National Academies Press: OpenBook

The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska (1999)

Chapter: 2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery

« Previous: 1 Introduction
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

2
Description of the Region and Fishery

To evaluate the potential effects of the community development program on the communities in western Alaska, it is essential to first understand the underlying biological, social, and economic conditions. In many respects, these conditions are unique to the region, which have implications for the transferability of the Community Development Quota (CDQ) concept. This chapter provides an overview of the biological conditions of the Bering Sea fisheries, the social history of the region, and the structure and historical development of the fishing industry in the region. This sets the stage for more detailed discussions of the CDQ program (Chapter 3), the committee's evaluation (Chapter 4), and discussions of applicability of the approach in other regions (Chapter 5).

Biology

The Bering Sea is bordered by the Seward and Chukchi Peninsulas in the north, by the Kamchatka Peninsula in the west, and the Aleutian Islands in the south and southwest. This sea covers 3 million km2, and one of its most unusual features is the extremely wide continental shelf, which makes the region an extremely productive ecosystem. The high productivity of the Bering Sea ecosystem exists despite the seasonal ice cover and limited light during the winter. Primary productivity on the southeast Bering Sea shelf is spatially variable and is highly episodic. Spring blooms are associated with the ice edge and with thermal stratification. In most oceanic ecosystems the primary production is consumed in the water column, and in many cases the nutrients are recycled within the top part of the water column. One unusual feature of the shallow Bering Sea shelf ecosys-

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

tem is that much of the annual production escapes the water column consumers to feed a benthic system unusual in its amount of secondary productivity. Once it becomes part of the benthic system, this material is often slow to recycle because it becomes incorporated into long-lived benthic animals. An important additional factor in the high productivity of the southeastern Bering Sea shelf is the transport of nutrients onto the shelf from deeper water, which augments those nutrients generated locally (NRC, 1996; Sambrotto et al., 1986). This dependence could cause problems in the future for any change in the circulation of the Bering Sea, for example, a climate change could alter this transport.

The high primary productivity of the Bering Sea supports large numbers of birds, mammals, and fishes. There are some 50 commercially important fish species and at least 50 species of marine mammals. The fisheries in the region are some of the most abundant and productive in the world, especially for groundfish, halibut, salmon, and crab. Groundfish species in the Bering Sea include the walleye pollock, Pacific cod, several flatfish and rockfish species, and sablefish. Walleye pollock is an important species both as a predator and as a food source for other fish in its juvenile stage. Adult pollock are a major commercial asset for the United States, and they are marketed as fillets for a variety of products and as a minced and processed fish product known as surimi. Pollock roe are harvested during the winter, and are particularly valuable as an export to Asia, where they are considered a delicacy.

The increase in human activity and natural climate variability in the Bering Sea region have resulted in massive, if sometimes poorly documented, changes in the ecosystem over the last 50 years (NRC, 1996). Changes in the physical environment acting in concert with human exploitation of predators (whales, fish) have caused a shift in the abundance and distribution of many top predators and have caused pollock to dominate the ecosystem (NRC, 1996). These same changes also have resulted in dramatic fluctuations in the crab populations, as well as declines in some key marine mammal populations (NRC, 1996).

The domestic fisheries in the region are generally fully developed and most fisheries managers and economists consider them overcapitalized—that is, there are more boats and harvesting capability than available fish (NRC, 1996). Maintaining sustainable fishery populations, reducing bycatch of non-target species, and the minimizing negative impacts of the fishery on the marine mammal and sea bird populations are the most important biological issues that need to be addressed. These issues were of central concern to Congress in the 1996 reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Act (i.e., the Sustainable Fisheries Act).

From the perspective of the CDQ program, some researchers contend that the ecosystem is very heavily exploited, and it seems extremely unlikely that the Bering Sea can sustain current rates of exploitation while also allowing the recovery of endangered species, especially large populations of marine birds and mammals (NRC, 1996). If the long-term goal of management is to maintain top-level predators, some fishing may have to be reduced. This emphasizes the need for

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

The sea has long been an essential source of food and other resources to the peoples of the Bering Sea region. In this 1984 photograph, Ella Tulik is drying herring using traditional techniques. (Photo by James Barker and provided courtesy of the Alaska State Council on the Arts, Contemporary Art Bank.)

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

for consideration of adaptive approaches to management (NRC, 1996) and may involve compromises that impinge on fishery resources. This issue is addressed in Chapter 4.

Cultural Aspects Of Bering Sea Fisheries

The goal of the CDQ program is to improve the social and economic conditions in rural coastal communities. Understanding the relationship that has developed between Alaska Natives and the use of marine resources is a key component in evaluating the potential impacts of the CDQ program on these communities. This section provides background on these historical relationships, and is followed by a consideration of the ways a CDQ program could enhance these relationships.

Importance of Marine Resources to Native Communities

The prehistory and history of the indigenous peoples of the coastal margin and islands of the eastern Bering Sea are intimately tied to the utilization of the marine resources. This section provides a short introduction to the indigenous peoples and cultures of the eastern Bering Sea region, including a synopsis of the archeological evidence for occupation and resource use in the region, the linguistic and ethnic diversity of the region at the time of European contact in the 18th century, and some crucial cultural ideologies related to traditional use of resources. The historical changes associated with the coming of the commercial fishing industry to the region in the 20th century are also discussed.

Prehistory

Present information suggests that the earliest occupation of this coastal region occurred shortly after the onset of the Holocene and after sea levels had risen significantly (approximately 10,000 BP) (Table 2.1). The oldest sites of habita-

TABLE 2.1 Sites of Earliest Human Occupation of the Eastern Coastal Bering Sea Region

Area

Earliest Date

Site

Source

Aleutian Islands

8700 B.P.

Anangula Island

Laughlin, 1980

Alaska Peninsula

5100 B.P.

Ugashik Knoll

Dumond, 1984

Western Bristol Bay

4800 B.P.

Security Cove

Ackerman, 1964

Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta

1200 B.P.

Manokinak

Shaw, 1983

Norton Sound

4150 B.P.

Cape Denbigh

Ackerman, 1984

St. Lawrence Island

2100 B.P.

Punuk Island

Ackerman, 1984

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

tion in the region are found in the Aleutian Islands in nearshore coastal areas, but evidence for occupation in the other parts of the eastern Bering Sea indicate a gradual and uneven process, both in terms of population and the people's cultural adaptations to the area.

Since archeological research in this region is both difficult (particularly in the marshy delta of the Yukon and Kuskokwim Rivers) and limited, these dates should be regarded with caution.

There are several significant characteristics of the Bering Sea ecosystem that vary as one moves from north to south. One variation is the occurrence of winter pack ice. This occurs from the Bering Strait south to approximately Cape Newenham, but can extend further south to the vicinity of Port Moller during exceptionally cold winters (NRC, 1996). The Aleutian Islands, however, always remain ice free, a fact that allows the harvest of intertidal resources along the archipelago and thus provides a significant resource for inhabitants of the region (NRC, 1996). A second characteristic is the variation in the nature of the food sources available along the southern edge of the Bering Sea: both salmon and caribou, major resources available to mainland groups, are absent from or rare west from Unimak Island and on St. Lawrence Island (Laughlin 1980, Jorgensen 1990). Finally, virtually all of the societies of the eastern Bering Sea coast were dependent on the annual migrations of species that were abundant for relatively short periods each year, especially walrus, bowhead whale, salmon, and waterfowl. Harvests of these species focused on gathering a surplus that could be used during the winter and distributed at ceremonial feasts through a wide network of local kinsmen (Langdon, 1987a).

Strategies of Adaptation

Two general trends are apparent in the human occupation of the north: sedentary occupations came earlier in the south and adaptation strategies became increasingly complex through time. There are several distinct strategies of adaptation to marine resources apparent in the record of cultural development. The first strategy of human adaptation to the eastern Bering Sea coastal environment, apparent at the Anangula Island site in the Aleutian Islands on the southern boundary of the eastern Bering Sea about 8,700 years ago, is one of a mixed subsistence (Laughlin, 1980). The inhabitants made substantial use of the rich intertidal resources of the area, including shellfish, sea urchins, chitons, seaweeds, birds, fish, and sea mammals. The second strategy, appearing on the Alaska Peninsula around 5,100 years ago, along the Brooks River drainage, is a riverine pattern in which salmon resources were apparently combined with caribou harvests to provide sustenance (Dumond, 1984). A third strategy, found in the Cape Denbigh region in Norton Sound and initially used approximately 4150 B.P. relied on winter use of seals by hunting them through the pack ice (Ackerman, 1984).

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

With this innovation, the human occupation of the high Arctic became possible and human expansion pushed eastward to Greenland.

