Subsistence and Personal Use Board of Fish Proposals
Salmon hanging to dry by Tursy Smelcer. Photo by Carol Cozzen.
By Allison Sayer
The Alaska Board of Fisheries (BOF) will meet in Cordova from December 10-16 to discuss new proposals for Prince William Sound and Upper Copper/Upper Susitna Finfish and Shellfish regulation changes. Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) Area Manager Mark Somerville, Assistant Area Manager Tracy Hansen, and the Copper Basin Advisory Committee (AC) reviewed the proposals in a public meeting on October 5.
The AC voted on which proposals it would support in comments to the BOF. These comments typically bear weight with the board, but do not mandate a decision. Personal comments from area residents are also used to inform the board’s decision, and are due November 26.
Several proposals were submitted to change subsistence or personal use fishing practices in the Glennallen and Chitina subdistricts. Some proposals seek to increase restrictions on these fisheries, while others seek to liberalize them.
The use of paid guide services for subsistence fishing in the Glennallen subdistrict was prohibited by a regulation change in 2021. Proposal 48 was submitted by Marlene Bertie Irneraucin to repeal that prohibition in the next cycle. Proposal 49 was submitted by the Ahtna Intertribal Resource Commission (AITRC) to prohibit paid, unguided transport services in the Glennallen subdistrict. Proposal 71, submitted by Ahtna Tene Nene’, would prohibit fishing guide services in the Chitina personal use fishery.
The AC opposed the proposal to reinstate the use of guides in the Glennallen subdistrict subsistence fishery. They approved the proposal to prohibit transporters. The AC opposed banning guides in the Chitina personal use fishery, stating it was safer for some personal use fishers to use guides than go it alone. They also praised guides for rescuing people in trouble this past season. Committee members did not think the proposal would have an impact on fishing effort, but just change the distribution of where people fished.
Proposal 68, submitted by Faye Ewan, would prohibit dipnetting from a boat in the Chitina subdistrict. Proposal 69, submitted by Shawn Gilman, would increase time and area restrictions on dipnetting from a powerboat. Proposal 50, submitted by Kirk Wilson, would prohibit the use of chartplotters or fish finders in both subdistricts. The AC opposed proposals 68 and 69. They did not vote on Proposal 50, but noted that electronics are useful for safety.
Proposal 70, submitted by the Chitina Dipnetters Association, would increase the area of the Chitina personal use fishery by extending its downstream boundary, which would primarily increase the area for fishing from boats. The AC opposed this proposal.
Proposal 67, submitted by Cordova District Fishermen United (CDFU), would prohibit removing a dipnet-caught king salmon from the water if it is required to be released. This was opposed by the AC. It was noted it would be difficult to identify and remove a king salmon from a dipnet without removing it from the water.
Proposal 51, submitted by Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve, Proposal 52, submitted by AITRC, and Proposal 53, submitted by the Copper Basin Advisory Committee, all seek to implement a pause in commercial fishing at the mouth of the Copper River after the second commercial opener. The proposals each include different benchmarks for salmon passage before re-opening the commercial fishery. The purpose of Proposals 51-53 is to allow for more of the early season stocks of salmon to enter the river system. Proposal 63, submitted by AITRC, seeks to postpone the earliest potential opening date of the Chitina personal use fishery for similar reasons.
The AC supported proposals 51-53, with a preference for the proposal with the lowest benchmark for reopening the commercial fishery. They deferred voting on Proposal 63 due to verbiage they would like to be clarified.
Proposal 55, submitted by Shawn Gilman, seeks to have more than two consecutive commercial king salmon fishery closures in nearshore saltwater trigger a sport fishing king salmon closure upriver. The AC opposed this proposal, noting that management action is based on counting fish as they enter the river. These fish have already passed through the commercial fishing area.
Proposal 58, submitted by ADF&G, seeks to give ADF&G the authority to increase the king salmon limit in the Chitina personal use fishery to a number greater than one if king salmon escapement exceeds the upper bound of the escapement goal. It would not mandate an increase. This was supported by the AC.
Several proposals sought to change the Chitina personal use salmon fishery limit. Proposal 59, submitted by ADF&G, would give ADF&G permission to increase the sockeye salmon limit in season if escapement exceeds the upper bound of the escapement goal. It would not mandate an increase. The AC supported this proposal.
Shirley “Tursy” Smelcer with salmon hanging to dry. Photo by Carol Cozzen.
Proposal 60, submitted by Shirley “Tursy” Smelcer, of Kluti-Kaah, seeks to reduce the Chitina personal use sockeye salmon limit from 25 to 20 for heads of household and from ten to five for each dependent. Proposal 61, submitted by Kalistrat Kuzmin, seeks to reduce the initial limit for heads of household to 15, but would allow for additional permits to be allotted in-season if sockeye escapement is strong.
Smelcer was in attendance to testify on behalf of her proposal. She stated that she remembered a pulse of fish about five to seven days after fish were abundant in Chitina. However, she said upriver communities were not experiencing that anymore.
Somerville stated that the number of fish caught in the Chitina personal use fishery was not a substantial proportion of the total sockeye escapement upstream, and should not have a substantial impact on upriver fisheries. He noted a variety of factors impacted fish wheel success including both high water events and whether people choose to use them. Smelcer insisted that fish abundance appeared to be lower. She also noted fish appeared “beat up” from navigating climate related increases in high water events. The AC supported Proposal 60, but opposed Proposal 61.
Proposal 62, submitted by Kenneth B. Jones, would cut the overall harvest limit in the Chitina personal use fishery in half in the event of a commercial salmon fishery closure 13 or more days long. Proposal 64, submitted by Cordova District Fishermen United (CDFU), would limit households to participating in either the Chitina or the Upper Cook Inlet personal use salmon fishery in one calendar year, but prohibit participation in both. The AC opposed proposal 62, and did not vote on Proposal 64.
Proposal 66, submitted by CDFU, would require emergency orders restricting fishing in the Chitina personal use fishery based on broodstock goals for the Gulkana hatchery. This was opposed by the AC, who noted the hatchery’s upstream location would make this impractical to carry out compared to similar actions designed for hatcheries on the coast.
Proposals 46, 47, and 65 would require inseason reporting for fishers in either subsistence or personal use fisheries in the Copper River. Somerville stated these would not be relevant to the current management framework for the fishery, and they were opposed by the AC.
The complete proposal book is available on the ADF&G website. Public comments are due November 26 and can be submitted via the ADF&G website or by mail to: Alaska Department of Fish and Game Boards Support Section, PO Box 115526, Juneau, AK 99811-5526. For more information, contact ADF&G Boards support at (907)465-4110.
Disclosure: Allison Sayer participates in the Chitina and Upper Cook Inlet personal use fisheries and is eligible for the Glennallen subsistence fishery.
NOTE:
The online version is edited from the original version.
We edited the description of Shirley “Tursy” Smelcer’s proposal to reflect that she is from Kluti-Kaah.
We added an additional line of explanation to the ACs opposition to proposal 71.