If the current Glacier Bay commercial fishing dispute was a simple matter of jobs vs. the environment it should be easy to take sides. But the problem interweaves philosophical, economic, cultural and legal issues.

Fishery management authority is in dispute, local economies have become dependent on these still-healthy fisheries, and conflict with visitor use is limited or nonexistent. Still, the National Park Service (NPS) proposes to close commercial fisheries in and around this National Park, which was recently named the crown jewel of the NPS system while commercial fishing was taking place. Proposed closures address intangible issues: that un-fished marine areas are important for research purposes, that some fishing damage may go unnoticed, and that national parks are fundamentally incompatible with commercial fishing use.

Indeed, Glacier Bay is in many ways the picture-perfect national park, with ecosystems still apparently intact. And it provides perhaps the best chance in the entire NPS system, maybe in the world, to develop a model of preservation, conservation, cooperative research, compatible use and sustainable communities, all in the context of state - federal cooperation. But there is no obvious basis for viewing commercial fisheries as a problem requiring drastic action; this is a choice being made by the NPS. Alaskans are ready to engage with the NPS in progressive, cooperative park management. Yet, Alaskans find it hard to accept the NPS' recent unequivocal statement of purpose and policy: that there is no place in Glacier Bay for the commercial fisheries that have been the lifeblood of the area economy for a century and more.

Commercial fishing for salmon, halibut, crab, and a variety of other species began in Glacier Bay, Icy Strait and along the Gulf of Alaska coast long before the national park was established. Originally known only to the local Tlingit and later a few hardy prospectors and fur farmers, in 1997 over 300,000 visitors entered Glacier Bay, between May and September. The vast majority of visitors arrived on cruise ships and other vessels. The scenery and wildlife of Glacier Bay are a major element of the cruise ship industry's marketing strategy for Southeast Alaska, and the park has come to play a significant role in the regional economy. Amid this new economy, fishermen in small, one to three person boats work their pots, long lines, and troll gear, as they have for generations. With their numbers limited by state law, and their catches tightly regulated, the scale of fishing is modest yet locally significant. Six vessels take Dungeness crab, and sell it locally. A couple dozen take Tanner crab during a 10-day winter season. Perhaps 40 halibut fishermen fish the area during the year. A handful of troll vessels take Chinook salmon, which do not spawn in Glacier Bay, by hook and line for a specialty market. These fishermen live in a half-dozen small fishing communities that depend on this fish harvest and processing.

The NPS has been active in the conduct of fisheries in and around Glacier Bay since the park's inception. Bartlett Cove, now park headquarters, has been a fueling site, harbor, and point of sale of fish products for generations of fishermen. Many park visitors enjoy occasional contact with the fishermen, and enjoy fresh seafood for dinner. Recent NPS vessel plans acknowledge the legitimacy of the fisheries and allow the boats to operate in the bay. Yet with a significant policy shift, the NPS now denies the legitimacy of the same activity so recently found compatible. No one should be surprised at the resentment the proposed regulations have inspired among Alaskans.

Since 1995 a diverse group has worked to understand and reconcile these issues. The Glacier Bay Work Group is a State of Alaska sponsored panel composed of fishermen, processors, Alaska Natives, local residents, agency officials, and environmental groups including the National Parks and Conservation Association, the Southeast Alaska Conservation Council, and the Friends of Glacier Bay. Over the past eight months the Work Group has defined a vision for fisheries management that is more detailed, more thoroughly grounded in local knowledge, better informed by science, better integrated with the state's abundance-based fisheries management programs, and more sensitive to the historical, social, and conservation context for the park than are the proposed rules. The group has taken a conservation-based approach, and the fishermen and the NPS are discussing a narrow range of differences. For example, while the NPS's preferred regulatory alternative would create no immediate sanctuary areas, proposals now before the Work Group, including the one advanced by fishermen, include no-fish zones that in nearly any configuration would create the largest marine protected area in North America.

Park management experience and common sense dictate that protected areas, if they are to endure, must have the support of locally affected people including, in this case, commercial fishermen. To suggest, as some have, that a wholesale closure by government fiat can create a politically stable result, is naive. Arriving at a solution to this issue, so we all might again look to Glacier Bay as a place of harmony rather than discord, will require that the NPS recognize the accomplishments of the Glacier Bay Work Group and adopt its vision through coordinated legislative and regulatory action.

ADF&G Home Page | ADF&G Press Releases

Copyright © 1995 Alaska Department of Fish and Game. All Rights Reserved.