Questions about board appointment remain unanswered

I’ve been thinking about this recently and wondering when the news would report the State of Alaska was prosecuting Roland Maw, the governor’s first choice to replace Karl Johnstone on the Alaska Board of Fisheries. Maw filed for and received Permanent Fund Dividends (PFD’s) for the same seven years (I believe 2007 to 2013) where he was claiming residency for hunting license purchases in the State of Montana. Maw owns homes in both Alaska and Montana.

A friend contacted me about this situation with some interesting information. First, apparently the State of Alaska has done nothing so far in charging Maw with these seven violations. According to Alaska’s statutes and regulations: “An individual is not eligible for a dividend if, at any time from January 1 of the qualifying year through the date of application, the individual has...obtained a resident hunting, fishing, or trapping license from another state or country.’’ This inaction is not for lack of evidence since Maw’s convictions in Montana for those same years are a matter of public record. Montana has the documentation and Maw declined the opportunity to challenge the documents in court. He accepted the Montana documentation as factual.

Second and quoting from the email my friend sent: “The reporter who started all of this appears to be gone from the Dispatch News. When contacted and asked about why his byline hasn’t appeared in that publication for months, he sung the praises of Dispatch publisher Alice Rogoff and would say only that he was ‘on leave’ for the summer. Daily News editor David Hulen has, however, told others the reporter is not coming back. Ms. Rogoff is a friend of the governor’s, and the governor was not happy with the Maw Affair.”

At this point, I think it would be fair to say all of this looks bad for Gov. Walker, who Maw has claimed as a friend. Is the Walker administration showing favoritism in protecting a friend of the governor? The state should either be prosecuting Maw or explaining to Alaskans why not.

On another topic, Fish and Game released a statement announcing: “the Fish Creek Youth-Only Fishery will open on Saturday and Sunday, August 1-2, from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. each day. The Youth-Only fishery allows anglers age 15 and younger to fish for all species, except king salmon, in waters between ADF&G markers at the mouth of Fish Creek and markers ¼-mile upstream of Knik-Goose Bay Road. All other sport fishing regulations remain in effect for Fish Creek. The daily bag and possession limit is three salmon; only two per day may be coho (silver) salmon. The weekend-only fishery for anglers of all ages will commence on August 9. Fish Creek is located at Mile 16 on Knik-Goose Bay Road.”

On yet another topic, a subcommittee of the Matanuska-Susitna Borough Fish and Wildlife Commission (MSBFWC) will begin reviewing something like 35 fish research proposals for potential funding using capital budget funds the state granted to the borough in FY 2014. The commission was able to secure $2.5 million that year earmarked for fisheries research and fish and habitat enhancement work.

To date, approximately $900,000 has been spent on road culvert upgrades to improve and protect salmon migration into spawning and rearing habitat. Approximately another $200,000 has been expended in developing a data base of information or lack thereof for salmon in the Northern District to highlight research needs and in developing methodology to establish research priorities and aid in proposal reviews.

The intent of the research grants the borough will make is, generally speaking, not to fully fund any particular proposal. The commission is looking to partner with other government agencies and private investigators in helping to complete a study lacking sufficient funds or to cover costs to fill in existing “holes” in ongoing studies. For example, Fish and Game might need funding for the final year of a multi-year study for which funding has not yet been secured. The US Fish and Wildlife Service (the feds) have been good in partnering with others to accomplish various research needs and have probably submitted some proposals. Fish and Game submitted 11 proposals.

The MSBFWC has come under criticism from the Central District commercial driftnet fishermen’s group for not immediately funding various projects with little or no planning. Commission members felt it was better to have a plan about what research needed funding. In today’s current fiscal situation, this approach has proven to be prudent!