Friday, January 27, 2012

Southeast seine permit buyback, take two

For reasons previously noted here on Deckboss, organizers of a proposed buyback of Southeast Alaska salmon seine permits were forced to redo a reverse auction to determine those willing to sell out of the fishery.

That's been done now, and the organizers recently submitted a new capacity reduction plan for approval.

The plan contemplates using more than $13 million in federal loan funds to buy out 64 of the fishery's 379 state permits.

Owners of the 64 permits, and their bid amounts, are listed at the end of the 17-page plan. The bid amounts average $205,204 and range from $175,000 to $240,000.

If the National Marine Fisheries Service approves the plan, seiners will then vote on whether to carry it out.

209 comments:

  1. YOU HAVE TO BUY BACK >102 PERMITS TO REDUCE THE EFFORT FROM LAST YEAR.

    THIS JUST BENEFITS THE 64 ON THE LIST, AND TAXES THOSE WHO AREN'T SELLING.

    WATCH HOW MANY BUY BACK IN AT CHEAPER PRICES.

    ReplyDelete
  2. UNBELIEVABLE, Get the rest of the fleet to tax themselves to fund the purchase of 64 permits for close to twice what they're worth. Amazing that the people on that list are so arrogant that they believe the rest of the fleet is ready to vote to create a windfall for a few people trying to be Bobby T wanna bees and extract a few bucks from the system.
    PITIFUL

    ReplyDelete
  3. Wait 5 years and see how many guys re-entered. Don't believe the latent permits are coming back? Call a broker and ask how many guys are looking, that will make you a believer.

    The last 10 years don't matter, the next 10 years do.

    I'm voting for it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. You don't own the salmon Bob. They own you. When you get too slow to compete for them someone else belongs to them.Competition is the way life has flourished since the beginning of time.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Sorry, you got the wrong guy.

    If you're so convinced the permits aren't becoming active, go call a broker. They'll tell you they got no permits to sell and guys waiting in line to buy them. Those are new entrants buying latent permits. The state value is now over $150 grand, and the only reason it's still that low is because not enough people are willing to sell for the State to update the price. $200 grand (less than half the average gross) to buy out these permits forever is a small price to pay.

    Last time we had prices like this (early 90's?), there were 380-some permits fishing. The average catch was like 400 thousand pounds. Tough-talk about competition won't feel so good with a million dollar boat payment, shorter openers and more lineups if even a fraction of those permits come back.

    The writing's on the wall man. If you think the boats aren't coming to a set near you, you're wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Overcapitalization should be rewarded
    with extinction in the same manner dinosaurs with the brains the size of walnuts met their destiny.There's no need to conspire to scrap the state constitution so you can have the biggest boat & eat it too.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Capacity Reduction, for mental midgets, as written in both Alaska Law, and Federal too.

    http://www.cfec.state.ak.us/RESEARCH/salmon/CHPT1_10_21_04.pdf

    Who teaches 4th grade reading in Petersburg, Juneau and the NMFS, Washington D.C.

    "the commission shall establish"

    AS 16.43.290 reads as follows:
    Optimum number of entry permits. Following the issuance of entry permits under AS 16.43.270, the commission shall establish the optimum number of entry permits based upon a reasonable balance of the following general standards:
    (1) the number of entry permits sufficient to maintain an economically healthy fishery that will result in a reasonable average rate of economic return to the fishermen participating in that fishery, considering time fished and necessary investments in vessels and gear;
    (2) the number of entry permits necessary to harvest the allowable commercial take of the fishery resource during all years in an orderly, efficient manner, and consistent with sound fishery management techniques;
    (3) the number of entry permits sufficient to avoid serious economic hardship to those currently engaged in the fishery, considering other economic opportunities reasonably available to them.

    How many million dollar boat payments does it take to pass a 4th grade reading class?

    Of course the Alaska Supreme Court, can't read it as legal either, but 7 grade reading class is required for some seiners in the state of confusion.

    7 Nowhere in the opinion did the court in Grunert I hold all co-op forms to violate the Limited Entry Act. Rather, Grunert I, in its holding, stated:

    The co-op regulation . . . transforms the
    limited entry permit from what used to be a
    personal gear license into a mere ownership
    share in a cooperative organization. . . .
    Before this regulatory scheme accomplishes
    such radical departure from the historical
    model of limited entry fisheries in Alaska
    and the spirit of the Limited Entry Act,
    however, we conclude that the legislature
    must first authorize the board to approve
    cooperative salmon fisheries.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Never let a fact, get in your way, for the criminal accomplished.

    The Criminal Fisheries Entry Commission, where shall be, shall not be read.

    http://174.123.24.242/leagle/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=19882014758P2d1256_11995.xml&docbase=CSLWAR2-1986-2006

    Johns v Criminal Fisheries Entry Commission

    We find the fact that there are applications which are not finally adjudicated for the fishery does not justify the CFEC's delay in initiating the optimum number process. The CFEC should determine the optimum number for this fishery. If the optimum is greater than the number of permits issued plus the number of applications pending, the excess should be sold under the provisions of AS 16.43.330. Similarly, as to those pending applications which are finally determined adversely to the applicant, additional sales should be held.
    For this reason, we REMAND this case to the superior court with instructions to order the CFEC to begin the optimum number process. In all other respects the decision of the superior court is AFFIRMED.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Petersburg Packing?

    What's the biggest a optimum number ever seen?

    2011

    Get locked in the Outhouse, at Beach School,
    when one took the 4th Grade Optimum Number Reading Class?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Why do we have to buy them? The State issued too many for the current economic trend, and we have to pay for it? You can rest assured that the State has the authority and will issue more when it wants to. I Vote no. No new taxes. No phony buyback.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Corrupt Bastards Club buyback, take three.

    ReplyDelete
  12. The state may have issued too many permits initially, but don't hold you breath to fix it anytime soon.

    If you think the Anchorage area legislators that control the State's funds are going to send millions of dollars to conduct another State buyback for us, you are mistaken. They need all the money they can get for their own issues (preventing teacher layoffs, their own pet projects, etc). Funding a seine buyback in one area of Alaska would be political suicide.

    If you think permit reduction is a valid concept, this is the deal. It won't get any better than this. Will this add value to your operation or not?

    ReplyDelete
  13. The State has billions of surplus revenue. What planet do you live on?

    ReplyDelete
  14. We need to get the permits down to 180, otherwise we are just pissing in the wind. We could have bought more permits 3 years ago...they waited too long. This buy back has been mismanaged and as it stands now will only enact a tax on us while doing very little to actually cut down on number of permits actually being fished. We have real problems to deal with....like Angoon trying to shut down the entire north end to seine. How about the fact that the salmon treaty is about to be negotiated again and we, as usual, are in a weak position. What about all the hatchery and fish farm drama....buy back....too little too late. While we are at it what about the 3 percent tax we are paying for hatcheries that are not producing for the fishermen who pay for them? We seem to be really quick to create these programs that tax fishermen to pay for their implementation that in the end do not work. The only thing they produce is jobs for people to deal with the unintended consequences .

    ReplyDelete
  15. Posters at 930 &955 are processors

    ReplyDelete
  16. State is cutting oil taxes by 1-2 billion. State program no good. There will be 500 million dollar powerlines to towns of 400 people before the state gives us a penny. The state had a million to give in 2007-stipulated for the buyback- and they gave it to icicle, Ocean Beauty and Norquest-Trident instead and they didn't even ask for it

    ReplyDelete
  17. Weak position on treaty- 2012 to 2018 we are in
    New deal in 2019

    ReplyDelete
  18. Hatcheries

    3% invested

    20% annual average takehomea

    ReplyDelete
  19. Angoon proposal
    3rd time loser- not a leg to stand on
    2 highest escapements for kanalku ever were 2009-2010

    ReplyDelete
  20. Processor poster at 955 is probably van am
    Guy you gotta get the words smaller

    All the big word guys on here are either JT or processors

    ReplyDelete
  21. Back to the topic
    What about bobbies permits that we all heard about
    Is it true he's buiLding anew boat how many permits do u need why weren't they sold did the SRA reject him just like psvoa did

    ReplyDelete
  22. Poster at 10:05....where were you fishing last year? It sure wasnt at Hidden Falls or Deep Inlet.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I am the poster at 9:55. I am a decades long seiner. I am tired of being called JT or a processor. This is still a free country and I am a stakeholder and I like to get results
    When I am taxed for these "programs". Not just throw my hard earned money down the rabbit hole.

