Something’s Fishy on the Yukon.
Ready for some fishy number crunching?
The run of chinook (king) salmon up the Yukon river historically numbers about 250,000 fish. Last year’s run was 180,000. The year before was 175,000. It takes a minimum of 170,000 fish to sustain the fishery for subsistence use, and to ensure that there are enough fish to repopulate the river next year. The projections for this year tell us that this minimum number may not be reached. Do the math. We are tiptoeing on the edge of disaster.
Anticipating another poor run of king salmon in the Yukon River, state and federal fisheries managers announced there will likely be no commercial fishing for kings on the river this summer and subsistence fishing will be substantially reduced in order to get more fish to Canadian spawning grounds.
Why do the fish need to get to Canada? Because that’s where the Yukon starts, and our two countries share the responsibility for managing this fishery. The number of king salmon reaching the Canadian border the past two years has fallen short of the number specified in the U.S.- Canada Yukon River Salmon Agreement which was signed by the U.S. and Canada in 2001. And as is the way with international treaties, they’re not supposed to be violated.
If only there were more fish…
The sad truth that the state of Alaska doesn’t want to deal with is the fact that there ARE more fish. Lots more fish. And what’s happening to tens of thousands of those king salmon that are swimming toward the Yukon River right now as you read this? They will be caught in the nets of factory trawlers fishing for pollack off the coast, they will be hauled out of the ocean, and they will die. As WASTE. These precious king salmon that should be feeding Alaskans, sustaining a commercial fishery, and helping us fulfill our treaty obligation with Canada are thrown overboard dead.
How can this happen? This is the fallout caused by bad policy. The notion that it’s OK to waste these fish that are so desperately needed, as the fishery teeters on the edge of collapse, was discussed during the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council meeting in Anchorage last month. This is where all these problems get talked about, where everyone on every side of fishing issues gets to air their grievances, make suggestions, and work out solutions to this kind of problem.
Native leaders, subsistence users, and others that depend on this fishery all had the opportunity to speak to this issue. What were they asking for? A safe cap of 24,000 for the king salmon “bycatch”. Bycatch is the name used for all the extra creatures that come up in nets that you weren’t really trying to catch, but you did anyway. So, if you want pollack and you get king salmon, that’s bycatch. If this were the military, it might be called “collateral damage”. Oops….didn’t mean to kill you. Sorry.
What people who depend on this fishery asked for is that no more than 24,000 king salmon should be allowed to be wasted each season. This would allow the salmon to rebound, and reach sustainable levels again.
Up until now, the limit for bycatch has been nonexistant. No cap. They can take as many salmon as they want. And because of that, during some seasons more than 120,000 fish were wasted. The great compromise this year? The state has decided they will cap the number at 68,000 ….two seasons from now in 2011.
Fishermen on the upper Yukon River have been trying for years to get the state to institute net restrictions that would protect king salmon, but the state Board of Fisheries has rejected those proposals, in part because the Department of Fish and Game has not supported them. “Every conservation effort ever put in front of the Board of Fish those guys have argued against, and now they’re asking us to reduce our subsistence harvest,” Smith said. People living in villages along the Yukon River are worried about whether they will be able to catch enough fish to feed their families this winter, Smith said. “They’re scared,” said Smith, who has talked to villagers up and down the river.
Victoria Briggs is a Bristol Bay village resident and fishing permit holder involved in the Alaska-based fish processing business. She has been heavily involved in the food drive for residents of Bristol Bay villages that have been hit hard by bad salmon runs leaving them with inadequate income, and food.
“As someone who attended the meeting in Anchorage on this by-catch issue, listened and read reports, and sat through days of public, state and industry testimony, I was extremely concerned by the lack of science being used to manage this resource.
My understanding of the state of Alaska is that fishing resources are to be managed for sustainability and the good of Alaskan residents.
To not err on the side of conservation in this matter, to me, seems to fly in the face of that policy.
I am afraid this might well be the canary in the mine of fishing sustainability for the state of Alaska if we do not manage it better.”
An email from Yup’ik leader Myron Naneng, President of the Association of Village Council Presidents asked the following:
Commissioner of Fish and Game, Denby Lloyd, made the motion at the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council (NPFMC) meeting earlier this month of the high bycatch rate of 68,000, even when his staff who work on the Yukon river was to report to the stakeholders on the Yukon the forecast for 2009 a week after the NPFMC meeting, which is dismal. KTUU has in its webpage the report of the the dismal 2009 forecast that the Alaska Department of Fish &Game released recently. Did the motion justify 68,000 in light of the current chinook salmon status on the Yukon River? Or was it just plain lack of concern by the Palin Administration?
(Raises hand) That would be answer B!
If the salmon are the collateral damage, then the losers of this war are those who have for thousands of years depended on the bounty of the Yukon. That bounty is now being dumped overboard for the benefit of the winners – out-of-state factory trawlers that supply breaded fish sticks for the masses. The losers are the people of Alaska.
We watch as salmon fisheries are closed, and as residents worry they will not have enough food. We watch as we put ourselves in danger of violating an international treaty. We watch as private citizens try to organize food drives, and as the governor shows up with food provided by a religious organization, and a plate of cookies as a way to make this all better.
The state has so far not been willing to deal with any of that. And yet we hear over and over the battle cry, “We don’t need the feds!” “They need to keep their noses out of Alaska!”
We’re beyond milk & cookies. We need the feds.
[Cross-posted at The Huffington Post - BUZZ IT UP!]
Yes – the feds are needed. Asses will be kicked. Names will be taken.
http://depts.washington.edu/kexp/blog/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/Grizzly%20Bear-Larry.jpg
Just mailed my deep frozen foods supplier in Germany that any fish from Alaska is now off my plate. Won´t buy any of it from the stores anymore either until proper capping and whatever necessary measures are introduced. I will tell my friends.
My husband used to buy that fake crab meat, which is made of pollock and other fish. We no longer buy it due to various reasons, but the main ones were the waste catching and abuse of the oceans. Check the ingredients on ALL fish products and see what you are eating. It may not be what is on the front of the package.
Wow, That $uck$! Thanks AKM for continuing to shine a light onto a situation we would otherwise never know. Through your intrepid pajama clad blogging perhaps the Native way of life won’t disappear with a whisper as it seems the Palin Admin would prefer.
Our family hardly ever eats breaded fish sticks (bought my only 3 bags for the last 18 months in the last month). I have one bag left in the freezer. I won’t restock it. Boycott Time!
MudPups: Perhaps letters to our Senators who are on Bureau of Indian Affairs would be in order? Here’s a link to the committee list: http://indian.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=About.Members It includes: Byron Dorgan, Chairman (ND)
Daniel Inouye (HI)
Kent Conrad (ND)
Daniel Akaka (HI)
Tim Johnson (SD)
Maria Cantwell (WA)
Jon Tester (MT)
Tom Udall (NM)
John Barrasso, Vice Chairman (WY)
John McCain (AZ)
Lisa Murkowski (AK)
Tom Coburn (OK)
Michael Crapo (ID)
Mike Johanns (NE)
Glad I don’t eat meat…
Is there anything where Palin’s touch doesn’t cause harm??
Banning frozen fish sounds like a good start
Help me to understand this situation. What does Sarah get out of allowing the commercial pollack fisherman to fish in Alaska? Do they pay fees? I’m trying to understand (although who can really understand) her angle. This seems like a no-brainer to me. You do what’s necessary for your own people first.
.
My grandfather was a fisherman out of Newfoundland. They used to say “fish in the Grand Banks” like they’d say “grains of sand on a beach” or “stars in the sky”: Practically infinite. Now the fish are almost all gone. The same thing is happening off the Pacific Northwest and Hawaii.
