Saving Seafood

ALASKA: Converging forces make for worst Upper Cook Inlet commercial salmon season in decades

November 13, 2020 — Low prices, an oddly timed sockeye run and another year of very poor Kenai king returns combined to result in one of the worst Upper Cook Inlet commercial fishing seasons on record.

The 2020 Upper Cook Inlet harvest of roughly 1.2 million salmon was less than half the recent 10-year average harvest of 3.2 million fish and the estimated cumulative ex-vessel value of approximately $5.2 million was the worst on record, according to Alaska Department of Fish and Game’s Upper Cook Inlet Commercial Salmon Fishery Season Summary.

The average ex-vessel, or unprocessed wholesale value of salmon caught by the Upper Cook Inlet fleet over the previous 10 years was $27 million and the last time it didn’t reach at least $10 million was 2001 when the total ex-vessel harvest value was $7.7 million. The last time the nominal value of the Upper Cook Inlet fishery — not adjusted for inflation — was at least as low as 2020 was 1972 when a harvest of 2.2 million salmon netted $3.5 million for fishermen.

However, the dismal result of the 2020 fishery was not because the primary target species, sockeye, didn’t show up. The preseason estimate for the total Upper Cook Inlet sockeye return of nearly 4.3 million fish, which corresponded to a preseason commercial harvest estimate of roughly 1.7 million sockeye, was just 2 percent less than the total sockeye return of just more than 4.3 million fish to the region’s river systems.

Read the full story at the Anchorage Daily News

COVID and climate: Alaska seafood talks zoom in on 2020 and the future of fish

November 13, 2020 — The pandemic and a growing public concern about the effects of climate change loomed large over the committee conversations at the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute’s virtual All Hands on Deck conference this week.

Alaska fisheries had a remarkably successful story to tell in terms of coping with the threat of covid-19 over the spring and summer, as tens of thousands of fishing and seafood industry workers converged on remote coastal towns across the state.

While the Bristol Bay salmon fleet matched that success with robust returns and a harvest of 39 million fish, statewide salmon returns were down overall, and the bay’s base price was half what it was in 2019, coming in at 76 cents. This year marks the state’s seventh lowest salmon volume since 1976 with run failures in the Chignik and Artic-Yukon-Kuskokwim districts, and disaster declarations in Cordova, Petersburg and Ketchikan.

“The [chum salmon] didn’t show up, with only 45 percent of the forecast harvested. On top of that, the ex-vessel prices were quite low,” said Dan Lesh with McKinley Research (formerly McDowell Group). Total value for the 2020 chum fishery was $26 million, less than half the previous 10-year low of $63 million in 2014.

Alaska’s salmon export volumes overall were down 48 percent as of September. A low global wild supply managed to compensate for a glut of farmed salmon and pushed export prices up 26 percent for wild Alaska salmon.

Read the full story at National Fisherman

Protecting the Critical Value of Nearshore Habitat

November 11, 2020 — The following was released by NOAA Fisheries:

No habitat in Puget Sound is more valuable to threatened Chinook salmon than nearshore habitat. No habitat is more degraded, either.

Nearshore habitat is shorthand for tidal marsh, wetlands, and river estuaries where land and water combine to support life of all kinds, from shorebirds to juvenile salmon and steelhead. Juvenile Puget Sound Chinook salmon spend their first critical months in saltwater feeding and growing in the sheltered water of nearshore habitat.

Their growth in that pivotal window determines in large part whether they will make it back to rivers as adults to spawn. With nearshore habitat dwindling, most do not.

When reviewing projects, NOAA Fisheries is updating its efforts to avoid further losses of nearshore habitat.

“It is important for projects to have a path forward, while we also need to stem the losses of this habitat that we have already lost so much of,” said Kim Kratz, Assistant Regional Administrator in NOAA Fisheries West Coast Region.

More than 95 percent of the most valuable nearshore habitat in Puget Sound is gone and is especially scarce in the south Sound, according to an analysis by the Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Project. Scientists described it as a “dramatic change in the historic occurrence [of] these once-prominent nearshore ecosystems.”

