To the editor:

It’s probably a pipe dream to believe that a modest proposal to preserve fish habitat could swim against “development” interests in this state where the key words to success in elections and laws are "jobs" and "development", not "preserving fish runs". Apparently a decline in commercial and recreational fishing is something we can live with, but not a delay or denial of jobs related to roads or mining, or new housing and shopping malls. Thus, the fate of Proposition 1 which asks for “pauses” in our decisions about projects which impact waterways, to look at ways to ameliorate the impact on fish reproduction and survival, is probably doomed.

Salmon have a long history, over continents as diverse as Europe, and North America (the colder continents), of coming out on the short end of the stick on survival. Salmon face many threats in today’s world, the most pressing being loss of genetic variation and habitat degradation. Salmon rely on pristine environments to complete their life cycles. After their sojourn at sea, they depend on returning to their original streams to spawn. Any obstacle to this journey in the form of dams or culverts, or diversion of rivers can negatively impact this journey “home” to spawn. Also, major “development” along waterways and toxic discharge into waterways degrades the natural environment which is so essential to successful spawning and plentiful fish runs.

Climate change is also having an adverse effect on fish runs, as spawning and survival of salmon are temperature sensitive, and the warming of oceans and streams is impacting fish survival.

Given the immense obstacles faced by salmon, I am already mourning the imminent decline and loss of this fine food source and “way of life” in Alaska. We have enjoyed the heyday of salmon fishing but it is unlikely to be handed down to our children.

Linda Sloan