Back 
Sea otter management resolution seeks to give added economic benefit to SE sea otter cull
House Joint Resolution 26 seeks to set a course for management of the reintroduced sea otter population of Southeast Alaska.
The resolution urges state and federal governments to work with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game and Southeast Alaska Native leaders to achieve this goal.
The management practice assumed in the bill is an increased cull to slow the growth of the population or to protect specific resources.
To provide economic advantages to the cull, the bill urges federal authorities consider the “use, transfer, and sale of intact sea otter pelts in order to restore to the state’s Native people the right to make full use of sea otters harvested for subsistence while expanding and enhancing economic opportunities for residents of Southeast Alaska,” according to the resolution text.
This section of the resolution did not sit well with the Alaska Federation of Natives and Sealaska Corp. by way of the testimony of AFN board member and Sealaska Heritage Institute President, Rosita Worl.
“This was received with mixed emotions in the native community because we do have an exemption in the Marine Mammal Act,” Worl said. “We fear if we opened it up it might change that protection for Alaska Natives,” Worl said. “If the language is to allow the sale of pelts to non-natives we would oppose that.”
The language would also raise the considerable ire of animal rights groups, she said.
Re-introduced to Southeast Alaska in the 1960s after being hunted out of the region a century before, sea otters took well to their once-native habitat and flourished.
This rapid expansion into areas is and was viewed simultaneously as a scientific success, a bounty and a scourge.
The concern over sea otters’ effect on fishing goes back at least to the early 1990s.
An L.A. Times headline from 1993 read, “Sea Otter Population Booms Amid Hunting Ban: Alaska: Biologists call it an amazing success story. Natives envision a lucrative fur trade. But conservationists fear there will be abuses.” The article went on to list the lamentations of fishermen and subsistence hunters who saw the growing otter population as a threat to their livelihood.
Worl offered the legislators more than a rebuff at Friday’s House Resources Subcommittee. She said the creativity of Alaska Natives, if unfettered, could increase demand for otter pelts.
Worl said Native leaders have heard from villagers about the effects of a growing sea otter population on commercial and subsistence fisheries.
“So we tried to see what is it that we could do,” Worl said.
The current Marine Mammal Act limits Native uses of the sea otter to “traditional arts and crafts products,” Worl said. “And this is where we have an issue, what is traditional?” She gave the example of a Native artist being cited for a sea otter teddy bear. Other possible options could be modern clothing designs with zippers and blankets.
Worl proposed using the resolution to urge federal agencies to better define the types of sea otter products Natives are allowed to craft.
The need to cull sea otter is still a controversial issue.
Commercial fisherman Kirk Hardcastle and Dennis Watson, mayor of Craig, had opposing views as to the effects on fishing of the feeding habits of sea otter.
Watson says otters devastate the areas they inhabit.
“They are quite efficient, smart little animals,” Watson said. “After a while you realize that they get into an area and quickly devastate the species in that area.”
Hardcastle says sea otters create habitat for the various life phases of most commercially caught fish and fish caught for subsistence.
“Every species of commercial fish, cod, halibut,” he said.
Trying to keep sea otters from taking commercial fish stocks will affect “100 percent of our fisheries in southeast Alaska, by the decline of our sea otter population,” Hardcastle said.
Sea otters eat sea urchins. Sea urchins eat kelp. When sea otters deplete an area of urchins the kelp forests return providing habitat for the notoriously un-buoyant sea otter. Kelp forests also provide habitat for young sea creatures.
Southeast Alaska in particular needs “healthy kelp forest systems for all of our fisheries, the crab, the halibut, the cod, every other fishery we have needs to rear in those kelp forest before they migrate to outer waters,” Hardcastle said.
• Contact reporter Russell Stigall at 523-2276 or at russell.stigall@juneauempire.com.
Comments (43)
Add comment"notoriously un-buoyant sea otter"
Mr. Kirk Hardcastle,
Have you ever seen a Sea Otter? They float like a cork. And if a crab is protected by kelp, it is only a matter of time till an otter here in Southeast Alaska makes a snack out of him. Try finding a crab around Kake.
I have thousands of hours of bottom time here in Southeast mostly in kelp beds and have seldom seen juvenile halibut and never a black cod. Where do you get your information?
Certainly not direct observations.
Sea urchins, abalone, crab, clams, sea cucumbers, and even star fish are the waste of sea otters and the reintroduced population here in Southeast found an otter heaven with a seaming unlimited horizon made of otter snacks. But, kinda like a brushfire, they leave nothing behind.
