Speaker Bryce Edgmon and Rep. Louise Stutes have come out strongly against Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s bill that would allow a limited amount of fish farming in Alaska.
Last Friday, Governor Mike Dunleavy introduced House Bill 111, legislation aimed at reversing Alaska’s absolute ban on fish farms. The bill has sparked immediate debate among lawmakers and stakeholders in the state’s fishing industry.
Under current law, Alaska prohibits fin fish farming, except for some nonprofit salmon hatcheries. HB 111 seeks to change that by granting the commissioner of the Department of Fish and Game, in consultation with the Commissioner of the Department of Conservation, the authority to permit the cultivation and sale of certain fin fish in inland, closed-system bodies of water.
In response to the proposed legislation, Rep. Louise Stutes (R-Kodiak) and Speaker Bryce Edgmon (I-Dillingham), who are chair and vice chair of the House Committee on Fisheries, issued a joint statement expressing strong opposition to HB 111:
“Alaska’s commercial fishing industry, our coastal communities, and fishing families across the state are suffering through historically poor market conditions, inconsistent returns, and unfair trade practices. Make no mistake, the industry will recover; however, lifting a ban on freshwater finfish farming sends the wrong signal, at the wrong time. It also erodes the spirit of the current ban and provides a foot in the door for possible salmon farming in Alaska. We need to be focusing on solutions for our fisheries that positively impact our industry, market conditions, and the bottom line for our fishermen, not legislation that distracts from that.”
Both Stutes and Edgmon are heavily funded in their campaigns by commercial fishing interests.
Gov. Dunleavy issued a video about his bill late in the day on Monday:
Rather than fish farming, why don’t we invest money in some of our closed fisheries? To start, the chum in Kotzebue.
As a compromise … Maybe(?), Edgmon and Stutes can reverse the 3rd year of closed sportsman fishing and open up King fishing in South Central?
Meanwhile the fish farms of Chile, Norway and Scotland now provide the bulk of all salmon consumed worldwide while Alaska’s contribution shrinks year over year. Rest assured if you order salmon at a L48 restaurant though the menu may proclaim the fish came from Alaska, but it did not. Edgmon and Stutes are the Luddites of the Alaskan fishing industry.
No surprise here. Let’s keep sticking our head in the sand and ignore what the rest of the world is doing to surpass Alaska “wild caught” salmon industry still reliving glory days.
The usual suspects
I’d ask if they read the bill, but I think we all know the answer to that.
Ok, let us unpack this thing.
Cannery owned Fish Traps were the nemesis to Local Alaska Fishermen prior to Statehood. The Feds managed the fishery in a political manner and the Seattle Cannery’s had a seat at the table.
Statehood promised an end to the traps.
The harvest of salmon would be done by independent operators and not corporate entities.
The problem facing the salmon fishery today is quite different. Farmed Salmon from Norway, Chile, Canada and Scotland have become the dominant suppliers of salmon to the world. Norway has built massive offshore floating salmon ranches, which supply high quality FRESH SALMON, year round, even Russia is under cutting Alaska’s Sockeye market in Japan by way of their use of fish traps.
Markets don’t care about your lifestyle. Markets demand high quality, low price and abundance. Politicians like these mentioned in this story are not looking at reality.
Interestingly enough legalizing traps again provide a decent solution to the problem of taking salmon from a mixed species fishery. They allow sorting kings (and other endangered species) from whatever it is you are targeting (usually reds). Start moving commfish permits from nets to traps and we have something to discuss. Cheers –
I’ve thought for many years now that they should do just that for Cook Inlet setnetters. Form a Co-Op that runs the trap(s). Kings can be released unharmed and sockeye can be harvested.
ISER report of 2022 is not available online.
Spoiler Alert- In 2014 – The State of Alaska spent $78 million on commercial fisheries management and received $70 million in commercial fishery revenue.
However, the state spent another $20+ million in capital projects for commercial fisheries.
Municipalities with “significant commercial fisheries” received $50.8 million in taxes on the commercial fishery industry.
‘https://scholarworks.alaska.edu/bitstream/handle/11122/11963/2015_12-FiscalEffectsOfCommercialFishingMiningTourism.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
It’s no wonder why Kodiak and Bristol Bay legislators are fighting against seafood and basic food security for the rest of Alaska.
They enjoy local tax dollars, as they serve as state representatives and advocate for the state to continue to invest capital project dollars in their communities while serving as fiduciaries of the State.
They know the state is losing money, but that loss serves them well.
Where does the line get drawn between the role as a fiduciary duty of an elected official for the State of Alaska budget versus advocating for the region they were elected to represent?
For me, in my simple brain, would think it’s when they advocate against other potential solutions that can have a positive impact on other regions or help the State to justify its historical overspending on an industry that is costing Alaskans over $78 million in operating costs and an additional $20 million in capital projects, while local municipalities could be funding these activities locally. You know, with the $50 million local tax they have been enjoying between 2010-2014.
There is more recent data available by ISER, but apparently they are not allowed to publish that online.
Stutes is a big supporter of the Seattle based factory trawl fleet that is systematically destroying Alaska’s small boat commercial fisheries with their outrageous bycatch of salmon, black cod, halibut, king crab and just about anything else that swims in the Bering Sea and Gulf of Alaska! Wonder if that has anything to do with her stance?
That fleet also targets salmon bound for upper Cook Inlet. Cheers –
I don’t know that they target salmon, but you’re absolutely right that they kill a lot of salmon bound for Cook Inlet, including Kings, as bycatch. Especially, when the factory trawl fleet congregates in Shelikof Strait and the Aleutians.
Our food supply is completely tax payer subsidized. Why do we subsidize food.??? People have to eat and therefore will pay a fair price for a product. Agriculture is actually the most un risky business a person could be in. Food is absolutely essential. And yet bail out after bail out. Grant after grant. You didn’t just pay for that fish 1 time you paid for it 3 times. Same goes for that box of corn flakes. Wake up America. This is not a fair market economy, it’s a government controlled nightmare.
Just curious but why don’t we have a king salmon hatchery on the Yukon for the continuous poor runs up there? Wouldn’t that benefit all the communities on the Yukon and support more fish across Alaska?
That’s a lot of money in a remote and hostile area without the infrastructure to support such an endeavor that will produce far fewer salmon than taking easier and less expensive measures, unfortunately they aren’t currently politically favorable.
Drag some money around on Kodiak and eventually Stutes will come calling. How do you think she paid for her fancy house down by the water with its amazing views? No principles. No ethics. One can tell when they meet her the emptiness and vulgarity of her manner. She is among the worst of the the worst Alaskan politicians.
I don’t know that they target salmon, but you’re absolutely right that they kill a lot of salmon bound for Cook Inlet, including Kings, as bycatch. Especially, when the factory trawl fleet congregates in Shelikof Strait and the Aleutians.
Comments are closed.