Board's task: define 'subsistence way of life'

The Alaska Board of Fisheries today begins a tedious, two-day session to clarify how it defines the expression "subsistence way of life."

This isn't just an academic exercise. A Fairbanks judge ordered this.

The weekend board meeting is the latest twist in an old struggle over the question of whether the dipnet fishery at Chitina should be classified as a subsistence fishery or a "personal use" fishery.

Why does this matter?

Well, commercial salmon fishermen at the mouth of the Copper River, downstream of Chitina, greatly fear a subsistence designation because that would give dipnetters a priority to the fish.

Superior Court Judge Michael MacDonald, in his Dec. 31 ruling, stopped short of overturning the board's 2003 action classifying the dipnet fishery as personal use, not subsistence.

But the judge said the board had failed to properly apply a key provision in state law that refers to the "subsistence way of life."

The judge ordered the board to define "subsistence way of life," and then reapply the law.

OK.

So, the board will meet today and tomorrow at the Hilton hotel in downtown Anchorage to work on its definition and take public testimony. Presumably, each of the seven board members will have a dictionary and thesaurus close at hand.

All kidding aside, this is a hot issue. The board received nearly 100 written public comments prior to the meeting.

What's next for charter halibut case?

Now that a federal judge has declined to block the one-fish rule, tourists and other anglers who go fishing on halibut charter boats in Southeast Alaska (Area 2C) will have to settle for one keeper a day instead of two, effective yesterday.

Now the lawsuit six charter boat operators are pressing against the federal government moves to trial.

"The trial on the merits of the case will likely commence in July," the Halibut Coalition said in a press release Thursday.

The coalition includes commercial halibut fishermen, processors and others who support the one-fish rule as a way to control the growing charter catch halibut in Southeast. That catch ultimately eats away at commercial catch quotas.

Thursday's ruling from U.S. District Court Judge Rosemary Collyer of Washington, D.C., was particularly interesting because a year ago she granted the charter plaintiffs an injunction blocking the one-fish rule.

She hasn't yet issued a written opinion, but evidently she feels the National Marine Fisheries Service has patched up leaks in the rule since the agency first attempted to impose it.