2010 Annual Subsistence Halibut Program Report

Technical Paper No. 367

Subsistence Harvests of Pacific Halibut in Alaska,
2010

by
James A. Fall
and
David Koster

January 2012
Alaska Department of Fish and Game

Division of Subsistence

Symbols and Abbreviations
The following symbols and abbreviations, and others approved for the Système International d'Unités (SI), are used
without definition in the reports by the Division of Subsistence. All others, including deviations from definitions
listed below, are noted in the text at first mention, as well as in the titles or footnotes of tables, and in figure or figure
captions.
Weights and measures (metric)
centimeter
deciliter
gram
hectare
kilogram
kilometer
liter
meter
milliliter
millimeter

cm
dL
g
ha
kg
km
L
m
mL
mm

Weights and measures (English)
cubic feet per second
foot
gallon
inch
mile
nautical mile
ounce
pound
quart
yard

ft3/s
ft
gal
in
mi
nmi
oz
lb
qt
yd

Time and temperature
day
degrees Celsius
degrees Fahrenheit
degrees kelvin
hour
minute
second

d
°C
°F
K
h
min
s

Physics and chemistry
all atomic symbols
alternating current
AC
ampere
A
calorie
cal
direct current
DC
hertz
Hz
horsepower
hp
hydrogen ion activity (negative log of) pH
parts per million
ppm
parts per thousand
ppt, ‰
volts
V
watts
W

General
all commonly-accepted abbreviations;
e.g., Mr., Mrs., AM, PM, etc.
all commonly-accepted professional
titles; e.g., Dr., Ph.D., R.N., etc.
Alaska Administrative Code
AAC
Alaska Department of
Fish and Game
ADF&G
at
@
compass directions:
east
E
north
N
south
S
west
W
copyright

corporate suffixes:
Company
Co.
Corporation
Corp.
Incorporated
Inc.
Limited
Ltd.
District of Columbia
D.C.
et alii (and others)
et al.
et cetera (and so forth)
etc.
exempli gratia (for example)
e.g.
Federal Information Code
FIC
id est (that is)
i.e.
latitude or longitude
lat. or long.
monetary symbols (U.S.)
$, ¢
months (tables and figures):
first three
letters (Jan,...,Dec)
registered trademark

trademark

United States (adjective)
U.S.
United States of America (noun)
USA
U.S.C.
United States Code
U.S. state
use two-letter abbreviations
(e.g., AK, WA)

Measures (fisheries)
fork length
mideye-to-fork
mideye-to-tail-fork
standard length
total length

FL
MEF
METF
SL
TL

Mathematics, statistics
all standard mathematical signs, symbols
and abbreviations
alternate hypothesis
HA
approximately
~
base of natural logarithm
e
catch per unit effort
CPUE
coefficient of variation
CV
common test statistics
(F, t, 2, etc.)
confidence interval
CI
correlation coefficient (multiple)
R
correlation coefficient (simple)
r
covariance
cov
degree (angular)
°
degrees of freedom
df
expected value
E
greater than
>
greater than or equal to

harvest per unit effort
HPUE
less than
<
less than or equal to

logarithm (natural)
ln
logarithm (base 10)
log
logarithm (specify base)
log2, etc.
x
mean
minute (angular)
'
not significant
NS
null hypothesis
HO
percent
%
plus or minus
±
population size
N
probability
P
sample size
n
second (angular)
"
standard deviation
σ or s
standard error (of the mean)
sx
type I error probability
Pa
type II error probability
Pb
variance
σ2 or s2

TECHNICAL PAPER NO. 367

SUBSISTENCE HARVESTS OF PACIFIC HALIBUT IN ALASKA, 2010

by
James A. Fall,
Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Subsistence, Anchorage
and
David Koster
Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Subsistence, Anchorage

Alaska Department of Fish and Game
Division of Subsistence
333 Raspberry Road, Anchorage, Alaska, 99518, USA
January 2012

Development and publication of this manuscript were partially financed by the U.S. Department
of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries
Service, under award number NA07NMF4370170.

The Division of Subsistence Technical Paper series was established in 1979 and represents the most complete
collection of information about customary and traditional uses of fish and wildlife resources in Alaska. The papers
cover all regions of the state. Some papers were written in response to specific fish and game management issues.
Others provide detailed, basic information on the subsistence uses of particular communities which pertain to a large
number of scientific and policy questions.
Technical Paper series reports are available through the Alaska Resources Library and Information Services
(ARLIS), the Alaska State Library and on the Internet: http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/sf/publications/. This publication
has undergone editorial and professional review.

James A. Fall and David Koster,
Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Subsistence,
333 Raspberry Road, Anchorage, Alaska, 99518, USA

This document should be cited as:
Fall, J.A. and D. Koster. 2012. Subsistence harvests of Pacific halibut in Alaska, 2010. Alaska Department of Fish
and Game Division of Subsistence, Technical Paper No. 367, Anchorage.

The Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) administers all programs and activities free from
discrimination based on race, color, national origin, age, sex, religion, marital status, pregnancy, parenthood, or
disability. The department administers all programs and activities in compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of
1990, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972.
If you believe you have been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility please write:
ADF&G ADA Coordinator, P.O. Box 115526, Juneau AK 99811-5526
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4040 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 300 Webb, Arlington VA 22203
Office of Equal Opportunity, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington DC 20240
The department’s ADA Coordinator can be reached via phone at the following numbers:
(VOICE) 907-465-6077, (Statewide Telecommunication Device for the Deaf) 1-800-478-3648, (Juneau TDD)
907-465-3646, or (FAX) 907-465-6078
For information on alternative formats and questions on this publication, please contact:
ADF&G, Division of Subsistence, Website: http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=contacts.anchorage

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES.........................................................................................................................................................ii 
LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................................................... iii 
LIST OF APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................................. iv 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................................................... v 
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................................................. vi 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .........................................................................................................................................vii 
CHAPTER 1: BACKGROUND AND METHODS ...................................................................................................... 1 
Background.................................................................................................................................................................... 1 
Project Objectives .......................................................................................................................................................... 2 
Data Collection Methods ............................................................................................................................................... 2 
Public Outreach......................................................................................................................................................... 2 
Postal Household Survey .......................................................................................................................................... 2 
Community Visits and In-Person Surveys ................................................................................................................ 4 
Sample Achievement ..................................................................................................................................................... 4 
Data Analysis................................................................................................................................................................. 5 
Data Entry ................................................................................................................................................................. 5 
Analysis: Development of Harvest Estimates ........................................................................................................... 5 
Products .................................................................................................................................................................... 8 
CHAPTER 2: FINDINGS ............................................................................................................................................. 9 
Subsistence Halibut Harvests In 2010 ........................................................................................................................... 9 
Estimated Number of Subsistence Halibut Fishers ................................................................................................... 9 
Estimated Alaska Subsistence Halibut Harvests in 2010 by SHARC Type and IPHC Regulatory Area ............... 10 
Estimated Alaska Subsistence Halibut Harvests in 2010 by Harvest Location ...................................................... 11 
Subsistence Halibut Harvests by Place of Residence.............................................................................................. 14 
Subsistence Harvests by Gear Type ........................................................................................................................ 15 
Number of Hooks Fished with Setline Gear ........................................................................................................... 15 
Number of Subsistence Halibut Fishing Trips ........................................................................................................ 15 
Sport Harvests of Halibut by SHARC Holders ....................................................................................................... 16 
Estimated Average Net Weights of Subsistence- and Sport-Caught Halibut.......................................................... 16 
Rockfish Harvests ........................................................................................................................................................ 17 
Lingcod Harvests ......................................................................................................................................................... 18 
CHAPTER 3: DISCUSSION ...................................................................................................................................... 21 
Comparisons With Other Harvest Estimates ............................................................................................................... 21 
Community Case Studies............................................................................................................................................. 22 

i

Sitka (Regulatory Area 2C) .................................................................................................................................... 22 
Petersburg (Regulatory Area 2C)............................................................................................................................ 23 
Cordova (Regulatory Area 3A) ............................................................................................................................... 25 
Port Graham (Regulatory Area 3A) ........................................................................................................................ 26 
Kodiak City and Road System (Regulatory Area 3A) ............................................................................................ 28 
Sand Point (Regulatory Area 3B) ........................................................................................................................... 29 
Unalaska–Dutch Harbor (Regulatory Area 4A) ...................................................................................................... 31 
Toksook Bay (Regulatory Area 4E)........................................................................................................................ 32 
Tununak (Regulatory Area 4E) ............................................................................................................................... 34 
Comparisons With Nonsubsistence Harvests In 2010 ................................................................................................. 35 
CHAPTER 4: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................... 37 
Summary And Conclusions ......................................................................................................................................... 37 
SHARC Expiration and Renewal Patterns, 2003–2009 ............................................................................................... 39 
Recommendations ....................................................................................................................................................... 40 
REFERENCES CITED ............................................................................................................................................... 43 
TABLES AND FIGURES ........................................................................................................................................... 45 
APPENDICES ........................................................................................................................................................... 115 

LIST OF TABLES
Table
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.

Page
Population of rural communities eligible to participate in the Alaska subsistence halibut fishery, 2000
and 2010. ....................................................................................................................................................... 46 
Project chronology, 2010 study year. ............................................................................................................ 49 
Sample achievement. ..................................................................................................................................... 50 
Estimated subsistence harvests of halibut, 2010, by SHARC type and regulatory area. ............................... 65 
Age of Subsistence Halibut Registration Certificate holders by SHARC type, 2010. .................................. 66 
Estimated harvests of halibut in numbers of fish and pounds net (dressed, head-off) weight by
regulatory area and subarea, 2010. ................................................................................................................ 67 
Alaska subsistence halibut harvests from 2003–2010 by geographic area fished. ........................................ 68 
Number of hooks usually fished, setline (stationary) gear, Alaska halibut subsistence fishery, 2010. ......... 69 
Average net weight of subsistence and sport harvested halibut, 2010, by regulatory area fished. ................ 70 
Estimated harvests of lingcod and rockfish by regulatory area and subarea. ................................................ 70 
Estimated harvests of halibut by gear type and participation subsistence and sport fisheries, selected
Alaska communities, 2003 through 2010. ..................................................................................................... 71 
Estimated harvests of halibut for home use, Sitka. ........................................................................................ 73 
Number of SHARCs issued, estimated number of subsistence halibut fishers, and estimated harvests by
SHARC category, Sitka, 2003–2010. ............................................................................................................ 73 
Estimated harvests of halibut for home use, Petersburg. ............................................................................... 73 
Estimated harvests of halibut for home use, Cordova. .................................................................................. 74 
Estimated harvests of halibut for home use, Port Graham. ........................................................................... 74 
Estimated harvests of halibut for home use, Kodiak road system.a ............................................................... 74 
Halibut removals in Alaska by regulatory area, 2010. .................................................................................. 75 
Comparison of selected SHARC survey results, 2003–2010. ....................................................................... 76 
Percentage of SHARCs that expired, by SHARC type. ................................................................................ 78 

ii

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.

Page
Regulatory areas for the Pacific halibut fishery. ........................................................................................... 79 
Number of surveys returned and return rates for subsistence halibut surveys, by SHARC type, 2010......... 80 
SHARC survey return rates, communities with more than 100 SHARCs issued and tribes with more
than 70 SHARCs issued, 2010. ..................................................................................................................... 81 
Return rate by place of residence, 2010. ....................................................................................................... 82 
Number of survey responses by response category, 2010. ............................................................................ 83 
Number of SHARCs issued and estimated number of subsistence halibut fishers by SHARC type,
2003–2010. .................................................................................................................................................... 84 
Age of subsistence halibut registration certificate holders by SHARC type, 2010. ...................................... 85 
Estimated number of Alaska subsistence halibut fishers, 2003–2010 by regulatory area of tribe or rural
community..................................................................................................................................................... 86 
Estimated number of subsistence halibut fishers by place of residence, 2003–2010, communities with
50 or more fishers in 2010. ............................................................................................................................ 87 
Estimated subsistence halibut harvests, pounds net weight, by regulatory area of tribe and rural
community, 2003–2010. ................................................................................................................................ 88 
Estimated Alaska subsistence halibut harvests in pounds net weight by SHARC type, 2003–2010. ............ 89 
Percentage of tribal subsistence halibut harvest by tribe, 2010. .................................................................... 90 
Percentage of rural community subsistence halibut harvest by community, 2010. ....................................... 91 
Percentage of subsistence halibut harvest by regulatory area fished, 2010. .................................................. 92 
Alaska subsistence halibut harvests by geographic area, 2010. .................................................................... 93 
Percentage of Alaska subsistence halibut harvest by geographic area, 2010. ............................................... 94 
Estimated subsistence halibut harvests, pounds net weight, by regulatory area fished, 2003–2010. ............ 95 
Change in Alaska subsistence halibut harvests from 2009 through 2010 by regulatory area fished. ............ 96 
Change in Alaska subsistence halibut harvests in 2010 compared to recent 7-year average (2003–2009)
by regulatory area fished. .............................................................................................................................. 97 
Average subsistence harvest of halibut per fisher in Alaska, 2010, by regulatory area, in pounds net
weight. ........................................................................................................................................................... 98 
Average subsistence harvest of halibut per fisher in Alaska, 2010, by regulatory area, in number of
fish. ................................................................................................................................................................ 99 
Alaska subsistence halibut harvests by place of residence, 2010. ............................................................... 100 
Percentage of subsistence halibut harvest by gear type by regulatory area, 2010. ...................................... 101 
Number of hooks usually fished, percentage of fishers using setline (stationary) gear, Alaska
subsistence halibut fishery, 2010. ................................................................................................................ 102 
Average number of subsistence fishing trips for halibut by regulatory area and SHARC type, 2010. ....... 103 
Number of subsistence fishing trips for halibut, 2010. ................................................................................ 104 
Average number of halibut harvested per subsistence fishing trip by regulatory area and SHARC type,
2010. ............................................................................................................................................................ 105 
Estimated incidental harvests of rockfish in the Alaska subsistence halibut fishery, number of fish, by
regulatory area fished, 2003–2010. ............................................................................................................. 106 
Percentage of incidental harvest of rockfish by regulatory area fished, 2010. ............................................ 107 
Estimated incidental harvests of lingcod in the Alaska subsistence halibut fishery, number of fish, by
regulatory area fished, 2003–2010. ............................................................................................................. 108 
Percentage of incidental harvest of lingcod by regulatory area fished, 2010. ............................................. 109 
Estimated harvests of halibut for home use, Port Graham. ......................................................................... 110 
Halibut removals, Alaska, 2010. ................................................................................................................. 111 
Halibut removals in Alaska by regulatory area and removal category, 2010. ............................................. 112 
Percentage of SHARC holders, and SHARC holders who fished for halibut, who did not renew their
SHARC, by SHARC type, through 2009. ................................................................................................... 113 
Percentage of SHARCs that were not renewed by survey response type and SHARC type, through
2009. ............................................................................................................................................................ 114 

iii

LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.

Page

List of eligible tribes and rural communities, 2003 (from Federal Register). ............................................. 117 
Letter sent to tribes about the project. ......................................................................................................... 120 
Survey instrument. ...................................................................................................................................... 122 
Set of frequently asked questions and responses. ........................................................................................ 126 
Results from returned surveys. .................................................................................................................... 129 
Project findings summary. ........................................................................................................................... 185 

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost, we thank the thousands of individuals who took the time to voluntarily respond to the
mailed survey form or to be interviewed. This report would not be possible without their cooperation.
Sally Bibb of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS facilitated the grant that funded this project
and also provided other project support). We also thank the staffs of the NMFS Restricted Access
Management (RAM) program and the Information Services Division, who initially implemented and
currently administer the Subsistence Halibut Registration Certificate (SHARC) program and helped
provide information to the public about the research.
We gratefully acknowledge the input and support of the Alaska Native Subsistence Halibut Working
Group. We also thank the many tribal governments that granted approvals for the survey projects, and the
local research assistants who helped with these projects. We especially thank the Sitka Tribe of Alaska
(Dan Williams, Heather Woody, and Jeff Feldpausch) and the Hydaburg Cooperative Association
(Anthony Christianson, Christine Tolson, Joey Adams, Raven Mooney, Tessa Mooney, Mona
Peratrovich, Selina Tolson, and Ben Young) for assisting with survey administration in their
communities. Matt Kookesh (Admiralty Island Adventures) organized the survey administration in
Angoon and Ketchikan; Christel Silva in Angoon and Rose Johnson in Ketchikan helped complete the
surveys.
In addition to the coauthor of this report, other Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) Division
of Subsistence staff who assisted with research, data management, and report preparation included Malla
Kukkonen, Margaret Cunningham, Maegan Smith, Hollie Wynne, Rebecca Fink, Davin Holen, Lauren
Sill, Lisa Olson, Garrett Zimpelman, and Lisa Ka’aihue, as well as Lesley Cook with the Division of
Wildlife Conservation. Ana Lewis, Michaela Silva, and Jennifer Bond provided project administrative
support.
Heather Gilroy and Gregg Williams (staff to the International Pacific Halibut Commission) provided
background information for this report. Several of the above mentioned ADF&G staff also offered
comments and suggestions on the preliminary draft.

v

ABSTRACT
This report describes the results of the eighth annual project to estimate the subsistence harvest of Pacific halibut
Hippoglossus stenolepis in Alaska since the National Marine Fisheries Service adopted rules governing subsistence
halibut fishing in 2003. Data were collected through a voluntary survey mailed to all holders of Subsistence Halibut
Registration Certificates (SHARCs). The survey response rate was 61% (6,670 surveyed of 10,953 SHARC
holders). An estimated 4,991 individuals participated in the subsistence fishery for halibut in 2010, compared to
5,296 in 2009; 5,303 in 2008; 5,933 in 2007; 5,909 in 2006; 5,621 in 2005; 5,984 in 2004; and 4,942 in 2003. The
estimated harvest in 2010 was 43,332 halibut, comprising 797,560 lb (net weight; ±3.4%), the lowest totals for the 8
years of the project. This compares to a high of 55,875 fish (1,178,222 lb, ± 3.0%) in 2005 and a previous low of
43,926 fish (1,041,330 lb, ±3.9%) in 2003. Of the total subsistence halibut harvested in 2010, 77% were harvested
with setline gear and 23% with hand-operated gear. As in 2003–2009, the largest portion of the Alaska subsistence
halibut harvest in 2010 occurred in Regulatory Area 2C (Southeast Alaska), 53%, followed by Area 3A
(Southcentral Alaska), 39%. Subsistence harvests represented about 1.3% of the total halibut removals in Alaska in
2010. The harvest estimates based on the surveys for 2003–2010 serve as a basis for understanding the overall
harvest, annual variability in catch, and whether any increase in harvest may be associated with implementation of
the 2003 regulations. The report recommends that monitoring of the subsistence harvest of halibut in Alaska be
continued.
Key words:

Pacific halibut, Hippoglossus stenolepis, subsistence harvests, Alaska, rockfish, Sebastes, lingcod,
Ophiodon elongatus.

vi

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report presents findings of a project designed to estimate the subsistence harvest of Pacific halibut
Hippoglossus stenolepis in Alaska in 2010. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G)
Division of Subsistence conducted the project under National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) award number NA07NMF4370170 from the U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). In May 2003, NMFS published federal regulations implementing a
subsistence halibut fishery in Alaska for qualified individuals who are residents of 118 rural communities
or members of 123 Alaska Native tribes with traditional uses of halibut. The year 2010 was the eighth in
which subsistence halibut fishing took place under these regulations. Subsistence fishers are required to
obtain a Subsistence Halibut Registration Certificate (SHARC) from NMFS before fishing. During 2010,
10,953 individuals held SHARCs, compared to a high of 15,047 at the end of 2007 and a previous low of
11,565 at the end of 2008 (Table 19). The number of valid SHARCs in 2010 was 17% below the previous
7-year average.
Harvest information was collected by means of a postal (mailed) survey. The one-page survey form was
mailed to all SHARC holders in early 2011, with one follow-up mailing. Household visits supplemented
the mailings in 4 communities in Southeast Alaska. In total, 6,670 surveys were returned, a response rate
of 61%. Participation in the survey was voluntary.
According to the project findings, an estimated 4,991 individuals participated in the subsistence halibut
fishery in 2010, compared to an estimated high of 5,984 in 2004 and a low of 4,942 in 2003 (Table 19).
The estimated harvest in 2010 was 43,332 halibut (±7.8%) comprising 797,560 lb (net weight; ±3.4%),
the lowest totals for the 8 years of the project. (“Net weight” is 75% of “round” or live weight; the
estimated harvest was 1,139,371 lb round weight.) This compares to an estimated high of 55,875 fish
(±3.0%) comprising 1,178,222 lb (±3.0%) in 2005 and a previous low of 43,926 halibut comprising
1,041,330 lb (±3.9%) in 2003 (Table 19). As measured in pounds, the 2010 harvest was about 7% lower
than the estimated harvest in 2009, and 24% lower than the previous 7-year average from 2003–2009.
Of the total subsistence halibut harvest in 2010, 610,992 lb (77%) were harvested with setline (stationary)
gear (i.e., longlines, or “skates”) and 186,567 lb (23%) were harvested with hand-operated gear (i.e., rod
and reel or handline). This was similar to the harvest by gear type in 2003–2009. Of those subsistence
fishers using setline gear in 2010, the most (40%) usually fished with 30 hooks, the maximum number
allowed by regulation in all areas except areas 4C, 4D, and 4E, where regulations establish no hook limit.
Subsistence fishers also harvested an estimated 12,851 rockfish Sebastes spp. and 2,864 lingcod
Ophiodon elongatus in 2010 while fishing for halibut. This compares to estimated high harvests of 19,001
rockfish and 4,407 lingcod in 2004 and low harvests of 12,395 rockfish and 2,355 lingcod in 2005 (Table
19).
Based upon fishing locations, the largest portion of the Alaska subsistence halibut harvest in 2010
occurred in Regulatory Area 2C (Southeast Alaska), 53% (424,818 lb); followed by:


Area 3A (Southcentral Alaska), 39% (312,650 lb);



Area 3B (Alaska Peninsula), 3% (23,009 lb);



Area 4A (Eastern Aleutian Islands), 2% (14,548 lb);



Area 4C (Pribilof Islands), 1% (10,859 lb);



Area 4E (East Bering Sea Coast), 1% (10,055 lb);



Area 4D (Central Bering Sea), less than 1% (1,171 lb); and



Area 4B (Western Aleutian Islands), less than 1% (450 lb).

vii

In 2003–2009 as well, Area 2C and Area 3A accounted for over 85% of the subsistence halibut harvests.
The proportion of the statewide subsistence halibut harvest occurring in Area 2C has ranged from an
estimated high of 60% in 2003 to an estimated low of 51% in 2005 and 2007 (Table 7). Correspondingly,
the portion occurring in Area 3A has ranged from an estimated high of 39% in 2010 to an estimated low
of 27% in 2003 (Table 7).
Preliminary data from the International Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC) combined with the findings
of this project indicate that 63.773 million pounds (net weight) of halibut were removed from Alaska
waters in 2010. Of this total, the subsistence harvest accounted for 1.3%. Commercial harvests took
66.8% of the halibut, followed by bycatch in other commercial fisheries (15.4%), sport harvests (12.1%),
and wastage in the commercial fishery (4.5%).
This report describes the results of the eighth annual project to estimate the subsistence halibut harvest in
Alaska since NMFS adopted rules governing subsistence halibut fishing in May 2003. The harvest
estimates based on the SHARC surveys for the 2003–2010 fishing seasons serve as a basis for
understanding the overall harvest, annual variability in catch, and whether any increase in harvest may be
associated with implementation of the new regulations. Demonstrating changes in the magnitude of the
Alaska subsistence halibut harvest resulting from the new regulations using the results of the SHARC
surveys for 2003–2010 is problematic, however, because of the limitations of earlier harvest estimates at
the statewide level. The subsistence harvest estimates for 2003–2010 for some of the larger communities,
such as Sitka, Petersburg, and Kodiak, which account for the majority of the harvest, are within the range
of harvest estimates based on household surveys prior to the new regulations. The higher overall harvest
estimates for 2004–2006 compared to 2003 may be due to more thorough registration of subsistence
fishers, hence better harvest documentation. The lower total harvest in net pounds in 2008, 2009, and
2010 compared to the previous 5 years appears to be the result of fewer registered SHARC holders, fewer
estimated participants in the fishery, lower average harvests per fisher, and a decline in the average size of
the harvested halibut over the 8 years of the study, from 23.7 pounds per fish in 2003 to 18.2 lb per fish in
2008, 19.0 lb per fish in 2009, and 18.4 lb per fish in 2010. Additional years of harvest data will be
necessary to shed light on these and other factors that may shape the subsistence halibut harvest in
Alaska.
The report concludes that 797,560 net pounds is a sound estimate of the Alaska subsistence halibut
harvest in 2010. The estimate is based upon a scientific sampling of SHARC holders and a relatively high
response rate. The total estimated harvest falls below the 1.5 million net pounds estimated for the
subsistence harvest when the current regulations were developed by the North Pacific Fishery
Management Council (see http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/frules/70fr16742.pdf, page 16748). Although the
2010 harvest estimate was 24% below the average for the previous 7 project years, there are no certain
trends in the harvest. The report recommends that monitoring of the subsistence halibut harvest in Alaska
continue so that trends in the fishery in terms of participation, location of harvests, and harvest quantities
can be better understood.

viii

CHAPTER 1: BACKGROUND AND METHODS
BACKGROUND
The primary goal of this project was to estimate the subsistence harvests of Pacific halibut Hippoglossus
stenolepis in Alaska in 2010 through a survey mailed to registered subsistence halibut fishers; the survey
was supplemented by interviews in selected communities. This was the eighth year for which this
research was conducted. (See Fall et al. 2004 for the results for 2003, Fall et al. 2005 for the results for
2004, Fall et al. 2006 for the results for 2005, Fall et al. 2007 for the results for 2006, Fall and Koster
2008 for the results for 2007, Fall and Koster 2010for the results for 2008, and Fall and Koster 2011 for
the results for 2009.) The Division of Subsistence administered the project through a grant from NMFS
(award number NA07NMF4370170).
In Alaska’s coastal areas, subsistence halibut fisheries are local, noncommercial, customary and
traditional food fisheries, as noted by Wolfe (2002) and described in Environmental
Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review/Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for a Regulatory
Amendment for Defining a Halibut Subsistence Fishery Category (an “EA/RIR/IRFA”) by the North
Pacific Fishery Management Council (NPFMC), ADF&G, IPHC, and NMFS, August 11, 2000 (NMFS
2000; see also NPFMC 2003). The EA/RIR/IRFA summarizes information about the subsistence halibut
fishery in Alaska. This background information is not repeated here but provided the basis for the
NPFMC’s recommendation for subsistence halibut fishing regulations in Alaska. Figure 1 illustrates
International Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC) halibut regulatory areas in Alaska.
In April 2003, the National Marine Fisheries Service, Alaska Region, published federal regulations
implementing a subsistence halibut fishery for qualified individuals in the waters in and off Alaska (68
FR 18145, April 15, 2003; see http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/frules/fr18145.pdf). Current regulations state
that persons eligible to subsistence halibut fish include 1) residents of rural communities with customary
and traditional uses of halibut (rural); and 2) members of federally recognized Alaska Native tribes with
customary and traditional uses of halibut (tribal). In total, residents of 118 rural communities and
members of 123 Alaska Native tribes are eligible to participate in the fishery.1 (See Appendix A for a list
of eligible tribes and communities as they appeared in the Federal Register in 2003.) On November 4,
2009, the U.S. Department of Commerce published a final rule (74 FR 57105, November 4, 2009),
effective December 4, 2009, modifying eligibility requirements for participation in the Alaska subsistence
halibut fishery. The action allowed rural residents who live outside the boundaries of the specified 118
communities to participate if they live within the boundaries of rural areas defined in §300.65(g)(3).
Subsistence halibut fishers are required to obtain a Subsistence Halibut Registration Certificate (SHARC)
from the Restricted Access Management Program (RAM) office of NMFS prior to fishing.2 Federal
regulations (50 CFR Part 300.65(h)(4)) also authorize periodic surveys of SHARC holders in order to
estimate annual subsistence harvests and related catch and effort information. The regulation states that,
“Responding to a subsistence halibut harvest survey will be voluntary.”
Table 1 provides population estimates for the eligible rural communities for 2000 based on the federal
decennial census. The total population of these communities in 2000 was 82,707, of which 38,990 were

1

2

In December, 2004, the NPFMC adopted a recommendation to the Secretary of Commerce to add Naukati Bay to the original
list of 117 eligible rural communities. Regulations implementing this change went into effect in 2008, resulting in 118 rural
communities eligible for a portion of 2008 and all of 2009. Also, note that the Northern Pacific Halibut Act of 1982, under
which the Alaska subsistence halibut fishery regulations are authorized, provides for fair and equitable allocations of halibut
among U.S. fishers, but does not establish priorities for those allocations (see http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/frules/70fr16742.pdf,
page 16747).
The subsistence rules were amended in 2005 by regulations published in the Federal Register at 70 FR 16742, April 1, 2005.
Among other things, this amendment provides for obtaining Community Harvest Permits, Ceremonial Permits, and
Educational Permits.

1

Alaska Natives (47%). As also shown in Table 1, estimates published by the U.S. Bureau of the Census
for 2010 report a total population of 84,353 for eligible rural communities and areas, including 39,164
Alaska Natives (46%; U. S. Census Bureau 2011). In addition, the nonrural communities of Juneau and
Ketchikan (excluding Saxman, whose residents are eligible) in 2010 had Alaska Native populations of
6,005 and 2,625, respectively (ADLWD 2011), most of whom were eligible to participate in the federal
subsistence halibut fishery through their tribal membership. Also, an unknown number of eligible tribal
members lived in other nonrural communities, such as Anchorage and the Kenai Peninsula Borough.

PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The primary goal of the project was to estimate the subsistence harvest of halibut in Alaska in the
calendar year 2010. Funding for 2010 ($103,000), as for 2009 and 2008, was reduced by about one-half
compared to the first 5 years of the project. Consequently, the project plan for 2008 initially focused on
estimating harvests only in regulatory areas 2C and 3A, where most of the harvests occur. However,
because of lower costs of analysis and report preparation, due to the experience of conducting the survey
for 5 years, and after evaluating available funds, it was decided to again produce a statewide estimate
using a mailed survey to all SHARC holders. This goal was retained for 2009 and 2010. However, as in
2008 and 2009, outreach and supplemental interviewing in 2010 could occur only in a few communities
in Area 2C. Therefore, the project objectives for 2010, listed below, were identical to the first 7 years of
the project:
1. Produce an estimate of the subsistence harvest of halibut in Alaska in 2010 by community,
tribe, gear type, and IPHC regulatory area, along with an estimate of the number of
individuals who subsistence fished for halibut in 2010.
2. Produce an estimate of the harvest of halibut by SHARC holders while sport fishing in 2010.
3. Produce an estimate of the number of lingcod and rockfish taken by subsistence fishers while
subsistence fishing for halibut in 2010.

DATA COLLECTION METHODS
Public Outreach
In February 2011, the Division of Subsistence sent the report for project year 2009 (Fall and Koster 2011)
to all eligible tribes, along with a short summary of the findings for 2009 and a letter informing them that
the research would continue for the 2010 harvest year (Appendix B). Before 2009, the division published
announcements in local newspapers about the upcoming mailing of halibut survey forms to SHARC
holders. Due to rising costs and the reduced budget, these announcements were not published for the 2009
and 2010 study years. Information about the project was available on the NMFS web site for subsistence
halibut fishing in Alaska (http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/ram/subsistence/halibut.htm).

