News from the Board of Fisheries meeting

The 2024 Upper Cook Inlet Finfish (UCI) meeting of the Alaska Board of Fisheries (BOF) is in the books. The Matanuska-Susitna Borough Fish and Wildlife Commission MSBFWC) went into that meeting with the objective of protecting gains made in previous meetings. Overall, I think we accomplished that goal, but we lost some potential improvements on the status quo.

Andy Couch told me he would touch on the small gains we made on pink salmon and increased fishing times on some of our local systems, among other topics, in his column. I want to talk about other aspects of the meeting.

A major topic at the beginning of the meeting was the upgrading of the Kenai River Late-Run King Salmon Management Plan. This run of kings has tanked over the last several years and folks concerned about the future viability of the large fish component wanted to raise the escapement goals to begin rebuilding the returns. Because of the poor return strength of the large fish, the setnetters were closed all of last year and have been significantly restricted in previous years.

ADF&G presented data which clearly showed that, at the current lower escapement goal being used (13,500), if the lower end of the goal was the management objective (as it usually is for lack of fish), the run would never rebuild its strength. The commissioner bluntly stated that a return of 18,000+ was needed for the large fish component to reasonably rebuild over a period of years. This would put the setnetters, using standard fishing techniques, on the beach for, probably, several years to come while the stocks replenished.

Several innovative techniques involving net depth, location above the bottom of the inlet waters, and other developments have been shown to significantly reduce harvest of king salmon by the setnetters, while allowing them to harvest the target species of sockeyes. However, many of the commercial setnetters don’t want to change how they fish, resulting in the season closures to protect the king salmon.

Obviously, the setnetters were not happy. Our two Valley board members, one of whom is a commercial Northern District setnetter, voted to only raise the lower bounds of the escapement goal by 750 fish, rather than the almost 5,000 needed, according to ADF&G, to reasonably begin the rebuilding process. This new lower bounds (14,250) large fish goal would probably allow the setnetters some fishing time while very slowly beginning the rebuild, if it could even happen at that low number.

When I was on the board, I always tried to put the resource first, which is what should be done. I understand why our two board members voted for a lower escapement goal to allow some fishing time, but I was disappointed that they didn’t protect the fish first. The setnetters must have found other jobs last year when they were not allowed to fish. They could do the same while the large fish king stocks rebuild. That’s a hard thing to say, but the resource must come first. This was a tough choice for board members.

The drifters wanted to get rid of the “1% rule,” which provides an orderly transition from fishing for sockeyes into recreational coho salmon management. The drifters say they are targeting reds in the late season, but usually end up harvesting more coho than reds in these “mop-up” fishing periods. One recent fishing period showed that, while 5,000 sockeye were harvested, an additional 12,000 coho were also harvested. I was told directly by an ADF&G management biologist at a previous UCI meeting, that 95% of those coho were northern bound fish. The board voted to retain the 1% rule. This will continue helping move coho into the Northern District.

Given the unknowns of the upcoming federal management of federal waters in Cook Inlet, the MSBFWC proposed some restrictions on where and how the drift fleet could fish in state waters in an attempt to maintain some semblance of the Conservation Corridor, which has successfully moved fish north through the Central District commercial fishery. The board didn’t support those suggested changes; however, the ADF&G commissioner went on record stating that the salmon fishery in state waters would be managed essentially as we had asked the board to put in regulation.

This was a temporary “win” but needs to be put in regulation to protect some semblance of our northern stocks. We appreciate the commissioner’s commitment to move fish into the Northern District. Not everybody wants to eat pink salmon because no kings or cohos are available!