Butter clams, important to many Alaskans’ diets, are notorious for being sources of the toxin that causes sometimes-deadly paralytic shellfish poisoning.
Now a new study is providing information that might help people harvest the clams more safely and monitor the toxin levels more effectively.
The study, led by University of Alaska Southeast researchers, found that the meat in larger butter clams have higher concentrations of the algal toxin that causes PSP, than does the meat in smaller clams.
“If you take 5 grams of tissue from a small clam and then 5 grams of tissue from a larger clam, our study suggested that (in) that larger clam, those 5 grams would actually have more toxins — significantly more toxins — than the 5 grams from that smaller clam,” said lead author John Harley, a research assistant professor at UAS’ Alaska Coastal Rainforest Center.
Advertisement
Partners in the study were the Sitka Tribe of Alaska, which operates one of only two laboratories in the state that test shellfish for algal toxins, and with other organizations.
It is one of the few studies to examine how toxin levels differ between individual clams, Harley said.
The findings came from tests of clams collected from beaches near Juneau on five specific days between mid-June and mid-August of 2022.
The 70 clams collected, which were of varying sizes, yielded a median level of saxitoxins of 83 micrograms per gram, just above the 80-microgram limit. Toxin concentrations differed from clam to clam, ranging from so low that they were at about the threshold for detection to close to 1,100 micrograms per gram.
And there was a decided pattern: Toxin concentrations “were significantly positively correlated with butter clam size,” the study said.
Advertisement
A woman sorts though a pile of butter clams on a dock in Alaska in 1965. Butter clams have long been harvested for personal consumption in Alaska. (Photo provided by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game)
Among the tested clams in the top 25% size, 81% had concentrations above the regulatory threshold, while among the quartile with the smallest size, only 19% came in at above the threshold.
The typical butter clam has a shell that is about 3 inches wide and up to 5 inches in length; clams in the study ranged in shell width from less than 1.5 inches to more than 4 inches. The mass of meat inside the shells of tested clams ranged from 3.87 grams to 110 grams, the study said.
The detections of toxins were in spite of the lack of significant algal blooms in the summer of 2022 – making that year an anomaly in recent years.
In sharp contrast, the summer of 2019 — a record-warm summer for Alaska — was marked by several severe harmful algal blooms. Near Juneau, toxin concentrations in blue mussels, another commonly consumed shellfish, were documented at over 11,000 micrograms per gram, and the toxins killed numerous fish-eating Arctic terns in a nesting colony in the area.
Advertisement
Just why the butter clams tested for the new study showed concentrations of toxins in a low-bloom year is a question for further review.
Butter clams are known to pose special risks because they retain their algal toxins much longer than do other toxin-affected shellfish. Like other species, butter clams do detoxify over time, but they do so much more slowly, Harley said. The clams in the study were all at least a few years old, and there are some possible explanations for why they still retained toxins in the summer of 2022, he said.
“Maybe these larger clams, because they’ve been consistently exposed to harmful algal blooms several years in a row, maybe they just haven’t had a chance to detoxify particularly well,” he said.
The unusual conditions in the summer of 2022 mean that the results of this study may not be the same as those that would happen in a summer with a more normal level of harmful algal blooms, he said. “It still remains to be seen if this relationship between size and toxin is consistent over different time periods and different sample sites and different bloom conditions,” he said.
Research is continuing, currently with clams collected in 2023, he said. That was a more typical year, with several summer algal blooms.
Advertisement
The algal toxin risks in Alaska are so widespread that experts have coined a slogan that reminds harvesters to send samples off for laboratory testing before eating freshly dug clams and similar shellfish: “Harvest and Hold.”
Harley said the fact that there are toxins in clams even when an active bloom is not present “is a very real concern” for those who have depended on harvest. The Southeast Alaska Tribal Ocean Research Network, known as SEATOR, has been monitoring shellfish in winter and other times beyond the usual months of algal blooms, he noted.
That monitoring has turned up cases of toxin-bearing shellfish well outside of the normal summer seasons. Just Tuesday, SEATOR issued an advisory about butter clams at Hydaburg, collected on Saturday, that tested above the regulatory limit for safe consumption.
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]
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
Key Data Points
Market Cap
$5.1B
Day’s Range
Advertisement
$46.04 – $47.84
52wk Range
$33.03 – $65.88
Volume
162.4K
Advertisement
Avg Vol
4.5M
Gross Margin
13.76%
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.
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.
(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.”
