Connect with us

Alaska

Alaska Congresswoman introduces bills to protect fish, ocean ecology from trawlers

Published

on

Alaska Congresswoman introduces bills to protect fish, ocean ecology from trawlers


U.S. Rep. Mary Sattler Peltola, a Democrat from Alaska, introduced two bills on Wednesday that align with her long-time political, professional and personal incentives to protect marine ecosystems from industrial trawling fleets.

The Bottom Trawl Clarity Act addresses a decades-long controversy in Alaska that would require regional fishery management councils to change the regulatory definition of the “midwater” trawler’s fishing nets that have “substantial bottom contact” with the ocean floor to a more accurate definition. The current regulations allow the trawlers to fish in ecologically sensitive areas closed to bottom trawling.

“We’re very serious about it, and it’s a real bipartisan bill; it addresses a real problem with a real solution,” said the first Alaska Native to serve in Congress in an extensive interview with USA Today on May. 22.

The second bill introduces the Bycatch Mitigation Assistance Fund which would finance purchases of “camera systems, lights, and salmon excluders” for fishermen, and it is designed to help finance technology research to reduce the number of prohibited fish that are accidentally caught.

Advertisement

The Bycatch Reduction and Mitigation Act would fund the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Bycatch Reduction Engineering Program up to $7.5 million more than it received in 2023. The nationwide program has been funded at a five-year average of $2.28 million between 2018 and 2022.

Referencing her pro-fish election platform and a bipartisan coalition in both her 2022 and current campaigns, Peltola said, “The fact that so many Alaskans from both parties and all regions of the state rallied behind a pro-fish candidate was something that the industry took notice of, and we’ve already seen a 50% reduction in chum bycatch.

“I think that is noteworthy and that we should recognize and appreciate the industry leaders who have taken it upon themselves to reduce bycatch, added Peltola.

Advertisement

Peltola explains that the ones who “have the kind of resources to get the gear, equipment, and technologies that reduce the level” should be recognized  as “leading by example.”

“With the other 50%, it shows that this is within reach and that this is a real [and] attainable goal, and one that we should be working towards. We should always be striving to do better when it comes to preventing waste,” added Peltola,

An industry leader issues a warning

“The bill as written could introduce a second crisis in Western Alaska communities that depend on CDQs [Community Development Quotas that direct need-based funding from fishing revenue to Western Alaska coastal communities] while favoring Seattle-based crabbing companies and pushing pollock vessels into areas of higher salmon bycatch,” said Eric Deakin, CEO, Coastal Villages Region Fund.

Presently, the trawlers are allowed to bycatch king and chum salmon and operate in areas sensitive to crab habitat. Subsistence communities and crab fishermen alike have encountered substantial fishing restrictions in recent years.

Advertisement

Q: Do you view the bills as a bipartisan effort?

“One hundred percent, we just got word that The Bycatch Reduction and Mitigation Act is going to have Garret Graves, a Republican from Louisiana, as a co-sponsor, as well as Jared Huffman from California as a co-sponsor.”

Q: Do you have an idea of how many specific supporters you already have on board?

“Well, I’ve got two supporters, and they’re very influential on the resources committee on both sides of the aisle. So, I think that is a very good sign, and I do really think that there is a lot of support for looking at the fisheries and how we can improve management and abundance.”

Q: How would you explain the situation in D.C. to those who would have the trawler fleets stand down or be more restricted from bycatch, and from areas known to be sensitive to crab habitat?

So this is one where I think the participation of the stakeholders is really important, and I will say that think that when of the tribes came forward and said that there holding the line and zero bycatch for Chinook salmon, that really was the tribes who came up with that, and it’s more on principle. Native people have a real, and I don’t even really know how to explain it, we have such an aversion to wasting and not [for] sharing. The worst thing you can do is waste food. We really feel strongly that the food that we eat, the animals and fish and birds that we eat, those animals, fish and birds knowingly gave themselves to the hunter or fisherman because they witnessed that they are responsible with their catches.

When we’re irresponsible with our catches, bad things happen; this is one of the foundational tenets of most native culture, because salmon is very present in our mind and salmon and has happened in our elders’ lifetimes. We are very conscientious about salmon. The smallest little change could result in disaster for many native people over history.

