tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5248187375964492769.post4352484255501794631..comments2023-05-12T05:00:37.055-07:00Comments on Tholepin: Fallacies of Trawler Arguments to Kodiak City/BoroughWiglafhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14357031507262299517noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5248187375964492769.post-83297802146958189202010-10-02T18:24:03.833-07:002010-10-02T18:24:03.833-07:00Mayor Selby's letter was sent on Monday, Septe...Mayor Selby's letter was sent on Monday, September 27, and indicates that he<br />and the "Kodiak Island Borough (KIB) and it residents" are "opposed to any<br />seasonal or annual closure areas proposed in the GOA Tanner crab bycatch<br />alternatives."<br /><br />Despite the significant nature and impact of this issue, and the high<br />interest that this issue holds for the entire Kodiak community and for a<br />great number of Kodiak fishing industry participants, the public was not<br />notified that Mayor Selby intended to write or send this letter to the<br />Council. Neither was the public consulted on the content of the letter, or<br />asked to provide comment on the wisdom of Mayor Selby's recommendation, on<br />behalf of the "Koidak Island Borough and its residents", to the Council.<br /><br />Moreover, the letter was not presented to the Kodiak Island Borough Assembly<br />for their consideration, nor was it included on the agenda of any KIB<br />Assembly Work Session or Regular Meeting. It appears that several members of<br />the KIB Assembly were not aware of this letter.<br /><br />The letter states, in part:<br /><br />"KIB is opposed to any seasonal or annual closure areas proposed in the GOA<br />Tanner crab bycatch alternatives. These closures are large and would<br />negatively affect both the pot and trawl sectors. The analysis shows that<br />high CPUE occurs for flat fish in the proposed closure areas, so moving the<br />trawl fleet outside the areas would likely increase bycatch, reduce ex-<br />vessel value to the vessels, reduce landing to the KIB and reduce raw fish<br />tax revenues. In addition, the logic of reducing the catch of the crab<br />predator fish swimming above the crab areas does not seem likely to result<br />in more crab."<br /><br />Importantly, as you are likely to be aware, the Council analysis indicates<br />that "The purpose of this action is to provide additional protection to Gulf<br />of Alaska (GOA) Tanner crab from the potential adverse effects of groundfish<br />fisheries, in order to facilitate rebuilding of Tanner crab stocks. This<br />would be achieved by closing areas around Kodiak Island that are important<br />to the Tanner crab stocks. Areas would be closed to some or all groundfish<br />fishing, depending on the vessel¹s gear type or gear configuration. . . ."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5248187375964492769.post-81787969141534540892010-10-02T15:56:16.219-07:002010-10-02T15:56:16.219-07:00Dear Assemblymember Jeffrey;
I was quite disappoin...Dear Assemblymember Jeffrey;<br />I was quite disappointed that the Kodiak Island Borough took a position counter to the long awaited conservation measure protecting Kodiak's recovering tanner and king crab stocks from bottom trawls. Mayor Selby recently wrote a letter on the Kodiak Island Borough's behalf which competely dismisses the fact that this proposal (which is up for final approval by the Council) has had its genesis in the NPMC science committee and was a result of data that none of us in the private or Borough sectors have access to due to the confidentiality regulations in place. <br /> <br /> But rather than argue the pros or cons of this proposal here, I have a problem with the PROCESS. I have a deep suspicion that this policy decision by the Borough Mayor has neither the transparency or opportunity for the public to comment which both Alaska's Open Meeting laws and Kodiak Island Borough ordinances require. I have talked to persons who attended recent City/Borough fisheries Advisory meetings, KIB Borough Assembly workshop meetings and regurlarly scheduled KIB Assembly meetings and to their best memory are unable to recall a specific instruction to Mayor Selby to write such a position statement on behalf of the Kodiak Island Borough on this matter.<br /> <br />Question<br />1) When was Mayor Selby authorized to issue this position statement on KIB's behalf?<br />2) if it is unauthorized action by the Mayor, when will the KIB either retract it or retroactively hold a public hearing and take an official position on this matter? The problem with holding a public meeting at this point is that most of the persons on the Island concerned about this issue will be travelling to Anchorage shortly to participate in the NPMC process. <br /> <br /> If this position is unauthorized or was polled and approved in a non-public process, it should be recinded immediately. If this letter is an unauthorized act, a public remand of the Mayor by the Assembly would also seem appropriate. <br /> <br />I look forward to your comment on this.<br /> <br />Sincerely, <br />(Name withheld by Wiglaf)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com