Payments for 2016 Pink Salmon Fishery Disaster Delayed

By Sarah Lapidus

Kodiak Daily Mirror, seafoodnews[dot]com 11/20/19

Fishermen who were expecting payments from the 2016 Gulf of Alaska pink salmon fishery disaster relief in December will have to wait until March to receive their checks, according to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game.

Many Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission permit holder applicants misreported their crew percentages or did not list any crew at all, said Karla Bush, the Fish and Game federal fisheries coordinator.

The Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission will delay payments until after the crew member application deadline on Jan. 31.

"I know participants were expecting checks to come six to eight weeks after the Oct. 31 deadline. That's now going to be pushed back," Bush said.

The Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission is an interstate agency that helps resource agencies and the fishing industry manage fisheries resources. Member states include Alaska, California, Oregon, Washington and Idaho.

After crew members send in their applications, Fish and Game will match crew members to the permit holders they work for. Payments will be sent to permit holders and crew at the same time, Bush said.

Payments to crew will be deducted from the permit holder's total disaster payment based on the crew shares provided in the permit holder's application.

The amount each permit holder received was calculated by averaging the value of pink salmon caught in even years from 2006 to 2014, minus the value of fish caught in 2016.

However, fishermen were concerned that the payment calculation did not take into account the unique circumstances in the fishing industry.

For example, some fishermen switched from a lower volume gear type to a higher volume gear type. Others had a partial catch history instead of a full or no catch history, causing their payments to be substantially less than others who fished alongside them, according to a letter written by Rep. Louise Stutes, R-Kodiak.

To address such issues and review calculations, an appeal process was put in place. Friday was the deadline to appeal.

These payments are part of the $53.8 million approved by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in July to restore losses caused by a poor 2016 salmon season in the Gulf of Alaska. The areas receiving funds are Kodiak, Prince William Sound, Chignik, Lower Cook Inlet, South Alaska Peninsula, Southeast Alaska and Yakutat.

Fishery permit holders and crew will receive $31 million, fish processors will receive $17.7, municipalities will receive $2.4 million and $3.63 million will go to research.

The payments to municipalities will be based on losses of fish taxes, Bush said.

Calculations for municipality payments are not yet available because NOAA is working the office of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget on the approval process.

Municipalities will use the funds for specific projects related to the pink salmon fishery such as projects that support the pink salmon fishing fleet.

"The people at NOAA grants are trying to work with the office of OMB in the White House to see at what level the projects need to be approved," Bush said. "OMB wants to approve the list of projects that each municipality will put forward themselves. We know that that will cause some additional delays, so we hope those will be approved by Pacific States or NOAA grants and not have to be forwarded all the way to the highest level."

Fish and Game is also waiting on fishery tax information from the Alaska Department of Revenue as a basis to calculate the payments, Bush said.

The tax information is vital before calculating the payment amount, because the Department of Revenue does a "split between the cities and boroughs and so I would expect the city of Kodiak and the Kodiak Island Borough would be getting a share of those moneys," Bush said.

To expedite future fisheries disaster funding, Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., chairman of the U.S. Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, sponsored legislation that would reform NOAA's Fishery Resource Disaster Relief program of the National Marine Fisheries Service to expedite relief for fishermen during fishery disasters.

2016 GOA Pink Salmon Disaster Funds Update

On Monday August 5^th, the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission (PSMFC) updated the published information related to the process to disperse fishery disaster funds for the 2016 Gulf of Alaska Pink Salmon Season.

PSMFC expects to send applications to impacted Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission (CFEC) Limited Entry Salmon Permit holders and impacted processors by mid-August. These applications will be due back to PSMFC by October 31. Payments are expected to be sent out 6-8 weeks after the application period. 

CFEC limited entry permit holders that meet the following criteria will be eligible for a payment:

• Must have held a CFEC permit card for salmon in 2016

• Must have fished for pink salmon  in 2016,

• CFEC permit holders in the South Alaska Peninsula area must have documented ADF&G fish ticket landings equal to or greater than 1,000 pounds of pink salmon landed in 2016.

• Must have a demonstrated loss of 2016 pink salmon ex-vessel revenue compared to their average pink salmon ex-vessel value during the most recent five even years from 2006 through 2014 as calculated from ADF&G and CFEC landings and value data.

Crew members for the 2016 salmon fishery identified as fishing crew by an eligible permit holder will be eligible for payment if the permit holder is eligible to receive a disaster payment. Disaster payment applications will be sent to eligible crew members after October 31, 2019. The application deadline for crew members will be January 31, 2020.

