July 15, 2019 — SEAFOOD NEWS — For nearly 40 years, Alaska has been the gold standard in Global Fisheries.  State management brought wild salmon back from the brink of commercial extinction in many rivers, so that today Bristol Bay, for example, is consistently producing bigger runs than in the past 100 years.

State management also lived by a few broad principles. Fisheries sustainability was written into the Alaska constitution.  And decisions were guided by science.  Further, the active fisheries management of NOAA and the ADF&G rested on a foundation of broad support.  This included research at the University of Alaska, the Sea Grant Program, ASMI, and the revenue sharing from fish taxes with local communities.

Now much of that infrastructure is under attack.  Despite a $600 million surplus, radical Governor Dunleavy has vetoed 181 items in the budget, totaling over $400 million, in an effort to provide a $3000 entitlement to Alaskans from the permanent fund, rather than $1600 as the legislature proposed.

The legislature is so paralyzed, it cannot even meet in one city.  A rump faction is camped in Wasilla, the majority continues to meet in Juneau, but because Alaska requires the highest override margin in the country (75%) the Juneau legislators have not been able to muster a veto override.

“I cannot fathom why the governor is purposely throwing Alaska into a severe economic recession,” said Sen. Natasha von Imhof, R-Anchorage. “It would be one thing if we didn’t have the revenue. But we do. We have plenty of money. After the Legislature spent five months creating a sensible and intelligent budget, we ended up with a $600 million surplus. The governor is cutting the budget not because we are in a fiscal crisis. It is to distribute nearly $2 billion to Alaskans to the detriment of core government services like public safety, roads and education.”

Economists have testified for months that if these vetoes go through, it will crash the state’s economy back into recession.

This fiasco in Alaskan government does not bode well for fisheries.

Alaska today is like the family bequeathed a once magnificent mansion, but now with squabbling relatives too poor to keep it up.  Signs of decay and disrepair are appearing more each year.

From afar, things still look great.  Bristol  Bay is strong.  Southeast Alaska is seeing more salmon.  Cod and pollock fisheries, which face a climate related threat, are still producing.  Prices are high for crab, salmon and pollock.

And in fact, in the face of huge budget cuts due to the Governor’s veto of the legislative budget this year, ADF&G is faring better than most agencies.

But the long term looks much worse.

Fisheries are under threat on two levels.

Fisheries are unique in that they are both for profit businesses, and a social endeavor.  This is because the ocean and its resources are common property.  But they are not fished as common property, they are fished by individuals and companies.

The basic compact is public support for the regulated economic activity of fishing, and in return, those in the business have the opportunity to thrive and grow returning money and opportunity to the state.

As Doug Vincent-Lang, Alaska’s Department of Fish and Game Commissioner told Laine Welch, “we take a $200m budget of which about $50 million is [from general funds]  and we turn that into an $11 billion return to our state.”

This economic activity is underpinned by public money.  Just as land-based companies could not exist without government provided roads and airports, so fisheries cannot exist without government provided science and management.

The science and management – the knowledge of what is happening with fish stocks, habitats and ecosystems, plus the resources to make and enforce decisions, are the roads and airports of the seafood industry.  Without them, fisheries cannot thrive.

Because of the cost-effectiveness calculation, ADF&G has fared better than other Alaska government agencies in the face of the Governor’s vetoes.  But this is a very narrow view.

The budget crisis threatens to unravel the University of Alaska, which is facing a one year immediate cut of 41% in state support.  The veto takes $130 million immediately out of the University budget, while the legislative budget cut was $5 million.

The University of Alaska Anchorage could have 700 layoffs and the elimination of about 40 of its 105 degree programs. That’s a loss of at least 3,000 students.

“There are going to be ripple — tidal wave if you will — effects of that cut,” University Chancellor Johnsen said. “On enrollment and the tuition that comes with enrollment, and also on research grants and contracts because there’ll be fewer faculty out there competing for those grants and contracts, so really the $130 million, I think, is a conservative estimate for the budget impact in the current fiscal year.”

Also the budget cuts have hit ASMI, which has seen steady reductions in state support.  At a time when the greatest threat to the seafood industry in Alaska is the trade war with China, ASMI is kneecapped, preventing it from acting effectively in foreign markets.

The fact is that Alaska’s fisheries are facing huge long term problems chiefly due to warming oceans and loss of sea ice.  This is changing the ecosystem in the Bering Sea and means that the basis of the state’s fisheries prosperity may be under threat especially as stocks move north to cooler waters.

This is a hugely difficult problem to understand.  Why have chinook catches plummeted?  What is the impact of hatchery salmon on ocean survival of wild salmon? Can Dutch Harbor sustain a shore based pollock fishery when the fishing grounds move several hundred miles to the North?

All of these interactions can be unraveled by fisheries managers only with a foundation of basic science and research, and much of this is provided by faculty and staff at the University of Alaska.  For example a number of them sit on various Scientific committees of the N. Pacific Management Council.

When NGO’s first began campaigns to address sustainable fishing, Alaska was held up as the gold standard because of its excellent management, strong political support for fisheries, and a track record of making decisions based on science. European fisheries, by contrast, were seen as compromised because fish were kicked around the political system like favors and patronage, and as a result, were consistently overfished.

Alaska’s political meltdown means that the government is in danger of no longer carrying out its basic public functions.  One of its public functions is to provide the underpinnings of successful economic activities like fishing.

Unless this is corrected, the economic returns from Alaska fisheries will be reduced as lack of manpower reduces science based knowledge, and leads to more cautious management decisions.  The market reputation of Alaska fisheries will suffer, as those consumers who care about the Alaska brand see that the state no longer can make the investments to keep it functioning at the highest level.

The biggest tragedy is that this crisis was created solely by politicians.  The legislature actually passed a budget with a $600 million surplus that addressed the long term decline in oil prices that has been impacting Alaska.  If the Governor’s vetoes stand, as looks likely at this time, the state will have a self-inflicted wound which will lead to more job losses, more people leaving, and lower vitality.  For what public purpose?

This story was originally published on SeafoodNews.com, a subscription site. It is reprinted with permission.