Postal Household Survey
As noted, this was the eighth year of a harvest assessment program for the subsistence halibut fishery in
Alaska. Because the subsistence halibut regulations came into effect in 2003, the first years of collecting
harvest data were exploratory. Subsequent project years have built upon the lessons learned in the first
years of the project and have benefited from outreach efforts to improve response rates. (See
recommendations in Chapter 4.)
As recommended by Wolfe (2002), survey methodology was based upon a registration system for
subsistence halibut fishers, which requires fishers to obtain a SHARC before fishing under federal
subsistence halibut regulations. All 10,953 individuals who held a SHARC for any portion of 2010, as of
December 31, 2010, were mailed a retrospective recall survey covering a 12-month harvest period:
calendar year 2010. SHARCs issued to nontribal residents of eligible rural communities are valid for 2
years and tribal SHARCs are valid for 4 years, after which they must be renewed. Because of

2

nonrenewals, the number of valid SHARCs for 2010 was down 7% from the 11,733 that were valid for
2009.
With one exception, the 2010 survey instrument was virtually identical to the form used for the 2003–
2008 project years. It is based on recommendations by Wolfe (2002:Appendix A), with slight
modifications, such as project year and return address. (See Appendix C in this report for a copy of the
2010 survey instrument.) Wolfe (2002:15–18) provided justification for the kinds of data to be collected,
which include name and address of the fisher; halibut harvests in numbers and pounds round (whole)
weight by gear type in 2010; number of hooks usually set; and harvests of lingcod and rockfish taken
while subsistence fishing for halibut. In 2003, a question addressing the water body fished (primary
location) while subsistence fishing was added at the recommendation of NMFS staff. This question was
retained for 2004–2010. Another was added in 2004 to record the location of sport halibut fishing by
SHARC holders. The survey was designed to reduce the potential double counting of halibut taken with
rod and reel gear, which could be reported in both the subsistence survey and in the ADF&G Division of
Sport Fish Statewide Harvest Survey (Wolfe 2002:19). For 2009, a new question was added about the
number of trips taken for subsistence halibut fishing in the study year. This question was retained for
2010.
A short explanatory letter with instructions on the back for completing the survey was included in the
mailings (Appendix C). The survey was designed so that it could be directly returned to the Division of
Subsistence, postage paid.
Presently under IPHC regulations, Community Development Quota (CDQ) fishers may retain halibut
under 32 inches (U32; formerly called “sublegal” or “shorts”) while commercial CDQ fishing in areas 4D
and 4E only. These regulations require the CDQ organization to report this harvest to the IPHC. To avoid
double counting, subsistence fishers were instructed not to include these fish on their subsistence halibut
survey.
During an October 2003 meeting of the Alaska Native Subsistence Halibut Working Group (ANSHWG),
held before the mailed survey for the first project year, community representatives expressed concern that
not all fishers would know which fish were to be included under the category “rockfish” for the incidental
harvest question on the survey. This would have led to an overestimation of this harvest if fishers reported
fish such as Pacific cod Gadus macrocephalus or various species of sculpins in response to this question.
The instructions mailed with the survey provided guidance on this question.3
Table 2 provides a chronology of key activities during the project. Table 3 provides a summary of
response rates by mailing, SHARC type (rural or tribal), and place of residence. The first mailing to
10,953 SHARC holders occurred on March 16, 2011. The second mailing to 5,702 SHARC holders
occurred on May 16, 2011. For the 2003–2008 study years, a third mailing took place, usually in April or
May. Due to increasing printing and mailing costs, and the previous relatively low responses to this
mailing, the third mailing did not occur in 2010 or 2011.
The Division of Subsistence created a dedicated e-mail address that recipients of the postal survey could
use if they had questions about how to respond. Also, the RAM Program set up a toll-free telephone
number (1-800-304-4846) to provide information about the subsistence halibut program, including the
harvest assessment program. Both the e-mail address and toll-free telephone number appeared on the
survey. A set of “frequently asked questions” and responses was developed by ADF&G and NMFS staff

3

The principal investigators for this project are aware that more than 30 species of rockfish inhabit Alaska waters. (See Alaska
Administrative Code 5 AAC 39.975 for definitions of management assemblages of rockfishes.) The goal of this project was to
keep the questions about incidental harvests simple. As discussed in the recommendations section (see Chapter 4), if more
precise harvest data for various rockfish are needed for particular areas, future research should be designed and funded to
address these data needs.

3

members to guide staff responses to telephone calls and e-mail inquiries about how to fill out the survey
form [Appendix D (FAQ), Appendix C (survey)].

Community Visits and In-Person Surveys
Because the response rates to the postal survey vary by community and tribe, the mailings were again
supplemented in selected communities with household surveys conducted by local research assistants
hired through subcontracts with Alaska Native tribes. Because of the large number of eligible
communities and tribes, it was not possible to conduct surveys in most communities. Additionally,
because of reductions in the budget, surveys for 2010 harvests, as for 2009 harvests, were limited to
selected communities in Area 2C.
In the 2010 project year, the interviews were administered in Sitka, Hydaburg, Angoon, and Ketchikan.
Cooperative agreements with Sitka Tribe of Alaska and Hydaburg Cooperative Association supported
interviewing in those communities. A contract with the firm Admiralty Island Adventures supported
interviewing in Angoon and Ketchikan. In each community, the surveys were administered face-to-face
or by telephone.

SAMPLE ACHIEVEMENT
Table 3 reports sample achievement by tribe, rural community, and community of residence. Overall,
6,670 surveys were returned by 10,953 SHARC holders, a response rate of 61% (Figure 2). For residents
of the 118 eligible rural communities and eligible rural areas who did not register as tribal members,
4,645 of 7,047 surveys were returned (66%). As shown in Figure 3, in 2010 there were 11 communities
with more than 100 nontribal SHARC holders, accounting in total for 85% of all nontribal SHARCs
issued in rural communities. Return rates were 60% or more in 10 of these communities; the return rate
for Kodiak, the rural community with the most SHARC holders, was 55%.
Of the 3,906 individual tribal members who held SHARCs in 2010, 2,025 (52%) returned surveys. As
shown in Figure 3, there were 18 tribes with more than 70 members who obtained SHARCs. Return rates
for these 18 tribes varied widely, from 87% in Hydaburg (where the Hydaburg Cooperative Association
conducted surveys to supplement the return of surveys by mail) to 38% for the Sun’aq Tribe of Kodiak
(where no directed outreach occurred). In total, these 18 tribes accounted for 71% of all tribal SHARCs.
Figure 4 illustrates survey response rates by place of residence of SHARC holders for the 22 communities
with 100 or more SHARC holders in 2010. These communities accounted for 84% of all SHARCs and
86% of all returned surveys. Response rates were 50% or higher in all but 4 of these communities.
Figure 5 shows the survey return rate by response category (see also Table 3). After the first mailing,
5,188 surveys were returned, for a response rate of 47%. Responses to the second (final) mailing added
1,046 surveys, for a total response to the postal survey of 6,234 surveys, 57% of the 10,953 SHARC
holders. In addition, surveys administered by representatives of tribal and other organizations working
with ADF&G, added 436 surveys. Most of these were in Hydaburg, Sitka, Angoon, and Ketchikan. This
brought the total response to 6,670 surveys, 61% of all individuals who held SHARCs in 2010.
The overall response rate for the survey for 2010 increased compared to 2009, from 59% to 61%. The
return rate was the highest in 2003 at 65% and the lowest in 2007 at 58%4. The number of returned
surveys increased over the first 3 years of the project, from 7,593 in 2003, to 8,524 in 2004, and 8,565 in
2005, reflecting the larger number of SHARC holders in 2004 and 2005 and the larger number of staffadministered surveys in 2005. The total number of surveys dropped slightly in 2006, to 8,426, but
increased again to 8,682 surveys in 2007, the largest annual total for the 8 years of the project. The
number of surveys returned for 2008 dropped to 7,316, reflecting the sharp drop in the number of SHARC
holders in 2008. For 2009, 6,944 surveys were received, and for 2010, there were 6,670 returned surveys,
4

See Table 19 for sample sizes and fractions and selected project findings for the 8 project years.

4

the lowest total of the 8 years of the project; 2010 was also the year with the lowest number of eligible
SHARCs (10,953). The response rate by mail declined during the first 5 years of the project, from 62% in
2003 to 59% in 2004, 55% in 2005, 52% in 2006, and 50% in 2007. In 2008, the response rate by mail
increased to 60%, the highest since the first project year, but declined to 56% for 2009 and 57% in 2010.
As noted above, due to increasing costs and a decreased budget, only 2 mailings of surveys occurred for
the 2009 and 2010 study years; 3 mailings had occurred in the previous 6 study years. Responses to the
third mailing had dropped since the first years of the project, accounting for 10% of total returns in 2003
(1,211 surveys) and 14% in 2004 (1,970 surveys), compared to 4% in 2007 (599 surveys) and 4% in 2008
(473 surveys). Thus it is unlikely that eliminating the third mailing for 2009 and 2010 had a significant
effect on return rates or harvest estimates.
The number of surveys returned as “undeliverable” increased from 208 in 2003 (Fall et al. 2004:45), to
617 in 2004 (Fall et al. 2005:48), 613 in 2005 (Fall et al. 2006:7), 1,194 in 2006 (Fall et al. 2007:7), and
1,700 in 2007 (Fall and Koster 2008:54); there were 817 undeliverable surveys in 2008 (Fall and Koster
2010:58), 653 in 2009 (Fall and Koster 2011:6), and 713 in 2010 (Table 3). Subtracting “undeliverables”
from the postal survey target gives a response rate by mail of 61% in 2010, compared to 63% in 2003,
62% in 2004, 57% in 2005, 57% in 2006, 54% in 2007, 64% in 2008, and 60% in 2009. More surveys
were administered in person or via telephone in 2010 (436) than in 2009 (318). Before 2009, the number
of staff-administered surveys had ranged from 355 surveys in 2004 to 392 in 2003, 408 in 2008, 733 in
2005, 1,089 in 2007, and 1,522 in 2006. The lack of outreach and household surveys in Area 3A, Area
3B, and Area 4 communities in 2008, 2009, and 2010 due to budget reductions accounts for the reduced
number of staff-administered surveys compared to 2005–2007.

DATA ANALYSIS
Data Entry
All returned surveys were reviewed for completeness prior to data entry. Responses were coded following
standardized conventions used by the Division of Subsistence. Staff within the Information Management
Section of the division set up database structures within Microsoft SQL Server5 at ADF&G in Anchorage
to hold the survey data. The database structures included rules, constraints, and referential integrity to
insure that data were entered completely and accurately. Data entry screens were available on a secure
Internet site. Daily incremental backups of the database occurred, and transaction logs were backed up
hourly. Full backups of the database occurred twice weekly. This ensured that no more than one hour of
data entry would be lost in the unlikely event of a catastrophic failure.
Survey responses were manually entered twice, and survey forms were electronically scanned. All data
were compared programmatically for inconsistent data entry. Double data entry ensured a more accurate
transfer of information from the coded survey forms into the database, and is a standard Division of
Subsistence practice. Data did not pass to the processing phase until inconsistencies within the twiceentered data set were eliminated. The scanned survey forms also facilitated efficient data correction and
editing.
Information was processed and analyzed using MS SQL programming. Initial processing included the
performance of standardized logic checks of the data. Logic checks are often needed in complex data sets
where rules, constraints, and referential integrity do not capture all of the possible inconsistencies that
may appear.

Analysis: Development of Harvest Estimates
Analysis included review of raw data frequencies, cross tabulations, table generation, and estimates of
population parameters. Missing information was dealt with on a case-by-case basis. The Division of
5

Product names are included for scientific completeness and do not constitute an endorsement.

5

Subsistence has standard practices for dealing with missing information, such as minimal value
substitution or use of an average response for similarly characterized households or communities.
Typically, missing data are an uncommon, randomly occurring phenomenon in household surveys
conducted by the division, as was the case in this project.
In general, estimates of harvests, levels of participation, and other findings were calculated based upon
the application of weighted means (Cochran 1977). These calculations are standard methods for
extrapolating sampled data. In this project, each tribe and rural community was a separate stratum for
purposes of estimating total harvests. In most cases, the mean for returned SHARC surveys was applied
to the total number of SHARCs issued for the tribe or community to calculate the estimated harvest. (See
Appendix Table E-1 for the reported harvests for each tribe and community.) The formula for standard
expansion of community harvests is

and Wi 

Ht   Hi

(1)

where H i  hiWi

(2)

Ni
(Harvest weight factor per strata i)
ni

(3)

Ht = the total harvest (numbers of fish or pounds),
Hi = the total harvest, numbers or pounds, for tribe or community i
Wi = the weight factor for tribe or community i,
hi = the total harvest, numbers or pounds, reported in returned surveys for tribe or community,
ni = the number of returned surveys in each tribe or community, and
Ni = the number of SHARCs issued for tribe or community.
The following instances are exceptions. First, 149 SHARCs were held by eligible tribal members living
outside of Alaska. Of these, 75 postal surveys were returned from this group, and very few of these
returned surveys indicated any subsistence fishing activity. Rather than assign the mean value for their
tribe (which would likely result in an overestimate of the harvest), all nonreturned surveys for SHARC
holders with out-of-state addresses were coded as “did not fish.”
Second, all SHARC holders were divided into 2 categories based upon the expiration date of their
SHARC. SHARCs having an expiration date falling within the project period and that were not renewed
were treated as separate strata from other SHARCs for the purpose of generating harvest estimates. This
was done to account for potential bias and resulting overestimation of harvests for SHARCs that were
fished for only part of the year. During 2010, 1,012 rural and 159 tribal SHARCs expired and were not
renewed; of those, 402 (40%) rural SHARCs and 54 (34%) tribal SHARCs participated in the survey.
Third, as in 2009, for tribal and rural SHARC holders from Nanwalek, comparisons of reported harvests
with estimates from previous years, plus relatively low response rates, suggested that survey responses
included all harvesters. Therefore, reported harvests were used as total harvest estimates for both the
Nanwalek tribe and for Nanwalek rural SHARC holders. Finally, again as in 2009, for Native Village of
Port Graham, one respondent reported harvests far above the mean for other respondents. This SHARC
holder was treated as a separate strata so as not to overestimate harvests for the tribe.
The RAM Program did not issue any community, educational, or ceremonial permits for 2010. If harvests
under any of these permits had occurred, the totals would have been added to the estimates for the tribe of
the permit holder because they are not reported by individuals in their response to the SHARC postal
survey.

6

It should also be noted that not every individual who obtained a SHARC as a tribal member resided in the
community where his or her tribe’s headquarters is located. Therefore, the sum of harvest estimates for
tribal SHARC holders and rural resident SHARC holders does not necessarily equal the halibut harvest
for particular communities of residence. Rather, an additional analysis was necessary to estimate harvests
by community of residence that assigned tribal SHARC holders to a community based on their mailing
addresses. Appendix tables E-4, E-5, and E-6 report project results by place of residence of the SHARC
holders.
The standard deviation (SD; or Variance [V], which is the SD squared) of the harvest was calculated with
the raw, unexpanded data. The standard error (SE), or SD of the mean, was also calculated for each
community or tribe. This was used to calculate the relative precision of the mean, or the likelihood an
unknown value falls within a certain distance from the mean. In this project, the relative precision of the
mean is shown in the tables as a confidence interval (CI), expressed as a percentage. Once the standard
error was calculated, the CI was determined by multiplying the SE by a constant that reflected the level of
significance desired, based on a normal distribution. The constant for 95% confidence intervals is 1.96.
Though there are numerous ways to express the formula below, it contains the components of a SD, V,
and SE.
Relative precision of the mean (CI%):
(4)
⁄

1

√

%

(5)

∑
1

Where

s  sample standard deviation
x = reported amount harvested by individual SHARC holders

x = mean harvest
n  total sample size

N  total population size
ni  tribal or community sample size
N i  tribal or community population size

t

2

 Student’s t-statistic for alpha level (α=0.95) with n–1 degrees of freedom.

Project staff explored the possibility of nonresponse bias for returned mail-out surveys and its effect on
harvest estimates. However, it was determined that responses to the survey, including harvest levels and
involvement in the fishery, were not notably different between any of the response categories (responses
to the first mailing, the second mailing, and staff administered surveys; see Appendix Table E-2).

7

As noted above, survey respondents provided harvest estimates in pounds round (whole) weight. For ease
of comparison with estimates of halibut removals in other fisheries, we have converted these estimates to
pounds net (dressed, head off) weight, where 0.75 × round weight = net weight.6

Products
The public review draft of this final report was completed in November 2011 and circulated for review
and comments. The draft report was also posted at the Division of Subsistence website. A presentation of
the project findings and recommendations occurred at the December 2011 meeting of the NPFMC in
Anchorage, Alaska. In past study years, draft results were also reviewed during a meeting of the Alaska
Native Subsistence Halibut Working Group (ANSHWG), but a meeting of this advisory group did not
take place in December 2011. The final report was revised in consideration of comments and suggestions
received from reviewers of the public review draft. In addition to the final report, a short findings
summary was prepared (Appendix F). The summary was sent to tribal government representatives and
other interested individuals and groups. This report was posted on the Division of Subsistence web site
and the RAM website in PDF format for downloading and printing by the public. Printed copies of this
report were sent to the Alaska Resources Library and Information Services as well as the Alaska State
Library.

6

The factor of 0.75 for converting halibut round weight to net weight is the standard used by the International Pacific Halibut
Commission and the ADF&G Division of Sport Fish. Division of Subsistence studies, as reported in the Technical Paper series
and in the Community Subsistence Information System (http://www.subsistence.adfg.state.ak.us/CSIS/, hereinafter referred to
as CSIS, and formerly the Community Profile Database [Scott, C.L., B. Brown, G.B. Jennings, and C. Utermohle.
Unpublished. Community Profile Database, 2001, for Microsoft Access 2000. Version 3.12. Alaska Department of Fish and
Game Division of Subsistence, Juneau. Hereinafter referred to as CPDB.]), generally use a factor of 0.72 for converting halibut
round weights to net weights, based on Crapo et al. 1993:7), who reports that on average, the weight of a dressed halibut with
the head removed is 72% of the round weight, with a range of 68% to 80%. In Division of Subsistence Technical Papers, “net”
weight (dressed, head off) is usually referred to as “usable weight.”

8

CHAPTER 2: FINDINGS
SUBSISTENCE HALIBUT HARVESTS IN 2010
Estimated Number of Subsistence Halibut Fishers
Of the 10,953 individuals who held valid SHARCs for any portion of 2010, an estimated 4,991 (46%)
participated in the subsistence halibut fishery in 2010 (Table 4, Figure 6). Of the 3,906 individuals who
held SHARCs as members of an eligible tribe, an estimated 1,502 participated in the fishery (38%). Of
the 7,047 individuals who held SHARCs as residents of qualifying rural communities, an estimated 3,489
(50%) participated in the subsistence fishery for halibut in 2010. The largest number of estimated
subsistence halibut fishers occurred in 2004—5,984 of 13,813 SHARC holders fished in the subsistence
halibut fishery (43%), including 2,157 of 6,533 tribal SHARC holders (33%) and 3,827 of 7,280 rural
SHARC holders (53%). The lowest estimated number of subsistence halibut fishers occurred in 2003—
4,942 of 11,635 SHARC holders fished in the subsistence halibut fishery (42%), including 1,836 of 5,578
tribal SHARC holders (33%) and 3,106 of 6,057 rural SHARC holders (51%; Figure 6).
In 2003–2007, differences in the demography of tribal SHARC holders and rural SHARC holders
probably accounted for some of the differences in the rate of participation in the subsistence halibut
fishery between these 2 groups. As a proportion of total SHARC holders, about twice as many tribal
SHARC holders were under 20 years of age compared to rural SHARC holders. This may reflect a policy
on the part of some eligible tribes in the first years after the regulations were adopted to register all or
most tribal members, including younger people who were less likely to participate in the subsistence
fishery than adults. Despite the substantial drop in the number of tribal SHARC holders in 2008, 2009,
and 2010, differences in the age structure of this group compared to rural SHARC holders remained. For
example, in 2007, 13% of tribal SHARC holders were younger than 20 years of age, compared to 5% of
rural SHARC holders (Fall and Koster 2008:11). In 2009, 11% of tribal SHARC holders less than 20
years of age, compared to 6% of rural SHARC holders (Fall and Koster 2011:9); and in 2010, 9% of tribal
SHARC holders less than 20 years of age, compared to 5% of rural SHARC holders (Table 5, Figure 7).
As illustrated in Figure 8 (see also, Table 4), the largest number of Alaska subsistence halibut fishers in
2010 were from tribes and rural communities in Regulatory Area 2C (Southeast Alaska), 3,020 (61%).
There were 1,574 subsistence halibut fishers (32%) from tribes and communities in Regulatory Area 3A
(Southcentral Alaska); 176 (4%) from Regulatory Area 3B (Alaska Peninsula) tribes and communities; 99
(2%) from Regulatory Area 4A (Eastern Aleutians) tribes and communities; and 84 (2%) from Area 4E
(East Bering Sea Coast) tribes and communities. Additionally, there were 38 (1%) halibut fishers who
were members of tribes and residents of communities in the 3 other regulatory areas. As also shown in
Figure 8, the distribution of subsistence fishers by regulatory area in 2010 was similar to that of 2003–
2009, except, continuing the pattern established in 2008, there was a sharp decrease in the number of
halibut fishers in Area 4E, from 376 in 2007 to 143 in 2008, 137 in 2009, and 84 in 2010. Compared to
2009, the estimated number of halibut fishers from tribes and rural communities also dropped in 2010 in 5
other regulatory areas, most notably in Area 3A (from 1,669 fishers to 1,574, a drop of 6%). The
estimated number of subsistence halibut fishers in Area 2C dropped by 5% (from 3,187 in 2009 to 3,020
in 2010). In contrast, the estimated number of subsistence halibut fishers rose in Area 4A, from 79 in
2009 to 99 in 2010 (a 25% increase).
Alaska Native tribes with the most subsistence halibut fishers in 2010 included the Central Council of
Tlingit and Haida Indians (184 subsistence halibut fishers), the Ketchikan Indian Corporation (136), the
Sitka Tribe of Alaska (131), the Sun’aq Tribe of Kodiak (68), the Hydaburg Cooperative Association
(63), the Metlakatla Indian Community (52), the Hoonah Indian Association (51), the Wrangell
Cooperative Association (42), the Angoon Community Association (42), the Agdaagux Tribe of King
Cove (41), the Qagan Toyagungin Tribe of Sand Point (32), and the Native Village of Eyak (30). Of the
SHARC holders who registered as residents of eligible rural communities, the most subsistence fishers

9

lived in Kodiak (827), followed by Sitka (632), Petersburg (384), Haines (252), Cordova (211), Wrangell
(197), and Craig (172). Appendix Table E-3 provides details for each tribe and community regarding
participation in the subsistence fishery and subsistence halibut harvests in 2010.
As noted above, not every tribal SHARC holder lives in his or her tribe’s headquarters community. After
assigning tribal members to a community based on their place of residence, an estimate of participation in
the subsistence halibut fishery in 2010 by community can be obtained. Appendix Table E-4 provides
project findings based on place of residence. Communities with 100 or more resident SHARC holders
who participated in the subsistence halibut fishery in 2010 were Kodiak (900), Sitka (755), Petersburg
(409), Haines (273), Wrangell (256), Craig (252), Cordova (235), and Ketchikan (198). Of the 8 Alaska
communities with 100 or more subsistence halibut fishers in 2010, 5 had about the same or fewer fishers
than in 2009 (±10%). The estimated number of subsistence halibut fishers in Sitka, Wrangell, and Craig
each decreased by about 11% (Figure 9). Hoonah had an estimated 91 subsistence halibut fishers in 2010,
a drop of 17% from the estimate of 109 fishers in 2009. (See Chapter 3 for further discussion of Kodiak,
Petersburg, Cordova, and Sand Point as case study communities.) Nine non-Alaska-resident tribal
SHARC holders subsistence fished for halibut in Alaska in 2010, compared to a high of 24 in 2005 and
low of zero in 2004 and 2007.

Estimated Alaska Subsistence Halibut Harvests in 2010 by SHARC Type and IPHC
Regulatory Area
Table 4 reports estimated Alaska subsistence halibut harvests for 2010 by SHARC type, IPHC regulatory
area, and gear type. The total estimated subsistence halibut harvest in Alaska in 2010 was 43,332 fish
(±8%) for 797,560 lb (net weight; ±3%).7 As estimated in pounds net weight, 54% of the subsistence
halibut harvest (430,866 lb [±5%]) was taken by fishers registered with tribes or rural communities in
Regulatory Area 2C (Figure 10). (Note that because some SHARC holders may fish in a regulatory area
different from the location of their tribal headquarters or rural community of registration, the area totals in
Table 4 do not precisely represent harvest locations. See the section on harvests by location, below.)
Fishers from Area 3A tribes and rural communities harvested 303,632 lb (±12%; 38% of the state total).
Harvests totaled 23,733 lb (±1%; 3%) for communities and tribes of Regulatory Area 3B. For tribal and
rural SHARC holders in Area 4A, the estimated harvest was 14,477 lb (±2%; 2% of the net harvest
weight). For Regulatory Area 4E,8 the estimated harvest for tribal and rural SHARC holders was 12,250
lb (±3%; 2% of the net harvest weight). For Regulatory Area 4C, the estimated harvest for tribal and rural
SHARC holders was 10,859 lb (±10%; 1% of the net harvest weight). Tribes and communities in 4D
harvested 1,270 lb (±23%; less than 1% of the net harvest weight) and those in 4B harvested 473 lb
(±36%; less than 1%).
The estimated subsistence harvest of 797,560 lb of halibut in 2010 represents a decrease of 7.4%
compared to the estimated harvest of 861,359 lb in 2009 (Figure 11). Harvests by tribal SHARC holders
decreased by 1.1% from 311,947 lb in 2009 to 308,569 lb in 2010. Tribal SHARC holders harvested 39%
of the Alaska subsistence halibut harvest in 2010, compared to 36% in 2009. Subsistence halibut harvests
by nontribal, rural resident SHARC holders decreased by 11.0%, from 549,412 lb in 2009 to 488,990 lb
in 2010. This group accounted for 61% of the statewide subsistence halibut harvests in 2010, compared to
64% in 2009.

7

8

This approximates 1,139,371 pounds round (live or whole) weight. See footnote 6 in Chapter 1 for an explanation of the factor
used to convert round weight to net weight.
Community Development Quota (CDQ) organizations operating exclusively in areas 4D and 4E may retain U32 halibut (under
32 inches in length) from their commercial catches for home use. In 2010, a total of 9,517 lb net weight of halibut was retained
by 3 organizations: Coastal Villages Regional Fund (3,924 lb), Bristol Bay Economic Development Corporation (2,155 lb),
and Norton Sound Economic Development Corporation (3,438 lb; Williams 2011). The IPHC includes these fish within the
“personal use” removal category, a category that also includes subsistence harvests (Gilroy 2005:64). See also the section in
Chapter 3, “Comparisons with Nonsubsistence Harvests.”

10

Members of 64 Alaska tribes harvested subsistence halibut in 2010. In 2 others, SHARC holders fished
but had no harvest. In 16 others, tribal members obtained SHARCs and returned surveys, but no one
fished. Members of 16 other tribes held SHARCS, but no one returned a survey form. No one in the
remaining 25 eligible tribes held a valid SHARC in 2010. All but one of these tribes was in Regulatory
Area 4E (East Bering Sea Coast). As shown in Figure 12, members of the 13 tribes with harvests of 8,000
lb or more accounted for 64% of the total subsistence halibut harvest by tribal SHARC holders in 2010.
These 13 tribes accounted for 58% of the tribal SHARCs (2,265 of 3,906) (Table 3). Members of the
other 51 tribes with harvests accounted for about 36% of the total harvest by tribal members.
Residents of 49 eligible rural communities harvested subsistence halibut in 2010.9 In 3 others, SHARC
holders fished unsuccessfully. In 9 others, individuals obtained SHARCs but no one fished. Residents of
10 other eligible rural communities obtained SHARCs, but no one returned a survey form. No one in the
remaining 47 eligible rural communities held a valid SHARC as a nontribal member in 2010. Most of
these communities (38) were in Regulatory Area 4E (East Bering Sea Coast).10 As shown in Figure 13, 10
rural communities with harvests of over 10,000 lb accounted for 81% of the subsistence halibut harvest
by the holders of rural (nontribal) SHARCs in 2010. Residents of the other 39 communities with harvests
accounted for 19% of the total harvest by rural SHARC holders.
As also shown in Figure 13, rural SHARC holders from 2 communities accounted for 45% of the total
harvest by this group in 2010: Kodiak (31%) and Sitka (14%). Adding Petersburg, the next highest rural
community harvest at almost 9%, the top 3 rural communities accounted for 54% of the rural community
(nontribal) subsistence halibut harvest in Alaska in 2010.

Estimated Alaska Subsistence Halibut Harvests in 2010 by Harvest Location
Survey respondents were asked to report the “water body, bay, or sound [that they] usually fished” for
subsistence halibut in 2010. Multiple responses were permitted. In Table 6, estimated subsistence halibut
harvests are reported for the 8 Alaska halibut regulatory areas and 22 subdivisions within these areas. It
should be noted that regulatory area totals in Table 6 differ slightly from those reported in Table 4
because not all SHARC holders fished within the regulatory area in which their tribal headquarters or
residence is located.
Subsistence halibut harvests in Regulatory Area 2C (Southeast Alaska) accounted for 53% of the Alaska
subsistence halibut harvest in 2010 (424,818 lb [net weight]; Figure 14, Table 6). Also, as shown in
Figure 15 and Figure 16, three of the 5 geographic subareas with the largest subsistence halibut harvests
in 2010 were in Area 2C: southern Southeast Alaska (254,366 lb [net weight]; 32% of the state total); the
northern Southeast Alaska other than the Sitka Local Area Management Plan (LAMP) area (93,464 lb;
12%), and the Sitka LAMP area (76,988 lb; 10%).11 Regulatory Area 3A (Southcentral Alaska) ranked
second, with 39% of the state’s total subsistence halibut harvest (312,650 lb [net weight]). Waters
bordering the Kodiak Island road system (including Chiniak Bay) ranked second among subareas, with a
subsistence halibut harvest of 103,066 lb (13% of the state total), and other Kodiak Island waters not
along the road system area (“Kodiak Island–Other”) ranked fourth (83,432 lb; 11%). Harvests within
Cook Inlet waters of Area 3A accounted for 8% of the state total (65,809 lb; ranking sixth), those within
Prince William Sound added 42,279 lb (5% of the statewide total), and the Yakutat Area added 18,064 lb
9

In this tally, Chiniak, listed separately in tables in this report, is counted as part of Kodiak, as it is for eligibility. Because some
residents of eligible rural areas had mailing addresses in non-eligible communities, 3 non-eligible communities are listed as
“rural communities” in Table 3. These were Juneau (3 SHARCs), Ketchikan (5 SHARCs), and Ward Cove (2 SHARCs).
These 3 places are not included in this count of participating communities.
10
Note that residents of these communities may have obtained SHARCs as tribal members.
11
For this project, “northern Southeast Alaska” includes those waters of Regulatory Area 2C north of Frederick Sound, including
waters surrounding Baranof Island and excluding the Sitka LAMP area. For a description of the Sitka LAMP area, see FR 68
18156, April 15, 2003, § 300.65(d)(1). The remaining waters of Area 2C are referred to as “southern Southeast Alaska” in this
report.

11

(2%). Among regulatory areas, Area 3B (Alaska Peninsula, including the Chignik Area) ranked third with
3% of the Alaska total (23,009 lb). Area 4A (eastern Aleutian Islands) ranked fourth with 14,548 lb (2%),
and Area 4C (Pribilof Islands) ranked fifth with 10,859 lb (1%). Area 4E (Bering Sea Coast) ranked sixth
with 10,055 lb (1%). Most of the harvest in Area 4E came from the Yukon–Kuskokwim Delta area, with
a smaller amount from Norton Sound and, as in 2009, and for the second time since the harvest
monitoring project began in 2003, no harvest from Bristol Bay. Area 4D (St. Lawrence Island) added
1,171 lb (<1%); and Area 4B (western Aleutian Islands) added 450 lb (<1%).
Figure 17 reports estimated harvests in pounds net weight by location fished at the regulatory area level in
2003–2010. Table 7 compares estimated subsistence halibut harvests by regulatory area and geographic
area in 2010 with those estimated for 2003–2009 and for the 7-year average from 2003–2009. As noted
previously, for the state overall, the estimated harvest in pounds decreased by about 7% in 2010 from
2009 (Figure 18). The estimated harvest in 2010 was 24% lower than average for the first 7 years of the
subsistence halibut harvest monitoring program (2003–2009; Figure 19).
Estimated subsistence halibut harvests decreased in 5 of the 8 regulatory areas in 2010 compared to 2009
(Figure 17; Figure 18; Table 7). As in the first 7 years of the project, Area 2C (Southeast Alaska)
accounted for the most subsistence halibut harvests in 2010 (424,818 lb; 53% of the state total); this
harvest represents a decrease of 7% compared to 2009 (Table 7; Figure 17; Figure 18), but a 24%
decrease compared to the 7-year average from 2003–2009 (Figure 19). The percentage of the total
statewide subsistence halibut harvest that took place in Area 2C in 2010 was 53%, similar to 2009 (53%),
2008 (52%), 2007 (51%), 2006 (52%), and 2005 (51%), but a decline compared to 57% in 2004 and 60%
in 2003. Harvests increased in the 3 subareas within Area 2C in 2010 compared to 2009, with a 3%
decrease in the southern Southeast Alaska subarea, an 11% decrease in the northern Southeast Alaska
subarea (excluding the Sitka LAMP area), and a 14% decrease in the Sitka LAMP area. Harvests were
down in all 3 Southeast subareas compared to recent 7-year averages: 15% in southern Southeast Alaska,
42% in the Sitka LAMP, and 27% in the remainder of northern Southeast Alaska. The reasons for these
changes in Area 2C are likely complex and beyond the scope of this report.12
Estimated harvests in Area 3A (Southcentral Alaska) decreased for the fifth straight year. The 2010
harvest of 312,650 lb dropped 5% from the 2009 harvest of 328,480 lb. The estimated subsistence halibut
harvest in Area 3A in 2010 was 14% lower than the previous 7-year average (Figure 19). In contrast to
the last 5 years, in terms of total pounds, the largest increase in estimated harvests over the first 3 years of
the project took place in Area 3A, where the 2005 harvest of 429,275 lb was 6% higher than the estimate
for 2004 (403,610 lb) and 50% higher than the estimate for 2003 (285,500 lb; Table 7). Area 3A
accounted for 39% of the statewide subsistence halibut harvest in 2010, 38% in 2009, 38% in 2008, 36%
in 2007, 34% in 2006, 36% in 2005, and 34% in 2004, compared to 27% in 2003 (Table 7). In Area 3A in
2010 compared to 2009, subsistence halibut harvests increased in the Yakutat area by 26% and in the
Prince William Sound area by 25%. Decreases in harvests occurred in the waters of Kodiak Island along
the road system (down 5%), the remainder of the Kodiak Island area (down 9%), and the Cook Inlet area
(down 19%; Table 7). However, harvests in 2010 were lower than the previous 7-year averages in all 5
Area 3A subareas.
In Area 3B (Alaska Peninsula), harvests declined from 25,492 lb in 2009 to 23,009 in 2010 (down 10%;
Figure 17; Figure 18; Table 7). In Area 3B, the 2010 estimated harvest was the lowest of the 8 years of
the project, 41% below the previous 7-year average, and notably below the estimates for 2005 (46,225 lb),
2006 (48,547), and 2007 (47,748 lb; Table 7; Figure 17; Figure 19). Earlier reports (e.g. Fall and Koster
2010:12) suggested that improved participation in the SHARC program in 2006, 2007, and 2008
accounted for some of the increase in the estimated harvests in Area 3B in 2005–2008, compared to 2003
and 2004, the first 2 years of the harvest monitoring program. However, the number of SHARC holders

12

Further discussion of differences between harvest estimates for 2003–2010 appears in Chapter 3 and Chapter 4.

