Saving Seafood

The water is so hot in Alaska it’s killing large numbers of salmon

August 20, 2019 — Alaska has been in the throes of an unprecedented heat wave this summer, and the heat stress is killing salmon in large numbers.

Scientists have observed die-offs of several varieties of Alaskan salmon, including sockeye, chum and pink salmon.
Stephanie Quinn-Davidson, director of the Yukon Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, told CNN she took a group of scientists on an expedition along Alaska’s Koyokuk River at the end of July, after locals alerted her to salmon die-offs on the stream.

She and the other scientists counted 850 dead unspawned salmon on that expedition, although they estimated the total was likely four to 10 times larger.

They looked for signs of lesions, parasites and infections, but came up empty. Nearly all the salmon they found had “beautiful eggs still inside them,” she said. Because the die-off coincided with the heat wave, they concluded that heat stress was the cause of the mass deaths.

Read the full story at CNN

Why did Ballot Measure 1 get crushed? Opponents outspent backers – by a lot – but other factors were also at play.

November 14, 2018 — The business-backed group Stand for Alaska poured more than $10 million into the campaign against Ballot Measure 1, eclipsing spending by the competition in one of the costliest campaigns ever seen in Alaska.

The Stand for Salmon forces, which raised less than $3 million to support the measure, pointed to the financial disadvantage as a key reason their side lost heavily Tuesday.

“We couldn’t overcome their messaging and misinformation,” said Stephanie Quinn-Davidson, a measure sponsor, as election results streamed in Tuesday night.

But campaign observers said the defeat didn’t necessarily turn on money, a view shared by Stand for Alaska’s political consultant, who said the opposition group didn’t spread lies.

The eight-page measure would have rewritten state law, setting new regulations for activity affecting salmon habitat.

The measure won in just six of 40 House districts — downtowns Juneau and Anchorage, and Southwest Alaska. It lost by nearly a 2-to-1 margin, receiving 85,553 yes votes, and 148,130 no votes, as of Friday.

Read the full story at the Anchorage Daily News

 

Ballot measure meant to boost salmon protections loses decisively in Alaska

November 7, 2018 — A ballot measure designed to boost protections for salmon and other fish failed by a large margin Tuesday night amid an onslaught of heavy opposition spending by powerful oil and mining interests.

With 98 percent of precincts reporting by 1:30 a.m. Wednesday, Ballot Measure 1 received 145,997 votes against, and 83,479 votes in favor, a 64-to-36 margin.

Supporters conceded defeat early in the night.

“We had an uphill battle the entire way,” said Stephanie Quinn-Davidson, a measure sponsor and former state fisheries biologist, noting the overwhelming spending by the opposition. “But this effort was unprecedented and we will continue to move this forward.”

Commonly called Stand for Salmon, the controversial measure generated more than $12 million in spending. At least $10.2 million of that was spent by industry-led opposition group Stand for Alaska — Vote No on One.

Opponents had contended the measure would create project delays and costs, halting some development.

Read the full story at Anchorage Daily News

 

Why a Boston billionaire and global resource companies are fueling Alaska’s salmon-initiative debate

October 2, 2018 — A billionaire East Coast investor and six-figure donations from corporate giants are helping fuel assertions from both sides in the Stand for Salmon debate that out-of-state money and motivations are driving opponents’ campaigns.

The industry-led opposition to the ballot measure says large corporate contributors, such as ConocoPhillips, are rooted in Alaska and have the state’s best interest at heart. They charge that Outside nonprofits with questionable intentions have played a key role in the measure, which seeks to strengthen fish protections in Alaska.

“I think this is an anti-resource-development agenda” from Lower 48 groups with national ambitions, said Willis Lyford, a Stand for Alaska consultant.

The measure’s supporters, meanwhile, say the multinational giants are more interested in global profits than protecting Alaska’s environment.

The fight over Outside contributions is coming “from people who want to drill for oil, mine, do all these activities in Alaska that will irreparably harm our salmon,” said Stephanie Quinn-Davidson, a measure sponsor and former state biologist.

One measure supporter is John Childs, a billionaire investor from Boston with a luxury fishing lodge in the Bristol Bay region, where the Pebble mine prospect would be developed.

Read the full story at Anchorage Daily News

Will the fish habitat ballot proposal prod Alaska lawmakers to pass a similar bill? Don’t count on it.

January 30, 2018 — JUNEAU, Ala. — Opponents of a citizens initiative to boost protections for salmon habitat have a path to adapt the proposal to better suit them: helping pass a similar bill through the Alaska Legislature, which would render the initiative void.

The largely Democratic House majority last week introduced a new version of its legislation, House Bill 199, that could serve as that vehicle. Both proposals would create new permitting systems for projects that would affect fish habitat.

But the initiative’s pro-development opponents say they’re not exactly thrilled by HB 199 either.

And they’re making no promises to try to transform it into a compromise measure that could permit resource-development projects while still achieving some of the habitat protections that supporters want.

“These solutions have to be to problems that actually exist,” said Soldotna Republican Sen. Peter Micciche, a Cook Inlet commercial salmon fisherman who also works for ConocoPhillips. “The Senate majority doesn’t recognize, at this point, that there’s a gap.”

The state elections division has not yet placed the initiative on the ballot. Yet it’s already proven polarizing, and its legality is also being challenged in the Alaska Supreme Court.

The initiative is backed by an array of conservation groups that have teamed with three sponsors: Mike Wood, a Cook Inlet commercial setnet fisherman; Gayla Hoseth, a tribal chief from the Bristol Bay region; and Stephanie Quinn-Davidson, an Anchorage ecologist and fisheries advocate.

The supporters say Alaska’s permitting standards are outdated and wouldn’t provide adequate fish protections if proposed megaprojects such as dams, coal export projects, and the Pebble mine near Bristol Bay are ultimately built. The eight-page initiative would create a two-level permitting system with more stringent rules, like requiring that developers avoid or minimize damage to fish habitat or promise to clean up damage caused by projects.

The initiative has raised $300,000, with support from conservation groups like Homer-based Cook Inletkeeper, Virginia-based Trout Unlimited, the Oregon-based Wild Salmon Center and New Venture Fund, a left-leaning nonprofit based in Washington, D.C., according to filings with state campaign finance regulators.

Read the full story at the Anchorage Daily News