Thursday, September 29, 2011

CDQ organizations talk back

On Sept. 14, Deckboss posted a 15-page appeal for reform of the North Pacific Fishery Management Council.

The appeal's authors contend Alaska, which holds six of the 11 voting seats on the council, has used its majority to the detriment of Oregon and Washington. And they focus on Alaska's growing Community Development Quota program to make their argument.

Well, now the CDQ players are talking back.

Here's a statement received today from their umbrella organization, the Western Alaska Community Development Association.


Anonymous said...

If America saw a documentary of village life and the struggle to simply survive, the trawl industry would have to hang their heads in shame at their gall at having to share a little slice of this extremely lucrative pie.

The trawl industry is damn lucky the CDQ groups did int get more quota, as they certainly could put it to humanitarian uses.

Where the trawlers do have a legitimate bitch is the highly paid leeches like Larry Cottter, who is an embarrassment to all the CDQ groups and their efforts to bring these villages out of extreme poverty.

Anonymous said...

I believe Cotter is with two t's not three genius.

Anonymous said...

Even Einstein made typos. Cotter and a couple of others have been milking the CDQ program with outrageous salaries, putting the better managed CDQ's in a poor light and they are all painted with the same broad brush.

After 20 years, there could have easily been a trained Native to take Cotter's place. It looks like at a couple of these poorly managed CDQ's that Natives are welcome to have any job except the highest paying jobs which are still reserved for white people.

This was the situation when the Supreme Court noticed that at Wards Cove all the low paying jobs were held by people of color and all the high paying jobs were held by white people.

Murkowski had to save Wards Cove then too.

Cotter is or has been paid more than the President of the United States. How can any one justify this ripping off of the CDQ's members which are for the most part incredibly poor.

Truly embarrassing.

Anonymous said...

Just curious and I wouldn never consider defending Larry Cotter but which of the CDQ groups do you think are better managed than APICDA? I've always thought that it was the best managed of the lot but that's not saying much. None of them are managed for the benefit of the people living in their communities.

Also, why should the CDQ group management be Alaska Natives? Contrary to what many people seem to think, the CDQ program is not a native program. Hiring people based on race is discriminatory and a bad way to choose competent leadership to boot.

Anonymous said...

The CDQ letter is a regurgitation of the standard Pollyannish talking points CDQ managers usually throw out when the CDQ program gets challenged. The reason the 15 page letter referred to is getting the traction it is because it contains a lot of truth, politically incorrect truth to be sure.

Anonymous said...

If you look at what the Yukon group has done for their village, they set a great standard.

I won't comment on the other groups as I simply don't know enough to judge.

The Kusko group has blown a ton of money on worthless showboat projects.

Cotter and a few others with exorbitant salaries will put the well managed CDQ groups at risk.

The Aleuts are perfectly capable of managing their own affairs better without Cotter.

If the fish consuming public saw on tv the struggles in these villages and saw how littlethe major seafood companies contribute compared to their profits from their free license, there might be a public outcry for more quota to go to CDQ groups.

The correct comparison is to compre the CDQ s local contribution to the contributions of the major seafood companies.

There is no comparison really and CDQ s are the first time in Alaska's history that colonial outside capitalists have had to leave something behind.

Just think, if it were not for the CDQ licenses, Alaska would have received zero Bering Sea licenses.

Anonymous said...

I have no idea why Wards Cove is being dragged into this, but for the record Wards Cove WON at the Supreme Court. You can't spell Cotter's name right, you can't read or understand case law, and you compare yourself to Einstein. Good Lord, man, get a grip on yourself and your delusions.

Anonymous said...

Actually, Wards Cove did not exactly win.
It looked like they might lose, so Murkowski and others sponsored and got passed a bill which exempts Wards Cove from the 1968 Civil Rights Act.

Wards Cove was is the only corporation in the country which is exempted.

As Justice Marshall correctly noted, at Wards Cove living quarters a mess halls were strictly segregated and nobody of color were ever allowed to advance.

Wards Cove may have lost if it did not have the power to rewrite the law.

If the Aleuts had not been held as slaves until 1964, and been awarded the first incredibly profitable Ifq, they easily would have had the resources to control the fisheries in the Bering Sea and the north Pacific.

It is amazing. How slavery and the theft of Alasks's resources by politicians have set Alaska's villages behind.

It amazes that one group who received hundreds of millions in free fishing licenses could be dumb enough to complain about predominantly Alaska Natives getting a handful of licenses for the first time in Alaska's history.

I wonder if some, just really don't like Indians to get any power.

They might just get uppity

Anonymous said...

It seems to me that your only interest is in slamming APICDA and Larry Cotter. If you're so dedicated to the cause, I would think you would've done some research on the "other groups."

Anonymous said...

Dr. Einstein seems to hate Larry and Wards Cove. And, Dr. Einstein, I'll say one last time that you don't understand case law because Wards Cove won at the Supreme Court level, 5 to 4, with Justice Byron White writing the opinion. Now, Dr. Einstein, be a good boy and run along. You teach physics at Princeton as I recall, and fall semester is under way so surely you have a class to teach.

Anonymous said...

"Also, why should the CDQ group management be Alaska Natives? Contrary to what many people seem to think, the CDQ program is not a native program. Hiring people based on race is discriminatory and a bad way to choose competent leadership to boot."

In the case of APICDA, say, if you went to Atka, you wouldn't find a single white resident. It's true, race should not be the overarching concern but when residents are systematically ignored because of vested interests there is no hope until something radical happens. Larry will NEVER let go the reins to a competent peer from the community. He would never find luxury employ ever again!

Anonymous said...

Apidca is good group with great members. Paying Cotter more than the President is bad or for all cdq's.

Wards Cove did win under the 1964 Civil Rights Act, but then the 1968 Civil Rights Act came along and then they knew they were screwed. So Alaska Congressmen got them exempted.

It was hard to justify segregated facilities for people of color. It was also hard to explain how people of color had never been able to advance.

It is still hard to find Alaska Natives with good wages in senior management in major seafood companies today.

The major seafood companies used to at least hire Alaska Natives seasonally, until they figured out it is cheaper to hire foreigners.

On the other hand the CDQ ' s have found and advanced many talented villagers who probably otherwise would never have the chace to enter a fishery with more Norwegians than Alaska Natives.

You see any Natives on Deadliest Catch??

The centuries old residents are no where to be seen.

It ain't an accident when the rules are written in Washington DC.

Anonymous said...

Every single thing you say about the Wards Cove case is a lie. Every. Single. Thing. Wrong on the law. Wrong on the facts. Wrong on the case. Wrong on the outcome. And now you hate the Norwegians, too? What did we ever do to you? So far, you seem to hate Larry Cotter, Norwegians, and Wards Cove. Who is next?

Anonymous said...

Interesting arguments guys, been keeping up with them all day....thanx

Anonymous said...

Ha! Me too. Dr. Einstein needs some anger management classes. And it seems, might want to better educate himself on the issues he brings up.

Anonymous said...

I do not know about Wards' Cove but he speaks the truth about some issues. Lets have a debate about the value of APICDA (the only CDQ I know about) to it's constituents. Excluding, of course, Justine, Gilda, Hugh, and a couple others.

Anonymous said...

APICDA=Trident Seafoods. That's about all that needs to be said there.

Anonymous said...