12

for Area 3B tribes and rural communities decreased from 606 in 2008 to 309 in 2009 and 369 in 2010, a
decline in program participation that may partially explain the lower harvest estimates for 2009 and 2010
(see discussion of Sand Point in Chapter 3).
Estimated subsistence halibut harvests in Area 4A (Eastern Aleutians) dropped 57% from 2009 (33,499
lb) to 2010 (14,548 lb). The harvest in Area 4A in 2010 was 44% lower than the previous 7-year average
(Figure 19). There are only 3 communities in Area 4A: Akutan, Nikolski, and Unalaska–Dutch Harbor.
Therefore, harvest estimates for individual communities strongly shape the area estimate. For example,
previous reports have discussed how sampling achievement in Akutan evidently affected the area’s
harvest estimate (Fall and Koster 2010:13). For 2009, an increased harvest by SHARC holders living in
Unalaska–Dutch Harbor, from 13,710 lb in 2008 to 29,306 lb in 2009, accounted for most of the change
in the regulatory area’s estimate between those 2 years, but estimated harvests in that community dropped
to 13,081 lb for 2010. (See below for more discussion of harvest estimates for Unalaska–Dutch Harbor.)
In Area 4B (Western Aleutians) there was a large decrease of 62% in the estimated subsistence harvest of
halibut in 2010 (450 lb) compared to 2009 (1,175 lb; Table 7; Figure 17; Figure 18). The 2008 estimate
was 147% higher than the previous 5-year average (Fall and Koster 2010:92). This increase in 2008 was
likely due in part to the larger reported average size of halibut harvested in this area in 2008 (30.5 lb [net
weight] per fish; see Table 9 in Fall and Koster 2010:66) compared to earlier years (19.5 lb [net weight]
per fish in 2007 [Fall and Koster 2008:71]). The average weight of subsistence harvested halibut in Area
4B in 2009 was only 15.4 lb (see Table 9 in Fall and Koster 2011) and 12.6 lb in 2010 (see Table 9,
below). The estimated harvest for Area 4B was 80% below the previous 7-year average (Figure 19), and
lower than any other year since the program began in 2003.
Estimated subsistence harvests of halibut in Area 4C (Pribilof Islands) rose 72% in 2010 to 10,859 lb,
from 6,323 lb in 2009 (Figure 17, Figure 18, Table 7). The 2010 was virtually identical to the previous 7year average (0.1% higher; Figure 19). As noted in reports for previous project years (Fall et al. 2005:15;
Fall and Koster 2008:15), a high response rate to the survey, based upon follow-up household surveys and
inseason data collection by the Central Bering Sea Fishermen’s Association, likely produced very reliable
harvest estimates for St. Paul, the largest community in Area 4C, after the first project year of 2003.
However, due to funding reductions, this work did not take place for 2008, 2009, or 2010. The number of
valid SHARCs held by St. Paul residents dropped from 246 in 2007 to 42 in 2008, 44 in 2009, and 41 in
2010, and the response rate to the survey declined from 83% in 2007 to 45% in 2008, 34% in 2009, and
29% in 2010. However, the estimated number of subsistence halibut fishers in the community remained
about the same: 14 in 2007, 15 in 2008, 16 in 2009, and 19 in 2010.
In Area 4D (Central Bering Sea), the subsistence halibut harvest estimate for 2010 of 1,171 lb was 82%
higher than the estimate of 644 lb for 2009. However, the 2010 estimate was 78% lower than the previous
7-year average for Area 4D (Figure 17; Figure 18; Figure 19; Table 7). It is likely that this sharp drop in
the harvest estimate for Area 4D since 2008 is the result of nonrenewal of SHARCs by subsistence
fishers. The number of SHARCs held by residents of Savoonga, the principal halibut harvesting
community in Area 4D, dropped from 43 in 2007, with an estimated 15 subsistence halibut fishers, to 17
SHARC holders in 2009, with an estimated 7 subsistence halibut fishers, and to 17 SHARC holders in
2010 with 6 fishers.
As in Area 4D, declining registration of subsistence halibut fishers in the SHARC program may also be a
primary cause of lower harvest estimates in Area 4E (East Bering Sea Coast) over the last 3 years (2008–
2010). Although the estimated harvest of 10,055 lb in 2010 was a 15% increase from the 8,749 lb
estimated for 2009, the 2010 harvest was 75% lower than the 7 year average from 2003–2009 (Figure 17;
Figure 18; Figure 19; Table 7). Lower harvest estimates for this area are likely in part attributable to the
substantial drop in valid SHARCs held by tribal members and rural community residents of Area 4E,
from 1,191 in 2007 to 421 in 2008, 374 in 2009, and 286 in 2010. Also, unlike 2003–2007, no outreach,
face-to-face interviewing, or telephone calls took place in Area 4E communities in 2008, 2009, or 2010,

13

resulting in lower response rates in several communities compared to previous years. For example,
response rates dropped in Toksook Bay from 41% (218 of 533 SHARCs) in 2007 to 32% (11 of 34
SHARCs) in 2008, 39% in 2009 (13 of 33), and 38% in 2010 (12 of 32); and in Tununak, from 64% (44
of 69 SHARCs) in 2007, to 10% (7 of 68 SHARCs) in 2008, 55% (6 of 11 SHARCs) in 2009, and 17% (3
of 11 SHARCs) in 2010.
Figure 20 illustrates the average subsistence halibut harvest in pounds net weight for those SHARC
holders who subsistence fished in 2010. Figure 21 illustrates the average harvest per fisher in numbers of
halibut. For the state overall, the average subsistence halibut fisher harvested 160 lb (net weight) or about
8.7 halibut in 2010. Average harvests per fisher at the regulatory area level ranged from 46 lb (net weight)
in Area 4B to 428 lb per fisher in Area 4C. Average subsistence halibut harvests were lower in 2010 than
in any of the previous 7 years. In 2003, subsistence fishers on average harvested 8.9 halibut (211 lb; Fall
et al. 2004:12–13): in 2004 the average harvests were 8.8 halibut and 199 lb (Fall et al. 2005:15); in 2005,
the average harvests were 9.9 halibut and 210 lb (Fall et al. 2006: 17); in 2006, average harvests were 9.2
halibut and 190 lb (Fall et al. 2007:18); in 2007, the averages were 9.1 halibut and 174 net pounds
harvested per fisher (Fall and Koster 2008:16); in 2008, average harvests were 9.2 halibut and 167 lb (Fall
and Koster 2010:13); and in 2009, average harvests were 8.6 halibut and 163 lb (Fall and Koster
2011:14).

Subsistence Halibut Harvests by Place of Residence
As shown in Figure 22, there were 26 Alaska communities whose residents had combined estimated
subsistence halibut harvests of approximately 7,000 lb or more (net weight) in 2010. In this figure,
community totals include harvests of all SHARC holders living in the community, regardless of type of
SHARC (tribal or rural) or tribal affiliation.13 Residents of these communities accounted for 88% of the
total Alaska subsistence halibut harvest in 2010. Residents of Kodiak (Kodiak includes the city of Kodiak
and other portions of the Kodiak Island Borough connected to it by roads) ranked first with 21% of the
total Alaska harvest, and Sitka ranked second with about 10%. With 12,824 and 8,881 residents,
respectively, these 2 communities included about 26% of the population of rural communities eligible to
participate in the subsistence fishery. There were 68 other Alaska communities with at least one resident
who participated in the subsistence halibut fishery in 2010. The total harvest for these other communities
represented about 12% of the state total.
For 2010, 149 SHARC holders provided out-of-state addresses from 117 communities in 24 states,
provinces, and territories.14 Seattle was the non-Alaska community with the most SHARC holders, with 5.
Nine non-Alaska resident SHARC holders subsistence fished for halibut in 2010, with a harvest of 20 fish
and 603 lb (0.08% of the state total; see Appendix Table E-4). In 2009, 6 non-Alaska residents
participated in the subsistence halibut fishery, with a harvest of 22 fish and 525 lb (0.06% of the state
total). In 2008, 3 non-Alaska residents participated in the subsistence halibut fishery, with a harvest of 13
fish and 237 lb (0.03% of the state total). In 2007, no non-Alaska resident SHARC holders participated in
the Alaska subsistence halibut fishery. In 2006, 7 non-Alaska resident SHARC holders subsistence fished
for halibut, reporting a harvest of 72 fish and 2,346 lb (net weight; 0.2% of the state total). No non-Alaska
resident SHARC holders subsistence fished for halibut in 2005. In 2004, 24 non-Alaska residents reported
subsistence fishing for halibut in Alaska, with an estimated total harvest of 169 fish and 4,845 lb (net
weight; about 0.4% of state total). In 2003, 5 non-Alaska residents participated in the Alaska subsistence
halibut fishery, harvesting 5 fish.

13

Note that nonrural places, such as Anchorage, Juneau, Ketchikan, and Valdez, appear in Figure 22 and in Appendix Tables E4, E-5, and E-6, because members of eligible Alaska Native tribes may participate in the fishery regardless of where they live,
and because some eligible residents of rural areas have mailing addresses in nonrural places.
14
Note that members of eligible tribes may obtain SHARCs regardless of their place of residence.

14

Subsistence Harvests by Gear Type
Table 6 and Figure 23 report the estimated subsistence harvests of halibut in Alaska in 2010 by gear type
and regulatory area fished. In total, 610,992 lb (77%) of halibut (net weight) were harvested using setline
(stationary) gear (i.e., longlines, or “skates,” sometimes set with a power winch attached to a vessel; the
highest percentage of any of the 8 study years) and 186,567 lb (23%) were harvested using hand-operated
gear (i.e., handlines or lines attached to a rod or pole). There were notable differences between regulatory
areas (Table 6, Figure 23). Harvests using setline gear predominated in Area 2C (Southeast Alaska; 83%
of the area’s total subsistence harvest), 3A (Southcentral Alaska; 72%), Area 4A (Eastern Aleutian
Islands; 53%), Area 4C (Pribilof Islands; 93% setline gear), Area 4D (Central Bering Sea; 72%), and
Area 3B (Alaska Peninsula; 51%). In contrast, hand-operated gear accounted for most of the subsistence
halibut harvests in Area 4B (Western Aleutian Islands; 53%) and Area 4E (East Bering Sea Coast; 69%).
In 2009, 72% of the total Alaska subsistence halibut harvest was taken with setline gear and 28% with
hand-operated gear (Fall and Koster 2011:15). In 2008, 74% of the total Alaska subsistence halibut
harvest was taken with setline gear and 26% with hand-operated gear (Fall and Koster 2010:14). In 2007,
69% of the total Alaska subsistence halibut harvest was taken with setline gear and 31% with handoperated gear (Fall and Koster 2008:16–17). In 2006, 70% of the total Alaska subsistence halibut harvest
was taken with setline gear and 30% with hand-operated gear (Fall et al. 2007:18–19). In 2005 also, 70%
of the total Alaska subsistence harvest was taken with setline gear and 30% with hand-operated gear (Fall
et al. 2006: 18). In 2004, 74% of the Alaska subsistence halibut harvest was taken with setline gear and
26% with hand-operated gear (Fall et al. 2005:16). In 2003, 72% was taken with setline gear and 28%
with hand-operated gear (Fall et al. 2004:13).

Number of Hooks Fished with Setline Gear
Respondents who fished with setline (stationary) gear (longline or skate) were asked to report how many
hooks they “usually set.” The findings by regulatory area are reported in Table 8. For the fishery overall,
most setline fishers (40%) used 30 hooks, the maximum number allowed by regulation in areas 2C, 3A,
3B, 4A, and 4B (there is no hook limit in areas 4C, 4D, and 4E; Figure 24). The next most frequently
reported number was 20 hooks, usually used by 17% of the fishers who used setline gear. Fifteen hooks
(11%) ranked third, followed by 25 hooks (8%) and 10 hooks (6%). This pattern is similar to that
recorded for 2009, when 37% of set line fishers used 30 or more hooks and 19% used 20 hooks (Fall and
Koster 2011:15); 2008, when 42% of setline fishers used 30 or more hooks and 19% used 20 hooks (Fall
and Koster 2010:14–15); 2007, when 41% of setline fishers used 30 or more hooks and 19% used 20
hooks (Fall and Koster 2008:17); 2006, when 38% of setline fishers used 30 or more hooks and 20% used
20 hooks (Fall et al. 2007:19); 2005, when 42% of setline fishers used 30 or more hooks and 20% used 20
hooks (Fall et al. 2006:18–19); 2004, when 44% of setline fishers used 30 hooks and 19% used 20 hooks
(Fall et al. 2005:16), and 2003, when 43% of setline fishers used 30 hooks and 20% used 20 hooks (Fall
et al. 2004:13).
Thirty was the most frequently used number of hooks with setline gear in 7 of the 8 regulatory areas
(Table 8): 2C (Southeast Alaska), 39%; 3A (Southcentral Alaska), 43%; 3B (Alaska Peninsula), 41%; 4A
(Eastern Aleutian Islands), 54%; Area 4C (Pribilof Islands), 83%; Area 4D (Central Bering Sea), 61%;
and 4E (East Bering Sea Coast), 34%. In Area 4B (Western Aleutians), 45% of fishers who used setline
gear used 10 hooks and 36% used 20 hooks.

Number of Subsistence Halibut Fishing Trips
For 2010, for the second time in the harvest survey program, respondents were asked to report the number
of subsistence fishing trips they took for halibut in the study year. The average number of trips for
subsistence halibut fishers was 4.7 (the same as in 2009 [Fall and Koster 2011:15]), with those holding
tribal SHARCs averaging 5.1 trips (compared to 5.5 in 2009) and those holding rural SHARCs averaging
4.6 trips (compared to 4.5 trips in 2009). In most regulatory areas, the average subsistence fisher took

15

between 4 and 7 trips, with higher averages in Area 4D (average of 6.8 trips) and Area 4C (average of 7.3
trips; Figure 25). As shown in Figure 26, about 76% of fishers took 5 or fewer trips, and about 17% took
between 6 and 10 trips. Six percent took between 11–20 trips, and about 1% took more than 20 trips.
The average number of subsistence halibut harvested per fishing trip in 2010 was 1.8 (the same as in
2009), with tribal SHARC holders averaging 2.3 fish and rural SHARC holders averaging 1.6 fish. The
highest average harvests per trip occurred among tribal SHARC holders in Area 4B (3.5 halibut per trip)
and Area 4C (2.8 halibut per trip; Figure 27).

Sport Harvests of Halibut by SHARC Holders
Survey respondents were asked to report the number of halibut and pounds of halibut they harvested
“while sport fishing during 2010.” They were instructed not to include fish they considered sport caught
as part of their subsistence halibut harvest. The goal of this question was to avoid double counting
harvested halibut in this survey and in the statewide survey of sport fishers administered by the Division
of Sport Fish of ADF&G. Answering this question required respondents to classify their hand-operated
gear (i.e., hook and line and rod and reel) harvests as either subsistence or sport; these gear types are legal
gear for both sport fishing and subsistence fishing. Fish reported in the survey as “sport harvests” are not
included in the estimated subsistence harvests discussed above. If SHARC holders also received the sport
fish survey for 2010, they would be expected to report only their sport caught halibut and not include any
halibut they reported as subsistence harvests, even if taken with rod and reel or handheld line with two or
fewer hooks. Note that the project findings do not represent the total recreational halibut harvest by
residents of eligible communities and tribes in 2010, because individuals from these tribes and
communities who did not obtain SHARCs could have sport fished.
As shown in Table 4 and Table 6, the estimated total sport halibut harvest by holders of SHARCs in 2010
was 8,651 fish and 149,241 lb (net weight). By area fished, most of the sport halibut harvest by SHARC
holders occurred in Area 3A (Southcentral Alaska; 72,244 lb; 48%) and Area 2C (Southeast Alaska;
71,364 lb; 48%; Table 6). In total, an estimated 2,297 SHARC holders (21%) reported that they sport
fished for halibut in 2010. A large proportion of these fishers fished in either Area 2C (1,313; 57%) or
Area 3A (887; 39%; Table 6). (See Appendix Table E-7 for estimated sport halibut harvests by tribe and
nontribal rural community SHARC holders.)15

Estimated Average Net Weights of Subsistence- and Sport-Caught Halibut
Table 9 reports the average net weight of subsistence- and sport-caught halibut by SHARC holders in
2010, based upon estimates provided by survey respondents. For the state, the estimated average net
weight of subsistence caught halibut was 18.4 lb and the average net weight of sport harvested halibut by
SHARC holders was 17.3 lb. For the halibut reported as harvested in the SHARC program by SHARC
holders in 2010, the average net weight per harvested halibut was 18.2 lb. Between regulatory areas, there
was a range of average weights per halibut. The halibut harvested by the communities of Area 4D (St.
Lawrence Island), averaged 31.0 lb (net weight) per fish. Halibut harvested in the subsistence fishery in
Area 4C were also larger than the state average, at 21.1 lb per fish, as were the halibut harvested in the

15

The ADF&G postal survey did not investigate the criteria by which survey respondents classified their rod and reel (hook and
line attached to a rod or pole) halibut harvests as subsistence or sport. However, a supplemental mailing to 1,098 SHARC
holders from Kodiak and Sitka who fished for halibut in 2004 asked respondents to provide reasons for classifying their halibut
harvests as sport or subsistence. For a discussion of the findings, see Fall et al. 2006:19–20, 123–138. In short, the primary
factor (for 69% of respondents) was the gear used to harvest the fish: respondents viewed rod and reel as “sport gear” and
setline gear as “subsistence gear.” Another factor, reported by 12%, concerned the composition of the fishing group. If the
SHARC holders had fished with relatives or friends who did not possess a SHARC, they classified their fishing as recreational.
Harvest amounts were also a consideration: harvests of one or two halibut with a rod and reel were considered “sport” by some
respondents, but if they harvested more than 2 fish with rod and reel in one day, they classified the harvest as subsistence.
Finally, about 19% of the respondents gave reasons related to the uses of the fish or other cultural and lifestyle explanations.

16

subsistence fishery in 2C, at 19.7 lb per fish. In contrast, in Area 4E, halibut harvested in the subsistence
fishery averaged 12.9 lb (net weight), 70% of the statewide average.
The average weight of halibut declined steadily over the first 6 years of this project. In 2009, averages
rose to 19.0 lb per fish in the subsistence fishery, 16.6 lb for sport-caught halibut, and 18.5 for all halibut
(Fall and Koster 2011:66), compared to 2008, when the average subsistence caught halibut weighed 18.2
lb, sport harvested halibut by SHARC holders weighed 17.3 lb, and all halibut harvested by SHARC
holders averaged 18.1 lb (Fall and Koster 2010:15–16). However, averages for subsistence-harvested
halibut (18.4 lb) and all halibut (18.2 lb) for 2010 were down from those recorded for 2009. In 2007, the
estimated average weight of halibut harvested in the subsistence fishery was 19.2 lb, the average halibut
harvested by SHARC holders while sport fishing weighed 17.9 lb, and the average of all halibut harvested
noncommercially was 19.0 lb (Fall et al. 2007; Fall and Koster 2008:18). In 2006, the estimated average
weight of halibut harvested in the subsistence fishery was 20.8 lb, the average halibut harvested by
SHARC holders while sport fishing weighed 19.9 lb, and the average of all halibut harvested
noncommercially was 20.7 lb (Fall et al. 2007:20). In 2005, the estimated average weight of halibut
harvested in the subsistence fishery was 21.1 lb, the average halibut taken by SHARC holders while sport
fishing weighed 20.8 lb, and the average of all halibut harvested noncommercially was 21.0 lb (Fall et al.
2006:20). In 2004, the statewide average for subsistence harvested halibut was estimated at 22.8 lb, the
average sport harvested halibut by SHARC holders was 20.0 lb, and the average for all halibut harvested
noncommercially was 22.2 lb (Fall et al. 2005:17). In 2003, the statewide average for subsistence
harvested halibut was 23.7 lb, the average sport harvested halibut by SHARC holders was 22.8 lb, and the
average for all halibut harvested noncommercially was 23.5 lb (Fall et al. 2004:14).

ROCKFISH HARVESTS
Survey respondents were asked to estimate the number of rockfish they harvested while subsistence
fishing for halibut in 2010. Harvest data at the species level were not collected as part of this survey.
Note that these survey results do not represent an estimate for the total subsistence rockfish harvest by
SHARC holders in 2010 because they might have harvested rockfish while fishing for species other than
halibut, and other fishers in the communities who did not obtain SHARCs might have harvested rockfish.
The Division of Subsistence Community Subsistence Information System (CSIS)16 includes estimates of
rockfish harvests for communities in which comprehensive household surveys have been administered.
It should also be noted that the label “bycatch” for these harvests is misleading.17 Rockfish are used for
subsistence purposes in rural communities throughout their range in Alaska (CSIS). It is highly likely that
most rockfish harvested incidentally in the subsistence halibut fishery are utilized as a subsistence food. It
is highly unlikely that many incidentally caught rockfish are discarded in this subsistence fishery.
As shown in Table 10, the statewide estimated rockfish incidental harvest in the subsistence halibut
fishery in 2010 was 12,851 fish by 1,322 fishers (12% of all SHARC holders, and 27% of all SHARC
holders who subsistence fished for halibut in 2010). This is an average of about 2.6 rockfish per fisher for
all subsistence halibut fishers in the SHARC program, and about 9.7 rockfish per fisher for those who had
a rockfish harvest. Most of the subsistence halibut fishers who caught rockfish fished in Area 2C
(Southeast Alaska; 937 fishers; 71%) and Area 3A (343 fishers; 26%). In Area 2C, about 31% of
16
17

http://www.subsistence.adfg.state.ak.us/CSIS. Hereinafter cited as CSIS; see footnote 6.
The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Section 3) defines “bycatch” as “fish harvested in a
fishery, but which are not sold or kept for personal use, and includes economic discards and regulatory discards. Such term
does not include fish released alive under a recreational catch and release fishery management program.” Federal regulations
(50 CFR 679.2) define “bycatch” or “bycatch species” as fish caught and released while targeting another species or caught
and released while targeting the same species; under 50 CFR 600.10 “discard” means to release or return fish to the sea,
whether or not such fish are brought fully on board a fishing vessel. In all cases, “bycatch” means to discard fish and excludes
retaining fish for use. The federal definition of “incidental catch” or “incidental species” is “fish caught and retained while
targeting on some other species, but does not include discard of fish that were returned to the sea” (50 CFR 679.2).

17

subsistence halibut fishers incidentally harvested rockfish, as did 21% in Area 3A (Southcentral Alaska).
(See Appendix Table E-7 for estimated rockfish harvests by tribe and by nontribal rural community
SHARC holders.)
As illustrated in Figure 28 and Figure 29, most of the incidental rockfish harvest in 2010 was harvested in
Area 2C: 7,688 rockfish, 60% of the statewide total. Area 3A accounted for the second highest total:
4,426 rockfish, 34% of the total. Harvests were very small by SHARC holders fishing in other regulatory
areas; their combined harvest of 738 rockfish was about 6% of the statewide total. Compared to 2009,
when 13,315 rockfish were harvested, the incidental rockfish harvest in the subsistence halibut fishery in
2010 was down by 4%. The 2010 estimated rockfish harvest was also lower than the estimate for 2004
(19,001 rockfish), 2006 (16,945), 2007 (15,266), and 2003 (14,870 rockfish), but higher than 2005, when
the incidental rockfish harvest was 12,395.
Table 10 also reports location of incidental rockfish harvests in 2010 within geographic subareas. Most of
the harvest occurred in southern Southeast Alaska (3,956 rockfish), the Sitka LAMP area (2,644
rockfish), the Kodiak Island road system (1,528 rockfish), the remainder of northern Southeast Alaska
(1,088 rockfish), other Kodiak Island locations (1,101 rockfish), Cook Inlet (612 rockfish), Prince
William Sound (611 rockfish), and the Yakutat area (574). Incidental rockfish harvests totaled 402 fish in
the eastern Aleutians east subarea, and 209 in the lower Alaska Peninsula subarea.

LINGCOD HARVESTS
Survey respondents were asked to estimate the number of lingcod they harvested while subsistence
fishing for halibut in 2010. Note that these survey results do not provide an estimate of the total
subsistence lingcod harvest by SHARC holders in 2010 because they might have harvested lingcod while
fishing for species other than halibut. Also, other fishers in the communities who did not hold SHARCs
might have fished for or harvested lingcod, so that these incidental harvests represent only a portion of the
total 2010 subsistence harvest. The Division of Subsistence Community Subsistence Information System
(CSIS) includes estimates of lingcod harvests for communities in which comprehensive household
surveys have been administered.
It should also be noted that the label “bycatch” for these harvests might be misleading.18 Lingcod are used
for subsistence purposes throughout their range (CSIS). It is highly likely that most lingcod harvested
incidentally in the subsistence halibut fishery are utilized as a subsistence food. It is very unlikely that
many lingcod caught in this subsistence fishery are discarded.
The statewide estimated incidental lingcod harvest in the subsistence halibut fishery in 2010 was 2,864
fish by 732 fishers (Table 10). This is an average of about 0.6 lingcod per fisher for all subsistence halibut
fishers who participated in the SHARC program, and 3.9 lingcod per fisher for those who had a lingcod
harvest. Of SHARC holders who subsistence fished for halibut in 2010, 15% harvested at least one
lingcod while halibut fishing. Almost all of the subsistence halibut fishers who harvested lingcod fished
in Area 2C (Southeast Alaska; 493; 67%) and Area 3A (Southcentral Alaska; 218; 30%). (See Appendix
Table E-7 for estimated lingcod harvests by tribe and by nontribal rural community SHARC holders.)
As illustrated in Figure 30 and Figure 31, most of the incidental lingcod were harvested in Area 2C: 1,800
lingcod, 63%. Area 3A fishing locations accounted for the second highest total: 880 lingcod, 31%. In
2003–2009, an estimated 3,298, 4,407, 2,355, 3,486, 3,402, 3,479, and 3,390 lingcod, respectively, were
harvested in the subsistence halibut fishery. The 2010 estimated harvest represents a decrease of 16% in
the incidental lingcod harvest compared to 2009, and a decrease of 16% over the previous 7-year average
(2003–2009).

18

See footnote 17 for definitions of “bycatch” and “incidental catch.”

18

Table 10 also reports the location of incidental lingcod harvests by geographic subarea in 2010. Most of
this harvest occurred in Area 2C (Southeast Alaska): the Sitka LAMP area (920 lingcod), southern
Southeast Alaska (719 lingcod), and northern Southeast Alaska waters outside the Sitka LAMP (161
lingcod). Incidental lingcod harvests totaled 260 lingcod along the Kodiak Island road system, 102
lingcod in the lower Alaska Peninsula, 242 lingcod in other Kodiak area waters, 144 in Cook Inlet, and
142 in the Yakutat area. Harvests totaled fewer than 100 lingcod in each of the other geographic subareas.

19

20

CHAPTER 3: DISCUSSION
COMPARISONS WITH OTHER HARVEST ESTIMATES
As discussed in the first report for the SHARC survey project (Fall et al. 2004:19–22), comparing the
statewide subsistence halibut harvest estimates generated by the SHARC survey with subsistence halibut
harvest estimates from projects conducted in previous years continues to be difficult. The primary reason,
as noted in Chapter 1, is that the regulations that allow subsistence halibut fishing in Alaska waters using
traditional gear, such as longlines with more than 2 hooks, and that removed the restrictive daily harvest
limit of 2 fish, have been in place for only 8 years, since May 2003.
Although the ADF&G Division of Subsistence has conducted systematic household surveys in many rural
Alaska communities that have traditional uses of halibut, these studies pertain to different harvest years.
In addition, there are many communities, especially in western Alaska, where such surveys have not been
conducted. Also, these Division of Subsistence studies have attempted to estimate the total halibut harvest
for home use by including harvests conducted under sport fishing rules and harvests removed from
commercial fisheries for home use. Typically, these studies have also collected harvests by gear type,
such as rod and reel or “other gear.” When using these data sets, therefore, it is not possible to separate
the “sport” harvest from the “subsistence” harvest for past harvest years, especially in larger rural
communities with a diverse population where at least a segment of the population perceives some of their
halibut fishing effort as recreational (see, for example, the discussions about Sitka and Kodiak, below).
Furthermore, the statewide subsistence halibut harvest estimates from the SHARC postal survey include
only those subsistence harvests by individuals who obtained SHARCs. The estimates do not include total
noncommercial harvests, such as those accomplished under sport fishing regulations, or halibut removed
by commercial fishers for use by their households or for noncommercial sharing.19 Thus they can be only
partial estimates of the total harvest of halibut for home use by rural Alaska residents and cannot be
directly compared to estimates from previous Division of Subsistence studies.
The report for the first year of this project included a detailed discussion of previous efforts to develop an
estimate of subsistence halibut harvests at the regional and statewide levels. The report suggested that the
2003 SHARC survey estimates were not markedly different from estimates based on Division of
Subsistence household survey data as reported in the Community Subsistence Information System
(CSIS). We will not repeat that full discussion here.20 However, the report also concluded that because of
the limitations associated with the previous subsistence harvest estimates at the statewide level, until a
time series is developed based upon the SHARC survey results, discussion of harvest trends in the
subsistence halibut fishery will remain speculative. A discussion comparing the project findings for 2010
with those for 2003–2009 appears in Chapter 4.

19

20

Since 1995, halibut removed for personal use by commercial fishers from their commercial harvests must be weighed and
accounted for within the commercial quota share program (Gregg Williams, IPHC, personal communication).
For example for 2000, the IPHC estimated 439,000 pounds net weight for Alaska “personal use” (noncommercial,
nonrecreational) harvests (in Wolfe 2001). The IPHC estimate is based upon a methodology described by Trumble n.d.. The
IPHC method assumed that 50% of Alaska Native rod and reel halibut harvests, as reported in ADF&G household surveys, are
“sport” and 50% “personal use,” and that 75% of the non-Native rod and reel harvests are “sport” and 25% “personal use”
(Trumble n.d.:62). No justification for these assumptions is provided, and changing these sport-to-personal-use ratios can
result in a very different estimate for the “personal use” halibut harvest. In a report to the Alaska Board of Fisheries in May
2001, using the same data source as the IPHC, Wolfe (2001) estimated that the subsistence halibut harvest in Alaska “probably
ranges between 400,000 and 1,000,000 pounds (round weight) annually,” based on harvest data in the CSIS/CPDB. This is an
estimated harvest of 300,000 to 750,000 pounds net weight. See Fall et al. 2004:19–21 for discussion of Wolfe’s methods. In
the original analysis for the subsistence halibut program, the NPFMC estimated the Alaska subsistence halibut harvest at 1.5
million pounds net weight (68 FR 18145, April 15, 2003, EA/RIR [NPFMC 2003]).

21

COMMUNITY CASE STUDIES
Despite the limitations discussed above, it is possible to compare some communities’ previous
noncommercial halibut harvest estimates with estimates generated from the SHARC survey, keeping in
mind the different sampling methods, uncertainty in the separation of subsistence and recreational
harvests, and the relative newness of the regulatory changes enacted in 2003. Prior Division of
Subsistence research has suggested that such communities, presented here as case studies, can also be
seen as representative of other communities of similar size and geographic location. In the following
evaluation, emphasis is placed on larger communities, since, as discussed in Chapter 2, a small number of
large communities have accounted for most of the statewide subsistence halibut harvest, according to the
SHARC surveys. A comparison of the harvest estimates for these communities helps to determine the
reliability of the statewide estimate generated by the SHARC survey, as well as survey performance.
Because, as noted in Chapter 1, not all tribal SHARC holders live in the community where their tribal
headquarters is located, the following comparisons are based upon place of residence of the SHARC
holder, in order to be consistent with earlier division studies. Table 11 reports selected project findings for
2003–2010 in the case study communities discussed below. Appendix tables E-4, E-5, and E-6 report
project results for 2010 for all communities, based upon residence of SHARC holders.

