Assess the Impacts of Options to Restructure the Bristol Bay Salmon
Fishery
Town Meetings to Obtain Public Input Naknek and Dillingham
June 2002
2
Format of Today’s Meeting
Introduce and describe the study
Questions and answers about the study
Your input on the design of the study
You provide ideas and concerns about changing the fishery
3
Landed Value of Bristol Bay Sockeye
050
100150200250300350400
1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002Land
ed V
alue
, Millio
ns $
(Yr 2
000)
4
The Issue to Address?
Find ways of making the fishery economical
1. Decrease the cost of getting salmon from the water to the customer
2. Increase the price paid for fish
3. Increase the harvest?
5
Possible ways to Decrease Costs
Reduce number of vessels * Modify regulations that hinder efficiency Allow more efficient fishing gear Allow permit holders and others to work
together Invest in infrastructure to decrease
costs of transportation, fuel and other inputs to fishing and processing
6
Increase Revenue (fish price)
Modify the fishery to improve fish quality
Investments in processing
Investments to expand markets
7
Why this Study? There is a wide array of restructuring options
available.
These options vary in their ability to improve the economics of the fishery and their impacts on the region.
These impacts have not yet been evaluated and quantified
8
Why this Study?
Identify impacts and tradeoffs among restructuring options
Help people and organizations in the region to justify and seek support for specific restructuring actions
9
What this Study Will Not Do?
Identify and recommend a single “best option”
10
Overview of the Study
Will Require 11 months to complete (March-Jan 2003)
Public input and assemble ideas 31 July Distill ideas to options 31 Aug Analyze impacts and implications 1 Nov Write draft report 1 Dec Peer review of report 31 Dec Final report 31 Jan 03
11
Study Team Michael Link – Project Manager
fisheries management & science Bob Waldrop
processing, marketing, economics Marcus Hartley, Scott Miller
fisheries economics Jim Barnett
legal & constitutional issues Jim Wilen
fisheries economics
12
Public Input
1. Meetings in Naknek and Dillingham
2. Mail-in questionnaire from the brochure
3. Website: www.bbsalmon.com
4. Electronic bulletin board at website
5. Email study team: [email protected]
6. One-on-one discussions
13
Collate, Review and Distill Ideas
With Advisory Panel, review ideas for suitability to have reasonable chance of improving economics of the fishery at a reasonable “cost”
Distillation of ideas down to 6 to 8 “options” that include the status quo
14
Advisory Panel to the Study Hattie Albecker Ted Angasan Robert Heyano Moses Kritz Hazel Nelson Robin Samuelsen Moses Toyukak
Gunnar Knapp Jeff Regnart Bruce Twomley Norm Van Vactor
15
Analyze Options
1. Use an economic model of the region to quantify effects of different options on the region’s economy
2. Examine the biological, legal, social, and political limitations/implications of each option
16
Analyze Option - Example
1. First Define the Option (e.g. buyback)
• How many permits• Who pays for permits (fishermen, gov’t)• How much is paid for permits and how
are they sold• Permanent or temporary• Discuss pros and cons of different
combinations of these features
17
Analyze Option - Example
2. Examine Economic Impacts• How much does the change affect:
• fishermen’s incomes• regional tax base• supply industry• number of jobs in the fishery• etc.
18
Analyze Option - Example
3. Examine Other Impacts and Implications• Biology
• Does it affect long-term sustainability?• Management
• Can the management system adapt?• Legal
• Is it legal, if not, what needs to be done?• Social
• How might it change the social fabric of the region?
19
Prepare Final Report
Document the impacts and tradeoffs among the different options, including status quo
Provide information to fishermen, decision makers, legislators, policy makers, and others
Use as a stepping stone toward seeking implementation of a potential solution
20
Purpose of Today
We are in the Public Input stage
We need your ideas and input on:
– Whether the fishery should be left alone– What options you would like to see examined?– Are there options you do NOT want to see
examined?
21
More Questions for Today
What criteria or impacts matter most (or least) to you?
– net income from the fishery?– local participation in the fishery?– number of jobs?– stability of communities?– tax revenues to local governments?
22
More Questions…
What do you see happening if nothing is changed?
Will you continue to participate in the fishery if nothing is changed?
Are there any questions about the study
23
A Reminder CFEC optimum numbers study
– Survey of driftnet permit holders
440 driftnetters were sent a questionnaire
65% have responded, more needed
Call Kurt Schelle, CFEC, Juneau, if you got a questionnaire but have questions
907-790-6937
24