• Alaska Fisheries and Regional Economics

      Hull, Dan; Goldsmith, Scott (Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of Alaska., 1994)
      This report provides profiles for several commercial fisheries and the regional markets in which they are sold within Alaska. Information on five broad fisheries includes harvest, stocks, season, managment, price, ex vessel value, processing, market, market conditions, 'general', and market outlook. Regional markets included here are Duch Harbor/Unalaska, Kodiak, Bristol Bay (Dillingham annd Naknek), Prince William Sound, Kuskokwim/Bethel, Norton Sound, and Southeast Alaska.
    • Alaska Halibut Markets and the Alaska Halibut IFQ Program

      Knapp, Gunnar (Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of Alaska., 1997)
      This report provides an introduction to Alaska halibut markets and how they are changing under the Alaska halibut Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) program, which was implemented in 1995. Appendixes to the report provide a variety of halibut market data. Several general conclusions may be drawn about the relationship between future Alaska halibut harvests and fresh and frozen production and wholesale prices: • The higher the Alaska harvest volume, the higher will be Alaska production of both fresh and frozen halibut. • The higher the Alaska harvest volume, the lower will be wholesale prices of both fresh and frozen halibut. The fresh share of halibut production is unlikely to rise to the levels seen in Canada in recent years (more than 90% ). If Alaska were to produce this volume of fresh halibut, fresh wholesale prices would be substantially lower and frozen wholesale prices would be substantially higher--reducing the incentive for processors to supply fresh halibut.
    • Alaska Seafood Industry: Seafood Sector Report and Summary

      Knapp, Gunnar; Smith, Terrence (Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of Alaska., 1991)
      The Alaska Seafood Industry Sector Report is a comprehensive review of Alaska's seafood harvesting and processing industry through the decade of the 1980s. This report provides an overview of the seafood industry in Alaska. We present basic information on fish and shellfish harvesting, processing,fisheries markets,seafood industry employment and income, publicrevenues and expenditures in support of fisheries,and product prices. Included under eachof these topics are separate data and discussion for salmon, shellfish, herring, halibut and bottornfish. The data presented focus on the last ten years of the fisheries,that is,1980-1989.
    • Economics of Sport Fishing In Alaska

      Goldsmith, Scott; Haley, Sharman; Berman, Matthew; Kim, Hong Jin; Hill, Alexandra (Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of Alaska., 1999)
      Sport anglers reeling in salmon, halibut, and other fish generated—both directly and indirectly—an estimated three percent of jobs and payroll in Alaska in 1993. This is one of the findings of a study of the economics of sport fishing that ISER did for the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Sport fishing is enormously popular with residents and visitors. The Department of Fish and Game estimates that nearly half a million anglers fished in Alaska in 1997, with numbers of visiting anglers slightly edging Alaskan anglers. Seven out of ten Alaska households have at least one sport angler. Nearly half of Alaska’s households rate hunting and fishing opportunities as important reasons why they live where they do. The department contracted with ISER to do this study because the economics of sport fishing in Alaska is an important consideration for resource managers allocating fish stocks, evaluating fishery projects, and making decisions about land and water management. The analysis is based largely on information we collected in surveys of sport anglers and guide and charter businesses in 1993 and 1994.
    • The First Year of the Alaska IFQ Program: Survey Reports

      Knapp, Gunnar; Hull, Dan (Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of Alaska., 1996)
      These three reports present the results of a mail survey conducted in the spring of 1996 by the University of Alaska Anchorage Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER). The purpose of the surveys was to gather information on changes during the first year of the Individual Fishing Quota program. The survey was funded by the Alaska Department of Commerce and Economic Development, and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. The report represents a start towards understanding the effects of the IFQ program. More detailed research over a period of years will be needed before the full effects of the program can be understood. The first report details findings from surveys of registered buyers of halibut and sablefish. Major findings include variation in effects on fish processing regardless of the size of the operation. The second report details findings from surveys of halibut quota shareholders. Major findings include the information that IFQ holders were choosing to fish together with more than one IFQ holder on board a fishing vessel. The third report details findings from surveys of sablefish quota shareholders. Again, the findings indicate that IFQ holders were choosing to fish together with more than one IFQ holder on board a fishing vessel.
    • Long-Term Effects of Limiting Access to Alaska's Sablefish and Halibut Fisheries

