Alaskans are all too familiar with radical groups funded by out-of-state interests seeking to shut down sustainable resource development. A predictable cast of characters — including billionaire activists and extreme environmental groups — are now working to destroy a large segment of the Alaska seafood industry. This campaign to ban trawling — a sustainable fishing method responsible for a substantial majority of fishery landings in the Alaska Region and nationally —poses a direct threat to Alaska’s coastal economy, seafood sector and way of life.
If you enjoy wild seafood — fish sandwiches or shrimp; fish sticks or scallops; fish tacos or rockfish — you are enjoying seafood caught by “trawl” or “dredge” fishing gears that touch the seafloor. It’s true that these fishing methods, like every farm, aquaculture facility and fishing operation on the planet, impact the environment. But, what’s also true is that the impacts of trawl fishing in Alaska are continually monitored to ensure long-term ecosystem health.
Few food production methods anywhere in the world are more sustainable and well-regulated than fisheries in the Alaska region, a fact we should all be proud of. Fishery scientists and managers use a clear, science-based process to decide where and when fishing can happen and how many fish can be caught. This results in sustainable Alaska fisheries — fisheries that support tens of thousands of jobs and many coastal communities — producing billions of seafood meals every year to feed people in America and around the world.
Advertisement
The recent commentary authored for the Alaska Beacon by Heather Sauyaq Jean Gordon and David Bayes is the latest effort to demonize sustainable trawl fisheries. Like other attacks on our sector, the commentary comes from a vocal few that play fast and loose with the facts.
First, let’s talk about bycatch. The authors’ claim that trawl fisheries have “high bycatch rates” is flat out wrong. The Alaska pollock fishery, for example, is recognized by the National Marine Fisheries Service as “one of the cleanest in terms of incidental catch of other species (less than 1 percent).” By way of contrast, the fixed-gear halibut and sablefish fisheries championed by Linda Behnken — one of the commentary’s co-signatories — have bycatch rates at least 28 times higher than the Alaska pollock fishery, with discard rates ranging from 28.5% to 48%.
We weren’t surprised to see the inaccuracies in the piece. Trawl critics constantly misrepresent bycatch data. For example, jellyfish — nearly 40% of the 1% bycatch in the pollock fishery — are deliberately grouped with other species in reported bycatch totals. In reality, less than 10% of trawl bycatch is made up of halibut, salmon and crab species, with pollock representing the largest component of total trawl bycatch.The dead halibut thrown overboard by the Gulf of Alaska IFQ halibut fishery exceeds the total halibut bycatch mortality from the entire Gulf of Alaska trawl fleet.
Let’s talk about monitoring. Alaska trawl fisheries lead the world in using independent observers and electronic monitoring to ensure full transparency. Across all Alaska Region trawl fisheries, 94% of the total catch was independently observed in 2023. Furthermore, Alaska’s pollock catcher vessels are implementing the largest Electronic Monitoring program in the United States, which will push North Pacific trawl vessel monitoring even higher, to almost 100%. Among the fleet that Linda Behnken represents, by contrast, just 23% of total 2023 harvests were observed by either electronic or human monitoring and there has been resistance to monitoring expansion.
Let’s talk about habitat. The emotive claim that trawl gear “scrapes the ocean’s bottom” implies permanent ecosystem harm. In reality, the Bering Sea floor is constantly subject to tidal and storm disturbance, and any additional impacts of trawling have consistently been found by experts to be “temporary and minimal”. Areas that have been regularly fished with trawl gear for decades remain some of the most diverse and productive fishing grounds on Earth.
Advertisement
David Bayes, a charter fisherman and a co-author of the recent commentary, has regularly attacked our region’s sustainable trawl fisheries. The Facebook page he founded often features posts that wish death or harm toward our fellow captains and crew, our boats and our processing plants. Other posts spew hateful, personal and vengeful attacks against anyone who dares to speak up and correct misinformation about trawling or Alaska pollock. Alaskans deserve better than this.
