How did we do with the BOF?

The Alaska Board of Fisheries (BOF) Upper Cook Inlet meeting is winding down. The Mat-Su Mayor’s Blue Ribbon Sportsmen’s Committee (MBRC) came to the meeting with an agenda to try to get more sockeye and coho through the commercial fisheries in the Central District and passed into the Northern District. The MBRC also wanted to get some major changes in the Northern District King Salmon Management Plan and the Northern District Salmon Management Plan, which serves as the umbrella plan overseeing all the other Northern District management plans.

How did we do?

With the aid of the Kenai River Sportsfishing Association (KRSA), MBRC achieved some definitive gains in moving sockeyes and cohos through the Central District commercial fisheries and into the Northern District. The BOF understood that the Susitna/Yentna sockeye stocks have not improved since they were declared a stock of concern three years ago. The BOF instituted some major changes in how the Central District drift gillnet fleet would fish on the mixed stock salmon runs moving through the Central District. Our Northern District fish are in that mix.

The changes to the Central District Drift Gillnet Fisheries Management Plan should pulse more sockeye and cohos through the commercial fishery and into Northern District waters. Included with these changes was the insertion of a priority use clause in the various fisheries management plans. This priority statement says that both kings and cohos should be managed primarily for the benefit of sport and guided sport anglers. This statement provides direction to future boards and state fisheries managers on how these species should be managed in Cook Inlet.

The MBRC also asked for some significant changes in how king salmon would be managed in the Northern District in light of the fact that six separate king stocks were declared stocks of concern at this same meeting. The MBRC asked that the west side king salmon commercial fisheries near the Theodore, Lewis, Chuitna and Beluga rivers be closed along with the sports fisheries in these same rivers. The BOF passed that request. In the Susitna drainage, the MBRC asked that Goose Creek be closed to sports fishing for king salmon; that the final weekend of the king sports fishery season be closed; and that king salmon fishing be closed from 11 p.m. to 6 a.m. in all but two king salmon fisheries in the Northern District. The BOF granted those requests.

However, this is where our good fortune started slowing down. The MBRC had asked that the Northern District commercial set gillnet fishery be restricted back to the fishing times, number of fishing periods and start dates in effect prior to 2002 for king salmon fishing. The thinking here was that major restrictions were needed on both the sport and commercial king salmon fisheries in the Northern District to allow king stocks to return to a healthy status. The BOF instituted the restrictions on the sports fisheries, but failed to make any changes in how the commercial set gillnet fishery would be prosecuted in the Northern District, other than the closures on the West Side rivers. This happened shortly after the BOF added a priority statement into the management plan about how king salmon should be managed for the primary use of sport and guided sport fishermen.

Then, the BOF turned around and expanded the Northern District commercial set gillnet fishery for coho salmon, the very same cohos the BOF had just taken away from the drift fleet and reallocated north to address coho run concerns. This happened within minutes of the BOF passing a priority statement on cohos that said they should be managed in Cook Inlet primarily for the use of sport and guided sport anglers. The Northern District commercial setnetters harvest a relatively small portion of the district’s salmon stocks, so their impact should be low.

We were mildly disappointed with these board actions until we realized the extent to which the “conservation corridor,” created to move fish north, would operate. After an explanation of the corridor’s function was presented, we were ecstatic!

Three board members essentially directed the deliberations that resulted in the positive gains mentioned above. They provided the supporting information and made persuasive arguments to achieve these gains. One member especially argued that the “fish come first” and that these restrictive changes in the commercial drift net fishery, while they might cause some short-term economic hardships, were necessary to bring the Northern District stocks back to a healthy status. However, it takes four votes to pass a proposal.

One other member basically refused to accept this deteriorating health condition of several Northern District salmon stocks and voted consistently against doing anything that might negatively affect the commercial stakeholders. Two other members voted for some of the changes because, in light of the arguments made by the three supportive members, common sense dictated the changes needed to be made.

The seventh member voted to make the initial changes benefiting the movement of stocks into the Northern District, but then switched his vote toward benefitting the Northern District commercial interests over putting more fish into the rivers as broodstock. For me, it was initially disappointing to watch some of the fish reallocated to address various conservation issues in the Northern District being reallocated into commercial nets. However, after a little thought, I realized the Northern District had just received a huge boost with the conservation corridor.

No, we didn’t get everything we hoped for. But the changes made to pulse more sockeyes and cohos north should greatly help the Susitna/Yentna sockeye stock of concern situation. That was our No. 1 priority and we got it!

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.