Hidden Falls Chum Tax - Forums Archive

Journey

2012-06-02 16:00:44

I was recently informed by a tender that NSRAA will be implementing a new tax on fishermen this season. If a person catches any part of their load of chums below Peril Strait or above somewhere down by Warm Springs they will be taxed 20% on the entire load. Apparently, NSRAA plans to tax Sitka Sound the same way in 2013 for their Medvijie and Deep Inlet chum runs. I was also told that they are planning to have a skiff with a camera to make sure fishermen aren't lying about their catch area when they sell.

Has anyone else heard anything about this? I know that in the last few years, NSRAA has greatly increased it's chum production, with higher percentages of those returns marked for cost recovery. Chums are cheap to produce, they can be released a few weeks after hatching, unlike kings and cohos that spend a year fresh water. I don't believe that NSRAA is hurting for money. Hatcheries exist to help sustain commercial fishing, not to force fishermen out of business.

SilverT

2012-06-02 17:13:41

Here is the link to their site and text on the issue:

http://www.nsraa.org/

Salty

2012-06-03 16:14:08

Journey and others,

Always a good idea to check with ADF&G or the source, in this case NSRAA (thanks for the web-link SilverT) before expressing concerns about issues or future issues.

As a troll representative on the NSRAA Board I am kept informed of these issues. In this case via e-mail from the NSRAA executive director. I have been busy fishing and tendering so I have mostly been out of phone and e-mail range so have not posted on this site for a few days.

Immediately on hearing the news that Revenue had insisted that the seine assessment on chums in the Hidden Falls Special Harvest area apply to both trollers and seiners I asked NSRAA and ADF&G troll staff to get out a joint press release and include in troll announcements to clarify. Both indicated they were working on it.

Personally, I support the seiners move to an assessment which does away with chum cost recovery at Hidden Falls. The seiners did not want to include trollers in the program, in essence were willing to give us a free ride, as they test it out. Revenue decided all commercial chum harvest in the assessment area should be subject to the tax. My understanding is that if you fish in the special harvest area during the trip then all your chums from that trip will be subject to the assessment. Otherwise people could claim they caught the chums elsewhere. The amount of chums we catch in the Special Harvest Area at Hidden smalls is very small since it is managed aggressively for cost recovery and seining and you are only allowed one chum per Chinook in July.

As for the future, my term on the NSRAA Board is up this fall and I encourage anyone to run. I have not heard any discussion of this program being expanded to Deep Inlet or other hatchery salmon. But, if it works out at Hidden Falls and it appears suitable for other sites then I would be open to supporting it.

I am no longer an officer or on the Board of the Chum Trollers Association. If they have a position on this issue I am unaware of it.

Journey

2012-06-03 20:00:35

Silver T- Thanks for the link, I tried searching ADF&G's site for info before posting, but didn't think to search NSRAA's page.

Salty- Thanks for the additional information. I have always found this site to be a place to come for knowledgable answers, thanks to you and others who take the time to attend meetings and stay up to date on issues concerning trollers. I too am out fishing where there is occasional internet and no phone service. It's nice to get a quick response when your time for source checking is limited. And now that I am better educated, I can say I still have the same concerns.

Here is the Email I just sent to NSRAA.

Steve,

I am hoping that you can take a few minutes to clear up some questions that I have about the new tax on Hidden Falls chum.

I understand from your news release on 5/31 that trollers are subject to this 20% tax due to an unforeseen legal issue. I also understand that if a person trolls in the special harvest area during a fishing trip that all chums from that trip will be subject to the assessment. I have also heard that there may be an observer on the fishing grounds to keep record of which boats are fishing.

My first question is, if trollers are not the intended taxed group, will there be efforts made to assure that they are taxed, what will they be, and why?

The second question is this, do you plan to similarly tax returns in other special harvest areas in the future? Specifically, will Medvijie or Deep Inlet returns be taxed in 2013?

And last, how is this new arrangement beneficial to trollers?

Thank you for answering,

Laura Slack

F/V Lucky Strike

itchyscratchy

2012-06-06 02:32:53

Taxation without representation....where was ATA representing trollers interest?...or anyone representing the fisherman's interests.? Sheeze....

I am guessing the meetings had to be secret other wise a fisherman would cause to much trouble and gum up the works.

The 20% tax is just one more sign NSARRA is in trouble.

Where is the accountablilty? poor runs, years of decreasing returns, yet no major changes have been made. Most likely the organization feels a not-for-profit plays by different rules. Perhaps the board and managers are so entrenched that the organization is suffering. The board should be tossed along with all the managers. We the fisherman are paying the price for a poorly managed operation and we don't have any say other then electing the same fisherman who are thinking the same way, to represent our interests. We are getting sold down the road.

Maybe a new direction is needed. How about the board step up and do something? How about hiring an outside consultant with a track record of honest organizational evaluations and throw the dice to see what they say.

I bet really looking at the organization and getting an outside honest evalution would be to scary. I wonder what kinds of excuses would be used to shoot down that idea? Cost to much money? It is costing to much money to not know what's the problem.

Attica, Attica, Attica!

Give me liberty or give me Chums.

John Murray

2012-06-06 05:37:37

Itchy you might try getting some backround of what happened at BOF and other information like Journey did vie e-mail to NSRAA before going off like a friggin volcano.Here's NSRAA's number 747 -6850.Steve Riefenstil was present.He is the current head huncho.

Journey

2012-06-08 05:20:29

Here is Steve's reply:

Laura,

Thanks for inquiring about the tax issue. First the NSRAA board of director did not intend for the tax to apply to troll chum. We thought we had the issue covered at the board of fish in February. However, when NSRAA met with ADF&G a week ago they told us the law couldn’t discriminate when a tax is applied. I was incredulous as I presented testimony at the full BoF and committee regarding the seine fishery. Anyway, we cannot do anything now. NSRAA will submit a proposal at the next BoF cycle to change it.

Now to your questions:

1. if trollers are not the intended taxed group, will there be efforts made to assure that they are taxed, what will they be, and why? I think the safe answer is yes. I have no idea how the Trooper will approach this. I am sure their official answer is yes (it would have to be on a legal basis). NSRAA plans to monitor seine boats not trollers. Of course NSRAA does not have enforcement authority. The seiners want this 20% tax instead of the standard cost recovery harvest methodology and therefore we will monitor seine boats in the area so ADFG and the Trooper have better information. We hope it is incentive for all seiners to embrace the new system.

2. do you plan to similarly tax returns in other special harvest areas in the future? Specifically, will Medvijie or Deep Inlet returns be taxed in 2013? We do not have plans at this time, but the board could chose to do so in the future. A tax system for collecting revenue is expected to lead to fewer closures for CR harvest opportunities. Medvejie/Deep Inlet in 2013 – definitely not.

3. how is this new arrangement beneficial to trollers? The basic benefit is NSRAA doesn’t harvest chum for CR and therefore there are more chum in the water for seiners or trollers to catch. Fewer closures.

I am sorry that this tax will apply to troll caught chum at Hidden Falls terminal area. It was a glitch that never should have happened.

Best regards,

Steve

Hopefully everyone finds this informative. I'm still uncomfortable with the situation and the precedent it sets, but I can now understand why it happened. I am optimistic that they will look the other way when we show up to fish in the THA. Only time will tell.