In October, Mr. Bayes attended a meeting of billionaire environmental funders that showcased a clear anti-fishing agenda. Panels like “Bycatch: Building Power Around Alaska’s Newest Four-Letter Word” revealed a roadmap for shutting down Alaskan fisheries. Oceans 5, a key sponsor of the meeting, pools money from billionaire activists to fund campaigns displacing harvesters from their traditional fishing grounds. Their main goal? Establishing Marine Protected Areas that ban all fishing activity. If Bayes’s activist allies succeed in shutting down Alaska’s trawl fisheries, don’t think they’ll stop there. Other fisheries — and even sport fishing — could be next in their crosshairs.
We take pride in harvesting Alaska pollock and other groundfish, contributing to Alaska’s rich fishing heritage, coastal communities, and economy. Alaskans deserve honest discussions about fisheries, which often require complex trade-offs. As warming oceans — not trawl fleets — affect certain salmon and crab stocks, making informed decisions is extremely challenging. We welcome fair debates grounded in truth, transparency, and facts that can help sustain all Alaskan fisheries.
Sam Wright is a lifelong Alaskan born and raised in Homer. He has fished for over 30 years for crab, flatfish, Pacific cod and other species in the Bering Sea, Aleutian Islands and Gulf of Alaska.
Dan Carney is an Alaskan, homesteader, farmer, fisherman, 43-year Bering Sea survivor.
Advertisement
Jason Chandler was born in Kodiak and is a lifelong resident. He has participated in multiple fisheries over more than 30 years and is now owner/operator of his family’s trawl vessel.
Kiley Thomson is a 32-year resident of Sand Point who fishes for salmon, crab, pollock and cod in the Gulf of Alaska. He is president of the Peninsula Fishermen’s Coalition and the Area M Seiners Association organizations, representing small vessels in Alaska groundfish and salmon fisheries respectively.
The Alaska Supreme Court ruled Monday that a man with the same name as Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan can challenge the sitting lawmaker in the state’s GOP Senate primary in August. The high court upheld a ruling from a lower court judge that cleared the way for Daniel J. Sullivan to appear on the primary ballot, reversing a decision by state officials earlier this month that he was ineligible because he was allegedly trying to confuse voters.
The state Supreme Court directed Alaska’s Division of Elections to decide how Daniel J. Sullivan should be listed on the ballot “within the confines of existing Alaska ballot design law.”
The conflict is taking place in one of the country’s most closely watched Senate elections. The sitting Sen. Sullivan is running for a third term, but former Democratic Rep. Mary Peltola is vying to challenge him, setting up what could be an unusually competitive race in a deep-red state that hasn’t elected a Democrat to the Senate in almost 20 years.
Advertisement
The senator has called his same-name competitor a “sham candidate” and accused him of trying to trick voters and help Democrats flip the seat. Daniel J. Sullivan — a retired teacher and former U.S. Forest Service employee from Petersburg, Alaska — has denied those allegations and insisted he is both qualified and genuinely interested in running for Senate.
Daniel J. Sullivan and sitting Sen. Dan Sullivan, both of whom are running in Alaska’s GOP Senate primary.
Karen Dillman via AP / Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call via AP Images
About two weeks ago, the Alaska Division of Elections determined that the challenger Sullivan could not appear on the ballot, arguing his paperwork “was not filed in order to declare an actual good-faith candidacy, but was instead filed with a purpose to confuse or mislead.”
Advertisement
In a letter to the candidate, Director Carol Beecher pointed to the fact that Daniel J. Sullivan had initially requested to appear on the ballot as “Dan Sullivan,” the same name format as the senator. She also wrote that he hadn’t previously been affiliated with the state Republican Party, had a website design that “appears to be deliberate[ly]” similar to the senator’s campaign site and had worked with a political consultant with links to Democratic candidates.
Daniel J. Sullivan asked a state court to reverse the decision. On Friday, Judge Thomas Matthews ruled in his favor, finding the non-senator Sullivan met the requirements to run for U.S. Senate and the state didn’t have the authority to exclude him based on “good faith.”
“The court does not minimize the Division’s concern that voters should not be misled,” the judge wrote. But he added that “Alaska election law gives the Division tools to address that concern,” including regulating how candidates appear on the ballot.
With ballots set to be printed this week, the issue was appealed to the Alaska Supreme Court on an expedited basis, with both sides filing court papers over the weekend.