Sitka (Regulatory Area 2C)
Sitka had a population of 8,835 people in 2000, 2,178 of whom were Alaska Native (U. S. Census Bureau
2001). In 2010, Sitka’s population was 8,881, including 2,184 Alaska Natives (Table 1; ADLWD 2011).
Sitka was the second largest rural community eligible to participate in the SHARC halibut fishery in
2010, and had the second highest number of SHARCs issued, at 1,635 (Table 11; about 15% of the
Alaska total). Of these, 1,363 were issued to nontribal residents of Sitka, and 272 to tribal members; the
latter total was down from 470 in 2007 (Fall and Koster 2008:22). Members of the Sitka Tribe of Alaska
(STA) held 289 SHARCs in 2010, compared to 485 in 2007, 273 in 2008, and 288 in 2009. It is important
to remember that some STA members live in communities other than Sitka and that members of other
Alaska tribes live in Sitka. Because of the relatively large number of SHARC holders who live there,
developing a reliable subsistence halibut harvest estimate for Sitka is essential for the success of this
subsistence harvest assessment program. Sitka residents’ response rates to the survey have also been
substantial during the 8 years of the project: 75% in 2003, 72% in 2004, 68% in 2005, 69% in 2006, 68%
in 2007, 71% in 2008, 67% in 2009, and 62% in 2010.
The Division of Subsistence has generated 2 estimates of noncommercial halibut harvests in Sitka for
years prior to the 2003 authorization of subsistence halibut fishing (Table 12). One is for the 1987 study
year, in which the estimated total noncommercial halibut harvest was 193,335 lb (net weight; ±22%), or
180,982 lb if fish removed from commercial harvests are excluded. This noncommercial total includes
only harvests reported by surveyed persons as taken with rod and reel; data on harvests using “other
methods” such as longlines, which were not allowed at that time in the subsistence fishery, were not
collected. An estimated 1,252 Sitka households had at least one member who fished noncommercially for
halibut in 1987. For 1996, the total estimated noncommercial harvest was 165,772 lb (net weight; ±28%),
and 149,244 lb with commercial removals excluded. In 1996, an estimated 943 Sitka households had at
least one member who fished noncommercially for halibut.
For 2010, the estimated subsistence harvest of halibut, by both tribal SHARC holders who live in Sitka
(most, but not all, of whom are members of the STA) and by other residents of Sitka (1,635 SHARC
holders), was 82,728 lb (net weight; 3,951 fish). This was the second highest of any community (behind
Kodiak), and accounted for 10% of the statewide total subsistence halibut harvest. Of Sitka’s total
subsistence halibut harvest, 74,394 lb (90%) was taken with setline gear, and 8,334 lb (10%) was taken
with hand-operated gear. Adding sport harvests by Sitka SHARC holders (9,257 lb) produces a
noncommercial estimate of 91,985 lb (net weight). Of all SHARC holders from Sitka, an estimated 755
subsistence fished for halibut in 2010. Of these, 700 used setline gear and 218 used hand-operated gear.

22

Also, an estimated 228 SHARC holders from Sitka sport fished for halibut in 2010. Thus the estimated
total number of SHARC holders living in Sitka who fished for halibut in either the subsistence or
recreational fishery in 2010 was 849 (Table 11).
Estimated subsistence and sport halibut harvests by Sitka SHARC holders in 2010 were lower than
estimates for any of the previous 7 study years and continued a downward trend that began in 2006 (Table
11). A total of 1,639 Sitka residents had SHARCs in 2003; 1,871 in 2004; 1,974 in 2005; 1,895 in 2006;
1,954 in 2007; 1,662 in 2008; and 1,731 in 2009, compared to 1,635 in 2010. Subsistence harvests by all
Sitka SHARC holders were 174,880 lb (net weight) in 2003 compared to 166,474 lb in 2004, 146,319 lb
in 2005, 163,372 lb in 2006, 142,049 lb in 2007, 109,581 lb in 2008, 97,424 lb in 2009, and 82,728 lb in
2010; the 2010 estimate was 15% lower than the estimate for 2009 and 53% lower than the estimate for
2003. A decline also occurred in the number of halibut harvested: 6,621 in 2003, 6,583 in 2004, 6,062 in
2005, 6,691 in 2006, 6,304 in 2007, 5,513 in 2008, 4,834 in 2009, and 3,951 in 2010 (18% lower than
2009 and 40% lower than 2003). Adding sport harvests of halibut by SHARC holders to subsistence
harvest totals results in noncommercial harvest estimates for Sitka that are similar among the first 4 years
of the project: 207,288 lb for 2003, 192,303 lb in 2004, 202,232 lb for 2005, and 186,404 lb in 2006, but
the total noncommercial harvests have declined annually since then, to 91,985 lb in 2010. According to
the SHARC survey, fewer Sitka residents participated in the subsistence halibut fishery in 2010 (755)
than any other study year, but this decline in participation (down 11% from 2009 and 8% compared to
2003) did not match the decline in harvests. There were 849 SHARC holders who participated in either
the subsistence or sport fisheries for halibut in 2010, lower than any other study year: 956 in 2003, 1,026
in 2004, 987 in 2005, 1,036 in 2006, 1,010 in 2007, 932 in 2008, and 941 in 2009.21
In summary, this comparison suggests that the 2003–2010 subsistence halibut harvest estimates for Sitka,
based on the SHARC survey, appear reasonable. The estimates for 2003–2007 were generally similar to
those generated from previous face-to-face household surveys conducted in 1987 and 1996. However, the
SHARC survey data for 2008, 2009, and 2010 show a decline in halibut harvests in Sitka compared to
previous project years. A decline in the number of SHARCs held by tribal members in Sitka may account,
at least in part, for lower 2008, 2009, and 2010 estimated harvests, although average harvests by nontribal
SHARC holders in Sitka were also lower in 2008–2010 compared to 2003–2007 (Table 13). For example,
nontribal SHARC holders from Sitka who fished for halibut in 2010 had an average harvest of 111 lb per
fisher, the lowest of the 8 project years and 28% below the previous 7-year average of 153 lb per fisher.
Tribal SHARC holders from Sitka who fished in 2010 also had much lower harvests than previous years:
only 105 lb per fisher, which is 54% below the previous 7-year average of 227 lb. These findings suggest
that the estimates of declining harvests in Sitka are not a result of inadequate sampling or less
participation in the SHARC program. Rather, the study finding show that subsistence halibut harvests in
Sitka have declined from 2005 through 2010. The causes of this decline require further investigation.

Petersburg (Regulatory Area 2C)
In 2000, Petersburg had a population of 3,224, including 388 Alaska Natives (U. S. Census Bureau 2001);
in 2010, the population had dropped to 2,948, including 390 Alaska Natives (Table 1; ADLWD 2011).
Prior to the 2003 authorization of federal subsistence halibut fishing, the Division of Subsistence
produced 2 estimates of noncommercial halibut harvests by Petersburg residents, based on household
surveys in 1987 and 2000 (Table 14). In the 1987 project, a random sample of 49 of the 1,123 households
in Petersburg was interviewed (4%), which generated a subsistence harvest estimate of 119,176 lb of
halibut (net weight; ±51%); of this, 11,728 lb were estimated to have been removed from commercial

21

Following a recommendation from the first project year (Fall et al. 2004:31), data from the ADF&G Division of Sport Fish
Statewide Harvest Survey (SWHS) about sport halibut harvests by Sitka residents were analyzed for additional background on
halibut fishing in the community and discussed in the report for the 2004 project year (Fall et al. 2005:23-24). An updated
analysis has not been prepared for this report.

23

harvests, resulting in a total noncommercial harvest estimate of 107,448 lb. As with Sitka, the 1987
project in Petersburg collected noncommercial harvest data only for halibut taken with rod and reel. Of
the 1,123 households in Petersburg, 54% were estimated to have at least one member who fished for
halibut noncommercially in 1987, which was an estimated 604 halibut fishers (CPDB). In 2000,
Petersburg residents were estimated to have harvested 55,974 lb (net weight) of noncommercial halibut
(±39%). Of this, 6,951 lb were estimated to have been removed from commercial harvests, for a
subsistence harvest of 49,023 lb, all of which was taken with rod and reel. In 2000, it was estimated that
468 Petersburg households had at least one member who fished for halibut for home use.
For 2010, the estimated subsistence harvest of halibut by Petersburg residents with SHARCs (961
SHARC holders) was 47,266 lb (net weight), very similar to the 46,766 lb harvested by 1,041 SHARC
holders in 2009 and the 46,600 lb harvested by 985 SHARC holders in 2008 (Table 11). In 2007, 1,123
SHARC holders in Petersburg harvested 47,517 lb of halibut in the subsistence fishery; in 2006, 1,082
SHARC holders harvested 53,682 lb; in 2005, 1,197 SHARC holders harvested 61,372 lb; in 2004, 1,187
SHARC holders harvested 71,784 lb; and in 2003, 1,047 SHARC holders harvested 55,718 lb. Of the
total 2010 subsistence halibut harvest, 33,951 lb (72%) was harvested with setline gear and 13,315 lb
(28%) with hand-operated gear. This was an increased portion of the harvest taken with longlines
compared to 2009, when 30,105 lb (64%) was harvested with setline gear and 16,661 lb (36%) with handoperated gear. In 2008, 67% of the subsistence halibut harvest by Petersburg residents was taken with
setline gear, and 33% with hand-operated gear; in 2007, 67% with setline gear, and 33% with handoperated gear; 66% with setline gear and 34% with hand-operated gear in 2006; 72% with setline gear
and 28% with hand-operated gear in 2005; and about 75% taken with setline gear and 25% with handoperated gear in both 2003 and 2004.
In 2010, Petersburg SHARC holders also harvested 13,251 lb of halibut they classified as sport harvested,
compared to 13,619 lb in 2009. This gives a total noncommercial halibut harvest estimate for Petersburg
SHARC holders of 60,517 lb in 2010, compared to 60,385 lb in 2009, the 2 lowest totals over the 8 years
of the project. In 2008, the sport harvest contributed 17,506 lb to the total noncommercial halibut harvest
of 64,108 lb; 15,177 lb in 2007, for a total noncommercial halibut harvest estimate of 62,694 lb; 17,351 lb
in 2006, for a total noncommercial halibut harvest estimate of 71,033 lb; 23,289 lb in 2005 for a total
noncommercial harvest estimate of 84,661 lb; 26,408 lb in 2004 for a total noncommercial harvest
estimate of 98,192 lb; and 19,611 lb in 2003 for a total noncommercial halibut harvest estimate of 75,329
lb (Table 11).
In 2010, an estimated 409 Petersburg SHARC holders harvested halibut in the subsistence fishery (323
with setline gear and 209 with hand-operated gear). This compares to 418 fishers in 2009 (323 with
setline gear and 224 with hand-operated gear); 393 fishers in 2008 (285 with setline gear and 207 with
hand-operated gear); 386 fishers in 2007 (274 setline and 191 hand-operated gear); 416 fishers in 2006
(300 setline and 222 hand-operated gear); 436 fishers in 2005 (338 setline gear and 175 used handoperated gear); 482 fishers in 2004 (322 setline gear and 206 hand-operated gear); and 415 subsistence
halibut fishers in 2003 (330 setline gear and 138 hand-operated gear). In 2010, an estimated 256
Petersburg SHARC holders sport fished for halibut, as did 247 in 2009, 279 in 2008, 264 in 2007, 246 in
2006, 312 in 2005, 351 in 2004, and 268 in 2003. An estimated total of 501 Petersburg SHARC holders
either subsistence or sport fished for halibut in 2010, as did 513 in 2009, 515 in 2008, 516 in 2007, 529 in
2006, 569 in 2005, 617 in 2004, and 523 in 2003 (Table 11).
Because some Petersburg residents without SHARCs likely sport fished for and harvested halibut, the
2003–2010 estimates of noncommercial halibut harvests by Petersburg residents generated by the
SHARC survey appear consistent with the 1987 estimate based on household interviews, although the
SHARC estimate is slightly higher than the in-person estimate for 2000, the year that state regulations
restricted subsistence fishing to handlines or rods and reels with no more than 2 hooks. In that year, no
Petersburg households reported taking halibut for home use with any gear other than rod and reel. In

24

contrast, an estimated 330 used setline gear in 2003, based on the SHARC survey, and 322 did so in 2004,
338 in 2005, 300 in 2006, 274 in 2007, 285 in 2008, 323 in 2009, and 323 in 2010 (Table 11, Table 14).

Cordova (Regulatory Area 3A)
In 2000, Cordova had a population of 2,454 people, including 368 Alaska Natives (U. S. Census Bureau
2001); Cordova’s population in 2010 was 2,239, with 344 Alaska Natives (Table 1; ADLWD 2011).
Before 2003, there were 6 Division of Subsistence household surveys that estimated noncommercial
halibut harvests in Cordova (Table 15). After subtracting fish removed from commercial harvests for
home use, estimated noncommercial halibut harvests by Cordova residents ranged from 25,609 lb (net
weight; ±33%) in 1991 to 120,221 lb (±62%) in 1988, with an average over the 6 project years of 57,285
lb. The estimated number of Cordova households with at least one member fishing noncommercially for
halibut ranged from 228 in 1985 to 401 in 1992, with a mean of 325 households (CSIS).
SHARC survey subsistence halibut harvest estimates and participation estimates for Cordova residents for
2003 were lower than might be expected from previous research (Fall et al. 2004:24–25). In 2003, 358
residents of Cordova obtained SHARCs (Table 11). Of these, an estimated 102 subsistence fished (68
with setline gear, 40 with hand-operated gear), 144 reported that they sport fished for halibut, and 194
fished for halibut either under the new federal subsistence halibut provisions or in the sport fishery. The
estimated subsistence harvest from the SHARC survey was 15,498 lb (net weight; 7,613 lb [49%] with
setline gear, 7,885 lb [51%] with hand-operated gear), and there were an additional 11,534 lb estimated
taken by SHARC holders while sport fishing. The total of 27,032 lb was about 47% of the average for
previous project years.
Based on these comparisons, the final report for 2003 suggested that the SHARC survey had
underestimated the amount of halibut harvested by Cordova residents for home use, perhaps because not
all subsistence fishers in Cordova obtained SHARCs in 2003. The results of the survey for 2004 also
supported this conclusion (Fall et al. 2005:25–26). A total of 526 Cordova residents had obtained
SHARCs by the end of 2004 (an increase of 47%; Table 11). An estimated 262 Cordova SHARC holders
subsistence fished for halibut in 2004, up 157% from 2003. Of these, 174 fished with setline gear (up
156%) and 97 used hand-operated gear. The estimated subsistence halibut harvest by Cordova residents in
2004 was 40,640 lb (net weight), an increase of 163% over 2003. Sport harvests by Cordova SHARC
holders (an estimated 174 of whom sport fished for halibut in 2004) added 12,149 lb to the community
harvest for 2004, for a total estimate of 52,789 lb of halibut harvested noncommercially by 325 fishers.
This total was an increase of 95% over 2003, and was about 92% of the average for the 6 survey years
prior to 2003 (and exceeded the total for 3 of those 6 years). Given that some Cordova residents likely
obtained halibut for home use exclusively in the sport fishery and without obtaining SHARCs, the
SHARC survey estimate for 2004 appeared consistent with earlier estimates of subsistence halibut
harvests in Cordova.
Findings for Cordova for 2005 were much like those for 2004 and supported the conclusions of the 2004
final report. As shown in Table 11, 602 Cordova residents held SHARCs in 2005, continuing the growth
that had occurred in 2004, but at a slower pace. Subsistence halibut harvests totaled 47,141 lb, up about
16% from 40,640 lb in 2004. In 2004, 73% of the total was harvested with setline gear, as was 74% in
2005. In 2005, 281 Cordova residents obtained SHARC cards and went subsistence fishing, compared to
262 in 2004. Cordova SHARC holders harvested 10,519 lb of halibut while sport fishing in 2005, for a
total noncommercial harvest estimate of 57,660 lb. This total was similar to the estimate for 2004 (a
combined total of 52,789 lb in the subsistence and sport fishery) and approximated the mean harvest of
57,285 lb estimated in the 6 harvest survey project years.
The estimated subsistence halibut harvest for Cordova in 2006 was 29,027 lb, a decline from 2004
(40,640 lb) and 2005 (47,141 lb) but still about double the 2003 estimated harvest (15,498 lb; Table 11).
The reasons for this decline remain uncertain. The estimated sport halibut harvest by Cordova SHARC
holders in 2006 was 7,020 lb, lower than estimates in the first 3 years of the SHARC program. In total,

25

Cordova SHARC holders harvested an estimated 36,047 lb of noncommercial halibut in 2006. This total
was substantially lower than the noncommercial estimates for 2004 (52,789 lb) and 2005 (57,660) lb, but
was higher than that for 2003 (27,032 lb; Table 11). The 2006 estimate was higher than estimates
generated during previous in-person survey efforts in 1985 and 1991, but lower than the average for the 6
years for which SHARC data are available (Table 14).
Estimated subsistence halibut harvests by Cordova SHARC holders declined slightly in 2007 from 2006
levels, to 28,716 lb, with most of this (21,683 lb; 76%) taken with setline gear. Sport harvests of halibut
by Cordova SHARC holders declined to 4,203 lb in 2007, the lowest of the 5 previous project years. The
total noncommercial harvest estimate for 2007 by Cordova SHARC holders was 32,919 lb of halibut,
lower than any project year except 2003 and also lower than the average for the previous 6 in-person
surveys (Table 11, Table 14).
For 2008, the estimated subsistence harvest of halibut in Cordova was 27,547 lb, lower than any SHARC
project year since 2003 but similar to estimates for 2006 and 2007 (Table 11). Of the 2008 subsistence
harvest, 81% (22,301 lb) was harvested with setline gear. Sport harvests of halibut by Cordova SHARC
holders totaled 5,562 in 2008, lower than during any SHARC project year except 2007. The 2008 total
noncommercial harvest of halibut by Cordova SHARC holders was 33,109 lb of halibut, which was the
second lowest (after 2007) since 2003. The 2008 estimated harvest was only 58% of the annual average
for pre-2003 project years, although it is higher than either 1985 or 1991 (Table 15).
The estimated subsistence halibut harvest for Cordova for 2009 was 23,364 lb, the lowest since 2003 and
continuing a declining trend that began in 2006 (Table 11) Of the 2009 subsistence harvest, 76% (17,766
lb) was harvested with setline gear and the remaining 24% (5,598 lb) with hand-operated gear. Sport
harvests of halibut by Cordova SHARC holders in 2009 added 3,868 lb, the lowest total over the first 7
years of the project. The 2009 total noncommercial harvest of halibut by Cordova SHARC holders was
27,232 lb, the lowest since 2003. The 2009 estimated harvest was 47% of the annual average for pre-2003
project years, and higher than only 1991 (Table 15).
The estimated subsistence halibut harvest for Cordova for 2010 was 28,428 lb, the highest since 2007 and
reversing the declining trend that began in 2006 (Table 11) Of the 2010 subsistence harvest, 90% (25,579
lb) was harvested with setline gear and the remaining 10% (5,849 lb) with hand-operated gear. Sport
harvests of halibut by Cordova SHARC holders in 2010 added 5,837 lb. The 2010 total noncommercial
harvest of halibut by Cordova SHARC holders was 34,265 lb, the highest since 2006. The 2010 estimated
harvest was 60% of the annual average for pre-2003 project years, and higher than only 1985 and 1991
(Table 15).
Fewer Cordova residents held SHARCs in 2010 (557) than in 2009 (599), 2008 (587), 2007 (615), 2006
(607), and 2005 (602). Fewer Cordova residents reported that they participated in the subsistence halibut
fishery in 2010 (235) than in any of the previous study years except 2009 (234). The estimated number of
Cordova SHARC holders who sport fished for halibut (106) was lower than any year from 2003–2009. In
2010, 261 Cordova SHARC holders fished noncommercially for halibut, down from 269 in 2009, 292 in
2008, and 315 in 2007. In 2010, fewer Cordova SHARC holders participated in any noncommercial
halibut fishing than in any year since the new regulations came into effect except 2003 (Table 11).

Port Graham (Regulatory Area 3A)
Port Graham, which is located in Lower Cook Inlet, had a population of 171 in 2000, including 151
Alaska Natives (U. S. Census Bureau 2001). Port Graham’s population in 2010 was 177, with 160 Alaska
Natives (Table 1; ADLWD 2011). It is presented as a case example of the smaller, predominantly Alaska
Native communities in regulatory areas 3A and 3B that depend heavily on subsistence harvests of fish and
wildlife resources. The division has produced estimates of subsistence halibut harvests by Port Graham
residents based on household surveys for 7 project years (Table 16). Excluding 1989, the year of the
Exxon Valdez oil spill, Port Graham’s noncommercial halibut harvests ranged from 4,451 lb (net weight;

26

±14%) in 1993 to 11,232 lb (±14%) in 1992, with a 6-year average of 7,591 lb (net weight; Figure 32).
Again excluding 1989, an estimated average of 38 Port Graham households had at least one member who
subsistence fished for halibut in the project years in the late 1980s and 1990s.
In 2010, a total of 47 Port Graham residents held SHARCs (excluding Port Graham tribal members who
do not live in Port Graham), the same total as 2009 and similar to the total of 48 SHARC holders in 2008.
In 2010, an estimated 30 Port Graham residents participated in the subsistence halibut fishery, with 23
using setline gear and 18 hand-operated gear; 5 said they went sport fishing for halibut. In comparison, in
2009, an estimated 35 Port Graham residents participated in the subsistence halibut fishery, with 22 using
setline gear and 31 hand-operated gear; 9 said they went sport fishing for halibut. In 2008, an estimated
30 Port Graham residents subsistence fished for halibut, with 13 using setline gear and 23 using handoperated gear. Also, 2 said they had sport fished for halibut in 2008. In 2007, of 59 SHARC holders in
Port Graham, an estimated 36 subsistence fished for halibut, with 22 using setline gear and 28 using handoperated gear. Also, 4 said they sport fished for halibut in 2007. In 2006, 30 Port Graham SHARC
holders subsistence fished for halibut, with 9 using setline gear and 24 using hand-operated gear. In 2005,
18 Port Graham SHARC holders subsistence fished for halibut, with 8 using setline gear and 18 using
hand-operated gear. Nine Port Graham SHARC holders sport fished for halibut in 2005. In 2004, 42 Port
Graham SHARC holders subsistence fished for halibut, with 15 using setline gear and 31 using handoperated gear; 11 said they sport fished for halibut. In 2003, 35 Port Graham SHARC holders subsistence
fished for halibut (10 used setline gear, 28 used hand-operated gear), and 3 said they sport fished for
halibut (Table 11). The findings for the 2003–2010 SHARC surveys were thus consistent with levels of
participation found in the noncommercial halibut fisheries during previous studies in Port Graham,
although estimated participation was lower in 2005, according to the SHARC survey.
The subsistence halibut harvest estimate for Port Graham in 2010 was 7,222 lb (Table 11). Of this, 5,011
lb (69%) were harvested with setline gear and 2,211 lb (31%) with hand-operated gear. Adding 267 lb
that Port Graham SHARC holders harvested in the sport halibut fishery results in a total community
noncommercial harvest estimate of 7,489 lb in 2010. Harvests in 2010 were up compared to 2009, when
Port Graham SHARC holders harvested an estimated 6,426 lb of halibut in the subsistence fishery, with
1,454 lb taken with setline gear and 4,973 lb with hand-operated gear, and an additional 197 lb in the
sport fishery. Harvests in 2010 were also higher than those in 2006, when Port Graham SHARC holders
harvested an estimated 6,194 lb of halibut, with 2,397 lb taken with setline gear and 3,797 lb with handoperated gear. (No sport harvests were reported for 2006). Harvests in 2010 were lower than those of
2008—9,097 lb in the subsistence fishery (6,896 lb by set line, 2,200 with hand-operated gear) and 51 lb
in the sport fishery; and 2007—8,493 lb in the subsistence fishery (5,347 lb by setline, 3,146 with handoperated gear) and 233 lb in the sport fishery. In the first 3 years of the SHARC program (2003–2005),
estimated subsistence halibut harvests were higher in Port Graham than in 2006–2010. In 2005, Port
Graham SHARC holders harvested an estimated 11,127 lb of halibut, with 7,938 lb taken with setline
gear and 3,190 lb with hand-operated gear. In 2004, Port Graham’s estimated subsistence halibut harvest
was 9,181 lb (net weight) with 4,425 lb (48%) harvested with setline gear and 4,755 lb (52%) with handoperated gear. In 2003, the estimated halibut harvest was 11,454 lb (net weight), with 4,398 lb (38%)
harvested with setline gear and 7,056 lb (62%) with hand-operated gear (Table 11).
Total noncommercial halibut harvest estimates for Port Graham (subsistence plus sport harvests reported
by SHARC holders) for 2003–2005 were similar to the highest estimate generated prior to the SHARC
survey (11,232 lb in 1992; Table 11), and they also exceeded the average of previous project years of
7,591 lb. This finding was not unexpected: Port Graham has traditionally used setlines with multiple
hooks to harvest halibut as well as hand-operated gear (Stanek 1985:67–69,151). With May 2003
regulations finally consistent with traditional harvest methods, residents of Port Graham and other
communities with similar traditions could fish with setline gear and hand-operated gear, and thus their

27

reported subsistence halibut harvests are probably similar to historical levels.22 However, the 2006
estimate of 6,194 lb and the 2009 estimate of 6,623 lb were lower than those for 2003–2005, and lower
than the average of the prior in-person survey estimates for 1987–1997. The 2007 and 2008 estimates
were also lower than 2003–2005, but above the average of the earlier survey years; the estimate for 2010
was very close to the pre-2003 annual average (Table 15). The reasons for the lower harvests in 2006–
2010 compared to 2003–2005 are uncertain, but a decline in the community’s population in the mid 2000s
may be part of the explanation.

Kodiak City and Road System (Regulatory Area 3A)
“Kodiak” in this report includes the city of Kodiak (population 6,334 in 2000, including 829 Alaska
Natives; population 6,130 including 848 Alaska Natives in 2010) and those portions of the Kodiak Island
Borough connected to the city of Kodiak by road. This area had a population of 12,973 people in 2000,
including 1,697 Alaska Natives (U. S. Census Bureau 2001). The population in 2010 was 12,824, with
983 Alaska Natives (Table 1; ADLWD 2011). This is the largest rural community eligible to participate
in the Alaska subsistence halibut fishery.
Based on Division of Subsistence household surveys, estimates of halibut harvests for home use are
available in the CSIS for the entire Kodiak road system population for 1982 and 1991. Estimates for
Kodiak city residents alone are available for 1992 and 1993, and these can be expanded to produce a total
for the entire road system population (Table 17). Excluding fish removed from commercial catches for
home use, noncommercial halibut harvests by Kodiak road system residents ranged from 247,283 lb
(usable weight; ±30%) in 1991 to 511,254 lb (±33%) in 1993. The average for the 4 available project
years was 366,682 lb; of this, 338,476 lb (92%) was taken with rod and reel, most likely consistent with
sport fishing regulations. On average for the 4 project years, 1,306 Kodiak road system households had at
least one member who fished for halibut for home use.
Kodiak residents held 1,702 SHARCs during 2010, down slightly from 1,826 SHARCs during 2009 and
1,725 in 2008 (Table 11). In 2010, an estimated 900 Kodiak SHARC holders subsistence fished for
halibut; most (747; 83%) used setline gear. This compares to an estimated 923 subsistence fishers in
Kodiak in 2009, of whom 749 (81%) used setline gear; 963 in 2008, of whom 763 (79%) used setline
gear; 945 in 2007, of whom 707 (75%) used setline gear; 961 in 2006, of whom 684 (71%) used setline
gear; 871 in 2005, 650 of whom (75%) used setline gear; 802 in 2004, 554 (69%) of whom used setline
gear; and 646 in 2003, 438 of whom (68%) used setline gear. In 2010, an estimated 539 Kodiak SHARC
holders sport fished for halibut, and 1,074 fished for halibut under noncommercial rules. This compares to
2009, when 619 Kodiak SHARC holders sport fished for halibut and 1,139 were involved in
noncommercial halibut fishing; 2008, when 693 Kodiak SHARC holders sport fished for halibut and
1,213 were involved in noncommercial halibut fishing; 2007, when 648 sport fished for halibut and 1,157
were involved in noncommercial halibut fishing 2006, when 562 sport fished for halibut and 1,092 were
involved in noncommercial halibut fishing; 2005 when 669 sport fished for halibut and 1,116 were
involved in any noncommercial halibut fishing; 2004, when 581 sport fished for halibut, and 971 fished
for halibut under either subsistence or sport regulations; and 2003, when 498 sport fished for halibut, and
858 either subsistence or sport fished for halibut (Table 11). Given the likelihood that many Kodiak
residents continued to fish for halibut under sport fishing regulations in 2003–2010 without obtaining
SHARCs, the estimated level of participation in the subsistence fishery based on the SHARC survey
appears reasonable when compared to the earlier household survey results.

22

A cautionary note for Port Graham for 2005 concerns response rate. Only 16 of 52 SHARC holders responded to the 2005
survey (31%; Fall et al. 2006:52). Further outreach in this community was necessary to improve the response rate and build
confidence in the harvest estimates. This outreach occurred in 2007 for the 2006 project year, and a response rate of 66% was
achieved.

28

The estimated subsistence harvest of halibut in 2010 for Kodiak road system area residents was 164,092
lb (net weight), lower than the 2009 estimate of 177,769 lb, the 2008 estimate of 177,334 lb, the 193,633
lb estimated for 2007, 205,822 lb estimated for 2006, 210,828 lb estimated for 2005, and 187,214 lb for
2004, but higher than the 153,254 lb estimated for 2003 (Table 11). In 2010, Kodiak subsistence fishers
harvested an estimated 127,816 lb of halibut with setline gear (78%) and 36,275 lb (22%) with handoperated gear. This compares to 130,802 lb of halibut with setline gear (74%) and 46,966 lb (26%) with
hand-operated gear in 2009; 128,226 lb (72%) harvested with setline gear and 49,108 lb (28%) with handoperated gear in 2008; 135,351 lb (70%) harvested with setline gear and 58,282 lb (30%) with handoperated gear in 2007; 142,326 lb (69%) harvested with setline gear and 63,496 lb (31%) with handoperated gear in 2006; 146,781 lb (70%) harvested with setline gear and 64,047 lb (30%) with handoperated gear in 2005; 131,719 lb (70%) harvested with setline gear and 55,605 lb (30%) with handoperated gear in 2004; and 101,575 lb taken in 2003 with setline gear (66%) and 51,678 lb (34%) with
hand-operated gear. In addition, Kodiak road system SHARC holders harvested an estimated 47,646 lb
(net weight) of halibut in 2010 they classified as sport caught, which was below the range of harvests in
other years: 64,034 lb in 2009, 72,915 lb in 2008, 68,556 lb in 2007, 64,320 lb in 2006, 82,455 lb in 2005,
73,181 lb in 2004, and 68,170 lb in 2003.
In total, Kodiak SHARC holders harvested 211,738 lb (net weight) of halibut in 2010; this is lower than
all previous study years: 241,803 lb of halibut in 2009, 250,249 lb in 2008, 262,189 lb in 2007, 270,142
lb in 2006, 293,283 lb in 2005, 260,395 lb in 2004, and 221,424 lb in 2003 (Table 11). Not surprisingly,
the totals for all 8 years of the SHARC survey are lower than those based on household surveys for
previous years (except that the 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008 SHARC survey estimates are higher
than the household survey estimate for 1991) because, as noted, many Kodiak road system residents who
fish for halibut likely do not obtain SHARCs and continue to harvest halibut under sport fishing rules.
Overall, the 2003–2010 subsistence harvest estimates for Kodiak appear reasonable, but they should be
further evaluated using ADF&G Division of Sport Fish Statewide Harvest Survey data and with
additional years of subsistence harvest survey data.