So one of the most important things for native people is the most important kind of guiding moral compass principle, [it] is this idea of not wasting anything, and the fact that we have metric tons of juvenile salmon, halibut crab have been discarded every year for 30 years. It’s very disturbing, and many people feel like this is because of that 30 years of metric tons being wasted, and that that’s why we’re in this predicament.

Advertisement

Crab fishermen have many concerns about these sensitive areas, and the other thing I want to say is we have so much more research that needs to be done. I’ve spoken with crab fishermen in Kodiak who really believe that a lot of the surveys are incomplete, or they are too small of a snapshot.

My personal belief is at the federal level, we have got to get much more serious about surveys and research. During the [U.S. Senator] Ted Stevens’s years, he invested a lot of money in research, and over the years, that has diminished and been siphoned off to other states. The administration has interpreted those funds [as] that they need to be … prioritized for treaty tribes or the funding to be prioritized to endangered stocks, which puts Alaska at a real disadvantage.

If half of the world’s seafood comes from Alaska, we should be investing so much more money in surveys and research. There’s so much that we do not know, we do not understand, and we need to understand better, especially with this paradigm change. So, I just really want the federal government to start investing in a real way.

When it comes to specific numbers, I think this is something that the stakeholders really need to have a robust discussion about.

Q: Has there been any correspondence with the Biden Administration about updating the National Standards of the Magnuson-Stevens Act?

We have heard that they have been looking at those three national standards that we’re pushing them to help define, and I like to call it the ABCs of the standards: So, its ‘allocation, bycatch and communities.’ We understand that they are working on those rules, and the proposal may come out in June, but we have not been given any heads-up on what they’re working on and what those may look like.

Advertisement

The MSA National Standard Four says that ‘allocations of fishing privileges should be distributed so no corporation acquires an excessive share of such privilege.’

Q: Has enforcement and recognition of this standard concerning the largely Seattle-based pollock fleets been improved and can it be further improved?

I don’t think we’re meeting that definition, and I think that is a time that we revisit the national standard and see that we’re meeting the mark. I think many Alaskans would feel that we’re not meeting the mark on a number four.

[Reporter’s note:] The MSA National Standard Eight says negative economic impacts on communities should be minimized ‘to the extent practicable.’

Q: Has enforcement and recognition of this standard concerning the largely Seattle-based pollock fleets been improved and can it be further improved?

I think we have a lot of room to grow on this one, and this is one where I think it’s important that we define ‘practicable.’ That is one thing that many Alaskans have expressed concern about, because it tends to be an arbitrary definition. Any user-group could say, ‘well that’s not practicable.’ So that makes it a really challenging rule to get your arms around. What is practicable and what isn’t practicable? And if there’s a 1% drop in earnings, and I think that’s where a lot of folks are saying, ‘Well that’s not practicable because then we’ll lose money.’

We are seeing significant impacts to communities, and one of the other concerns I have with number eight is just the definition of community itself. We find in the AP [House Appropriations] subcommittee where members of the AP were advancing this idea that industrial factory trawlers are a community. This concerns me a great deal because my definition of a community tends to be more of, say, a Yukon River village that’s been in that location for about 12,000 years, and it’s located there because of its dependence [on salmon] and because of its relationship with salmon and understanding that the salmon will return every year.

Advertisement

That, to me, is a community that has been there and has shown, a reliance and independence and a relationship with marine resources versus an industrial factory trawler that really came about in the 1990s or 1980s or, you know, much, much more recently in any way than 12,000 years.



Source link

Alaska

Wayne and Wanda: I’m ready to break up with Alaska but facing resistance from everyone

Published

on

Wayne and Wanda: I’m ready to break up with Alaska but facing resistance from everyone


Dear Wanda and Wayne,

I never thought I’d be the person writing this letter, but after this winter, I think I might be done with Alaska. I was born here, grew up here, raised my family here, and never imagined living anywhere else. I defended Alaska to the haters. I rolled my eyes at people who retired to Arizona. I told myself long winters are worth it because summers are the best.