Log-lines, drift-nets, factory ships, Russian, Japanese, Norwegian, Spanish and other industrial navies are floating just a few miles off our shores and wiping out our fish stocks. The individual State governments can do little or nothing: They don’t have jurisdiction. The Republicans in Washington, DC have not cared to do much of anything. I guess we’ll see how much the Dems care.
All of our favorite fish are being wiped out. In a few years, there may not be many edible fish left in the world’s oceans, lakes, rivers and streams, between over-fishing, pollution and global warming. Millions of people worldwide who rely upon fish as their primary source of protein will be devastated.
Farmed fish will never be able to keep up with the demand. Aquaculture is a major industry here in Hawaii, but problems with productivity, fish diseases, and genetics make it a small supplement at best to Mother Nature, as she was. If something isn’t done for her soon, it will be too late to save the fish.
“Compromises” by “reasonable” “moderate” corporate shills have squandered many golden opportunities to fix this over the last forty years. Now that we’re way past the crisis point, it’s time to get radical. As with so many other issues, the “moderates” have bargained away all the easy alternatives. Now fixing things really is going to hurt, as the moderates predicted when they first started using that as a stalling tactic. Let’s make it hurt them, and their corporate masters, while we still can. The alternative is disaster.
.
Amanda-
The pollock are caught in federal waters, between the 3 and 200 miles out from the coast line.
Where the state comes into the equation is in how the board, NPFMC, is appointed and deals with the issue.
The board is made up of a combination of representatives from Alaska, Oregon and Washington. Industry, fish managers and others who deal with the fishery are on it. There are 15 members, I believe 4 do not vote.
http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/npfmc/membership.htm is a link to explain the exact makeup.
When it comes to voting members those who are representatives the Gov nominates Alaska has 6 of the 11.
The AK Depart of Fish and Game, Denby Lloyd heads that group up and is suppose to be leading the efforts to protect Alaska interests.
There is a MAJOR question as to how that ‘leader’ decided not to listen to those from Western Alaska who had concerns and looked to have followed a course of letting the pollock industry off without any REAL protection for the salmon.
In western Alaska the commercial fishery puts dollars directly into fishermen’s and their crews pockets. Those monies, especially in villages, goes around many times to support the residents.
The subsistence fishery puts food directly on the tables of villagers.
Taking away the ability to support themselves they are FORCED into looking to the state and others to assist them. NONE want this!!
It seems to be missed in this that taking away of direct dollars of income, but offering it back in assistance is NOT what is needed.
These representatives are TRUSTED to use science and best judgement to take care of the interests of the residents and interests of the state.
The US pollock industry is I believe only 19 years old, mostly out of state interests, the commercial salmon industry is at least 100 years. The cultures that depend on this fishery are thousands of years old.
Hopefully this helps!
To comment to Virginia(the last attempt went into space I think) The pollack fish industry represents big business and employment opportunities in rural Alaska. The salmon fishermen are living subsistence and selling on a smaller scale. Some folks do both; work on trawlers and catch salmon on their own.Big business was successfull at the last meeting to keep their industry without too much regulating. Issues of ocean health and scientific studies of the salmon and the numbers required for the healthy survival of that fish were not used as guidelines for decision making. The result of this is that rural Alaskans do not have salmon to feed themselves…
Here is a link to the bit by bit highlights of the testimony that was given in Anchorage. It is interesting in the bits and pieces of information that was offered and who packed the meeting.
Many hints were given as to how this industry works and influences the parties.
http://anonymousbloggers.wordpress.com/2009/04/05/npfmc-salmon-by-catch-meeting/#comments
To me the feds is my mailman and he/she doesn’t seem to be too concerned. To me the feds are actually You fine folk (being the We in we the people) the ones who actually care and are making a difference.
I <3 The Mudflats.
I don”t think my mail people/FEDS care too much about SALMON IN ALASKA either but they Do Mail my flat rate boxes to rural Alaska….Some basic things are out of whack.
Can’t help but compare this to the swine flu, lack of sanitary conditions at a US pork plant in Mexico and the e coli outbreaks of the last few years.
The republicans have screamed about government interference in “business”.
The banking crisis is a direct result of less not more government over site.
Well the results have been catastrophic.
We are a nation that is not protected and at the mercy of businesses that have convinced republicans and a certain number of people that they can control themselves. President Obama I hope will change that.
Think about Sarah Palin and her cronies ignoring the needs of her people and the bloggers, the horrible “blog people” who sounded the call that fed and gave money for heat for Alaskans.
What is the sense of taking away food(salmon) from people and then having to send food half way across the country so they can eat. What about the self esteem of being able to provide a living for you and your family?
I am tired of republican lies. The last 8 years were hell and we are just seeing the start of what they have caused by their lies, deregulation and their greed.
It is our responsibility to make sure this never happens again.
MY GOD, Sarah Palin could have been VP of this country. How low have we sunk????
And what does John the Fisherman Moller have to say? Or is he too busy teaching folks to look for a job on the internet and calling it an employment program?
Thank God that the Feds have a treaty obligation with Canada, and the fate of the Salmon fisheries doesn’t depend solely on the “free market capitalism Church Lady”.
“and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth”
Thanks for educating us AKM. Your framing of the issues makes it very clear that the present policy doesn’t work and needs to be changed. This is another issue that needs to be put out there in the mainstream media and to the higher ups in power (yes, the Feds!). No more fishsticks or fake crab in our house, that’s for sure.
This may be an ignorant question, but why can’t the commercial pollack fishermen separate out the bycatch fish from their pollack as they clear the nets? If they’re separating out the bycatch and throwing them back into the ocean, seems to me it’s not any more trouble to throw the bycatch into a separate freezing compartment.
Then they can deliver the bycatch to the nearest commercial fishing dock and give it or sell it to the locals.
Maybe they don’t want to do that because it would then show how much bycatch fish they’re actually taking.
WildlifeAvenger: I ♥ Larry
I live by SF in Cali…for the second year they are suspending commercial Salmon fishing here, b/c the numbers are so low. There are big commercial fishing boats that come down from WA along with local commercial fishing.
I looked up Pollock and it seems a lot of it goes to —->china!
I have to agree the Repugs don’t want “govt messing with anything”, and so they have basically gotten away with murder the last 8 yrs. as we can see. Its time to put caps on collateral damage ie: salmon NOW! I don’t know how they can get away with killing salmon for Pollock? Seems crazy! And yes, the FEDS are not just your “mailman” its the people in DC more important that ever since you have a clueless gov in the pocket of commercial fisheries and big oil. Don’t look to her for any help. Call and write the people in DC. This needs to stop, for the greater good of (almost) all!
The saddest thing about this situation is that she wants to “drill, baby, drill” which would more harm to Alaska. Yes, oil would bring in the big bucks but at what cost to the environment? To the wildlife? Do people just NOT understand that there is a delicate balance and that once you cross that little line all could be lost?
I feel so sorry for the villages that depend upon the fish to live. They are going to have a hard row of it (not that they aren’t already). Here we are with an abundance of food that goes to waste every single minute just because we might decide we want it for dinner. I have heard that grocery stores will damage the food that can’t be sold because they can’t give it to food banks & they don’t want dumpster divers to have it either.
Very sad……..
I understand the commercial fishermen need to be able to make a living but when the few larger “factory” operations drive the decision-making process, a non-democratic process takes place and abuses occur. Because of the abuses, a real unfortunate thing takes place: massive reduction in our natural resources. This is what happened off the New England coast and is why cod – once abundant – is so difficult to find anywhere, to the point that in some years its viability as a species is in doubt. Don’t let the salmon go the way of the cod.
Compared to salmon and cod, pollock is a greasy little fish. Eating pollock after eating salmon is like eating soycream after eating real Ben & Jerry’s ice cream for years.
@17 KaJo -
Hopefully ugavic will hop in and provide more info.