Why are APICDA and Larry Cotter such a target here?

Anonymous said...

1. APICDA has the smallest population they serve relative to their 'Q' shares but relatively little of the $ ends in Unangan's hands.
2. Cotter has an irritating titanic ego. 'Lawrence of the Aleutian's'
3. Manage the Aleutian's from Juneau?
4. The only CDQ CEO that didn't come from, or live in, the world he represents.
5. Sponsor of numerous idiotic 'projects to nowhere' that only represent debt to his constituents.

One could go on.....

Anonymous said...

Did anybody actually read the Ward's Cove article on Alaska Dispatch linked to above? It has nothing to do with the 1989 racial discrimination lawsuit.

The article entitled, "Setting record straight on Ward's Cove purchase " attempts to clears up the common misconception repeated in these comments that CDQ groups are Native Corporations. They're not.

The CDQ program is owned by the residents of 65 coastal communities regardless of race or ethnicity.

Anonymous said...

Most of the anti-Cotter comments made here are, in all probablility, made by a fellow with the initials ME from Homer/Halibut Cover. He used to work for APICDA many years ago and quit when his assistant was fired for cause. His animosity toward Cotter and APICDA are huge, and it generally extends to APICDA board members as well because they clearly feel differently about Cotter -- or they would replace him or pay him a lower salary.

Anonymous said...

Some of us learned from Enron that what corporation board members do does not necessarily reflect what is best for the corporation or its shareholders.

That goes triple for CDQ corporation board members who are usually very happy to get on the gravy train. There aren't a lot of opportunities to acquire easy money in the CDQ villages and sitting in meetings pretending to direct a multi-million dollar corporation is the easiest to come along yet. Do you think they are going to take on the CEO and risk losing their place at the trough?

Well, I guess some brave souls said enough to Robbin' Roben but that doesn't happen very often. CDQ board seats are a highly sought after way to rake in some cash and prudent directors know enough to not make waves so the fact that Cotter has held onto his position for as long as he has doesn't prove much of anything.

Anonymous said...

In reading the above comments, it would seem no one really knows much about the CDQ program or what each of the six groups do for each community. To single out one group or one person sounds like envy. If you are going to comment, know what and who you are talking about, don't show your ignorance.

Anonymous said...

To the commentator: "To single out one group or one person sounds like envy. If you are going to comment, know what and who you are talking about, don't show your ignorance."
I've lived, if you added it all up, about a year of my life in CDQ communities working on CDQ projects. You sir, are naive.

Anonymous said...

Dear anonymous, you say "In reading the above comments, it would seem no one really knows much about the CDQ program or what each of the six groups do for each community."

No one? What about those of us who live in those communities? It is true that we don't know about all of the machinations of our CDQ organizations but that is because they hide as much as they can from us. What we do know is that they are a closed club who take very good care of themselves and for the rest of us, not so much.

You go on to say, "To single out one group or one person sounds like envy."

Actually is sounds a lot more like anger, outrage and disgust to me but I apparently know a lot more about the situation than you do.

And then you follow it up with, "If you are going to comment, know what and who you are talking about, don't show your ignorance."

So enlighten us, the letter from WACDA was, how shall I say it, vague. What exactly are the commenters you object to missing? Scholarships? How many scholarship recipients are graduating from college who wouldn't have without CDQ program scholarships? Jobs? Who is working and how much are they making? Self-sustaining fisheries related economies in the villages? Where is it? When is it going to start? Be specific.

Anonymous said...

Speaking of outrageous CDQ salaries. In 2010, Morgen Crow, Trevor McCabe, and Richard Monroe collectively took in $1,748,000. That's 217 times the annual per capita income of the residents of Chevak. After twenty years of the CDQ program that was supposed to help reduce poverty in the villages, people in Chevak are having to get by on $8,038 per year in an area with some of the highest living costs in America.

Altogether, thirty CDQ managers made more in 2010 than all 671 of the people who live in Savoonga. To top it off, very few of the people who are living large in CDQ management live in one of the CDQ communities. Even the ones who at one time lived in the villages took the money and ran for the big city where they can support their novo riche lifestyles.

Morgen Crow takes in more in a week than the average resident of 63 of 65 CDQ program eligible villages earns in a year and Crow only has to clock part of the day on Monday to take in more than the average annual income of all of the residents of the 65 communities in the CDQ program including Nome and Dillingham.

The owners of the program Morgen Crow is supposed to be working for use five gallon plastic buckets for a toilet while he lives in an exclusive gated community in Anchorage. How is this equitable?

Anonymous said...

Latta CDQ Bend Overs blogging. Gotta keep those easy bucks flowing into those checking account for ripping off the people.

Anonymous said...

I live amongst the poor people of the Western Alaska Coastal area and we don't need a repeat of the Alaska Native Land Claims Corporations. The CDQ was modeled after them and from the looks of the situation twenty years(20) later, it's the same old, same old. Just a handful of people are getting big salaries and prestige through the peoples monies.

Anonymous said...

Let's see some facts before we decide if the CDQ program has really met the goals of the original intent 20 years ago. How many kids from the Western Alaska Coastal villages have college degrees? Scholarships. How many people have gainful year round employment from the CDQ program? Employment. What about the monopoly the CDQ program has gained with the peoples monies on opportunities for a handful of fishermen in Western Alaska?

The 20 year Review of the CDQ program is mandated to happen shortly - 2012. Get it started now because if the picture isn't painted realistically, then it'll be buried for another 20 years! That's what 'information holders' do. Keep the truth from the public.

Anonymous said...

The blogger refering to the "Yukon group" must have rose colored glasses on, either that or he isn't talking to the thousands of poor people who are up against the Pollock Fishery and the Salmon Bycatch issue which is killing off their culture and tradition.

Anonymous said...

WAIT A MINUTE!!! This guy is not interested in Morgen Crow, Trevor McCabe, or Richard Monroe. He is only interested in critisizing APICDA and Larry Cotter. So don't waste your breath trying to bring up any other subject.

Anonymous said...

I don't hate Norwegians, Cotter, or Wards Cove.

Cotter is a capable fella, just grossly overpaid.

It would be nice to have some Alaskan Natives make it on the Deadliest Catch, not just Norwegians.

And yes Wards Cove was faced with losing their discrimination lawsuit and got two Alaska Senators to bail this Seattle company out.

Oddly, Murkowski and Steven sided against their own Alaska Natives, and in a twist of fate that only comes from having bought Alaska's Senators off, Washington's Congressmen fought long and hard to get Wards Cove's special exemption tossed out.


My point is much simpler though. Much of Alaska's discriminatory behavior to Alaskan Natives did in fact happen, and it is fresh, as many of its' victims are still alive.

These practices put them at a disadvantage, no doubt.

While the special interests with powerful Senators in Washington DC have virtually always won every battle for Alaska's vast natural resources, the CDQ's finally won a small victory.

It is about time.

Not all CDQ's are managed with the same effectiveness, but by the way I have seen many poor management at seafood companies. Apples to apples.

The major seafood corporations and the CDQ's are fundamentally different organizations. The seafood companies are for profit corporations, and the CDQ's are charitable organizations.

Not matter what the complaints about CDQ's if you measure their community charity against the major seafood companies, the CDQ's win hands down.