Sand Point (Regulatory Area 3B)
In 2000, the population of Sand Point was 952, with an Alaska Native population of 421 U. S. Census
Bureau 2001). The population in 2010 was 976 with 417 Alaska Natives (Table 1; ADLWD 2011). The
only estimate of halibut harvests for home use by Sand Point residents based on Division of Subsistence
household surveys prior to 2003 is for 1992 (Fall et al. 1993), at 13,981 lb (net weight). Of this, 6,240 lb
were removed from commercial harvests, 6,934 lb were taken with subsistence methods (setline or
jigging with a hand-held line) and 807 lb were harvested with rod and reel. The total harvest with
noncommercial methods was 7,741 lb. Of the 204 permanent households in the community, 122
harvested halibut for home use; 65 used “subsistence methods,” 16 fished with rod and reel, and the rest
obtained halibut for home use from their commercial harvests.
At the end of 2003, 73 residents of Sand Point had obtained SHARCs. The estimated subsistence halibut
harvest for 2003 was 4,819 lb (net weight), based on the SHARC survey. Of this, 3,409 lb were harvested
with setline gear and 1,410 lb with hand-operated gear. Twenty-one Sand Point residents reported that
they subsistence fished for halibut in 2003. In addition, 11 Sand Point SHARC holders reported that they
harvested an estimated 410 lb of halibut while sport fishing, for a total estimated noncommercial harvest
of 5,229 lb of halibut (Table 11). These are lower harvests and levels of participation than might be
expected, considering the 1992 survey findings.
By December 31, 2004, 351 Sand Point residents had obtained SHARCs, a very substantial increase over
2003, when 73 obtained SHARCs. The estimated total subsistence halibut harvest was 11,355 lb (net
weight). Of this total, 4,360 lb were harvested with setline gear (38%) and 6,996 lb (61%) with handoperated gear. In total, an estimated 109 Sand Point SHARC holders subsistence fished for halibut in
2004, about 5 times the estimate for 2003. Also, an estimated 50 Sand Point SHARC holders sport fished

29

for halibut, with an estimated total harvest of 1,384 lb. In total, 121 Sand Point SHARC holders fished for
halibut noncommercially in 2004 and had a total estimated harvest of 12,739 lb (net weight; Table 11).
This is more than double the 2003 estimate, and similar to the total community estimate for 1992 (which
included halibut removed from commercial harvests). It is likely that the higher estimate for 2004 does
not indicate an increased harvest by Sand Point residents over 2003, but rather a more complete estimate
due to much larger number of participants in the SHARC program.
A total of 321 Sand Point residents held SHARCs in 2005. The estimated subsistence harvest of halibut
increased to 21,901 lb, with 12,201 lb (56%) taken with setline gear and 9,700 lb (44%) caught with
hand-operated gear. One-hundred Sand Point residents subsistence fished for halibut in 2005. In addition,
23 sport fished for halibut, adding 1,281 lb for a total noncommercial halibut harvest estimate of 23,182
lb (Table 11). The increase in the total halibut harvest, especially the increase in setline harvests, suggests
that Sand Point residents were increasingly participating in the opportunities provided by the federal
subsistence halibut fishery.
In 2006, the number of Sand Point residents with SHARCs increased to 365. The estimated number of
SHARC holders who subsistence fished for halibut also increased, to 133 from 100 in 2005 and 109 in
2004. The estimated number of Sand Point SHARC holders subsistence fishing with setlines also
increased notably to 59 in 2006, compared to 35 in 2005 and 25 in 2004. The number fishing with handoperated gear rose slightly to 87 in 2006, from 77 in 2005 and 74 in 2004. The estimated subsistence
halibut harvest by Sand Point residents in 2006 was 20,214, similar to the estimate for 2005 of 21,901. In
2006, 37% (7,406 lb) of the subsistence halibut were harvested with setline gear and 63% (12,809 lb) with
hand-operated gear. In addition, an estimated 29 Sand Point SHARC holders sport fished for halibut in
2006, with an estimated harvest of 6,300 lb, up substantially from 1,281 lb of sport harvested halibut in
2005 and 1,384 lb in 2004. As a result of the higher estimated sport harvests of halibut by Sand Point
SHARC holders in 2006, the total estimated noncommercial harvest of halibut increased to 26,514 lb
from 23,182 lb in 2005 and 12,739 lb in 2004 (Table 11).
Subsistence halibut fishing patterns in Sand Point in 2007 were generally similar to those of 2006. During
any part of 2007, 364 Sand Point residents held SHARCs, and 138 used them to subsistence fish for
halibut. Of these, 49 used setline gear and 113 used hand-operated gear. The total estimated subsistence
halibut harvest in 2007 was 24,615 lb, up slightly from 2006 and the highest estimate for the 5 years of
the project. The subsistence harvest was about evenly split between setline gear (13,278 lb; 54%) and
hand-operated gear (11,337 lb; 46%). An estimated 16 Sand Point SHARC holders also went sport fishing
for halibut and they harvested an estimated 3,034 lb. In total, the noncommercial halibut harvest at Sand
Point in 2007 was 27,649 lb, with 138 people involved in this harvest (Table 11).
The results of the SHARC survey for Sand Point for 2008 found subsistence halibut fishing patterns
similar to those of 2006 and 2007. During 2008, 342 Sand Point residents held SHARCs, and 130
subsistence fished for halibut. Of these, 71 used setline gear and 88 used hand-operated gear. The total
estimated subsistence halibut harvest in 2008 was 25,013 lb, up slightly from 2007 and the highest
estimate for the 6 years of the project. Setline gear accounted for 15,766 lb (63%) and hand-operated gear
added 9,247 lb (37%). An estimated 19 Sand Point SHARC holders also went sport fishing for halibut
and they harvested an estimated 2,195 lb. In total, the noncommercial halibut harvest estimate at Sand
Point in 2008 was 27,208 lb, with 132 people involved in this harvest (Table 11).
The majority of SHARCs issued to Sand Point residents expired during 2008 and were not renewed. The
number of active SHARCs during 2009 was 137, down 60% from the 342 active SHARCs in 2008.
Correspondingly, based on survey responses, estimates of participation in the subsistence halibut fishery
in Sand Point in 2009 and estimated harvests were down substantially from 2005–2008. During 2009, an
estimated 70 Sand Point residents participated in the subsistence halibut fishery, compared to 130 in
2008. In 2009, 28 Sand Point fishers used setlines, compared to 71 in 2008, and 58 used hand-operated
gear, compared to 58 in 2008. The estimated subsistence halibut harvest in 2009 was 11,759 lb,

30

approximately half the average annual harvest from 2005–2008; setline gear accounted for 3,987 lb (34%)
and hand-operated gear provided 7,772 lb (66%) in 2009. An estimated 19 Sand Point SHARC holders
also went sport fishing for halibut in 2009 and they harvested an estimated 2,665 lb. In total, the
noncommercial halibut harvest estimate at Sand Point in 2009 was 14,424 lb, with 70 people involved in
this harvest; this harvest was 55% of the annual average of the previous 4 years (Table 11).
The survey findings for Sand Point for 2010 illustrated the pattern first noted for 2009 of declining
estimates of harvests and participation in the subsistence halibut fishery that may be the result of lowered
rates of participation in the SHARC program. In 2010, the number of active SHARCs in Sand Point
dropped to 130, the lowest since 2003. An estimated 61 SHARC holders participated in the subsistence
fishery, 22 with setlines and 50 with hand-operated gear, again the lowest numbers since 2003. The
estimated subsistence harvest of 7,306 lb (3,408 [47%] with setlines, and 3,898 [53%] with hand-operated
gear) was the lowest estimate since 2003, and less than a third of the peak harvest estimates of 2005–
2008. Sport harvests of 1,129 lb by 18 SHARC holders produced a total noncommercial halibut harvest
for Sand Point of 8,435 lb, again lower than any year but 2003. Outreach in Sand Point is likely necessary
to determine if subsistence halibut harvests have declined or whether the recent lower estimates are solely
the result of decreased participation in the SHARC program.

Unalaska–Dutch Harbor (Regulatory Area 4A)
The city of Unalaska (which includes Dutch Harbor) had a population of 4,283 in 2000, including 397
Alaska Natives (U. S. Census Bureau 2001). The population in 2010 was 4,376 with 355 Alaska Natives
(Table 1; ADLWD 2011). The Division of Subsistence conducted a household harvest survey in
Unalaska–Dutch Harbor for the 1994 data year and estimated that the total halibut harvest was 97,601 lb
(net weight; 3,049 fish; ±34%), excluding 10,606 lb (331 fish) removed from commercial catches for
home use. Of the 700 households in the community, an estimated 391 (56%) had at least one member
who fished for halibut in 1994. Most of the noncommercial harvest, 88,142 lb (90%), was taken with rod
and reel (CSIS).
By the close of 2003, only 92 residents of Unalaska and Dutch Harbor had obtained SHARCs (Table 11).
Notably, only 14 members of the Qawalangin Tribe of Unalaska obtained SHARCs in 2003. For the
community overall as well as for the tribe, this was far fewer registrants than might have been predicted
from the 1994 survey results. By the end of 2004, 131 Unalaska–Dutch Harbor residents had obtained
SHARCs, as had 25 Qawalangin Tribe members. In 2005, 150 community members held SHARCs, as did
31 Qawalangin Tribe members. While a notable increase over 2003, this total continued to be lower than
expected. The total increased to 171 SHARC holders in 2006, including 43 Qawalangin Tribe members.
During 2007, 176 Unalaska–Dutch Harbor residents held SHARCs, including 46 Qawalangin Tribe
members. In 2008, 173 Unalaska–Dutch Harbor residents held SHARCs, as did 43 Qawalangin Tribe
members. In 2009, 164 community residents held SHARCs, as did 37 Qawalangin Tribe members. In
2010, the Unalaska–Dutch Harbor total was 155 SHARC holders; Qawalangin tribal members held 36
SHARCs in 2010.
In 2010, an estimated 92 Unalaska–Dutch Harbor SHARC holders participated in the subsistence halibut
fishery, an estimated 54 sport fished, and an estimated 103 participated in either fishery. In comparison, in
2009, an estimated 76 Unalaska–Dutch Harbor SHARC holders participated in the subsistence halibut
fishery, an estimated 45 sport fished, and an estimated 98 participated in either fishery. In 2008, an
estimated 87 Unalaska–Dutch Harbor SHARC holders participated in the subsistence halibut fishery, an
estimated 43 sport fished, and an estimated 101 participated in either fishery. In 2007, 83 Unalaska–Dutch
Harbor SHARC holders participated in the subsistence halibut fishery, 33 sport fished, and 92
participated in either fishery. In 2006, 81 Unalaska–Dutch Harbor SHARC holders participated in the
subsistence halibut fishery, 50 sport fished, and 101 participated in either fishery. In 2005, 88 SHARC
holders participated in the subsistence halibut fishery and 28 sport fished; 97 participated in either fishery.
In 2004, 81 SHARC holders subsistence fished for halibut and 34 sport fished; 93 participated in either

31

fishery. In 2003, 50 Unalaska–Dutch Harbor SHARC holders subsistence fished for halibut, 33 sport
fished, and 70 fished in either fishery (Table 11).
In 2010, SHARC holders in Unalaska–Dutch Harbor harvested an estimated 13,081 lb of halibut in the
subsistence fishery. Of this, 7,417 lb was harvested with set lines (57%) and 5,663 lb (43%) with handoperated gear. Additionally, they harvested 2,730 lb of halibut in the sport fishery, for a total
noncommercial harvest of 15,811 lb (Table 11). The 2010 harvest was down substantially (49%) from
2009, when SHARC holders in Unalaska–Dutch Harbor harvested an estimated 29,306 lb of halibut in the
subsistence fishery (19,204 lb with setlines [66%] and 10,102 lb with hand-operated gear [34%]). In
2009, there was an additional 1,861 lb of halibut harvested in the sport fishery, for a total noncommercial
harvest of 31,167 lb (Table 11). The 2009 estimated halibut harvests by Unalaska–Dutch Harbor SHARC
holders increased substantially from the first 6 years of the project, while the 2010 estimate was lower
than all but one prior year. For example, in 2008, SHARC holders in Unalaska–Dutch Harbor harvested
an estimated 13,710 lb of halibut in the subsistence fishery. Of this, 7,293 lb was harvested with setlines
(53%) and 6,417 lb with hand-operated gear (47%). Additionally, they harvested 2,962 lb of halibut in the
sport fishery, for a total noncommercial harvest of 16,672 lb. In 2007, the estimated subsistence halibut
harvest was 13,250 lb, 9,012 lb (68%) with setline gear and 4,238 lb (32%) with hand-operated gear. The
estimated sport harvest was 2,287 lb, for a total noncommercial harvest of 15,537 lb. In 2006, the
estimated subsistence halibut harvest was 16,331 lb, 7,526 lb (46%) with setline gear and 8,805 lb (54%)
with hand-operated gear. The estimated sport harvest was 3,768 lb for a total noncommercial harvest of
20,100 lb. In 2005, the estimated subsistence harvest was 18,108 lb (net weight), with most (9,573 lb;
53%) taken with setline gear and the balance with hand-operated gear. In addition, in 2005 Unalaska–
Dutch Harbor SHARC holders harvested 2,439 lb of halibut while sport fishing, for a total
noncommercial halibut harvest of 20,547 lb. In 2004, the estimated subsistence harvest was 15,530 lb (net
weight), with most (9,557 lb; 62%) taken with setline gear and the balance with hand-operated gear. In
addition, Unalaska–Dutch Harbor SHARC holders harvested 2,165 lb of halibut while sport fishing in
2004, for a total noncommercial halibut harvest of 17,695 lb. The estimated subsistence harvest for 2003
was 10,860 lb (net weight), and there was an additional 5,519 lb of halibut harvested while sport fishing,
for a total noncommercial harvest of 16,379 lb.
The 2009 noncommercial halibut harvest by Unalaska–Dutch Harbor SHARC holders, by far the highest
for the 8 study years, represents just 32% of the harvest estimate for 1994. Similarly, the 2010 estimate
was 16%, the 2008 total halibut harvest was 17%, the 2007 total halibut harvest was 16%, the 2006 total
halibut harvest was 21%, the 2005 total halibut harvest was 21%, the 2004 total halibut harvest was 18%,
and the 2003 estimate was 17% of the 1994 estimate. There are at least 5 explanations for these
differences. First, actual noncommercial halibut harvests in Unalaska may have declined since 1994,
although a decline of this magnitude is probably unlikely. Second, if many fishers did not obtain a
SHARC, the SHARC survey may have underestimated the subsistence halibut harvest. A third
explanation is that the 1994 survey may have overestimated the halibut harvest. A fourth explanation is
that many halibut fishers in Unalaska may prefer to harvest halibut under sport fishing regulations and
therefore do not obtain SHARCs. A fifth possibility that may account for a decline in subsistence halibut
harvests is a decline in stock abundance. The IPHC has noted a decline in abundance in Area 4A since
1994 (Gregg Williams, IPHC, personal communication, 2005). A combination of all 5 factors could be
responsible for the unexpectedly low subsistence halibut harvest estimated for Unalaska from the SHARC
surveys in all 8 study years. Further outreach in Unalaska is clearly appropriate, as well as additional
research to better understand patterns of halibut fishing in the community.

Toksook Bay (Regulatory Area 4E)
Toksook Bay had a population of 532 in 2000 and 590 in 2010 (Table 1; U. S. Census Bureau 2001;
ADLWD 2011). As discussed in Chapter 1, the number of valid SHARCs held by Toksook Bay residents
dropped from 533 (approximating the community’s total population) in 2007 to 34 in 2008, 33 in 2009,
and 32 in 2010. Very few SHARCs that had been obtained in 2003 and that expired at the close of 2007

32

were renewed. The Division of Subsistence has not conducted a household harvest survey in this
community. Wolfe (2002) estimated a subsistence halibut harvest of 12,600 lb (net weight, 16,800 lb
round weight) for this community for 2000, based upon a 1986 per capita estimate for the neighboring
community of Tununak. During SHARC project years from 2003–2007, Division of Subsistence staff,
with the assistance of the Toksook Bay tribal government, evaluated the list of SHARC holders in the
community, estimated the total number of subsistence halibut fishers, and conducted interviews with
likely fishers. Based on the results of this collaboration with the tribal government, it is highly likely that
most community residents who subsistence fished for halibut in 2003–2007 provided harvest data through
the SHARC survey. Therefore, harvest estimates for Toksook Bay for 2003–2007 represent the harvests
reported by respondents to the survey, and are not expanded to the total number of SHARC holders in the
community. In 2008–2010, however, no outreach or interviewing occurred in Toksook Bay. Of 34
SHARC holders in 2008, 11 (32%) responded to the mailed survey, as did 13 (39%) of 33 in 2009 and 12
(38%) of 32 in 2010. Unlike 2003–2007, returned survey data were expanded to estimate 2008, 2009, and
2010 halibut harvests in Toksook Bay.
The estimated harvest for Toksook Bay for 2003 was 24,500 lb (net weight) by 54 fishers (Table 11).
Project staff consider this a reliable subsistence harvest estimate for the community. It should be noted
that Toksook Bay is a member of the Coastal Villages Regional Fund (CVRF) CDQ organization23. The
majority of the 5,034 lb of U32 (under 32 inches in length) halibut retained for home use by members of
this CDQ organization in 2003 was landed at Toksook Bay and Mekoryuk (Williams 2004:59–60).
For 2004, 56 Toksook Bay SHARC holders reported a harvest of 6,596 lb of halibut, with most of this
(5,737 lb) harvested with hand-operated gear (Table 11). This suggests a substantial decline in subsistence
halibut harvests compared to 2003. As in 2003, a majority (69% of 7,120 lb [net weight]) of the U32
halibut retained for home use by the CVRF was landed at Toksook Bay and Mekoryuk (Williams 2005),
but this cannot account for the decline in subsistence harvests.
In 2005, subsistence harvests by Toksook Bay SHARC holders rebounded to 14,870 lb; adding the 98 lb
of SHARC holder’s sport caught halibut produces a community total of 14,968 lb (Table 11). Almost all
(14,269 lb; 96%) of the subsistence harvest was taken with hand-operated gear. Sixty-one Toksook Bay
residents participated in the SHARC subsistence halibut fishery in 2005.
The estimated subsistence halibut harvest by Toksook Bay SHARC holders increased substantially in
2006, to 36,481 lb, all harvested with subsistence gear and most (34,149 lb; 94%) caught with handoperated gear (Table 11). In 2006, the estimated number of participants in the SHARC subsistence fishery
also increased, to 113 SHARC holders; the previous highest estimate was 61 subsistence halibut fishers in
2005. During interviews in the community in April 2007, SHARC fishers in Toksook Bay reported that
subsistence fishing had been very productive in 2006; halibut were abundant and there was a
corresponding increase in subsistence fishing effort. This may account for the large increase in the
estimated harvest in 2006. Also, in 2006, over 67% of the 19,710 lb of U32 halibut retained for home use
in the CVRF CDQ fishery were landed at Toksook Bay and Mekoryuk (Williams 2007). Division staff
conducting interviews with SHARC holders in Toksook Bay reminded respondents to exclude CDQ U32
halibut in their subsistence estimates for the SHARC survey.
In 2007, the estimated subsistence harvest in Toksook Bay dropped to 7,921 lb (from 36,481 lb in 2006),
with most of this harvest (6,469 lb; 82%) taken with hand-operated gear. The estimated number of
participants in the subsistence fishery was 112, with most of these (100; 89%) using hand-operated gear.
Also in 2007, 59% of the 11,398 lb of U32 halibut retained from home use during the Coastal Villages
Regional Fund CDQ fishery were landed at Toksook Bay and Mekoryuk (Williams 2008). When
conducting interviews in Toksook Bay in early 2008 about 2007 subsistence halibut harvests, Division of

23

See footnote 8 for more information about the CDQ program.

33

Subsistence staff encountered several subsistence fishers who did not hold SHARCs. Therefore, the 2007
estimate based on the SHARC list likely underestimates the community’s total by an unknown amount.
As noted above, the number of valid SHARCs for Toksook Bay dropped to 34 in 2008. Based on the
SHARC survey returns (11 of 34; 32%), it is likely that many active halibut fishers in the community did
not renew their SHARCs and therefore were not part of the SHARC survey, resulting in underestimates of
participation in the fishery and in estimated harvests. For example, based on the survey results, 9 Toksook
Bay residents participated in the subsistence halibut fishery in 2008, compared to an average of 73 for the
previous 5 years (range 44 to 112; Table 11). The estimated harvest was 2,143 lb in 2008, while the
previous 5-year average was 18,074 lb (range 6,596 to 36,481 lb).
Results for 2009 were similar to those of 2008. Only 33 SHARCs were active in Toksook Bay, again
suggesting that many subsistence fishers are not participating in the program. Based on returned surveys
(13 of 33; 39%), the estimated subsistence halibut harvest was 1,055 lb, with 789 lb (75%) taken with
hand-operated gear. This harvest was less than one-half of that of 2008 and just 6% of the annual average
from 2003–2007. The estimated number of subsistence halibut fishers in Toksook Bay in 2009 was 10,
compared to 112 in 2007 and an average of 79 from 2003–2007.
Results for 2010 continued trends observed for 2008 and 2009. Only 32 SHARCs were active in Toksook
Bay, again suggesting that many subsistence fishers are not participating in the program. Based on
returned surveys (12 of 32; 38%), the estimated subsistence halibut harvest was 875 lb, with 560 lb (64%)
taken with hand-operated gear. This harvest was less than one-half of that of 2008 and just 5% of the
annual average from 2003–2007. The estimated number of subsistence halibut fishers in Toksook Bay in
2010 was 10, compared to 112 in 2007 and an average of 79 from 2003–2007. In 2010, Toksook Bay
obtained 35% of the U32 halibut retained by the Coastal Villages Regional Fund CDQ catch, about 1,373
lb (Williams 2011:64).
Without renewed registrations in the SHARC program and outreach in the community, it is unlikely that
the mail survey alone will provide reliable harvest estimates for the subsistence halibut fishery in
Toksook Bay in the future.

Tununak (Regulatory Area 4E)
Tununak had a population of 325 in 2000, 315 of whom were Alaska Native (U. S. Census Bureau 2001).
The population for 2010 was 327, with 314 Alaska Natives (Table 1; ADLWD 2011). The Division of
Subsistence conducted a comprehensive household harvest survey in Tununak in 1986, which provides
the only estimate of subsistence halibut harvests for the community prior to the adoption of the 2003
subsistence regulations. The harvest estimate for 1986 was 1,532 fish and 30,643 lb (net [dressed]
weight), with a 95% confidence limit of ±26%. The harvest per capita was 93 lb (net weight; CSIS).
No residents of Tununak obtained SHARCs in 2003,24 and the Traditional Elders’ Council in Tununak did
not approve Division of Subsistence plans to conduct interviews with potential subsistence halibut fishers
for 2003. Therefore, there is no subsistence halibut harvest estimate for this community for 2003. By the
close of 2004, however, 70 residents of Tununak had obtained SHARCs (Table 11). Because only 9
SHARC holders responded to the postal survey (13%), harvest estimates for Tununak for 2004 are based
on a very low sample achievement. The estimated total subsistence halibut harvest was 1,954 lb (net
weight) by 31 fishers, 878 lb harvested with setline gear and 1,076 lb with hand-operated gear. No
Tununak SHARC holders reported sport fishing activity.
The tribal government supported Division of Subsistence interviewing of subsistence halibut fishers in
Tununak for the 2005 project year (Fall et al. 2006:5). Thirty-three of 70 SHARC holders were
interviewed (47%). As in Toksook Bay, reported harvests were not expanded for Tununak for the 2005

24

One tribal member obtained a SHARC, but this person was not a resident of Tununak.

34

project year because most known halibut fishers were interviewed. The total subsistence harvest of
halibut was 2,661 lb by 20 fishers. Most of the harvest (88%) was taken with hand-operated gear. There
were no sport harvests of halibut reported in Tununak in 2005.
In 2006, 70 Tununak residents held SHARCs. No interviewing took place in the community, but division
staff did attempt to contact SHARC holders by telephone. Sample achievement was low (10 of 70
SHARC holders; 14%). Based on this limited sample, the estimated subsistence halibut harvest at
Tununak in 2006 was 4,032 lb by 33 subsistence fishers. Almost all of this harvest (3,808 lb; 94%) was
with hand-operated gear.
In 2007, 69 Tununak residents held SHARCs for a part of the year. With the support of a short-term
contract with the division, staff of the Tununak IRA council conducted interviews in their community in
order to supplement SHARC survey data. The estimated subsistence harvest in Tununak in 2007 was
7,015 lb by 38 fishers. Most of this harvest (5,479 lb; 78%) was taken with hand-operated gear.
In 2008, 68 Tununak residents held SHARCs. No outreach or supplemental interviewing took place in the
community in 2008. The response rate to the mailed survey was 10% (7 of 68 SHARC holders).
Estimated harvested based on this sample were by far the lowest of any project year for which data are
available: 2,143 lb, all with hand-operated gear by an estimated 8 fishers. This is almost certainly a large
underestimation of the subsistence harvest of halibut in Tununak in 2008.
Few of the SHARCs active in 2008 in Tununak were renewed and only 11 were active in 2009; 6 (55%)
responded to the survey. An estimated 7 subsistence fishers harvested 488 lb of halibut in 2009, all with
hand-operated gear. Due to the very limited participation in the SHARC program and based on results
from 2004–2007, it is highly likely that a reliable estimate of subsistence halibut harvests in Tununak was
not obtained for 2009.
As in 2009, only 11 SHARCs were active in Tununak in 2010; 3 (27%) responded to the survey. An
estimated 9 subsistence fishers harvested 576 lb of halibut in 2010, all with hand-operated gear. Due to
the very limited participation in the SHARC program and based on results from 2004–2007, it is highly
likely that, as for 2009, a reliable estimate of subsistence halibut harvests in Tununak was not obtained for
2010.
Also, compared to the results of the 1986 survey, the harvest estimates for Tununak for 2004 through
2007 appear low. The reasons for this difference are uncertain. As just noted, the low response to the
mailed SHARC survey plus a lack of outreach or follow-up interviews likely resulted in a large
underestimation of the 2008, 2009, and 2010 harvests. Several additional years of harvest data collection
plus renewed outreach and community support will be necessary to adequately document subsistence
halibut harvest trends in this community.

COMPARISONS WITH NONSUBSISTENCE HARVESTS IN 2010
As reported in Table 18, the preliminary estimated total halibut removal in Alaskan waters in 2010 was
63,773,077 lb (net weight) based on data compiled by the IPHC (IPHC and Geiger 2011) Williams
2009and this project. In this total, the removal of 9,517 lb of U32 (under 32 inches in length) halibut for
personal use by CDQ organizations in Areas 4D and 4E has been added to the subsistence harvest
category. Commercial harvests accounted for 66.8% of halibut removals in Alaska in 2010 (Figure 33).
Bycatch mortality of halibut in various other commercial fisheries ranked second, with 15.4% of the
statewide removals. Sport harvests ranked third, with 12.1%. Wastage in the commercial halibut fishery
added 4.5% to the total halibut removals. Finally, the subsistence fishery accounted for 1.3% of the total
removals of halibut in Alaska waters in 2010.
Halibut harvests by fishery in 2010 at the regulatory area level did not differ substantially from the
statewide pattern (Table 18, Figure 34). In all regulatory areas, commercial harvests accounted for 56% or
more of the total pounds net weight of halibut removals. In Area 2C (Southeast Alaska) and Area 3A

35

(Southcentral Alaska), sport fisheries took 31.6% and 16.9%, respectively, of the halibut harvest in 2010;
however, sport fisheries were just 0.3% of the total harvest in Area 3B (compared to 0.2% for the
subsistence harvest) and about the same as subsistence harvests in Area 4. Commercial bycatch accounted
for 41.6% of halibut removals in Area 4. As a percentage of the total removal, subsistence halibut
harvests were largest in Area 2C at 5.3% of the total (although they were less than 17% of the sport
harvest and about 9% of the commercial harvest) and in Area 3A at 1.0%.

36

CHAPTER 4: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
New federal regulations governing subsistence halibut fishing in Alaska went into effect in May 2003.
The 2010 calendar year was the eighth for which a program was implemented to estimate the subsistence
harvest of halibut under these regulations. By several measures, the program is a success. Of 10,953
SHARC holders, 6,670 (61%) voluntarily provided information about their subsistence halibut fishing
activities in 2010 by responding to the survey. This compares to a response rate of 59% (6,944
respondents of 11,733 SHARC holders) for the 2009 project year; 63% (7,316 respondents of 11,565
SHARC holders) for the 2008 project year; 58% (8,682 respondents of 15,047 SHARC holders) for the
2007 project year; 59% (8,426 respondents of 14,206 SHARC holders) for the 2006 project year; 60% for
the 2005 project year (8,565 respondents of 14,306 SHARC holders); 62% for the 2004 project year
(8,524 respondents of 13,813 SHARC holders); and 65% for the 2003 project year (7,593 respondents of
11,625 SHARC holders). In 2010, the number of valid SHARCs (10,953) was lower than 2009 (11,733)
and 2008 (11,565), and 17% lower than the 7-year average from 2003–2009 (Table 19). Nonrenewed
SHARCs probably account for most of this decline. The largest portion of this decline in the number of
SHARC holders was in the tribal segment: 3,906 SHARCs in 2010 compared to 7,446 in 2007, a decline
of 48%. Tribal SHARCs are valid for 4 years, so those issued in 2003, the first year of the new fishery,
expired in 2007. In comparison, the number of nontribal SHARC holders dropped 5% from 2007 (7,601
SHARCs) to 2008 (7,249 SHARCs), increased to 7,724 in 2009, and decreased to 7,047 in 2010.
Nontribal SHARCs are valid for 2 years, so there have been several rounds of expirations and renewals
since 2003, in contrast to the tribal SHARC group. The next section of the report discusses an analysis of
SHARC expiration and renewal patterns and identifies some implications of these patterns for future
harvest estimates.
Based on the survey returns, an estimated 4,991 individuals participated in the Alaska subsistence halibut
fishery in 2010. This is a decrease of 6% from the estimated 5,296 SHARC holders who subsistence
fished for halibut in Alaska in 2009, and is 10% lower than the 7-year average from 2003–2009. The
estimated subsistence harvest of halibut in Alaska in 2010 is 43,332 fish and 797,560 lb (±3%). In
comparison, the 2009 estimated subsistence halibut harvest was 45,434 fish and 861,359 lb (±4%); the
2008 estimated subsistence halibut harvest was 48,604 fish and 886,988 lb (net weight; ±3.0%); the 2007
estimated subsistence halibut harvest was 53,697 fish and 1,032,293 lb (±4.1%); the 2006 estimated
subsistence halibut harvest was 54,089 fish and 1,125,312 lb (±2.9%); the 2005 estimated subsistence
halibut harvest was 55,875 fish and 1,178,222 lb (net weight; ±3.0%); the 2004 estimated subsistence
harvest was 52,412 halibut and 1,193,162 net pounds (±1.5%), and 43,926 halibut for 1,041,330 lb (±4%)
were harvested in the subsistence fishery in 2003. As measured in pounds, the 2010 subsistence halibut
harvest was about 7% lower than the harvest in 2009 and 24% lower than the 7-year average from 2003–
2009 (Table 19). The total estimated harvests for 2003–2010 are below the 1.5 million net pounds
estimated for the Alaska subsistence halibut harvest when the current regulations were developed by the
North Pacific Fishery Management Council (see http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/frules/70fr16742.pdf, page
16748; NPFMC 2003). The larger estimated harvest in 2004 compared to 2003 most likely corresponded
to the greater number of individuals who held SHARCs through December 2004 and a proportional
increase in the number of individuals who subsistence fished for halibut. The leveling off and slight
decline in the harvests in 2006 and 2005, compared to 2004, are consistent with the leveling-off of the
number of individuals who held SHARCs for at least a portion of these years. However, harvests as
estimated in pounds dropped in 2007 despite an increase in individuals who held a SHARC for at least
part of the year. In 2008, estimated harvests dropped by 14% and the number of SHARC holders dropped
by 23%; in 2009, the number of SHARC holders rose slightly (1.5%) while the harvest dropped by 0.1%;
in 2020 both the number of SHARC holders and the harvest dropped by about 7% compared to the
previous year. Average harvests per fisher were about the same in 2010 (8.7 halibut per fisher for 160 lb)
as 2009 (8.6 halibut per fisher for 163 lb), but down compared to 2008 (9.2 halibut per fisher for 167 lb),

37

2007 (9.1 halibut per fisher for 174 lb), and 2006 (9.2 halibut per fisher for 190 lb). Of the 7 previous
project years, average harvests were highest in 2005 (9.9 halibut per fisher for 210 lb). In the first 2 years
of the project, averages were 8.8 halibut per fisher for 199 lb in 2004 and 8.9 halibut per fisher for 211 lb
in 2003. Of the 8 project years, the average weight of subsistence halibut declined from 23.7 lb in 2003 to
18.2 lb in 2008 (a decline of 23%), rose slightly to 19.0 lb in 2009, and dropped slightly to 18.4 lb per fish
in 2010 (Table 19). The average weight of a subsistence-caught halibut dropped 11% from 2003 to 2010.
After 8 years of the harvest assessment program, it appears likely that the overall larger statewide harvest
estimates in 2004, 2005, and 2006, compared to 2003, were, at least in part, a consequence of increased
participation of subsistence fishers in the SHARC program after 2003 and, perhaps, an increase in trust on
the part of subsistence fishers in the survey. The lower harvest estimates for 2008, 2009, and 2010 may in
part be a consequence of reduced participation in the SHARC program, especially among eligible tribal
members. As the community case studies demonstrate, however, a number of factors appear to have
caused the differences in harvest estimates over the 8 project years, and these differ by community. Some
were methodological (St. Paul, for example), while other factors were probably linked to more thorough
and accurate documentation of harvests (Cordova and Sand Point, for example) rather than a true
increase. On the other hand, decreases in subsistence halibut harvests in Area 2C appear to reflect
declining success in harvests, with declines in Sitka (down 53% from 2003 to 2010) particularly notable.
In 2010, most subsistence halibut were harvested with setline (stationary) gear (77%) and the rest with
hand-operated gear (23%). Similarly, in 2009, most subsistence halibut were harvested with setline gear
(72%) and the rest with hand-operated gear (28%); in 2008, 74% of the subsistence halibut were taken
with setline gear; in 2007, 69% of the subsistence halibut were taken with setline gear; in 2006, 70% of
the subsistence halibut were taken with setline gear; in 2005, 70% of the subsistence halibut were
harvested with setline gear; in 2004, 74% of the subsistence halibut were harvested with setline gear; and
in 2003, setlines accounted for 72% of the harvest.
The largest portion of the Alaska subsistence halibut harvest in 2010 occurred in Regulatory Area 2C
(Southeast Alaska), at 53% (424,818 lb), followed by Area 3A (Southcentral Alaska) at 39% (312,650 lb),
Area 3B (Alaska Peninsula) at 3% (23,009 lb), Area 4A (Eastern Aleutian Islands) at 2% (14,548 lb),
Area 4C (Pribilof Islands) 1% (10,859 lb), Area 4E (East Bering Sea Coast) at 1% (10,055 lb), Area 4D
(Central Bering Sea) at less than 1% (1,171 lb), and Area 4B (Western Aleutian Islands) at less than 1%
(450 lb). In 2003–2009, Area 2C (Southeast Alaska) and Area 3A (Southcentral Alaska) also accounted
for most of the subsistence harvests. The proportion of the statewide subsistence halibut harvest occurring
in Area 2C (Southeast Alaska) has declined from 60% in 2003 and 57% in 2004 to 51% in 2005, 52% in
2006, 51% in 2007, 52% in 2008, 53% in 2009, and 53% in 2010. Correspondingly, the portion occurring
in Area 3A (Southcentral Alaska) increased from 27% in 2003 to 34% in 2004, 36% in 2005, 34% in
2006, 36% in 2007, 38% in 2008, 38% in 2009, and 39% in 2010. Subsistence harvests accounted for
1.3% of the total halibut removals in Alaska waters in 2010, compared to 1.2% in 2009, 1.3% in 2008,
1.4% in 2007, 1.5% in 2006, 1.5% in 2005, 1.5 % in 2004, and 1.3% in 2003.
Subsistence halibut fishers had an estimated incidental harvest of 12,851 rockfish in 2010. This is a
decrease of 4% from the estimate of 13,315 rockfish for 2009 and a decrease of 15% from the 7-year
average from 2003–2009 (Table 19). There were 1,322 SHARC holders who harvested rockfish while
subsistence halibut fishing in 2010, compared to 1,427 in 2009, 1,404 in 2008, 1,568 in 2007, 1,529 in
2006, 1,544 in 2005, 1,616 in 2004, and 1,239 in 2003. Most of the incidental rockfish harvests in 2010
occurred in Area 2C (60%), as they had in 2009 (67%), 2008 (70%), 2007 (68%), 2006 (68%), 2005
(63%), 2004 (68%), and 2003 (67%).
In 2010, subsistence halibut fishers harvested an estimated 2,864 lingcod in the subsistence halibut
fishery. This is a decrease of 16% from the estimate of 3,390 lingcod harvested in the subsistence halibut
fishery in 2009, and a decrease of 16% from the 7-year average from 2003–2009. In total, 732 SHARC
holders harvested lingcod while subsistence halibut fishing in 2010. This is 19% lower than the 900

38

SHARC holders who had an incidental harvest of lingcod in 2009, and 17% lower than the 7-year average
from 2003–2009 (Table 19). As with rockfish, most of the incidental lingcod harvests took place in Area
2C in 2010 (63%), 2009 (60%), 2008 (71%), 2007 (66%), 2006 (59%), 2005 (56%), 2004 (56%) and
2003 (51%).
As discussed above, although comparisons of the 2003–2010 harvest estimates with those from previous
research by the Division of Subsistence are complicated by different research methods, such comparisons
may still be instructive. Subsistence harvest estimates for most of the larger communities (combining
tribal and rural SHARC holders) such as Sitka, Petersburg, and Kodiak for 2003–2010 are within the
range of earlier estimates based on household surveys. This is significant in that these communities
account for a very large percentage of the total harvest. We conclude that the 8 years of the survey of
SHARC holders produced sound estimates of subsistence harvests of halibut in Alaska based on a
scientific sample and a relatively high response rate. The estimates can be further evaluated as additional
years of harvest data are collected. Continued documentation of the subsistence harvests is also necessary
for any meaningful discussion of long-term trends in the fishery.