    ReplyDelete
  24. @180 u would get 40% of the 2011 permits out of the fishery-yeah that would be worth 3% but might have a bit of an optimim # prob
    U c in 2004 we fished 207
    Long term average is around 330

    So 180

    U r high processor dude
    We never even tried to get below 225

    So u were 4 it 3 years ago but against it now because- gee, what about that treaty - gee what about Angoon- gee what about the hatcheries

    What planet r u on
    We may not have this buyback done but we got Bobbyt working on all that other stuff right at this moment

    Duh

    And lots of other guys
    Hatchery boards

    Randy Gregg
    DeanHaltinet
    Rick linblom
    John Peckham
    Bruce Wallace
    John carle
    Jared bright
    Mitch EIDE
    Sven stroosma
    Russ Cockrum
    John Barry

    Treaty
    Bobbyt
    Jim bacon
    John carle
    Mitch EIDE

    Angoon
    Everyone in the state of Alaska Since this is asking for the Feds to take over state waters salmon management

    Ata should bd the most concerned as they are out in fed waters anyways

    ReplyDelete
  25. Seas board
    Lauch leach
    Dan castle
    Gary Haynes
    Brad hsynes
    Sven stroosma
    Al Jacklet
    Nik nebl
    Seth woman
    Randy Stewart
    Notch EIDE
    John Barry
    Jeremy jensen
    Troy thomassen

    And Seafa
    And pvoa
    And psvoa

    ReplyDelete
  26. Gotta watch the processor man posts this weekend A's the boss prob won't let him post on company time

    JT has no job tho so he'll be on here all month with our legal, anti Alaska diatribe-- and thousands poorer after Carlson

    ReplyDelete
  27. 955
    Decades long seiner from nipomo who hasn't caught his 3% of hatchery fish and doesnt follow the treaty too well

    Probably getting paid on the side from trident

    ReplyDelete
  28. You guys are all morally and intellectually bankrupt. A bunch of selfish sissys.

    ReplyDelete
  29. 1036 definitely processor

    ReplyDelete
  30. Come on now- folks must like the list- it's been out all week

    ReplyDelete
  31. Why should we buy out permits so that we can be taxed even more money, when most of the permits aren't even being fished.

    Anybody care to explain this apparent waste of money?

    ReplyDelete
  32. So the 955 longtime fisherprocessor thinks that we should stop doing buyback cuz we have treaty hatchery Angoon problems that we cannot handle- if that were true we'd need the buyback more

    Angoon and Canada are not pissed because we have too few boats

    And if HF and deep crash forever where u gonna put all the boats

    No friends what u desperately need-- and the 955an poster admits-- and have long needed- is a SE seine buyback

    ReplyDelete
  33. They have a surplus now from high oil prices, but the oils running out and they know it. The governor is vetoing projects for being too expensive, and the states retirement fund is going bankrupt.

    The mat-su legislators will not watch their teachers get pink slips while they fund a Buyback that benefits so many non-resident fishermen. In case you haven't been paying attention, commercial fishing isn't real popular in Mat-su because of the hAlibut thing and the kenai....and they control the state government because that's where all the people are.

    Then there's the whole issue of if you do it for SE, you have to do it everywhere else too.

    I don't see the state funding another Buyback on this planet any time soon.

    ReplyDelete
  34. 1981-1998

    Between 325 and 375 permits fished

    1999 345 permits fished
    2001. 335 permits fished
    2004 207

    2011 269 actual

    2013 290 predicted

    2017-2027 predicted 330 permits fished


    --------------
    419 original permits
    2008
    After round 1- 379

    After this round - 315

    10 million left

    After round 3- 260 min to maybe 275

    ReplyDelete
  35. The processors cut em in 2002

    The processors are bringing them back
    A nickel a pound off your price to recruit and get Canadian boats - it's a good place to be if u r seiner but if we when we get back to 300 plus it'll bust

    Longtime 955 poster
    Did ya have any lineups this year

    ReplyDelete
  36. I think you ran 955 off...I have to say....he had some good points. To think that lineups will go away if the buy back is passed is in a word....foolish.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Longer lineups

    And who pays this- processors pay it 4 u
    Of course u really pay but the assessment will be 50% paid by the top 15% of the fleet

    U don't make it up from California
    U don't have to pay a penny

    ReplyDelete
  38. Can we just vote already! Let's just be done with this one way or another.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Off topic (like most posts here) but 955 should do some research before trashing the SE hatchery program.

    Check the total seine contributions compared to total seine income from NSRAA amd SSRA since inception.

    Ask yourself what our early season north end fishery would have looked like over the last 25 yrs. without Hidden Falls.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Poster "9:30" here, I wish that I was a processor, sitting on all your hard earned millions, but I'm just a lifer fishin dude like the rest of us. I do know a couple of "big words" though, I got me some edumacation back when I was a small fry. Did me some business, law, accounting, real estate, in fact I just plain know too much for my own good. That's why I think the numbers on this buyback stinks like an old hold with gurry and a few fish hiding under the boards. Processors have been RAPING us for decades. Does that convince you what side I'm on?

    ReplyDelete
  41. So processors are opposed

    So r u

    That puts u on their side

    Vote no

    And keep getting raped

    ReplyDelete
  42. Taxing myself to remove zero net permits does not compute. Sorry.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Seems like when you can barely afford a hefty vessel debt service, and the sky starts falling, just dial:
    1-900-LOBBYST. Get Uncle Sam to eliminate the competition for you.
    It's DEDUCTABLE!

    ReplyDelete
  44. Well the last polling we saw in seas was 85% in favor-opinions are like assholes- Everyones got one. Btw last poster was definitely a processor

    Processors pay this assessment. No wonder they're against it

    ReplyDelete
  45. Lobbying isn't tax deductible
    But the 3% assessment is

    ReplyDelete
  46. Dial 1900processor if u have debt service-if u don't have a major either financing or buying u a boat then u have not been paying attention
    Guys who can't even crew are getting boat deals
    See any weird looking bots with ex crew or gillnetters driving them last year?

    ReplyDelete
  47. Processor paranoia prevails.

    I seen'em. Day's evrywhere. Best be gettin' muh trunk munkey ready.

    Wait a minute, I might even be a processor and not even know it.

    Serious dude, you da processuh.

    Get the numbers down, easier to control. Vote no.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Google up Trunk monkey fights aliens, you tube. Aliens, processors, what's the difference?

    ReplyDelete
  49. Get the numbers up

    Split 16 million pinks with 45 more boats so the average goes down 100,000 lbs- or 50 grand

    Den ju Gunnar vishnu gu hab de buyback
    Can't fool us mr processor

    If u think less are easier to control then why do u get a seine market if u have a 42 footer and a pulse

    The processors want more boatsN

    Dont believe it? Then why did seas and psvoa have to hire Kent Dawson for 40,000 in 2010 to help out helpless Bobbyt when Obsi and pspa and nppi ( natively for you non-taufens) held up the last piece off buyback legislation
    Look it up on apoc

    ReplyDelete
  50. Why not forego the loans, buyouts, Federal oversight, etc. and simply consolidate the permits in a market driven fashion similar to Bristol Bay: Two permits on a boat gets you a little something extra (a longer net) that some consider to be an advantage at the right time / place. At the end of the day for every permit that is consolidated, 100 fathoms and one boat come off the water.
    Give the folks in S.E. the option of two permits on one boat, with incentive of being able to use a LONGER boat or a seine drum, stand back and watch what happens. At the end of the day isn't it all about the concept of profitability, not for those who want out but for those who want to reinvest and stay in?

    ReplyDelete
  51. This would take decades. Plus it's obvious that with the rancor and hate spewed out last time about permit bid numbers, imagine bobbyt with a 70 footer. Yeah. I'll vote for that. Duh.

    And who would benefit. Those who already have a longer boat or who have 2 permits. Nice ideas but rejected during the 80's 90's and last decade when those entrusted with looking at the best se solutions were busy working on this. And angoon. And Canada. And humpy prices. And USAG. And Board of fish.

    We let the fleet buy 2 permits back in 2002 just so we could do this. So far 3 people have 2 permits and one just sold theirs. Not an enticing timeframe. ONly thing almost as pathetic is the buyback itself. Which is a good thing. It's the only thing. If some of you want fewer than 275 or 260 then you can bring those ideas up at that time.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Are you for real?

    If the processors wanted "more boats" they could set up more guys with the latent permits that will still be available after this buyback. This does not reduce active permits, period, period, period...ad infinitum. Sorry if I sound too educated to be a fisherman, my fault. I can go back to smaller words, misspellings, and improper grammer if that would help you.

