Clarifying the Board of Fisheries debate

I want to follow up on the comments I made at the end of last week’s column. I don’t want to leave anyone with the impression that folks on the Kenai Peninsula are any different than folks from around the rest of the state.

This issue of where to hold a Board of Fisheries meeting has a long history of contentious debate in several areas of the state. In talking with the board’s executive director, I’ve learned that the issue of where to hold a meeting probably began with the formation of the board itself.

My first year on the board involved Cook Inlet meetings, both Lower and Upper, the Kodiak and Chignik meetings, and the King and Tanner Crab meeting. The dates and locations had been set the year before and I don’t remember much concern being expressed over the locations.

The Lower Cook Inlet meeting was held in Homer; the Kodiak meeting was in Kodiak; and the Chignik meeting was in Anchorage, as were the Upper Cook Inlet and King and Tanner Crab meetings.

The BOF has a history of rotating meetings for a given area or region between various host cities within that area or region that are capable of supporting such a meeting. The exception has been including the Anchorage location for several areas. For many of the major fisheries across the state, a large number of the stakeholders do not live in the specific region or area and Anchorage becomes a convenient “middle ground” to accommodate these folks every other cycle or so.

My first exposure to the contentiousness of location came when the BOF voted to hold the Prince William Sound (PWS) meeting in Valdez. The discussion revolved around the level of accommodations available and the ability of the host community to provide what the board considered to be necessary services. The City of Cordova felt slighted and made a concerted effort to get the board to relocate the meeting. The BOF reconsidered and moved the meeting to Cordova.

While the meeting went off with no major problems, I must admit the accommodations were marginal and “second class” to the facilities and accommodations the board has experienced in other locations — and no, I’m not talking about Anchorage here.

Many of these small, sea coast fishing communities tend to “close up” after the fishing seasons are over and the tourists have left. Cordova had one restaurant that was open year-round. The hotel I stayed in was nice, but had no Internet or phone service in the rooms. A single phone in the lobby provided our telecommunications needs, as long as you had a calling card to make long-distance calls. To access the Internet, you took your laptop and sat in the lobby to log on to the very limited range wireless they had available.

The next location issue surfaced when the board was deciding where to hold the Bristol Bay meeting. As I have commented before, I think the board was ready to go with King Salmon until they were told the community had lost the only facility suitable for a meeting of this nature to fire. Since the previous meeting had been in Dillingham, the board voted for Anchorage to accommodate the stakeholders coming from around Alaska and the Lower 48 to attend. We’ve discussed the firestorm that decision ignited in previous columns.

At this just completed work session, the BOF was once again deciding where to hold the Cook Inlet, Kodiak, Chignik, and King and Tanner Crab meetings. Homer was given the nod again for the Lower Cook Inlet meeting. To my knowledge, there are no other communities in that area capable of supporting a board meeting. Anchorage, once again, was picked for the Chignik and King and Tanner Crab meetings. For these two meetings, Anchorage actually seems to be the preferred location for the stakeholders involved.

The town of Kodiak was again chosen to host the Kodiak meeting. The board was told that Kodiak had just opened a new community center which had good facilities to host such a meeting. Other than having to deal with the infamous Kodiak weather, Kodiak has everything required to comfortably host a board meeting.

The Upper Cook Inlet meeting was again given to Anchorage, in spite of the City of Kenai’s request to hold it there. The vote was 2-5 against Kenai. Why? I’m not sure. Perhaps board members see Anchorage as the closest thing to “middle ground” between holding the meeting in the Mat-Su cities of Wasilla or Palmer or on the Kenai Peninsula in either Kenai or Soldotna.

Something I haven’t mentioned yet is that the board holds a work session meeting every year before the regulatory meetings get underway. The board voted to hold next year’s work session in Kenai. Next year, two of the six meetings scheduled, and one of the two Cook Inlet meetings for the cycle will happen in communities on the Kenai Peninsula. That’s not too bad.

Perhaps the time has come for the board to institute a set rotational schedule for meetings around the state. It might reduce some of the bickering.

Howard Delo is a retired fisheries biologist with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. You can leave him a message by e-mailing sports@frontiersman.com.