SHARC EXPIRATION AND RENEWAL PATTERNS, 2003–200925
Since the current federal subsistence halibut regulations came into effect in 2003 through 2009, 19,603
individuals had obtained SHARCs. SHARCs must be renewed periodically: rural SHARCs every 2 years
and tribal SHARCs every 4 years. Continuing participation in the SHARC program by subsistence halibut
fishers is essential for achieving reliable harvest estimates.
Of the 19,603 SHARC holders, 7,870 (40.1%) did not renew their SHARCs, including 49.7% of tribal
SHARC holders and 33.6% of rural SHARC holders. The remaining 11,733 SHARCs were active in 2009
(59.9% of all SHARCs issued), either being renewed one or more times or not yet being subject to
renewal. This includes 4,009 tribal SHARCs (50.3% of all Tribal SHARCs that have been issued) and
7,724 rural SHARCs (66.4%; Figure 35).
SHARC holders who did not renew their SHARCs were more likely than currently (in 2009) active
SHARC holders to have never responded to the harvest survey or to never have participated in the
subsistence halibut fishery (Table 20, Figure 36). Of all SHARC holders, 27% of nonrenewals had never
responded to the survey, compared to 15% of currently active SHARC holders. Additionally, 33% of
expired SHARCs had not been fished; 13% of active SHARC holders have not fished. This pattern exists
within each SHARC type as well. Of tribal SHARC holders, 29% who did not renew their SHARC never
responded to the survey, compared to 19% of currently active tribal SHARC holders. Also, 41% of
expired tribal SHARCs never were fished, compared to 21% of active tribal SHARCs. Of all rural
SHARC holders whose SHARCs expired, 25% never responded to the survey and 25% did not fish. Of
active rural SHARCs, 12% have not responded to the survey and 8% have never fished.
This finding suggests that over time, the set of active SHARC holders has become more likely to include
individuals who will respond to the survey and participate in the subsistence halibut fishery. The trend is
more pronounced for tribal SHARC holders, most likely because, as discussed above, this group initially
included a large percentage young tribal members and elders who did not actively participate in the
fishery.
However, 40% of expired SHARCs were held by individuals who had participated in the subsistence
halibut fishery, including 30% of expired tribal SHARCs and 50% of expired rural SHARCs (Figure 36).
Of all SHARC holders that reported some subsistence fishing activity, 27% did not renew their SHARC,
including 33% of tribal SHARC holders who fished and 24% of rural SHARC holders who fished (Figure

25

The following analysis is based on data available through the 2009 study year and has not been updated for this report.
However, the patterns and trends described for 2003–2009 likely continued through the 2010 study year, thus we have retained
this section in this current report.

39

35). The reasons why subsistence halibut fishers did not renew their SHARCs are unknown. If a
substantial number of these individuals have continued to participate in the subsistence halibut fishery
without renewing their SHARC, an underestimate of future subsistence halibut harvests may result.
There were 22 tribes with 13 or more individuals who obtained SHARCs from 2003 through 2009 that
had SHARC renewal rates of less than 50%. In total, 2,590 members of these tribes obtained SHARCs,
33% of all tribal SHARC holders, and 1,933 of these SHARCs (75%) were not renewed, 49% of all
nonrenewed tribal SHARCs. Of the 963 members of these tribes who held SHARCs and participated in
the subsistence halibut fishery, 62% did not renew their SHARCs. Nonrenewal rates for subsistence
fishers among this group of tribes ranged from 25% to 100%. This finding suggests a trend in at least
some tribes of subsistence fishers dropping out of the SHARC program, which may result in an
underestimate of the subsistence halibut harvest in the future.
In summary, this analysis of renewal patterns for SHARC holders from 2003 through 2009 suggests 2
trends that may have opposite effects on subsistence halibut harvest estimates. First, it appears that
individuals who did not respond to the survey or did not participate in the fishery were less likely than
those who fished to renew their SHARCs. Thus nonfishers may have been overrepresented in the first
several years of the harvest survey, and been over-represented in the nonrespondent group. If so, harvests
for the early years of the program may have been overestimated. Second, it appears that a notable portion
of subsistence fishers have not renewed their SHARCs. If so, future estimates of subsistence halibut
harvests will be too low, because they are based solely on responses to the survey that is mailed to
SHARC holders.

RECOMMENDATIONS
We conclude this report with the following recommendations based on experiences during the 8 years of
this project. These suggestions are similar to those that were offered at the conclusion of the earlier years’
reports (Fall et al. 2004:30–31; Fall et al. 2005:34–36; Fall et al. 2006:37–38; Fall et al. 2007:39–40; Fall
and Koster 2008:39–40; Fall and Koster 2010:35–36; Fall and Koster 2011:36–38).
1. The harvest assessment program for the Alaska subsistence halibut fishery should continue.26
The 8-year effort just completed developed a time series for assessment of harvest trends in
the future. As discussed above, the methods used for 2003–2010 (a short postal survey with at
least one follow-up mailing, supplemented by community outreach, interviewing in selected
communities, and partnerships with tribal governments), were successful and should be
retained to facilitate comparisons across project years. It should be noted, however, that due
to reduced funding and rising costs, in 2009 and 2010 only 2 survey mailings took place and
supplemental surveys occurred only in a few Area 2C communities. Such reductions may
result in lower response rates in the future. A recommendation in the final report for the third
year of the program was that “implementation of a program to collect harvest data in season
in selected communities should be considered on a trial basis to help supplement and evaluate
the data collected through the postal survey” (Fall et al. 2006:37). The Division of
Subsistence conducted an inseason harvest monitoring project for the subsistence halibut
fishery in Sitka and Kodiak in 2006 with funding provided by NMFS. Findings were
presented in Fall et al. (2009). Consideration should be given in the future to inseason
monitoring programs in other communities as a method to compare harvest estimates with
those from the mailed surveys.
2. As noted in Chapter 1, most likely due to expirations and nonrenewals, total valid SHARCs
declined from 15,047 in 2007 to 11,565 in 2008, 11,733 in 2009, and 10,953 in 2010, with
26

Through a new grant, award number NA11NMF4370059, the Division of Subsistence received funding in 2011 from NOAA to
conduct a ninth year of surveys to document subsistence harvests that occurred in 2011. A modest increase in the budget will
allow restoration of the third round of survey mailings and enhanced outreach activities.

40

most of this decline occurring in the tribal segment of SHARC holders (7,446 in 2007, 4,316
in 2008, 4,009 in 2009, 3,906 in 2010). Such changes in the registration of potential
subsistence halibut fishers has implications for future harvest estimates and are another
reason why monitoring of the harvests should continue.
3. Additionally, analysis suggests that a significant number of subsistence halibut fishers may
not have renewed their SHARCs. This finding suggests that additional outreach among
eligible tribes and rural areas is necessary to maximize enrollment of fishers in the SHARC
program.
4. Specifically, additional or renewed outreach is needed in several communities outside of Area
2C (the only area where outreach took place in the last 2 study years), including Unalaska–
Dutch Harbor, Atka, Tununak, Toksook Bay, St. Paul, Sand Point, and Savoonga, based on
relatively low response rates or unexpectedly low numbers of SHARCs issued, especially if
more reliable harvest estimates are desired in areas 3B and 4, and given reduced funds to
conduct the project. Contracts with tribal governments or local hiring in communities of Area
2C, such as Sitka, Angoon, Hydaburg, and Ketchikan, should be continued in future harvest
monitoring efforts in those communities.
5. Given the drop in SHARC registrations, community outreach is also necessary in Area 4E
(East Bering Sea Coast) if reliable harvest estimates are to be produced. There are many
communities in this very large geographic area but, compared to areas 2C and 3A, relatively
few SHARCs have been issued and a smaller percentage of the statewide subsistence halibut
harvest occurs in Area 4E. Through the 2007 project year, the focus of outreach in Area 4E
was on those communities that are known to have relatively large traditional harvests of
halibut. Harvests in many other communities in this area are likely to be small. However, due
to funding cuts, no outreach or supplemental surveys took place in any Area 4E community
for 2009 or 2010. Although a major outreach effort that would include most of communities
of 4E would be expensive and probably unnecessary, communications with tribal
governments could result in more enrollments in the SHARC program and more confidence
in the survey results.
6. If rockfish or lingcod incidental harvests in the halibut subsistence fishery continue to be of
interest to managers in some areas, more specific data collection tools need to be developed
to collect rockfish harvest data at the species level in particular communities. This should be
done only in selected areas of concern given the additional costs to data collection and
analysis that this will entail (see Wolfe 2002 for more discussion of collection of rockfish
harvest data through the SHARC survey). Such research should occur only through
partnerships with local communities and tribes, and should include a combination of
participant observation, key respondent interviewing, and survey methods. A model is the
study of subsistence harvests of rockfish in Nanwalek, Port Graham, Chenega Bay, and Sitka
conducted by the Division of Subsistence with funding from the North Pacific Research
Board (Turek et al. 2009).
7. Further evaluation of several years of sport fishing harvest data achieved through the postal
Statewide Harvest Survey administered by the Division of Sport Fish should take place for
the larger rural communities participating in the subsistence halibut fishery. (Analysis of
these data for Sitka was conducted as a pilot effort for 2004. See Fall et al. 2005:22–24.) As
discussed in Chapter 2 and Chapter 3, many SHARC holders also reported that they sport
fished for halibut in 2003–2010. It will be important to try to determine if a shift in harvest
from the “sport” category to the “subsistence” category is occurring, in order to evaluate
trends in the subsistence fishery and the effect of the new subsistence halibut regulations on
fishing patterns. Also, as noted in Chapter 3, comparisons of community harvest estimates

41

from previous research require consideration of sport harvests as well as harvests under the
new subsistence regulations. Such comparisons are also important for evaluating the
subsistence harvest assessment program and the performance of the new subsistence
regulations.
8. Consideration should be given to funding and implementing ethnographic investigations in
key halibut fishing communities to evaluate the effects of the new subsistence fishing
regulations on fishing patterns. These studies would entail more detailed interviewing of
fishers regarding changes in gear choice, fishing effort, harvest amounts, incidental harvests
of rockfish or lingcod, or other fishing activities that have resulted from the regulatory
changes. These interviews could also investigate traditional knowledge about local halibut
stocks (as well as local stocks of rockfish and lingcod) that might prove useful to
management agencies, communities, and tribes for future management of the subsistence,
sport, and commercial halibut fisheries in Alaska.
9. Results of the 8 years of survey data and the inseason project should be evaluated to design a
sustainable harvest monitoring program for the Alaska subsistence halibut fishery consistent
with available long-term funding. Such a program could be based on a postal survey linked
with other data gathering methods in selected communities or regulatory areas, such as faceto-face interviews, calendars, or limited inseason monitoring. Outreach about the subsistence
halibut regulations, including the requirement to obtain a SHARC, should be part of any
continuing harvest monitoring program. Steps toward evaluating and enhancing the current
program will be taken under the new grant (award number NA11NMF4370059) that supports
project activities for the 2011 harvest year. The award includes a modest budget increase to
restore the third round of survey mailings and support enhanced outreach activities.

42

REFERENCES CITED
ADLWD (Alaska Department of Labor and Workforce Development).
http://labor.alaska.gov/research/pop/popest.htm

2011.

Population Data, Juneau

Cochran, W. G. 1977. Sampling techniques. 3rd edition. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Crapo, C., B. C. Paust, and J. K. Babbitt 1993. Recoveries & yields from Pacific fish and shellfish University of
Alaska Fairbanks Alaska Sea Grant College Program, Marine Advisory Bulletin #37, Fairbanks.
Fall, J. A., D. B. Andersen, L. Brown, M. Coffing, G. Jennings, C. Mishler, A. Paige, C. J. Utermohle, and V. Vanek
1993. Noncommercial harvests and uses of wild resources in Sand Point, Alaska, 1992 Alaska Department of
Fish
and
Game
Division
of
Subsistence,
Technical
Paper
No.
226,
Juneau
http://www.subsistence.adfg.state.ak.us/techpap/tp226.pdf
Fall, J. A., M. George, and B. Easley 2005. Subsistence harvests of Pacific halibut in Alaska, 2004 Alaska
Department of Fish and Game Division of Subsistence Technical Paper No. 304, Juneau.
http://www.subsistence.adfg.state.ak.us/techpap/tp304.pdf
Fall, J. A., M. Kerlin, B. Easley, and R. J. Walker 2004. Subsistence harvests of Pacific halibut in Alaska, 2003.
Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Subsistence Technical Paper No. 288, Anchorage and Juneau.
http://www.subsistence.adfg.state.ak.us/techpap/tp288.pdf
Fall, J. A., and D. Koster 2008. Subsistence harvests of Pacific halibut in Alaska, 2007 Alaska Department of Fish
and
Game
Division
of
Subsistence
Technical
Paper
No.
342,
Anchorage
http://www.subsistence.adfg.state.ak.us/TechPap/TP342.pdf
Fall, J. A., and D. Koster 2010. Subsistence harvests of Pacific halibut in Alaska, 2008 Alaska Department of Fish
and
Game,
Division
of
Subsistence
Technical
Paper
No.
348,
Anchorage
http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/techpap/TP348.pdf
Fall, J. A., and D. Koster 2011. Subsistence harvests of Pacific halibut in Alaska, 2009 Alaska Department of Fish
and
Game,
Division
of
Subsistence
Technical
Paper
No.
357,
Anchorage
http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/techpap/TP357.pdf
Fall, J. A., D. Koster, and B. Davis 2006. Subsistence harvests of Pacific halibut in Alaska, 2005 Alaska
Department of Fish and Game Division of Subsistence Technical Paper No. 320, Juneau.
http://www.subsistence.adfg.state.ak.us/techpap/tp320.pdf
Fall, J. A., D. Koster, and M. Turek 2007. Subsistence harvests of Pacific halibut in Alaska, 2006. Alaska
Department of Fish and Game Division of Subsistence Technical Paper No. 333, Juneau.
http://www.subsistence.adfg.state.ak.us/techpap/TP333.pdf
Fall, J. A., D. Koster, and M. Turek 2009. Estimates of subsistence harvests of Pacific halibut in Kodiak and Sitka,
Alaska, 2006 Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Subsistence, Special Publication No. 2009-06,
Anchorage.
Gilroy, H. L. 2005. The Pacific halibut fishery, 2004 Pages 5–18 in the proceedings of the International Pacific
Halibut Commission Eighty-First Annual Meeting, January 17–21, 2005. International Pacific Halibut
Commission,
Victoria,
British
Columbia
http://www.iphc.washington.edu/halcom/pubs/annmeet/2005/bluebook/Bluebook2005.pdf
IPHC, and H. Geiger 2011. Annual report: 2010 International Pacific Halibut Commission, Seattle, WA.
NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 2000. Environmental assessment/regulatory impact review/initial
regulatory flexibility analysis for a regulatory amendment for defining a halibut subsistence fishery category
(EA/RIR/RFA). North Pacific Fishery Management Council, Alaska Department of Fish and Game,
International Pacific Halibut Commission, and National Marine Fisheries Service, Anchorage.
NPFMC (North Pacific Fishery Management Council). 2003. Environmental assessment and regulatory impact
review for a regulatory amendment to define a halibut subsistence fishery category in convention waters
National Marine Fisheries Service, Juneau and the North Pacific Fishery Management Council, Anchorage
http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/analyses/subsistence/halibut0403.pdf

43

Stanek, R. T. 1985. Patterns of wild resource use in English Bay and Port Graham, Alaska Alaska Department of
Fish
and
Game
Division
of
Subsistence,
Technical
Paper
No.
104,
Anchorage
http://www.subsistence.adfg.state.ak.us/techpap/tp104.pdf
Trumble, R. J. n.d. 1998 estimates of personal use halibut. Pages 61–64 in Report of assessment and research
activities 1998. International Pacific Halibut Commission, Seattle.
U. S. Census Bureau. 2001. Profiles of general demographic characteristics, Alaska: 2000. U.S. Department of
Commerce Washington, D. C.
U.

S. Census Bureau.
2011.
2010 Census.
U.
http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml

S.

Census

Bureau,

Washington,

D.

C.

Williams, G. H. 2004. Retention of sublegal halibut in the areas 4D/4E CDQ fishery: 2003 harvests. Pages 59–60
in IPHC staff, editor. International Pacific Halibut Commission report of assessment and research activities
2003, Seattle.
Williams, G. H. 2005. Retention of sublegal halibut in the areas 4D/4E CDQ fishery: 2004 harvests. Pages 59–60
in IPHC staff, editor. International Pacific Halibut Commission report of assessment and research activities
2004, Seattle.
Williams, G. H. 2007. Retention of sublegal halibut in the area 4D/4E CDQ fishery: 2006 harvests. Pages 63–65
in IPHC staff, editor. International Pacific Halibut Commission report of assessment and research activities
2006, Seattle.
Williams, G. H. 2008. Retention of sublegal halibut in the area 4D/4E CDQ fishery: 2007 harvests. Pages 79–81
in IPHC staff, editor. International Pacific Halibut Commission report of assessment and research activities
2007, Seattle.
Williams, G. H. 2009. Retention of sublegal-sized halibut in the Area 4D/4E CDQ fishery: 1998–2008 harvests.
Pages 67–70 in, volume IPHC report of assessment and research activities 2008. International Pacific Halibut
Commission, Seattle.
Williams, G. H. 2011. Retention of U32 halibut in the 2010 Area 4D/4E CDQ fishery. Pages 63–66 in IPHC
report of assessment and research activities, 2010. International Pacific Halibut Commission, Seattle.
Wolfe, R. J. 2002. Subsistence halibut harvest assessment methodologies. Report prepared for the National Marine
Fisheries Service, Sustainable Fisheries Division, San Marcos, CA.

44

TABLES AND FIGURES

45

Table 1.–Population of rural communities eligible to participate in the Alaska subsistence halibut
fishery, 2000 and 2010.
Communitya
Angoon
Coffman Cove
Craig
Edna Bay
Elfin Cove
Gustavus
Haines
Hollis
Hoonah
Hydaburg
Hyder
Kake
Kasaan
Klawock
Klukwan
Metlakatla
Meyers Chuck
Naukati Bay
Pelican
Petersburg
Point baker
Port Alexander
Port Protection
Saxman
Sitka
Skagway
Tenakee Springs
Thorne Bay
Whale Pass
Wrangell
Census area balancesd
Subtotal, Area 2C 5
Akhiok
Chenega Bay
Cordova
Karluk
Kodiakb
Larsen Bay
Nanwalek
Old Harbor
Ouzinkie
Port Graham
Port Lions
Seldovia
Tatitlek
Yakutat
Census area balancesd
Subtotal, Area 3A

Regulatory
area
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
2C
3A
3A
3A
3A
3A
3A
3A
3A
3A
3A
3A
3A
3A
3A
3A

Population: 2000
Total
Alaska Native
572
419
199
12
1,397
432
49
2
32
0
429
32
1,811
332
139
13
860
597
382
342
97
4
710
530
39
19
854
496
139
123
1,375
1,125
21
2
135
13
163
42
3,224
388
35
3
81
11
63
7
431
302
8,835
2,178
862
44
104
5
552
27
58
2
2,308
550

Population: 2010
Total
Alaska Native
459
405
176
10
1,201
378
42
0
20
6
442
30
1,713
278
112
10
760
502
376
324
87
5
557
449
49
22
755
446
95
86
1,405
1,245

25,956
80
86
2,454
27
12,973
115
177
237
225
171
253
286
107
680

8,052
75
67
368
26
1,697
91
165
203
197
151
163
66
91
375

113
88
2,948
15
52
48
411
8,881
920
131
471
31
2,369
1,230
25,957
71
76
2,239
37
12,824
87
254
218
161
177
194
420
88
662

17,871

3,735

17,508

-continued-

46

9
36
390
2
3
13
276
2,184
52
5
23
1
582
7,772
62
46
344
35
983
66
227
194
140
160
119
121
58
330
2,885

Table 1.–Page 2 of 3.
Communitya
Chignik
Chignik Lagoon
Chignik Lake
Cold Bay
False Pass
Ivanof Bay
King Cove
Nelson Lagoon
Perryville
Sand Point
Census area balancesd
Subtotal, Area 3B
Akutan
Nikolski
Unalaska
Census area balancesd
Subtotal, Area 4A
Adak
Atka
Census area balancesd
Subtotal, Area 4B
St. George Island
St. Paul Island
Census area balancesd
Subtotal, Area 4C
Gambell
Savoonga
Diomede
Census area balancesd
Subtotal, Area 4D
Alakanuk
Aleknagik
Brevig Mission
Bethel
Chefornak
Chevak
Clark's Point
Council ANVSAc
Dillingham
Eek
Egegik
Elim
Emmonak
Golovin
Goodnews Bay
Hooper Bay
King Salmon
Kipnuk
Kongiganak
Kotlik

Regulatory
area
3B
3B
3B
3B
3B
3B
3B
3B
3B
3B

Population: 2000
Total
Alaska Native
79
48
103
85
145
127
88
15
64
42
22
21
792
379
83
68
107
105
952
421

Population: 2010
Total
Alaska Native
91
56
78
58
73
70
108
20
35
27
7
7
938
384
52
40
113
110
976
417
5
2,476
1,189
1,027
76
18
17
4,376
355
178
5,599
448
326
46
61
58

4A
4A
4A

2,435
713
39
4,283

1,311
117
27
397

4B
4B

5,035
316
92

541
118
84

4C
4C

408
152
532

202
140
460

387
102
479

104
92
417

4D
4D
4D

684
649
643
146

600
622
614
137

581
681
671
115

509
654
637
110

4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E

1,438
652
221
276
5,471
394
765
75
0
2,466
280
116
313
767
144
230
1,014
442
644
359
591

1,373
638
187
254
3,719
386
734
69
0
1,503
271
89
297
720
133
216
971
133
631
349
568

1,467
677
219
388
6,080
418
938
62
0
2,329
296
109
330
762
156
243
1,093
374
639
439
577

1,401
660
185
366
4,334
403
912
55
0
1,549
289
51
305
737
148
232
1,070
132
626
430
563

-continued-

47

Table 1.–Page 3 of 3.
Communitya
Koyuk
Kwigillingok
Levelock
Manokotak
Mekoryuk
Naknek
Napakiak
Napaskiak
Newtok
Nightmute
Nome
Nunam Iqua (formerly Sheldon
Point)
Oscarville
Pilot Point
Platinum
Port Heiden
Quinhagak
Scammon Bay
Saint Michael
Shaktoolik
Shishmaref
Solomon Anvsa
South Naknek
Stebbins
Teller
Togiak
Toksook Bay
Tuntutuliak
Tununak
Twin Hills
Ugashik
Unalakleet
Wales
White Mountain
Census area balancesd
Subtotal, Area 4E
Total

Regulatory
area
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E

Population: 2000
Total
Alaska Native
297
280
338
331
122
116
399
378
210
203
678
319
353
341
390
383
321
311
208
197
3,505
2,057
164
61
100
41
119
555
465
368
230
562
4
137
547
268
809
532
370
325
69
11
747
152
203

154
61
86
38
93
540
453
343
218
531
3
115
518
248
750
519
366
315
65
9
655
137
175

28,880
82,707

23,176
38,990

Population: 2010
Total
Alaska Native
332
319
321
310
69
62
442
425
191
185
544
283
354
344
405
393
354
343
280
266
3,598
2,348
187
70
68
61
102
669
474
401
251
563
0
79
556
229
817
590
408
327
74
12
688
145
190
398
30,378
84,353

174
67
57
57
87
650
472
379
242
540
0
66
530
220
767
555
396
314
72
9
574
136
167
24,856
39,164

Source U.S. Census Bureau 2001, 2011; Alaska Department of Labor and Workforce Development 2011.
a. Alaska Native village statistical area (ANVSA) populations were used whenever no city or census designated place
(CDP) populations were present in the census.
b. Total population for Kodiak Island road system area; includes Kodiak City, Kodiak Station, Chiniak, and other areas
on the road system.
c. There is no census table for a Council CDP or municipality in 2000. The Council ANVSA table indicated that all 40
housing units were vacant in 2000.
d. Population living outside incorporated places and CDPs but eligible for participation in the subsistence halibut fishery
as of December 4, 2009.
e. Nontribal residents of Naukati Bay were not eligible for SHARCs until 2008. This community was not included in
population estimates for previous study years.

48

Table 2.–Project chronology, 2010 study year.
Date
October 1, 2010
January 26, 2011
February 7, 2011
March 16, 2011
May 16, 2011
April through June 2011
April 8, 2011
October 24, 2011
November 21, 2011
December 7, 2011
December 31, 2011

Event/Action
Award No. NA04NMF4370170 between NMFS and ADF&G amended to support the
research for study year 2010
Presentation of 2009 study findings at IPHC annual meeting, Victoria, B.C.
Distribution of final report and 4 page summary for study year 2009
First mailing of survey forms
Second mailing of survey forms
Administration of surveys in Angoon, Hydaburg, Ketchikan, and Sitka
Submission of semiannual report on project progress to NMFS
Submission of semiannual report on project progress to NMFS
Release of public review draft of final report
Presentation of study findings, NPFMC, Anchorage
Completion of revised final report

49

Table 3.–Sample achievement.

50

Tribal name
Angoon
Community
Association
Aukquan
Traditional
Council
Central Council
Tlingit and
Haida Indian
Tribes
Chilkat Indian
Village
Chilkoot Indian
Association
Craig
Community
Association
Douglas Indian
Association
Hoonah Indian
Association
Hydaburg
Cooperative
Association
Ketchikan
Indian
Corporation
Klawock
Cooperative
Association
Metlakatla
Indian
Community,
Annette Island
Reserve

First Mailing
Second Mailing
Third Mailing
Totals
Surveys
Surveys
Surveys
Returned
Regulatory Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
SHARCs Returned through
Response
returned
returned
returned
mailed returned undeliverable mailed returned undeliverable Mailed returned undeliverable issued by mail
staff Response
rate
areas
Undeliverable
2C

92

20

2

66

2

5

0

0

0

92

22

51

73

79.3%

7

2C

1

2C

488

158

31

316

46

9

0

0

0

488

204

11

215

44.1%

40

2C

23

15

1

13

2

0

0

0

0

23

17

0

17

73.9%

1

2C

48

18

2

31

3

1

0

0

0

48

21

1

22

45.8%

2

2C

63

27

5

35

5

1

0

0

0

63

32

1

33

52.4%

6

2C

16

1

1

14

2

0

0

0

0

16

3

0

3

18.8%

1

2C

141

52

11

83

15

2

0

0

0

141

67

1

68

48.2%

13

2C

124

27

9

89

0

0

0

0

0

124

27

81

108

87.1%

9

2C

503

140

27

350

16

9

0

0

0

503

156

163

319

63.4%

35

2C

80

24

4

54

7

1

0

0

0

80

31

0

31

38.8%

5

2C

172

49

9

120

24

1

0

0

0

172

73

3

76

44.2%

10

-continued-

Table 3.–Page 2 of 15.
First Mailing
Second Mailing
Third Mailing
Totals
Surveys
Surveys
Surveys
Returned
Regulatory Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
SHARCs Returned through
Response
returned
returned
returned
mailed returned undeliverable mailed returned undeliverable Mailed returned undeliverable issued by mail
staff Response
rate
areas
Undeliverable

51

Tribal name
Organized
2C
Village of
Kake
Organized
2C
Village of
Kasaan
Organized
Village of
2C
Saxman
Petersburg
2C
Indian
Association
Sitka Tribe of
2C
Alaska
Skagway
2C
Village
Wrangell
2C
Cooperative
Association
Subtotal, Area 2C
Kenaitze Indian
3A
Tribe
Lesnoi Village
3A
(Woody
Island)
Native Village
3A
of Afognak
Native Village
3A
of Akhiok
Native Village
3A
of Chenega
Native Village
3A
of Karluk

80

41

0

43

13

1

0

0

0

80

54

0

54

67.5%

1

8

3

3

2

1

0

0

0

0

8

4

0

4

50.0%

3

37

5

3

29

1

1

0

0

0

37

6

12

18

48.6%

3

73

33

4

40

6

0

0

0

0

73

39

1

40

54.8%

4

289

105

22

168

22

3

0

0

0

289

127

25

152

52.6%

24

94

58

6

37

3

1

0

0

0

94

61

1

62

66.0%

7

2,335

779

140

1,491

168

35

0

0

0

2,335

947

351

1,298

55.59%

171

123

51

5

79

10

1

0

0

0

123

61

0

61

49.6%

6

71

35

5

32

4

1

0

0

0

71

39

0

39

54.9%

6

24

11

0

13

3

0

0

0

0

24

14

0

14

58.3%

0

9

1

2

6

1

0

0

0

0

9

2

0

2

22.2%

2

17

8

0

10

0

0

0

0

0

17

8

0

8

47.1%

0

3

4

-continued-

Table 3.–Page 3 of 15.
First Mailing
Second Mailing
Third Mailing
Totals
Surveys
Surveys
Surveys
Returned
Regulatory Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
SHARCs Returned through
Response
returned
returned
returned
mailed returned undeliverable mailed returned undeliverable Mailed returned undeliverable issued by mail
staff Response
rate
areas
Undeliverable

52

Tribal name
Native Village
3A
of Eyak
Native Village
3A
of Larsen Bay
Native Village
3A
of Nanwalek
Native Village
3A
of Ouzinkie
Native Village
3A
of Port
Graham
Native Village
3A
of Port Lions
Native Village
3A
of Tatitlek
Ninilchik
3A
Village
Seldovia
3A
Village Tribe
Sun'aq Tribe of
Kodiak
3A
(Formerly
Shoonaq')
Village of
3A
Kanatak
Village of Old
3A
Harbor
Village of
3A
Salamatoff
Yakutat Tlingit
3A
Tribe
Subtotal, Area 3A
Agdaagux Tribe
3B
of King Cove
Chignik Lake
3B
Village

80

32

3

48

9

1

0

0

0

80

41

0

41

51.3%

4

37

16

1

21

4

3

0

0

0

37

20

0

20

54.1%

3

44

12

0

34

6

0

0

0

0

44

18

0

18

40.9%

0

37

12

0

25

5

0

0

0

0

37

17

0

17

45.9%

0

43

12

1

30

13

1

0

0

0

43

25

0

25

58.1%

2

32

19

0

14

3

0

0

0

0

32

22

0

22

68.8%

0

23

9

2

12

2

0

0

0

0

23

11

0

11

47.8%

2

81

32

7

43

8

1

0

0

0

81

40

0

40

49.4%

7

63

33

6

24

2

0

0

0

0

63

35

0

35

55.6%

6

126

40

11

81

8

1

0

0

0

126

48

0

48

38.1%

11

18

4

1

13

1

3

0

0

0

18

5

0

5

27.8%

4

46

16

4

27

3

0

0

0

0

46

19

0

19

41.3%

4

21

13

1

7

0

0

0

0

0

21

13

0

13

61.9%

1

41

14

2

29

7

1

0

0

0

41

21

0

21

51.2%

3

940

370

52

551

89

13

0

0

0

940

459

0

459

48.83%

62

72

28

0

47

10

1

0

0

0

72

38

0

38

52.8%

1

11

1

1

10

0

0

0

0

0

11

1

0

1

9.1%

1

-continued-

Table 3.–Page 4 of 15.
First Mailing
Second Mailing
Third Mailing
Totals
Surveys
Surveys
Surveys
Returned
Regulatory Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
SHARCs Returned through
Response
returned
returned
returned
mailed returned undeliverable mailed returned undeliverable Mailed returned undeliverable issued by mail
staff Response
rate
areas
Undeliverable

53

Tribal name
Ivanoff Bay
3B
Village
Native Village
3B
of Belkofski
Native Village
3B
of Chignik
Native Village
3B
of Chignik
Lagoon
Native Village
3B
of False Pass
Native Village
3B
of Nelson
Lagoon
Native Village
3B
of Perryville
Native Village
3B
of Unga
Pauloff Harbor
3B
Village
Qagan
Toyagungin
3B
Tribe of Sand
Point Village
Subtotal, Area 3B
Native Village
4A
of Akutan
Qawalingin
Tribe of
4A
Unalaska
Subtotal, Area 4A
Native Village
4B
of Atka
Subtotal, Area 4B

8

4

0

4

0

0

0

0

0

8

4

0

4

50.0%

0

7

7

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

7

7

0

7

100.0%

0

20

9

0

14

0

0

0

0

0

20

9

0

9

45.0%

0

22

11

2

9

3

0

0

0

0

22

14

0

14

63.6%

2

8

3

2

4

0

0

0

0

0

8

3

0

3

37.5%

2

48

13

9

27

1

0

0

0

0

48

14

0

14

29.2%

9

86

34

3

58

12

0

0

0

0

86

46

0

46

53.5%

3

291

114

17

178

27

1

0

0

0

291

141

0

141

48.45%

18

21

5

0

16

2

0

0

0

0

21

7

0

7

33.3%

0

36

10

0

26

3

0

0

0

0

36

13

0

13

36.1%

0

57

15

0

42

5

0

0

0

0

57

20

0

20

35.09%

0

2

1

2

0

1

0

0

0

5

2

0

2

40.00%

1

5

1
3

5
5

-continued-

Table 3.–Page 5 of 15.
First Mailing
Second Mailing
Third Mailing
Totals
Surveys
Surveys
Surveys
Returned
Regulatory Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
SHARCs Returned through
Response
returned
returned
returned
mailed returned undeliverable mailed returned undeliverable Mailed returned undeliverable issued by mail
staff Response
rate
areas
Undeliverable

54

Tribal name
Pribilof Islands
Aleut
4C
Community of
St. George
Pribilof Islands
Aleut
4C
Community of
St. Paul
Subtotal, Area 4C
Native Village
4D
of Diomede
(Inalik)
Native Village
4D
of Gambell
Native Village
4D
of Savoonga
Subtotal, Area 4D
Chevak Native
4E
Village

6

3

0

4

1

0

0

0

0

6

4

0

4

66.7%

0

42

11

0

33

2

0

0

0

0

42

13

0

13

31.0%

0

48

14

0

37

3

0

0

0

0

48

17

0

17

35.42%

0

18

8

1

10

2

0

0

0

0

18

10

0

10

55.6%

1

20

9

1

11

2

0

0

0

0

20

11

0

11

55.00%

1

1
1

3

(Kashunamiut)

Chinik Eskimo
Community
Egegik Village
King Island
Native
Community
Levelock
Village
Manokotak
Village
Naknek Native
Village
Native Village
of Aleknagik
Native Village
of Brevig
Mission

4E

1

4E

1

4E

1

4E

1

4E

1

4E

8

0

1

7

1

0

0

0

0

8

1

0

1

12.5%

1

4E

6

1

0

5

2

0

0

0

0

6

3

0

3

50.0%

0

4E

1

-continued-

Table 3.–Page 6 of 15.