    ReplyDelete
  53. that was definitely a processor at 553. a defensive deal about monkeys and such. comeon, we all saw moneyball. only difference is they only let you have 28 ballplayers each club in the majors. Moneyball, get more guys, no more troys and jareds and johns and daniels available so you get 2-3 gillnetters to convert or 2-3 new crewguys with canadian rigs and you still get the production of a denkinger or a barry. if i were a processor i'd have never let one boat go in 02. i'd have picked up street, cole, et. al. and had 100 boats by now. SBS would have never been started. right now isi, obsi, nppi, ags and trident have to fight for the remaining 60% of the pinks that SBA leaves behind. not a pretty picture.

    but it's a good thing for both seiners now and in the future. the processor is going to need you more if he only has 30 boats or 40 boats than if he has 60-80. U know how fast the limits will come again. only thing that matters is that the processors plant is humming.

    less boats means more leverage. the entire spectre of the buyback has caused the processors to pull in tightly to the fleet they have left. it's been a good thing for seiners and crewmembers, who had their first 100,000 dollar crewshares in SE in 2011. first time in history. no wonder so many crew are lined up to buy permits and run boats.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Buybacks are about maintaining "economic viability" not consolidating into multi-millionaires. Read the CFEC mandates.

    ReplyDelete
  55. economic vitality. yeah. the guys that had zero net income from 2000-2007? there are a few, very few, at the top, the millionaire club. the rest of us are just making a go of it. even with this past year, there is only one sector in so1a that has made a long term profit. the processor.

    btw isn't it past your on duty blog time to destroy the buyback, mr processor. more boats, less money, longer lineups, more limits. that's what we want. vote it down. some of us will survive. let's just go to last man standing.

    if the processors want the buyback like mr processor keeps on surmising, then why doesn't one get on here and post and let us know just how much they want it.

    ReplyDelete
  56. vote no on the buyback and vote yes on processor moneyball.

    seiners have finally a chance at free agency. stick with the owners or the players. you got 6 owners and 269 players and 1300 crew who are paid by the players. pick your side. vote no on the buyback to support the owners.

    ReplyDelete
  57. help me to understand.

    how is buying permits that are not being used currently going to help those permit owners who are currently fishing?

    why not just let them remain inactive/not used?

    ReplyDelete
  58. Call me what you want, but you're a damn fool if you think that I'm a processor. They have been stealing us blind for decades. Would a processor say that? Think real hard. I'm done arguing with a fool, makes me feel like a fool. Good night, and vote no new taxes.

    ReplyDelete
  59. One last shot for the night after seeing the other post @ 9:14. Thanks for restoring my faith that there may be logical sanity elsewhere in the fleet. Goodnight!

    ReplyDelete
  60. 914 they will come. history repeats itself. last time this big a shift came was 77-79

    you are buying permits that will fish if not bought. we initially tried to get down to 225. too late now. when we tried many said why buy permits that aren't fishing as there were only 207 fishing. now there are 269.

    if 914 restored your sanity you are brainless. mark my word, vote against this at your peril.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Put in a provision where those who sell out can not buy back in for 10 years or so.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Processors are against it? Who are the processors left in Southeast? Trident in Wrangell, Icicle in Petersburg and Silver Bay in Craig & Sitka. Silver Bay, owned by Bobby T's buddies on the SRA & SEAS, headed by Rob Z with another facility in Valdez. Silver Bay, with Alaska Seiners boats who bought in and are on the board of PSVOA, which happens to have run the first buyout using grant funds.

    Don't forget the first list on the buyout using Pacific Salmon grant funds that was run through the state using federal funds but these funds were never announced the Federal Register as required by law, another Sue Aspelund special. Bobby T & Rob Z counts on the fishermen's short memory.

    NMFS Environmental Impact Statement specifically recommended AGAINST the buyout:

    http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/Salmon-Harvest-Hatcheries/Salmon-Fishery-Management/Salmon-Hrvst-Prgrmtc-EIS.cfm

    Read more here: http://community.adn.com/node/128509#storylink=cpy

    There used to be 415 permits, the entire argument was that fish prices were too LOW, but last year crew shares on some boats were over 6 figures ($100K) on some boats, so the argument that there are too many permits for seiners to make money doesn't hold water.

    A list of the first buyout can be downloaded her:

    http://community.adn.com/sites/community.adn.com/files/Seiner_buyout.doc

    Tell me why the accepted bid amounts ranged from $55,000 to $94,950 in 2008 and now they have nearly doubled in price.

    The fleet needs to consider how much it is going to cost them before they vote yes, especially since UFA, SRA, Alaska Seiners, and SEAS are going to feed at the trough you will fill.

    ReplyDelete
  63. One would think the State, would wan't to consider how much it's going to cost them first?

    Alaska's Constitution contains a number of provisions, generally referred to as the "equal access clauses," that would be relevant to any attempt to implement a state IFQ system. Article VIII, section 15, of the constitution generally prohibits exclusive or special rights of fishery, but does allow for limitation of entry into any fishery for certain specified purposes. The common use clause provides, "[w]herever occurring in their natural state, fish, wildlife, and waters are reserved to the people for their common use." Alaska Const. art. VIII, § 3. The uniform application clause provides:
    Laws and regulations governing the use or disposal of natural resources shall apply equally to all persons similarly situated with reference to the subject matter and purpose to be served by the law or regulation.
    5 of an IFQ permit risk the possibility of suspension or revocation of the permit if the federal IFQ regulations are
    However, under federal law, holders of sablefish IFQs who fish in state waters in violation of the terms determined to be enforceable in state waters. See 15 C.F.R. § 300.
    6
    We note that, if procedures for federal preemption are followed, state constitutional provisions will be preempted along with state regulations. Federal authorities will then be able to create exclusive fisheries in state waters regardless of any provision of the Alaska Constitution which might prohibit the state from taking similar action.
    The Honorable Alan Austerman, Representative July 31, 1995 Alaska State Legislature Page 7 A.G. file no: 223-95-0472
    Alaska Const. art. VIII, § 17. In addition to the preceding "equal access clauses," Alaska's equal protection clause provides, "all persons are equal and entitled to equal rights, opportunities and protection under the law." Alaska Const. art. I, § 1.
    1. The Alaska Constitution Allows Limitation of Entry Into Fisheries.
    The Alaska Constitution explicitly provides that the state can limit entry into any fishery for specified purposes:
    No exclusive right or special privilege of fishery shall be created or authorized in the natural waters of the State. This section does not restrict the power of the State to limit entry into any fishery for purposes of resource conservation, to prevent economic distress among fishermen and those dependent upon them for a livelihood and to promote the efficient development of aquaculture in the State.
    Alaska Const. art. VIII, § 15. The second sentence of section 15, the limited entry clause, was not present in the original constitution, but was added as an amendment that became effective after voter ratification in October of 1972.
    The courts have recognized the tension between the limited entry clause and the equal access clauses. In Ostrosky v. State, however, the Alaska Supreme Court concluded, "the purpose of the amendment to Article VIII, section 15, was to grant the state the power to impose a limited entry system in any fishery, notwithstanding any state constitutional provisions otherwise prohibiting such a system." 667 P.2d 1184, 1190 (Alaska 1983) (emphasis added).7

    Now a granted property right, by the Criminal Fisheries Entry Commission

    rickey@ak.gov.criminal

    http://www.law.state.ak.us/pdf/opinions/opinions_1995/95-017_223950472.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  64. Go Robbery GO!

    Meet Bobby and Robby, Ted and Ben's favorites!

    ...Daddy sang Frank, mamma sang Trevor, me and little Arnie Just joined right in there...

    http://alaskareport.com/taufen30019.htm

    ReplyDelete
  65. DON'T let these 64 vote. Totally unfair. You will already have 20% yes votes before you start by people that aren't voting on the issue, they're voting to approve their financial windfall. Then they will take 50-60% of their windfall and buy back in. Result, no net change. JUST ANOTHER Zuanich scam VOTE NO

    ReplyDelete
  66. Look at the list:

    Michelle Zuanich has TWO permits, and Rob Z and Michelle have never fished. In fact, Michelle works in a white collar job, the Zuanich family was buying up permits to speculate.

    The Manos family had TWO permits to sell - and Tom Manos is wired in to the SRA as well.

    Denkinger - another Silver Bay guy, a PROCESSOR and Rob Z buddy.

    Peder Thorstenson - fishes but as a gill netter, not a seiner - another speculator wired into SEAS.

    Haltiner - another family compatriot of Bobby T.

    Marrese - well, well, Buddy just left the SRA a few months ago but was involved in setting the parameters. He was involved as a board member in moving the hatchery next door to Silver Bay in Sitka. Funny how the hatchery staff then went to work for Silver Bay.

    This just stinks like the first buyback round, all that has changed is Gina Thorstenson has pulled out.

    The fix is still in, the deck of cards is shuffled is all. If the seine fleet votes to tax itself to subsidize these crooks, then there is no hope for you.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Petersburg Packing...