It is the nature of trawling that the Chinook mostly expire in the process and cannot be thrown back, alive.
The freezing question came up in questions by the board at NPFMC and as salmon are so thick are beyond the capabilities of usual freezing equipment on board it is not the norm.
Observers are required -by law- to monitor bycatch . There is lots of talk about how partial/impartail they could be said to be.
It is of great importance that it is not merely the waste of bycatch fish for food but that there is a deep concern that the whole fishery is in danger of not allowing enough fish to return to spawn. At this point , the regulatory bodies are focussing on fish-in-the-river. We are asking that fish-on-the-way-to-the-river get at least equal scrutiny.
I think the central issue is the Rethuglican (first time I’ve ever written that; it feels unpleasant) assurance of the benevolence of business. I remember watching McCain debating Obama about the issue of health coverage, saying patronizingly, “Of COURSE businesses will offer health insurance for their workers. We just have to give them the tax breaks so they have the money to do it…” I blew coffee all over the couch. The whole GOP strategy is based on that idiocy. Business is NOT benevolent. It will not “of course” act for the benefit of its workers, society, or the environment. It will act to make as much money as it can, as fast as it can, for the people who can do it the most good. And when the resources are gone, it will go somewhere else and do something else. Saying we don’t need Federal regulations is like saying we don’t need laws against murder, since people will “of course” not choose to kill anyone. If I actually thought that the GOP believed that I would feel sorry for them. But they don’t. Their Big Business pals exploit that lack of regulation. It’s calculated. It’s piracy cloaked as liberty, and it’ll wind up killing us all if we don’t do something about it. OK. Rant over.
Folks- there is SO much regulation involved in this fish issue that it is hard to sort out entities and their responsibilities to the questions.
AKM is correct that we have likely moved to this needing to be solved by the fed BUT the fed has had a hand in creating this mess with the Magnuson-Stevens Act .
Whatever is/was good about the approach , serious flaws exist- also too.
DebinOH Says:
April 29th, 2009 at 6:06 AM
I feel so sorry for the villages that depend upon the fish to live. They are going to have a hard row of it (not that they aren’t already). Here we are with an abundance of food that goes to waste every single minute just because we might decide we want it for dinner. I have heard that grocery stores will damage the food that can’t be sold because they can’t give it to food banks & they don’t want dumpster divers to have it either.
Very sad……..
_____________________________
Good heavens the stories I could tell you about grocery stores and the absolute WASTE of food that goes on. It is sickening, beyond sickening, it is heartbreaking to see (and this was an every day occurrence) 3 or 4 grocery carts of breads and rolls, cakes & pies, 5 buggies of fresh produce all thrown away in a compactor with bleach poured onto it. It was just horrible. I used to beg that we be allowed to give it to the homeless shelters or food banks (that were begging for food donations) but was always told “NO”. “If someone wanted to claim they got sick we could get sued”. I then offered to take it myself and sign a waiver, releasing them from all liability and got the same answer. I took it all the way to my district supervisor and was told to leave it alone or I could lose my job.
It was just maddening.
Just hearbreaking. Thanks for posting this AKM
Heartbreaking indeed. Painful. Thanks AKM.
AKM: “(Raises hand) That would be ansewer B!”
Can’t help myself. What a great Freudian slip. Everything that comes from the Palin administration is in the sewer!!
Thanks AKM, as usual, for bringing light onto subjects that rarely make media radars. It is mystifying to see that many of you sincerely give a damn about village life – but to be honest, it has always been like this for us, a struggling existence with a very neglectful government. The Feds are in many cases, the rich uncle that makes caregiver Juneau play nice.
I join Ann and Victoria and thanking you all so very much, Quyana Caknek, for doing what you can in terms of advocacy letters and emails, cash or food donations to and on behalf of our native households.
Now at the risk of being unpopular for trying to reason the rhetoric, I have to be a little bit of a Devil’s Advocate – regarding the Pollock industry.
Nearly 20 years ago Native Leaders and grass-roots advocates launched a very aggressive effort to not only Alaskanize the lucrative Seattle/Foreign Bering Sea fishery, but to give the Native coastal communities a percentage of a commodity of what is essentially public domain.
Despite enormous obstacles and powerful counter-interests, the Community Development Quota program was authorized by the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council and the Federal Government. The CDQ program was meant to level the playing field for native villages to participate in the multi-billion dollar fishery.
It was a great step in Americanizing and Alaskanizing the industry.
Obviously, the villages had no capital, no infrastructure to become players in harvesting, processing and marketing these fish – so the Feds guaranteed a percentage (under 10% of the total allowable catch) to the 60 some communities and they leveraged that ownership to create partnerships with the Industry players – most of the foreign owned companies had to sell at least 51% of their company to the Native groups in order to keep fishing in US/Alaskan waters! It was an ingenious concept, one that I still can’t believe actually happend.
I write conflicted, because the bycatch issue is contrary to the purpose of the spirit of the program. The CDQs fish to improve the lives of the villages, and provide economy and resources for the locals. For example, they train and provide small motor mechanics and shop access for our fishermen. Otherwise, believe me when I say there would be none. There are very few enterprising mechanics that can open a shop in the village – they are snatched up by regional entities to work in a system and Joe fisherman is left to his own devices, mail order parts and tuning by a wing and a prayer.
They also have purchased large numbers of felled trees in other parts of Alaska and barge them in to their communities to provide free firewood to the residents.
Frankly, most CDQ companies are the only ones buying the salmon from Natives. They are the only ones allowing a commercial river fishery to even occur, the only cash source possible with the historical tender boats and processors having long abandoned the practice. Most CDQ companies operate at a loss to buy those fish from the native fishermen, but do it to provide a cash income for their efforts.
If only the CDQs would do a better job explaining how their existence and success more than trickles down to the village level. Maybe the programs and investments the CDQ companies make into their member villages are not sufficient enough to warrant the practice of allocating a public resource? That is something I’d like to determine with the full picture.
With the impossible energy prices, high cost of transporting goods and services and lack of human resources to meet the needs of village life, the benefits seem to be getting lost in translation. Then again, I believe they are hamstrung with laws that regulate what they are allowed to invest in. CDQs have their work cut out for them.
So, I challenge the CDQ groups to do better by explaining and upping the benefits to their own villages. I challenge them to use their majority ownership to demand and practice a clean(er) fishery.
I ask you, dear Mudpuppies, to please think twice before making fish sticks an evil thing, because the Lower Yukon fishermen can’t sell their salmon if the CDQs aren’t around to buy them. If you help create the buzz that Yukon Kings are endangered, villages like Emmonak, Marshall, Alakanuk – who have spent decades trying to build brand recognition and break into far more sophisticated markets for their world class Chinook and other salmonid species – it could become vogue to quit eating wild salmon entirely because the consumers are not that well versed in the differences.
And you should know that Wild salmon is so superior to farmed fish.
As a coastal resident, I’m doing my part to make the CDQs accountable and uphold the very purpose of their existence, but I want to tell you that while you engage in an anti-Pollock Industry campaign, WHILE crying foul at how it affects the Yukon salmon stocks, it still invariably affects the very people you are trying to protect.
Quyana.
Here in Oregon, Commercial Salmon Fishing has been banned completely (southern OR) or severely reduced (Northern OR).
In CA, I believe – it’s the second year in a row that commercial fishing of Salmon has been banned.
I remember back when there was a huge outcry about the dolphins getting caught in the tuna nets, with tuna boycotts etc. I don’t know if the issue was actually solved, or if it simply went off the radar.
IF it was “solved,” does anyone remember how? Could that solution or a form of it somehow be applied here?
(OT – a coworker called to see if I could open the shop today as she was stuck in (stopped) traffic – stopped due to the Presidential motorcade leaving the airport!)