A fourth strategy was used on St. Lawrence Island, in the period around 2100 B.P. A major innovative leap was made allowing group harvesting and sharing of large sea mammals such as walrus and bowhead whale—a strategy used by the northwest Alaska Eskimo populations (Dumond, 1984). Finally, a diversified mobile strategy developed a little over a thousand years ago in the Yukon-Kuskokwim delta, combining the harvesting of many resources, including migratory waterfowl, small freshwater fish, small sea mammals, and herring in certain locations. This strategy made possible the permanent occupation of this last, difficult region (Shaw, 1983).

Linguistic Groups and Cultural Patterns

In the 18th century when the Russians, and later other Europeans, first came to the eastern Bering Sea, five linguistic groups were distributed along the coast and in the islands (Langdon, 1987a). These groups shared (to a certain degree) cultural strategies of communal interdependence and spiritual beliefs about the interdependence of animals and humans.

Aleut speakers (or Unangan—the term of self-identification in their language) occupied the entire Aleutian Archipelago as well as the Shumagin Islands in the North Pacific Ocean and the Alaska Peninsula east to Port Moller (Laughlin, 1980). West of Unimak Island, the Aleuts were predominantly marine mammal hunters (sea lions and harbor seals) and fishermen (halibut and cod). From Unimak Island eastward, they made use of salmon and caribou; marine mammal hunting and saltwater fishing were of less importance. The Aleut people were devastated by the Russian occupation in the 18th and 19th centuries, but they have persisted on their traditional lands in spite of various setbacks (Laughlin, 1980).

Alutiiq speakers (a Yup'ik Eskimo language spoken primarily on Kodiak Island and in the Prince William Sound region) occupied the Bering Sea shore of the Alaska Peninsula from just above Port Moller to about the Naknek River (Clark, 1984). The Alutiiq were primarily riverine salmon fisherman who also hunted small marine mammals (seals) and caribou. Alutiiq speakers are presently found at Meshik (Port Heiden) and Pilot Point, and they have strong cultural ties with communities around Chignik Lake and Chignik Lagoon (Clark, 1984).

Central Yup'ik speakers (practicing several dialectical variants) occupied the coast of Bristol Bay eastward and northward through the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta region into the eastern portion of Norton Sound. These people used a variety of subsistence strategies depending on the abundance and availability of resources. Along the major rivers (Kvichak, Nushagak, Kuskokwim, and Yukon) they harvested and dried salmon and supplemented their diets with caribou, migratory waterfowl, freshwater fish, berries, and other resources (Van Stone, 1984). Along the coast away from the salmon streams, small marine mammal

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

hunting was combined with herring fishing, freshwater fishing, migratory waterfowl hunting, and berry gathering (Van Stone, 1984).

Inupiaq speakers (northern Eskimo language) occupied the northern and western shore of Norton Sound and the small islands in the vicinity of Bering Strait (King Island, Sledge Island, and Little Diomede Island) (Ray, 1975). Along the mainland, groups combined fishing and hunting of small sea mammals (supplemented by an occasional beluga whale) and caribou. On the islands, Inupiaq speakers were predominantly marine mammal hunters who took walrus, bowhead whale, and seals and did some saltwater fishing for cod (Ray, 1975).

Siberian Yup'ik speakers occupied St. Lawrence Island and were in close contact with their Siberian Yup'ik residents on the Siberian mainland at East Cape and in periodic conflict with the Chukchi reindeer herders of the Chukotsk peninsula (Jorgensen, 1990). The Sivukaqmiut of St. Lawrence Island were large marine mammal hunters who acquired the majority of their foodstuffs and materials from harvests of walrus and bowhead whale. Seals and cod were supplementary resources (Jorgensen, 1990).

Cultural ideologies among all groups placed great importance on the acquisition of skills to enable them to effectively provide resources necessary to sustain their families. There was a clear division of labor between men and women. The acquisition of hunting and fishing skills was stressed among males. For females, skills in processing and storing food, sewing skins for clothing and for the covers of the vessels used by the men to hunt and fish were stressed (Clark, 1984). In the case of the Aleut, the predominant hunting orientation was the baidarka (kayak) manned by a single hunter (Clark, 1984). Among the Alutiiq and Central Yup'ik, the orientation was toward two men working as partners hunting together and sharing together as a unit, usually under the guidance of elders and shamans who shared their knowledge of the animal behavior to assist the younger hunters in their endeavors (Clark, 1984). Among the Inupiaq and the Siberian Yup'ik, coordinated units of 6 to 8 men successfully pursued large marine mammals such as walrus and bowhead whale using 20- to 30-foot open skin boats (Clark, 1984). Strategies combining competition and status with cooperation helped ensure the successful capture, landing, and rapid use of these large marine mammals.

Sharing and generosity were valued and practiced in these societies. Leaders sought to demonstrate their worthiness by sharing the products of their efforts widely among the people. The underlying spiritual and cosmological system of the groups stressed the interdependence of people and the resources that maintained them. Both human and animal life forms were thought to be cycled (reincarnated) from this world to the spirit world on death, and then returned from the spirit world to this world by birth (Fitzhugh and Kaplan, 1982; Fienup-Riordan, 1983). Animals were conceptualized as sentient non-human beings capable of recognizing human beings and their behavior. Animals made a conscious decision to deliver themselves to certain human groups based on their previous treatment by these groups (Fienup-Riordan, 1994).

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

Perhaps the most dramatic representation of the mutual dependence of humans and animals is demonstrated by the Nakaciuq (Bladder Feast) of the Central Yup'ik (Fienup-Riordan, 1983; Morrow, 1984). The Central Yup'ik believe that the spirit/life force of the seal is found in the bladder of each animal. When seals are killed, the bladders are stored in the qasgiq (ceremonial house) until the time of the feast in the ceremonial season (Cauyarnariuq—Season of the Drum) in the winter (Morrow, 1984). Then under the leadership of the shaman, the bladders, which are symbolic of wombs, are returned to the ocean where it is thought they will return to their homes beneath the ocean to be reborn. If they have been satisfactorily treated with respect by the humans, that is, the humans have demonstrated their worthiness, then the animals will return and once again give themselves to the human beings (Morrow, 1984). The animals judged the worthiness of humans by the humans' willingness to share the fruits of the animals' gifts among each other. This ceremonial giving became a source of cultural conflict when Euroamerican missionaries entered the central Yup'ik region and sought to modify their cultural pattern from one of communal interdependence to one modeled after Euroamerican and Judeo-Christian notions of familial independence. The European model never quite took hold, however.

The Modern Era

The various linguistic groups had remarkably different historical experiences since the coming first of European and later American influences to the region. Two sources of variation are particularly noticeable. The experiences of Alaska Natives are strongly affected both by the timing of initial Euroamerican contact and by the degree to which market-oriented economic development penetrated the community. The variations seen in these two dimensions are substantial and provide insight into the present conditions of peoples in the different areas.

Experience of the Unangan/Aleut

The Unangan were the first to encounter substantial European presence with the arrival of the Russian promyshlenniki (industrialists) in the middle of the 18th century. The Russians abducted Unangan wives and children, and thus coerced the Unangan men into harvesting sea otter and fur seal for the Russians. Through a combination of disease, warfare, and starvation, the Unangan were reduced from an estimated population of 12,000-15,000 to 2,000-3,000 in less than a century (Laughlin, 1980). Their traditional culture was radically altered and they took on a new identity, as Aleut, with the Russian Orthodox faith as a core foundation of the new culture. The culture evolved into a combination of marine mammal hunting for trade and subsistence purposes, and this strategy sustained Aleuts throughout their range until the latter part of the 19th century.

In the late 19th century, two commercial fishing enterprises based in the

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

Seattle, Washington, area began to appear along the western North Pacific Ocean coast and in the eastern portion of Bristol Bay. The first of these was the salt cod industry that began in the late 1870s, bringing Scandinavian dory fishermen to various fishing stations in the Shumagin Islands out to Sanak Island and up to Port Moller (Laughlin, 1980). Some of these fishermen remained and married eastern Aleut women, establishing new families in communities such as Unga, Pirate's Cove, Sanak, Pauloff Harbor, and Squaw Harbor (Laughlin, 1980). These fishermen and their industry did not penetrate as far west as Akutan, so that the western Aleuts retained the more traditional identity and cultural orientation.

The second commercial fishing development was the movement of the salmon processing industry, dominated by the canning sector, into Bristol Bay and the Alaska Peninsula in the late 1880s (Jones, 1976; and Van Stone, 1967). This was a massive incursion brought on by huge capital investments in plants, equipment, and vessels by Euroamerican firms. The canned salmon industry expanded as far west as False Pass, but the lack of significant salmon runs further out the chain limited the expansion in that direction. The canned salmon industry was well established along the east and north shores of Bristol Bay by the mid-1890s (Van Stone, 1967).