    "Several of the directors told me that Thorstenson and Zuanich had pitched the vessel buyback plan (also known as a fleet reduction program) to the SEAS board saying that Ben Stevens had said, "I've got the Crab deal to my credit. Hire me and I'll get my dad to fund you guys too."

    N445A, have we got a job for you!

    http://www.leftcoastrebel.com/2010/08/video-ted-stevens-plane-crash-photos-of.html

    ReplyDelete
  68. Hey, Rob Z is a processor and he is the one running this reverse auction. Troy Denkinger, Greg Blakey (another processor) and Rob Z hold the controlling interest in Silver Bay Seafoods. Rob Z and Bobby T are the majority owners in the building SEAS is located in, Bobby T gets both a salary and a lobbying fee from SEAS and convinced SEAS to buy a share in his almost empty building.

    If some troll thinks processors are against this buyback in SE Alaska, they are sorely mistaken. Furthermore, Silver Bay owes Pacific Seafoods a great amount of money on their Sitka operation - another processor, Rob Z is controlling the entire buyback from the federal enabling legislation, to the SRA board, to PSVOA running the reverse auction, to owning the the building SEAS is located, the entire enterprise. The biggest processor in Southeast Alaska has also wired it in by getting friends and family to buy up extra permits to sell at inflated prices - prices above the CFEC valuation that were not being fished.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Amen! This deal stinks.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Let's not forget Bobby T, proponent of the buyback, has been a lobbyist for Wrangell Seafoods (a processor) and is wealthy due to the genetic roulette wheel he scored on by being born to a processor - one of the founders of Icicle Seafoods.

    As I recall, Bobby T five or six years ago lobbied for Silver Bay Seafoods as well.

    The troll earlier on this board stating the processors are against is spreading misinformation, the smaller players in Southeast are just not supporting it wholeheartedly and singing in chorus with Bobby T, Rob Z, and Denkinger.

    What is interesting is nobody knows exactly who is on the list of investors for Silver Bay Seafoods, I hear it is over 30 and less than 40 Southeast Seiners, it would be really interesting to get a copy and see how many were permit stacking and sold in the first and second round of the buyback, and are on the boards of Alaska Seiners, PSVOA, SRA, or SEAS.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Sec. 16.43.320. Administration of the buy-back program.

    The commission shall adopt regulations providing for the purchase of transferable entry permits with money in the buy-back fund for each fishery. The commission shall cease purchases of entry permits in a fishery when the number of entry permits in the fishery has been reduced to the optimum number...

    The missing number, SO1A, where 1 Asshole is just like another.

    ReplyDelete
  72. CFEC has not calculated an optimum number.

    Read the buyback document linked to Wes Loy's post, it mentions one but according to Sec. 16.43.320 an optimum number as the target reduction has not been calculated.

    ReplyDelete
  73. At least it make's for an easy target, MIA as usual.

    Article 11
    Optimum Numbers of Entry Permits

    1140. Optimum number of entry permits for the Southeastern Alaska roe herring purse seine fishery.

    1145. Optimum number of entry permits for the Northern Southeast Inside sablefish longline fishery.

    1147. Optimum number of entry permits for the Bristol Bay drift gillnet fishery.

    20 AAC 05.1140. Optimum number of entry permits for the Southeastern Alaska roe herring purse seine fishery

    The optimum number of entry permits for the Southeastern Alaska roe herring purse seine fishery is 46.
    History: Eff. 1/21/94, Register 129
    Authority: AS 16.43.100 (a)

    AS 16.43.110 (a)

    AS 16.43.290

    20 AAC 05.1145. Optimum number of entry permits for the Northern Southeast Inside sablefish longline fishery

    The optimum number of entry permits for the Northern Southeastern Inside sablefish longline fishery is 73.
    History: Eff. 5/17/2001, Register 158
    Authority: AS 16.43.100

    AS 16.43.110

    AS 16.43.290

    20 AAC 05.1147. Optimum number of entry permits for the Bristol Bay drift gillnet fishery

    The optimum number of entry permits for the Bristol Bay drift gillnet fishery is 900 to 1,400.
    History: Eff. 11/25/2005, Register 176
    Authority: AS 16.43.100

    AS 16.43.110

    AS 16.43.290

    AS 16.43.990

    ReplyDelete
  74. It is no secret amongst the fleet that bobby t. Was encouraging everyone to buy se seine permits awhile back because he knew the buyback was viable. One who can act like this truly has no regard for the fishery or anyone that is involved. Bobby cares about himself and then those that pay him. If we as seiners vote this in then we are no better.

    ReplyDelete
  75. 1145. Optimum number of entry permits for the Northern Southeast Inside sablefish longline fishery.

    Isn't this the optimum number that Bobby T's college buddy Arne sought to maximize and now finds himself pleading guilty to, and singing to the Feds? We can only hope he has other songs to sing about.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Good morning boys , it's processor man again. Bring on the insults.

    ReplyDelete
  77. And what's an insult?

    Marketing of Alaskan products for export has, for the first time in Alaska’s history has topped $5 billion according to the U.S. Census Bureau. This announcement was made by Governor Parnell today who declared that Alaska’s total exports were $4.2 billion for all of 2010, and in 2011 Alaska went over five billion dollars from January through November, 2011, with the largest annual dollar amount for exports were made by Alaska seafood...

    The S01A Insult, the democratic party special, for sale near you!

    ReplyDelete
  78. Insult, a self inflicted wound.

    Fishin for Tuition?

    What's a RECORD?

    Purse Seine Fishery, 2011

    Common property cumulative seine harvests include an estimated 54.4 million pink salmon, 2.5 million chum salmon, 0.50 million sockeye salmon, 0.32 million coho salmon, 25,700 Chinook salmon and a total salmon harvest of 57.8 million fish. These harvests compare with recent 10-year average harvests of 37.2 million pink salmon, 4.4 million chum salmon, 0.60 million sockeye salmon, 0.32 million coho, and 23,700 Chinook. A preliminary estimate of ex-vessel value for this year’s fishery is $105.7 million. This value compares to the recent 10-year average of $37.5 million and surpasses the prior record value of $91.2 million in 1989. Harvest has been reported this season by 269 permit holders in common property fisheries. The recent 10-year average effort is 259 permit holders. Pink salmon harvest by district in for the season in order of magnitude includes: 19.2 million from District 12, 8.5 million from District 13, 6.2 million from District 14, 7.0 million from District 9 4.1 million from District 3, 3.7 million from District 10, 2.4 million from District 4, 2.0 million from District 5, 0.8 million from District 2, 0.5 million from District 1, and 0.1 million from District 7. This year’s harvests from Districts 12 and 13 are new record-level harvests since statehood. Districts 6 and 11 did not open this season.

    http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=commercialbyareasoutheast.salmonfishery_updates

    ReplyDelete
  79. Insult......being an active seiner for decades and posting an opinion on this blog and being called a processor. That, sir, is an insult. Watching fellow seiners fall for this greed-driven colussion, is an insult.

    ReplyDelete
  80. @9:05 am - are you trolling for more insults or just self-flagellating?

    People make mistakes...

    ReplyDelete
  81. Naw boys- get to work on that treaty and those hatcheries and Angoon

    Don't worry about a buyback
    It's of no use
    We'll treat u fairly

    Signed
    All SE seine buyers
    Trident
    Marubeni- SSS
    Icicle
    SBS
    Ocean beauty
    Pacific seafoods - Wrangell
    Ec Phillips
    Jim pattison-ags

    ReplyDelete
  82. Yes people do make mistakes....I think the se seine buyback is proof of that.

    ReplyDelete
  83. If u don't want to be mistaken for a processor- sign ur name u homo
    I'm actually a processor trying to get u to vote 4 the program so I don't have to deal eith so many dumbass SE seiners

    ReplyDelete
  84. Stop the buyback
    Vote no

    So I can come up from California and shoe you crybabies how to fish

    You can tell who has permit on here

    The no votes can't vote cause they are processors or leasing permits---except for the 15,000 words posted by JT--who knows bristol bay should be first in line

    ReplyDelete
  85. Nice second grade remark. We are talking economics and other grown-up stuff. Would you like me to show you to the
    Play area?

    ReplyDelete
  86. Come on up from Cali....as you can see from poster 921,
    We don't discriminate.

    ReplyDelete
  87. Don't let the facts of the corrupted buyback, a completely unnecessary program, bog you down. Just spend your time spinning your wheels on trying to identify the processors - who really don't care who and how many are delivering fish to them.

    And the consumer really doesn't care if you chose to tax yourself 3% and cut into your profit (just like the processors really don't care) - it's all your money anyway.

    Someone said it was the Democrats idea, like when did that happen? This was Ted & Ben Stevens baby (who are life long Republicans), and signed by a Republican President, being implemented by a Republican Governor in one of the Reddest States in the US.