 A total of $1.7 million will be available for payments to impacted South Peninsula fishermen. Details can be found in the Frequently Asked Questions document posted on the PSMFC website Fishery Disaster Programs page.

AEB Fishermen's Meeting & WGOA Trawl Outreach DELAYED until 4PM

The Aleutians East Borough Natural Resources Department (NRD) will host a fishermen's meeting Wednesday July 24th, 2019 delayed until 4 PM, teleconferenced with the King Cove Harbor House, Sand Point Borough office and the Anchorage Borough office. This meeting will feature outreach to WGOA trawl stakeholders by ADFG Deputy Commissioner Rachel Baker and ADFG Extended Jurisdiction Program Manager Karla Bush calling in from Juneau. NRD Director Ernie Weiss will be in Sand Point for the meeting; NRD Assistant Director Charlotte Levy will be in Anchorage for the meeting due to a flight cancellation. The revised meeting agenda can be found here.

Update on GOA Pink Salmon Disaster Funds

Hello, I wanted to pass along a few updates on the 2016 Gulf of Alaska pink salmon disaster funds.

1. NOAA has approved approximately $54 million in disaster funds spending for research and direct payments to CFEC permit holders, crew and processors. The funds will be transferred to Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission (Commission). The Commission has established a fisheries disaster web site athttps://www.psmfc.org/fishery-disaster-programs. This site is the best source of information about the funds distribution process and timeline, please monitor the site for updated information.

2. The Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission will be mailing disaster funds payment applications directly to affected CFEC permit holders and processors. CFEC permit holders will be required to submit the names and addresses of each crew member on their application and Pacific States will send a separate application to those crew members. Applications must be completed and returned by the deadline to receive a payment. The application period will accommodate the summer fishing season.

3. To help ensure that CFEC permit holder applications are mailed to the correct address, permit holders may wish to verify the current mailing address on record with CFEC:https://www.cfec.state.ak.us/plook/#permits

If a correction is needed, submit the following address change form to CFEC:

https://www.cfec.state.ak.us/forms/Address_Change_Form.pdf

4. We are making good progress to find a method for distributing direct payments to eligible municipalities. The Pacific States web site will be updated with information as soon as it is available.

I hope you all have an enjoyable 4^th of July holiday.

Rachel Baker

Alaska Department of Fish & Game

Natural Resources Assistant Director to travel to Sand Point

Aleutians East Borough Natural Resources Assistant Director Charlotte Levy will travel to Sand Point Alaska  to observe the ADF&G Shumagin Islands Section immature salmon test fishery scheduled for July 3rd. Charlotte also plans to be at the AEB Sand Point office for the Special Assembly meeting scheduled for July 2nd. Charlotte looks forward to talking with residents about fisheries and other Borough natural resources while in Sand Point.

From the South Alaska Peninsula Commercial Salmon Management Strategy, 2019; Regional Information Report No. 4K19-08:
"Immature Test Fishery
In order to assess the abundance of immature salmon and reduce incidental harvest ADF&G will conduct a purse seine test fishery in the Shumagin Islands Section in early July, before the post-June fishery begins. If 100 or more immature salmon, per set, are present, the commercial fishery will be closed to purse seine gear in an area to be determined by ADF&G (5 AAC 09.366(i)). For the purpose of this management plan, “immature salmon, per set, are present” is defined as the number of Chinook O. tshawytscha, sockeye, coho, and chum salmon that are observed to be gilled in the seine web (5 AAC 09.366(i)). Test fishing is standardized to purse seine gear, conducting two 20-minute sets at Popof Head, Middle Set, and Red Bluff located on Popof Island. The commercial fishery may be constrained based on the abundance of immature salmon observed during the test fishery. Gillnet gear is permitted to fish in these areas during the presence of immature salmon because the larger mesh size permits immature salmon to pass through the nets."

Public Comment on the Pebble Mine Project Draft EIS

The Pebble Mine project area is within the Lake and Peninsula Borough (LPB) to the east of the Aleutians East Borough (AEB). The mine site is within the Koktuli River and Upper Talarik Creek (UTC) watersheds. The Koktuli watershed is approximately 83 miles upstream of the Nushagak river and 109 miles upstream of Bristol Bay. The UTC watershed is approximately 39 miles upstream from the Kvichak river, and 89 miles upstream of Bristol Bay. Both Nushagak and Kvichak support some of the largest and most important salmon stocks in the Bristol Bay.  