In 1942, the Japanese invaded the islands of the Western Aleutians and Pribilof Aleuts. Some residents from the westernmost inhabited Aleutian Island (Atka) were captured and transported as prisoners of war to Japan. The United States relocated other western Aleuts to camps in abandoned canneries in southeast Alaska, where they received poor housing and food. Meanwhile their communities were looted by U.S. troops, so that upon their return, their homes were virtually unlivable. This massive trauma was the subject of a major congressional hearing and reparations were subsequently paid to the western and Pribilof Aleuts for their mistreatment (Kohlhoff, 1995).

The impact of these cultural developments on later generations of Aleuts in the two areas encouraged the development of fishery-oriented communities, with males adopting commercial fishing as a new identity and lifestyle (Jones, 1976). In the post-World War II economy, the Aleuts in the east were able to position themselves as important participants in the salmon harvesting sector after the ban of floating fish traps in 1959. In the 1960s, the experience the Aleuts had gained in the waters of the central Gulf of Alaska provided them with a foothold when the crab industry began to expand. This commercial fishing heritage did not develop in the Aleut communities of Unalaska and west, nor in the Pribilof Islands.

Due to limited education and off-island exposure, few Pribilof Aleuts left the island permanently prior to World War II. Until the early 1980s, the Pribilof Island Aleuts continued their lifestyle tied to the fur seal harvest and processing, first for private companies and later as wards of the federal government (Jones, 1980). There was no development of commercial fishing or deep sea familiarity among the Pribilof Aleuts, although they did maintain some nearshore fishing for subsistence.

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Experience of the Bristol Bay Yup'ik and Alutiiq

The effects of early Russian fur trading and later Euroamerican commercial fishing development on the Bristol Bay Yup'ik and Alutiiq provides a contrast to the Unangan/Aleut experience (Van Stone, 1967). On the eastern shore, early penetration of Alutiiq and several Yup'ik speaking villages by Russian fur traders led to substantial population reduction and a remnant population that adopted Russian Orthodoxy and in some cases took on a new identity as Aleut. This self-identification can still be seen in the 1980 and 1990 census records from the communities from Pilot Point to Iliamna. However, west of Lake Iliamna, where Yup'ik speaking and identifying groups occupy areas near the Nushagak, Igushik, and Togiak Rivers, more of their cultural heritage was preserved. The Nushagak River villagers are dialectically somewhat different from those to the west and term themselves the Kiatagmiut. From the village of Alegnagik westward, villagers speak Yup'ik forms more closely related to those of the Lower Kuskokwim groups. It appears that a wave of Lower Kuskokwim groups moved into western Bristol Bay following substantial population decline in that area in the early 19th century.

The canned salmon industry entered Bristol Bay in the 1890s to exploit the sockeye salmon runs returning to the lakes of the region. On the eastern shore, where development first took place, cannery owners were reluctant to hire Alaska Native workers because they could not leave if the work was not suitable; other workers were obliged to the canneries for transportation (Van Stone, 1967). The canneries in Dillingham and much later at Togiak, primarily used imported Italian and Scandinavian fishermen and Asian labor until World War II. It was only during World War II that Bristol Bay Yup'ik began to be used as fishermen and processing workers. Strict union policies and rampant racism led to conflicts in the post-World War II era as Italian and Scandinavian fishermen and Asian cannery workers sought to regain their preeminence. This led to the formation of two fishermen's organizations: one headquartered in Dillingham to represent the largely Yup'ik fishermen of western Bristol Bay and a second headquartered in Naknek to represent non-native fishermen who fished primarily in eastern Bristol Bay (Petterson et al., 1984).

The commercial fishing adaptation fit well with the continuing subsistence practices of the Yup'ik villagers. The Athapaskans from Lake Iliamna and Lake Clark began to enter the commercial fishery and followed a similar pattern. Men fished cannery-owned drift gillnet boats as teams, often consisting of brothers, father, and son or brother, and brother-in-law. Equal sharing of work, capital, and return was the Yup'ik formula that was readily adapted from the traditional male subsistence practices. Women worked in the cannery and later in the summer worked their own set net sites, selling part of the catch and drying and smoking the remainder. In August, they would leave the canneries and return up

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

river to their villages where the last runs of dog and silver salmon would be harvested for subsistence.

The Bristol Bay pattern produced a sizable cash return and allowed purchase of fuel and food. In poor harvest years, canneries would extend credit for ''grub stakes" to see their fishermen and families through the winter. In the winter, trapping and hunting, accompanied by seasonal feasting, particularly around the Russian Orthodox New Year, were the primary activities. Thus, in this instance there was an effective integration of traditional work patterns with commercial fishing activities, and even a transfer of skills between the two patterns (Langdon, 1987b). Despite problems associated with the sale of limited-entry fishing permits, the integration of commercial fishing activities with traditional subsistence practices continued to be a major foundation of Yup'ik society and values in western Bristol Bay into the 1980s (Langdon, 1991).

It is important to note that the crab fisheries in the 1960s and 1970s were conducted by vessels over 60 feet in length based primarily out of Seattle and Kodiak. Unlike the Alaska Peninsula Aleut, the Bristol Bay Yup'ik did not have large vessels or enough deep water experience to compete on relatively equal footing in these new industries.

With the creation of the EEZ and the exclusion of foreign fishing, a sac roe herring fishery developed in the Togiak district of western Bristol Bay. Euroamerican purse seiners from districts in other parts of Alaska sought to monopolize this new industry to the exclusion of the local Yup'ik gillnet fishermen. However, the Yup'ik responded and won an important court decision that allowed foreign vessels to purchase sac roe herring from them, since domestic processors refused to purchase Yup'ik production (Langdon, 1982).

The restriction of entry into the Bristol Bay salmon and sac roe herring fisheries is a clear case of the denial of opportunity to local fishermen through arrangements between processors and groups of Euroamerican fishermen (Langdon, 1982). In many cases, local fishermen did not participate in the fishery unless outside labor was not available, and little effort was made to include them in the industry (Van Stone, 1967).

Experience of the Yukon and Kuskokwin Yup'ik

North of Bristol Bay, near the lower reaches of the Yukon and Kuskokwim Rivers, the experience of Alaska Natives was again different from that in other regions. In this region, significant and sustained contact with Euroamericans did not occur until well into the 20th century. Waters of the delta are extremely shallow, which was a major impediment to sailing vessels used by early fur traders (Oswalt, 1990). In the latter part of the 19th century, expansion of the salmon canning industry stopped near Bristol Bay due to the high cost of production on the Kuskokwim and Yukon Rivers. These factors combined to keep the regions along these rivers free from significant external influences until the mid-20th

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

century when improved transportation (airplanes) and expanded markets allowed a skiff-based commercial fishery to be developed. In the Yukon and Kuskokwin delta, an opportune fusion of skills, seasonal patterns, and working style similar to that in Bristol Bay allowed Yup'ik populations to develop a mixed subsistence-based society that provided an improved standard of living while retaining strong subsistence orientations, and values (Wolfe, 1984; Fienup-Riordan, 1986b, 1994). In some of the villages in the Yukon-Kuskokwim delta, local fishermen received permits and were able to participate in the fisheries. In other instances, some local fishermen were excluded from developing commercial fisheries because those fisheries were considered to be part of another river system. However, the limited size of commercial resources and distance from markets meant a lower income for Yukon and Kuskokwim fishermen compared to Bristol Bay fishermen (Langdon, 1991). The Yup'ik people of the Yukon-Kuskokwim delta have for over 25 years acted to protect their subsistence values and resources for future generations.

Experience of the Norton Sound Yup'ik

The experience of Yup'ik cultural change in Norton Sound is similar to that of the Yup'ik to the south; however, the gold rush on the Seward Peninsula that led to the creation of Nome had significant effects on cultural development. Nome has been the center of significant disruptive influence on local societies since its founding. Alcohol, violence, and ethnic conflict have been central factors in the social disruption. It is important to note that Alaska Native institutions (regional corporations, school districts) have elected to locate their headquarters in Unalakleet rather than in Nome. Many Alaska Natives feel that the Euroamerican financial power structure that has substantial influence in Nome is not supportive of their goals.

A limited commercial fishery for salmon, sac roe herring, and king crab appeared in the Norton Sound area in the 1960s. These fisheries were conducted using gillnets and small boats similar to those in the Yukon-Kuskokwim region. The more northerly location of these fisheries placed them at the margin of the economy's ability to absorb their production and provide the fishermen with a reasonable rate of return. Commercial fisheries have been operated as far north as Kozebue, but they have not been profitable over the long term due to poor weather and low prices. Low run size and extreme population fluctuations also have combined to limit commercial fishing as a viable source of income in certain years. Subsistence activities continue to be important to the Inupiaq and Yup'ik residents of the region. As in regions further south, the mixed subsistence-based economy includes wage labor and transfer payments as important components of the local economy.