For seafood companies to complain about a bunch of Natives getting fishing rights in our country for the first time, when they got there licenses for free, is opening a can of worms, which they may lose.

This is a greedy move with more than a wisp of racism.

The trick to keeping Alaska racist past alive for so long depended upon tow long practiced ingredients. One, and one who reveals the mistreatment is labled a liar and subjected to personal attacks. Second, don't let anyone for the world of journalism vist and report to the American people.

This worked in the Pribs for a century, but it will not work in today's internet age.(Google: Century of Servitude)

It is only a matter of time until the villages along the Bering Sea coast have documentary crews.

Taking away what little these people have, may leave a bitter taste in America's mouth towards our seafood products when a documentary is shown to the American people.

As it is there is an epidemic of teenage suicide amongst boys. Some of it stems form diminished economic opportunities in the villages as their only resource, salmon are being stripped from the villages by trawlers on the high seas.

How much do the executives at the seafood companies make. That would be apples to apples.

This is one dumb move, by folks who are making a lot of money already.

Anonymous said...

There is no "MINUTE" to waste anymore. Twenty years is a long time!

Anonymous said...

A good read is "Disrobing the Aboriginal Industry" by Frances Widdowson and Albert Howard. Same old stuff - manipulation of the ignorant and the illiterate who are POOR. Instead of government agents, it's the people doing it to their 'own people' for as long as the majority remain passive and dumb.

Anonymous said...

"Apples to apples" - we've got to take the fruitness out of the picture. The CDQ's are not working as intended! Check out the 2006 Coast Guard rider to the Magnason-Stevens Act. It gave a handful men exculsive rights to a Public Resource!

Anonymous said...

CDQs are NOT "charitable organizations" - they've morphed into multi-million dollar profiteers with Public Monies and no oversight by stakeholders or the government agencies - Federal or State. "charitable"? I don't think the US Federal Government gave the CDQs the ticket to stay as Non-Profits yet. The CDQ's were begging for the status back before Uncle Ted crashed and died.

Anonymous said...

To the blogger refering to "racism". It's not okay for White People to be racists against Natives but it's OKAY for Natives to be racists against White People? Reverse Discrimination. Double Standards. Exclusion. Bullying. Defamation. Wrong ethical behaviors for a Public Monies program.

Anonymous said...

Very good, lively things happening here. Usually, the deck boss is the dead zone. CDQ's on fire! Hope the delegations are listening. Of course, forget Don.

Anonymous said...

"The seafood companies are for profit corporations, and the CDQ's are charitable organizations"

CDQ's as charitable organizations? Now I've heard it all. LMAO. CDQ program is just a back-handed welfare program, with predictable results. Great jobs for a handful of well-connected insiders, and prominent families in a few of the villages. At least they should pay taxes!

Anonymous said...

One man's welfare, is another man's dividend check.

CDQ's have given away tremendous amounts of money for local projects.

The CDQt. They cannot send out dividend checks by law.

I think what you are saying though is if Trident sends its stockholders a dividend check from the earnings of the Bering Sea licenses it received for free from the government, they have earned it.

But if the CDQ's hire a local person to do a jobs for a paycheck, it is welfare.

Not all CDQ groups are managed poorly. All have their financials posted online.

Are they all poorly managed, or are you picking out the poorly managed ones, and painting the others with the same paintbrush.

I know, Cotter is overpaid, but he only works for one CDQ. How about the Yukon CDQ. Top salary 150k, and that is for only two people, and both these people work hard and live in the villages. Not Juneau. Most of their money goes back to their residents in wages or fish prices.

They also have given out far more scholarships than Trident.

At some of the CDQ fish processing plants they have 100% American hire. Not so in Dutch.

Be careful what yo wish for.

Anonymous said...

CDQ's are required under Magneson-Stevens Act to invest in local infrastructure and economic development. Its not some magnanimous gesture of a charitable organization--its required by law.

Welfare, yes, in the sense that instead of the government providing the funds for economic development, the law stripped 7% (now 10%) of the Bering Sea fisheries away from the individuals and business that participated in them historically, and gave it to the CDQ entities--who then promptly turned around and leased those fishing privileges back to the very people who had been fishing them. Spin it as you will, dress it up, but its a welfare program funded by private industry.

Anonymous said...

CDQs - "a welfare program funded by private industry." with no oversight by the Federal or State government. That's like kids in a candy store with no supervision except we're talking about millions and millions of dollars for the poor people of the Western Alaska Coastal villages. Yet, the CDQ stakeholders in those ZERO economic opportunity villages still have to crap in "honey buckets" and deal with "an epidemic of teenage suicide amongst boys." It's not a pretty picture out here in Western Alaska. CDQs brought HOPE and the CDQ Managers squashed it! It's time for a major overhaul and now is the time. Demand that the 20 year Review of the CDQ program take place - 2012.

Anonymous said...

Only one of the top five highest paid people on the Yukon Delta Fisheries Development Association payroll during 2010 lived in a village. Two of them lived in Anchorage, one in Big Fork, Montana and one in Hansville, Washington.

The 3,200 people who live in the 6 YDFDA communities used to make their living commercial and subsistence fishing for salmon but king salmon commercial fishing hasn't been open for three years. What happened to the king salmon you ask? Well a lot of them were killed and wasted as bycatch on the high seas by the pollock trawlers that are owned by the CDQ groups.

The second highest paid person in YDFDA management is Anchorage resident Eric Olson, chairman of the NPFMC. He was pretty quiet in April 2009 when the council decided to let the trawlers take up to 60,000 kings per year as bycatch and he isn't saying much about limiting chum salmon bycatch during the council's deliberations now. The council hasn't indicated what they are going to do about a chum salmon bycatch yet but you can bet that when they come in with a ridiculously high number, Mr. Chairman will be on the industry's side. I doubt that very many of the people living in the communities on the lower Yukon River agree with that but nobody in CDQ program management really cares what they think.

Residents of the YDFDA communities made an average annual per capita income of $12,990 in 2009. That doesn't go very far when gas in Emmonak costs $6.50 per gallon and other essentials are priced accordingly.

YDFDA isn't the worst run CDQ program, there are other very strong contenders for that title but they probably could be doing a lot better.

Comparing the social welfare accomplishments of Trident to those of a CDQ group is intellectually dishonest. Nobody expects Trident to do anything but enrich its owners. Providing economic benefits to the residents of the 65 CDQ communities is the reason the CDQ groups were created. It makes no sense to think that Congress wanted to sponsor tax-exempt nonprofit competition for the commercial fishing industry. The direction the CDQ groups have taken is misguided and Congress and the State of Alaska need to clarify that their objective is to address poverty and lack of economic opportunity in the villages, not playing at becoming mini-Chuck Bundrants.

Anonymous said...

^^^^^nice post & well said...^^^^

Anonymous said...

CDQs and "scholarships" - Land Claim Corporations and "scholarships". Duplicating programs with very little cold, hard facts.

Norton Sound's CDQ group, NSEDC reportedly gave "more than $680,000 to students pursuing higher education at an accredited college or vocational school." according to their 2010 Annual Report,which by the way, just ended up in the regions mail boxes this last week. 2010 news at the downside of 2011.

".... more than a million(680 thou rounded up) is vaguely stated. That's it. Benefits are glorified yet the details are vague. Stakeholders deserve the truth. If it's not working, then CHANGE is needed. Western Alaska should be the highest education population by now based on all that "scholarship" money being funnel by both Land Claims Corporations and CDQ programs.

