Cook Inlet notes

Here are a couple of items concerning salmon management in the Cook Inlet Exclusive Economic Zone.

• Anchorage federal Judge Sharon Gleason has dismissed a driftnetter lawsuit challenging the 2024 federal takeover of salmon fisheries in the EEZ. Here's the judge's 32-page decision and order.

• Eugenio Piñeiro-Soler, head of the National Marine Fisheries Service, is chiding the North Pacific Fishery Management Council for advising it doesn't intend to recommend catch limits for the 2026 Cook Inlet EEZ salmon fishery.

A major victory for the groundfish industry

A federal judge has thrown out a lawsuit two tribal organizations brought against the National Marine Fisheries Service challenging the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands groundfish fisheries.

Here is U.S. District Judge Sharon Gleason's 45-page decision and order dismissing the claims of the Association of Village Council Presidents and Tanana Chiefs Conference. The two groups sued in April 2023.

And here is a joint press release from the At-sea Processors Association and United Catcher Boats.

Troll fishery in jeopardy

This court order could have serious consequences for commercial fishing in Southeast Alaska, as the state Department of Fish and Game explains.

A loss for Cook Inlet setnetters

A judge this week denied a bid to force the state to reopen the eastside Cook Inlet salmon setnet fishery.

Cook Inlet reopening

In a huge ruling issued today, a judge has vacated Amendment 14, which closed the federal waters of Cook Inlet to commercial salmon fishing.

Case dismissed

A federal judge has thrown out a lawsuit opposing development of the Pebble mine. Here's the ruling.

NMFS, industry win Steller sea lion case

A federal judge has ruled in favor of the National Marine Fisheries Service and industry in a case in which Oceana and Greenpeace challenged expanded commercial fishing in the Aleutian chain.

Here's the 18-page order.

Kodiak processors fail in rockfish challenge

Deckboss trusts you recall how Kodiak processors sued the federal government challenging the Central Gulf of Alaska rockfish catch shares program.

The processors were miffed the program omitted processor shares.

Well, the lawyers have made their arguments, and the judge has ruled.

Processors lose.

Here's the order granting the government summary judgment.

Shut-out charter operators lose court case

A federal judge has thrown out a challenge to limited entry for Alaska halibut charter boats. Here's the ruling.

And here's what we posted last year when the lawsuit was filed.

State, industry ask judge to lift Steller restrictions

We have a flurry of new filings in the Steller sea lion case.

As you'll recall, federal Judge Timothy Burgess last month upheld commercial fishing restrictions the National Marine Fisheries Service imposed to protect endangered Steller sea lions in the Aleutians.

However, the judge found that NMFS violated environmental law in taking the action.

He invited parties on all sides of the case to file further input on how to proceed.

The state of Alaska and industry groups want Burgess to lift the fishing restrictions while NMFS prepares an extensive environmental study. Read their filing here.

NMFS says the restrictions should stay in place while it does the study, which could take two years.

Well, sounds like we can look forward to another big ruling from Judge Burgess.

Industry group sees silver lining in sea lion ruling

Here's a press release from the Marine Conservation Alliance:

Jan. 20, 2012

MCA applauds portion of ruling in Steller sea lion case

A victory for open, transparent fishery management process

The Marine Conservation Alliance applauds a judge's ruling in the Steller sea lion lawsuit as a victory for those seeking a more open decision-making process in application of the Endangered Species Act.

In his ruling Thursday, U.S. District Judge Timothy Burgess found that the National Marine Fisheries Service violated the National Environmental Policy Act by failing to prepare an environmental impact statement and provide the public with sufficient opportunity to comment when the agency determined additional fishery closures were required to protect endangered Steller sea lions.

"Although western Aleutian Islands fisheries involved in this lawsuit begin the season with fishing restrictions in place, we are pleased that the court acknowledged that there were flaws in the NMFS process which should now be corrected," said Merrick Burden, executive director of MCA, a coalition of harvesters, processors and communities involved in Alaska groundfish and crab fisheries.