Mean while, as Homeland Security naps we are attacked and millions dollars in sea food is made into fertiliser.
Sure otters are cute! Take one home with you.
Basic intro middle school biology
Basic intro middle school biology. Kelp forests are the rearing grounds of many many fish. Yes otters eat a lot. So do bears, whales, seals, other fish, eagles,etc etc. Sorry, you don't, can't, and won't have exclusive rights to catch all the marine critters you want.
so-called management
There is no scientific management of marine mammals. There is fundamental racism, expenditure of money the federal government cannot afford to spend, and a failure of the American political system.
This article was written much better than might have been the case had the usual Empire legislative reporter been the author.
Board of game
Let our corrupt board of game decide the fate of the otter. I'm sure they would like to strafe the furry corks from airplanes or helicopters.
No problem.
It's the skin of a dead animal, period! Nothing more, nothing less. Once entered into the economic stream, let er go!
Sea Otters
As I understand the law about sea otter harvest by native hunters, the animal/skin has to be "significantly altered" ADF&G says you "significantly alter" the animal when you shoot it, but, as they come under USF&W not ADF&G, the state has no say in it. I have been told that the bare minimum to alter a pelt for sale to a non native is to turn the tanned pelt inside out, the native artist draws halibut or king salmon on the leather side, signs his/her name as the artist, then they can sell the pelt to a non native. That is what the native corporation people in Sitka say.
Does your "tradition" include
Does your "tradition" include eating them, or just killing them out of greed?
And they need to be 'managed' why?
Yeah, I get that some dungeness crab fishermen don't like them. But do sea otters have a significant impact on other species we rely on?
And Hardcastle's contention regarding kelp habitat enhancement, and Dennis Watson's claim of impacts...
This article was woefully short of information. Where was the interview of the NOAA otter specialist talking about the science? Interviewing lawyers, politicians, and commercial fishermen is all fine, but let's start with scientific facts, then move on to policy.
BA---LANCED
Balance in nature will not come easy. Humans are the ultimate invasive species. The eradication of Sea Otters in South East Alaska, BC, Washington, Oregon and California prior to 1910, well they are easier than sitting ducks. Ducks fly.
Given the time the otters' food species had to propagate without pressure from otters, the bottom was a veritable Garden of Eden, a banquet set for otters in the late 60's. Protection from hunting allows uninterrupted feeding and fornicating till now the otters have a mobile meal machine expanding towards the limits of the feast. When they reach the lunch limit, many otters will face starvation. Then a great cry will arise that the SE Alaska, the group of otters that was transplanted from Amchitka is now endangered.
Some of todays 20,000+ otters will survive.
Kpawsuh
As to having "exclusive" fishing rights: take some time to look at some of Alaska's fishery management plans. Sustained harvest is the goal, mandated by the state constitution.
Again, the expanding front of Sea Otters is like an underwater brush fire, leaving piles of broken shells, spines and several gaps in the number of species (crab, sea urchin, sea cucumbers, clams, abalone and even star fish) found in the shallow water that support kelp beds.
You should spend a bit of time on the bottom of the ocean. I have; thousands of hours. It is way more complicated than middle school.
profits
The question not being addresses is who is going to get the profits from the sale of sea otter pelts. Is it going to be some obscure group based on some political decision as to who get to sell the pelts; is is going to be some type of lottery system to determine who harvest and sells the pelts; or is it going to be a program where the pelts are sold by a government agency and the profits put into program cost for management of the species.
I sure hope we do not let this become the first option and make this another example of how politicians allocate a profit making industry to a very select group who have bought votes with campaign contributions.
Lol Hardcastle
Build habitat? You mean like a Sidewinder thriving in a desert?
The science of Sea Otters is that they eat constantly. They have very little body fat (unlike other sea mammals) which requires them to eat (which is basically their daily activity).
If that is not enough, they usually travel with many other family members (rafts) and can mow down an area like a herd of sheep feeding on grass leaving little in their path.If they can chew or break it open, they eat it.
These critters need to be managed better and making money off the pelts wouldn't be so bad.
otters
seniorfrog
I have seen seine fulls of juvenile "black cod" so you are not looking hard enough.
The State of Alaska is depending on Rosita for "opinions" about the Tribe? Where are the Clan Leaders? Sealaska only represents Sealaska. Management over there look at the pathetic voting habits of shareholders and take over "leadership" to "help" the Tribe. We then end up with Corporate hacks being called "leaders". Time to wake up!