Anonymous said...

More 2010 CDQ facts from Norton Sound's NSEDC as quoted in their "2010 Annual Report": half a million($458,188) in compensation for seventeen (17) directors;twice that amount($874,000) for 7 "highest paid personnel within NSEDC", including the President and CEO of NSEDC's for-profit corporation Siu Alaska(pronounced SEE-U) and their Asset Manager's salary as well. Pretty top heavy isn't it?

Poor little communities in the Norton Sound receive $100,000 from NSEDC's Community Benefit Share program - 1.5 million dollars indirectly benefitting thousands of poor people while the BOD and Managers get just about the same amount.

Reasonable dollar sense minded people can see the irony in those glossy all is wonderful annual reports.

Anonymous said...

Hmmm...about $27,000 to be a director at NSEDC. To do what? Attend a handful of meetings (all expenses paid, of course) and try to stay awake through the process. Not a bad gig, where do I sign up?

Anonymous said...

The NSEDC board of directors just voted themselves a raise too so their 2011 paychecks will be larger than they were in 2010. It's even better for the three NSEDC directors that manage to finagle their way onto the Siu Alaska for-profit subsidiary board. NSEDC is moving almost all of its assets over to Siu and Siu's financial information is strictly confidential.

Norton Sound residents can't find out how much the people who control Siu are paying themselves and even the majority of the NSEDC board are locked out. They aren't notified of and can't attend Siu meetings, they can't see the audited financial statements and really can't find out anything about what the privately owned for-profit corporation that now holds most of NSEDC's assets is doing. There is a total lack of transparency. Does that seem like a good idea?

NSEDC and Siu say it is because they need to hide their business dealings but tax-exempt nonprofit corporations aren't supposed to be in competitive businesses to begin with. That's why Murkowski and Begich are trying to get them a tax code loophole so they can continue to operate for-profit without paying taxes.

The bill hasn't gone anywhere so far. It is easy to imagine that some of the congressmen are asking Lisa and Mark why in a time when so many of the largest corporations in America are on the ropes and begging for taxpayer bailouts that the CDQ's with millions of dollars in the bank are coming to them for this questionable windfall so that they can squirrel away even more money in the bank. I read the letters from WACDA and I didn't see anything even slightly convincing contained therein.

It seems they would have a lot stronger argument if they were spending their money building the economies of their communities but despite all the blather about scholarships and jobs, solid data showing how the villages have benefitted is nowhere to be found. If the CDQ groups were doing what they say they are doing you would think they would be able to slap the numbers on the table along with something to back them but they don't.

The MSA requires the State of Alaska to do a decennial review of the CDQ program in 2012 but Wanetta Ayers, former executive director of WACDA, is now working for DCCED and leading the review for the state so I'm not expecting much rigor and thinking that most likely it will be a whitewash. I guess we will find out soon enough.

It's a crying shame that so many programs intended to help rural Alaskans get hijacked the same way the CDQ program has been. Uncle Ted was a genius at getting money out of congress to pay for these programs but never bothered to set up governance structures that would ensure that the the funds would actually go to benefit the people who are living in third world squalor in the villages and of course, with nothing to stop them, there will always be people willing to divert the money for themselves.

Anonymous said...

bobby t, please post, I'm bored.

Anonymous said...

I hope readers take the time to read the 15 page letter that is linked to in this blog. I think a pretty accurate statement of the situation with the CDQ organizations.

CDQ program appears to be another social engineering experiment gone awry, and is in need of serious reform. Unfortunately, look for our Congress members, and political establishment in the State to maintain status quo.

Anonymous said...


Here goes. Off to meetings down south then moose camp so I won't be around for awhile.

1. These guys should do more for the regions with the CDQ cash. I worked for Coastal for a semester in the legislature and Bobby Williams pulled some good cash out for renewable energy for Kong, Kwig and Tunt. Coastal then spent around $30 million to develop Platinum. I was only a one termer so don't know what eventually happened there, but Trev, Morgan and Bobby were obviously trying their darnedest to do the right thing.

2. I don't know all these guys but I do know a few. The reason Cotter and McCabe get paid more than the President of the United States is that they are worth more. Recall the "babe" when asked if he was worth more than the President one year, he replied " I had a better year".

Not that I'm against the Pres. If I hear one more mean-spirited Obama bashing diatribe from the Republican primary candidates I'm going to organize a Conservatives for Obama campaign. I kind of like the guy.

3. The CDQ groups have made good strides with their local development programs.

4. When you stack salaries it's like apples and oranges. I'd pay half million to a genius who can keep a company in the black vs. paying a guy or gal $10K a year to run the company in the ground.

5. The CDQ program is a slippery slope to begin with. The Ballard Norwegians who risked life and limb and, in some cases, died to catch crab and pollock to keep their families in food and a roof over their head should perhaps be the final arbiters about how well the CDQ groups operate. It was their blood and sweat that the CDQ groups are spending. And while things are good right now it certainly was a long road with lots of bankrupt companies and boats to get from there to here. Heck if I was a banker, I wouldn't have given Trident 50 cents to operate in some of the uncertain years of the 90's.

6. Finally, if I had a blog I wouldn't be a chickenshit and let folks write this blather without signing their name. This anonymous crap is for the birds. Man up, you lily-livered pussies who bitch and moan about everyone else but don't have the guts to put your name behind what you say. At no point in US, or for that matter, world history, have folks been able to print or say this chickenshit dribble without signing their frigging John Hancock to it.

Have a good October folks.
Good hunting and good fishing to you.


Anonymous said...

Its actually been a pretty good thread...I'd hardly call it chickenshit dribble and blather, to use your words. Look around the internet at message boards everywhere, its the same, if you don't like guys not signing in with their "real" names, don't visit the board and don't post. Simple. Thanks for the history lesson, btw.

Anonymous said...

Here's the overarching problem with all the CDQ groups: they are still stuck on the Pollock tit. They have not matured. Remove the Pollock and they collapse, it's that simple. The plan was to build sustainable economic blocks, that has not happened. It's not a matter of if but rather when there is a collapse in the biomass with obvious consequence.

Anonymous said...

hope bobby t and his fellow ilk are enjoying their moose hunt, subsisting off the land in the great alaskan wilderness drinking bad beer and even worse whiskey no it's probably good whiskey!after all he and his companions got there dividend checks!i can imagine the storys around the bonfire at night farting the bad moose meat and burping the good whiskey talking of the old days when they could do anything they please and not have to answer to anyone,yes the good old days burp! fart!

Anonymous said...

More top heavy facts from Norton Sound's CDQ NSEDC's 2010 Annual Report, page 12, 2010 Employment Statistics: 648 people employed to the tune of 10 million dollars($7,936,125)! Of that amount, 2 million was paid to 33 people in Management. 2/10 to the top. Pretty lopsided alright.

The remaining 7 thousand stakeholders have to contend with penny anty stuff like a few thousand bucks for eskimo dance groups, open gym coordinators, cultural revival, cultural education, .........! The last two is getting pretty hard to sell because NSEDC is killing off the Salmon as Bycatch in their Pollock Fishery investments. Ironic.