The court deferred to the technical expertise of the federal agency in finding that it had properly applied Endangered Species Act standards in its determination that some of the fisheries conducted in the Aleutian Islands region of Alaska could jeopardize the recovery of endangered Steller sea lions.

The state of Alaska and affected fishing companies initiated legal action to halt additional fishery closures because endangered Steller sea lion populations overall have been increasing and are estimated to exceed 50,000 animals in the U.S. and another 25,000 animals in Russia. The legal action challenged the scientific basis for the agency determination and the process used to make that decision.

With regard to the NEPA violation, Judge Burgess has indicated he will enter an injunction requiring NMFS to prepare an EIS in compliance with NEPA procedures, allow for public comment and provide meaningful responses to comments on the draft EIS. The court will set a deadline for that action. All parties in the case have until Feb. 8 to file further briefs to address remedies in the case.

Considerable debate remains about the cause of the population decline, including predation by killer whales and nutritional stress caused by climate change or competition for prey with fisheries.

Alaska Supreme Court deals nonresident fishermen a costly blow in the long-fought Carlson case

Read the high court's 26-page opinion here.

The Alaska Department of Law issued the following press release:

Jan. 20, 2012

Alaska Supreme Court reduces judgment by $50 million

ANCHORAGE — A unanimous Alaska Supreme Court decided today in the State v. Carlson case to cut approximately $50 million from a judgment awarded to nonresident commercial fishermen who had filed a class action lawsuit against the Alaska Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission.

In so doing, the court overturned one of its own earlier decisions in the case, which had ordered the state to pay the interest rate that applies to delinquent taxes — 11 percent compounded quarterly.

In today's decision, the court substituted the standard prejudgment interest rate for court judgments.

The case was filed in 1984 by non-Alaskan commercial fishermen who disputed the higher commercial fishing fees that Alaska charged to nonresidents.

The state was ordered to refund some of the fees after the court found that while the state can charge higher fees to nonresidents, the additional payment must be related to the nonresidents' share of the state's cost of managing Alaska's commercial fisheries.

The amount of overpaid fees that the state was ordered to refund was approximately $12.5 million and the interest initially awarded for this judgment was about $62 million.

Under today's decision, the interest will be reduced to about $12 million.

This is the fifth time the Alaska Supreme Court has heard an appeal in this case. The court issued earlier decisions in 1990, 1996, 2003 and 2008.

In these earlier decisions, the court decided that nonresidents can be charged a higher rate, determined the elements of the fisheries budget that were relevant to calculating the appropriate rate, and set the prejudgment interest rate that would apply to an overpayment.

In today's opinion, the court reconsidered and overturned that interest rate decision, which it made in the third appeal ("Carlson III").

NMFS reacts to sea lion decision

Here is a statement from the National Marine Fisheries Service, Alaska Regional Office, on the Steller sea lion ruling:

"Overall, we are pleased with the court's decision, which supports the science-based foundations of the fishery management regulations we have worked to put in place to protect the western Steller sea lion," said Alaska Regional Administrator Jim Balsiger. "Going forward, NOAA Fisheries will work with the Department of Justice to comply with the Court's request for briefing on a remedy in regards for the need for an environmental impact statement."

"We are certainly most sympathetic to the plight of fishermen in these trying times," Alaska Fisheries Science Center Director Doug DeMaster added. "A healthy ecosystem is in the long-term interest of fishermen, who depend more than most industries on natural resources. We are looking forward to working with our partners and the North Pacific Fishery Management Council to maintain healthy, robust ecosystems for the long-term economic benefit of fishers in Alaska."

Conservationists hail Steller sea lion ruling

Deckboss reckons we'll hear quite a bit of reaction to the big Steller sea lion ruling. Here's the first of it, from conservation group Oceana:

Jan. 19, 2012

Steller sea lion protections in Aleutian Islands upheld

Today, the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska upheld protections for the western population of Steller sea lions. The new measures were put in place by the National Marine Fisheries Service to reduce competition between large-scale commercial fisheries and endangered Steller sea lions in the Aleutian Islands.

