|
Web posted
The action comes with a provision that all members actively participate in the fishery.
The fish board decision, made during a teleconference May 4, comes in the wake of a recent Alaska Supreme Court ruling, which said the intent of the state's Limited Entry Act is that permit holders actively participate in the fishery for which a permit is held. The fish board's action is intended to bring the regulations for the Chignik cooperative fishery into compliance with this ruling.
"I think it is a wonderful solution," said Greg Cook, a Juneau attorney representing the cooperative. "This is the fifth time the board of fish has unanimously voted in favor of this fishery. Every time it has been a unanimous decision. I can't say I'm surprised that the board has continued its support."
Axle Kopen, president of the Chignik Seafood Producers Alliance, also known as the Chignik co-op, applauded the fish board's decision. "It was never our intention to have people sitting around collecting a check," Kopen said. "The idea was better quality and reduced costs. So far, everybody I have talked to is very happy about it, that they can come and do their part."
Controversy over the cooperative has stemmed from its decision to cut costs by having a finite number of purse seine fishermen do the harvesting on behalf of all cooperative members. In a majority opinion issued March 17, the state's highest court said the fish board lacked the authority to revamp the sockeye salmon fishery at Chignik by creating the cooperative.
"We hold that the regulation (which created the Chignik cooperative) is fundamentally at odds with the Limited Entry Act," the court said.
In forming the cooperative, the state board essentially awarded control of most of the sockeye salmon returning to Chignik to a large group of Chignik seiners who wanted to stop racing one another for fish. Instead, the group wanted a harvest cooperative using fewer boats. Their idea was to cut costs and divide profits at season's end, allowing dozens of fishermen who did not fish to earn money.
The court found that while the Legislature might conclude it is necessary to amend the Limited Entry Act to allow for creation of cooperative fisheries, the Legislature had not yet done so. As a result, "we must hold that the regulation (creating the co-op) is invalid," the court's majority opinion said.
Representing the cooperative, Cook appealed the court's decision, asking for a rehearing, but the court denied that request, the attorney said. Subsequently, Cook filed a petition with the fish board. "An emergency situation existed, a sudden and unforeseen circumstance where an otherwise available resource would go unharvested," he said.
About 15 percent of the Chignik fleet opposed the cooperative, said Soldotna attorney Arthur "Chuck" Robinson, who represented plaintiff salmon seiners Dean Anderson and Michael Grunert. When the high court decision was issued, Robinson said he was not surprised that it ruled in opposition of the cooperative.
Independent fishermen John Jones, who has fished in Chignik 32 years, called the fish board's move allowing the cooperative to fish "a disgrace to the law system. It's wrong," he said.
Jones said it was a joke that the state Supreme Court could rule the cooperative illegal and then the fish board "could turn around and add a couple of things, just to have it active. It's not a fishery any more," he said.
The board ruled that to actively participate in the cooperative a fisherman must make at least 10 deliveries of salmon in 2005 to a buyer, but that the fishermen were not required to participate from the season opening to season closing.
The cooperative's Kopen said most co-op members had homes in Chignik and that requiring them to make deliveries was easy enough because they either lived there or traditionally went home to Chignik in the summertime.
The board also ruled that not every boat signed up for the cooperative must fish, and that any permit holder who applied to participate in the cooperative this year may withdraw by notifying the state Division of Commercial Fisheries by May 16.
Jones said he was concerned that to comply with the requirement that 10 deliveries of fish be made, some cooperative members would bring as few as one fish to the tender. "It doesn't matter how many fish is on the ticket," he said. "If you have one fish on a ticket, that counts as a delivery. That's what I think they are going to do. That's what I know they are going to do."
Despite the co-op's continued presence this year, Jones said he will still fish this season.
"This co-op is a sore subject with me," he said. "I've been fighting it for the last three years, going on a fourth year, and I'm going to keep fighting it. I bought a Chignik permit to fish here. I bought a boat to fish here. You bet I'm going to fish this year.
"I never did belong to the co-op and I never will," he said. "The coop hasn't furnished enough money to pay my fishing permit, boat payment or my insurance. Why join something that's not going to make me some money?"
The fish board expects to review the whole matter of the Chignik cooperative again next fall, at a date to be announced in June, said Diana Cote, executive director of the board.
Kopen said this year his main concern was whether the sockeye salmon run would be strong. "We will have a good price this year, but I don't know if any fish are going to show up," he said. The co-op is in the last year of a three-year contract with NorQuest Seafoods for purchase of their harvest. Through that agreement, the co-op has seen its harvest shipped fresh to upscale restaurants in the Midwest, Southwest and East Coast of the United States, as well as to Europe, he said.
Cook, the co-op's attorney, said that while the forecast is for 7 million sockeye, "none of us trust the forecast. Weather reports have a much higher success rate," he said. "It's not a forecast we can put any confidence in at all. The trend has been toward diminishing returns. The average last year was 14 deliveries (per vessel)."
Whatever the catch, there is much market opportunity out there for Alaska salmon, Kopen said. "As long as you provide a quality fish, there is no problem selling them. Our fresh markets talk to others and they come to us, seek us out," he said.
Margaret Bauman can be reached at margie.bauman@alaska
journal.com.
|