Hey bobbyt, think a CDQ group will hand over $18,000 so you can have a Norwegian Cultural Revival? Not!
A Public Monies program giving funds for racial cultural events reeks of discrimination doesn't it.

Anonymous said...

It is interesting that other commenters bring up the 1989 Ward's Cove racial discrimination lawsuit. Norton Sound Economic Development Corporation, the new owners of Ward's Cove has been sued four times so far for racial discrimination.

CDQ groups discriminate on the basis of race in hiring and in many other ways and the discrimination goes beyond race to cronyism and nepotism. The Norton Sound CDQ group NSEDC employs a lot more Ivanoffs than it would if hiring were based on equal opportunity standards.

The CDQ groups need new and improved governance structures and more oversight. Ever since Don Young slipped a rider into the 2006 Coast Guard Reauthorization Act removing state and federal oversight of CDQ group spending, the people who control the CDQ windfall have gone rogue, buying commercial fishing industry white elephants like there is no tomorrow and spending the corporation assets to maintain their control.

Rural Alaskans have seen this story before and it has never ended well. The idea that you can put together a board of directors made up of uneducated people having no experience handling money and they will magically transform themselves into a body that makes responsible decisions about spending hundreds of millions of dollars of public money is about as probable as the proverbial infinite number of monkeys typing on an infinite number of typewriters banging out the works of Shakespeare. It hasn't happened yet. There has to be a better way to help western Alaska communities break the cycle of poverty and lack of opportunity.

Anonymous said...

Another side of the story


When Wards Cove provided inferior housing, bathrooms, showers and food to Alaska Natives, no Alaskan representative even complained.

All court room theatrics aside, most folks would agree that Wards Cove mistreated minorities in a fashion that most Americans found unconscionable.

Wards Cove never once apologized, nor interestingly did they ever deny that they segregated by race and provided inferior facilities and food. They admitted the segregation and differing treatment.

Did Alaskan Senators Murkowski and Stevens complain about the treatment of their own first citizens of Alaska.

Not once, but in fact sided with the Seattle based processor against their won citizens mistreatment.

Economic slavery existed long after physical slavery was ended. Natives could not advance at Wards Cove which would have allowed them to save some capital and go to the bank for the rest to buy a boat. Banking at that point in the state was dominantly by the National Bank of Alaska, which was also controlled by the founders of Wards Cove. Good luck with that loan.

When the Japanese invaded the Aleutians and the US forced the Aleuts to be relocated., the US needed to rent a facility to house them, and Wards Cove stepped forward to rent their facilities to house a concentration camp for Aleuts.

The irony would be funny, if it weren’t so sad.

The money making strategy for all capitalists in Alaska has always been to buy off powerful politicians, including Alaska’s own.

When the traps stole the best fishing sites from Alaska Natives, if the Natives protested they were arrested, or had no place to sell their fish. When trawlers incidentally harvest salmon, they have taken these fish away from a Native Fishermen who historically preceded them with both capital and effort. The recent re-allocation of salmon from the inshore fisheries to the trawlers prevents these inshore fishermen from accumulating capital.

All too often the new entrants to Bering Sea fisheries espouse that they deserve the licenses due to the capital investments and being “first”, but when the salmon fishermen in Western Alaska preceded them on salmon, they just got the Feds to reallocate a portion of the salmon to the trawl industry without any payment. I wonder how they would like this treatment if it were reversed.

The Bering Sea catches of salmon have been a disgrace, and the industry clearly could not limit itself in respect for the inshore fishermen, who often are poor and have nothing else. If it had not been for the efforts of the CDQ groups pushing to limit these theft of already allocated salmon, the inshore villages would have been starved out of existence, which is one sure way of eliminating political interference.

In the end, CDQ’s have given Native Alaskans political power for the first time in history, and some folks do not like it when the niggers get uppity.

In the end folks want to take away the CDQ’s quotas, and what they are not saying is that they want these quotas reallocated to them, so that they can become richer still.

Racism goes underground and dies hard, especially when capitalists have gotten rich and not had to share with Alaskans in general. Economic slavery is simply preventing a race from ever accumulating any capital by denying them fair opportunities granted to others.

They want it all. They think that it is their right.

Anonymous said...

Some CDQ groups are now invested in offshore factory trawlers that are also catching salmon that western AK. fishermen have complained bitterly about. Ironic, no?

The race card is the "goal line stand" strategy for those who want status quo in the CDQ programs. Those who question the program, how its run, and its effectiveness end up having to dodge the "racist" arrow that gets shot their way. Its beyond predictable. In the end, its a loser for politicians and policy makers to try to make needed changes, because they, predictably, spend all their time defending themselves against charges of racism. .

Anonymous said...

Emmonak has had some seriously hard times recently, and I have often wondered why on earth some of these millions of dollars can't be directed at helping this town and its residents.
It's quite obvious the money is not going where it was intended to go! This 15 page appeal letter spells out some real flaws.
It will be best for residents, natives and whites, and non-residents, to restucture the CDQ groups fully.

Anonymous said...

I never meant to suggest that all trawl interests are racists, only that as the rules for issuing these valuable licenses were written, it was a foot race as to who culd spend the most capital, and the licenses were predominently to those who had the most captial.

Winning this captial foot race against Native Alaskans really was not a fair race, as they have nver been given a fair chance to accumultae much capital.

Virtually every single IFQ system has been revamped to include the people along the nearby shorelines in the licensing.

What the government gives away, can be taken back, and in New Zealand, Austrailia, South Africa, Canda, and now Iceland, the government has finally taken some of these licenses back and reissued them to folks who have stake in the public resources other than simply who has the most money and influence.

Public pressure has caused this in all countries.

Be carfuls what you wish for. Big money interests have won the footrace against weak opponents, which the Native interests in Alaska no longer are.

Goliaths first mistake, was in arrogantly thinking that David would not fight back.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous wrote, "The Bering Sea catches of salmon have been a disgrace, and the industry clearly could not limit itself in respect for the inshore fishermen, who often are poor and have nothing else. If it had not been for the efforts of the CDQ groups pushing to limit these theft of already allocated salmon, the inshore villages would have been starved out of existence, which is one sure way of eliminating political interference."

Now there's a gem of historical revisionism. Where in the world did you get that whopper?

The CDQ groups most certainly have not pushed to limit the disgraceful waste of our salmon resources as bycatch. In fact, Trevor McCabe dressed up more than a hundred Y-K Delta village residents in "Pollock Provides" tee-shirts and caps and lined them up to parrot carefully coached scripts telling the NPFMC at their April 2009 meeting industrial trawling for pollock was more important than Alaska village residents fishing for king salmon. The council went along with them and adopted a 60,000 per year king salmon bycatch cap that won't do anything to restore salmon harvesting opportunity for Native people in Western Alaska.

At their June meeting in Nome, the council voted to not go with the State of Alaska proposal to limit king salmon bycatch in the Gulf of Alaska and selected a final alternative allowing the pollock trawlers to kill and waste 25,000 kings. Not one CDQ program spokesperson spoke up for a lower hard-cap. Not one.

The council is currently considering chum salmon bycatch in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands pollock trawl fisheries. No CDQ group has defended the interests of rural Alaska salmon fishermen before the council. No CDQ group has advocated for limiting chum salmon bycatch to a responsible level and protecting subsistence and commercial fishing in rural communities. None.

