Federal fisheries regulators have set some limits on salmon chum bycatch in the Bering Sea. The highly debated – and long awaited – decision aims to protect declining salmon stocks while minimizing harm to pollock fisheries.
The North Pacific Fishery Management Council voted Wednesday to set a Western Alaska chum bycatch limit in the Bering Sea pollock fishery. The regulation includes a partial closure for the fishery if it exceeds the bycatch cap.
“I think it's needed. I think it’s going to change behavior. I think it's going to reduce Western Alaska chum bycatch,” said council member Nicole Kimball, who voted for the motion.
Kimball added that while she was sure “nobody is very happy” with the council’s compromise, the decision reflects extensive discussion and available Western and Indigenous science.
Difficult tradeoffs
The decision comes after years of debate and calls for action on the issue.
The trawl fishery in the Bering Sea near the Aleutian Islands is focused on pollock, but boats also scoop up other types of fish – called bycatch. That includes chum salmon, some of which migrate to Western and Interior Alaska rivers, where the fish are a crucial subsistence resource. But chum runs in the Yukon and Kuskokwim rivers have been declining, leading to repeated fishing closures for some communities.
The pollock industry had spoken against the strictest measures proposed to limit chum bycatch, citing expected financial losses for them and for the coastal communities economically tied to the industry.
The council, which manages federal fisheries off the coast of Alaska, received more than 600 written comments about the issue leading up to the Anchorage meeting. Council members spent more than three days listening to public testimony from people from across the state, over the phone and in person.
Council member John Moller, originally from Unalaska, is Alaska Native and a commercial fisherman. He said he is fortunate to put fish up each year and feels for those who can’t.
“I know how important that is to me, how important that is to my family, and passing that on to my children – I get that,” Moller said. “And my heart is ripped out, speaking with all of you that are living on the rivers right now that don't have that same ability that I have living in Southeast.”
Council member Jon Kurland also said it's been heartbreaking to hear stories about how the lack of salmon has affected people's food security, traditions and well-being. He added that it was important to hear the other side of the story too.
“It's also been moving to be reminded about the socio-economic benefits of the pollock fishery,” Kurland said. “The family businesses that operate catcher boats, the seafood processing capacity in many remote areas that really needs a steady flow of pollock to make it possible to process other species for smaller scale fisheries.”
The decision
The council voted 8-3 to support a motion that struck a compromise between several proposals while avoiding the strictest regulations. It sets a limit to Western Alaska chum bycatch of 45,000 fish, with variations among different pollock sectors.
Exceeding that limit would trigger a partial closure for half of the fishing corridor. If trawlers failed to follow that, the closure would remain in effect all season the following year.
Rachel Baker, a deputy commissioner at the Alaska Department of Fish and Game and the vice chair of the council, presented the motion.
“It has the penalty of potentially depriving the pollock fleet of prime fishing grounds,” she said. “It's designed to hopefully influence behavior before the fleet ever reaches that threshold.”
Baker said that the sections where the limit and closures would take place are some of the most important areas for pollock fishing. That is also the area where the majority of Western Alaska chum are caught in the pollock fishery, and where tribes say it’s crucial to let salmon pass to make it up the rivers.
Only about 17% of chum salmon bycatch taken by the Bering Sea pollock fleet comes from Western Alaska stock. Most is from Asian hatcheries or other parts of Alaska and the Pacific Northwest. But Baker concluded that the available science and testimonies pointed to how crucial the area is for Western Alaska salmon.
Among those who opposed the motion was council member Anne Vanderhoeven, director of government affairs for Arctic Storm Management Group, which operates catcher processor vessels in the fishery. She said that while she empathizes with the need to protect Western Alaska salmon, the low fish returns are driven by climate factors more than by bycatch.
Vanderhoeven and several other members said that the cap and potential closure might disproportionately hurt smaller vessels and coastal communities while not providing a detectable improvement for salmon returns.
“The science clearly supports a more precise, data-driven approach,”Vanderhoeven said.
Baker said that even a small increase in return counts.
“We're at this table used to thinking about large volumes of fish, in tons,” she said. “We heard in testimony that four fish were able to provide the needs for a potlatch.”
The motion also includes other provisions for strengthening existing measures to avoid bycatch. The plan goes next to the National Marine Fisheries Service before it can be implemented.