    Guess what, the buyback is just more regulation but instead of a government subsidy, the program is counting on the fleet being dumb enough to tax itself to fund it. If there were actually free market capitalism at work here, they would just the market work like it has -- when prices are low, permits aren't fished.

    ReplyDelete
  88. Yeah!!!!!! Someone who actually has. Ommon sense and speaks the truth! Hallelujah!

    ReplyDelete
  89. And when prices are high permits are fished

    That's why we are having the buyback

    And if processors don't care then why are they adding 10-15% to each fleet in 2012- heck most of the fleet managers will be fired if they don't deliver on that goal

    With 30 or so guys Ieaving in 2012- only to come back in 2013 (2 obviously will not from false pass if we buy them)the processors need to get these numbers to fill the gap

    ReplyDelete
  90. And then why is SEAS & the UFA asking for legislation to allow the CFAB to allow for higher limits on boat & permit loans? Same circular logic as the poster @10:25 am, fewer permits means the price of the remaining permits goes sky high, see one of the earlier posts where the first buyback prices in 2008 are less than half of the prices in this reverse auction.

    And you are making an apples & oranges comparison - False Pass is NOT in Southeast. Adding to each fleet doesn't matter because the buyback is only for Southeast.

    Don't forget, those who have put their permits up for sale have already fished or never have their permit and will not have to pay the 3% so they get a free ride (see Michelle Zuanich, who has two permits to sell).

    ReplyDelete
  91. What's telling is that the majority of posters on here do not own a SE permit-

    If they were so easy- and relatively cheap- to buy then why don't you all own one.

    You can all have opinions.

    But only permit holders can vote.

    Here you sit on your anonymous asses and shoot down a decade of work- my lifes work as it were as I never had a job until I turned 40- while you do nothing but tear others down. What have you dedicated your last decade to.

    What's amazing is that this lost had been out a week- posted on www.seiners.net, has had 1300 views, so all of you have soaked this up for a week and had 0 comments on the website where someone actually gives a frog about the program-- someone who will vote --

    Because:::: 1300 hits?

    I'll bet there were some permit holders on there.

    You guys--and a couple of you do have permits and great on you for standing up for what you believe in.

    You have my number. I've talked with a few of you. There's not a kink we haven't worked out this decade and this program has been long overdue in southeast.

    Bobbyt

    ReplyDelete
  92. Devoutly processor
    No one says 'the UFA'

    ReplyDelete
  93. Seas is currently neutral on the new cfab bill-- not on our radar screen of top 10 issues at this time
    Cdfu and ufa aren't seas

    Bobbyt

    ReplyDelete
  94. LOL - not a processor

    Too funny, bobby t never had a job until he was 40, for once he might be telling the truth (let me guess, Daddy's Icicle Seafoods deep pockets kept you going, huh). His life's work...

    ReplyDelete
  95. Processor at 1034
    Pete and Tom
    See you are advocating to oppose and you don't knowxshit

    ReplyDelete
  96. Pete and Tom are the false pass guys is what you meant to say to 1034 processor puke right?

    ReplyDelete
  97. And Tom is on the SRA stupid

    And the False Pass fleet stays in port part of the summer the past couple of years stupid

    And best of all, you think I'm a processor, which is the most stupid of all.

    ReplyDelete
  98. For some of us our life's work is fishing...and this buyback is going to interfere with our work no matter what. Many of us did not ask for this, we do not want it. We want to go about this the good 'ol American way and let the market dictate the number of permits.

    ReplyDelete
  99. Processor guy,

    Think how this will play out: When that crab thing passes guys will be able to borrow almost the the full price. Then these permits go up in price again
    from 150 to 200+. This Buyback will look like a really good deal then. People Sid the same things in round 1 when guys sold out in the high 80s. Too high, yeah right.

    Good news is that you processors won't have to front the lease payment for guys that decided not to buy in anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  100. 11:04, unfortunately, the "ol American way would have no limited entry, so we all agree that some regulation is necessary. Do we need more? It would be nice if permit holders could have a rational discussion that addresses the important issues.

    1. The conflicts of interest. The new list somewhat diminishes the intensity, but this is still the elephant in the room.

    2. The numbers of permits outstanding, fished during the good 2011 season, and the number likely to be fished in the future with and without this buyback.

    All this talk about gross stocks, who is a processor and who isn't, etc, is needless distraction.

    ReplyDelete
  101. Since they just lifted the tariff of norways farmed fish, we will be back to where we started, with a glut of salmon on the markets and being sold at a lower price the ak wild salmon. Will the buyback help that? What about many seiners I know who have not fished in years, but are waiting for the buyback to go thru so the permit prices will soar and then they will sell to new entrants. All the while never having to pay the 3 percent because they are out of the fishery.

    ReplyDelete
  102. Looks like the good ol' American, free market capitalisim WINS again! God bless America 11:23!

    ReplyDelete
  103. Why not instead use an extra 3% assessment for hatchery expantion. Add another 20% or so to the salmon biomass?

    ReplyDelete
  104. Money isnt limiting the hatcheries. Scientists have to approve more release. And they aren't. Good idea though.

    ReplyDelete
  105. Half full beats half empty. Just keep expanding on doing what we already do best.

    ReplyDelete
  106. The fewer the fishermen, the fewer the strings to pull.

    Vote Yes.

    Sincerely yours,
    Your Loving Processors.

    ReplyDelete
  107. Finally, some more commentators that make sense, and then...there is good ol' booby tea. Really Bob, sounds like you want to meet every one who doesn't think as you do, out back behind the portable after school. Never did much care for bullies. Something wrong there.

    ReplyDelete
  108. It would be interesting to give the fleet an option on how they wish to asses themselves a tax. Hatch more or permit less? Fish increase or fleet reduction? More democratic.

    ReplyDelete
  109. Anybody know what the SE canneries were paying per pound at the end of the season? Any ideas what the final price will amount to bearing in mind any price adjustment?

    ReplyDelete
  110. If it were as easy as just hatching more, don't you think we would have done it by now?

    Permits and hatcheries are two totally different issues, so it has no bearing on the buyback plan.

    ReplyDelete
  111. Add another 20% to the salmon biomass
    We don't count them ht way

    And tax seiners 3 more percent to give (2011) 72-% of the fish to the troll and gillnet fleets

    So there are SE permit holders on here
    They're just not seine permit holders

    The processors Have had an adhoc committeefor 3 years now and we hate less hatchery harvest than when they began

    ReplyDelete
  112. I think the economic benefits to fishermen, communities, and state, as well as buyers & service industries would really benefit more from increased throughput; more fish in the system.
    If we're in the fishing business, balancing risks of area closures or treaty restrictions with more assets,fish, is just basic business sense.
    Fish farms will just keep cranking out more product, and to simply maintain the market share we've built up we have to keep going on the supply side.
    Reducing effort is a type of thinking that undermines the long term interests of the fishery and all it represents.

    ReplyDelete
  113. Can we get some good ol' processor quota share, tossed into the mixture too bobbyt?

    Petersburg Packing, Parnell, and Palin(D) shown best at ADF&G Criminal Hunting and Fishing Parties.

    http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/corey-rossi-and-30-bear-weekend

    Who was Teddy Roosevelt(R)?

    What does Conservation mean?

    (D)on't ask em in Petersburg, thats where you can't get past another trailer trash welfare queen.

    ReplyDelete
  114. The Mississippi (D)emocratic Bear Hunt, brought to you by bobbyt for who's your democratic party's chief?

    http://www.theodoreroosevelt.org/kidscorner/tr_teddy.htm

    "Go get Sheets, we need another vote."
    Ted Stevens(D)

    ReplyDelete
  115. The Purse Seine Cases always confuse em at the "artificial associations and co-ops" from bobbyt SEAS, Dr. Crapo too, and the Alaska Department of Criminal Fish and Game employees too...

    "..With this backdrop, the court in Grunert I concluded that “[p]articipation by the individual is inherent in the limited entry permit system.   The Chignik cooperative fishery scheme is fundamentally at odds with this premise because it allows people who are not actually fishing to benefit from the fishery resource...” 

    "The Supreme Court clearly read the Limited Entry Act to reflect two basic criteria.   One is to restrict eligibility for permits to those who would be actually fishing, and they-that's sort of the source of their description of what is active fishing and what is active participation.   And also, those people who have a dependence on fishing, that's a factor in the assignment originally and, you know, sort of post-creation of the whole limited entry scheme.   The point seems to be that the Act prefers to have people actively participate and be economically dependent, not necessarily exclusively, but be economically more dependent than less, and to require active participation.   And I think it's significant that the Act requires-defines permit holders in terms of persons and defines persons to be natural persons, not a variety of artificial and associational or cooperative groups..."

