Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to document economic and demographic changes for communities of the Gulf of Alaska, Southcentral Alaska, and Southeast Alaska over the period of 1950 to 2023. Over this period several major changes were made to the way that State and Federal commercial fisheries were managed in Alaska waters. These changes -particularly the introduction of the Limited Entry program in the mid-1970s and individual fishing quotas in the mid-1990’s – limited access to fisheries. Changes to fisheries access has implications not just for the fisherman directly included or excluded, but also more broadly to their home communities through the economic spillover effects that the fishing industry creates.
Watson et al., (2021) shows that the impacts of the commercial fishing industry in Alaska extends beyond the income it provides to vessel captains. Fishing activity also provides for crew member and shore-side processing jobs and spillover effects into upstream and downstream industries. It also creates broader induced economic effects as income and wages are spent on local goods and services. However, as Watson et al., (2021) shows, these effects only tend to materialize in the home communities of fishermen. In other words, economic impacts follow fishermen.
This report documents socioeconomic changes for the 46 communities that are eligible to participate in the Community Quota Entity (CQE) Program. The CQE program was established by the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council in 2004 as a response to declines in fisheries participation in rural and fishing-dependent communities. Through the program, designated communities are able to form non-profit corporations that can purchase and lease quota for halibut and sablefish (Fields, 2016). As of 2024, only six communities own quota through the CQE program. A potential lack of information and capital and concerns of adverse impacts may help explain the little take up in the CQE program (Carothers, 2011). Requirements to qualify for the CQE program are outlined in NPFMC 20-year review of the IFQ program:
Eligibility to participate in the CQE Program was limited to communities with fewer than 1,500 people, documented historical participation in the IFQ fisheries (at least one landing of halibut or sablefish), direct access to saltwater on the Gulf of Alaska coast, and no road access to a larger community. (NPFMC, 2016)
Among the CQE-eligible communities, we highlight changes for a subset of particularly small, rural, and predominately Alaska Native villages which are associated with Koniag Inc. and Sealaska Corporation. We also highlight outcomes for the community of Metlakatla. We include Metlakatla as a comparison given their unique circumstances as the only community part of a reserve and maintains sovereignty over their local fisheries (Langdon, 2019; Metlakatla Indian Community, 2017). Throughout the rest of this report, we will refer to these communities as “Sealaska Villages” and “Koniag Villages.” For the subset of target communities, we document declines in fisheries participation which have been well established to date by others (Carothers et al., 2010; Szymkowiak et al., 2019). Additionally, we look at established broader socio-economic indicators and vessel characteristics (Sethi et al., 2014).
Since the issuance of permits in 1975 for a set of the most important salmon fisheries, ownership of these transferable permits has declined by 32% on average for the CQE communities. Sealaska villages were originally issued 232 salmon permits in 1975; in 2019 they hold 144 (a 38% decline). For Koniag villages, the change has been greater. In 1975, Koniag villages were initially issued 97 permits; in 2019 they hold 36 (a 63% decline). There is also differentiation across recipient rates for non-transferable salmon permits between target communities. In Koniag villages 1% of salmon permit recipients received non-transferable permits. In Sealaska villages 29% of salmon permit recipients received non-transferable permits. Change in access rights has been similar since the 1995 inception of the halibut quota program. In 1995, 707 fisherman living in CQE communities were quota owners. By 2021 this number had fallen to 235. This is due primarily to consolidation of these quota share into a smaller number of owners. As a result of these declines in participation, these communities have seen declines in ex-vessel earnings from commercial fishing.
Communities may see declines in the number of permits held by resident because permits are transferred to someone outside the community, because a resident of the community moves out of a community, or because a permit is canceled. Several circumstances can result in permit cancelation, including revocations, buybacks, forfeitures and lapses. As of 2022, 50 transferable limited entry permits and 203 non-transferable limited entry permits had been canceled in CQE communities.
Declines in participation are also reflected in declines in fleet capitalization (the quantity and size of commercial fishing vessels owned by members of a community) and in jobs for crew members. From 1978 to 2019, the number of vessels owned by CQE communities declined from 632 to 327. For Sealaska villages, total vessel ownership declined from 470 in 1978 to 236 in 2019 (a 50% decline). Koniag villages went from a fleet of 78 vessels in 1978 to 61 in 2019 (a 22% decline). In Metlakatla there were 84 vessels in 1978 and 30 vessels in 2019 (a 64% decline). From 1995 to 2014, the total number of crew licenses issued by Alaska Department of Fish and Game to residents of CQE communities declined from 2,666 to 1,482 (a 44% decline). For the target villages of Sealaska, Koniag, and Metlakatla, these crew licenses declined from 587 to 318 (a 46% decline), 225 to 94 (a 58% decline), and 102 to 21 (a 79% decline), respectively.
Understanding broader socioeconomic changes in CQE communities is complicated by the available data for small places. This report compiles census data (a precise measure of population), survey data (an imprecise measure of income, unemployment, and poverty in places where sample sizes are small), and administrative data (a precise measure, but are often limited in scope).
In terms of population, CQE communities in aggregate were seeing decade-over-decade growth prior to 1980. After 1980, Sealaska villages (on average) continued their growth through the mid-1990’s, but have fallen in population by 10% (on average) since population peaked in 1992. Koniag village populations declined from 1980 through around 2010, when populations briefly began growing again, before falling again. Populations in these villages have declined 35% (on average) since their peak in 1980. In Metlakatla population increased steadily each decade through the mid-1990’s. Population declined and rebounded from the late-1990’s to the late-2010’s in Metlakatla. Metlakatla’s population peaked in 2015 at 1,661 people and the population fell by 5% since then.
Federal survey-based data on outcomes of income, unemployment, and poverty were not able to show statistically significant differences in these economic conditions over time. Administrative data on the employment rate (the percent of the population that are employed in the formal sector of the economy) is available, but for a more limited time period of 2000-2015. All groups on average have lower employment in 2015 than they did in 2000. Some of this decline is likely due to demographic change (overall the US and Alaska populations are aging). However, economically dynamic locations will tend to attract and keep workers.
The remainder of this report describes each of the aforementioned trends in detail, starting with changes in limited entry permit ownership and proceeding to through to discuss changes in broader economic conditions. Declines in participation, consolidation in ITQ ownership, declines in fleet capitalization all emerge as important fisheries outcomes. Beyond declines in population, broader socio-economic trends are more difficult to understand with statistical certainty because of limited data.
Please see Gulf of Alaska Limitations Report for the full article.