I realize I am in danger of writing my own blog, that is not my intent, but I just want to offer a regional perspective with institutional memory since so many of you are not from around here. You all have such good intentions. . .
FYI – Chinook (King) salmon is the largest of the salmon species, why? Once it spawns, the seedstock spend the winter growing in freshwater, the river under the ice. When break-up occurs, the smelt then begin their journey down river toward the ocean. It is the largest species because it takes up to 7 or 8 years to mature out in the Bering Sea / North Pacific before they return to their natal waters as a broodstock. This is the cycle.
So for those of you concerned about last summers diminished returns, it was because their brood year in 2001 was bad. Not because last year was bad. But now it looks like 2002 was bad too. To be fair, their life in the ocean is a mystery, conditions out there, like El Nino caused havoc on our returns.
The Arctic/Yukon/Kuskokwim management area used to have terrific turf wars with another area along the migratory chain called Area M, where the Aleutian penninsula breaks into the chain of islands. This one narrow opening between the Bering Sea and the North Pacific was squeezing the salmon to run together, the smaller reds (sockeye) heading back to the Bristol Bay rivers school near the surface of the water while the Chums (Arctic Keta or Dog-Salmon) swim right below those targeted reds (with their fire-engine colored flesh so desired by Japanese consumers.) This relationship invariably caused a Chum bycatch and we forever engaged the Board of Fish to institute or decrease the cap limit for the sake of escapement goals – enough to allow us up along the rest of the coast to have a commercial and (more importantly) a Subsistence fishery.
Bycatch is not a new issue for us, nor is the burden of conservation. The Yup’ik / Cup’ik fishermen are always the first ones cut out of the fishing loop when numbers look bad. The cap concept is not new to us either, we’ll fight it out, we’ll figure it out. I hope we can count on the new legions of YK fans to help us use the Board of Fish an NPFMC process to make sound policy decisions.
What I would like to suggest is that you continue to question the Palin Administration’s willful disregard for the predicament her forgotten villages suffer annually due to poor energy and infrastructure policy.
We also need her Fish & Game division head, Denby Lloyd (a notorious Area M defender, isn’t that surprising?) and Jon Moeller to acknowledge the damage bycatch causes for in-river fisheries. If only Sarah would find it in her depth to flaunt procedural boundaries and declare a fishery disaster – it would make way for federal relief. . .wait, she’s made her career of doing whatever she wants until the courts tell her not to, what is holding her up on this, even California declared a fishery disaster, it is reasonable!
Off my box for now, got a job to do.
Do we need more science or just common sense, AKM? Michael Pollan is an author who says “Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.” I am not saying that for Native Americans, but surely we in the lower 48 could follow this advice. (I’ve been a lacto ovo vegetarian for over 35 years, but my cats definitely eat meat, chicken and fish
.)
Oh, I forgot we were talking about the spoiled todler. No common sense there!
Nan Says:
April 29th, 2009 at 7:35 AM
I remember back when there was a huge outcry about the dolphins getting caught in the tuna nets, with tuna boycotts etc. I don’t know if the issue was actually solved, or if it simply went off the radar.
——————————————————-
That problem was solved with the banning of drift gill nets to catch tuna. There are also requirements for boats of a certain size to have an observer on board to make sure dolphins aren’t being harmed in other ways.
You can see the ‘Dolphin-Safe’ logo on your can of tuna. I believe the majority of tuna-fishing companies now use dolphin-safe methods.
Dolphins are mammals, and they’re cute and universal so it’s not suprising that they got the attention they needed.
I think environmental organizations could be asked to help pressure the folks in DC. If there could be some pressure, we’d be in a better position to go directly to the food processors and ask them to cooperate on a bycatch-reduction plan. Those labels were effective at the time of the tuna controversy. Sometimes it helps to start with the smaller processors and work up to the larger ones. It also seems to me that a lot of fish sticks are consumed by children. A natural constituency, there, with the moms? Maybe some women’s organizations would even consider helping?
Blogged it forward. Thanks.
@ I See Villages From My House – I’m so GLAD you chimed in! We need more of you to help us understand and give this context!
Oh my this is a complicated scheme – I’ve been privy to many emails and discussions about the Yukon fishery and it still makes my head spin. Makes me feel kind of lost, actually – as though I can’t understand something which should be much simpler but instead confuses the crap out of me.
AKM somehow grasped the basics of this problem very well, and the additional info provided by I See Villages From My House (thank you!) helps, also – but I’m still lost. I was born and raised in the Pacific NW, which used to survive very much on logging and fishing (both of which are very depleted now), I should understand all of this much better! Since we should not boycott pollack (even though I don’t like it much), try to locate salmon from Western AK by questioning suppliers & grocers, NEVER buy farmed salmon (yucky poo) – what else can we do as consumers and or activist letter writers?
I See Villages From My House, Victoria, Ann – can we have a couple of bullet points for action besides stuffing ourselves w/ Keta salmon til we pop (I LOVE salmon)? Bullet points are good. Wish they made a book of them for living life in a complicated world! I know I sound like a really dense Alaskan who should know better!
I felt ill reading your post. I live in a village along the Yukon and every year people look forward to catching salmon, canning and preserving for winter.
When I was younger (I’m 34), I remember salmon nets heavy with salmon and fish wheels overflowing. We would pull the nets and wheels after a few weeks. Now, it could take the whole salmon season and we would just make enough. People would go to nets and come back empty. The lucky ones come back with 2,3 or 4 per day.
It’s not just the food that is striking people but the ‘whole’ action of fishing is a connection to the land. It’s peaceful to go out with your family and lay the net, build the fishwheel and then watch the floats on the net bob up and down, or sit on the gravel bar and watch the salmon get scooped up out of the ruver into the fish wheel basket. It was peaceful. Something to do with family. Now there is more of a sense of hesitant hope, which either turns into a smile upon seeing a salmon or worse yet, emptiness and expected disappointment.
Thank you for writing about the salmon.
I wouldn’t call it a waste.
I’d call it STUPID.
@ #4 SmallSteps: Thanks for that list. I already emailed both my Oregon senators and will add Murkowski and Cantwell to my list.
I See Villages..
There is much right, but also only with CDQ you have been exposed to, that needs to be addressed in what you say.
I need to pull some info before addressing fully BUT just a few things;
-The CDQ program has not done in its 15+years for villages what it was intended to do. Made lots of people rich, but not economic development in villages. “Wean off federal money” was the intent!!
- it is full of a lack of accountability to the actual villages it is to help.
-Testimony was given that when villages asked for less by-catch # they would loose funding on other projects, not due to a lack of $ BUT because the board would PULL it!! That is threatening the people they are to help!!
-most board members that represent villagers are appointed. NOT good.
-only in a few CDQs is salmon bought by the actual CDQ and after at least one worked to drive all the OTHER buyers that where they before out of business.
-IF I remember right the CDQ was not to even enter an “established” fisheries, meaning they should not be involved in things like salmon buying.
-to take dollars directly out of pockets, and the ability to support your family and instead stick fishermen and others on big factory boats or in plants so they can get the money back in an seasonal hourly job is not a good program.
I will be back later with a little more but there are many things the CDQ were set up to do, but destory a fishery was not one of them.
I read labels and one of the things I noticed about “fish sticks” are that they are usually made of “minced” fish, which creates a nasty mental image of fish sticks made out of the scraps left over from fileting (sorta like how hot dogs are made). We only eat local fish: farm-raised talapia and catfish, wild cat perch, trout, etc. As a small farmer, I think I have the same feelings about factory trawlers that I do of the huge factory farms: it’s just not natural.
This issue is extremely complicated and while bycatch of king salmon in the Bering is certainly a factor in poor returns, it isn’t the only factor or even the most significant factor.