But this winter broke something in me. It was so long, dark, icy and relentless. By the time spring finally arrived, I felt angry that winter took so much out of me and that I spent months feeling trapped by weather, darkness and road conditions. Angry that I’m getting older and still structuring my life around surviving winters instead of enjoying my life. And at the time I’m writing this, this spring has sucked! My heat is still coming on every day. I’m still wearing my puffer jackets!

Part of me wonders if it’s not really about the winter at all. I’m divorced and my two kids are grown and doing their own thing, both staying in Alaska for now. For the first time in my life, nothing is really anchoring me to a place. And if I’m being honest with myself, in addition to feeling trapped by the weather, I’m bored with it here. The dating scene feels impossibly small. Every time I open a dating app, it’s the same people. Half the time I already know them, or know someone who dated them (and broken up with them for a good reason!).

Advertisement

So I’m sketching out plans to move somewhere warmer, bigger and completely unfamiliar. I think I want to know what life feels like somewhere else while I’m still young enough to enjoy it. I really feel this is a moment for a big change.

The problem is that nobody seems supportive. When I bring it up, people act like I’m having a midlife crisis. Friends tell me I’ll regret it. Family members remind me that the kids are here. Other Alaskans give me the usual speech about how the Lower 48 is generic. It’s gotten to the point where I almost don’t talk about it anymore because I’m tired of defending myself.

But all the resistance has me questioning myself and whether moving is a legitimate and logical step, or whether I’m just exhausted from a hard winter and romanticizing a different life. How do you know the difference between running toward something and simply running away?

Wanda says:

You’re asking whether you’re running toward or away from something — essentially if you’re taking a positive step or being reactive. Those aren’t mutually exclusive. Sometimes we leave both because we’re exhausted by what we’ve been carrying, and also because we are moving toward something new at the same time.

Advertisement

Every reason you listed for staying in Alaska has changed. You raised your children here? They’re grown. You had a marriage here? That chapter is closed. You tolerated winters for the sunny payoff? Nailed it: This spring has sucked.

Now you’re primed for a reset, and questioning how you want the near term and future of your life to unfold is not a crisis, it’s taking action. And it’s way more productive than floating along season to season in a fog of monotony, settling for an unfulfilling existence. Your friends and family may genuinely believe they’re protecting you from a mistake, but they’re also protecting their own worldview. Your decision to leave can feel like an implicit criticism of their choices.

But this isn’t a committee decision, and you’re a grown woman capable of major decisions, who absolutely should explore life’s possibilities without defending it to everyone you know. So go explore. Visit places. Rent before you buy. Spend a winter somewhere else. Gather information instead of arguments. And know that no matter where you land, you can always come home again — even if it’s just for a long visit in the middle of summer.

Wayne says:

This isn’t a midlife crisis that can be glossed over with a motorcycle, lip filler, a 20-something boyfriend (who probably went to high school with your kids — yikes), or kicking off your Cowgirl Era with a hat, boots and a two-week Nashville dive bar tour.

Advertisement

This is an existential crisis with your health and happiness at risk. And you’ve faced it thoughtfully, sat with it thoroughly, and are now making the best decisions selfishly. Good for you! You can’t fault your family and friends for also being selfish and wanting you to stay in AK. Of course they don’t want their mom and friend moving far away. But you’ve got to mute that noise and focus on what’s best for you.

Yes, Alaska life is special, but it sure isn’t easy. And we don’t get medals for stubbornly battling through decades of winters. What we do get is some sweet and fleeting summer moments followed by more winters. You know that, and it’s not enough for you anymore.

Most people would totally understand an 18-to-20-year-old Alaska kid taking off to see what else is out there in the world. What, we’re supposed to stop being interested in new experiences once we hit a certain age? And we’re expected to stick around someplace forever just because we’ve always been there?

It’s time for you to go. See what life feels like when you’re not scraping ice off your windshield in May. See how much fun you can have with new people in new places. It’s exciting, it’s living, and you deserve it.

[Wayne and Wanda: Is it the winter blues I can’t shake off, or something more?]

