Can ADF&G clean up its own mess?

The never-ending saga of Cook Inlet fisheries management continues. \

The judge who originally issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) last month blocking the implementation of drift gillnet management plan changes made by the Alaska Board of Fisheries (BOF) in March has decided to reconsider the case. I’m no lawyer, but if I read the reconsideration document correctly, the judge based his decision on the fact that the TRO was issued largely based on a one-sided presentation of the merits of the lawsuit and not allowing the state to properly prepare its rebuttal to these points.

I don’t understand a lot of this legal mumbo-jumbo, but the fact that the judge is willing to reconsider the case tells me maybe, in hindsight, he realizes he screwed up the process and possibly misapplied whatever law he based his original decision on. The timing to correct this mess is too late for this fishing season, but let’s hope correct regulations will be in place for next year.

The second item is that the BOF held another teleconference meeting this past Monday to decide what to do about this whole confusing situation. I listened to the teleconference at the LIO in Wasilla and heard some interesting comments from board members and some double-speak answers to direct questions from some Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) staff.

The meeting, in a nutshell, was to decide which option the BOF wanted to pursue to address this situation for yet a third time. There were three choices:

1. The BOF could address things through an agenda change request (ACR) if one was submitted for consideration by the public.

2. The BOF could generate its own proposal to address the management plan changes, schedule the proposal for a meeting in the upcoming cycle and go through the whole public input process and deliberations, essentially repeating about a week’s worth of effort from the Upper Cook Inlet meeting held this past March.

3. The BOF could hand this whole situation over to the commissioner of ADF&G with the stipulation to address the errors found in the regulations and implement permanent corrections.

I know the Kenai River Sportfishing Association (KRSA) has an ACR already prepared for submission to the BOF. I would strongly encourage them to submit it, if for no other reason than to cover that potential loophole in the process. Board members clearly understand about the board-generated proposal route and, I expect, are holding that option in reserve in the event ADF&G screws this thing up again. The board voted for the third option, which hands the situation over to the commissioner to use the authority the BOF gave to that office several years ago to correct errors in regulation.

I listened to the arguments made by board members during the discussion of which option to adopt, and frankly, in a perfect world, would agree completely with the decision the board chose — let the commissioner clean up the mess her department created in the first place. However, this is not a perfect world and, to be honest, I’m not sure I trust the department to do the right thing here.

Anybody who has followed the BOF/ADF&G process for Cook Inlet for a few years has seen a clear bias on the part of the department toward the commercial fishing industry. When errors have been made in regulations, they always seem to benefit the commercial side. When tough management decisions need to be made, they always seem to favor the commercial side.

Here are a few examples. Just about a week ago, ADF&G issued an emergency order (EO) opening the commercial setnet fishery for a 56-hour period to “clean up” the dying remnants of the Kenai sockeye run. This fishery intercepts Kenai late-run king salmon as well as the reds. Sportfishing for these late-run kings had already been restricted to no bait because of the weak return, yet the commercial nets were being allowed to catch the fish that would probably have been saved by the no-bait restriction in-river. How does that make sense? Only after extreme public outcries and about 40-hours of commercial setnet fishing did ADF&G finally close the commercial season.

Another EO issued last week allows the northern district setnetters to use four nets or 105 fathoms of gear to fish. That management plan restricts the amount of gear that can be used for a certain time period and then allows for the resumption of more gear usage. The coho runs to the northern district have been weak so far and extra gear will catch more silvers. Management plans dictate that silvers are to be managed for the in-river sports users, not the commercial fishermen. The last line of the EO states, “The duration of this reduction of gear is over, so it is now necessary to return the legal complement of gear back to 105 fathoms by emergency order.”

Since when is it “necessary” to allow more gear to commercially fish for stocks showing weak returns when the in-river users have already been restricted in their ability to catch those fish? Bait is not being allowed in the Little Susitna because of the weak silver returns to date.

Maybe it’s just me, but this sure looks like a department bias toward the commercial industry at the expense of all other user groups. And we’re supposed to trust them to correct the mess they made with the drift net regulations? I’ll believe it when I see it. I’ll let you know what happens.

Howard Delo is a retired fisheries biologist with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Leave him a message by emailing sports@frontiersman.com.