      Berman, Matthew (Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of Alaska., 1997)
      The study analyzed potential long-term effects of the Alaska halibut and sablefish individual transferable quota (ITQ) program for the fishing fleet and coastal communities. The analysis focused on changes in the structure of the fleet, changes in fisheries markets, changes in fish processing and transportation, and regional shifts in the pattern of harvesting and processing activities. As a tool for projecting the combined effects of these major changes, two complementary models were developed: a fisheries impact model and a community impact model. Projections from these models for long-term scenarios of fish prices, total allowable catch by management area, and rate of inter-community quota transfers show that some communities could see large changes as a result of the program. The projected gains and losses are sensitive to assumptions about prices processors can pay in each community, suggesting a role for further research on evolving processing and transportation costs.
    • National Guard Subsistence Survey Reports (2006 and 2007)

      DeRoche, Patricia; Goldsmith, Scott; Killorin, Mary; Schultz, Caroline; Ulran, Uyuriukaraq Lily Anne Andrews; Wilson, Meghan (Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of Alaska., 2006)
      These reports provides data collected regarding subsistence activities in communities of Alaska's north and south west regions (2006) and in the southeast region including Kenai and Kodiak (2007) . Data is tabulated by community and then by species. No interpretation is provided. Information intended to determine the best times for the National Guard to conduct training exercises in these areas.
    • On the Eve of IFQs: Fishing for Alaska's Halibut and Sablefish

      Berman, Matthew; Leask, Linda (Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of Alaska., 1994)
      This year, anyone with a boat, longline gear, and a $50 permit could try for halibut in Alaska’s commercial fisheries. But that open access will likely end in 1995, when the federal government introduces Individual Fishing Quotas (IFQs). Quotas—shares of the catch—will be issued just to those who owned or leased vessels that fished for halibut between 1988 and 1990. An IFQ system for sablefish (black cod) under federal management will start at the same time. The IFQ plan is not popular with the men and women who fish for halibut: 68 percent of captains (permit holders) believe IFQs will unfairly allocate halibut, even though 78 percent agree they will make fishing safer. But the IFQ system could also cause big changes in wealth, income, and jobs in Alaska’s coastal communities, which rely heavily on fishing. ISER is studying the potential effects of IFQs, especially on small coastal towns, under a Saltonstall-Kennedy grant. As a first step we surveyed captains (most of whom were also owners) of vessels with longline gear. This publication reports our survey findings.
    • Subsistence Use of Renewable Resources by Rural Residents of Southeast Alaska

      Kruse, Jack; Muth, Robert (Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of Alaska., 1990)
      The Tongass Resource Use Cooperative Survey consists of 1,465 interviews conducted in 30 southeast Alaska communities between October 1, 1987, andMarch 13, 1988. The study was directed by the Institute of Social and Economic Research of the University of Alaska Anchorage. All permanent communities, with the exception of Juneau and Ketchikan, were included in the study. The purpose of this report is to describe the extent of harvest and distribution of renewable natural resources by rural southeast Alaska residents. Eighty-five percent of all households surveyed harvest one or more species of fish, wildlife, or plants. Such resources include deer, salmon, halibut, and other(non-salmon) fin fish, crab, shrimp, clams, other invertebrates, ducks, bear, harbor seal, berries, firewood, and other resources. Forty-one percent of all households report that at least 25 percent of the meat and fish they eat comes from resources harvested by members of their own households or is given to them by family or friends.