imperative in my mind. How will that come about? I would do my best in the future to to say what I can about that. And I have to say, I think House Bill 33 helped progress that further.

I would say that when it comes to ethics disclosures and stuff like that, I really agree that it can't just be up to the personality of the board chair, that that should be separated to some degree and also be looked at by— through the Attorney General, so it can be more or less of a biased take on someone's ethics. So, that being said, I think there's room for improvement in a lot of directions, and hopefully this new board has the ability to stand up to it and make it happen.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Wood. Seeing no further questions from the committee, I am going to open up public testimony. Is there anyone in the room that would like to testify? Seeing no one, I will start with Mr. Hollier.

If you'd— and if you could keep your testimony to 2 minutes or less. Due to the restraint on time, I would be appreciative if you'd state your name and affiliation for the record, please.

Okay, thank you, Madam Chairman. I'll try to make this short. My name is Gary Hollier, a 72-year-old lifelong resident of Kenai. I fully support Mr. Mike Wood's back to the Board of Fish for a couple reasons. Seems like it takes at least one 3-year term at the board to really get a handle about how the board works and operates.

I see Mr. Wood, he Mr. Wood leaves a Board of Fish with a stack of stuff that he takes home and looks at every night. Some people don't do that. Mr. Wood definitely does. He has come down and looked at the area of Cook Inlet firsthand with his own— out of his own diamond pocketbook to try to understand the contentious issues in Cook Inlet. He doesn't always vote the way that I would like, but that's the part of a good board member that they can look at the science and the facts and make an honest decision that's good for the resources and the people.

I will say that he is very, very strong when it comes to the process. The process was definitely taken out of cycle here in the statewide meeting when there was two board-generated proposals that one put the drift fleet on a stamp up there in inlet, took away half their area, and two took away a 140-year-old setnet fishery. And I would I would like to see Representative Vance get a response back from the chairman because she is certainly the one that makes the— the buck stops with her. And the state of Alaska deserves better when 86% of the residents of Setnetters are residents and 80% live in a borough. And this is just a slap in the face.

And maybe I'm getting off beat here, but I certainly support Mr. Woods because he is a very honest and capable board member, and thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. Um, Mr. Murphy, Robert Murphy from Kodiak, if you'd state your name and affiliation for the record and begin your testing. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Bob Murphy. I live in Kodiak, represent myself. I have support of the appointment of Mike Wood to the Board of Fisheries. Mr. Wood is knowledgeable, knowledgeable of fisheries across the state, engages with stakeholders to find out the concerns of those involved and most importantly makes decisions based on the best available science. He has represented the system's commercial sport and personal use fisheries well in his capacity as a board member, and I'll keep it short and thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you very much.

Next we have Nels Evans. Mr. Evans. Yeah, hi, this is Nels Evans, Petersburg Vessel Owners Association, calling in to share and express our support for Member Woods. He's spent the last 3 years working really, really hard, and you can tell the benefits from that hard work. He really is reaching out to all member groups, trying to make the most well-informed decisions between the shareholders— or the stakeholders— between the science, between the resource for our shared fisheries resources here in the state.

Getting back to trying to build public sentiment for for the board again, when I was performing outreach with my membership and explaining who the board members were for reappointment and up for new appointment, all members that have participated in the board process over the last 3 years expressed their happiness with Member Wood because of the time that he takes when stakeholders reach out to him. They can tell that he really considers and thinks through all of the steps and processes. We are supportive of his reappointment. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Mr. Milney— no, Milne. I got it. Mr. Milne, if you'd state your name and affiliation and begin your testimony, please. Yes, thank you. Thank you, Representative Steed.

My name is Malcolm Milne. I'm the president of the North Pacific Fisheries Association. We're based in Homer, Alaska, represent about 65 commercial fishing operations, and we are in support of the reappointment of Mike Wood to the Board of Fisheries. He's been an excellent board member. I mean, I guess trying not to repeat too much of what's being said, how lucky we are that he's ready to submit himself to the rigorous torture of the Board of Fisheries.

