The Alaska Board of Fisheries plans to meet Jan. 28 through Feb. 9 in Ketchikan to discuss proposed changes to finfish and shellfish fisheries in Southeast Alaska. Ahead of that meeting, the Upper Lynn Canal Fish and Game Advisory Committee met in November, December and January to consider and weigh in on some of those proposals.
The state board typically considers Southeast Alaska finfish and shellfish fisheries once every three years, barring exceptional circumstances where the board agrees to consider an issue out of that cycle.
In all, there are 159 proposals that will be considered covering everything from new limits on hatchery salmon releases, changes to the personal use and commercial Dungeness crab fisheries, reducing rockfish bag limits, creating a new commercial squid fishery, and much more.
In all, the Upper Lynn Canal Advisory Committee discussed more than 40 proposals that could impact the region. The positions the advisory committee takes are one of several pieces of information the board considers when deliberating each proposal. Advisory Committees from other Southeast Alaska communities will also submit their positions, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game has provided staff recommendations on many of the proposals, and individuals and organizations have the opportunity to submit written comments by January 14 or testify in-person toward the beginning of the meeting in Ketchikan.
The board will consider the proposals in several groups, as outlined in its tentative agenda.
The Upper Lynn Canal Advisory Committee actions are grouped here in the order in which the state board will likely consider them this year:
Commercial and Sport Crab
The Upper Lynn Canal AC opposed proposal 250 to reduce the minimum size limit for Dungeness crab harvested by personal use fishers after hearing that Fish and Game staff also opposed the change.
Currently, both personal use and commercial crabbers can only retain male crabs 6.5 inches across or longer; the proposal would allow personal use retention of 6.25 inch crabs while maintaining the larger limit for commercial crabbers.
AC member Kip Kermoian said the change could be a slippery slope, and that reducing the size of harvestable crab could have a cascading impact across the region.
The committee also opposed proposal 258, which sought to open many parts of Registration Area A, which includes the Upper Lynn Canal, that are currently closed to commercial Dungeness crabbing.
AC member Raif McGuire characterized the effort to open such a large swath of ocean as “radical”, and AC member Derek Poinsette said closing areas is an effective strategy for conservation and it was likely best to leave the decision to open or close those areas with Fish and Game.
The committee also considered proposal 251 which would shorten the commercial Dungeness crab season in the area that includes the Upper Lynn Canal, changing the opening to July 1.
The proposal made by a crab fisherman who is concerned that a portion of the crab caught at the beginning of the season can still have soft shells, making them more prone to handling mortality.
The committee first discussed the change at its Dec. 16 meeting, and then reconsidered that action on Jan. 6. Ultimately, the final motion to oppose the shorter commercial season failed Jan. 6 in a tie vote, meaning that the AC ultimately took no action.
Many of those opposing the shorter commercial season were concerned that it would result in more commercial fishing in the fall, when the weather tends to be less safe for crab fisherman, while those who did not oppose the season cited the proposal language addressing the softer crab and also noted reduced personal use harvests in recent years and concerns about the status of the Dungeness crab stock.
Commercial, Subsistence, Sport and Personal Use Groundfish
The Upper Lynn Canal AC supported proposal 192, which suggested a gear change for the bottomfish fishery that would allow personal use fishers to put pots on a longline instead of setting each pot out on its own individual line. McGuire said he likes to fish for black cod with slinky pots, and would appreciate being able to put them out on a longline. AC member Lee Nash said allowing personal use fishers to put their gear on a longline could also reduce the overall buoy line in the water, which can be a risk for whale entanglement.
The committee also supported a proposed reduction in Southeast’s pelagic rockfish bag and possession limits, proposal 210, agreeing to support the decreased limits. The proposal would change the daily bag limit from five to three, and reduce the possession limit from 10 to six. Those limits apply to Black, Blue, Dark, Dusky, Widow, and Yellowtail rockfish.
The proposal, which was put forth by Fish and Game, cited concerns about increased rockfish pressure from charter anglers. Kermoian said that this action could help protect the fishery, as anglers spend more time going after rockfish when opportunities to harvest halibut and king salmon decrease.
The committee also opposed two proposals that would have allowed nonresidents to harvest certain demersal shelf rockfish. The rockfish included in those proposals were Quillback, Copper, Canary, China and Tiger; which Fish and Game staff said they did not have enough information about to expand.