So where did you come up with the notion that the CDQ groups pushed to limit this "theft of already allocated salmon"? The villages are being starved out of existence with the enthusiastic complicity of the CDQ groups and their callous indifference to the needs of the people the CDQ program was supposed to benefit. The CDQ groups represent the industrial commercial fishing industry. They are the ones working hardest to eliminate political interference from Alaska Native people. You either need to check your facts or stop making stuff up to fit your political agenda although at this point it is a little hard to tell whose side you are on. You seem to be defending Native people's rights but you are doing them no favors by defending the people who are using the CDQ program to rip them off.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps what is needed is a restructuring of all the fisheries that receive their quotas in perpetuity by congressional action. The CDQ allocations are made the same way as the non-CDQ pollock fisheries did as well as the way the former Rockfish Pilot program got their allocation! What is different with the CDQ groups is they have to disclose their financial statements, report on their activities, spend the money made off of the allocations they receive, (re)invest money back into fisheries and their regions, and disclose the compensation for their top five individuals. To really get something to compare the CDQ groups against would be to see how the non-CDQ fisheries participants fare in the same categories. That is what needs to happen to have an "intellectually honest" discussion. Also, it's incredibly "intellectually dishonest" to wine and complain that the fisherman and residents who live in the region are the only ones who can work for or advocate for their interests. If you look at who advocates for most of the industry at council meetings; a lot of them never step foot on boats and are legal/lobbyist types hired by their respective (term used loosely) industries.

Anonymous said...

Now you are on to something.
Making the Cdq's better managed.
That is not what is being proposed though, only taking their quota.

Using the poorly managed cdq's paint the well managed unfairly, intllectally dishonest.

The Yukon CDQ and the individual residents lobbied loud and long to reduce the salmon bycatches leading by example reducing their bycatch far below industry practices.

Good for deckboss to host debate from both sides.

This decision to attempt a reallocation from CDQ 's to large seafood firms will allow for relieving the debate over the fairnes of the initial licenses.

Maybe the fishermen who actually labored at sea, instead of just absentee boat owners will get some licenses.

For the first time in history Native groups provided more polical support for Senator Murkowsi than the non-resident seafood conglomerates.

Let the games begin.

Anonymous said...

Your 'intellectually honest' comparison would only show how many marbles everybody has. So what? I don't understand your point. As far a needed restructuring, I totally agree. Before the passage of the Coast Guard Bill, after the so-called 'Blue Ribbon Panel' gave their laughable recommendations, the State of AK had guidelines that scored the groups and could add or subtract quota based on their evaluations. Of course, that could be political but certainly no more political than getting into Don Young's pants! If anything there is less transparency now than there was under the former regimen. These 'consolidated' financials are a joke, you can't follow the money. So, a CDQ group gives a 'community dividend', where does that money go? To buy fuel for the elders? Just try and find out.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous wrote, "The Yukon CDQ and the individual residents lobbied loud and long to reduce the salmon bycatches..."

Well you got that half right, the individual residents of the Yukon River did lobby for serious reductions of king salmon bycatch. The Yukon River Drainage Fisheries Association, the Association of Village Council Presidents, the Bering Sea Fishermen's Association, Tanana Chiefs, the Yukon River Panel and many individual Yukon River residents asked the council to limit king salmon bycatch in the BSAI pollock trawl fisheries to 32,482 or lower.

The CDQ group, Yukon Delta Fisheries Development Association didn't join with these groups and individuals. It went with a higher cap of 47,591 king salmon. I attended the NPFMC meetings and their lobbying even for this higher cap was not what I would call loud or long.

YDFDA hasn't said much about limiting chum salmon bycatch in the pollock trawl fisheries which is being considered by the council now. It would be great if YDFDA would get behind the local organizations that want to reduce that waste substantially but we'll have to wait and see. Their performance on king salmon bycatch left a lot to be desired.

Anonymous said...

As near as I can tell, the trawl industry is not proposing to assist the villages, only take away their quota.

Maybe someone could clarify this.

If they take away the CDQ quota who are these folks proposing gets this removed quota?

It is always finding the true hidden motive, isn't it?

Anonymous said...

What about BBEDC hoarding all the money from it's communities. Spending all the money on IFC's, marketable securities,and unconsolidated affiliates. our communities are starving for infrastructure and economic developement but management with their high school education can't produce anything but personnal economic developement. Here it not what you KNOW, but who you know and who you blow.

Anonymous said...

The Norton Sound CDQ can be renamed as the 'Community Defamation sQuad. Anyone who speaks out about the bullying and unfairness is defamed. Bullies in control of millions and millions.

Anonymous said...

Thank you Wes for posting this CDQ blog. 20 years of the CDQ and the poor people of the Western Alaska Coastal villages are still poor.

Anonymous said...

Before these wealthy whiners complain about the CDQ groups management, they should clean up their own house.

The North Pacific Council which set fishing rules is rife with conflicts of interests which are not allowed any where else in government.

Having industry vote on regulations to enrich themselves is bad management, It is like Exxon working for the EPA writing rules for themselves.

The rape and theft of salmon resources without any payment to compensate the poor coastal residents, is grossly unfair. They were there first, but the North Pacific Council will never vote to stop this practice as long as the trawlers control the Council with votes that has a clear conflict of interest.

Seafood companies which control the Council should hire more Americans instead of going overseas. We need to put Americans back to work.

The majority of seafood companies (not all) have refused to hire Alaska Natives for decades. This practice should stop.

Go visit their offices in Seattle, and see with your own eyes how many Alaska Natives have made it up the corporate ladder to the good paying jobs. After a century of domination, the number of Alaskan Natives in good paying positions of these seafood companies is virtually zero.

If we are going to have a discussion of how well organizations are managed, I think all organizations should be under inspection, not just Native groups.

It is only fair.

If you want to know more about mismanagement of the public's resources read:

Anonymous said...

My daughter worked at the Icicle plant in Petersburg this summer.
I wasn't excited about the idea at first but she applied and committed to the job before I had any say about it. Naturally I'd rather she go fishing.

Although her great-grandmother, great-aunts, aunts, mother and every preceding generation worked there or at Petersburg Processors, Inc., she is the first of her generation to do so.

There were darned few local girls her age working there. It wasn't a matter of trying to garner interest from hiring US or Alaskan residents. There just isn't interest in these jobs like there used to be back when I was a kid.

American seafood companies would love to hire Americans. But Americans don't want the jobs.


Anonymous said...

Maybe the reason for not hiring more American in seafood processing is that it is simply cheaper to hire foreigners.

With millions of Americans out of work, these jobs could help.

The seafood industry has gotten accustomed to hiring foreigners cheap, so they do not even know how to compete for workers by raising their wages a buck or two an hour.

I noticed that the CDQ groups have figured out how to hire local workers in their shore based plants, and those workers have a chance to move up.

If the CDQ groups shore plants can find Americans to hire, I don't know why the major seafood companies cannot.

Maybe the majors have quit trying very hard. If something is cheap and easy about ordering up plane loads of foreigners, maybe they are just getting lazy.

The Seafood industry has been lily white in its good paying jobs for far too long.

Senior management refuse to see ANY problems their own long standing practices of not hiring Native Alaskans, and giving them an honest shot at advancement, causing Native Alaskans to give up even applying for these jobs, as their chances would be hopeless. There are far more Norwegians and Japanese at senior positions in the seafood industry, than Native Alaskans.