The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is soliciting public comment on the draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Pebble Mine project, as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The public comment period is open March 1 through May 31, 2019.  There will be a public hearing in Anchorage, Tuesday April 16th from noon until 8pm at the Dena’ina Center.

The DEIS looks at the No Action Alternative and action alternatives for a functioning Pebble mine project that meet the purpose and need statement and are reasonable and practicable under Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) standards. The EIS also analyzes environmental impacts of each alternative including direct, indirect and cumulative effects.                                

In general, the No Action Alternative would not contribute to any direct, indirect or cumulative effects on salmon or salmon habitat.

Concerns resulting from Action Alternative 1 potential impacts include but are not limited to the following:

• Although the DEIS purports that most potential risks identified have a low probability of occurrence, the magnitude, extent and longevity of impacts would be disastrous.

• The DEIS has a section regarding Spill Risk which identifies activities with risk that span beyond the localized project site – this non-exhaustive list includes diesel fuel, natural gas, copper-gold ore concentrate, chemical reagents, bulk and pyritic tailings, and untreated contact water. Although the section is comprehensive, many of the scenarios are theoretical – some scenarios have few existing studies to draw comparable assumptions from, many of the scenarios are circumstantial (severity would depend on timing, location, etc.), and do not explore secondary and tertiary impacts on affected ecosystems. The concerns for fishermen are addressed, but not given due consideration.

The USACE has invited 38 federally recognized tribes throughout the region to consult during the EIS decision process, including Port Heiden Village Council and the Chignik Tribal Councils.  No tribes within the AEB have been invited for consultation. Likewise, the LPB and the State of Alaska have been invited to participate as cooperating agencies, but the AEB has not been invited or directly consulted about the proposed project.

Direct, indirect and cumulative impacts of the project, and resulting mitigation measures are calculated in the DEIS for communities and activities near to the proposed project, not for neighboring communities or fishing activities in the AEB.

NEPA requires agencies to consider mitigation measures to avoid or reduce environmental impacts, or to compensate through mitigation, any unavoidable impacts. Mitigation can be achieved through project design and use of best management practices.

• From DEIS Section 4.24.2.1- In terms of magnitude and extent of impacts, project construction, operations, and closure at the mine site would have a footprint of 8,806 acres (10.7 square miles), of which 3,458 acres are wetlands or other waters. Duration of impacts to these affected areas would be long term, lasting throughout the life of the project, and they would be certain to occur if the project is permitted and constructed.

• From DEIS Section 4.6.6.2 - Pebble Mine Expanded Development Scenario - The Pebble Mine Expanded Development Scenario would result in an additional 78 years of mining/milling and include a larger open pit mine with expanded and new storage facilities for tailings and waste rock.

• From DEIS Section 4.24.6 - Reasonably foreseeable future actions (RFFAs) combined with natural events, have the potential to contribute to adverse effects on aquatic resources by altering flow regimes and drainage patterns; direct habitat loss; diminishing water quality from riverbank erosion, turbidity, and sedimentation; changes in water chemistry; fish displacement and injury; and degrading the extent of productive habitat conditions.

The proposed Pebble project may offer opportunities like temporary employment to local residents. However, salmon is the cultural and economic foundation for all of our communities, and all Southwest Alaska fishermen harvest salmon that are bound for Bristol Bay. Any of the potential negative impacts to salmon runs would directly affect These fishermen. Since there is no discernable direct benefit to most fishermen from the development of the proposed mine, but potential for significant risk due to myriad of possible failures associated with the project, it could be said that the fishermen have nothing to gain but everything to lose from any of the alternatives except the No Action Alternative.

The No Action Alternative is the least environmentally damaging alternative. While the project has the potential to fulfill the stated purpose and need to develop a non-renewable resource, it could come at the expense of one of Alaska’s most valuable renewable resources, sockeye salmon from Bristol Bay. Bristol Bay sockeye returns are of utmost importance to the fishermen and communities of Southwest Alaska. The proposed project has the potential to adversely impact wetlands and to seriously degrade parts of the Bristol Bay watershed where the salmon are reared.  Salmon are already being stressed from the effects of climate change and changing ocean conditions, including overall rising ocean temperatures and ocean acidification. Any threat to the renewable Bristol Bay sockeye resource is an unacceptable risk. The Pebble project is an avoidable risk. The No Action Alternative is the option in the public’s best interest.