"It's a good day for our oceans," said Susan Murray, Oceana's senior director, Pacific. "This decision shows that responsible management requires steps to protect healthy ocean ecosystems including sustainable fisheries and vibrant communities. We are moving away from managing single species money fish and toward ecosystem-based management that takes into account the needs of apex predators in our oceans."

The court found that the agency based its decision on good science and, with one exception, followed appropriate process. According to the court, the agency did not comply with the law in failing to prepare a full environmental impact statement.

"Today's decision validates the agency's use of the best science to protect our oceans," said Colin O'Brien, staff attorney at Earthjustice. "The next step is a full evaluation of the impacts of fisheries on ocean ecosystems, including Steller sea lions."

Oceana and Greenpeace, represented by Earthjustice, intervened in the lawsuit to defend the new measures.

The parties will submit briefing on the scope of the new environmental impact statement by Feb. 8. The court indicated that protections will remain in place while the new analysis is prepared.

Another note on the sea lion ruling

The judge indicates on page 54 of his decision that despite the failure of federal fishery regulators to prepare an environmental impact statement, he will not vacate, or lift, the fishing restrictions opposed by industry and the state.

The gist of the Steller sea lion ruling

Here is the judge's overall finding in the Steller sea lion case:

As discussed in detail below, although the Court sympathizes with the Plaintiffs and Amici Curiae, who stand to suffer large economic and other losses as a result of the fishery restrictions, "judges are not scientists." The Court must defer to the technical expertise of the agency as long as there is a rational connection between the evidence and its conclusions. In this case, the Court finds that NMFS did not apply improper ESA standards and that the evidence, although equivocal, was sufficient to support its conclusions that the fisheries were likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the WDPS and adversely modify its critical habitat. Additionally, although the procedures NMFS employed to comply with its obligations under the APA and MSA were far from ideal, the Court nonetheless concludes that they were adequate under the law. The Court does find, however, that NMFS violated NEPA by failing to prepare an environmental impact statement and provide the public with a sufficient opportunity to weigh in on its decision-making process.

Here's a mini-glossary for all those acronyms:

APA — Administrative Procedure Act
ESA — Endangered Species Act
MSA — Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
NEPA — National Environmental Policy Act
NMFS — National Marine Fisheries Service
WDPS — Western Distinct Population Segment of Steller sea lions

Judge sides with government in Steller case

A federal judge has ruled substantially in favor of the National Marine Fisheries Service, and against industry groups and the state, in a case involving commercial fishing restrictions the agency imposed to protect endangered Steller sea lions in the Aleutians.

Here is the 56-page ruling from Judge Timothy M. Burgess of Anchorage.

Cook Inlet commercial salmon industry scores huge victory as judge grants restraining order

The 12-page ruling says the Alaska Board of Fisheries lacked an "emergency" basis to enact late-minute regulations that drift gillnetters said could have cut their catch by up to half this season.

It's a defeat for the state as well as the Kenai River Sportfishing Association, which jumped into the case as an intervenor.

A setback for Chitina salmon dipnetters

Looks like a Fairbanks judge has declared the Alaska Board of Fisheries the winner, for the most part, in a lawsuit challenging the board's denial of subsistence status for the Chitina dipnet fishery.

Here's the 35-page ruling.

The popular dipnet fishery, of course, is upstream of the famed Copper River commercial salmon fishery.

While siding with the defendants on most counts, the judge is requiring a bit more work of the board. One assignment: define the term "subsistence way of life."

Oh, that should be a snap, right?

Update on halibut charter lawsuit

Reliable sources tell me a Washington, D.C., federal judge today declined to grant Southeast Alaska halibut charter boat operators an injunction to block the one-fish bag limit set to take effect tomorrow.

More details as soon as I can snag them.