    ReplyDelete
  116. I agree. This buyback reeks of incremental long term encroachment of federal management quota schemes on state fisheries. A 10 year plan.

    ReplyDelete
  117. JT has a friend in processor man

    ReplyDelete
  118. Gillnetters have federAl observers next year
    And they don't have a Buyback with the lowest interest rates since ww1 and Woodrow wilson
    Can't change the fact we live in the usa

    ReplyDelete
  119. It seems most seiners had a pretty good buy back going already when the state allowed them to buy two permits each. The problem that followed was that the select few (two permit holders) decided to make the rest of the fleet pay for their endeavors. Why not put our energy into the board of fish process and have regulations that allow the dual permit holders and extra day here and there to harvest fish while the single permit holders sit on the beach. This would only work if the regulations do not interrupt the normal way of fishing we have enjoyed over the last five decades. Can you imagine having a hand full of boats fishing Hawk Inlet one extra day a week as a perk towards their investment?

    ReplyDelete
  120. sounds good. and give them 3 times as much fishing if they have 3 permits. are you fucking kidding me. there's just a little resentment because a few well known smart guys made a few thousand dollars on permits. imagine denk, bobbyt and barry fishing while u r watching. what a fucked up idea

    ReplyDelete
  121. hey. be nice on here. this was an original attempt to come up with another way.

    thats why we rejected such ideas--that one is a new one--when we came up with the Program.

    ReplyDelete
  122. One permit, one "small" business, divides an industry into many living income units. Shrink these permit numbers and you are heading toward salmon ratz with guaranteed processor shares. Vote no.

    ReplyDelete
  123. salmon ratz with guaranteed processor shares???

    oh my.

    let's not do anything then. no stacking. no special privileges.

    and let's get all 379 permits back on the water. we may not catch any fish or make a living

    but surely we could then avoid salmon ratz with guaranteed processor shares. what did you think we had when we were getting a nickel a pound on daily limits. that's what we were involved in. trying to get out of it. not back in it. with 379 permits operating, or even 300, like we'll have in 2013, we'll have limits and defacto p shares.

    your coffee must be bad this am.
    guess the processors are still on the payroll even after the weekend. surely this is a processor hoax. who in their right mind would compare a fishermen-run, fishermen-decided fleet consolidation to a processor-run, processor-decided program.

    ReplyDelete
  124. heck, if your logic is sound, then the best way to avoid p shares is to give our permits back to the state and let anyone with 50 bucks get one any year.

    like the good old days. i'm up for that. i can handle the competition. can you?

    at least we'll avoid p shares or ratz since less permits means we are vulnerable, more and more permits at 50 bucks apiece is the answer.

    why should you get to fish anyways. it's a public resource. when us alaskans take it back over, we'll kick out the outsiders anyways or maybe just have you pay a 25% royalty to the native corporations.

    ReplyDelete
  125. Well, there you go again, making all kinds of emotional nonsense.

    Competition? You bet, bring it.

    I get to fish because I am the public. Did you think that I'm a talking fishtrap? Furthermore, my permit was original issue. Our fish prices were better before CFEC came along, that's even BEFORE adjusting it to todays dollar. Permit debt loading has created a necessity of fishing for many, no matter what the lousy price is.

    You don't even know what made up the "good ol' days". Oil revenue entitilements, native corps, and Limited Entry has stolen what Alaska truly was. Guys like you shame what the Great Land has to offer. I guess you're too young to know the difference or else you're just corrupt. Fire me some more insults kid, and don't forget to vote no when your shareholder buddies aren't watching over your shoulder.

    ReplyDelete
  126. There you have it folks, if it weren't for CFEC, fish prices would be high again.

    Forget about global trade, and farmed salmon, and quota shares, and spectra nets and super seiners. Let's go back to 400 permits, fish in wood boats, get rid of radar and gps and go back to the glory days. Let's can 'em all like we used to, maybe have a few weeklong closures in there too.

    I can appreciate anybody fond of what Alaska used to be, but I'm more concerned about the future now. The changes we've seen are not going away, and the fishery needs to change too.

    ReplyDelete
  127. Fish prices better before Cfec came along?
    I'm original issuance also and I am an Alaskan. Cfec was 1974. So we've both been at this for 38 years. Guess neither of us will pay that 3% for long so let's let the young guys decide

    It's their future

    ReplyDelete
  128. I'm from down south and I"m voting YES!!! eventhough I re sent the comments by super Alaskan dude.

    It's not perfect but it's the best we've got. And I"ve got 38 years left to fish and pay the tax. I read that if things were good the tax would be paid off in 6 years. Maybe that's why old guy is pissed. He'll be paving my future. Certainly I'm a pikerdude and probably learned fromold guy and I won't make nearly as much as oldguy these next 6 years.

    Vote YES for our future.

    ReplyDelete
  129. I'm not "pissed", just trying to warn you about how the State works.

    They WILL issue more permits when we start making too much $$$. If you think the appointed officials don't react to the directions of the elected officials who appoint them, you've got a lot to learn.

    You will tax yourself just to have them reissued before you will actually realize a net profit from the buyback, unless of course you are selling into this round. I've been involved at State level and conferred with the department/commission heads. If you think I'm wrong, tell me what language is in place to protect us from additional permits being issued. WE DON'T EVEN HAVE AN OPTIMUM NUMBER CONFIRMATION, and, that is still subject to economic opportunity obligations mandated by the State through the CFEC.

    You're just buying pie in the sky without the teeth in the language to protect your purchase here. The paint sure is pretty but what's under the hood?

    ReplyDelete
  130. So true. They will issue more permits for a variety of reasons. Ask around the optimum number is pretty much whatever they want it to be.

    ReplyDelete
  131. optimum number cannot exceed permits being fished so it's likely to be around 220-269 right now.

    also the optimum number for sitka sac roe is the same as the permit number, so the chances of throwing more permits in is nil.

    and hb484 from 2006, stipulates that the state will give us the money from the proceeds if they ever do sell any permits.

    but look at your operation. it's stand alone for optimum number purposes. your boat, net, moorage, insurance... it's all going to be counted against the s01a fishery, not all the other fisheries you belong in. that's how they did sitka sac roe.

    we've thought about this for decades. it was always the reason not to do a buyback. we got the bill we needed in 2006 as well as the reality that there has never been permits issued to come UP to an optimum number.


    obviously if you don't know about 2006 and hb484 then you don't have a clue

    processor excuse #11 for opposing the buyback has now been registered.

    ReplyDelete
  132. Yes vote registering in.
    Way to go SEAS and PSVOA.

    ReplyDelete
  133. I Vote my pocket book. I vote Yes. And so does my cousin and best freind. And I live in AK. Held a permit since 1992. Don't know nobody on the list hardly but don't care either.

    ReplyDelete
  134. I hate SEAS and PSVOA. They suck. But I remember how hard it was to make a living just a few short years ago. With the uncertainty of hatcheries, access, fights with gillnetters, subsistence, sport and such we need to get our numbers down. Also remember how much this fishery has changed. I vote yes also.

    ReplyDelete
  135. There is a bunch of us who don't like seas or pvsoa but we will be voting no.

    ReplyDelete
  136. go ahead. it's a free world. no one is holding a gun to your head after all.

    except your processor.

    ReplyDelete
  137. Yes is a smart vote IMHO.
    All SE gear groups are too crowded.
    All fleets these days are very mobile, catch fish one opening
    and count on a crowd for the next opening. With cell phones everyone
    gets instant catch reports from all
    areas. No more secrets, big sets
    are on youtube before the next
    announcement comes out.
    I wish the seiners luck and hope
    the trollers & gilnetters follow.

    ReplyDelete
  138. Once again, just because I can string together better logics and multiple syllable words better than you can, you accuse me of being a processor. Shows what you think of fishermen. Sounds to me more like an attitude a real processor would have. You, mr. processor accuser, are the processor minded one. You think fishermen can only be low browed and monosyllabic. Know the law, know the State, know the commissions, know the players, NO the vote.

    ReplyDelete
  139. 3% tax, no less permits, bad deal.

    ReplyDelete
  140. youngster. if you were around when we had 350 plus permits fishing you'd have a clue. if you were and still want to vote no, just have fun trying to make a living. those of us who do other fisheries will do fine. those of you who do just salmon. suck on this. vote no and suck on this.

    ReplyDelete
  141. The best business deal for Z and Denk would be a NO vote. So please help out our newest processor with a no vote on this. They own half of Silver Bay. They'll make millions more if there is no buyback.

    ReplyDelete
  142. Who would want to buy into a fishery that all of you have f*** up. You guys deserve each other.