Fewer than one percent of Puget Sound Chinook salmon juveniles that migrate to the ocean each year survive to return as adults. That means that already imperiled populations continue to decline. There are also repercussions for other species such as en

Read the full release here

ALASKA: 2020 Salmon harvest in Southeast less than half of previous year’s

November 10, 2020 — Southeast Alaska’s salmon harvest was less than half of last year’s haul. That’s according to a preliminary report from the Alaska Department of Fish and Game released on Monday.

Commercial fishermen in Southeast harvested just over 14.3 million salmon across the five species this year — almost 5 million chum salmon, 8 million pinks and 1.1 million coho. For sockeye, the harvest was about 373,000 and 200,000 Chinook.

That’s a drop in harvest for every species except Chinook — also known as king salmon — which increased by a few thousand fish this year. In other words, Southeast’s total salmon harvest was 19 million fewer fish than last year.

The preliminary ex-vessel value of Southeast’s 2020 salmon fishery was just over $50 million dollars. That’s less than half of 2019’s estimated value, and the third consecutive year that Southeast’s value paid to fishermen has dropped.

Read the full story at KSTK

Federal judge rules FDA must reevaluate effects of potential GE salmon escape

November 9, 2020 — AquaBounty Technologies is facing another legal battle over its AquAdvantage salmon, as a California court ruled last week that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) violated core environmental laws in approving genetically engineered salmon for sale and consumption.

On 5 November, a federal judge in San Francisco ruled the FDA ignored serious possible environmental consequences by approving genetically engineered salmon, and was also violating the National Environmental Policy Act. The judge also ruled the FDA approval was in violation of the Endangered Species Act, as the agency did not consult with the National Marine Fisheries Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service before taking an action that “may affect” a listed or endangered species.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

Court orders FDA to assess environmental impact of GM salmon

November 6, 2020 — A federal court judge ordered the U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Thursday to conduct an environmental assessment of genetically modified salmon that he said was required for the agency’s approval of the fish.

But the judge did not vacate the FDA’s approval of the salmon for human consumption in the meantime, because he said the risk for near-term environmental harm is low.

“The FDA has to go back to the drawing board and do its homework,” said George Kimbrell, legal director for the Center for Food Safety, one of the groups that filed suit challenging the agency’s approval of the genetically modified salmon.

The ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Vince Chhabria in San Francisco centers on AquaBounty’s salmon, which are genetically modified to grow faster than normal salmon. In 2015, the fish became the first genetically modified animal approved for human consumption in the U.S. After clearing other regulatory hurdles. AquaBounty began growing the fish in indoor tanks at an Indiana plant last year.

Read the full story at The Washington Post

Some ups but mostly downs for Alaska salmon permit values

November 4, 2020 — After a salmon season that successfully fished its way through a pandemic and upturned markets, the value of Alaska salmon permits is ticking up in two regions while toppling in others.

Permit values are derived by the state Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission based on the average value of four permit sales.

One of the uppers is the bellwether fishery at Bristol Bay where driftnet permits are showing good gains after a strong fishing season, despite a disappointing base sockeye price of $.70 a pound, down by nearly half from last year.

“Probably the lowest asking price out there right now is $170,000,” said Doug Bowen of Alaska Boats and Permits in Homer. “Of course, the next big news here for the Bay would be the forecasts for next year which are not out yet, and they could certainly have an influence on what people are willing to pay for those permits. But they have come up considerably from the low of $150,000 before the season.”

Alaskan Quota and Permits in Petersburg lists one Bristol Bay permit at $195,000, while Dock Street Brokers has new drift listings at between $170,000 and $180,000.

Read the full story at the Anchorage Daily News

Alaska salmon: Annual harvest tallies lower, as expected; 
sales stay hot for self-marketed fishermen

November 4, 2020 — Alaska’s preliminary statewide salmon harvest came in at 113.56 million fish, down sharply from last year’s 199.98 million fish and ranking it 34th largest on record.