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Experience of St. Lawrence Yup'ik

The Siberian Yup'ik people of St. Lawrence Island have a history distinct from other groups in the region. The population of the island was reduced by starvation from approximately 1,500 to 300 in 1878-89 (Bockstoce, 1986). A primary cause of this starvation was the decimation of the walrus and bowhead whale herds, the two primary staples of the Sivukaqmiut (Siberian Yup'ik term for residents of the island), by Yankee whalers in the 1860s and 1870s. The remaining Yup'ik population consolidated at the oldest settlement on the island, Sivukaq (now called Gambell). In 1892, reindeer were introduced at the Teller Reindeer Station under the sponsorship of Sheldon Jackson, a missionary working to improve local economic conditions (Jackson, 1906). The native community on St. Lawrence Island has retained its essential subsistence character and is considered a center of cooperative group marine mammal-hunting activities. While there has been some subsistence harvesting of cod traditionally and into the contemporary period, commercial fishing had not been practiced by residents of St. Lawrence Island until it was initiated under the CDQ program in 1996.

Industry Structure and History

To evaluate the CDQ program and its effects on the participating communities, some understanding of the history and structure of the commercial fishing industry of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI) is necessary. Historically, the management system adopted by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council (NPFMC) has separated halibut, sablefish, crab, and groundfish fisheries, and these fisheries have shown differences in management structure, as well as historical development of the fleets. The following sections describe some of the key elements of these fisheries. These sections provide a general introduction into both the complexities of fishery management in the North Pacific and the historical development of the domestic commercial fisheries in the Bering Sea. This introduction provides context for understanding the CDQ program. Several aspects of the historical development of the industry are particularly relevant, including who participated, the relative recency of the domestic industry, how the domestic industry was actively "developed," and the extreme variability of some of the fishery resources involved.

The Commercial Halibut Fishery

The commercial halibut fishery in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands targets a single species, the Pacific halibut (Hippoglossus stenolepis) and, by regulation, is conducted exclusively with hook-and-line gear known as longline or setline gear (Figure 2.1). In 1996, 313 vessels harvested 5.27 million pounds of halibut from Area 4, the overall management unit established by the International

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

Figure 2.1

International Pacific Halibut Regulatory Areas for the Alaskan halibut fishery.

Pacific Halibut Commission for the BSAI areas (International Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC), 1997). These figures include harvests from both the individual fishing quota (IFQ) program and the CDQ halibut fishery. The IFQ and CDQ programs were introduced into the halibut fishery in 1995. Prior to the 1995 season, the halibut fishery was conducted as an open-access fishery. Increasingly short seasons, overcapitalization, concerns over safety, and other factors had been concerns in the halibut fishery since shortly after the implementation of the Magnuson-Stevens Act in 1976 (NPFMC, 1998). Efforts at limiting access in the fishery led to a number of proposals, and eventually to the implementation of the Alaskan halibut (and sablefish) IFQ program in 1995 (NPFMC, 1998). The Alaskan halibut IFQ program is designed to allocate a percentage (quota share) of the total allowable catch to individual fishermen who qualify to receive or purchase quota share based on criteria established by the North Pacific Council. The history of the fishery in the BSAI was previously summarized by the NRC (1996):

Halibut were reported in the Bering Sea by U.S. cod vessels as early as the 1800s. However, Bering Sea halibut did not reach North American markets until 1928 (Thompson and Freeman, 1930). Small and infrequent landings of halibut from the Bering Sea were made by U.S. and Canadian vessels between 1928 and 1950, but catches were not landed every year until 1952 (Dunlop et al., 1964). The catch by North American setline vessels increased sharply between

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

1958 and 1962 (exceeding 3,300 t), then fell to a low of 130 t by 1973 before recovering to a high in 1987, and then declined slowly.

While there are many participants in the halibut fishery, most of the catch is captured by a smaller segment of the fleet. The halibut fishery can be prosecuted by small vessels, but the catch is concentrated in the larger vessels in the fleet. Although a majority of vessels participating in the fishery were 35 feet in length or less, 76 percent of the 1996 combined IFQ and CDQ Area 4 halibut harvest was captured by the 33 percent of the fleet consisting of vessels greater than 55 feet long (IPHC, 1997). Similarly, although vessels from many CDQ villages adjacent to Area 4 participated in the open access fisheries (particularly Atka, Akutan, Unalaska, St. Paul, St. George, Mekoryuk, Toksook Bay, and Tununak), the initial distribution of quota shares in the IFQ program reflected catch history during the qualifying years, and local residents did not receive a significant share of quota (CFEC, 1996). Exceptions to this pattern were found in sub-areas 4C and 4E.

Notably, these are sub-areas that received specific local fishery development attention from the International Pacific Halibut Commission and the North Pacific Fishery Management Council prior to the inception of the IFQ program. In the late 1980s, the commission and the council employed a combination of trip limits, short openings, and vessel clearance requirements to "provide more fishing opportunity for local fishermen" from the Pribilof Islands (Area 4C) and Nelson and Nunivak Islands (Area 4E) relative to non-local fleets (Hoag et al., 1993; see also 53 FR 8938, March 18, 1988, 53 FR 10536, April 1, 1988, and 53 FR 20327, June 3, 1988).

Some residents of the CDQ communities have participated in the halibut, sablefish, crab, and groundfish fisheries as crew members, skippers, or vessel owners. However, there had not been any formal participation in the Bering Sea fisheries by these communities as a whole prior to the implementation of the CDQ program. With the implementation of the halibut and sablefish IFQ program, data were collected indicating the residency of the individuals involved in those fisheries. Similar information is more difficult to obtain for the crab and groundfish fisheries. In general, residents of the CDQ communities have had a longer and more extensive participation in the halibut fishery than the other Bering Sea fisheries.

Sablefish

The domestic commercial fishery for sablefish (Anoplopomafimbria) in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands is a relatively recent development. Domestic landings were first recorded in 1980 and foreign harvests were not eliminated until 1988 (NPFMC, 1989a). This pattern of recent domestic fishery development contrasts sharply with both the halibut fisheries of the region and the

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

domestic sablefish fishery in the Gulf of Alaska. Domestic sablefish fishing in the Gulf began in the early 1900s, was displaced by foreign harvests in the early 1970s, and resumed prominence in the mid 1980s as foreign harvests were phased out (Low et al., 1976; NPFMC, 1989a). Japan dominated the foreign harvests of sablefish throughout the North Pacific.

The domestic sablefish fishery is prosecuted with longline gear similar to that used in the halibut fishery but because sablefish are generally found at much greater depths and farther offshore, the sablefish fishery is prosecuted using relatively larger vessels. Participation by local residents of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands areas was very low prior to the inception of the CDQ program and contrasted sharply with local participation in the halibut fishery (NPFMC, 1992).

Commercial Crab Fisheries

The commercial crab fisheries covered under the council's BSAI king and Tanner crab fishery management plan target king, Tanner, and snow crabs. Targeted king crab are of the family Lithodidae: red king crab (Paralithodes camtschatica), blue king crab (P. platypus) , and brown or golden king crab (Lithodes aequispinus). The Tanner crab fisheries involve Tanner or bairdi crab (Chionoecetes bairdi) and to a much lesser extent grooved Tanner crab (Chionoecetes tanneri) and triangle Tanner crab (Chionoecetes angulatus). The snow crab fishery targets snow, or opilio, crab (Chionoecetes opilio).

The commercial crab fleet is characterized by vessel type: whether the vessel delivers live crab to a processing plant (a catcher vessel) or processes the crab at sea on board the vessel while harvesting (a catcher-processor). The fleet is also characterized by vessel length and by residency of the vessel owner. Currently, the BSAI crab fisheries are constrained by a moratorium on vessel entry and a more restrictive license limitation program is pending implementation. The council's license limitation program for the BSAI crab fisheries is expected to issue species- area-specific licenses to 427 distinct crab vessels. Of these 427 vessels, 400 are catcher vessels and 27 are catcher-processors. The majority of the catcher vessels are less than 125 feet in overall length, whereas all but 2 of the catcher-processor vessels are over 125 feet long. Only 175 of the 400 catcher vessels are reported to be owned by Alaskans, while residents of Washington own the bulk of the remaining vessels. The majority of the crab catcher-processor vessels is owned by Washington residents. With the exception of the recipients of licenses for Norton Sound red and blue king crab, virtually none of the projected recipients are from coastal communities adjacent to the respective BSAI crab fisheries (all data from NPFMC, 1997a).

The BSAI crab fisheries vary considerably by number of participating vessels, harvest amount, value, and season length as shown in Table 2.2.

Although there is some overlap between the crab and groundfish fleets, a substantial portion of the BSAI crab fleet is comprised of dedicated crab vessels.