55

Tribal name
Native Village
of Council
Native Village
of Dillingham
(Curyung)
Native Village
of Eek
Native Village
of Goodnews
Bay
(Mumtraq)
Native Village
of Hooper Bay
Native Village
of Kanakanak
Native Village
of Kipnuk
Native Village
of Kongiganak
Native Village
of Koyuk
Native Village
of
Kwigillingok
Native Village
of Kwinhagak
Native Village
of Mekoryuk
Native Village
of Nightmute
Native Village
of Scammon
Bay
Native Village
of Shaktoolik

First Mailing
Second Mailing
Third Mailing
Totals
Surveys
Surveys
Surveys
Returned
Regulatory Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
SHARCs Returned through
Response
returned
returned
returned
mailed returned undeliverable mailed returned undeliverable Mailed returned undeliverable issued by mail
staff Response
rate
areas
Undeliverable
4E

4

4E

16

6

2

9

1

0

0

0

0

16

7

0

7

43.8%

2

4E

7

3

0

5

0

0

0

0

0

7

3

0

3

42.9%

0

4E

4

4E

16

6

0

12

0

0

0

0

0

16

6

0

6

37.5%

0

4E

1

4E

13

1

0

12

1

0

0

0

0

13

2

0

2

15.4%

0

4E

5

4E

1

4E

4

4E

3

4E

6

3

0

2

0

0

0

0

0

6

3

0

3

50.0%

0

4E

1

4E

3

4E

1

-continued-

Table 3.–Page 7 of 15.

Tribal name
Native Village
of Toksook
Bay

First Mailing
Second Mailing
Third Mailing
Totals
Surveys
Surveys
Surveys
Returned
Regulatory Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
SHARCs Returned through
Response
returned
returned
returned
mailed returned undeliverable mailed returned undeliverable Mailed returned undeliverable issued by mail
staff Response
rate
areas
Undeliverable
4E

33

12

0

21

0

0

0

0

0

33

12

0

12

36.4%

0

13

3

0

10

0

0

0

0

0

13

3

0

3

23.1%

0

15

7

0

8

1

2

0

0

0

15

8

0

8

53.3%

2

9

3

0

7

0

0

0

0

0

9

3

0

3

33.3%

0

6

0

8

0

0

0

0

0

14

6

0

6

42.9%

0

68
1,371

6
217

141
2,453

8
302

7
57

0
0

0
0

0
0

210
3,906

76
1,673

1
352

77
2,025

36.67%
51.8%

13
266

(Nunakauyak)

56

Native Village
4E
of Tununak
Native Village
4E
of Unalakleet
Native Village
4E
of Wales
Newtok Village
4E
Nome Eskimo
4E
Community
Orutsararmuit
4E
Native Village
South Naknek
4E
Village
Stebbins
Community
4E
Association
Traditional
4E
Village of
Togiak
Twin Hills
4E
Village
Ugashik Village
4E
Village of
4E
Chefornak
Village of
4E
Clark's Point
Village of
4E
Kotlik
Subtotal, Area 4E
Tribal name subtotals

3
1
1

1
4

3
1
2
14
1
1
210
3,906

-continued-

Table 3.–Page 8 of 15.

57

Rural
community
Angoon
Coffman Cove
Craig
Edna Bay
Elfin Cove
Gustavus
Haines
Hollis
Hoonah
Hydaburg
Hyder
Juneau
Kake
Kasaan
Ketchikan
Klawock
Klukwan
Metlakatla
Meyers Chuck
Naukati Bay
Pelican
Petersburg
Port Alexander
Port Protection
Pt. Baker
Saxman
Sitka
Skagway
Tenakee
Springs
Thorne Bay
Ward Cove
Whale Pass

Regulatory Surveys
areas
mailed
2C
16
2C
49
2C
376
2C
37
2C
15
2C
61
2C
426
2C
44
2C
99
2C
10
2C
32
2C
3
2C
35
2C
8
2C
5
2C
155
2C
2
2C
32
2C
9
2C
40
2C
40
2C
875
2C
26
2C
16
2C
15
2C
11
2C
1,363
2C
51

First Mailing
Second Mailing
Third Mailing
Totals
Surveys
Surveys
Surveys
Returned
Surveys
Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
SHARCs Returned through
Response
returned
returned
returned
returned undeliverable mailed returned undeliverable Mailed returned undeliverable issued by mail
staff Response
rate
Undeliverable
7
1
9
0
2
0
0
0
16
7
9
16 100.0%
2
27
0
24
14
0
0
0
0
49
41
0
41
83.7%
0
188
18
199
48
7
0
0
0
376
236
2
238
63.3%
22
18
0
25
5
2
0
0
0
37
23
1
24
64.9%
2
6
2
7
5
0
0
0
0
15
11
0
11
73.3%
2
37
2
25
8
1
0
0
0
61
45
0
45
73.8%
3
258
12
171
51
3
0
0
0
426
309
0
309
72.5%
14
32
3
15
3
2
0
0
0
44
35
0
35
79.5%
5
67
3
36
13
1
0
0
0
99
80
0
80
80.8%
4
6
1
3
0
0
0
0
0
10
6
2
8
80.0%
1
19
1
15
5
1
0
0
0
32
24
0
24
75.0%
1
20
2

2
0

13
4

7
0

0
0

0
0

0
0

0
0

35
8

27
2

0
2

27
4

77.1%
50.0%

2
0

85

7

70

16

1

0

0

0

155

101

1

102

65.8%

8

19
8
24
20
516
14
5
5
6
698
32

2
0
2
0
23
0
1
0
1
78
2

14
4
15
22
383
12
10
10
4
652
20

2
1
2
7
107
1
5
6
0
114
4

0
0
2
4
5
0
0
0
0
20
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

32
9
40
40
875
26
16
15
11
1,363
51

21
9
26
27
623
15
10
11
6
812
36

0
0
4
0
0
0
1
0
0
60
0

21
9
30
27
623
15
11
11
6
872
36

65.6%
100.0%
75.0%
67.5%
71.2%
57.7%
68.8%
73.3%
54.5%
64.0%
70.6%

2
0
4
4
27
0
1
0
1
96
2

2C

53

39

0

22

7

0

0

0

0

53

46

0

46

86.8%

0

2C
2C
2C

119
2
18

74

2

50

16

2

0

0

0

119

90

0

90

75.6%

4

16

0

3

2

0

0

0

0

18

18

0

18

100.0%

0

-continued-

Table 3.–Page 9 of 15.

58

Regulatory Surveys
Rural
community
areas
mailed
Wrangell
2C
377
Subtotal, Area 2C
4,420
Chenega Bay
3A
7
Chiniak
3A
3
Cordova
3A
498
Karluk
3A
6
Kodiak
3A
1,552
Larsen Bay
3A
6
Nanwalek
3A
7
Old Harbor
3A
7
Ouzinkie
3A
13
Port Graham
3A
10
Port Lions
3A
11
Seldovia
3A
144
Tatitlek
3A
10
Yakutat
3A
74
Subtotal, Area 3A
2,348
Chignik
3B
1
Chignik Lagoon
3B
1
Chignik Lake
3B
1
Cold Bay
3B
32
False Pass
3B
1
King Cove
3B
25
Nelson Lagoon
3B
1
Perryville
3B
1
Sand Point
3B
15
Subtotal, Area 3B
78
Unalaska
4A
119
Subtotal, Area 4A
119
Adak
4B
5
Subtotal, Area 4B
5

First Mailing
Second Mailing
Third Mailing
Totals
Surveys
Surveys
Surveys
Returned
Surveys
Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
SHARCs Returned through
Response
returned
returned
returned
returned undeliverable mailed returned undeliverable Mailed returned undeliverable issued by mail
staff Response
rate
Undeliverable
238
19
145
36
2
0
0
0
377
274
0
274
72.7%
21
2,492
182
1,988
486
55
0
0
0
4,420
2,978
84
3,062
69.3%
228
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
7
0
7 100.0%
0
293
3
722
3
4
4
9
6
6
77
6
43
1,186

13
0
142
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
159

215
3
762
4
4
2
6
4
8
75
7
34
1,124

56
3
126
0
0
0
0
0
2
31
0
10
228

10
0
29
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
41

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

498
6
1,552
6
7
7
13
10
11
144
10
74
2,348

349
6
848
3
4
4
9
6
8
108
6
53
1,414

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

349
6
848
3
4
4
9
6
8
108
6
53
1,414

70.1%
100.0%
54.6%
50.0%
57.1%
57.1%
69.2%
60.0%
72.7%
75.0%
60.0%
71.6%
60.2%

23
0
170
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
198

23

2

8

4

0

0

0

0

32

27

0

27

84.4%

2

11

2

17

4

0

0

0

0

25

15

0

15

60.0%

2

4
39
67
67

0
5
8
8

11
41
53
53

2
11
9
9

1
1
0
0

0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0

15
78
119
119

6
50
76
76

0
0
0
0

6
50
76
76

40.0%
64.1%
63.9%
63.9%

1
6
8
8

2

1

2

1

1

0

0

0

5

3

0

3

60.0%

2

-continued-

Table 3.–Page 10 of 15.
First Mailing
Second Mailing
Third Mailing
Totals
Surveys
Surveys
Surveys
Returned
Regulatory Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
SHARCs Returned through
Response
returned
returned
returned
areas
mailed returned undeliverable mailed returned undeliverable Mailed returned undeliverable issued by mail
staff Response
rate
Undeliverable

59

Rural
community
St. George
4C
1
Island
Subtotal, Area 4C
1
Aleknagik
4E
2
Bethel
4E
1
Chefornak
4E
1
Dillingham
4E
23
Egegik
4E
1
King Salmon
4E
2
Kongiganak
4E
1
Manokotak
4E
2
Naknek
4E
6
Nightmute
4E
1
Nome
4E
20
Port Heiden
4E
3
Quinhagak
4E
1
South Naknek
4E
1
Teller
4E
10
Togiak
4E
1
Subtotal, Area 4E
76
Rural community subtotals
7,047
Tribal–Rural Totals
10,953

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

0.0%

0

13

2

8

4

0

0

0

0

23

17

0

17

73.9%

2

2

0

4

0

0

0

0

0

6

2

0

2

33.3%

0

10

2

8

1

0

0

0

0

20

11

0

11

55.0%

2

1

0

9

1

0

0

0

0

10

2

0

2

20.0%

0

31
3,817
5,188

5
360
577

40
3,249
5,702

9
744
1,046

0
98
155

0
0
0

0
0
0

0
0
0

76
7,047
10,953

40
4,561
6,234

0
84
436

40
4,645
6,670

52.6%
65.9%
60.9%

5
447
713

-continued-

Table 3.–Page 11 of 15.

60

City of
State of Surveys
residence
residence mailed
Adak
AK
8
Akhiok
AK
6
Akiachak
AK
1
Akutan
AK
16
Aleknagik
AK
3
Anchor Point
AK
12
Anchorage
AK
219
Angoon
AK
109
Atka
AK
1
Auke Bay
AK
5
Barrow
AK
1
Bethel
AK
8
Chefornak
AK
14
Chenega Bay
AK
8
Chevak
AK
2
Chignik
AK
10
Chignik Lagoon
AK
13
Chignik Lake
AK
4
Chiniak
AK
18
Chugiak
AK
3
Clarks Point
AK
1
Coffman Cove
AK
46
Cold Bay
AK
35
Cordova
AK
557
Craig
AK
510
Dillingham
AK
30
Douglas
AK
17
Dutch Harbor
AK
80
Eagle River
AK
8
Edna Bay
AK
28
Eek
AK
6
Egegik
AK
1
Elfin Cove
AK
14

First Mailing
Second Mailing
Third Mailing
Totals
Surveys
Surveys
Surveys
Returned
Surveys
Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
SHARCs Returned through
Response
returned
returned
returned
returned undeliverable mailed returned undeliverable Mailed returned undeliverable issued by mail
staff Response
rate
Undeliverable
3
1
4
1
1
0
0
0
8
4
0
4
50.0%
2
0
1
5
1
0
0
0
0
6
1
0
1
16.7%
1
2

0

14

2

0

0

0

0

16

4

0

4

25.0%

0

6
85
27

0
27
1

6
114
78

0
17
4

0
8
7

0
0
0

0
0
0

0
0
0

12
219
109

6
102
31

0
0
65

6
102
96

50.0%
46.6%
88.1%

0
35
7

1
6
8

0
0
0

7
8
0

0
0
0

0
0
0

0
0
0

0
0
0

0
0
0

8
14
8

1
6
8

0
0
0

1
6
8

12.5%
42.9%
100.0%

0
0
0

8
4

0
0

2
11

0
0

0
0

0
0

0
0

0
0

10
13

8
4

0
0

8
4

80.0%
30.8%

0
0

10

0

10

1

0

0

0

0

18

11

0

11

61.1%

0

25
26
317
273
14
2
41
6
15
2

0
2
8
26
3
6
5
0
0
0

23
8
258
249
13
9
40
3
19
5

13
4
64
53
5
2
7
0
3
0

0
0
9
7
0
1
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

46
35
557
510
30
17
80
8
28
6

38
30
381
326
19
4
48
6
18
2

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

38
30
381
326
19
4
48
6
18
2

82.6%
85.7%
68.4%
63.9%
63.3%
23.5%
60.0%
75.0%
64.3%
33.3%

0
2
17
30
3
7
5
0
0
0

6

2

6

4

0

0

0

0

14

10

0

10

71.4%

2

-continued-

Table 3.–Page 12 of 15.

61

First Mailing
Second Mailing
Third Mailing
Totals
Surveys
Surveys
Surveys
Returned
State of Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
SHARCs Returned through
Response
returned
returned
returned
staff Response
rate
City of residence residence mailed returned undeliverable mailed returned undeliverable Mailed returned undeliverable issued by mail
Undeliverable
Elmendorf AFB
AK
1
Ester
AK
1
Fairbanks
AK
7
4
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
7
4
0
4
57.1%
2
False Pass
AK
1
Fritz Creek
AK
1
Gakona
AK
1
Gambell
AK
1
Girdwood
AK
1
Glennallen
AK
1
Golovin
AK
1
Goodnews Bay
AK
4
Gustavus
AK
58
37
2
22
6
0
0
0
0
58
43
0
43
74.1%
2
Haines
AK
473
276
11
208
58
2
0
0
0
473
334
0
334
70.6%
12
Hollis
AK
1
Homer
AK
25
13
2
9
1
0
0
0
0
25
14
0
14
56.0%
2
Hoonah
AK
236
114
16
117
29
3
0
0
0
236
143
1
144
61.0%
19
Hooper Bay
AK
14
6
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
14
6
0
6
42.9%
0
Hydaburg
AK
120
32
2
87
0
0
0
0
0
120
32
84
116
96.7%
2
Hyder
AK
31
19
1
14
5
1
0
0
0
31
24
0
24
77.4%
1
Juneau
AK
349
91
35
234
26
8
0
0
0
349
117
0
117
33.5%
43
Kake
AK
110
64
2
48
19
0
0
0
0
110
83
0
83
75.5%
2
Karluk
AK
9
3
0
6
3
0
0
0
0
9
6
0
6
66.7%
0
Kasaan
AK
15
4
5
3
1
0
0
0
0
15
5
0
5
33.3%
5
Kasilof
AK
13
7
2
7
1
1
0
0
0
13
8
0
8
61.5%
3
Kenai
AK
108
45
8
66
9
2
0
0
0
108
54
0
54
50.0%
9
Ketchikan
AK
571
160
27
395
30
14
0
0
0
571
190
195
385
67.4%
40
King Cove
AK
87
30
1
63
12
0
0
0
0
87
42
0
42
48.3%
1
King Salmon
AK
2
Kipnuk
AK
12
1
0
11
1
0
0
0
0
12
2
0
2
16.7%
0
Klawock
AK
237
104
6
141
23
2
0
0
0
237
127
0
127
53.6%
8
Klukwan
AK
2

-continued-

Table 3.–Page 13 of 15.

62

City of
residence
Kodiak
Kongiganak
Kotzebue
Kwigillingok
Larsen Bay
Manokotak
Mekoryuk
Metlakatla
Meyers Chuck
Naknek
Nanwalek
Naukati
Nelson Lagoon
Newtok
Nightmute
Nikiski
Ninilchik
Nome
North Pole
Old Harbor
Ouzinkie
Palmer
Pelican
Perryville
Petersburg
Pilot Point
Point Baker
Port Alexander
Port Graham
Port Heiden
Port Lions
Port Protection
Port William

State of Surveys
residence mailed
AK
1702
AK
6
AK
1
AK
3
AK
33
AK
2
AK
5
AK
193
AK
8
AK
9
AK
48
AK
25
AK
1
AK
1
AK
2
AK
9
AK
38
AK
23
AK
4
AK
41
AK
47
AK
10
AK
45
AK
18
AK
961
AK
2
AK
20
AK
28
AK
47
AK
2
AK
39
AK
2
AK
1

First Mailing
Second Mailing
Third Mailing
Totals
Surveys
Surveys
Surveys
Returned
Surveys
Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
SHARCs Returned through
Response
returned
returned
returned
returned undeliverable mailed returned undeliverable Mailed returned undeliverable issued by mail
staff Response
rate
Undeliverable
775
150
853
136
30
0
0
0
1702
911
0
911
53.5%
179
2
0
4
1
0
0
0
0
6
3
0
3
50.0%
0

15

1

21

4

3

0

0

0

33

19

0

19

57.6%

3

63
7
2
15
16

8
0
0
0
0

129
4
7
36
10

26
1
1
6
4

0
0
0
0
3

0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0

193
8
9
48
25

89
8
3
21
20

0
0
0
0
0

89
8
3
21
20

46.1%
100.0%
33.3%
43.8%
80.0%

8
0
0
0
3

1
16
13

0
3
1

8
19
9

1
3
1

0
0
0

0
0
0

0
0
0

0
0
0

9
38
23

2
19
14

0
0
0

2
19
14

22.2%
50.0%
60.9%

0
3
1

17
20
2
23
8
555

4
0
1
0
2
26

21
29
7
25
8
431

3
5
1
8
4
121

0
0
0
4
0
6

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

41
47
10
45
18
961

20
25
3
31
12
676

0
0
0
0
0
0

20
25
3
31
12
676

48.8%
53.2%
30.0%
68.9%
66.7%
70.3%

4
0
1
4
2
31

7
16
17

1
0
1

12
11
31

8
1
12

0
0
1

0
0
0

0
0
0

0
0
0

20
28
47

15
17
29

0
0
0

15
17
29

75.0%
60.7%
61.7%

1
0
2

21

0

22

6

0

0

0

0

39

27

0

27

69.2%

0

-continued-

Table 3.–Page 14 of 15.

63

First Mailing
Second Mailing
Third Mailing
Totals
Surveys
Surveys
Surveys
Returned
State of Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
SHARCs Returned through
Response
returned
returned
returned
staff Response
rate
City of residence residence mailed returned undeliverable mailed returned undeliverable Mailed returned undeliverable issued by mail
Undeliverable
Quinhagak
AK
5
Sand Point
AK
130
50
9
81
11
1
0
0
0
130
61
0
61
46.9%
10
Savoonga
AK
17
7
1
9
2
0
0
0
0
17
9
0
9
52.9%
1
Saxman
AK
12
0
3
10
0
1
0
0
0
12
0
1
1
8.3%
3
Seldovia
AK
152
76
2
82
29
1
0
0
0
152
105
0
105
69.1%
2
Seward
AK
12
3
3
6
0
1
0
0
0
12
3
0
3
25.0%
4
Sitka
AK
1635
795
95
817
131
25
0
0
0
1635
926
88
1014
62.0%
117
Skagway
AK
56
37
2
21
4
0
0
0
0
56
41
0
41
73.2%
2
Soldotna
AK
44
22
2
20
3
0
0
0
0
44
25
0
25
56.8%
2
St. George Island
AK
4
St. Paul Island
AK
41
11
0
31
1
0
0
0
0
41
12
0
12
29.3%
0
Sterling
AK
4
Tatitlek
AK
15
7
0
10
1
0
0
0
0
15
8
0
8
53.3%
0
Teller
AK
10
1
0
9
1
0
0
0
0
10
2
0
2
20.0%
0
Tenakee Springs
AK
53
39
0
22
7
0
0
0
0
53
46
0
46
86.8%
0
Thorne Bay
AK
114
74
2
45
15
0
0
0
0
114
89
0
89
78.1%
2
Togiak
AK
4
Toksook Bay
AK
32
12
0
20
0
0
0
0
0
32
12
0
12
37.5%
0
Trapper Creek
AK
1
Tununak
AK
11
3
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
11
3
0
3
27.3%
0
Twin Hills
AK
2
Unalakleet
AK
1
Unalaska
AK
75
37
3
39
6
1
0
0
0
75
43
0
43
57.3%
3
Valdez
AK
38
20
0
22
1
0
0
0
0
38
21
0
21
55.3%
0
Ward Cove
AK
32
10
1
21
4
0
0
0
0
32
14
0
14
43.8%
1
Wasilla
AK
43
13
6
25
3
3
0
0
0
43
16
0
16
37.2%
9
Whale Pass
AK
8
8
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
8
8
0
8 100.0%
0
Whittier
AK
2
Willow
AK
2
Wrangell
AK
476
299
22
187
38
3
0
0
0
476
337
2
339
71.2%
25
Yakutat
AK
110
57
0
61
16
1
0
0
0
110
73
0
73
66.4%
1
Subtotal, AK
10,804
5,123
557
5,634
1,036
150
0
0
0 10,804
6,159
436
6,595
61.0%
690

-continued-

Table 3.–Page 15 of 15.
First Mailing
Second Mailing
Third Mailing
Totals
Surveys
Surveys
Surveys
Returned
City of
Regulatory Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
Surveys Surveys
SHARCs Returned through
Response
returned
returned
returned
residence
areas
mailed returned undeliverable mailed returned undeliverable Mailed returned undeliverable issued by mail
staff Response
rate
Undeliverable
Subtotal, non-Alaska
residents
149
65
20
68
10
5
0
0
0
149
75
0
75
50.3%
23
City of residence totals
10,953
5,188
577
5,702
1,046
155
0
0
0
10,953
6,234
436
6,670
60.9%
713

a. To protect confidentiality, data for tribes and communities with 5 or fewer surveys mailed are not reported in this table. Subtotals include all tribes and
communities.

64

Table 4.–Estimated subsistence harvests of halibut, 2010, by SHARC type and regulatory area.
Return rate

65

SHARCa Regulatory SHARCs Surveys
area
type
issued returned Percent
Tribalb
2C
2,335
1,298
55.6%
Tribal
3A
940
459
48.8%
Tribal
3B
291
141
48.5%
Tribal
4A
57
20
35.1%
Tribal
4B
5
2
40.0%
Tribal
4C
48
17
35.4%
Tribal
4D
20
11
55.0%
Tribal
4E
210
77
36.7%
Subtotal, tribal
3,906
2,025
51.8%
Ruralb
2C
4,420
3,062
69.3%
Rural
3A
2,348
1,414
60.2%
Rural
3B
78
50
64.1%
Rural
4A
119
76
63.9%
Rural
4B
5
3
60.0%
Rural
4C
1
0
0.0%
Rural
4D
0
Rural
4E
76
40
52.6%
Subtotal, rural
7,047
4,645
65.9%
Allb
2C
6,755
4,360
64.5%
All
3A
3,288
1,873
57.0%
All
3B
369
191
51.8%
All
4A
176
96
54.5%
All
4B
10
5
50.0%
All
4C
49
17
34.7%
All
4D
20
11
55.0%
All
4E
286
117
40.9%
Total
10,953
6,670
60.9%

Subsistence fished
Subsistence halibut
Sport fished halibut
Sport halibut harvest
Lingcod bycatch
Rockfish bycatch
halibut
harvest
Estimated Estimated
Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated
Estimated
number
number
number
number
Percent of Estimated number of
number
Percent of number number of number
fish
poundsc respondents
respondents
fish
fish
respondents SHARCs number fish poundsc respondents SHARCs
859
36.8%
8,245
168,965
310
13.3%
1,032
18,652
112
556
252
2,578
372
39.6%
6,247
95,359
153
16.2%
632
13,555
63
308
84
1,560
134
46.0%
1,209
17,243
39
13.4%
166
3,368
8
76
17
138
29
51.2%
197
3,022
9
15.0%
15
123
3
15
12
123
3
50.0%
18
263
3
50.0%
3
53
0
0
0
0
25
52.9%
515
10,859
0
0.0%
0
0
2
5
3
50
7
33.3%
42
1,270
0
0.0%
0
0
2
15
2
17
73
34.8%
911
11,589
17
8.3%
106
1,518
4
10
6
29
38.5%
1,502
17,384
308,569
530
13.6%
1,953
37,268
194
984
376
4,496
2161
48.9%
13,591
261,900
1,014
22.9%
3,372
54,065
385
1,271
685
5,308
1202
51.2%
11,237
208,273
682
29.1%
3,080
54,636
142
521
242
2,637
42
53.9%
357
6,490
23
29.3%
35
485
6
44
12
128
69
58.4%
693
11,456
46
38.6%
208
2,638
4
44
7
283
3
60.0%
22
210
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
3,489
3,020
1,574
176
99
6
25
7
84
4,991

14.5%
49.5%
44.7%
47.9%
47.7%
56.0%
55.0%
51.8%
33.3%
29.4%
45.6%

48
25,948
21,836
17,484
1,567
890
40
515
42
959
43,332

661
488,990
430,866
303,632
23,733
14,477
473
10,859
1,270
12,250
797,560

1
1,767
1,325
835
62
55
3
0
0
19
2,297

1.8%
25.1%
19.6%
25.4%
16.7%
31.0%
25.0%
0.0%
0.0%
6.6%
21.0%

3
6,698
4,404
3,712
200
223
3
0
0
109
8,651

147
111,972
72,717
68,191
3,853
2,761
53
0
0
1,665
149,241

0
537
497
206
14
7
0
2
2
4
732

0
1,880
1,827
828
120
59
0
5
15
10
2,864

0
947
937
326
29
18
0
3
2
6
1,322

0
8,356
7,886
4,198
266
406
0
50
17
29
12,851

Source ADF&G Division of Subsistence SHARC survey, 2011.
a. Subsistence Halibut Registration Certificate (SHARC).
b. “Tribal” = individuals who obtained SHARCs as members of an eligible tribe, sorted by location of tribal headquarters. “Rural” = individuals who obtained
SHARCs as residents of an eligible rural community. “All” = sum of tribal and rural SHARC holders for a regulatory area based on location of tribal
headquarters or rural community. Because some SHARC holders may fish in regulatory areas other than the location of the area of their tribal headquarters or
rural residence, area totals in this table differ slightly from those in tables 6, 7, and 9.
c. Pounds net (dressed) weight = 75% of round (whole) weight.

Table 5.–Age of Subsistence Halibut Registration Certificate holders by SHARC type, 2010.
SHARC
Type

0–4

5–9

Age (years)
Number of SHARC Holders
10–14 15–19 20–24 25–29 30–34 35–39 40–44 45–49 50–54 55–59 60–64 65–69 70–74 75–79 80–84 85–89 90–94

95+ Totals

Tribal

11
72
0.3% 1.8%

116
3.0%

171
4.4%

260
6.7%

256
6.6%

269
6.9%

263
6.7%

343
438
461
423
8.8% 11.2% 11.8% 10.8%

322
8.2%

217
5.6%

153
3.9%

78
2.0%

32
0.8%

17
0.4%

2
1
0.1% 0.0%

3,906

Rural

10
51
0.1% 0.7%

112
1.6%

198
2.8%

223
3.2%

403
5.7%

546
7.8%

532
7.6%

638
811
960
913
733
9.0% 11.5% 13.6% 13.0% 10.4%

466
6.6%

271
3.8%

113
1.6%

51
0.7%

12
0.2%

2
1
0.0% 0.0%

7,047

Total

21 123
228
369
483
659
816
796
981 1,249 1,421 1,336
0.2% 1.1% 2.1% 3.4% 4.4% 6.0% 7.4% 7.3% 9.0% 11.4% 13.0% 12.2%

1,055
9.6%

Source SHARC database, Restricted Access Management Program, NMFS, Juneau, as of 12/31/2010.

683
424
191
83
29
4
2 10,953
6.2% 3.9% 1.7% 0.8% 0.3% 0.0% 0.0%

66

Table 6.–Estimated harvests of halibut in numbers of fish and pounds net (dressed, head-off) weight by regulatory area and subarea, 2010.

