Bristol Bay Reds are a menu item at Monterey Bay Aquarium Festivities

Some 400 guests at a Meet the Chefs Reception on May 15th at the Monterey Bay Aquarium’s annual Cooking for Solutions event will be sampling Bristol Bay sockeye salmon in appetizers prepared by Chef Jeff Rogers of the aquarium’s culinary team. And on the following day, the San Francisco-based sustainable sushi restaurant, Tataki, will offer over 2,800 guests at the Cooking for Solutions Gala a special “Canapé for Bristol Bay.

The three-day long event brings together hundreds of chefs, food producers, media and other food leaders from around the country to discuss and celebrate the latest challenges and successes in the sustainable seafood movement.

There will also be an online auction to benefit the aquarium’s seafood watch program. Bids are being accepted through May 27.

Major gatherings will include a gourmet gala with dishes prepared by celebrity chefs and 90 outstanding restaurants, organic and sustainable wines from 60 West Cost wineries and craft beer from 11 breweries.

The world famous Bristol Bay sockeye salmon fishery supplies nearly half of the world’s red salmon supply. This summer the Alaska Department of Fish and Game is forecasting a run return of over 26 million reds.

Sue Aspelund, executive director of the Bristol Bay Regional Seafood Development Association, which represents some 1,850 commercial salmon driftnet fishermen, said the fishermen they represent are honored to be featured at this year’s celebration of sustainable seafood.

“We take great pride in our sockeye salmon and look forward to sharing both our product and our story at this year’s event,” Aspelund said.

More information about the BBRSDA is at http://www.bristolbaysockeye.org

Information and tickets for the events are at www.cookingforsolutions.org

Maritime Risk Management Needed for Financial Safety

For vessel owners and captains engaged in commercial fisheries, maritime risk management is a critical financial safety first, says Seattle maritime insurance executive Chris Trainer.

Attention to state and federal laws and regulations, proper safety equipment, proper training of crew, and proper operation and maintenance of vessels in all weather conditions can result in savings of millions of dollars, Trainer told fishermen participating in the recent ComFish 2014 forums at Kodiak.

Preventive steps may be taken, from hiring procedures to vessel maintenance, but vessel owners should also have proper maritime insurance for unforeseen events, to avoid millions of dollars in insurance claims, he said.

Among the real life examples Trainer cited was a $2.35 million Jones act verdict for a deckhand who suffered a crushed foot injury aboard a scallop boat. The vessel was found to be unseaworthy and negligent when the moving deck hatch rolled over the deckhand’s foot on the board.

Another Jones Act verdict of $1.4 million was handed down for the death of a crewman who fell from a Jacob’s ladder while transferring between vessels. The vessel was cited for improper training in man overboard procedures.

It is important, said Trainer, for vessel owners to identify, characterize and assess threats to safety of the vessel and those on board, and identify ways to reduce those risks. Insurance is one form of risk management used to hedge against such losses.

The Merchant Marine Act of 1920, also known as the Jones Act, adopted by Congress back in 1920, allows injured seamen to make claims and collect from their employers for negligence of the ship owner, the captain or fellow crew members. Legal action under the Jones Act may be brought either in federal or state courts, and the seaman is entitled to a jury trial.

Jones Act remedies also include unearned wages, wage losses, future medical needs, pain and suffering, and permanent or partial disability.

And there are plenty more reasons for vessel owners and captains to employ risk management, to avoid violation of federal and state pollution laws, Trainer said.

Vessel owners should also consider pollution liability stand-alone policy coverage, which covers clean up, third party property damage, civil penalties and criminal fines, loss of revenues and profits by third parties, loss of public services and more, he said.

Seattle's Fishermen's Terminal – Celebrating 100 Years

By Kathy A. Smith

On January 10, 1914, the Port of Seattle commissioned Fishermen's Terminal as its first operating asset. Since then, the prominent West Coast commercial fishing facility has been providing, and constantly improving on, much-needed amenities that service the North Pacific Fishing Fleet's eclectic mix of commercial vessels.