Subsistence Shellfish, Commercial and Sport Shrimp, Commercial and Sport Miscellaneous Shellfish Proposals
With limited discussion, the committee voted to support reducing the season for the state’s subsistence, sport and personal use shrimp fishery. That change was proposed by Fish and Game, which has requested closing the pot fishery in March and April when shrimp eggs mature and hatch. Currently, the Southeast subsistence, sport and personal use season is open year round with no region-wide closure. The commercial fishery has a more limited season, and the sport, subsistence and personal use season would still be longer than the commercial season if the proposal is passed by the board.
The committee also discussed proposals 230 and 231, which would create a directed jig fishery for magister armhook squid Southeast, but ultimately voted against taking action to support them.
Currently, opportunity to harvest that squid exists only through a commissioner’s permit, and participation is limited. Ryan Cook, a commercial fisherman, said he was interested in seeing the expanded opportunity for commercial fishing in Southeast.
“If there’s an abundance of them, we should be able to go harvest them,” he said.
AC member Tim McDonough said that while members might support the idea of expanded commercial opportunity, more information about the species was needed first, such as a stock assessment. Jessica Plachta also talked about the need for more research before a new fishery was opened, and Marvin Willard Jr noted the potential to disrupt the ecosystem if squid were harvested without a complete understanding of how they impact other stocks.
King Salmon
The local advisory committee supported proposal 104, which would allocate at least 5,000 king salmon to a subsistence fishery and establish provisions for that fishery. That proposal was developed by the Southeast Alaska Subsistence Regional Advisory Council, and widely supported by members of the Upper Lynn Canal AC, including Poinsette.
“I think it’s a good and kind of clever idea to add an allocation for the subsistence fishery for chinook salmon so that subsistence fishers aren’t the first ones that get cut out,” Poinsette said.
The salmon allocated for that subsistence use would come off Alaska’s “all gear” allocation under the International Pacific Salmon Treaty. Under the proposal, the subsistence allocation would roll over to other user groups if not harvested.
The group also supported proposals 106 and 107, which would change nonresident sport fishery landing and possession regulations in an effort to ensure that fishers targeting kings offshore from Alaska are subject to state regulations.
“I think this would close a loophole that would potentially allow people to fish in what’s effectively state waters without following our regulations,” McGuire said.
The proposals were submitted by the Territorial Sportsmen Inc., Alaska Trollers Association and Juneau Douglas Advisory Committee.
The AC opposed proposals 108 which would modify the Southeast Alaska King Salmon Management Plan, as well as 112 and 113 which would both change the allocation of king salmon to charter sport fishing. Nash and others said all of those proposals contained provisions that didn’t manage the charter fleet enough or in the way that the group would prefer, and that they wanted to see that industry share the burden of king conservation.
The group supported proposals 115, 116 and 117 which set a limit on the number of kings nonresidents can catch, at either one or two fish depending on the time of year. “Nonresidents are not limited and they need to be,” said Nash.
The group opposed proposal 118, which would have set a higher limit of three kings per year for nonresidents.
The group supported proposal 109 and another very similar proposal, 110, which would modify the existing Southeast Alaska King Salmon Management Plan that expires in March.
Proposal 109 would direct Fish and Game to manage the sport fishery in-season to achieve the annual sport king allocation and change the way the sport and commercial allocations are currently split.
Nash supported the proposal and said several other groups in Southeast Alaska supported the approach, including the Sitka and Ketchikan boroughs, and the Elfin Cove AC. He also noted that proposal 109 was authored by Jacqueline Foss, a Sitka resident who he said had tried to be fair to both the charter industry and others targeting kings in Southeast Alaska.
“We’re not trying to kick the charter guys out right now,” Nash said. “We just want to limit more people coming in.”
The group supported proposal 122 which would prohibit the removal of king salmon from the water whenever the retention of king salmon is prohibited in the Southeast Alaska sport fishery and 123 which would prohibit handling and netting in catch and release fisheries.
“It’s good practice to keep fish alive,” McDonough said.
The AC also supported proposals 125 and 126, which would close sport fishing for king salmon in a region that includes the Upper Lynn Canal from April 1 through June 14 when stock of concern status exists for king salmon stocks. The spring commercial fishery is also closed during that time frame.
Proposal 131, which addressed the summer troll fishery, also got the AC’s support. That proposal would allow for multiple commercial limited harvest fisheries in the summer, and enable the department to provide different fishing opportunity if there weren’t enough kings for a competitive 3-day opening.
Nash said the change would spread out fishing effort and help smaller operators be more competitive, as well spread out the availability of fresh kings on the market when possible.
The AC supported proposal 134, which would establish more restrictions for the purse seine fleet regarding king retention, including requiring them to log when kings can’t be sold but are retained for personal use.
Cook, a gillnetter, said he supported the proposal, as did Menke and others on the committee.