I live in the upper Yukon and have been involved with salmon genetic research (taking samples from kings we catch) and am very familiar with the subsistence fishery. If blame is gonna be spread around, some of that blame also goes to subsistence fishers who disobey closures and who have in the past (when chum runs were low or chum fishing curtailed) caught kings to feed large dog teams. I’m talking hundreds of kings taken by just one fisherman for dog food.
Overall, the notion of “conservation” of this stock in the recent past has been a hard sell among many locals and villagers. We all depend on kings so when we are told we need to cut back fishing times or maybe stop fishing altogether for a summer…many just aren’t willing to do that. So it’s been a contentious issue for a number of years as some of us have noted the poorer returns and called for closures of the commercial in-river fishery on the lower Yukon as well as cutting the subsistence fishery and/or equalizing the harvest among lower and middle/upper Yukon subsistence users. (Lower Yukon subsistence fishers, for example, mostly caught what they needed last summer…whereas the closures in the middle and upper river later on prevented those residents from harvesting the same amount of fish.)
And now we’re at the point where we must do something, where we have to cut the commercial in-river fishery that many lower Yukon residents depend upon for their livelihood, as well as the subsistence fishery along the entire river system folks like myself depend upon for a source of food. We waited too long, basically to make the hard choices because so many user groups were fighting over allocations, wanting “their” fish. We also waited too long to deal with the bycatch issue and many of us are indeed not happy with the results of the recent NPFMC meeting…but again bycatch is only one facet of the problem. Another facet not as well understood is how some warmer summers and lower water levels affected spawning and recruitment and viability of those fish. For example in 2004 and 2005 it was extremely warm and we had massive wildfires here in the interior and the lowest water levels I have ever seen (and warmest too) and kings could not make it to their normal spawning grounds in various tributaries. We haven’t seen the inriver return result yet of those years. I’m also collecting water temp data here where I live and in communications with ADF&G biologists many river systems are seeing increasing river temps…so an overall climate change also could have something to do with chinook spawning, recruitment, and returns.
I will say that the genetic research ADF&G is doing is going to really help in determining escapement/allocation down the line. This summer is going to be very hard for many of us; last summer was very bad for upper Yukon residents who weren’t able to put up the amount of fish they needed. And with low moose populations in some areas, “subsistence” as we know it is going to get harder.
ADF&G is doing the best they can with this, and so is Denby Lloyd. I wouldn’t put this one on Gov. Palin either. Just a complicated issue that involves both federal and state agencies…state doesn’t control what goes on in the open ocean either.
Sincerely,
Mark Richards
This problem of wasted bycatch is happening, in both large and small scales, around the world and is one of the major factors in the fishery collapse that is occuring. We are now seeing the ramifications of what modern “fisheries management” and policy decisions have brought us.
Somalian pirates are actually local fishermen who’ve watched factory ships come in and not only take their fish, but drive over their nets and boats, and then to add insult to literal injury, dump toxic waste in thier waters.
http://www.afjn.org/intros/frontpage/evaluating_the_somali_pirate_situation.htmlme time.
http://www.alternet.org/water/136481/why_we_don‘t_condemn_our_pirates_in_somalia/
Here in my village the local native tribe has an agreement with the salmon hatchery to release subsistence salmon for the village’s use in exchange for rent for the land they are using. Unfortunately most of those returning fish get caught in the commercial salmon fleet’s nets. There are a few boats that will come to the dock and unload fish for anyone who wants them, but the fact remains -someone else (usually non-local, if not out of state) is making profit off of resources that were meant to sustain the local community.
Martha – I feel your pain. I too am rather confused by this whole issue. Bullet points would be fabulous. Now, I’m not sure what sort of letter to write to the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. ?????
Our family fell in love with Alaskan Sockeye while living in Eagle River. We continue to only eat that when it comes to Salmon. I just bought some from WalMart that came from Bristol Bay.
Please continue to support sustainable Alaska salmon such as the Copper River Red fishery. This is an upcoming, sustainable fishery that benefits many local communities. And, it’s MUCH more healthy to eat than tuna.
In my comment #43 above, I should have said, ” This problem of wasted bycatch, illegal catch, and lop-sided fishing allocations is happening…”
I was doing some research on the situation and apparently the law allows the Salmon to be thrown back in dead or frozen and donated to a foodbank. Since Seattle is the closed city, most of the Salmon ends up in foodbanks there. One step would be to change the law to have the food sent to Alaskan Natives as compensation for intercepting their fish on its way to them. Of course this doesn’t address the issue of not enough Salmon making their way to Canda to reproduce and create the next generation of Salmon. It seems like studys need to be done tracking the path of the Salmon and the polluck to see where they come together. There maybe place sto fish where the polluck are plentiful and few salmon are around.
We need to rethink the entire fishing culture of the big trawlers and the power-run huge nets and big commercial fisheries and canneries giving people mindless jobs that pay squat. Go back to more sustainable methods of fishing that create real livelihoods, better conditions for the fish, and healthier foods.
Enough. Let’s do this, people.
A few years ago I spent a few weeks at a friends fish camp on the Yukon.
What a beautiful place to spend a summer day.
This is a family camp like many on the Yukon with a few family members with both subsistence and commercial permits.
Fish and Game spent a lot of time harnessing this camp, they would sit for days down river and check marking on the nets and watch to make sure these nets were removed at the proper time.
The people in this camp were diligent in watching the regulations and listened to the radio nightly for changes in open fishing that would be broadcast at night.
One day Fish and Game approached the camp and claimed that they were fishing in violation and there nets should have been removed hours ago because fishing was closed.
They were very threatening and pretty much claimed that this camp and equipment were going to be confiscated for the violation.
The permit holders argued with F&G for quite a while until one member went and got a copy of the regulations from the cabin.
It took several minutes for F&G to catch on that they were wrong and there claim was that they did not have a copy of the regs and fishing times with them.
That is when I heard one of the best lines ever.
A particularly angry permit holder said ” You guys have done such a great job of managing the fish that they have disappeared, maybe it is time we have you manage the misquotes”
There were about 15 people there that just busted out laughing, F&G got in there boat and left no apology for the harassment.
We should remember that Sarah Palin has a _Felony Conviction_ on her record for operating an _Illegal Drift Net_ in Bristol Bay. She has a documented record of gross abuse regarding our fisheries.
Given this history, it is unlikely that she will _ever_ support the long term interests of Alaskans over those of the international commercial fishing lobby.
We need strong federal oversight because our state regulatory entities under the Palin administration have been rendered impotent.
Sustainable fisheries–perhaps the most important issue on the planet.
My heart goes out to the people of the salmon in Western Alaska. It’s hard to understand just how VITAL this fish is– nutritionally, spiritually, economically, culturally –to Alaska Native people unless you really take a look. I lived in a northern Southeast Alaska community for most of my adult life and was nourished and supported by these amazing fish. Things are a little brighter there….if you want to see a 5 minute video that will deepen your understanding, go here:
http://yakutatwild.com
This may sound paranoid, but since my people have 400 years of experience with this mindset, I’ll spout off anyway.
130 years ago, when the newly forming states west of the Mississippi were demanding the government do something about “the Indian problem”, the policy that was formed was the eradication of the food supply, the plains buffalo, forcing the indigenous people to give up their lands and move where the government provided land “as long as grass grows and rivers flow”. We all know how that turned out.
Now here we are with an overt Palin policy of forcing the villagers to “consider” leaving. The Dept. of Labor actively discourages the kids from taking even the state run fisheries training courses in favor of the courses that would favor her oil based economy. The current administration is bent on forcing the villagers to abandon their homes and traditional ways. Who stands to benenfit from this. The state? the Feds? The oil companies? The Native Corporations?