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

TABLE 2.2 Participation Levels, Harvests, Ex-Vessel Values, and Season Lengths for Selected Crab Fisheries in the Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands in 1996

Fishery

Year

Vessels (Days)

Harvest (Value)

Ex-Vessel (Value)

Season Length (Days)

Bristol Bay red king

1996

196

8.4

33.6

4

Pribilof red & blue king

1996

63

1.1

3

11

St. Matthew blue king

1996

122

3.1

2.2

8

Adak brown king

1995/96

25

4.9

9.6

289

Bering Sea Tanner

1996

195

1.8

4.5

16a

Bering Sea snow

1996

234

65.7

85.6

45

NOTE: Harvests in millions of pounds of live crab. Ex-vessel value in millions of dollars.

a Bering Sea Tanner crab season length represents 4 days as bycatch during Bristol Bay red king crab season plus 12-day directed season following closure of the red king season.

SOURCE: ADF&G, 1997

Within the crab fleet prior to the license limitation, there was considerable overlap between the vessels that fished the Bristol Bay red king crab and the other crab fisheries, with the exception of the Adak brown king crab and the Norton Sound red and blue king crab fisheries. The Adak fishery is informally an exclusive fishery by virtue of physical conditions (depth and tidal currents) and season length. The Norton Sound fisheries are exclusive by regulation (vessels that register to fish in Norton Sound cannot fish in any other area).

The following historical account of commercial crab fishing in the BSAI draws directly on the Council, 1989 (Zahn, 1970; Otto, 1981; ADF&G, 1997; and Browning, 1980). Japanese tangle-net fishing for king crab in the eastern Bering Sea began in 1930, ended in 1940, and resumed in 1953. A Russian king crab fleet entered the eastern Bering Sea fisheries in 1959. Domestic U.S. exploration of a potential commercial fishery began (and ended) in 1941 and was resumed in 1946 utilizing trawl gear. Domestic effort increased at the end of the decade, but it declined in the late 1950s, and no domestic catch was recorded in 1959. Domestic king crab harvests in the Bering Sea were low and variable until the mid-1960s. Management of the domestic fishery initially was vested in the U.S. Bureau of Commercial Fisheries (the precursor to the National Marine Fisheries Service), but was transferred upon statehood to Alaska's Board of Fisheries and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. The State of Alaska continues to manage the crab fishery under authority delegated to it by the North Pacific Council.

From the beginning, the Board of Fisheries moved to "protect local fleets" (NPFMC, 1989b). In 1964, the U.S. government negotiated bilateral agreements with Japan and the USSR with the aim of gradually supplanting the foreign fish-

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

eries with domestic harvesting and processing capacity. Russian and Japanese king crab harvests ended in the 1970s. At the same time, domestic production in the Bristol Bay red king crab fishery increased throughout the 1970s until in 1979, the port of Dutch Harbor/Unalaska became the number one U.S. port in terms of dollar value of commercial fishery landings. The steady progression of record red king crab catches peaked with the 129.9 million pounds harvested during the 40-day 1980 season. The red king crab fishery then experienced dramatic decline, and there was no commercial fishery in 1983. The fishery reopened in 1984, and catches rose to 20 million pounds in 1990, but declined again with a total closure of the Bristol Bay red king crab fishery in 1994 and 1995. The red king crab fishery was reopened in 1996.

Compared to the Bristol Bay red king crab fishery, all of the other crab fisheries in the BSAI are relatively recent. Despite later development, most of the other crab fisheries have shared the "boom and bust" pattern of the Bristol Bay red king crab fishery. A directed domestic Tanner crab fishery began in 1974. Foreign Tanner crab fishing was phased out by 1980. The record harvest of Tanner crab in the Bering Sea, 66.6 million pounds, occurred during the 1977-78 season. The Tanner crab fishery was closed in both 1986 and 1987 due to stock declines, and more recently in 1997. The domestic snow crab fishery began in 1977. The record harvest for the snow crab fishery, 328.6 million pounds, occurred in 1991, but catches have steadily declined since then to a catch of 65.7 million pounds in 1996. The commercial Pribilof blue king crab fishery began in 1973, was closed from 1988 to 1994, and reopened in 1995. The commercial Pribilof red king crab fishery first opened in 1993.

Commercial Groundfish Fisheries

The BSAI Groundfish Fishery Management Plan defines the following target species for which specific total allowable catch (TAC) levels are set annually: pollock (Theragra chalcogramma), sablefish (Anoplopomafimbria ), Pacific cod (Gadus macrocephalus), squid (Berryteuthis magister and Onychoteuthis borealijaponicus), yellowfin sole (Limanda aspera ), rock sole (lepedopsetta bilineata), flathead sole (Hippoglossoides ellassodon), Atka mackerel (Pleurogrammus monopterygius), Greenland turbot (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides), Pacific ocean perch (Sebastes alutus, also includes the "other red rockfish" complex), arrowtooth flounder (Atheresthes stomias), other flatfish (primarily by Alaska plaice—Pleuronectes quadrituberculatus), and other rockfish (mostly by shortspine thornyheads—Sebastolobus alascanus).

Various fleets pursue the species of these fisheries, but, unlike the crab and halibut fisheries, some of the groundfish fisheries of the BSAI are prosecuted using multiple gear types (e.g., Pacific cod, Greenland turbot, and sablefish), while the others are prosecuted with trawl gear exclusively. Within the trawl fisheries, some (e.g., rock sole) are pursued almost exclusively by catcher-pro-

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

cessor vessels. In contrast, the pollock fishery (an exclusively trawl fishery) is allocated between offshore processor vessels (catcher-processors or offshore motherships receiving deliveries from catcher vessels) and inshore processors (shore-based plants and nearshore floating processors receiving deliveries from catcher vessels). The Pacific cod fishery is allocated among trawl, longline, and pot gears, and the catch is processed by both inshore and offshore processors. Finally, some (e.g., arrowtooth flounder) "target" species are hardly pursued as targets at all.

Although multiple gear types are present, trawl gear dominates the groundfish fisheries of the BSAI, accounting for 92 percent by weight of all groundfish harvested in 1995 (Kinoshita et al., 1997). The trawl fleet itself is divided into catcher vessels and catcher-processor vessels, with the latter category further divided by the type of product produced. In order of decreasing vessel size, the trawl catcher-processor fleet includes surimi processors (sometimes in excess of 300 feet) that also sometimes produce fillets; fillet processors (220-300 feet); and head and gut processors (20-220 feet). Four shore-based processors account for most of the "inshore" processing of BSAI groundfish; three plants are located in Unalaska and one in Akutan.

Pollock is the dominant groundfish fishery both by value and weight. Collectively, the 1995 groundfish fisheries landed 1.93 million metric tons worth an estimated $585 million in ex-vessel value (Kinoshita et al., 1997). Of these amounts, pollock represented 69 percent by volume and 48 percent by value. The groundfish fisheries are subject to a license limitation plan approved by the Secretary of Commerce; the plan excludes the longline portion of the sablefish fishery (which falls under the IFQ program) and a small vessel jig-gear-only fishery for Pacific cod in the Aleutian Islands area established by the Council shortly before adoption of the license program.

Analysis of the license program estimated that 407 catcher vessels and 141 catcher-processors (fixed and trawl gear) would receive licenses to fish groundfish in the BSAI, including vessels jointly licensed to fish in the Gulf of Alaska groundfish fisheries (NPFMC, 1997a). The analysis also indicated that most of the harvesting capacity in both the catcher vessel and the catcher-processor sector resides in the larger vessels in each sector, and that both vessel sectors are based predominantly in Washington State (NPFMC, 1997a). The analysis also underscored the fact that the BSAI groundfish fisheries are highly industrialized and overcapitalized. The state of the groundfish fisheries results directly from the fisheries development policies pursued in the BSAI.

Although domestic commercial groundfish fishing occurred in the BSAI as early as an 1864 venture that fished for Pacific cod (Cobb, 1927), the domestic groundfish fisheries were virtually non-existent when the Fishery Conservation and Management Act was passed in 1976 (Rigby, 1984). Domestic harvests in the BSAI in the late 1970s primarily consisted of a bait fishery supplying the then soaring king crab fishery (BSAI FMP, p. 8). When the Act was passed in 1976,

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

groundfish fishing in the BSAI was a foreign activity (principally by the Japanese and Soviet fleets, but fleets from Poland, Korea, and Taiwan were also active). The Act was amended in its second year to emphasize that "a national program for the development of fisheries which are underutilized or not utilized by the United States fishing industry, including bottomfish off Alaska, is necessary. . ." (Sec. 2(a)(7)). Domestic harvesting capacity responded to the emphasis on displacing foreign harvesting fleets by utilizing foreign processing fleets during the rapid buildup of capacity that occurred during the so-called "joint-venture era."