SENIOR FROG - keystone species
Yes, I have spent most of my life swimming in the waters of the Pacific from Panama to Alaska. I have interacted with these animals on a daily basis. I am making reference to to importance of these animals as a "keystone species" for the kelp forests as "rearing grounds" of many juvenile species of our coastal region. Most animals in the ocean have many "morphic stages" that do not look obviously like the adult stages of which have a commercial market value. I do not make reference to the consumption habits of these animals, I am however emphasizing their stabilizing influence they have in maintaining stabile and safe rearing grounds for a multitude of commercially viable of species. Merely 5% of the Sea Otter diet is competitive consumption. For me this is an ECONOMIC issue for ALL fisheries of which you are not the only one privy to decide the fate of ....
SEINING IN A KELP BED
Randyk
I dive in the kelp beds and have never seen anyone seining in the kelp either.
++++
Kpawsuh
The ocean is much more complicated than middle school.
Boom and bust cycles...
In the long term, S.E. Alaska will be more productive with Sea Otter populations distributed. There would be a period of boom and bust cycles as new territories are occupied by Sea Otters, but once kelp forests are established, it has been well documented that the carrying capacity for a wide range of wildlife would be greatly increased.
Since the kill off of the Sea Otters more than a hundred years ago, there has been a less diverse urchin and crab dominated ecosystem in many areas. Humans have grown up used to a somewhat unbalanced system compared to the original ecosystem. The way I see it, there are a few commercial special interests that want to get rid of the Sea Otters for personal financial gain. Like so much in Alaska, MONEY is the consideration.
Everyone is in a hurry, in biological time, to make money in S.E. Alaska. It will take many decades for Sea Otters to get reintroduced into their native areas, then get through the introductory boom and bust cycles to reach a state of ecological equilibrium. Then even longer for the kelp forest ecosystems to develop into maturity.
It is a open question if any of this is even possible with the constant financial and harvest pressure on the ecosystem. One thing that may be able to assist this process would be MPA's, which are not popular in S.E. Alaska because they prevent harvesting.
This is the conundrum of aggressive commercial harvesting. Once a commercial group is relying on the income, reinvesting in a ecological restoration is virtually impossible. In this case, the real damage was done long before everyone who is now alive was born.
So the question becomes, do we want to allow Sea Otters to repopulate, and ultimately increase kelp forests and productivity, or do we want to keep on supporting the commercial interests who are profiting from the current situation?
Sr Frog, I didn't go beyong
Sr Frog, I didn't go beyong Middle School science in my explanation as that seems to be where you got lost. Yes they are way more complex than that. But if you think the ecosystem can survive with the current set up, then you need to retake middle school science. Ever see any herring in those kelp beds? Ever see herring eggs laid on kelp? Ever see salmon smolt in the kelp? How about rockfish? Shrimp? Krill? Lots of stuff in a deleloped, mature kelp forest. My experience has been that very few divers notice anything but the megafauna.
Kelp Forests do not need otters.
I've lived on a beach in Juneau for 30 years and the first sea otter I've ever seen was recently. The story about otters eating urchins and maintaining kelp forests makes for a good story about ecology but the truth is the kelp forests around here have been doing JUST FINE for many years without sea otters. Obviously, there are some other factors at work that are keeping the urchins from destroying the kelp.
Sea Otters are eating machines. Unlike other local marine mammals, they don't have blubber so they must eat A LOT to stay warm.
If you enjoy shellfish such as dungeoness crab, you should probably be in support of some sort of population control of sea otters.
Kelp forests seem to be doing fine without otters.
The story about otters controlling urchins is a good story, but look around you; we have no shortage of kelp and haven't had any in my lifetime, yet I am only just starting to see otters around.
You are wrong, Socrates.
We don't many kelp forests at all in the inland waters of S.E. Alaska. The kelp you see is simply what you see, and all your short life you have only seen a altered system. That is not much compared to what you would see in an unaltered ecosystem. It's just that you have never seen a unaltered system. With the habitat in this area, we could easily have a hundred times the kelp we do have.
The point here is...
... Who's otters are they? I'm an Alaskan. I buy licenses from ADF&G. I pay for the management. I pay taxes. I play by the rules. I WANT MY SEA OTTER! If they are being managed with my capital, I want my dividend as a vested shareholder.
They don't belong to anyone
Human beings (some of them) hunt sea otters. They don't own them.
My point exactly, dust.
So nobody can lay claim to them. No person, no group of persons. If they are up for harvest or depredation, then any Alaskan hunting licensee should have a chance at one. Make it a permit draw. Rosita is welcome to apply with the rest of us.