The Port boasts the only fresh water moorage that is neither impacted by tidal zones or corrosive agents. And the temperate climate doesn't hurt. Situated in Salmon Bay on the Lake Washington Ship Canal, Fishermen's Terminal resides on approximately 75 acres. The Maritime Industrial Center, about a mile west of the Terminal, sits on six acres and provides commercial moorage to the fleet's larger-size vessels.

"We can handle 240-foot processing ships all the way down to 30-foot Puget Sound gillnet boats," says Kenneth R. Lyles, Sr. Manager, Fishing & Commercial Vessels, Lyles has been working for the Port of Seattle for 29 years, the past 12 managing commercial operations at Fishermen's Terminal. "The majority of the fleet are salmon seiners that fish in Southeast Alaska and Bristol Bay. We also have freezer longliner vessels, the historic "Highliner" longline fleet, catcher-processors and crab boats."

The Port can accommodate up to 500 commercial fishing vessels at any one time. It has a 200-slip facility in addition to several concrete loading docks – 2,800 linear feet at Fishermen's Terminal and approximately 830 linear feet at the Marine Industrial Center – for loading and repair work. There is also plenty of room for reefer trucks, fiber, pallets, gear or equipment that needs to be staged and a number of forklifts, hydraulic cranes and hoists.

"We're a full-service facility," says Lyles. "We also provide garbage service and recycling service for fiber and metal as well as used oil and have pump-out facilities for bilge and sewage. Additionally, we have a very robust environmental compliance program that we employ here as well."

Moorage fees are very competitive, adds Lyles. "We've worked over the past 12 years to bring them to market," he says. "We're five percent less than our competitors because we are committed to being the home port of the North Pacific Fishing Fleet."

While a lot of seasonal vessel refurbishing takes place at dock like painting, electrical and hydraulic work, an onsite boatyard and shipyard, as well as additional haul-out facilities across the canal at the historic Pacific Fishermen's Shipyard are also available. "We have a complete infrastructure here in Seattle where the service providers are based," explains Lyles. "Specialists from electrical to refrigeration to hydraulic and different outfitters are here, unlike what you'll find anywhere else on the West Coast or in Alaska. Fishermen also swap out gear as we have a percentage of our fleet that participate in multiple fisheries."

Over the last 15 years, the Port has invested more than 60 million in infrastructure improvements, which have included electrical upgrades, water and sewer line replacement, the redevelopment of the west and south seawalls as well as the redevelopment of docks 5 through 10. Wooden docks 3 and 4 were also redeveloped after the Nisqually earthquake in 2001.

An ambitious 25-year plan is now under review for future developments. Lyles reports there are some proposals that have yet to be completely reviewed and adopted by the five elected port commissioners. To date some initial legwork has been accomplished in regard to looking at opportunities in the retail core and additional support facilities for the fishing fleet. The uplands area, which includes offices and a retail core, has not seen redevelopment since 1988 but the Port is considering creating additional facilities such as more covered work areas and mixed-use facilities, including retail.

A recent economic impact study conducted by the McDowell Group for the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute identified the commercial maritime and fishing vessel industry as having contributed 30 billion dollars to the area's local economy, and that five billion is directly related to the fleets that tie up at Fishermen's Terminal and the Port's Terminal 91. West Coast fishermen also supply half the fish consumed in the United States.

One of the results of the study has prompted a recapitalization of the large boat fleet. Federal legislation has opened up the ability for the big catcher-processors, crab boats and freezer longliners to turn their fleets over after over 46 years. New vessels are now entering the market as old vessels are being retired out of it, which has provided an economic boon to area communities invested in shipbuilding.

"It's really seen a resurgence in the eyes of our community leaders," adds Lyles. "For years the industry has been taken for granted, but with this economic impact study, it has been put on par with Microsoft and Amazon, major industries here in the State of Washington."