Development of the groundfish fisheries was accelerated further by additional Congressional attention to the processing sector as reflected in subsequent amendments to the Act, including the processor preference amendment and the American Fisheries Promotion Act. The former set the stage for the beginning of the end of the joint ventures, while the latter formalized the informal policy of maintaining some foreign access to harvests in exchange for highly desired technology transfer and opening of export markets to assist in the effort to "Americanize" fisheries like the groundfish fisheries (specifically, the BSAI pollock fishery). In addition to this external focus on foreign nations, Congressional fishery development policy also had an internal focus: tax credit and loan guarantee programs were provided to encourage investment in the domestic industry. The rapid success of these development policies can been seen in the line graphs presented in Figure 2.2 below:

Figure 2.2

The "Americanization" of the Alaska groundfish harvest.

NOTE: The graphs pertain to all groundfish harvests off Alaska (i.e., the Gulf of Alaska plus BSAI harvests, but the scale of the BSAI groundfish fisheriesis such that the fisheries are effectively drowned out in the graphs). SOURCE: NPFMC, 1990.

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

Like the crab and halibut fisheries, only more so, the groundfish fisheries of the BSAI are a direct product of government-directed fisheries development policies. In this, they provide a suitable context for a review of the CDQ program. The history of the groundfish fisheries is a history of development pursued through the allocation of economic opportunities. The EEZ, the Processor Preference Amendment, the American Fisheries Promotion Act, the creation and subsequent closure of joint ventures, the individual fishing quota (IFQ) program, the inshore/offshore allocation, the cod trawl/fixed-gear allocation, the small boat jig-gear allocation and the CDQ program are all acts by Congress or the Council in pursuit of particular visions of ''development."1 The fact that government-backed development is the consistent theme of all post-Magnuson Act fisheries management is often overlooked by participants in north Pacific fisheries. A quote from the not-so-distant past serves as a reminder that those persons embroiled in debate over today's development policies were often endowed by past development policies:

It's almost like a battlefield, the U.S. exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of Alaska, with the North Pacific Fisheries [sic] Management Council acting as arbitrator among warring factions of seafood-hungry nations. The council ruled in our favor this year, eliminating all foreign fishing from the zone. . . And with less of their own production to rely on from the Bering Sea, both Japanese and Korean buyers will be clamoring for groundfish from the U.S. zone. (Seafood Business, 1988)

Current Issues in Western Alaska

The economic conditions in many Alaska Native communities reflect the lack of recent commercial development. Although the subsistence economy still works in some communities, the lack of economic opportunities for Alaska Native continues to exist. The lack of economic opportunities and the despondency

1  

The EEZ, the IFQ program and the inshore/offshore allocation are described elsewhere in this report. The Processor Preference Amendment (PL 95-354) was fashioned by Congress during the 1978 amendments to the MSFCMA and spelled the beginning of the end for the "joint venture" production in which harvests by a domestic fleet were processed on-board foreign at-sea processors by establishing a priority for domestic processors. The American Fisheries Promotion Act (PL 96561, the 1980 reauthorization of the MSFCMA) was another step in the Congressional effort to "Americanize" fisheries in the EEZ and formalized the "fish and chips" policy of encouraging foreign investment in domestic processing capacity. In late 1990, the Council "brought to an end the joint venture era in the groundfish fisheries off Alaska by apportioning all quotas [the 1991 total allowable catches by fishery] to fully domestic fisheries" (NPFMC, 1990). In 1993, the Council divided the harvest of Pacific cod in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management areas between contesting gear factions by establishing specific trawl gear and fixed gear (longline and pot gear) allocations. To support a fledgling small boat cod fishery developing in the Aleutian Islands area, the Council also established a third direct allocation of cod reserved for small boats exclusively using jigging gear.

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

that results has had profound effects on the social conditions of these communities and has exacerbated existing social problems (Alaska Natives Commission, 1994). As an example, alcoholism and suicide among Alaska Natives continues to remain high, and recent studies suggest that the rates for alcoholism, alcohol-related deaths and injuries, and suicide are significantly higher in western Alaska than in the general U.S. population (Gessner, 1997; Landen et al., 1997). Some villages have attempted to counteract high rates of alcoholism by restricting the sale of alcohol in the villages, and those policies have reduced the rates of alcoholism and alcohol-related deaths (Landen et al., 1997).

These social problems, in addition to poor sanitation and immunization rates, and the limited availability of health care, education, and employment opportunities have been well-documented (Alaska Natives Commission, 1994). In many cases, Alaska Natives have among the lowest levels of income, employment, and life expectancy of all ethnic groups in the United States yet have among one of the highest birth rates (Hensel, 1996; Alaska Natives Commission, 1994). These conditions contribute to a reduction of the ability of villagers to participate in many of the subsistence activities that provide important food and domestic products for these regions, and further exacerbate economic and social problems (Marshall, 1988).

Some villages have generated locally based businesses and industries that have been important sources of employment and hope through coordination among different organizations (e.g., Emmonak, Saxman in Southeast Alaska). Generally, there has not been an expansion of locally-based businesses and industries (Alaska Natives Commission, 1994). All of these factors indicate that the lack of development continues to be a central factor in the social and economic problems facing western Alaska communities.

What is Development in Western Alaska?

The idea of "development" has been evolving in the past several decades, both among some academic experts and among the peoples concerned. Of course, the alleviation of poverty and the attendant social ills remain fundamental and are the common denominator of all definitions. But the narrow view of economic growth—expansion of production, productivity, and per capita income—as the greatest good and an end in itself has been superseded by, or included in, a more general understanding of development as the enrichment of chosen forms of human life. It is material growth that now appears as the means. The end is the overall fulfillment of human existence according to a people's own cultural conceptions of what a good life is. Development currently includes the concepts of the enrichment of a way of life and self-determination, concepts beyond a strictly economic perspective. No doubt many factors have contributed to this shift in perspective. Among them is the recognition of cultural diversity. Economists and other social scientists long thought that development was impeded by the

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

The idea of "development" has been evolving, and is no longer focused exclusively on economic growth. The goal of development initiatives such as the CDQ program includes both alleviation of poverty and attendant social ills and enrichment of a way of life and self-determination. (Photo of Charles Hanson by James Barker and provided courtesy of the Alaska State Council on the Arts, Contemporary Art Bank.)

indigenous culture of the so-called traditional societies. Yet often what they were witnessing was the integration of modern technologies, goods and relations in and by local traditions, which gave such "development" (as locally defined) an unrecognizable appearance. In many situations cultural tradition and economic change are not necessarily antithetical, but the traditions continue to orient the economic change, such that the continuity of tradition consisted in the specific

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

way a people were prepared to change (Hannerz, 1992; Thomas, 1991; Sahlins, 1993).

A report of the World Commission on Culture and Development established by UNESCO reflects the shift in thinking about the concept of development (Pérez de Cuéllar, 1995).

According to one view, development is a process of economic growth . . . According to the other, espoused by the UNDP's [United Nations Development Programme's] annual Human Development Report and by many distinguished economists, development is seen as a process that enhances the effective freedom of the people involved to pursue whatever they have reason to value . . . Poverty of life, in this view, implies not only lack of essential goods and services, but also a lack of opportunities to choose a fuller, more satisfying, more valuable and valued existence. The choice can also be for a different style of development, a different path, based on different values from those of highest income countries now. The recent spread of democratic institutions, of market choices, of participatory management of firms, has enabled different groups and different cultures to choose for themselves.

It can no longer be supposed, as it was in an earlier generation of "modernization" theories, that the non-Western people's culture has something the matter with it. If any general lesson can be drawn from the mixed practical efforts of earlier decades to remake the world in the Western image of progress, it is that a people's economy is part of their larger organization of life, and the culture that supplies its principal relationships and values. As stated by the World Commission on Culture and Development: "Culture is not a means to material progress: it is the end and aim of 'development' seen as the flourishing of human existence in all its forms and as a whole" (Pérez de Cuéllar, 1995). In other words, development in the late 20th century is realized as the indigenization of modernity—the encompassment of modern technologies in local cultures.

The NRC Committee to Review the Community Development Quota found this concept of development particularly appropriate to its investigation. It is useful and appropriate because a working relation between the modern market economy and the existing cultural traditions is already in effect in western Alaskan communities, the market now providing important monetary means for the realization of the cultural traditions. Indeed, the most serious problem facing these communities seems not so much how to synthesize the commercial economy with their own cultural values, as how to get enough income from the market to support the traditional cultural values that are now dependent on it. For the so-called subsistence lifestyle widely practiced in western Alaska by non-native and native people alike is both less and more than the term "subsistence" tends to imply. It is less because subsistence production would be impossible without engagements in the commercial relations and civic institutions of the larger American society, including the income people need for their means of subsis-

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

tence production. The necessary adoption of modern technology makes money their own cultural capital. But then, "subsistence" means more than it seems since, as an Anchorage Daily News reporter put it, it is "not a lifestyle but a life" (Anchorage Daily News, 1989).