There are long standing historical reasons for this, that the industry has denied for far too long. They are like the tobacco industry, refusing to admit any culpability whatsoever.

Could part of this problem be the result of historical racism.

Why of course it could.

If you see a drunken Native on the streets of Anchorage, do you even notice the Native Alaskan in the suit going to work like the rest of us.

Be honest.

Not all racism is intentional, but is the result of years of imprinting subliminal messages to our brain. Much racism of the past cannot be placed at the feet of today's managers, but having said this, most people still do not see the Alaskan Native with the engineering degree going to work, but only see the drunken Native.

Today, more than ever we have overcome racial challenges, but only by being brutally honest about what has transpired and attempting to ensure that today's Native children come to understand that if they apply for a job at a seafood company that they will be well treated, fairly compensated, and will absolutely have chance to advance, even to CEO if they work the butts off and earn it.

This is a change that needs to happen, but memories of past abuse haunts all of us, and in the case of Alaskan Natives the slaves are still alive today.

For generations now those of "white" people worked hard and worked our way up, understanding that if we persevered we could get the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Generations of Natives have given up, as they have come to know that if the work hard, they still cannot get to the pot of gold under the rainbow, because the game is rigged. For most of the last century, this has been the case, and letting the Native kids know, that times have changed, and they will get an honest shot at success if they work hard and save their money will take some time.

The Cdq groups have begun this process and made serious strides in getting kids placed into good jobs in the fishing and processing industry. Far greater opportunities than now exist in the major seafood companies.

When you go to the Seattle offices of these seafood companies and there are no Native Alaskans, it shows there is still much work to be done.

The seafood industry, probably more than any Alaska industry, has historically been a serial abuser of Natives, and this history haunts both management practices and the Native view of these companies.

Read: "A Century of Servitude" for a impeccably researched history of the Aleuts, which are right smack dab in the center of the Bering Sea and its valuable bounty. Google it. It is free online.

Anonymous said...

Not all whiners posting here are fat cat from seattle and else were. Some come from these cdq villages and have been challanging management for too long to invest in our communities. I welcome this review but wished the deck wasn't stacked against us with Wanetta Ayers in DCCED.
BBEDC needs a complete overhaul and the head of management has to go. The mining companies are doing more to help the region then bbedc, what a sad day in BB.

Anonymous said...

The CDQS are proving, if there was any doubt, that no race has a monopoly on racism, nepotism and cronyism. We can't do anything about whatever may have happened in the past. Today the CDQ companies are arguably the most discriminatory players in the seafood industry and we need to do something about that.

Anonymous said...

Which CDQ is the best managed?

They are are not all the same, and pointing the worst examples, and intentionally not mentioning the good projects accomplished, paints an unfair picture.

Apparently CDQ's effectiveness undergoes a review every ten years, and the fishing quotas can be reassigned depending upon the report from an ineffective organization to a well managed organization.

Rewarding well managed CDQ;s will send a powerful mesage. Too bad it only happens every ten years.

Let's hope the review process is not gamed, as this would cast a terrible message public and cast a pall over the fisheries of the North Pacific.

Hopefully the CDQ's go through what is technically called a "performance audit" and the audit is accomplished by a firm that is impartial, independent, and has substantial experience doing performance audits.

"Performance audits" are entirely different that financial audits, which many organizations point to with pride.

The difference is financial audits really tell the world, that money isn't being stolen. Performance audits tell the world, how effective management has been as using the resources to meet the final end goal of the organization.

Dumb decisions versus theft, is the simple way to view these tow types of audits.

Someone will try and game the system though, because they think they can hide their sneaky misdeeds form the public.

Sneakiness won't work, as there are too many people watching this pot of gold.

Everyone involved could take a step back and feel that problems would be fixed, if One of the major consulting firms were to perform a performance audit.

It is critical that the current process be followed through and the well managed CDQ groups obtain more fishing quota and the poorly managed CDQ groups have quota taken away.

That simple message that they are actually being watched and monitored, will guarantee that the folks in the villages see better results.

This review process is in writing, and if this process is gamed, and Judge and likely a someone form the Attorney General's office will step.

Considering the money at stake, there may be crimes uncovered.
There is certainly enough money involved to motivate criminal misdeeds.

Anonymous said...

To the last blogger, I agree with you 100%, "Considering the money at stake, there may be crimes uncovered." Changing rules to benefit a special interest group is a crime. Believing and acting on lies is a crime. I could go on and on but I think you have the point right on. Control at any cost is their mantra.

Anonymous said...

The October 5, 2011 7:05 AM comment makes some very good points and recommendations for what should be done in the first ever 2012 decennial CDQ program review. However, here's a reality check; Wanetta Ayers is in charge of the review. She is the former Executive Director of the CDQ industry panel WACDA; you know the person who would have signed the statement that is the subject of Wes's blog above if she weren't now working for the State of Alaska DCCED. Do you think she is going to conduct a thorough review? Can you say whitewash?

The concept of rewarding well managed CDQ groups by increasing their allocations and punishing poorly managed groups by reducing their allocations needs a little more thought. That would mean that the residents of communities which have been deprived of the full benefits of the CDQ program because their CDQ groups were controlled by fools, scoundrels and thieves would be further deprived by having their future CDQ allocations diminished. Top management is going to get their cut regardless, the people who would lose would be the people in the villages who really have no way to influence what their CDQ group's management does. They are already in dire straits economically, there needs to be a way to correct management incompetence and malfeasance without further harming the stakeholders.

The State of Alaska needs to wake up and take control of the CDQ program and so does the federal government. The money that should be going to the villages from the CDQ program but isn't, has to be made up from additional welfare programs and transfer payments that come from the state and federal general funds.

Anonymous said...

October 5, 2011 11:43 AM Comment is right on. So how does one find out how to influence what is going to happen in the review? For that matter, how does one find out ANYTHING about said review?

Anonymous said...

I called Wanetta Ayers but she was pretty tight lipped. She said they were waiting for the CDQ groups themselves to tell the state what was supposed to be covered in the review.

This is what they came up with.

So each CDQ group is going to evaluate their own performance over a 4 year and 8 month period.

I remember when decennial meant 10 years, boy those were the days.

Each of the CDQ groups will use their own chosen criteria to score their performance. If they find that they did a swell job during that period and I'm pretty certain they will, they will tell the government to give them the same CDQ allocations they have been getting.

What's not to like about an objective review process like that, I ask?

As usual, the residents of the CDQ communities will have no opportunity to participate in any of this.

It turns out our only role in anything associated with the CDQ program is being poor and pitiable and boy howdy, our people can do that better than just about anybody in America.

Anonymous said...

CDQ groups are limited to what they can invest in. The CDQ statute states that 80% of annual investments must be fishery related and only up to 20% can be made in non-fishery related investments. So of course CDQ groups are going to spend money on fishing rights and fishing boats... fishery investments only make sense as they can maximize the quota they get from the program.

I don't think CDQs were meant to be a replacement state and federal programs... they weren't meant to replace welfare. To put that on the program is a bit unfair.

This program has the opportunity to help those who want to help themselves. Its harder to create opportunities in Western Alaska, but CDQ dollars have created fisheries and access to them for local residents. Scholarship money creates opportunities for kids from the villages to get an education and hopefully go back to their villages and make them better.