    ReplyDelete
  143. Well put 7:08 post ! Voting yes is the way to
    go. I'll be involved for the payment of this buyback
    and consider the tax a small price to pay.
    VOTE YES to support yourself and the so1a fishery...

    ReplyDelete
  144. Another yes vote here.

    I get the impression most of the antis don't get to vote anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  145. NONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  146. Yes
    28 years old
    400,000 mortgage
    I vote yes

    ReplyDelete
  147. When is the Vote and whats the timeline?

    ReplyDelete
  148. If the remaining permit values go up to the average
    bid in the buyback, seems to me everyone who has
    one just got the first round paid for. That just sounds horrible!!! That's a yes vote. >)))•>

    ReplyDelete
  149. I VOTE YES,

    Another end run, to pay bobbyt and rob zuanich back for the Ben Stevens $500,000.00

    What a KLASSIC! Legislation from the Criminal Fisheries Entry Commission and quite a few Juneau Legislative members too.

    More Ben Sevens today?

    HOUSE BILL NO. 484 "An Act allowing for revenue received from issuance of additional entry permits to be appropriated for reimbursement to salmon fishery associations."

    ReplyDelete
  150. I vote yes. It's a great deal my crew will pay for it.

    ReplyDelete
  151. I VOTE YES,

    Someone has to pay those who can't make it fishin and can't make it in politics either.

    The 24th Legislative Corruption Probe, brought to you by Bobbyt, and Rob Zuanich...

    has not been charged "YET"

    Adak, Iraq, and a Ben to GO!

    Stevens has been investigated by the FBI in connection with an ongoing Alaska political corruption probe, though he has not been charged with any crime. His office has been visited twice by FBI agents who seized evidence including documents relating to an alleged payment scheme involving fisheries legislation.
    A 2003 legislative earmark gave the Alaska Native community at Adak Island (and thereby Adak Fisheries) exclusive rights to pollock fishing, worth millions of dollars to Adak Fisheries.Beginning in July 2002, Stevens held a secret option, expiring in December 2004, to buy a 25% ownership in Adak for an immediate payment of $50,000 and another $450,000 paid over time. In mid-2004, 50% of Adak was sold for $4.3 million to a Seattle company. In November 2004, Stevens attempted to exercise the option, but because of changes in ownership of Adak, the complexity of the agreement between Aleut and Adak, and subsequent litigation, his $50,000 check was never cashed and Stevens did not get any ownership rights. Adak Fisheries paid Stevens $295,000 between 2000 and 2004.
    In September 2007, Stevens called into an Anchorage talk radio show to proclaim his innocence. He said he "didn't do anything illegal" and that he worked in the state's best interest as a senator.

    ReplyDelete
  152. Yes. No brainer guys.

    ReplyDelete
  153. By the way no charges coming. Statue of limitations.

    ReplyDelete
  154. Vote yes on the buyback, ignore the names on the list, support permit stacking at the BOF level, and you will never miss the money. Keep the personalities out of it, it is simply good business for your long term involvement.

    ReplyDelete
  155. Yeah, that's right. Team up with the liars and thieves. Trust them, they will only steal from the other guy and never you.

    ReplyDelete
  156. Yeah the same liars and thieves who have been protecting this fishery forever have sure done a lousy job haven't they/ what has this fishery become-can't even make a living in SE seine

    ReplyDelete
  157. Can we please all get back to what's truly important here?!? More verbal fellation of Daniel Crome!! That guy is AWESOME!!!

    ReplyDelete
  158. Poster @ 532
    JT in style-but lacking Webster and Willamette
    Hey dumbluck, heard Ted just testified in heaven in favor of bobrob
    Isn't it obvious that this case is closed
    Ted was exonerated
    So was ben
    Yeah but that bobrob, they're still after them with full force of the law

    Btw JT what's thishavepOtentially Squat to do with your yes vote

    Oh that's right - u can't vote cuz u r a bay gillnetter

    ReplyDelete
  159. BTW, charges were dropped against Ted, rightfully so due to federal prosecutor misbehavior. The feds broke the rules for sharing evidence with the defense, so the case got tossed. That is NOT the same thing as being exonerated, however.

    ReplyDelete
  160. well bobrob were never indicted so no need for exXonerrations-- if the average dude had as much surveillance and allegations made, and then they get a 100% clean bill of health, shouldn't we think that dude is actually cleaner than we are. btw the bobrob was never even a part of the Stevens thing.

    ReplyDelete
  161. the stevens thing insofar as the federal allegation. the bobrob thing was vic smith allegations and he has no personal private court to try them in, and no one to believe his line of BS and remember, even before bobrob came along, he almost got sued by bedford. vic met with the fbi, showed them his stuff almost 6 years ago and it looks like that file is really HOT

    ReplyDelete
  162. To whom it may concern:
    I have had my own vessel for 4 seasons in Southeasternalaska. I crewed for 10 years before that time. And I believe in the buyback. I know you are all entitled to your opinions but I am 34 years old with a family of four. And I see the buyback as the only solution. It is the only reason I joined seseinersassociation. And I plan on paying this assessment for fortie years or more. I live in a rural town in southeasternalaska. And we see city slickers, other cities in Alaska, and other outsiders getting into the fishery. And we want to freeze the number as soon as possible. I believe we could have done it cheaper many years ago and wonder why we did not do so. But now we are where we are and please do the right thing for my future. And the future of
    My children
    Vote yes

    ReplyDelete
  163. Too bad we didn't do it 15 years ago. Then we would have kept the riff raff out like you. You're the type that bans logging after YOUR house is built.

    ReplyDelete
  164. I love it when residents turn on other residents because they are not locals. Reminds me of the idiot tribal feuds that divide enemy combatant forces. Me, me, me.

    ReplyDelete
  165. 15 years ago there were 415 permits fishing, that's the whole point.

    ReplyDelete
  166. What do you call a SE Alaskan?

    ReplyDelete
  167. Anyone whose family has lived there for a century
    Anyone who came after the 20's or 30's is a cheechakoe

    ReplyDelete
  168. Ted was exonerated?

    Just like Aaron Burr, and Benidict Arnold, Ted's Heros.

    Whats a cheechakoe?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f99PcP0aFNE

    ReplyDelete
  169. So at 6:28pm

    Do you always sell your children down the road, like SEAS, UFA, and the rest of Petersburg Packing is famous?

    Vote to sell your chidren down the road, including free housing, 3 hots, and a cot too.

    You democrats are the same in every port, now we callit investing in our childrens future, by seling them down the road?

    VOTE UNEDUCATED FISHERMEN OF ALASKA!

    http://www.alaskapublic.org/2011/09/26/former-crew-members-attempted-to-turn-in-fuglvog/

    ReplyDelete
  170. Lipstick the Movie.

    And the trailer trash queen, take two, on HBO!

    http://www.alaskadispatch.com/video/game-change-trailer-released

    ReplyDelete
  171. Bobbyt, have you been trying to trick us by posting anonymously?

    ReplyDelete
  172. "It’s time to stop putting extreme special interests above our people’s interests. Where the federal government would lock us out, we will open the doors of opportunity for Alaskans. So long as I am governor, we will not revert to colonial status – and we will not cede control of Alaska’s future..."
    Gov. SP

    ReplyDelete
  173. when will we ever learn.i remember back in the 70s the mere mention of limited entry and the speculation involved caused the halibut license to go from 300 active fishing permits to 1200 in a short three year period!wa la creat your own problems,vote no!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  174. Actually in Teds Stevens’s case the prosecutors should have shared the evidence that they withheld. It would have made the case against him stronger. That evidence was that Bill Allen bribed/paid under aged girls to have sex with him. He was briber and paid for what he wanted. And basically he and Ted had the same relationship

    ReplyDelete
  175. Accused, but never convicted, guilty as hell is hot, but wriggled off on the technicalities. But alas, there is a higher power to ultimately answer to. Going down?

    ReplyDelete
  176. You sir are just as guilty as Mr Granger when he rejoices in the tragic loss of one of our states greatest heroes, not to mention the nations longest serving Republican Senator. As for Senator Stevens, If you knew him at all, sir, you would have known that he.......there's nothing left to say. Pathetic corpses of inhuman beings inhabit the bodies you Losers who rejoice in even the death of anyone. And you should not allowed the right to post here.

    How could someone have so much hatred.

    Bobbyt

    ReplyDelete
  177. Every elected official is sworn to defend the Constitution. If in the end it isn't there for them, perhaps they were not there for it.
    Preserving economic freedom in our salmon fisheries is also defending the Constitution. If we are all slaves once we've hung yourselves who is to blame?