A total world order of cultural values, practices and relationships is linked to the annual cycle of harvesting wild animal and plant resources. "Subsistence" includes: (1) the relationships of households, extended families, and larger communities constructed through cooperation in production and customs of reciprocal sharing; (2) the division of labor between men and women and the corresponding understanding of their respective competencies; (3) the accumulation of prestige and influence by certain individuals, such as successful hunters or whaling captains, and certain knowledgeable people, such as experienced elders, which constitutes the political contours of the community; (4) the dances, inter-village exchange festivals, and other social celebrations, often integrated in the calendar of Christian religious and American national holidays; and (5), not least, the distinctive relations of exchange that people understand to exist between themselves and the natural species on which they depend.

Native communities attach very strong values to indigenous foods, a diet of which is considered indispensable to human strength and health. Also associated are certain valued traits of human character, of the kind necessary to undertake an often difficult "subsistence" existence: a very considerable knowledge of nature and a high degree of technical competence (including competence in dealing with modern technologies), highly athletic physical skills, and the sort of mental toughness that combines sagacious prudence with the ability to respond to the emergencies and contingencies of famously difficult Arctic conditions (Nelson, 1969). "Subsistence" is indeed much more than subsistence; it is a whole way of life that extends to the people's essential conceptions of themselves and of the objects of their existence2 (Jorgensen, 1990).

Yet "subsistence" is no longer a phenomenon of the people's own making, and in that sense we say it is less than a complete existence. It depends decisively and unconditionally on monetary flows from the public and private sectors for the acquisition of necessary capital. There is no going back now to fur clothing, dog sleds, and bone-pointed harpoons; the subsistence economy runs on snow-machines, motorized aluminum fishing vessels, four-wheel all-terrain vehicles, pickup trucks, CB radios, manufactured fishing and hunting gear, fossil fuels,

2  

Subsistence also includes the responsibilities that people fulfill in providing for their families and caring for the older people and for other relatives, friends, and neighbors. It includes the pleasure that people derive from subsistence pursuits and from being out in the country. It includes the respect and reverence that people have toward the land and animals. It includes the understanding people have of the deeper connections between themselves as a people, the land and the sea, and the resources. The people know that these connections sustain not only their bodies but also their cultural and personal essences, giving them identity and meaning in their lives as persons and as a people.

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

camping equipment, imported cold weather clothing, and airplanes (Langdon, 1991). Changes in lifestyle including settlement patterns in the villages, improved safety, the availability of technology, and the desire for other market goods that reduce the time available for subsistence activities have contributed to the increasing importance of capital for conducting subsistence activities. An average of about $20,000 to $25,000 in annual cash expenses per household is a reasonable estimate of what is presently required to maintain an ongoing "subsistence" economy.

As is well known, the Alaska Natives have adopted a great variety of strategies to acquire the income necessary for daily life—although the available sources have not been sufficient to prevent serious and widespread poverty. In broad terms, the principal sources of cash income have been commercial fishing and hunting; craft production; dividends from native corporations; income from participation in the National Guard and state construction projects3; loans from government agencies and fiscal institutions; and a variety of transfer payments ranging from Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) to annual distributions from the Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend. Considering that these flows go largely to maintaining the so-called subsistence system, it follows that the "development" of western Alaskan communities is, in an unusual double sense, an enrichment of their way of life.

It is important to stress the seeming paradoxes of this development, precisely because in western Alaska the market economy and the traditional lifestyles have proved to be compatible despite the conventional social science wisdom, now outmoded, according to which synthesis of money and culture would be impossible. For many years it was believed that money destroys the traditional community, because money becomes the community, the effective nexus of relationships between people. But decades of academic studies in western Alaskan communities by a variety of anthropologists and sociologists have repeatedly testified to the contrary; the Alaska Native communities have proven open to technological innovation and adaptable to market economy as well as to government bureaucracy, while all the time integrating these external influences in their own cultural purposes (Hensel, 1996; Nowack, 1975; Van Stone, 1960, 1962). General observations to this effect have been made in villages in the CDQ area. For example, a study conducted on the lower Yukon Delta notes:

The interaction of monetary income and subsistence output argues against a conceptual polarization of a "subsistence economy" and "market economy" as mutually exclusive and antagonistic production systems. Rather than being competing systems, Kotlik fishermen have blended them in a mutually supportive mixed economy (Wolfe, 1986).

3  

Income from the National Guard and state construction projects have fallen in recent years, contributing to a shrinking economic base.

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

Anne Fienup-Riordan found similar conditions on Nelson Island. She writes:

The fact that the same men and women who affirm their cultural heritage through the defense of traditional subsistence resource utilization patterns are often the very ones who are anxious to develop the [commercial] economic opportunities available in their villages does not represent a contradiction or a basic incompatibility between cultural values and economic reality. Rather, choices in the realm of economic, political, and social activity are made in accordance with a common cultural value system (Fienup-Riordan, 1986a).

Finally, a study of two Yup'ik communities, Togiak and Quinhagak, in the Bristol Bay and Kuskokwim regions makes a telling observation about the positive relationship between success in the commercial and traditional economies—a finding that has been replicated in a number of Alaska Native villages:

It is . . . noteworthy, as found elsewhere in rural western Alaska, that "success" in petty commodity production is highly correlated with success in subsistence . . . [T]he high commodity producers choose to be high producers in the subsistence sector as well. They have sufficient time and well organized managerial skills to pursue subsistence. Subsistence activities continue to provide them with satisfaction, status and allow them to fulfill obligations to kinsmen and community. Subsistence is deeply embedded in what it means to be a Yup'ik in these communities (Langdon, 1991).

From this complementary relation of the subsistence and monetary economies follows the finding—extremely relevant for assessing the CDQ program—that higher levels of household cash income are directly correlated with the people's commitment to and their returns from natural resource harvesting (hunting, fishing, and gathering). So again, an observation on Kotlik villagers:

The members of families with larger monetary incomes had a larger quantity of subsistence food products in their diets than families with smaller monetary incomes. The relationship appears linear and significant at p = .05 . . . The implication is that income and subsistence use increase together (Wolfe, 1986).

Indeed, where commercial fishing is involved, the relationship of the two sectors is mutually reinforcing: successful fishing yields increased cash, thus improved subsistence gear, hence greater returns from each subsistence attempt. Yet, interestingly enough, studies show the same positive relationship held where employment is concerned: that men who are able to obtain employment locally, even for the greater part of the year, are at least as committed to subsistence activities as those employed, and are generally more successful. Kruse (1986), for example, found this to be the case in North Slope Iñupiat villages—where the data indicate that subsistence activity increases with the number of months of employment annually, up to those working for wages nine months or more—and the general correlation is also reported for villages in the CDQ program area

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

(Langdon, 1986, p.32, Wolfe, 1980, 1986; Lonner, 1986). Of course, it is the increased mobility and efficiency provided by modern technology, provided by cash income, that makes it possible for individuals to succeed in both sectors of the economy at once. Extended families, as well as households at a stage in their development cycle that affords them working members in two generations, are even better endowed to exploit simultaneously the monetary and subsistence spheres. In such cases a division of labor—such as between elders and younger members of the family or between young men of different skills and dispositions—will provide the advantage of at least some specialization in the two sectors (Worl and Smythe, 1986). Family size, solidarity, and stage of development are also critical in determining whether outside employment and educational opportunities can be exploited—such as the opportunities expected from CDQ programs.

Another unusual empirical finding deserves emphasis, namely that adults in rural villages who have the greatest "outside" experience in terms of education and employment, which is to say the more "acculturated" or ''Westernized" individuals, usually have greater interest and output in the subsistence economy than people who have not had such backgrounds (Kruse, 1986). This relationship is again contingent on higher monetary income, thus improved means of subsistence production, among those who have passed time in urban environments of Alaska or elsewhere. Still, it would come as some surprise to earlier theories of "modernization" that the more Westernized people become, the more indigenous they will be:

It appears, then, that men remain interested in subsistence activities despite exposure to western influences. In fact, men who for reasons of choice or fate have been exposed to Western influences tend to be more interested in subsistence (Kruse, 1986).

For some time now, especially since World War II, the communities of western Alaska have extended beyond the boundaries of their villages. These communities include people working or studying in metropolitan centers of Alaska and the contiguous United States, people who may well return in the classic pattern of "circular migration," but who remain linked to their villages of origin by sentiment, kinship, and the exchange of money, goods, and news. Such linkages have, of course, been facilitated by modern means of transportation and communication. As in many other areas of the world where people, ideas, and commodities are on the move between rural homelands and urban centers of employment, new forms of dispersed communities have developed in the Twentieth Century—and may well be with us for generations to come. The geographic village is small, but the social village extends for thousands of miles. Moreover, the flow of goods—so-called remittances that are viewed locally as part of a traditional reciprocity or sharing system—generally favors the village, hence reverses the historic parasitic economic relationship between cities and rural areas.