Follow the money.
ccr
The human race’s continued survival depends on the survival of all of it. We can’t protect the river otter if we don’t protect the river, the fish, the insects, the plants, etc. We have brought so many species to extinction or collapse, to the detriment of all around it, mostly for the $. Which one is the ‘tipping point’?
We DO have a fine line to watch in not buying Pollock products but not hurting not only the Yukon but all Alaskan Salmon.
The Yukon fishery IS danger and to deny that is crazy. Pressuring the industry with a slow down of pollock MIGHT be a way to let them know it could hurt more if things are not done, now!!
The tuna/dolphin issue was lessened with upgrades in nets and equipment, even though the industry claimed it could not. Same thing that is being said by the trawlers now.
Yes, fish run in cycles but if you go back and look at high by-catch years, when the industry was to be ’self regulating’-where have we heard that before, you will see the effects in the runs now. It is a delayed effect.
THAT is the issue. IF we do not help now we most likely will not have enough fish to fix it no matter what when things get even worse!
Do we need more research?? HECK YES!!
Can we track fish by DNA and other methods? YES.
Is Denby Lloyd a fan of DNA and science? NO, NO and can I say it one more time – NO!
If you want to look into things more, see what happened to the DNA lab and who it reports to when getting pressured to only test in certain places and times. It was moved to help keep the science clean.
Funding has been cut in many programs for science when we need more so the fish are better managed.
CDQ programs that are spoken about in I See Villages are in only a few CDQ regions. There are 6 and one is beign spoken of.
Why is there only a CDQ buying Yukon fish now, when for years it was many family owned companies? Most were up against the CDQ buying at a loss and could only hold on so long. NOW gone and the fish are bought at a loss. Just another form of welfare and dangerous if the funds to do it run out.
Now what happens if the Pollock runs are not as sustainable as they claim? Green Peace is claiming they are not and claim they have science to show that.
If we want to get to the bottom- Ask the pollock industry how long it takes them, in trawling time per sq ft of net, to get each pound of fish as they were 19 years ago. The answer is NOT one they want to admit to.
If all that subsidized pollock monies go away, then we have all those ‘companies and benefits’ that take that money going away AND a dead Chinook industry.
I am sorry but the programs the CDQ are trying to justify now seem short termed and dangerous if all does not go right. Where will the villagers be then??
This is NOT just a Yukon River issue, it is just the first river in AK to show the effects of what is going on.
Quyana Cakneq AKM for bringing attention to this!!
Sorry I wasn’t home yesterday to offer the comment you asked for. I was in Bethel having my first official prenatal appointment. It was a very, very long and tiring day. But all is well…unborn and I are doing well.
Still trying to get caught up around here. Quyana again AKM!
There is much more going on here beyond salmon bycatch, I always agree with postings but this one has too much science behind it. North Pacific manages their fisheries in a way admired by the entire world. Something is going on here but it’s not bycatch, the statistics are alarming on increasing acidity that could topple over the food system of salmon in alaska. There is much more going out in the North Pacific than the numbers caught by the pollock trawlers. Those numbers are absolutely miniscule relative to what is happening.
Currently the North Pacific oscillation has begun to occur, how does one account for the increase in fisheries south of alaska. We are in for the affects of global warming and it will not be good for us here. Everyone is searching for a blame subject on this one and the trawlers are not the reason.
I think it would be really helpful if I See Villages From My House could do a guest editorial on this issue. This is an incredibly complex issue and for people not familiar with intertwined issues, it is easy for the first “helpful” responses to be actions that are actually counter productive. Advocacy is important but we need to be really clear about what we are advocating for and the likely impacts.
For those like Martha Unalaska that want a more cohesive understanding of Western Alaska fishing, the Bering Sea Fishermens Association is top notch.
http://www.bsfaak.org/
BSFA has been around for dozens of years and is truly representative of village fishermen concerns, conservation first for sustainable fishing.
There is even a salmon bycatch petition you can use as a resource that addresses the salient points of the matter.
Both commercial and subsistence fishing is such hard work, it requires diligence with following the seemingly arbitrary openings by the hour and utilizing the midnight sun for three months. @Rubber Room and @VillageReader share some stories that evoke the imagry of river fishing.
For such a short summer, Western Alaska housholds conduct rigorous and tireless fishing operations that don’t just stop with the fish in the boat, they have to head, gut, filet, brine, smoke, can, pickle, ferment, dry or freeze the fish for their winter cache. It’s amazing and humbling, knowing we are practicing and applying techniques that haven’t changed in hundreds of years.
Most families are working 12-18 hour days to process several hundred fish. And still, urban lawmakers like Mike (win by one vote and let-them-chop-wood) Kelly to accuse us of being layabouts waiting for a handout!
Anyway, thanks for your interest.
Jo in Ak-your point of view is new to me and perhaps we are not on the right track regarding the destructivity to salmon and even pollack wrought by the nets of trawlers.You are probably right to suggest that our oceans are sick,and so is our air.I know we need to deal with big issues;but I think we need to work on the somewhat smaller issue of over-fishing,too,in order to maintain the bounty of the sea and land until we fix these other serious disturbances in the chain of life on our planet.Can you explain a bit more about the North Pacific oscillation-in simple terms please?
Jo in AK mentioned oscillation.
Here is a link to let you see and understand what is occuring in the world.
http://jisao.washington.edu/pdo/
Although it is a normal occurance, scienists are concerned that global warming may be making this worse. There is a lot we do not know, but we all agree we have a problem with climate change, and sustainablility.
I don’t eat much fish myself. I’m allergic to shellfish and thus have a psychological aversion to eating things that swim [I DO love deep fried calimari with a nice marinara every now and again
]. However, I recognize the nutritional value and so I was planning on introducing fish sticks to my picky preschooler. However, if most fishsticks are made from pollock, and the pollock industry is negligent in their responsibilities of maintaining the sustainability of our oceans/fisheries, I don’t want to siupport them. What’s a mom to do? Is there something to look for on the label? Is the whole industry wasteful (it’s mind boggling that 100s of 1000s of fish are killed and thrown out as trash each year), or are their companies with better practices?
This needs to go national. Put it on Huffington Post, see if perhaps a boycott or the threat of one of the companies that benefit from the Pollock fishing would force a change. Get this national. Surely, there are environmental groups who could publicize this. This sort of waste needs to stop. I guess it’s time to contact the WH and Salazar and anyone else who might have pull about this problem.
D’oh!
…are THERE companies with better practices?
Sorry, they’re/there/their is a pet peeve of mine! Along with to/too/two; and your/you’re, among others!
I See Villages From My House: “As a coastal resident, I’m doing my part to make the CDQs accountable and uphold the very purpose of their existence”
Truly, I mean no disrespect; I ask this out of curiosity:
Which CDQ are you holding accountable?
And how accountable is ANY CDQ today, with the way the laws and regs are currently written? Don’t the CDQs act in secrecy, for the most part, without transparency, and without much accountability to the communities they are reputed to serve?
How are “elections” held, and how frequently, for your CDQ’s board positions? What are the prerequisites for “running”? Who is allowed to participate in voting for board members? Who counts “the votes” for all those board members, and how are the results announced to the communities of the CDQs? Who spends/invests/decides the use of the millions of dollars of revenue each CDQ gets annually?
Overall, what is the CDQs’ accountability to the communities they serve?
Are you satisfied with YOUR CDQ’s accountability and transparency? If not, why not? If not, what do you think will be required to make your CDQ truly accountable?
@ Elsie
Good questions! When articles re: salmon come up at ADN, there are lots and lots of hot and heavy comments going back and forth about CDQs (mostly negative from what I remember due to lack of accountability). It sure doesn’t seem like people are in the middle on this one, so does this mean that the way it is run really varies a lot between communities? Who is the CDQ police so to speak?
If we cannot sustain the Yukon, God help the rest of Alaska’s fisheries. I loved my times at fish camp as well, RRH, and those memories will always be with me. Best smoked salmon in the world comes from family fish camps!!
What can we do to stop these trawlers? I’ve signed petition after petition, written letter after letter to Presidential administrations (Sec. of Interior, etc etc) since the Carter Administration. I’ve written to our Senators and Representative-for-life Don Young, I’ve written to my State representatives – but it seems most folks in our fair state are of the “drill baby drill” mindset, even when it comes to our fisheries. Bristol Bay yields are way down, as are the fisheries off the West Coast.
WHAT can we do??
Completely OT – GINO will be on that Motorcycle Chopper show – they are going to make a motorcycle to honor the 50th Anniversary of Statehood. What the fusilli?? Read it here: http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20275559,00.html
ChiCat-
Used canned salmon, add a little egg, rice krispies and make your own salmon sticks – can be baked or lightly browned in a non- stick. (just take a small amount and roll into a ball or stick shape and cook)
We do that for kids and they love um:-)))
You all need to be aware that many CDQ’s are held locally, including Dillingham and native corporations that employ village Alaskans, some of the few that build locally in the bush and uses fishery earnings to promote jobs and education completely unrelated to fishing. Don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater on this issue. There are many people in the fishing industry that are not sportsfisherman that are protecting our fisheries as well as harvesting fish. I know many of these people in this industry and they honestly care about all of these issues, it is not helpful to them to destroy the fishing industry such as they have seen elsewhere.
This is far too complicated an issue to hash over with one article. It is so complex that scientists that believe in the sole interest of protecting fisheries are dumbfounded. The pollock is such a small portion of this problem that we ought to learn as much as possible. The pollock that many of you eat in fast food restaurants pay back to villages in more ways than can be counted.
Sometimes it pays to have a bit more information and be prudent, rather than overreacting to one point of view.
Case in point, the Palinbots and our health secretary…..
Wow, lots of knowledgeable Alaskans here!
Have all of you folks been over to the “Gubernatorial Q & A: Alaskan Fishing – Who’s Responsible for What”? and Bob Poe’s page at anonymousbloggers?
http://anonymousbloggers.wordpress.com/2009/04/27/gubernatorial-q-a-alaskan-fishing-whos-responsible-for-what/
http://anonymousbloggers.wordpress.com/bob-poe-lets-hope-theyre-right-page/
I would love to see your comments over there, especially since following a thread is truly like monitoring a conversation, and more information is in context. Please join in!
Wow, lots of knowledgeable Alaskans here!
Have all of you folks been over to the “Gubernatorial Q & A: Alaskan Fishing – Who’s Responsible for What”? and Bob Poe’s page at anonymousbloggers? (sorry couldn’t post links without spelling “DOT”)
http://anonymousbloggers.wordpress DOT com/2009/04/27/gubernatorial-q-a-alaskan-fishing-whos-responsible-for-what/
http://anonymousbloggers.wordpress DOT com/bob-poe-lets-hope-theyre-right-page/
I would love to see your comments over there, especially since following a thread is truly like monitoring a conversation, and more information is in context. Please join in!
Hey, Jo in AK, thanks for your response. “…many CDQ’s are held locally, including Dillingham and native corporations that employ village Alaskans, some of the few that build locally in the bush and uses fishery earnings to promote jobs and education completely unrelated to fishing.”
From what I know, the 65 villages that make up the entire CDQ program are divided into just six CDQs altogether. The Dillingham-area CDQ is Bristol Bay Economic Development Corporation (BBEDC).
Do you have any first-hand knowledge and can share any information regarding the questions I posed earlier:
How often, and in what manner, are elections held for the BBEDC board positions?
What are the prerequisites for running for one of the seats on the BBEDC?
Who is allowed to participate in voting for those board members?
Who counts the votes for the election of BBEDC board members, and how are the results announced to the Bristol Bay/Dillingham communities?
Who decides the use of the millions of dollars of revenue that BBEDC gets annually?
CDQs appear to do some good, but the secrecy in their operations and lack of transparency with the villages they are obliged to serve raise more questions than are answered.
Whether it’s Farms or Trawlers, we need to get rid of it if it has the word “Factory” attached to it.
@mlaiuppa–boy howdy do we!
Jo In AK -
I do not think anyone is talking about getting rid of anything, CDQ or otherwise BUT instead making them accountable.
How many of those CDQ have offices NOT based in Anchorage?
How many villages have seen an increase in businesses due to CDQ input?
How many new jobs have been created IN VILLAGES due to CDQ?
Have ANY of the CDQs formed a economic development plan for their area? If I were a company wanting to locate in a village could I go to a CDQ and see what positives and negatives each had that might help me locate there?
Given this is a BILLION dollar industry there is little that is filtering back to villages to MAKE THEM SUSTAINABLE – which was the entire idea.
AGAIN what happens IF the pollock money goes away?
Elsie – great questions and I would love to see the answers. There is too much that is in question, too many villagers who are not happy, too little involvement of actual villagers BEFORE actions are taken.
No one wants to destroy the pollock industry, BUT it is not an excuse to be a factor to destroy another fisheries.
I keep saying this BUT MORE science is needed on this fishery. It is being managed without the base data and thus why we are struggling for answers.
Listening to the testimony was an eye opener, even being familiar, with the industry. The effect of by-catch on ALL Chinook runs, the threats supposedly going on,to villages that speak out, the amount of money putting that is put into programs with no hopes of breaking even, the claims of not being able to make a profit while making others GIVE UP their income, not good!!
Also what is with DL NOT paying attention to Western AK concerns and instead locking step with the pollock industry?
The discussion needs to continue and more education of ALL the stakeholders needs to be done!!
Jo in Ak. I have been trying to follow your train of thought ; but now that sports fisherman got thrown in with subsistence fisherman I am getting a bit confused. Ofcourse you know that these are 2 different types of fishing. Further you know that some folks that live subsistence also work for trawlers-SOME DO. not all. Seems to me that Elsie is asking some very well informed questions. Since you seem knowlegeable about cdq’s and environmental issues as well perhaps you can answer these questions she poses. I would be most interested in a clear answer.
Jo_ I hope I do not sound too challenging in type…I really think that you have a point of view worth pursuing: I hope that you will clarify and organize .
northofdenali Says:
April 29th, 2009 at 12:24 PM
If we cannot sustain the Yukon, God help the rest of Alaska’s fisheries… What can we do to stop these trawlers? I’ve signed petition after petition, written letter after letter to Presidential administrations (Sec. of Interior, etc etc) since the Carter Administration. I’ve written to our Senators and Representative-for-life Don Young, I’ve written to my State representatives – but it seems most folks in our fair state are of the “drill baby drill” mindset, even when it comes to our fisheries. Bristol Bay yields are way down, as are the fisheries off the West Coast….WHAT can we do??
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Northofdenali—Let me invite you to come join the conversation at Anonymous Bloggers…the link is http://anonymousbloggers.wordpress.com/2009/04/27/gubernatorial-q-a-alaskan-fishing-whos-responsible-for-what/#comments There you will find some links that delve more into this subject, with contributions from a couple of Democratic candidates in the next gubernatorial election, Rob Rosenfeld and Bob Poe. You can pick up some background and, who knows, maybe even find answers to some of the regulatory confusion regarding salmon bycatch and pollock fishing, etc.
Northofdenali—Let me invite you to come join the conversation at Anonymous Bloggers…the link is
—————-
Let me second that to all!
We are hoping to get lively discussions between stakeholders, agencies, politicians, supporters and critics started on a non-partisan basis.
Let’s work together to bring truth, transparency, new ideas and overwhelming support to the rural communities of Alaska.
If you would like to throw out an issue that concerns rural Alaska, write a post and send it to me.
Let’s get the discussion started.
Thanks,
Jane
info@anonymousbloggers.com
anonymousbloggers.wordpress.com/
Thanks UgaVic, that sounds like an easy recipe!
Sorry, UgaVic but there is no accountability.
Even if there were regulations in place, the lobbyists for the fishing industry would gut the consequences. Either that or they’d simply continue business as usual and if they were caught….pay the fines. Because they would figure it’s cheaper than any alternative.
The car industry does this all of the time. Cheaper to settle out of court with the surviving family members than recall the cars and fix them.
We have all sorts of regulations and fines in place re: environment and water. And yet companies still dump chemicals all of the time. When they’re caught….they pay the fines.
The exchange occurring here is all we ever get with the CDQ program. Vic, Elsie and others pose reasonable questions; questions any social welfare program should be able to answer readily and should want to answer and all we get is silence.
I See Villages From My House wrote, “If only the CDQs would do a better job explaining how their existence and success more than trickles down to the village level.” One has to ask why they aren’t doing a better job of getting the word out if they are in fact providing meaningful benefits to the communities they are supposed to work for. Wouldn’t they want to get credit for helping the people in the villages?
They have tried. WACDA, the association of the six CDQ group executive officers published a glossy report entitled, “2007 CDQ sector report”. It is impressive in documenting the tremendous amount of money brought in by the CDQ groups but the benefits filtering down to individual village residents lacks detail and appears to be mostly a bunch of low paying seasonal jobs.
That’s not what the legislation that created the CDQ program said it was supposed to do. The CDQ program was supposed to create careers in fishing industries and develop fisheries related economies in western Alaska villages so that people could live with dignity, raise their families in their communities and someday retire with a reasonable lifestyle *in their communities*. Why are there no statistics showing how many people have been assisted in achieving those worthy goals by the CDQ program, I ask? I’ve been asking that question of a lot of people who should know for the past 17 years since the CDQ program was initiated and I have gotten no answers yet. I’m in good company too, a prestigious committee of the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences and the Governor’s Blue Ribbon Committee asked those same questions when they studied the CDQ program and wrote in their reports that they could not obtain that information. Until I see some numbers showing otherwise, I’m going to have to conclude that the CDQ program hasn’t really done a whole lot of what it was supposed to do.
It has catapulted a few lucky individuals in CDQ group administration into lives of the rich and famous; boy howdy has it done that. In 2006, NSEDC’s Steve Reiger was paid 1.05 million. In 2007 Morgen Crow of CVRF got paid $679,565 and I understand he picked up a couple of well deserved raises since then. In the meantime, Nick Tucker, Victoria Briggs and Anne Strongheart have written graphically about how people in CDQ program villages must ration their food and can barely scrape up enough money to buy stove oil.
The CDQ group novo riche didn’t take long to find their villages too confining for their new lifestyles either. Only two of the six CDQ groups are headquartered in their regions. The others are in Anchorage, Juneau and Seattle.
In looking at the CDQ group’s claims of success, one must ask, how did they manage to rathole $465 million in combined net assets by 2007? If they had invested that money in their communities like they were supposed to have done, two things would have happened. First, the residents of those communities would be in a lot better position to weather the economic hard times we are facing today. Second, that money would not have been in the stock market to be lost by the hundreds of millions. Now it appears that 25% or more may be going to the IRS in back taxes, penalties and interest because these highly paid professionals forgot that when you operate competitive for-profit industrial commercial fishing businesses with your multinational corporate partners, you have to pay corporate income tax like everybody else.
http://community.adn.com/node/137593
The CDQ groups owe us answers to a lot of questions beginning with the ones listed above by Vic and Elsie. I’m not holding my breath though. They don’t answer questions, all of their books and records are hidden from the public, most of their financial information is held secret and most of their business is conducted in executive sessions where the public is excluded or in locations far from their villages or both.
Congress was remiss in failing to enact detailed rules for how the CDQ groups are supposed to conduct themselves. A cynic would attribute worse motives to the lobbyists and congressmen who got the 2006 MSA amendments passed that removed what little accountability and transparency the program came with originally. Now they need to go back and fix what they screwed up. The State of Alaska should get back into an oversight role and pass clear laws to regulate the CDQ program. Letting the CDQ groups continue to get away with murder they way they have for the past 17 years during these desperate times for the people in the villages should not be an option.
AKM, please, please post this as a diary on Daily Kos. It deserves far wider circulation, and comments on a national blog advising readers to stop buying fish sticks, “krab”, and other pollock products.
Time to get rid of the Fish farms that are bringing in fish lice.
ALSO, the best way to do this, is to eat Alaska caught Salmon.
I think this issue is too complicated to start out by boycotting pollack. Sounds like the CDQ system is just whacked – kind of like our banks. With no oversight and accountability, many of the groups have become secretive and have grown beyond the control of the village communities. Let’s listen to the Alaskans who know the ins and outs of this fishery and ask what we can do that is EFFECTIVE. OK, now I need help here!
The big corporate pollock fishing industry still has TWO MORE SEASONS to trash the salmon bycatch in the seas before the ridiculous 68,000 bycatch cap even comes into play in 2011, while, at the same time, harvesting their vast millions of tons of pollock now, and then again in 2010, and pocketing their beaucoup millions of dollars in profits.
In reality, however, that 68,000 bycatch cap could very well be a moot issue in two years. After all, overfishing and bad government policy already killed off and/or closed salmon fisheries in the North Atlantic Ocean and off the coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington states. The sustainability of wild Alaskan salmon is now threatened in some of the last remaining fisheries in the Bering Sea, Aleutian Islands, and Gulf of Alaska.
Meanwhile, the small-time Alaskan fishing villagers, who depend on salmon for their own limited livelihood and to feed their families throughout their hard winters, get screwed, yet again.
It is useful to consider what happened with the tuna fishery and dolphin and porpoise bycatch. Following a successful consumer boycott, the tuna purse seine fleet was able to reduce their bycatch substantially by modifying their fishing behavior. They caught and killed so many dolphins and porpoises primarily because they didn’t care.
Tuna fishermen set their nets to surround dolphins and porpoises because the tuna swam with them the same way Chinook salmon are associated with pollock. When they stopped doing that, son of a gun, they stopped catching dolphins & porpoises. They also learned that even when they netted the dolphins and porpoises, they could release them unharmed using a process called backing down the net whereby the fishing vessel towed the net forcing part of it underwater allowing the dolphins and porpoises to escape. Another means to releasing the dolphins and porpoises involved crewmembers physically forcing the net floatline underwater to provide an escape path.
According to testimony before the NPFMC, the highest rates of Chinook salmon bycatch in the pollock fishery is the result of similar lack of concern by the pollock fishermen and it is also intentional. Apparently, during the pollock roe season, the pollock associated with Chinook salmon are of higher quality than those with fewer salmon. Also, the areas with high bycatch rates may be closer to shorebased processing plants and bycatch avoidance would require longer travel, more days at sea and larger expenditures for fuel, supplies and labor.
The lesson to be learned from this is that fishermen can reduce bycatch by changing how and where they fish but they have to want to.
Others have cautioned that a pollock boycott could have a deleterious effect on the already depressed village economies because they get money through the CDQ program. I’m not sure that concern is warranted because only a small fraction of CDQ revenues actually go to the villages. For example, in 2007 CDQ group NSEDC reported it spent $13.3 million on “Program Services”. Those are the things they are supposed to do as part of their tax exempt purposes. These numbers are probably inflated with a bunch of expenditures that have nothing to do with the villages but even assuming they are accurate, NSEDC reported 2007 revenues of $34 million. So even if future profits from pollock were substantially reduced, NSEDC could easily fund its programs benefitting the villages at the same level or higher.