While local, state and federal officials have recognized the impact, Lyles says they're working to bring visibility to the industry to protect the industry and to promote the careers that provide the labor to keep these industries in operation.

"They've recognized there is a greying of the workforce," he says. "The average commercial fishing employee is 50+ years old and is looking at retirement over the next 10 years. A lot of work is being done to replenish that workforce, and the Port of Seattle is working to help facilitate that effort to ensure that the industry is ready for the next 100 years."

Climate Change Affects Alaska’s Fisheries

A new federal report on "human-induced" climate change released May 6 claims acidifying changes in ocean chemistry have potentially widespread impacts on the marine food web, including commercially important species.

The National Climate Assessment claims that the effects of global warming are not something of the future, but already having an impact, with Alaska in particular being heavily impacted.

Those engaged in commercial fisheries in Alaska should take special note of the section on the 49th state, within document, which is online at http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/report/regions/alaska.

Current and projected increases in Alaska’s ocean temperatures and changes in ocean chemistry are expected to alter the distribution and productivity of Alaska’s marine fisheries, a leader in commercial value, the report says.

Ocean acidification, rising ocean temperatures, declining sea ice and other environmental changes interact to affect the location and abundance of marine fish, including those commercially important, those used as food by other species and those used for subsistence.

Researchers found that these changes have allowed some near-surface fish species, including salmon, to expand their ranges northward along the Alaskan coast. Non-native species meanwhile are invading Alaskan waters more rapidly, primarily through ships releasing ballast waters and bringing southerly species to Alaska, the report said. The introduction of these non-native species could affect marine ecosystems, including the feeding relationships of fish important to commercial and subsistence fisheries, the report said.

Overall habitat extent is expected to undergo change too. Reductions in seasonal sea ice cover and higher surface temperatures may open up new habitat in polar regions for some species, including cod, herring and pollock. But continued presence of cold bottom-water temperatures on the Alaskan continental shelf could limit northward migration into the northern Bering Sea and Chukchi Sea off northwestern Alaska.

Warming might cause reductions in abundance of some species, such as pollock, in their current ranges in the Bering Sea and reduce the health of juvenile sockeye salmon, potentially resulting in decreased overwinter survival.

Should ocean warming continue, current fishing pressure on pollock cannot likely be sustained, and frequency of early Chinook salmon migrations will likely increase, making management of the fishery by multiple user groups more challenging.

Outlook Optimistic for Lower Yukon River Chum Salmon

An increased number of commercial fishermen on Alaska’s Lower Yukon River are expected to be using dipnets this summer to harvest chum salmon, in a continuous effort to avoid king salmon, for whom there will be no commercial fishery.

“Chum runs are forecast as healthy, and we expect a good commercial harvest of chums,” says Jack Schultheis, sales manager for Kwik’pak Fisheries, in Emmonak.

Kwik’pak Fisheries, a subsidiary of Yukon Delta Fisheries Development Association, is a community-based firm formed by the people in six Yupik Eskimo villages along the Lower Yukon. Harvesters are provided with ice and insulated totes to keep the fish cold, and each fish is bled and iced immediately to preserve freshness.

Markets are already lining up for oil rich chums, about half of which will be sold in domestic markets, with the other half going to Europe and Asia.

For the domestic market, the chums are sold mostly as fillets, with some headed and gutted, Schultheis said. The European market is all fillets and the Asia market all headed and gutted.

The key to the company’s growing market, Schultheis said, is bringing customers to the Yukon Delta to see for themselves that this region is really like. “Once people come here, it makes such an impression on them,” he said. “They are enamored by it. It’s overwhelming. They see it is a small boat fishery. It’s families, not a cowboy fishery. These are low income Native families trying to get by… people proud of their fish.

“They are doing it just to get by and they take a lot of pride in what they are doing,” Schultheis said. The customers see this and it makes them more loyal, better customers, he said.