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

It can be expected that Alaska Native communities will have members working in the cities but contributing to the village economy, even if they become longtime city residents. For this reason, varied educational and training programs, even without seeming applicability to rural economic activity, can have great development benefits for the native villages.

The pattern of benefits from education, training, and outside employment, accruing to families (or extended families) in the CDQ villages depends on the demography and the stage in the development cycle of the family. Some households, particularly those composed of young married couples with dependent children and those composed of older community members without access to young people's labor, will not be able to take advantage of economic opportunities outside the village. These people can be served by development projects that emphasize increased economic activities in the villages or nearby rural areas, rather than in distant fishing grounds or urban areas. Village-based development projects include loans for expanding local commercial fishing operations and creation of local wage-earning and marketing opportunities in fish processing and distribution.

Indeed, the circular migration between rural villages and cities is an aspect of recent Alaskan history that affords a ready—made experimental demonstration of just what "development" is in this cultural context—and thus, what might be hoped for from the CDQ program. We mean the cultural "renaissance" as it has been called and as it has been reported from several locations within the CDQ region, coming on the tide of increased cash flows in rural Alaska since the early 1970s. ''It was not anticipated," Joseph Jorgensen wrote in a recent work on Oil Age Eskimos (1990), "that ANCSA's [Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act] provisions would lure natives back to their natal villages from urban areas in Alaska and elsewhere, but the prospects of employment, land, and money have had that effect." The result of a multi-year investigation by a team of ethnographers, Jorgensen's report included two villages, Unalakleet (Yukon) and Gambell (St. Lawrence Island), in the CDQ program—as well as a third, Wainwright, on the North Slope (Jorgensen, 1990). The influx of money and increase of employment opportunities in these communities came from activities of native corporations, government projects, and the North Slope oil development, as well as enhanced commercial fishing and craft production. Federal housing projects in the villages, unrelated to ANSCA, have also contributed by providing an incentive to lure people back to their villages. Immigration, as well as efforts to eradicate diseases in these communities, also contributed to population increase. Gambell, for example, grew from 372 in 1970 to 522 in 1989.

If the population increase was not anticipated, even less expected was the "renaissance of native culture" that accompanied it—what the researchers characterized summarily as a resurgence of "subsistence pursuits, native lore and legends, native dancing and singing" (Jorgensen, 1990). These were not the only aspects of the local culture that found new life. Relations of kinship were

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

extended and (on St. Lawrence Island) clanship strengthened, as these were engaged in the organization of production and exchange. It is "an interesting fact that should not go unnoticed," observed Jorgensen (1990), "that the more people earned, whether in private sector jobs or as successful private sector fisherman, the more widely they shared." On Nelson Island (also in the CDQ program), a similar cultural efflorescence has been described by Anne Fienup-Riordan (1983, 1986, 1990). The focus has been the traditional springtime seal festival, celebrating the first catch of the season, the occasion of elaborate distributions of meat and goods that realize the main social relationships of these Yup'ik communities. The feast and exchanges, including inter-village exchanges, have seen "an incredible quantitative elaboration" in recent times (Fienup-Riordan, 1986). Noting that the forecasts of a waning subsistence lifestyle so popular in the 1950s and 1960s have not been confirmed, Jorgensen sums up such surprising development effects as follows:

To the contrary, political and economic events since 1970 have had the contradictory consequences of causing Alaskan Eskimos to become increasingly dependent on the public and private sectors of the national economy but also to hunt, fish, and collect more efficiently. Furthermore, the economic and political forces of the past fifteen years have triggered a renaissance of Eskimo dancing and singing, a return migration to villages from urban areas . . . In short, there is a determination on the part of Eskimos to maintain traditional Eskimo culture and at the same time to adapt a pragmatic acceptance of the benefits of modern technology (1990).

What will happen if the CDQ program is economically successful, if it brings increased employment opportunities and moneys to western Alaskan communities, is not entirely unpredictable. The predictions are not the same as might have been made by social scientists (and others) 20 or 30 years ago, but then, they are based on the unexpected experience of recent decades, which have seen the "development" of traditional culture in places where access to the market economy, monetary incomes, and technological means of subsistence production have all improved. "Development" thus indeed turns out to be "the enrichment of a way of life." But of course it would be very wrong to suppose that this process is ever economically simple or culturally unproblematic. "Enrichment" is never easy, nor are all modes of doing so supportive of the local way of life—or the people's sense of self-respect.

It is a popular opinion that the social problems of indigenous Alaskan communities—alcoholism, drug abuse, and suicide most notably—are the results of a "clash of cultures." Presumably the unfulfillable expectations and intractable barriers set up by American society, together with the declining strength and appeal of native custom, have been the principal ingredients of a widespread despair. On the other hand, the information we reviewed suggests that the explanations of despondency by reason of cultural conflicts are not altogether suffi-

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

cient. The great success stories in native communities figure as their main protagonists the people who have had the most "outside" experience and ability in the market economy—success consists precisely in turning these assets to the enhancement of the "subsistence lifestyle." The leaders of some native communities in western Alaska are often among the most "acculturated" of the local people. It is their competence in both cultures, the native and the Western, that allows them to synthesize the differences—and gives them also a measure of local respect. Hence the problems of modern native communities do not necessarily reside in inherent cultural incompatibilities so much as in situations that make it difficult for people to synthesize the differences.

If development is "the enrichment of the community's way of life," it is important to stress again that, as the situation now stands in western Alaska, the traditional way of life cannot proceed without cash. In this respect, young men and women and young families are in a particularly precarious position. Many of the skills that traditionally equipped people for an honorable and satisfying existence—such as, for men, knowledge of nature, hunting skills, dog sledding, kayaking, whaling—have been rendered technologically obsolete and lost to the younger generation. Unless young people can acquire a monetary stake to subsidize their customary productive activities with the technologies now required, they are in danger of becoming a lost generation. The situation is all the more critical because of the role of autonomy in traditional cultures, that is, on the ability to provide for oneself and family, and beyond that to achieve community standing by supplying others, especially elders and poorer people, with shares from successful subsistence endeavors. As we noted earlier, the problem is not so much that money and the traditional way of life are incompatible, but that without money one cannot participate in the traditional way of life. In that event, the failure is compounded: it is a failure in both cultures. Unable to function in their own society, left with nothing to do and no possible future, the young people are also left out of Euroamerican culture, the good things of which are in their view but not within their grasp. It is a formula for despondency.

As matters have evolved, it is necessary for western Alaskans to succeed, one way or another, in the Euroamerican culture in order to find a place, and peace, in the native culture. If the CDQ program is to have serious developmental consequences, it will have to open the possibilities, especially for young people, to make a go of it in their local communities. But at the same time, there is something more to the value of autonomy that engages the villages and regional organizations as such, the structures by which the CDQ program is constituted. More than any previous welfare or development initiative, more even than the native corporations, the CDQ program seems to offer a viable way for local people to gain control over the means by which they are articulated to the larger economy and society.

This would not only be true of the development councils set up by the CDQ groups but also of the educational training grants they provide. In this regard, it

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×

should be remarked that "development" has come to include—not only in Native Alaska, but generally in the world—a growing aspiration for self-determination, both as the means and the end. The people seek a measure of governance, one that will allow them to shape their own future—not only in ways that safeguard their language, values, and customs but according to these cultural desiderata. Such distinctive control by and for members of local communities has thus become a crucial condition of development. Many of the hopes for the CDQ program that NRC committee members encountered in their site visits came from this promise of self-determination—by invidious contrast to welfare handouts and other projects that wind up confirming people in their dependency without relieving their despondency.

Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 15
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 16
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 17
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 18
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 19
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 20
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 21
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 22
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 23
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 24
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 25
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 26
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 27
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 28
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 29
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 30
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 31
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 32
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 33
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 34
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 35
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 36
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 37
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 38
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 39
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 40
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 41
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 42
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 43
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 44
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 45
Suggested Citation:"2 Description of the CDQ Region and Fishery." National Research Council. 1999. The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6114.
×
Page 46
Next: 3 Overview of the Community Development Program »
The Community Development Quota Program in Alaska Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $67.00 Buy Ebook | $54.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

This book reviews the performance and effectiveness of the Community Development Quotas (CDQ) programs that were formed as a result of the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996. The CDQ program is a method of allocating access to fisheries to eligible communities with the intent of promoting local social and economic conditions through participation in fishing-related activities. The book looks at those Alaskan fisheries that have experience with CDQs, such as halibut, pollock, sablefish, and crab, and comments on the extent to which the programs have met their objectives—helping communities develop ongoing commercial fishing and processing activities, creating employment opportunities, and providing capital for investment in fishing, processing, and support projects such as infrastructure. It also considers how CDQ-type programs might apply in the Western Pacific.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!