The state Division of Elections asked the high court to overturn Matthews’ ruling, arguing it would “leave Alaska constitutionally required to permit bad-faith ballot access.” The agency said it reached its conclusion about Daniel J. Sullivan after it received a complaint from the National Republican Senatorial Committee “credibly alleging” he was seeking to “cause voter confusion” and made a “bewildering” request to appear on the ballot with the senator’s middle initial.
Advertisement
If Daniel J. Sullivan is permitted to remain on the ballot, the state asked the Alaska Supreme Court to allow it to print his full name and list his party affiliation as “nonpartisan” to “ensure voters are not forced to guess between two nearly identical names.”
The Alaska Republican Party and several GOP-led states filed amicus briefs siding with Alaska.
Daniel J. Sullivan’s lawyers, meanwhile, argued the state “lacked any basis in Alaska law to exclude Mr. Sullivan from the ballot” and didn’t have the power to look into his “private motivations.” They wrote that state law doesn’t give officials the power to keep qualified candidates off the ballot due to potential confusion.
“[All] that Mr. Sullivan asks here is to be listed on the ballot, and the Division is obviously empowered to do so in a non-confusing manner,” his lawyers wrote.
Following oral arguments, the high court sided with Daniel J. Sullivan in a two-page order late Monday, and said it would issue a fuller opinion at a later date.
Advertisement
Jeffrey Robinson, an attorney for Daniel J. Sullivan, told CBS News his legal team is “grateful” for the Alaska Supreme Court’s decision to “affirm Judge Matthews’ well-reasoned, thorough order vacating the Division’s unlawful decision to exclude Mr. Sullivan as a candidate.”
“We expect that the Division will act in full compliance with existing Alaska ballot design law in its preparation of the ballots,” Robinson said in an email.
The senator’s campaign spokesperson, Nate Adams, said: “We’re disappointed in the court’s decision because as the sham candidate Dan J. Sullivan’s lawyers made clear in their legal arguments, the only reason he is running is to deceive voters and manipulate Alaska’s election system.”
“However, we are encouraged by the fact that the Director of the Division of Elections will be able to use her expertise to differentiate between the Petersburg fraud and the incumbent — Senator Dan Sullivan — to the benefit of Alaska voters,” Adams said.
The first Jesuit missionaries in Alaska sailed up the Yukon River in 1887. By the turn of the 20th century, the religious order of the Catholic Church had as many as 50 Jesuits in the state.
Now, only two remain. And by the end of June, there will be none.
The Jesuits’ nearly 140 years in the state was honored at an event at Bethel’s Immaculate Conception Church on June 16. A procession of priests wearing long white gowns with red hems walked down the aisle to open the event. The Bishop of the Diocese of Fairbanks, Stephen Maekawa, thumped the ground with a shimmering silver staff known as a clozier as he approached the altar.
Bishop of the Diocese of Fairbanks, Steven Maekawa, walks toward the altar at the Immaculate Conception Church in Bethel.
“My brothers and sisters, we gather together to celebrate this wonderful and blessed occasion to acknowledge the love of God and the work of God through the 139 year mission of the Society of Jesus of the Jesuit fathers,” Maekawa said to open the event.
Advertisement
A traditional Catholic mass followed, with readings in both English and Yup’ik. During the sermon, Maekawa acknowledged the vastness of the Fairbanks diocese, and the tremendous amount of work done by the Jesuits to establish it.
“All of the 46 churches of the Diocese of Fairbanks that we currently have were established by either the Jesuit fathers or by direction of a Jesuit bishop,” Maekawa said. “We have a long history of the Society of Jesus’ presence and ministry here in all of Alaska.”
The Jesuits are an order within the Catholic Church, akin to the Dominicans or Franciscans. They have a reputation for taking on some of the Catholic Church’s most remote assignments.
That missionary spirit brought the Jesuits to the Yukon River in 1887, where they built churches, schools, and ministries. Without their work, Catholicism may not have taken root in huge swaths of Alaska, particularly among Alaska Native communities.
The Immaculate Conception Church in Bethel.
But the Jesuits leave a complicated legacy. Their methods of converting Native people to the religion, particularly in the first half of the 20th century, created generational traumas still felt to this day.