Advertisement

[Wayne and Wanda: Rebuilding my social life after a divorce]

[Wayne and Wanda: My relationship is poised for big steps, and I’m anxious]





Source link

Continue Reading

Alaska

Here’s Why Alaska Air Shares Popped Higher This Week | The Motley Fool

Published

on

Here’s Why Alaska Air Shares Popped Higher This Week | The Motley Fool


Shares in Alaska Air Group (ALK 1.16%) rose by 12.7% in an excellent week for airline stocks. The move comes as the sector climbs a wall of worry driven by soaring jet fuel prices stemming from the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. While the market’s prior concerns are understandable, there’s growing anecdotal evidence suggesting that airlines, including Alaska Air, might emerge from the period in better shape than many expect.

This week’s airline updates

Southwest Airlines (LUV 0.83%) CEO Robert Jordan gave a presentation at the Bernstein 42nd Annual Strategic Decisions Conference, and his remarks surprised the market. It’s no secret that jet fuel prices have soared, and that’s challenging airlines’ profitability. Still, it doesn’t appear to have affected end demand, with Delta Air Lines previously telling investors that strong demand in the first quarter was continuing into the second quarter, even as it raised prices.

Today’s Change

(-1.16%) $-0.54

Advertisement

Current Price

$46.05

That positive trend, with Southwest’s Jordan telling investors that Southwest had participated in seven consecutive fare increases with “no drop off in demand at all.” Jordan went on to note that “I’m becoming increasingly bullish that we will be able to cover these fuel increases with revenue increases,” and also believes that “the industry will retain a much higher percent of the fare increases that would be typical historically.”

Advertisement

What it means to Alaska Air

Given that Alaska competes with Southwest on some routes and is suffering from rising jet fuel prices, the news from Southwest is particularly relevant. For example, in its recent first-quarter earnings report, Alaska’s management said higher fuel costs would impact earnings per share (EPS) by $0.70 in the first quarter and by more than $3 in the second quarter.

Air passengers.

Image source: Getty Images.

These are significant numbers from an airline that analysts expect to report a $0.77-per-share loss in 2026 and then $6.32 in EPS in 2027. However, if Alaska can offset fuel costs with higher prices, then those estimates might need a positive revision.

Lee Samaha has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool recommends Alaska Air Group, Delta Air Lines, and Southwest Airlines. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Alaska

State of Alaska Secures Win in Fight for Transparency Around Oil Development

Published

on

State of Alaska Secures Win in Fight for Transparency Around Oil Development


 

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Image-SOM

(Bethel, AK) –Wednesday, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a favorable opinion for the State of Alaska in ConocoPhillips Alaska v. Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (AOGCC), agreeing that State laws requiring disclosure of oil well data are not preempted by federal law.

“Alaska relies heavily on our resources and resource development,” said Acting Alaska Attorney General Cori Mills. “We are also stewards of those resources for the citizens of Alaska. Alaska’s law both allows resource development now, and encourages further development and exploration in the future. We’re pleased that the Ninth Circuit recognized that federal law has not overridden Alaska’s balanced approach.”

The Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission regulates oil and gas operations throughout Alaska, including within the National Petroleum Reserve–Alaska (NPR–A). Under Alaska law, companies need permits from the AOGCC to drill and must submit well data. The AOGCC is required to keep well data confidential for 24 months.

Advertisement

ConocoPhillips drilled several wells on lease holdings within the NPR–A and submitted data to the AOGCC. When the 24-month period expired, the AOGCC notified ConocoPhillips of the upcoming well data disclosure. ConocoPhillips sued in federal court to stop the disclosure process claiming that the Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act, the federal law allowing private exploration in the NPR–A, preempted Alaska’s 24-month disclosure law. The federal district court found Alaska law preempted, and the AOGCC sought appellate review by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

On appeal, the Ninth Circuit agreed with the AOGCC. The federal Production Act does not preempt state law. The Ninth Circuit therefore reversed the district court’s holding to the contrary.

“The Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission is pleased with the court’s decision upholding Alaska law,” said AOGCC Commissioner Jessie Chmielowski in a declaration filed in the litigation court. “Alaska’s balanced approach to well data confidentiality leads to increased exploration activity, not less. Alaska law allows for a two-year confidentiality period on exploration well data to leverage a company’s investment in drilling. Thereafter, making the data public has incentivized exploration on the North Slope. Placing well data in the public record allows competing companies to evaluate different exploration concepts or interpretations based on seismic data that, without well data, are just educated guesses.”

# # #



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending