Comments on: Something’s Fishy on the Yukon. http://www.themudflats.net/2009/04/29/somethings-fishy-on-the-yukon/ Tiptoeing Through the Muck of Alaskan Politics Fri, 10 Feb 2012 02:08:29 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: NS_Crabber http://www.themudflats.net/2009/04/29/somethings-fishy-on-the-yukon/#comment-50405 NS_Crabber Thu, 30 Apr 2009 22:47:59 +0000 http://www.themudflats.net/?p=3296#comment-50405 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. 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.

]]> By: cuppajava http://www.themudflats.net/2009/04/29/somethings-fishy-on-the-yukon/#comment-50384 cuppajava Thu, 30 Apr 2009 20:50:51 +0000 http://www.themudflats.net/?p=3296#comment-50384 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. 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.

]]> By: Martha Unalaska Yard Sign http://www.themudflats.net/2009/04/29/somethings-fishy-on-the-yukon/#comment-50234 Martha Unalaska Yard Sign Thu, 30 Apr 2009 07:02:22 +0000 http://www.themudflats.net/?p=3296#comment-50234 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! 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!

]]> By: mt http://www.themudflats.net/2009/04/29/somethings-fishy-on-the-yukon/#comment-50226 mt Thu, 30 Apr 2009 06:26:47 +0000 http://www.themudflats.net/?p=3296#comment-50226 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. 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.

]]> By: HarpboyAK http://www.themudflats.net/2009/04/29/somethings-fishy-on-the-yukon/#comment-50190 HarpboyAK Thu, 30 Apr 2009 04:34:09 +0000 http://www.themudflats.net/?p=3296#comment-50190 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. 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.

]]> By: NS_Crabber http://www.themudflats.net/2009/04/29/somethings-fishy-on-the-yukon/#comment-50149 NS_Crabber Thu, 30 Apr 2009 03:24:07 +0000 http://www.themudflats.net/?p=3296#comment-50149 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. 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.

]]> By: mlaiuppa http://www.themudflats.net/2009/04/29/somethings-fishy-on-the-yukon/#comment-50142 mlaiuppa Thu, 30 Apr 2009 03:15:24 +0000 http://www.themudflats.net/?p=3296#comment-50142 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. 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.

]]> By: ChiCat http://www.themudflats.net/2009/04/29/somethings-fishy-on-the-yukon/#comment-50062 ChiCat Thu, 30 Apr 2009 01:47:31 +0000 http://www.themudflats.net/?p=3296#comment-50062 Thanks UgaVic, that sounds like an easy recipe! Thanks UgaVic, that sounds like an easy recipe!

]]> By: Jane in Miami http://www.themudflats.net/2009/04/29/somethings-fishy-on-the-yukon/#comment-49977 Jane in Miami Thu, 30 Apr 2009 00:48:55 +0000 http://www.themudflats.net/?p=3296#comment-49977 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/ 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/

]]> By: Elsie http://www.themudflats.net/2009/04/29/somethings-fishy-on-the-yukon/#comment-49880 Elsie Wed, 29 Apr 2009 23:47:51 +0000 http://www.themudflats.net/?p=3296#comment-49880 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 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.

]]>