It's a lot of work and reading and time, and the fact that he's been through a whole cycle already with in each area and learned that information, the nuances of the different areas, or started to learn anyway, is a huge asset. And for him to be able to put his name up again and be willing to go through another round is, is really valuable to the state. So we fully support his reappointment. Thank you. Thank you very much.

And lastly, we have Kim Landin. If you would state your name and affiliation. For the record and begin your testimony.

Thank you again, Madam Chair. For the record, Kim Wyndine, Co-Executive Director of Southeast Alaska Guides Organization, or SEGO. I want to start by saying I understand it can sometimes be seen as unusual for a sport fishing organization to support a commercial representative, but I want to start by stating that one of SEGO's core values is collaboration, and we have deeply appreciated the collaborative nature demonstrated by Mr. Wood, particularly during the most recent Board of Fish Southeast Alaska meeting where he balanced and worked heavily to balance the Chinook in-season management with resident priorities and the rebalancing of allocation that happened down in our region. With that in mind, SIGA does support the reappointment of Mike Wood to the Alaska Board of Fisheries. He has shown a willingness, as many have said already, to engage with complex issues often on his own dime, and his continued service would provide important continuity in board deliberation, carrying forward the experience gained through this regulatory cycle.

If I may, Madam Chair, we would just like to offer our gratitude for Member Wood for the last 3 years. We know that serving on the board is not an easy assignment like your assignments of sitting in those seats, but we do deeply appreciate anyone who's willing to provide service to the state, specifically with resource management, and specifically one who's willing to show resident priority and work for sustainable outcomes for all user groups. So with that, I will end my comment, and thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you very much. Appreciate your testimony.

Seeing no comments and having no further public testimony, I will close public testimony. Is there any further discussion from this committee? Representative Vance. I just want to say, uh, thank you to Michael Wood again for, um, just really being open and, uh, and being so collaborative. Because I remember, uh, the first confirmation where I spoke on the record, I really tried not to like you.

I wanted to vote no, and I tried to find every way possible to vote no. And it was my fishermen who came to me and said that you really put in the work and truly listened to them, and that every vote you would present your argument in your position and why you voted a certain way that garnered respect from every user group. And so you have been the picture of what we're looking for, for a Board of Fish member that truly is seeking to do what's best for, for the benefit of everyone. And I just want to say publicly on the record that I appreciate that, and that's what we strive for every member that sits is that the open collaboration where people feel that they can have a public trust in, in your decisions and just the way that you approach every single topic. So thank you for that.

Thank you. Other comments? I will echo Representative Vance. I know myself I've written two letters to the Board of Fish, one on 191, 192, and then one prior to that. And I thank all three applicants for the Board of Fish as well as, um, Ms. Welsh for her willingness to sit as the CFC commissioner.

And I hope all of you recognize how important the public process is and the transparency of that process. And we are— seem to be getting away from that, and that is not a good thing for the state, for the public, for the students.

Process, for the whole situation. So I hope that everyone keeps that in the forefront of their mind. And with that, having completed our discussion, unless somebody wants the last word besides me, I will— I want to remind members that a signature on the report does not reflect intent by any committee member to vote for or against confirmation of any of the governor's appointees that we have heard from today or during any further sessions. And with that, Representative Himschoot, I would entertain a motion. Thank you, Madam Chair.

The House Special Committee on Fisheries has reviewed the qualifications of the governor's appointees: Tracy Welch to the Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission, as well as Paul Sear, Blair Hickson, and Mike Wood to the Alaska Board of Fisheries. And recommends that their names be forwarded to a joint session for confirmation. Thank you, Representative Himschute. And with that, the names will be forwarded to the joint session, and we will gavel out at 11:40. And I would ask the members to please stay to sign the report.