Advertisement
Fr. Sean Carroll is the provincial of the Jesuits West Province, which oversees Alaska and nine other states.
Fr. Sean Carroll, provincial of the Jesuits West Province, speaks at an event recognizing nearly 140 years of Jesuit service in Alaska.
“Thank you for all that you have taught us about who Jesus is and how to love and serve Him wholeheartedly,” Carroll said. “I also thank you for your patience with us. For there have been times when we have sinned and when we have hurt you.”
Missionaries, including the Jesuits, forcefully converted and assimilated Alaska Native people into Western culture and religion. Students at Jesuit-run boarding schools were forced to abandon their Native languages and physically punished when caught speaking languages other than English. Native dancing and drumming were also banned.
The Jesuits West Province maintains a list of 150 Jesuits with credible claims of sexual abuse against minors or vulnerable adults. A quarter of the accused Jesuits served in Alaska at some point in time.
“I ask for your forgiveness for all that we have done that was not rooted in Christ and love for Him, and for when we did not value your culture nor recognize the presence of God in you,” Carroll said.
Advertisement
Carroll gave the order to withdraw from the state last spring. A big issue was the recruitment of Jesuits willing to travel and serve in remote villages. He told the congregation that the Jesuits’ work would continue, just without a permanent presence.
Fr. Rich Magner, one of the two remaining Jesuit priests in Alaska, attends a ceremony in Bethel.
Fr. Rich Magner is one of the two remaining Jesuit priests in Alaska. His last day serving Chevak, Hooper Bay, and Scammon Bay is June 30.
“We all always knew coming in, or should have known, that we’re not going to be here forever. It’s going to be mission accomplished at some point,” Magner said. “And then we hand it off to the diocese that we’ve helped create, and so that’s a good feeling.”
Magner’s next stop is a Clinical Pastoral Education residency in Tacoma, Washington.
The other remaining priest, Fr. Tom Provinsal, first came to Alaska in 1968 to teach. A fond memory, he said, was meeting Elders that practiced traditional subsistence lifestyles.
Advertisement
“Some of the grandmothers, their fingers were just all bent with arthritis and stuff like that, you know, their whole lives they’ve been working out in the cold and the wet, doing food, sewing, all that kind of stuff,” Provinsal said. “I’d say I just feel very privileged to have come when I did come and to see that.”
Provinsal returned in 1975 as a priest and has served in the region ever since. After moving away, he plans to take a five month sabbatical. What happens next, he said, is in God’s hands.
Two lines formed in the aisle for communion at the end of the mass. After taking communion, Bethel’s Parish Administrator Susan Murphy gave a final thank you.
“It’s difficult to say goodbye to people who have been a part of our lives for so long,” Murphy said. “We know that you have done what was yours to do, and have taught us to do what is ours to do. We are grateful.”
Jesuit priests form a row along the altar of Bethel’s Immaculate Conception Church as members of the congregation lift their arms and pray.
Dominic Hunt, a Yup’ik deacon that flew in from Emmonak for the event, led the congregation through a final prayer.
Advertisement
“Bless them with your wisdom, that they may be a word of hope, a world in need. We ask this through Christ, our Lord. Amen,” Hunt said.
About 70 people posed for a photo on the altar – priests, deacons, parishioners, Elders and children — many of them smiling, some standing quietly.
The photo doesn’t tell the whole story. But it’s a moment when gratitude, grief, and memory all shared the same room.
Bishop of the Diocese of Fairbanks, Steven Maekawa, stands in the middle of a crowd waiting to take a photo at Bethel’s Immaculate Conception Church.
JUNEAU, Alaska (KTUU) – The Supreme Court of Alaska will be taking up the case of the State of Alaska, Division of Elections v. Daniel J. Sullivan, Jr.
The oral arguments will be held Monday at 10 a.m. via Zoom, according to an order and opening notice.
The document also specifies that a decision is expected to be made before noon on Tuesday.
According to documents from the Division of Elections, the state must start printing ballots at noon on the same day.
Advertisement
This comes after an Anchorage Superior Court Judge ordered Dan J. Sullivan on to the ballot Friday.
See a spelling or grammar error? Report it to web@ktuu.com