As predicted by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, the harvest of pink salmon this year was expected to drop by around 68 million fish from last year; so there were no surprises when the final pink tally came at 57.91 million.

As for the harvest of other species in 2020, fleets landed 7.89 million chums, 2.14 million silvers, 249,000 kings and 45.38 million sockeyes.

In Bristol Bay, about 70 percent of the gillnetters showed up to fish as the season got underway in late June. Fishermen and seafood plant workers were quarantined in some cases, and drift fishermen were confined to living on their boats out on the water for the season instead of tying up to the docks during fishing closures.

Read the full story at National Fisherman

ALASKA: Seafood Bycatch Donation Relieves Hunger and Reduces Waste

November 2, 2020 — The following was released by NOAA Fisheries:

Fishermen sometimes unintentionally catch fish they do not want or cannot keep. This is called bycatch. While these fish are returned to the sea, many of them do not survive. This is a major problem worldwide—nearly 10 percent of global fishery catches are discarded each year

This waste of valuable seafood protein has been an increasing focus of management, industry, and public concern due to its ecological and economic impacts. That’s where our innovative donation program comes in.

Alaska fishermen occasionally catch Pacific halibut and salmon incidentally in trawls targeting groundfish. Because halibut and salmon are valuable targets of other fisheries, they are designated as prohibited species. Groundfish trawlers are not allowed to retain or sell them. Historically, all prohibited species caught in Alaska were discarded at sea to avoid any incentive to catch these species.

The North Pacific Fishery Management Council and the Alaska seafood industry have a long history of cooperative efforts to reduce bycatch. However, even after bycatch has been eliminated to the extent practicable, some is inevitable.

In 1996, NOAA Fisheries and the North Pacific Fishery Management Council established the Prohibited Species Donation Program. It takes a unique approach to the problem of discarded fish by making it possible for fishermen to donate some bycatch to hunger relief organizations. It simultaneously reduces waste, provides high quality seafood protein to people in need, and avoids incentives to catch prohibited species.

“Bycatch donation is an example of thinking outside the box. When we think about reducing waste, it is usually about avoiding bycatch. This program is a creative solution to maximize the value of the bycatch that can’t be avoided,”  said Jordan Watson, NOAA Fisheries biologist at the Alaska Fisheries Science Center.

Read the full release here

Salmon study sheds light on why fall-run fish are bigger than their spring-run cousins

October 30, 2020 — For the Yurok people, who have lived at the mouth of the Klamath River for generations, the spring run of Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) is a welcome—and nutritious—relief from winter. But as the fish have dwindled to just a fraction of their original numbers, Indigenous groups there are pushing to have them protected by the Endangered Species Act. New research, which suggests genes play only a small role in distinguishing the spring salmon from their fall-run cousins, may call into question the need for such a designation.

The rivers of the Pacific Northwest used to teem with two waves of Chinook: those that arrived in March or April, and those that came 6 months later, swimming from the sea to their upriver breeding grounds. Although technically the same species, the spring-run and fall-run fish have some “iconic differences,” says Eric Anderson, a molecular geneticist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Southwest Fisheries Science Center. Spring salmon are smaller, fattier, and less sexually mature than fall fish. They also swim further upriver to breed.

To tease out the genetic basis of those differences, Anderson and colleagues teamed up with Yurok fishers living at the mouth of the Klamath River in northern California. Together, they examined 500 fish as they started their upstream journeys in all four seasons. The researchers measured the size of each fish, assessed its fattiness and reproductive status, and took samples of its DNA. The researchers gathered similar data from other rivers.

Past studies have shown that a small region of the salmon chromosome 28 contains two genes, GREB1L and ROCK1, that vary between spring and fall salmon. Anderson and his colleagues did further genomic studies, sequencing the whole genomes of 160 fish in the hopes of linking the two genes to the spring and fall traits. The data set is “impressive” and the work unique says Sheela Phansalkar Turbek, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Colorado, Boulder, who was not involved with the work.

Read the full story at Science Magazine