Fish and Game comments described the restrictions as redundant, but AC members noted anecdotal stories of purse seiners offloading kings in Southeast when other gear types and users are not legally allowed to catch them.
Subsistence, Commercial, Sport, and Personal Use Salmon and Trout; Enhancement and Terminal Harvest Areas
Hatcheries, and their potential and perceived impacts on fisheries across Alaska, garnered significant discussion from the group and guests who attended the meetings to provide additional information.
The committee supported proposal 140, which would require the use of barbless hooks for sport fishing throughout Southeast Alaska from April 1 to June 14.
Doug Olerud had asked the committee to consider making a similar proposal for the Haines area during a Nov. 22 meeting, and said that many anglers who visit the area are surprised that barbed hooks are allowed. Barbless hooks are gentler on fish and can reduce release mortality.
Ultimately the group determined it was too late to submit a new proposal this year, but said they could consider pursuing a local regulation in the future.
The group opposed 141, which would prohibit bait in Southeast Alaska saltwater sport fisheries from April 1 to June 14. AC members said that was more restrictive than current regulations without a strong justification. Fish and Game staff also opposed the change and noted the lack of conservation need for the regulation.
The AC also supported proposal 156 to reduce the quantity of hatchery pinks and chums released in Southeast Alaska after an extensive discussion during its Dec. 16 meeting.
Menke said that with concerns about the status of salmon throughout the state, she wanted to support the effort to bolster wild stocks by reducing the potential harms hatchery fish pose include competition to wild stocks and straying.
“Our wild stocks resource is the highest priority,” she said. “I think it’s very important that we send a message to the [Board of Fish] that we have some concerns about these hatchery fish in Alaska.”
Katie Harms, the executive director of Douglas Island Pink and Chum, Inc., the hatchery nonprofit that supports Upper Lynn Canal hatchery releases, attended the meeting and said the cuts would make it too difficult for DIPAC to continue its operations.
Cook said that would be a problem for local fishermen.
“I highly oppose this proposal,” he said. “The Haines gillnet fleet depends a lot on the DIPAC fish to survive in the summertime.”
Ultimately, the committee supported the proposal in a 6-5 vote, with Menke, Willard Jr, McGuire, Kermoian, Poinsette and Plachta favoring the hatchery reductions; Adam Smith, Nash, Cook, McDonough and Teresa Katzeek opposing it. Mark Sogge did not vote, saying he believed that there is an issue with the ocean’s carrying capacity, but wasn’t sure the details of the proposal were the solution.
The proposal called for reducing the permitted release of pinks and chums from several facilities by 25 percent each. Permits for those hatcheries are issued by the commissioner of fish and game, and whether the board has authority to regulate those releases has been debated for decades.
Haines Mayor Tom Morphet sent a letter to the state board opposing that same proposal. The borough’s assembly will consider a resolution opposing the reduced hatchery releases at its Jan. 14 meeting.
The group supported proposal 157 to create a terminal harvest area targeting hatchery runs at Burnett Inlet near Etolin Island. A cost recovery fishery is allowed there currently, and Cook said the proposal would allow a common property fishery in the future.
The AC also considered proposal 166 to allow Fish and Game to authorize the use of longer gillnets in District 11 during the coho fishery, but ultimately did not vote in favor of it. District 11 is south of Lynn Canal and includes the waters around Juneau.
Cook and Nash both supported the proposal, and Nash explained that because coho swim deeper, the longer nets could be more effective to catch them.
Limited information was available about the impacts those longer nets could have on various coho stocks, and AC members including Poinsette and Willard Jr., said more information and numbers would be needed for them to support the idea.
The group opposed proposal 167, which would allow longer purse seines.
McGuire, a gillnetter, and Willard Jr., both referenced concerns about seiners bycatch and the potential for them to catch even more with longer nets.
Herring
The group also considered several herring proposals, most intended to limit the fishery, although members had different opinions on whether those were directly relevant to Upper Lynn Canal and few proposed changes were ultimately supported.
The AC supported, however, the idea of co-management of Southeast herring fisheries between the State of Alaska and local Tribal governments, voting in favor of proposal 190. That proposal would direct the state fish board to co-manage Southeast herring fisheries alongside local Tribal governments; though they voted to amend it by striking a section that would allow a Tribe to order an emergency closure of the commercial fishery.
The AC also supported proposal 175, which would establish a cap on the Sitka sac roe herring fishery’s harvest.
Sogge said he thought the cap provided a balance of helping with herring conservation while not crippling the existing commercial fishery, and also recognized that a primary market for the roe had declined.
• This story originally appeared in the Chilkat Valley News.
