For decades, Indigenous villages along the Gulf of Alaska have been grappling with an unfolding economic disaster.
This crisis has led to lost jobs and the gradual destruction of a traditional way of life, primarily revolving around fishing.
Recent findings from a survey sponsored by an economic development nonprofit revealed a dire situation, with over 80% of respondents indicating that Southeast Alaska and Kodiak Island are experiencing a “crisis of sustainability” due to diminished access to fisheries.
Indigenous leaders in these coastal regions are urging Alaska lawmakers to reform the Limited Entry Act, a landmark 1973 law that limits fishing permits primarily to existing permit holders.
Currently, new fishermen can only participate in commercial fishing if they buy or inherit a permit, which often costs over $100,000 — an amount that is typically unattainable for young rural residents without established credit.
Joe Nelson from Sealaska, an Indigenous corporation, emphasized the importance of preserving this tradition for future generations, stating that communities want their children and grandchildren to continue the legacy of their ancestors.
Despite the urgency of the situation, the issue of fishing access has largely gone unnoticed in Juneau, where many lawmakers focus on urban concerns like state funding for schools and budget deficits.
Representatives from coastal areas find themselves navigating conflicting interests between their constituents and a politically influential group of existing fishermen who fear that legislative changes could harm their livelihoods.
The lack of consensus on the specifics of necessary reforms has hampered progress, leading to a frustrating standstill.
Even as growing discontent with the 1973 law mounts, no significant legislative efforts have been proposed, with advocates hoping for discussions that never materialized in this year’s session.
Robin Samuelsen, a Native leader from the salmon-rich Bristol Bay region, expressed profound frustration, stating that the system needs reform to ensure the survival of rural Alaska communities.
He warned that without intervention, these communities risk fading away.
The Limited Entry Act was devised to create a more sustainable commercial fishing industry by limiting the number of boats, granting permits primarily to those who had already been operating in the industry.
A controversial “free transferability” provision allowed permit holders to sell their permits on the open market, leading to significant losses for Alaska’s rural Native communities as these permits were acquired by urban interests or individuals from other states.
In January, Northern Journal reached out to 16 state legislators whose districts border the Gulf of Alaska to gain insight on the issue, but none of them responded.
Additionally, several lawmakers approached for comment on the subject preferred to remain silent, indicating a lack of awareness or concern.
Senate President Gary Stevens, who has represented Kodiak Island for 25 years, acknowledged the complexity yet did not demonstrate an eagerness to engage further on the matter, stating, “I don’t see any reason I need to meet with you on this.”
Kodiak Island’s Indigenous villages, having once thrived on commercial fishing, have faced significant permit losses since the 1973 law took effect, resulting in a dire local economy.
For instance, Ouzinkie, one of those villages, currently has only a single fishing skipper left in its harbor.
Butch Laiti, an elder and long-time commercial fisherman, has witnessed the slow decline of his community’s fishing heritage as fellow tribe members sold off their boats and permits.
At 76, Laiti is now among the few remaining Indigenous fishermen in his area and aims to pass on his knowledge and skills to a new generation.
He currently serves as president of the Douglas Indian Association, which is working toward establishing a community-owned fish processing plant in Juneau.
In a forward-thinking initiative, his tribe invested $210,000 in a commercial fishing vessel designed to serve dual purposes: fishing and marine debris cleanup.
Hoping to include a permit for salmon harvesting to enable collective fishing efforts, Laiti sought approval from the state’s fisheries management agency.
The response was clear: the current law prohibits collective ownership of permits, emphasizing individual ownership to prevent corporate control over fishing resources.
For Laiti’s tribe to operate their boat collectively while complying with the state’s regulations, a change in the Limited Entry Act is required — a monumental task for a tribe with limited lobbying power in the state Capitol.
Despite this barrier, a coalition of advocates, including regional Indigenous corporations and conservation groups, has begun coordinating efforts to push for reform of the Limited Entry Act.
While specific legislative changes remain undecided, Laiti argues that allowing collective ownership would be a straightforward solution.
He passionately stated, “This is ours. It always has been ours…and if we’ve got to buy back our heritage, then so be it.”
In light of this pressing issue, Laiti challenged lawmakers directly, questioning, “What’s the holdup?”
However, one of the factors contributing to the delay is the resistance from the existing commercial fishermen who currently hold permits.
Max Worhatch, the executive director of the United Southeast Alaska Gillnetters Association, has expressed strong opposition to proposals that would enable community trusts to own permits.
He emphasized that current fishing entities already have access to capital and should utilize available state loans rather than altering the legislation to boost rural participation.
Despite the efforts of organizations like the Bristol Bay Economic Development Corp., which has initiated programs to support local permit ownership, the problem persists as rural fishing communities have continued to witness declining participation.
Some community leaders acknowledge this ongoing issue, stating that many young villagers feel they lack the financial resources necessary to engage meaningfully in the fishing industry.
Defenders of the existing system often assert that external factors beyond the Limited Entry Act are to blame for rural fishing decline, such as the closure of processing plants and alteration in fish populations.
Industry veterans like Jerry McCune argue that these circumstances have suppressed competition within the seafood market and reduced access to fishing for many communities.
Concerns have also been voiced that adjusting the permit system could jeopardize the overall Limited Entry framework, potentially instigating legal challenges that might destabilize it.
However, critics of the status quo, including legal experts like Jim Brennan, argue that calls to reform the limited entry system are misconstrued as threats and that previous legal challenges have not led to its downfall.
Brennan remarked, “I think that’s kind of a scare tactic. It’s not a house of cards.”
Lawmakers have expressed the need to proceed in a cautious and balanced manner, considering the various affected groups involved, including fishermen, Indigenous communities, and state regulators.
Rep. Louise Stutes, chair of the House Fisheries Committee, expressed support for reducing barriers to fishing access while acknowledging the need for a collaborative approach involving all stakeholders in potential legislative changes.
As the fishing industry faces its own economic challenges, lawmakers find themselves in a precarious position, trying to address long-standing issues while dealing with the immediate pressures confronting fishermen.
Rep. Rebecca Himschoot, who represents a diverse array of fishing communities, acknowledged the complexities of finding solutions without adversely affecting current permit holders.
“When we lift up one side, does it force the other side down?” she pondered, underscoring the delicate balance that needs to be maintained in upcoming discussions.
In the face of these challenges, one thing remains clear: there’s an urgent need for comprehensive engagement and dialogue to create pathways that will enable the revival of Indigenous fishing communities in rural Alaska.
Without significant reforms and recognition of Indigenous rights to their maritime heritage, the future of these communities hangs in the balance.
image source from：https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/2025/06/01/coastal-alaskans-see-commercial-fishing-limits-as-a-crisis-lawmakers-dont/