It's easy to focus on the negative... let's be fair and acknowledge some of the good this program has created and can create.

Anonymous said...

IMHO, the good has been mostly the education part. That can not be manipulated. If you look to the Aleutians the simple fact is that population is declining rather substantially since the start of the program, despite the resident CDQ's efforts. There is no one-to-one relationship of dollars spent to stay home kids. That calculation is too dynamic. My guess is that other areas have seen increases in population. In my opinion, the groups spend far too little on education. Some crappy job on a slime line does a future make

Anonymous said...

CDQ's doing their own REVIEW! Now that a crock of crap if ever. Of course it'll be rosy and nice and all those other rose colored glasses verbs when groups get to pat themselves on the back because their constitutients are too ignorant and illerate to ferret out the truth.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous wrote, "fishery investments only make sense as they can maximize the quota they get from the program." I don't agree with your statement above. CDQ group investments, fisheries related or otherwise, only make sense if they benefit the people in the CDQ communities. Most of the CDQ group investments in the big time industry are extremely risky and the benefits to the people living in western Alaska communities are tenuous at best. A trip or two working on the slime line of a factory trawler is not what the CDQ program was supposed to be about.

The other problem with these investments in competitive for-profit commercial enterprises is that they threaten the CDQ groups' tax exempt status. The IRS is taking a wait and see approach as Murkowski's tax code amendment that would make the CDQ groups' for-profit commercial fishing ventures exempt from taxation languishes in congress.

Tax exempt IRS 501(c)(3) charitable and educational organizations and 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations which are what the CDQ groups call themselves, are not supposed to be engaged in competitive, for-profit businesses. There is no way that anyone can legitimately claim that the CDQ groups aren't organized and operated primarily for profit.

Anonymous said...

No one is saying that the CDQ program was supposed to be a replacement for welfare. What it was supposed to do was help people in western Alaska to get off of welfare by providing opportunities for careers in locally based self-sustaining fisheries industries. It has failed to do that. Very few people living in the villages have gotten long term jobs that pay enough to support a family. Working on the slime line long enough to buy a snowmachine and qualify for unemployment is not what the CDQ program promised. All of the good jobs are in CDQ group administration and almost all of those are in the big cities.

People in Gambell had an average 2009 per capita income of $10,117. During 2010; none of the 684 Gambell residents worked on any of NSEDC's commercial fishing vessels, in fish processing plants or in any of its fisheries related businesses. Lots of them collected welfare during 2010.

Anonymous said...

** Anonymous wrote, "fishery investments only make sense as they can maximize the quota they get from the program." I don't agree with your statement above. CDQ group investments, fisheries related or otherwise, only make sense if they benefit the people in the CDQ communities. **

I didn't mean to use the term "only" as its absolute. I actually meant to use the word "also" instead... in order to make the most out of their quota from the program CDQ groups are better off setting themselves up with complementary investments. It's better to own all or part of the boat harvesting the CDQ instead of simply collecting a royalty check.

Anonymous said...

Read "An Empty Donut Hole: the Great Collapse of a North American Fishery" by Kevin M. Bailey. Little known facts because Information Holders put the report on shelves to collect dust.

The Donut Hole is in the southern part of the Bering Sea in what is known as the Aleutian Basin. The pollock has been crashing since the late 80's. Low and behold, the CDQs were formed shortly after. Sounds like a scam to me. Sell out as fast as you can and pass it onto ignorant and illiterate people who'll get bailout money from the Federal Government. In the meantime, a handful of Managers are raking it in until the pollock fishery is no longer lucrative.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous wrote, "It's better to own all or part of the boat harvesting the CDQ instead of simply collecting a royalty check." Maybe. Consider this though. The worst that can happen if the CDQ groups collect the royalties from the quota is that their royalty payment may vary from year to year with the TACs and the markets. If they invest in the harvesting vessels they could lose most or all of their investment by buying the wrong equipment or mismanaging the operation.

A very wise business adage goes: don't invest in what you don't know. During the past 40 years since ANCSA we've watched rural Alaska corporations managed by boards of directors made up of the same people who run the CDQ groups invest foolishly in venture after venture that has gone belly up. These boards are prime targets for every fast talking huckster with a sure fire business scheme ready to separate the fools from our money.

In the past we were able to run crying to Uncle Ted and he would pry another billion or so out of congress to repair the damage. Remember the Net Operating Loss bailout of the ANCSA corporations that let them sell their tax losses to the giant corporations? That cost the taxpayers $900 million.

Ted's not here anymore and when the CDQ groups' excellent adventure into the dog-eat-dog world of industrial commercial fishing fails, as it is likely to do and has done already. Remember the 1997 Brown's Point fiasco? The CDQ group now run by Trevor McCabe, CVRF was previously called Coastal Villages Fishing Cooperative. The state had to take away it's CDQ or risk having it seized by the Christiana Bank of Norway for defaulting on its loan for the Brown's Point factory trawler. That may happen again.

The CDQ groups have no business investing in risky for-profit commercial fishing operations. It won't do anything to further their mission which is to help the people in impoverished rural Alaska communities join the economy and it has the potential for the types of disaster we have seen repeated so many times in the past.

It's not that easy to compete with Chuck Bundrant and the CDQ groups are poorly equipped to do it.

Anonymous said...

The holy grail for supporters of the program is scholarships; as if throwing money at post-secondary education does something. The reality is that a small fraction of the scholarship recipients graduate. Aside from heartwarming anecdotes, you won't find much factual information on the results of the CDQ sponsored scholarship programs.

The largest CDQ group, NSEDC doled out 680,000 in scholarships in 2010, that sounds pretty good until you realize that was only 2% of its revenues and miniscule compared to the $4,946,343 it spent on administration.

"Let's be fair and acknowledge some of the good this program has created." OK, I'm open to that. Let's see some quantitative data and by that I don't mean the touchy, feely public relations fluff that comes out of the CDQ industry.

There is a recent story on salmon bycatch by NSEDC communications director Tyler Rhodes published in the October 6, 2011 Nome Nugget on page 9 that illustrates what I mean.

Anonymous said...

Wes, this has been your best blog ever! Write more about the CDQs. They have kept their purpose pretty quiet for years with sayings such as "it's for fishermen" and "we've got to protect our transactions because of our competitors in the fishery".

Not much from WACDA, even in these comments. They can't justify their position without misleading facts. WACDA's director, Aggie Blandford is an extension of NSEDC. That's where she learned about the game: 1 for you, 10 for us, 1 for you, 10 for us!

Anonymous said...

I'm taking the time to learn how to read a Financial Report for NSEDC and I just spotted something really unusual in their 2010 Annual Report that the Norton Sound stakeholders finally got in their mailboxes a couple of weeks ago.

On page 21, "Consolidated Statement of Activities: December 31, 2010 and 2009". Now that's a hummer, what year? 2010? or 2009?
Of course, the truth will not be known unless an outside force investigates the program.

Anonymous said...

More FACTS from the NSEDC 2010 Annual Report: page 19 and I say HOLY COW! - 5 Million Dollars spent for Administrative Expenses. Of that amount, only 5 thousand dollars was spend on "Board Members" training. It's obvious that they are keeping those village guys on the Board in the dark. Easier to manipulate alright.