Why It Matters
Alaska’s commercial and subsistence fishing communities are in renewed conflict over salmon access in the Aleutian Islands, after the state’s acting attorney general nullified regulations that had been designed to protect salmon stocks bound for Western Alaska’s rivers. The decision carries significant consequences for Indigenous and rural communities that depend on salmon runs for food security, particularly as Yukon River summer chum populations have fallen sharply over the past five years.
What Happened
The Alaska Board of Fisheries, in a 4-3 vote, approved a set of restrictions targeting commercial salmon harvesting in the Aleutians — specifically in Area M, which opens for commercial fishing in June. Those restrictions would have reduced the number of days commercial operators could fish, narrowed the harvest area, and added net depth requirements aimed at allowing more salmon to pass through to Western Alaska spawning streams.
Acting Attorney General Cori Mills invalidated the regulations on May 19, siding with commercial fishing interests who had mounted legal challenges to the board’s decision. Following Mills’ ruling, commercial fishing groups dropped their lawsuit. An objection to that dismissal filed by the Bering Sea Fishermen’s Association was subsequently rejected by Anchorage Superior Court Judge Herman Walker Jr.
A subsistence advocacy group has indicated it may seek review from the Alaska Supreme Court.
Ethics Complaints and Legal Disputes
The Aleutians East Borough had challenged the restrictions on multiple fronts. In addition to filing a lawsuit in April in Anchorage Superior Court, the borough lodged ethics complaints against three board members who voted for the regulations: Olivia Irwin, Märit Carlson-Van Dort, and Curtis Chamberlain. Chamberlain was accused of making a materially false statement about prior advocacy work he had done on behalf of Western Alaska fishermen while employed as an attorney for the Calista Corporation.
The ethics complaints went unaddressed for 42 days before the attorney general issued her ruling on the underlying regulations. The combination of legal and administrative challenges reflected the intensity of the dispute between commercial interests based in the Aleutians and subsistence communities relying on salmon further upriver.
By the Numbers
- 4-3: Board of Fisheries vote in favor of the now-invalidated restrictions
- 72%: Estimated decline in summer chum salmon on the Yukon River over the past five years, compared with average runs from two decades earlier
- 42 days: Time the borough’s ethics complaints went unanswered before the attorney general’s ruling
- May 19: Date Acting AG Mills issued her decision favoring commercial fishermen
- June 6: Date the commercial salmon fishery opener occurred in Area M
Subsistence Communities Sound the Alarm
For Western Alaska residents, the stakes extend beyond regulatory procedure. The summer chum salmon run on the Yukon River has declined roughly 72 percent over the past five years compared to the preceding two decades, a collapse that has restricted subsistence harvests and strained communities that have relied on the fish for generations.
Charlie Wright, a subsistence fisherman, described the contrast between present-day conditions and his childhood memories. “There was so much fish when I was a kid that we could literally see them jumping from my grandma’s camp,” he said.
Commercial operators in the region have voluntarily closed the fishery on some days to allow salmon to pass upstream, though subsistence advocates argue voluntary measures are insufficient given the scale of the population decline. For more on Alaska’s wildlife management challenges, see Alaska’s First Confirmed Mule Deer Kill Prompts Moose Disease Warning.
What’s Next
With the attorney general’s ruling now in place and the Superior Court dismissal standing, the board’s restrictions will not apply to this season’s commercial opener. The subsistence group’s potential appeal to the Alaska Supreme Court represents the most likely near-term development that could reopen the legal question — though any ruling would likely come after the current fishing season has concluded.
The broader conflict over salmon allocation between commercial and subsistence users in Alaska reflects a long-running tension in state fisheries management, one that is likely to intensify as declining salmon populations narrow the margin for compromise between competing interests.