For now, the company and the fish harvesters are busy getting ready for the coming summer and fall chum runs, and the harvest of thousands of fish.

Schultheis said he sees the markets as strong, particularly with inventories low, and, prices may also improve upward this year.

NPFMC Will Take Up Bering Sea Salmon Bycatch

Bering Sea king and chum salmon bycatch will be under discussion again by federal fishery managers when the North Pacific Fishery Management Council convenes its summer meeting in Nome from June 4 to June 10.

The subject is a highly emotional one, often pitting harvesters of pollock in the Bering Sea against both commercial and subsistence harvesters, particularly with the decline of Chinook salmon runs so severe that there will be no commercial fishery for the kings.

At this meeting the council will be listening to a staff prepared discussion paper analyzing potential changes to the current king salmon bycatch management plan. The discussion paper will also cover an overview of modifications to goals and objectives of the program needed to incorporate chum salmon bycatch into the existing incentive program agreements. These include shortening the pollock season, requiring salmon excluders and additional constraints on the fleet when bycatch rates are high.

The council expects to post that discussion paper by mid-May onto the council website, www.npfmc.org.

During the council’s April meeting in Anchorage, the Bering Sea pollock industry provided their annual reports on their respective sector incentive program agreements for king salmon bycatch management, as well as a report on the current combined cooperative management of chum salmon bycatch. These reports are already available on the council website.

Amendment 91 to the fishery management plan for groundfish in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands combines a hard cap on the amount of king salmon that may be caught incidentally with an incentive plan agreement and a performance standard designed to minimize bycatch to the extent practicable in all years and prevent bycatch from reaching the limit in most years. Regulations implementing Amendment 91 require participants engaged in an incentive plan agreement to provide an annual report to the federal council detailing their incentive measures and evaluating their effectiveness.

Council staff noted that the majority of king salmon bycatch in the Being Sea is from the aggregate coastal western Alaska stock grouping which includes rivers from Norton Sound to Bristol Bay, including the middle and lower Yukon and the Kuskokwim Rivers. The complete meeting agenda is online at http://legistar2.granicus.com/npfmc/meetings/2014/6/893_A_North_Pacific_Council_14-06-02_Meeting_Agenda.pdf.

EPA’s Inspector General Will Review Process of Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment

Congressional requests and hotline complaints are prompting the US Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Inspector General to take a look at the process behind the now completed Bristol Bay watershed assessment.

The EPA Inspector General’s office said in a memo issued on May 2 that it wants to be sure the agency followed all the rules in developing its assessment.

The EPA announced back on Feb. 28 that it was initiating the 404 (c) regulatory process, because of the threat to the Bristol Bay watershed posed by the Pebble deposit, a mine unprecedented in scope and scale, to ensure protection for the world famous sockeye salmon fishery of Bristol Bay. The action was based on information that includes extensive data collected for the watershed assessment.

Section 404 (c) authorizes the EPA to prohibit or restrict use of a defined area as a disposal site if it is determined that the discharge of such materials in that area will have an unacceptable adverse affect on fishery areas, municipal water supplies, shellfish beds and recreational areas.

The Canadian mining company bankrolling the Pebble project contends that the EPA doesn’t have the statutory authority to undertake pre-emptive action related to the future of the mine. Ron Thiessen, president and chief executive officer of Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd., a wholly owned subsidiary of Hunter Dickinson Inc., a diversified global mining group, said May 6 that documents the mining company has obtained paint “the picture of an agency launching a watershed assessment to justify a pre-determined outcome.”

While backers of the Pebble project have invested upwards of $720 million into the project to date, they have yet to submit applications to permit the mine. They want the state, rather than the federal government, to decide whether the mine can be built and operated in harmony with the fisheries.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, sides with the mine backers on this, saying they must be given due process allowed under the existing permitting process, lest there be a chilling effect on development across Alaska and the nation.

Sen. Mark Begich, D-Alaska, has defended the EPA’s action, saying Pebble is the wrong mine in the wrong place.