Feeding Alaskans is job No. 1: State must uphold dip-netters' rights on Copper River

From the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, December 4, 2011, Community Perspective
Regardless of how the Alaska Supreme Court hearing on the proper classification of Chitina dip-netters goes Monday, it’s a sad day for all Alaskans. It’s sad because our Board of Fisheries, and especially the governors who have appointed its members, have failed to uphold our state Constitution and put Alaskans first and foremost in their decision making, and it has culminated into a court case of this magnitude.

Make no mistake, the decision made by the court in this case will have ramifications throughout Alaska and will affect everyone and anyone who hunts and fishes. Ironically, the board meets in Valdez on Monday as well. Don’t expect much of a turnout by dip-netters, as most have learned that testifying in front of the board is an exercise in futility, with their opinions and decisions made well in advance, despite the evidence brought forward.

Commercial fishermen pay nothing for our fish, sell them for a premium, then tell us we should be grateful for the hatcheries they pay for (see Mike Mickelson’s community perspective, Nov. 20). For the record, they can keep their hatchery fish. In fact, they can take their hatchery and remove it from our river altogether. The hatcheries are a direct threat to the health and vitality of our wild stocks. They threaten the genetic makeup of our wild salmon and the hatchery fish have a direct impact on the habitat of our wild stocks and their recruitment.

The greed of the commercial fleets will never allow that reality to sink in. Instead the spin continues. Look no further than the hoodwinking of several Native tribes who now see dip-netters as a threat to their subsistence lifestyle. The irony of it all is that we are talking not about game but fish, a resource that is plentiful and abundant. Except of course, that the smallest group, which takes more than 90 percent of the resource, wants more and more.

They want more and more because it’s all about money. Big money. That’s why Mickelson mentions his $325,000 investment. That’s why Herb Jensen, poster child of the Cordova fishermen, brought forth a lawsuit to ban all "personal use fishing" within Alaska (Jensen vs. Gutierrez et. al.). His claim: Dip-netters cost him and the other 493 commercial fishermen $2,257. That’s chump change to these people and to this multi-billion-dollar industry, but their gluttony is unchecked and has been for some time because of the ineptitude of the board, in which our governors are complicit.

We as a state funnel big money to the fishing industry yet get little in exchange. The Department of Fish and Game, for example, spent $42.6 million in support of the industry in fiscal 2008. It collected only $16.2 million. Commerce, Community, and Economic Development spent $15.5 million to support the commercial fishing industry. It collected nothing. Environmental Conservation spent $2.1 million and collected $1.2 million. Total net return to the state was only $23.5 million. Looking only at the ex-vessel value of $1.9 billion for that year, the state of Alaska made a whopping 1.2 percent. Total economic output, closer to $6 billion, makes that number even more skewed. The tourism industry, however, had a net return to the state of $68.7 million ($102 million in state revenue with $33.3 million expenditures) and the mining industry added a net return of $129.7 million ($144.7 million in state revenue with $15.1 million spent).

The commercial fishing industry states that it puts more people to work than any other industry, yet Alaskans only make up one-third of the seafood processing work force, and nonresidents earn more than 80 percent of the money. More than 55 percent of the money paid to fishermen goes to nonresidents. So ask yourself: Why is it that we let these gluttonous fishermen, many of whom are not even residents, dictate the management of our resources when we get so little in return? Why is the state denying its residents the right to harvest fish from our rivers to feed our families before denying the commercial fleets?

Our state Constitution clearly spells out how our fish and game are to be managed "for the maximum benefit of its people." The Constitution should be the metric for any Board of Fisheries nominee: Will you abide by our state Constitution and manage our resources for the maximum benefit of its people? An even better question might be: What is the highest and best use of our fishery resources? If they say anything other than feeding Alaskans — all Alaskans regardless of their race, culture or zip code — then they are unfit to serve. I hope the Alaska Supreme Court meets this metric as well on Monday.

Jake Sprankle is a resident of Fairbanks who feeds his family moose, caribou, sheep and salmon from Alaska’s lands and waters. He is a board member of the Chitina Dipnetters Association; the above column reflects his personal views, not necessarily those of the organization. Contact him at jakesprankle@gmail.com.