    ReplyDelete
  178. Processor man who yet hates Ted

    ReplyDelete
  179. perserve ekonomik freedom. vote no on the buyback so that you can enjoy the great treatment you've had with the prozzeczars

    ReplyDelete
  180. Uncle Ted did great things for Alaska with the power he had. But he also abused his power and lined his own pockets, his son’s pockets and his cronies’ pockets. If you were lucky enough have your pockets lined by Ted’s power you are probably a very happy happy boy and would never have a discouraging word toward Ted. The sad thing is that he would be alive today if he was in prison where he belonged.

    ReplyDelete
  181. Bobbyt, responding to your pile of crap from a few up, I did know Ted and spent some time with him. You are the lie and hate spewer you so easily accuse others of. I merely refer to the truth that he had gotten quite crooked and anyone in those situations are allied with...enough said. I don't rejoice in Ted's death, that's you making up garbage, as usual. I'm guessing that you think that it's "tragic" that anyone dies. Get over it, we all die sooner or later. Some are afraid to die, afraid there's nothing else, or worse. I would caution you to not refer to me as a pathetic corpse, you are heading in the wrong direction and need a course correction.

    ReplyDelete
  182. The buyback needs to put to vote real soon!

    ReplyDelete
  183. 706
    If you were the 547 yesterday then what did you mean by 'going down' when referring to Ted setvens and a higher power.

    I assumed you were referring to the plane crash.

    If so you are a pathetic corpse.

    Bobbyt

    ReplyDelete
  184. And FYI
    My letter for Ted setven-I mean Stevens- would not have been much different than my letter for Fug, except I know Fug far better than I knew Ted. And I don't care what anonymous assholes say about me. Heck, there are 800 million people from 149 countries on the Internet and I just assume my detractors are from countries that I can't pronounce the names of since the pathetically proud authors of their hate speeches never emerge.

    Sir Ted may you rest in peace and your family knowing that you made us Alaskans proud and helped every corner and every poor , middle class and better off people of Alaska and the USA.

    Bobbyt

    ReplyDelete
  185. As for the buyback.

    It's not a personal thing at all. I work for SEAS and the organizations membership overwhelmingly supports the buyback, through 6 polls we have taken since 1984. The very lowest was 77% in favor. The highest was 86%. Last April it was 85%.

    I'll survive either way. I've fished this fishery when there were 375 and when there were 207. But after studying the idea hard for a decade then working on it for another decade, I've come 100% to the realization that it is the answer. I was only about 98-98% sure those other years.

    If you want the latest news then tune in to www.seiners.net and we'll keep you permit holders and SEAS members posted.

    Bobbyt

    ReplyDelete
  186. Oh
    And BTW for the whining bitches.

    In the past decade there have been 40 permit holders-12 percent of the total- involved in the seas sta and psvoa boards

    Yet only 10%(6) of the permits sold were from these groups

    So that means there must have been a conspiracy amongst the 58 of the other 339 permit holders who sold out at a higher rate than those on the ' inside'

    Really

    Look at the numbers

    And that dumbass who complained about my brother's permit is high. Pete bought his permit to fish the 2000 season on the Shannon, which he had bought from Steve Peterson

    Some specslation
    In 2000 no one was in favor of a buyback

    Nov 2001 was the first meeting

    Nice try but consistent with the anti-crowd information

    This baby is done. Over. The SE permit hilders win

    Bobbyt

    ReplyDelete
  187. And BTW, Whining Bitches?

    We know you like em whining bobbyt, like your #1 bitch, on the 1st List

    Well Done, Medium Rare, Rare?

    You should read the whole body of the Magnusen Act BT, hold the lettuce, the Optimum Number, an the total inclusive laws of both State and Federal Law Requirements.

    "ALL" is ALWAYS CONFUSING at SEAS now isn't "IT"

    Any Vessel 10 tons...

    The Judiciary Act of 1789
    September 24, 1789.
    1 Stat. 73.
    CHAP. XX. – An Act to establish the Judicial Courts of the United States...
    SEC. 9. And be it further enacted, That the district courts shall have, exclusively of the courts of the several States, cognizance of all crimes and offences that shall be cognizable under the authority of the United States, committed within their respective districts, or upon the high seas; where no other punishment than whipping, not exceeding thirty stripes, a fine not exceeding one hundred dollars, or a term of imprisonment not exceeding six months, is to be inflicted; and shall also have exclusive original cognizance of all civil causes of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction, including all seizures under laws of impost, navigation or trade of the United States, where the seizures are made, on waters which are navigable from the sea by vessels of ten or more tons burthen, within their respective districts as well as upon the high seas; saving to suitors, in all cases, the right of a common law remedy, where the common law is competent to give it; and shall also have exclusive original cognizance of all seizures on land, or other waters than as aforesaid, made, and of all suits for penalties and forfeitures incurred, under the laws of the United States. And shall also have cognizance, concurrent with the courts of the several States, or the circuit courts, as the case may be, of all causes where an alien sues for a tort only in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States. And shall also have cognizance, concurrent as last mentioned, of all suits at common law where the United States sue, and the matter in dispute amounts, exclusive of costs, to the sum or value of one hundred dollars. And shall also have jurisdiction exclusively of the courts of the several States, of all suits against consuls or vice-consuls, except for offences above the description aforesaid. And the trial of issues in fact, in the district courts, in all causes except civil causes of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction, shall be by jury.

    ReplyDelete
  188. Bobby, I'll type real slow so that you can understand. Going up refers to heaven, going down refers to hell. I thought you testified that you and the Fug were Confirmed together. It goes without saying that you weren't paying attention and that you need to return your certificate of Confirmation. And still typing reeeal slowly, notice that it is in the form of a question, not a statement of judgement. You are a shame to that old Lutheran Church and need to not refer to it when you act and speak so reprehensibly.

    ReplyDelete
  189. Its all unfair! and it will never get any better. Unless all you fishermen get together and do something about it. Create your own group, I have no idea how, but the bottom line is, without you hard working fishermen standing up for yourselves you will always get screwed.
    Without fish none of these people would have jobs, they work for you! Someone needs to twist the screws on all these politicians and show them just how valuable you guys are. Its your product, without it they have no choice!

    ReplyDelete
  190. So JT gets up at 556am to call my wife Gina a bitch. Guess that ends the string IMO. That's pretty low when you get peoples family involved but at least you have the signature "I vote scab" and Daniel Webster to let us all know who you are, Mr. Granger. Not as low as flipfantasies you have about Ted's airplane crash but low nonetheless.

    If any permit holder has a single question, you have my phone number or you can get it at www.seiners.net.

    I thought it would be good to comment on the fleet consolidation and answer any outstanding questions but it this blog long ago ran off the tracks with it's erratic, bizarro, anonymous posting system.

    Didn't I read awhile back that assholes are like opinions... everyone's got one.

    Well. Signing off. Just a topic I do know something about so thought I'd be on here once again. Bye until the vote is over.


    bobbyt

    ReplyDelete
  191. We don't want you to leave mad, just leave.

    Oh and BTW, booby, if you think that you can call other guys whining bitches and pathetic corpses, you shouldn't be too surprised if a little splatter comes back at'cha. Rules of engagement. Rules of engagement.

    ReplyDelete
  192. "everyone has one..." but some a larger than others.

    With 16,264 permit holders, there must be a few, that do have quite a few questions bobbyt.

    Such as whining bitches and pathetic corpses?

    That's the exclusive right and special privilege, as taught in the Petersburg Packing Lutheran Church's Sunday School Class.

    Alaska Constitution
    Article VIII, Section 15
    "No exclusive right or special privilege of fishery shall be created or authorized in the natural waters of the state."

    http://www.cfec.state.ak.us/pregs/StateLimitedEntry.pdf

    And the Stevens Plane Wreck.
    GUILTY as Charged!

    "We are not in a world ungoverned by the laws and power of a superior agent. Our efforts are in his hands, and directed by it; and he will give them their effect in his own time."
    Thomas Jefferson(R) to David Barrow, 1815

    "We hold these truths to be self evident...

    "diamonds from a dunghill, Vote (bobby(D)t today!

    ReplyDelete
  193. I love the assumptions a commenter is a processor when bobbyt is descended from a long line of processors and that the buyback is being run largely by the Silver Bay processor cabal (Denkinger, Blakey, Zuanich, and their 30-odd seiners who have invested with them).

    Careful of who you are calling a processor since there are over 30 seiners who are processors these days.

    The processor argument is a red herring.

    ReplyDelete
  194. Followup to the Silver Bay post, from the Silver Bay website company profile:

    "ownership by fishermen who represent over 70% of the committed fishing effort."

    So, the buyback would allow these fishermen to reduce their competition and otherwise constitute an illegal restraint of trade would it not, as processors of 70% of the processing capacity in Southeast Alaska? Rob Z has touted it as a vertically integrated model, and this is what they do.

    ReplyDelete