For fourteen years the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council (NPFMC), the agency that decides who gets how much halibut, has struggled with the issue of the guided sport industry. Ultimately, the NPFMC is responsible for dividing the catch between commercial long-line operators and charter boat fishermen. The Problem Statement adopted by the council to address the recent growth of charter harvests states that the council "seeks to address this instability while balancing the needs of those who depend on the halibut resource for food, sport and livelihood." Just how that lofty phrase plays out depends on where the fulcrum is placed on the scale. Noticeably, nearly all of the options proposed in their solution include draconian cuts to the charter catch.

According to the 85-year-old International Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC), whose charge is to research Pacific Halibut and set harvest levels, the resource itself is experiencing a slight decline as exceptional year-classes from the 1980s pass out of the fishery while new above-average year classes from the 1990s are entering. While localized depletion issues are reported in some areas of the state, overall stocks appear to be in good shape.

Recently the allocation battle heated up when the IPHC switched the way it calculated the biomass from an area based to a coast-wide assessment model. This switch was in recognition of developing science that confirms that part of the biomass migrates great distances. As a result the 2008 area allocations redistributed some halibut historically caught in coastal areas of southeast Alaska west to the Aleutians. Consequently southeast Alaska will take a cut in harvest this year. Both commercial and guided sport harvests will be lower.

Currently, the way the harvest is divided in southeast and southcentral Alaska, commercial long liners are allocated about 75% of the Total Allowable Catch (TAC) or 26.17 million pounds (Mlb) through the Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) program; the remaining 25% is divided between sport, subsistence, personal use, wastage, and research. Guided sport harvest is expected to be about 12% or 4.33Mlb in 2008. For comparison the total by-catch in the trawl fishery is 12.1 Mlb, nearly three times the guided sport allocation. Over 50% of the by-catch is immature halibut that happen to feed where the draggers target other species, so there is considerably more mortality per pound in the by-catch than in the directed fisheries. To their credit the trawl industry has made progress in reducing their by-catch.

In recent years the guided sport fishery has grown, placing pressure on regulators to preserve the value of commercial IFQs. The IFQ program was implemented in 1995 with a free initial allocation that has since been bought and sold on the open market. The popularity of fresh halibut has increased the value of commercial IFQ shares from about $6 per pound in 1995 to nearly $30 a pound now as the price of halibut at the fish market has increased to around $13 per pound. The by-catch is not negotiable. It is based on how much halibut resource is unavoidably removed to allow for other important fisheries to occur. Consequently, as the sport catch grows the commercial long-line catch must shrink.

Commercial long liners are undoubtedly angry that their incomes are being adjusted by sport fishing. Some of them may even feel that the IFQ program gives them ownership of the resource. They know they can't win a battle with the trawl industry so as the old saying goes, fish slime runs down hill. The sport-fishing industry believes that halibut are a public resource and belong to the people first. Enter the balancing act.

Several times a year the council chambers become the battleground of the commercial and guided sport halibut industries. Commercial fishermen and charter operators from around the state leave their boats tied to the dock and bring their grievances before the council. While the commercial sector decries the ravages of uncompensated reallocation of their fish to the sport sector, charter operators espouse the economic virtues inherent in their fishery, the more conservative resource per dollar ratio and the right of public access to the resources.

The bad news is that of the 11 voting members on the council only one is a sport-fish representative. To claim that the NPFMC is heavily weighted with commercial interests is an understatement. In their defense, the council spends the lion's share of its time on commercial fishing matters from crab and pollock to endangered species mitigation and controlling by-catch, so it should be primarily composed of commercial interests. All federally-managed fisheries come under its purview and only halibut involves a conflict with sport fishing.

Presently regulations are being considered that will restrict the sport-fish bag limit on charter boats to one halibut a day in southeast Alaska for the 2008 season. Should that pass more pressure will be placed on Southcentral halibut stocks as sport-fish visitors take their dollars north. This will drive the sport catch above the Guideline Harvest Level there as well, triggering a similar regulatory action. The good news is that the guided sport industry in Alaska is becoming better organized and better at fighting for the public's right to catch halibut. We can't do it alone, however. If you visit a saltwater lodge or take a halibut charter in Alaska this year your captain will probably have a public comment form onboard. He or she will offer you a chance to fill out the form and make your voice heard at the NPFMC this October when guided sport allocation numbers will undergo final action.

We need public comments to fight for the public's right to the resource. With enough pressure from you we may be able to push the fulcrum closer to the center and bring real balance to this decision.