Despite industry rhetoric, the problems with trawling are easy to understand

"Finding the Homes of Wild Salmon" on June 2, 2019, by NASA Goddard Photo and Video is licensed under CC BY 2.0. (Credit: Department of Interior)

By Dave Kiffer

As a lifelong Alaskan from a family of commercial fishermen, I understand and appreciate how much our state depends on healthy fisheries. Salmon, halibut, black cod, rockfish and countless other species are more than economic resources — they are how many families feed themselves, support their businesses and pass traditions from one generation to the next.

That is why debate over industrial trawling should not be as complicated as some would have us believe.

The basic question is simple: Should one fishing method be allowed to remove enormous quantities of fish — and unintentionally kill thousands more — when those same fish are desperately needed by subsistence users, sport anglers and smaller commercial fishermen across Alaska?

Industrial trawl vessels are incredibly efficient at catching pollock, but they also catch species they are not targeting. Salmon, halibut, black cod, rockfish and other marine species are caught in their nets every year. While regulations have improved over time, bycatch remains an unavoidable part of this type of fishing.

Every salmon caught as bycatch is one less fish returning to rivers where families depend on them for food. It is one less fish available to charter operators welcoming visitors to Alaska. It is one less opportunity for people with a rod and reel, guides, commercial trollers, set netters, gillnetters and longliners whose livelihoods depend on abundant, healthy fish populations.

We recently saw the importance of preserving king salmon stocks when a judge in Washington considered shutting down the entire troll salmon fleet in Southeast Alaska just to preserve salmon that are returning to Puget Sound. Suddenly those king salmon caught incidentally by trawlers became very important in the larger scheme of things.

The impacts are felt throughout Southeast, Southcentral, Western Alaska and the Interior. Small communities that have harvested salmon for thousands of years face increasing restrictions while industrial trawl vessels continue operating hundreds of miles away. Commercial fishermen using more selective gear are often asked to shoulder conservation measures even though they catch only the fish they intend to harvest.

No fishing method is perfect, but not all methods have the same environmental footprint.

It reminds me of the debate over fish traps that was so intense during the decades before Alaskan statehood. On one hand, the traps were a very efficient way to support the salmon canning industry that was so important to the Alaskan economy. But they were so efficient they decimated the salmon runs. When Alaska became a state, its first act was to ban the traps to protect the resource and the future of communities throughout the new state.

Hook-and-line fisheries, trolling, pot fisheries and many small-boat operations are far more selective. They allow fishermen to target specific species while minimizing unintended catch. These fisheries support thousands of independent Alaska families and coastal communities while producing some of the highest-quality seafood in the world.

Industrial bottom trawling also raises broader environmental concerns. Dragging heavy gear across the seafloor can disturb sensitive marine habitat and ecosystems that take years to recover.

Alaskans have long been proud of managing fisheries based on sustainability. That principle only works if every sector shares equally in conservation and if management recognizes that fish have value far beyond the dock. They sustain tourism, recreational fishing, subsistence harvests, local businesses and entire coastal economies.

Healthy fisheries should benefit as many Alaskans as possible — not simply maximize efficiency for the largest industrial fleets.

This is not about ending commercial fishing. Alaska's commercial fishing industry is part of who we are and deserves to thrive. But there is a meaningful difference between fisheries that harvest fish selectively while supporting coastal communities and industrial operations that generate significant bycatch and compete directly with the fish needed by other users.

The conversation about trawling ultimately comes down to stewardship. Every fish unnecessarily lost to bycatch is one that cannot be caught by a sport fisherman, harvested by a subsistence family, or landed by an Alaska commercial fisherman using more selective and environmentally responsible gear.

Alaskans have always believed our fisheries are a public resource held in trust for future generations. Protecting that resource means asking whether current practices are serving all Alaskans equally — or whether it is time to place greater value on fishing methods that conserve fish, reduce waste and leave healthier oceans for those who come after us.

• Dave Kiffer is the son, grandson and great grandson of Alaskan commercial fishers. He is a fourth-generation Ketchikan resident and served as the Mayor of both the City of Ketchikan and the Ketchikan Gateway Borough.