Leave the law on Sea Otters
Leave the law on Sea Otters alone greedy people!!!!
seniorfrog, thats odd! no
seniorfrog,
thats odd! no juvenile blackcod in the kelp and no seining! spent a lot of time dragging seine's through the kelp in the rock piles. but maybe fishing is different now days.
Leaving the law be...
Aankadaxtseen,
I'm guessing your post about greed is aimed at SeaAlaska wanting exclusive rights to anything made from sea otter and the ability to expand their market to whomever has the most green (versus being restricted to the much smaller market of shareholders from whom they already mooch).
If the market for selling is opened up, the market for harvesting should be opened as well. You want to make non-traditional toys and clothing out of pelts? Well, Me Too!
seniorfrog
I dragged the end of the seine's through the kelp and cuddled up to rock piles all over southeast. if you were around I might have scooped you up too!
Queued for moderation
Never to be seen again. No matter how innocuous.
Abducted and detained...I hope those comments aren't being tortured before dissolution.
Senior Frog- Regional Economics of Keystone Species
Yes I know what a Sea Otter looks like, I have spent most of my life swimming in the Pacific waters from Panama to Alaska. I have spent days on end in these kelp forests and have interacted with these animals more times than I can count, yes they are as mean as they are cute, and have had numerous confrontations with them. My focus in not on their consumptive abilities, (...even though it is only 5% competitive consumption of commercially viable species). Most marine invertebrates have multiple "morphic stages" (some up to 13 different life stages), many microscopic that are not obvious until they are at commercially harvestable adult stages, these include your harvest as well. This may be why you are not seeing them.
My focus is on the economic value of these animals as a "Keystone Species" for preserving the diversity of a habitat that is a rearing, feeding, and protective grounds that ALL fisheries have a stake in maintaining. Commercial fishing is the stabilizing economic influence for the state of Alaska, it is not oil, timber, mining, or tourism. As well - my fear is the lower 48 markets would begin to label Alaska seafood as Sea Otter unfriendly, and that would be devastating to the stabilization of our Alaskan economy.
I am not willing to jeopardize the economic stability of the state, much less our region because you can not out work a water weasel. A ploy to use native groups as your bounty hunters is shameful, and as an economic aspect there is no infrastructure or end user market for sea otters that would satisfy the cull for what you are proposing. This rings like the past idea of the bounty on Bald Eagles because "they eat the salmon". You do not have privy or entitlement to this national public resource either ... if you thought cull of wolves by shooting them from helicopters was entertaining wait until the national media gets ahold of this story ..... I can only hope not !!
Inside waters, MPAs and Otters: OH MY!
Evening All
Very few seine boats venture into the open ocean. There are major differences between the inside protected waters and the open (real) ocean. The more protected from open ocean swells and wind the less oxygen in the water, highly variable salinities and temperatures and far less diversity of species. Only extreme current, bottlenecks involving tide and land forms change this equation in protected waters.
Sea otters know or find where the food is and if they are not out in the open ocean they are only marginally removed from it. What is missing here is a discussion of the situation in SE today. This includes a local (SE Alaska) problem; the sudden overabundance of sea otters that were reintroduced into an area with a huge food resource, temperate weather and no apex predator looking to make lunch of them.
From between the 400 and 500 otters relocated from Amchitka in the late 60s, today's measured estimates range over 20,000 otters and are predicted to be 25,000 by 2015. Today these otters are ravaging resources around Craig, Cape Chacon, both sides of Dahl Island Glacier Bay and Yakatat. Sitka is gone. There are pockets of individual otters left behind their moving front and the otters are winning. But also losing!
With Dixon Entrance on the south and with the open ocean north of Yakatat, much less protection is offered by the islands along the coast here in SE. Protections even otters need in severe weather. So when the otters reach the limits of their food, there will be major redistributions of their numbers, eventually arriving at numbers the resources can support.
The question is, do you want the maximum number otters possible, excluding all the shellfish resource use by humans, or do you want to strike a balance? There is no question, that if current policies continue, humans will have no share. Certainly not a resource that will sustain either commercial or subsistance harvests.
++++
As to Marine Protection Areas (MPAs) which exclude all commercial use of specific areas. There have been highly variable results in the many areas created in the lower 48. Conditions dependant, likely no two have acquired the same results. Alaska manages the whole state for sustained harvest as per our constitution. Sure, nothing is perfect, but that was not even tried down south and is the major reason there are not MPAs here today.
Who's greedy here, AankadaxTseen?
Are they your otters?