67

Set hook gear
Number of Estimated Estimated
number
SHARCs
number
Regulatory subsistence respondents halibut
c
harvested
fished
fished
Subarea
area
Southern Southeast Alaska
2C
1,618
1,373
9,797
Sitka Lamp Area
2C
718
657
3,118
Northern Southeast Alaska
2C
776
686
4,084
Subtotal, Area 2C
3,013
2,625
16,999
Yakutat Area
3A
66
53
543
Prince William Sound
3A
291
260
1,767
Cook Inlet
3A
228
138
2,780
Kodiak Island road system
3A
687
564
4,429
Kodiak Island–Other
3A
592
466
2,854
Subtotal, Area 3A
1,631
1,283
12,374
Chignik Area
3B
42
20
132
Lower Alaska Peninsula
3B
130
65
696
Subtotal, Area 3B
171
84
829
Eastern Aleutians–East
4A
99
61
429
Eastern Aleutians–West
4A
8
7
32
Subtotal, Area 4A
101
62
461
Western Aleutians–East
4B
10
6
22
Western Aleutians–Other
4B
0
Subtotal, Area 4B
10
6
22
St. George Island
4C
6
5
23
St. Paul Island
4C
19
13
468
Subtotal, Area 4C
25
17
491
St. Lawrence Island
4D
4
2
32
Area 4D–Other
4D
0
Subtotal, Area 4D
4
2
32
Bristol Bay
4E
4
4
0
Yukon Delta
4E
60
15
170
Norton Sound
4E
6
6
38
Kotzebue Sound
4E
0
Subtotal, Area 4E
70
25
208
Total, Alaska

c

4,991

4,071

31,416

Estimated subsistence harvest by gear typea
Estimated sport harvest
Hook and line or handline
All gear
Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated
pounds
pounds
pounds
number pounds
number
number
number
number
number
halibut respondents halibut
halibut respondents halibut
halibut respondents halibut
halibut
b
b
b
harvested
harvested harvested
harvested harvested
harvested harvestedb
fished
fished
fished
207,535
671
2,927
46,831
1,618
12,725 254,366
833
2,928
47,523
68,532
229
586
8,456
718
3,704
76,988
236
529
8,960
77,223
263
1,007
16,241
776
5,091
93,464
296
855
14,880
353,290
1,118
4,521
71,528
3,013
21,520 424,818
1,313
4,312
71,364
13,296
29
191
4,768
66
734
18,064
15
76
1,198
35,004
143
364
7,274
291
2,132
42,279
139
361
7,905
36,870
157
2,607
28,939
228
5,386
65,809
126
579
9,008
82,139
315
1,146
20,928
687
5,575 103,066
450
1,871
35,599
56,642
285
1,346
26,790
592
4,201
83,432
310
1,055
18,534
223,951
807
5,654
88,699
1,631
18,028 312,650
887
3,943
72,244
2,912
35
183
2,945
42
315
5,857
5
6
103
8,845
96
514
8,306
130
1,210
17,152
51
143
2,248
11,757
130
697
11,251
171
1,525
23,009
56
148
2,351
7,046
66
409
6,297
99
838
13,343
53
217
2,682
665
3
22
540
8
55
1,205
6
8
132
7,711
67
431
6,837
101
892
14,548
57
225
2,814
210
4
14
240
10
36
450
3
21
432
210
563
9,555
10,118
843

4
5
6
11
2

14
8
16
24
6

240
158
584
742
328

10
6
19
25
4

36
30
485
515
38

450
720
10,139
10,859
1,171

3
0
0
0
0

21
0
0
0
0

432
0
0
0
0

843
0
2,542
571

2
0
56
0

6
0
571
0

328
0
6,942
0

4
4
60
6

38
0
741
38

1,171
0
9,484
571

0
2
0
0

0
2
0
0

0
35
0
0

3,113

56

571

6,942

70

779

10,055

2

2

35

610,992

2,183

11,916

186,567

4,991

43,332

797,560

2,297

8,651

149,241

Source ADF&G Division of Subsistence SHARC survey, 2011.
a. “Setline” = longline or skate. “Hand-operated gear” = rod and reel, or handline.
b. Weights given are “net weight.” Pounds net (dressed, head off) weight = 75% of round (whole) weight.
c. Because fishers may fish in more than one area, subtotals for regulatory areas and the state total might exceed the sum of the subarea values. Includes
subsistence and sport fishing.

Table 7.–Alaska subsistence halibut harvests from 2003–2010 by geographic area fished.
Subsistence halibut harvests, net weight (lb)

68

Geographic area
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Southern Southeast
Alaska
290,443 369,319 328,658 307,921 283,422
Sitka LAMP Area
173,323 147,312 133,545 147,526 132,190
Northern Southeast
Alaska
159,772 160,453 135,869 124,670 109,286
Subtotal, Area 2C
623,538 677,084 598,072 580,117 524,897
Yakutat Area
11,198
20,153
36,515
19,187
17,516
Prince William
Sound
28,409
58,429
68,063
47,965
52,407
Cook Inlet
52,609
83,939
79,024
59,965
75,623
Kodiak Island road
system
114,028 129,145 134,849 140,388 130,538
Kodiak Island–Other
79,256 111,944 110,824 111,752
96,206
Subtotal, Area 3A
285,500 403,610 429,275 379,258 372,289
Chignik Area
10,500
12,053
14,783
17,780
15,397
Lower Alaska
Peninsula
16,977
21,467
31,442
30,767
32,351
Subtotal, Area 3B
27,477
33,519
46,225
48,547
47,748
Eastern Aleutians–
East
19,345
26,715
33,882
25,993
12,753
Eastern Aleutians–
West
1,852
2,162
1,734
1,069
2,193
Subtotal, Area 4A
21,197
28,877
35,615
27,062
14,946
Western Aleutians–
East
2,582
916
1,351
2,761
1,997
Western Aleutians–
Other
0
0
0
0
0
Subtotal, Area 4B
2,582
916
1,351
2,761
1,997
St. George Island
2,042
1,823
2,145
3,443
3,736
St. Paul Island
20,839
7,911
5,571
5,085
11,342
Subtotal, Area 4C
22,881
9,734
7,716
8,527
15,077
St. Lawrence Island
4,380
10,923
5,848
8,297
3,204
Area 4D–Other
0
0
0
0
0
Subtotal, Area 4D
4,380
10,923
5,848
8,297
3,204
Bristol Bay
435
203
2,169
1,336
2,116
YK Delta
53,284
28,298
51,950
69,407
50,019
Norton Sound
56
0
0
0
0
Subtotal, Area 4E
53,775
28,501
54,119
70,743
52,135
Total, Alaskaa
1,041,330 1,193,162 1,178,222 1,125,312 1,032,293

2008

2009

2010

Percent change
between years
7-year
2009 to average
2010 to 2010

254,510 262,046 254,366
104,973 89,812 76,988

-2.9%
-14.3%

98,877 105,139 93,464
458,360 456,997 424,818
16,084 14,390 18,064

-11.1% -26.8%
-7.0% -24.1%
25.5%
-6.4%

47,112 33,796
76,795 81,043

42,279
65,809

96,872 108,049 103,066
100,540 91,202 83,432
337,403 328,480 312,650
11,842 5,889
5,857

25.1%
-18.8%

-15.1%
-42.0%

-12.0%
-9.5%

-4.6% -15.5%
-8.5% -16.8%
-4.8% -13.7%
-0.5% -53.5%

Percentage of state total

2003

2004

2005

2006

27.9%
16.6%

31.0%
12.3%

27.9%
11.3%

27.4%
13.1%

27.5%
12.8%

15.3% 13.4% 11.5%
59.9% 56.7% 50.8%
1.1%
1.7%
3.1%

11.1%
51.6%
1.7%

10.6% 11.1%
50.8% 51.7%
1.7%
1.8%

2.7%
5.1%

4.9%
7.0%

5.8%
6.7%

4.3%
5.3%

11.0% 10.8% 11.4%
7.6%
9.4%
9.4%
27.4% 33.8% 36.4%
1.0%
1.0%
1.3%

12.5%
9.9%
33.7%
1.6%

2007

5.1%
7.3%

2008

2009

2010

28.7%
11.8%

30.4%
10.4%

31.9%
9.7%

5.3%
8.7%

12.6% 10.9%
9.3% 11.3%
36.1% 38.0%
1.5%
1.3%

12.2% 11.7%
53.1% 53.3%
1.7%
2.3%
3.9%
9.4%

5.3%
8.3%

12.5% 12.9%
10.6% 10.5%
38.1% 39.2%
0.7%
0.7%

30,406 19,603
42,248 25,492

17,152
23,009

-12.5%
-9.7%

-34.4%
-40.6%

1.6%
2.6%

1.8%
2.8%

2.7%
3.9%

2.7%
4.3%

3.1%
4.6%

3.4%
4.8%

2.3%
3.0%

2.2%
2.9%

19,043 33,090

13,343

-59.7%

-45.3%

1.9%

2.2%

2.9%

2.3%

1.2%

2.1%

3.8%

1.7%

509
409
19,553 33,499

1,205
14,548

194.7%
-56.6%

-15.0%
-43.7%

0.2%
2.0%

0.2%
2.4%

0.1%
3.0%

0.1%
2.4%

0.2%
1.4%

0.1%
2.2%

0.0%
3.9%

0.2%
1.8%

450

-61.7%

-79.7%

0.2%

0.1%

0.1%

0.2%

0.2%

0.5%

0.1%

0.1%

-61.7%
2.9%
80.3%
71.7%
81.8%

-79.7%
-66.5%
16.6%
0.1%
-77.5%

81.8%

-77.5%
-100.0%
-75.9%
61.1%
-75.2%
-23.7%

4,737

1,175

0
0
4,737 1,175
450
1,150
700
720
4,507 5,623 10,139
5,657 6,323 10,859
3,131
644
1,171
0
0
3,131
644
1,171
84
0
0
14,669 7,468
9,484
1,145 1,281
571
15,898 8,749 10,055
886,988 861,359 797,560

27.0%
-55.4%
14.9%
-7.4%

0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2% 0.1% 0.1%
0.2%
0.2% 0.5%
0.1% 0.1%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.3%
0.4%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
2.0%
0.7%
0.5%
0.5%
1.1%
0.5%
0.7%
1.3%
2.2% 0.8% 0.7%
0.8%
1.5% 0.6%
0.7% 1.4%
0.4%
0.9%
0.5%
0.7%
0.3%
0.4%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.4% 0.9% 0.5%
0.7%
0.3% 0.4%
0.1% 0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
0.1%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
5.1%
2.4%
4.4%
6.2%
4.8%
1.7%
0.9%
1.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
5.2% 2.4% 4.6%
6.3%
5.1% 1.8%
1.0% 1.3%
100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Source ADF&G Division of Subsistence SHARC surveys, 2004–2011.
a. The sum of the harvests by geographic areas for 2003 reported here differs slightly from that reported in Table 8 in Fall et al (2004:50) due to rounding.

Table 8.–Number of hooks usually fished, setline (stationary) gear, Alaska halibut subsistence fishery, 2010.
Regulatory area (No.
of SHARC holders)

Number of hooksb
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 12

13

14

15

16 17 18

19

20

21 22 23

24

25

26 27 28

29

30

Missing

Totala

No.
Pct.

6 16 9
4 28 16
3 14
1 147 3 46
5
2 373 9 0 10
0 448 0 8 10 17 202 16 12 101 18 1,013
0.2 0.6 0.4 0.1 1.0 0.6 0.1 0.5 0.0 5.6 0.1 1.8 0.2 0.1 14.2 0.3 0.0 0.4 0.0 17.0 0.0 0.3 0.4 0.7 7.7 0.6 0.4 3.8 0.7 38.5

95
3.6

2,630

3A (3,288)

No.
Pct.

13
6
5
4 8
5
3
7
0
1.0 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.5 0.0

77 4 20
2
0
6.2 0.3 1.6 0.1 0.0

52 8 4
7
3 214 2 0
2 10 129 11 6 24 16
4.2 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.3 17.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.8 10.4 0.9 0.5 2.0 1.3

537
43.3

64
8.6

1,240

3B (369)

No.
Pct.

10
0
0
0 0
1
0
0
0
12.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0

4 0
0
2
0
4.9 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0

2 0 0
2
0 15 2 0
0
0
2.6 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 18.8 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0

0 0 0
2
0
0.0 0.0 0.0 2.7 0.0

34
41.2

8
11.4

82

4A (176)

No.
Pct.

0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
0
9 0
1
0
0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.5 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0

4 0 0
0
0 10 0 0
0
0
7.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

3 0 0
0
0
4.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

31
53.6

0
0.0

58

4B (10)

No.
Pct.

0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
0
3 0
0
0
0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 45.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0 0 0
0
0
2 0 0
0
0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 36.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0 0 0
0
0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0
0.0

1
8.3

6

4C (49)

No.
Pct.

0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0 0
0
0
0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0 0 0
0
0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0 0 0
0
0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0 0 0
0
0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

14
82.8

3
6.7

17

4D (20)

No.
Pct.

0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0 0
2
0
0
0.0 0.0 39.5 0.0 0.0

0 0 0
0
0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0 0 0
0
0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0 0 0
0
0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

3
60.5

0
0.0

5

4E (286)

No.
Pct.

3
0
0
1 0
0
0
0
0
9.2 0.0 0.0 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

1 0
0
0
0
3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

2 0 0
0
0
6 0 0
0
0
5.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0 0 0
0
0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

11
34.1

8
10.5

33

Alaska (10,953)

No.
Pct.

31 22 14
9 36 22
6 21
1 241 6 69
8
2 432 17 4 19
3 695 4 8 11 27 334 27 18 127 33 1,643
0.8 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.9 0.5 0.2 0.5 0.0 5.9 0.2 1.7 0.2 0.0 10.6 0.4 0.1 0.5 0.1 17.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.7 8.2 0.7 0.4 3.1 0.8 40.4

179
4.4

4,071

69

2C (6,755)

Source ADF&G Division of Subsistence SHARC survey, 2011.
a. Number of fishers using setline (fixed) gear. Based on location of tribe or rural community of SHARC holder.
b. The column for 30 hooks includes those fishers who reported using more than 30. There is no 30-hook limit in Areas 4C, 4D, or 4E.

Table 9.–Average net weight of subsistence and sport harvested halibut, 2010, by regulatory area
fished.
Sport harvesta

Subsistence methods
b

Area

Total halibut

Number Net weight (lb) Average per fish Number Net weight (lb) Average per fish Number Net weight (lb) Average per fish

2C
21,520
3A
18,028
3B
1,525
4A
892
4B
36
4C
515
4D
38
4E
779
Alaska 43,332

424,818
312,650
23,009
14,548
450
10,859
1,171
10,055
797,560

19.7
17.3
15.1
16.3
12.6
21.1
31.0
12.9
18.4

4,312
3,943
148
225
21
0
0
2
8,651

71,364
72,244
2,351
2,814
432
0
0
35
149,241

16.6
18.3
15.8
12.5
21.0

25,832
21,971
1,674
1,117
56
515
38
781
51,983

17.5
17.3

496,182
384,894
25,360
17,362
882
10,859
1,171
10,090
946,800

19.2
17.5
15.2
15.5
15.7
21.1
31.0
12.9
18.2

Source ADF&G Division of Subsistence SHARC survey, 2011.
a. Sport harvest of halibut by SHARC holders.
b. Area totals are based on the location of the harvest (see also Table 6 and Table 7).

Table 10.–Estimated harvests of lingcod and rockfish by regulatory area and subarea.
Lingcod

Subarea
Northern Southeast Alaska
Sitka Lamp Area
Southern Southeast Alaska
Subtotal, Area 2C
Cook Inlet
Kodiak Island Other
Kodiak Island Road System
Prince William Sound
Yakutat Area
Subtotal, Area 3A
Chignik Area
Lower Alaska Peninsula
Subtotal, Area 3B
Eastern Aleutians - East
Eastern Aleutians - West
Subtotal, Area 4A
Western Aleutians - East
Subtotal, Area 4B
St. George Island
St. Paul Island
Subtotal, Area 4C
St. Lawrence Island
Subtotal, Area 4D
Bristol Bay
Norton Sound
Yukon Delta
Subtotal, Area 4E
Totals

Regulatory area
2C
2C
2C
3A
3A
3A
3A
3A
3B
3B
4A
4A
4B
4C
4C
4D
4E
4E
4E

Estimated
number
SHARCs
fished

Estimated number
respondents
harvested

776
718
1,618
3,013
228
592
687
291
66
1,631
42
130
171
99
8
101
10
10
6
19
25
4
4
4
6
60
70
4,991

Source ADF&G Division of Subsistence SHARC survey, 2011.

70

53
265
197
493
27
71
90
44
29
218
0
8
8
7
0
7
0
0
2
0
2
2
2
0
0
3
3
732

Rockfish
Estimated
number
lingcod
harvested
161
920
719
1,800
144
242
260
92
142
880
0
102
102
59
0
59
0
0
5
0
5
15
15
0
0
3
3
2,864

Estimated number
respondents
harvested
143
344
482
937
32
127
157
77
18
343
6
20
25
18
1
18
0
0
3
0
3
2
2
0
0
3
3
1,322

Estimated
number
rockfish
harvested
1,088
2,644
3,956
7,688
612
1,101
1,528
611
574
4,426
33
209
242
402
4
406
0
0
50
0
50
17
17
0
0
23
23
12,851

Table 11.–Estimated harvests of halibut by gear type and participation subsistence and sport fisheries, selected Alaska communities, 2003
through 2010.

Communitya
Cordova

Kodiak

71

Petersburg

Port Graham

Sand Point

Year
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007

Number of
SHARC
holdersb
358
526
602
607
615
587
599
557
1,320
1,561
1,741
1,716
1,880
1,725
1,826
1,702
1,047
1,187
1,197
1,082
1,123
985
1,041
961
52
57
52
50
59
48
47
47
73
351
321
365
364

Subsistence harvests
Sport harvestd
Setline (fixed) gear
Hand-operated gear
Total subsistence harvest
All harvests
Estimated
Estimated
Estimated
Estimated
Estimated
Estimated
pounds
Estimated
pounds
Estimated
pounds
Estimated
pounds
Estimated
pounds
number fished
harvested
number fished
harvested
number fished
harvested
number fished
harvested
number fished
harvested
68
7,613
40
7,885
102
15,498
144
11,534
194
27,032
174
29,693
97
10,946
262
40,640
174
12,149
325
52,789
238
34,907
104
12,234
281
47,141
179
10,519
358
57,660
202
21,059
125
7,968
248
29,027
152
7,020
301
36,047
233
21,683
128
7,033
282
28,716
123
4,203
315
32,919
231
22,301
95
5,246
254
27,547
126
5,562
292
33,109
201
17,766
103
5,598
234
23,364
118
3,868
269
27,232
207
22,579
121
5,849
235
28,428
106
5,837
261
34,265
438
101,575
278
51,678
646
153,254
498
68,170
858
221,424
554
131,719
335
55,605
802
187,214
581
73,181
971
260,395
650
146,781
398
64,047
871
210,828
669
82,455
1,116
293,283
684
142,326
497
63,496
961
205,822
562
64,320
1,092
270,142
707
135,351
486
58,282
945
193,633
648
68,556
1,157
262,189
763
128,226
479
49,108
963
177,334
693
72,915
1,213
250,249
749
130,802
433
46,966
923
177,769
619
64,034
1,139
241,803
747
127,816
374
36,275
900
164,092
539
47,646
1,074
211,738
330
41,704
138
14,013
415
55,718
268
19,611
523
75,329
322
53,885
206
17,900
482
71,784
351
26,408
617
98,192
338
44,050
175
17,321
436
61,372
312
23,289
569
84,661
300
35,608
222
18,075
426
53,682
246
17,351
529
71,033
274
32,026
191
15,491
386
47,517
264
15,177
516
62,694
285
31,077
207
15,523
393
46,600
279
17,506
515
64,106
323
30,105
224
16,661
418
46,766
247
13,619
513
60,385
323
33,951
209
13,315
409
47,266
256
13,251
501
60,517
10
4,398
28
7,056
35
11,454
3
156
36
11,610
15
4,425
31
4,755
42
9,181
11
850
42
10,031
8
7,938
18
3,190
18
11,127
9
488
18
11,615
9
2,397
24
3,797
30
6,194
2
0
30
6,194
22
5,347
28
3,146
36
8,493
4
233
36
8,726
13
6,896
23
2,200
30
9,097
2
51
30
9,148
22
1,454
31
4,973
35
6,426
9
197
35
6,623
23
5,011
18
2,211
30
7,222
5
267
30
7,489
15
3,409
11
1,410
21
4,819
11
410
21
5,229
25
4,360
74
6,996
109
11,355
50
1,384
121
12,739
35
12,201
77
9,700
100
21,901
23
1,281
105
23,182
59
7,406
87
12,809
133
20,214
29
6,300
140
26,514
49
13,278
113
11,337
138
24,615
16
3,034
138
27,649

-continued-

Table 11.–Page 2 of 2.

Communitya

Sitka

Toksook Bay

72

Tununak

Unalaskac

Year
2008
2009
2010
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010

Number of
SHARC
holdersb
342
137
130
1,639
1,871
1,974
1,895
1,954
1,662
1,731
1,635
532
529
522
533
533
34
33
32
0
70
70
70
69
68
11
11
92
131
150
171
176
173
164
155

Subsistence harvests
Sport harvestd
Setline (fixed) gear
Hand-operated gear
Total subsistence harvest
All harvests
Estimated
Estimated
Estimated
Estimated
Estimated
Estimated
pounds
Estimated
pounds
Estimated
pounds
Estimated
pounds
Estimated
pounds
number fished
harvested
number fished
harvested
number fished
harvested
number fished
harvested
number fished
harvested
71
15,766
88
9,247
130
25,013
19
2,195
132
27,208
28
3,987
58
7,772
70
11,759
19
2,665
70
14,424
22
3,408
50
3,898
61
7,306
18
1,129
67
8,435
760
155,276
160
19,604
821
174,880
401
32,408
956
207,288
714
151,660
147
14,739
904
166,474
412
25,829
1,026
192,303
738
126,426
172
19,893
814
146,319
417
55,913
987
202,232
809
145,542
297
17,830
915
163,372
395
23,032
1,036
186,404
839
115,162
270
26,886
921
142,049
315
16,200
1,010
158,249
784
96,314
232
13,266
845
109,581
307
13,055
932
122,636
774
86,219
265
11,205
844
97,424
265
10,516
941
107,940
700
74,394
218
8,334
755
82,728
228
9,257
849
91,985
8
3,790
47
20,709
54
24,500
0
0
54
24,500
7
859
44
5,737
56
6,596
0
0
56
6,596
5
602
60
14,269
61
14,870
2
98
62
14,968
6
2,333
112
34,149
113
36,481
0
0
113
36,481
17
1,451
100
6,469
112
7,921
0
0
112
7,921
6
707
8
1,436
9
2,143
0
0
9
2,143
3
266
10
789
10
1,055
0
0
10
1,055
5
315
10
560
10
875
0
0
10
875
16
3
7
14
0
0
0
39
43
60
53
67
59
56
58

878
332
224
1,536
0
0
0
6,713
9,557
9,573
7,526
9,012
7,293
19,204
7,417

23
18
33
38
8
7
9
31
39
57
47
38
42
54
60

1,076
2,329
3,808
5,479
1,296
488
576
4,146
5,973
8,535
8,805
4,238
6,417
10,102
5,663

31
20
33
38
8
7
9
50
81
88
81
83
87
76
92

1,954
2,661
4,032
7,015
1,296
488
576
10,860
15,530
18,108
16,331
13,250
13,710
29,306
13,081

Source ADF&G Division of Subsistence SHARC surveys, 2004–2011.
a. For data on all communities for 2009, see appendix tables E-4, E-5, and E-6.
b. SHARC = Subsistence halibut registration certificate; includes all SHARC holders living in the community.
c. Includes Dutch Harbor.
d. Sport harvests by SHARC holders only.

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
33
34
28
50
33
43
45
54

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5,519
2,165
2,439
3,768
2,287
2,962
1,861
2,730

31
20
33
38
8
7
9
70
93
97
101
92
101
98
103

1,954
2,661
4,032
7,015
1,296
488
576
16,379
17,695
20,547
20,100
15,537
16,672
31,167
15,811

Table 12.–Estimated harvests of halibut for home use, Sitka.
Pounds usable (net) weight

Year
1987
1996
Annual average

Number of
fishing
households

Removed from
commercial
harvests

Rod and reel

Other methods

Total

Total without
commercial
removal

1,252
943
1,098

12,353
16,528
14,441

180,982
135,048
158,015

14,196
14,196

193,335
165,772
179,554

180,982
149,244
165,113

a

95% confidence
range (±%)b
22
28

Source ADF&G Community Subsistence Information System (CSIS).
a. Harvest data not collected for "other methods" in 1987.
b. Pertains to estimate of total harvests.

Table 13.–Number of SHARCs issued, estimated number of subsistence halibut fishers, and estimated
harvests by SHARC category, Sitka, 2003–2010.

Year
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Historical
average
(2003–
2009)

Rural SHARCs

Tribal SHARCs

All SHARC holders residing in Sitka

Average
harvest
per
Subsistence
fisher
SHARCs fished
Harvest (pounds)

Average
harvest
per
Subsistence
fisher
SHARCs
fished
Harvest (pounds)

Average
harvest
per
Subsistence
fisher
SHARCs
fished
Harvest (pounds)

1,224
1,464
1,578
1,429
1,484
1,388
1,446
1,363

679
785
654
759
754
722
717
632

128,489
135,532
114,632
120,735
104,530
87,945
82,246
69,779

189.2
172.7
175.3
159.1
138.6
121.8
114.7
110.5

415
407
396
466
470
274
285
272

142
119
160
156
167
123
127
124

46,391
30,942
31,687
42,637
37,519
21,636
15,178
12,949

326.7
260.0
198.1
273.6
224.7
175.9
119.5
104.6

1,639
1,871
1,974
1,895
1,954
1,662
1,731
1,635

821
904
814
915
921
845
844
755

174,880
166,474
146,319
163,372
142,049
109,581
97,424
82,728

213.0
184.2
179.8
178.6
154.2
129.7
115.4
109.5

1,430

724

110,587

152.7

388

142

32,284

227.4

1,818

866

142,871

164.9

Table 14.–Estimated harvests of halibut for home use, Petersburg.
Pounds usable (net) weight

Year
1987
2000
Annual average

Number of
fishing
households

Removed from
commercial
harvests

Rod and reel

Other methodsa

Total

Total without
commercial
removal

604
468
536

11,728
6,951
9,339

107,448
49,023
78,236

0
0

119,176
55,974
87,575

107,448
49,023
78,236

95% confidence
range (±%)b
51
39

Sources ADF&G Community Subsistence Information System (CSIS); ADF&G Division of Subsistence household
survey, 2001.
a. Harvest data not collected for "other methods" in 1987.
b. Pertains to estimate of total harvests.

73

Table 15.–Estimated harvests of halibut for home use, Cordova.
Pounds usable (net) weight

Year
1985
1988
1991
1992
1993
1997
Annual average

Number of
fishing
households
228
343
272
401
382
321
325

Removed from
commercial
harvests
3,776
18,701
25,107
11,383
3,762
3,551
11,047

Rod and reel
31,002
119,873
25,493
60,612
39,556
58,647
55,864

Other methods

Total

1,752
348
116
0
2,056
4,252
1,421

36,530
138,922
50,716
71,995
45,374
66,450
68,331

Total without
commercial
removal
32,754
120,221
25,609
60,612
41,612
62,899
57,285

95% confidence
range (±%)a
29%
62%
33%
48%
32%
41%

Source ADF&G Community Subsistence Information System (CSIS).
a. Pertains to estimate of total harvests.

Table 16.–Estimated harvests of halibut for home use, Port Graham.
pounds usable (net) weight

Year
1987
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1997
Annual averagea

Number of
fishing
households
42
29
32
35
42
42
36
38

Removed from
commercial
harvests
1,237
3,217
3,003
1,663
24
86
79
1,015

Rod and reel Other methods
3,809
1,482
4,106
2,332
7,867
3,105
2,881
4,017

Total

3,389
1,222
3,171
4,846
3,365
1,346
5,326
3,574

8,435
5,921
10,280
8,841
11,256
4,537
8,286
8,606

Total without
commercial
removal
7,198
2,704
7,277
7,178
11,232
4,451
8,207
7,591

95% confidence
range (±%)b
14%
47%
22%
17%
14%
14%
28%

Source ADF&G Community Subsistence Information System (CSIS).
a. Excludes 1989, the year of the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill.
b. Pertains to estimate of total harvests.

Table 17.–Estimated harvests of halibut for home use, Kodiak road system.a
Pounds usable (net) weight

Year
1982
1991
1992
1993
Annual average

Number of
fishing
households

Removed from
commercial
harvests

Rod and reel

Other methods

Total

Total without
commercial
removal

1,404
1,178
1,178
1,336
1,306

NA
48,245
89,625
142,108
93,326

NA
206,692
329,345
479,391
338,476

NA
40,591
18,732
31,863
30,395

451,223
295,528
437,702
653,362
462,197

360,113
247,283
348,077
511,254
366,682

95% confidence
range (±%)b
45%
30%
33%
33%

Source ADF&G Community Subsistence Information System (CSIS).
a. Harvest data are available based on random samples drawn from the entire road system population for 1982 and
1991. Only Kodiak City was sampled in 1992 and 1993. Estimates for the entire road system population were
developed for this table based on the known portion of the total road system harvest harvested by city residents
in 1982 and 1991.
b. Pertains to estimate of total harvests.

74

Table 18.–Halibut removals in Alaska by regulatory area, 2010.
Pounds net weight
Area
2C
3A
3B
4
Alaska

a

Commercial

4,486,000
20,502,000
10,114,000
7,469,000
42,571,000

b

Sport

2,548,000
5,068,000
40,000
42,000
7,698,000

Subsistencec

Wastage

424,818
312,650
23,009
46,601
807,077

251,000
1,438,000
907,000
279,000
2,875,000

Bycatch
341,000
2,663,000
1,226,000
5,592,000
9,822,000

Total
8,050,818
29,983,650
12,310,009
13,428,601
63,773,077

Sources Williams 2011; Division of Subsistence, ADF&G, SHARC Survey, 2011; IPHC and
Geiger 2011.
a. Commercial catch includes IPHC research catch and in Area 2C, the Metlakatla fishery catch.
b. Projected harvests.
c. Includes 9,517 lb of U32 (under 32 inches in length) halibut legally retained by CDQ
organizations in areas 4D and 4E for personal use. The subsistence harvest by SHARC holders
was 797,560 lb, including 37,084 lb in Area 4.

75

Table 19.–Comparison of selected SHARC survey results, 2003–2010.
Study years

2003

76

Response to survey
Number of SHARCs issued
Number of surveys returned
Response rate
Subsistence halibut fishing
Estimated number of subsistence halibut fishers
Percent of all SHARC holders subsistence fishing
Estimated number of subsistence halibut
Estimated net pounds of subsistence halibut
Average weight of subsistence-harvested halibut
Average harvest per fisher, fish
Average harvest per fisher, net pounds
Sport halibut fishing by SHARC holders
Estimated number of sport halibut fishers
Percent of all SHARC holders sport fishing
Estimated number of sport halibut
Estimated net pounds of sport halibut
Average weight of sport-harvested halibut
Average harvest per fisher, fish
Average harvest per fisher, net pounds
Total number of halibut fishers
Estimated number of fishers, subsistence or sport
Percent of total SHARC holders who fished
Incidental rockfish harvests
Number of rockfish harvesters
Percent of all SHARC holders
Percent of all subsistence halibut fishers
Number of rockfish harvested
Average number of rockfish harvested, all subsistence
halibut fishers
Average number of rockfish harvested, subsistence
halibut fishers who harvested rockfish

2004

2005

2006

Percent change

2007

2008

2009

2010

2010
2010 compared
compared to to previous 72009
year average

11,635
7,593
65.3%

13,813
8,524
61.7%

14,306
8,565
59.9%

14,206
8,426
59.3%

15,047
8,682
57.7%

11,565
7,316
63.3%

11,733
6,944
59.2%

10,953
6,670
60.9%

-6.6%
-3.9%
2.9%

-16.9%
-16.7%
0.0%

4,942
42.5%
43,926
1,041,330
23.7
8.9
210.7

5,984
43.3%
52,412
1,193,162
22.8
8.8
199.4

5,621
39.3%
55,875
1,178,222
21.1
9.9
209.6

5,909
41.6%
54,089
1,125,312
20.8
9.2
190.4

5,933
39.4%
53,697
1,032,293
19.2
9.1
174.0

5,303
45.9%
48,604
886,988
18.2
9.2
167.3

5,296
45.1%
45,434
861,359
19.0
8.6
162.6

4,991
45.6%
43,332
797,560
18.4
8.7
159.8

-5.8%
0.9%
-4.6%
-7.4%
-2.9%
1.2%
-1.7%

-10.4%
7.4%
-14.3%
-23.7%
-11.0%
-4.3%
-14.9%

2,580
22.2%
10,784
245,947
22.8
4.2
95.3

3,107
22.5%
12,530
251,092
20.0
4.0
80.8

3,147
22.0%
14,096
293,415
20.8
4.5
93.2

2,894
20.4%
11,219
223,639
19.9
3.9
77.3

2,566
17.1%
10,959
196,198
17.9
4.3
76.5

2,609
22.6%
11,427
197,760
17.3
4.4
75.8

2,528
21.5%
9,938
165,318
16.6
3.9
65.4

2,297
21.0%
8,651
149,241
17.3
3.8
65.0

-9.1%
-2.6%
-13.0%
-9.7%
3.7%
-4.2%
-0.7%

-17.2%
-0.9%
-25.2%
-33.6%
-10.8%
-9.6%
-19.4%

5,941
51.1%

6,980
50.5%

6,876
48.1%

6,899
48.6%

6,787
45.1%

6,202
53.6%

6,153
52.4%

5,835
53.3%

-5.2%
1.6%

-10.9%
6.7%

1,239
10.6%
25.1%
14,870

1,616
11.7%
27.0%
19,001

1,544
10.8%
27.5%
12,395

1,529
10.8%
25.9%
16,945

1,568
10.4%
26.4%
15,266

1,404
12.1%
26.5%
14,346

1,427
12.2%
27.0%
13,315

1,322
12.1%
26.5%
12,851

-7.4%
-0.8%
-1.7%
-3.5%

-10.4%
7.5%
0.1%
-15.2%

3.0

3.2

2.2

2.9

2.6

2.7

2.5

2.6

2.4%

-5.4%

12.0

11.8

8.0

11.1

9.7

10.2

9.3

9.7

4.2%

-5.7%

-continued-

Table 19.–Page 2 of 2.
Study years

2003
Incidental lingcod harvests
Number of lingcod harvesters
Percent of all SHARC holders
Percent of all subsistence halibut fishers
Number of lingcod harvested
Average number of lingcod harvested, all subsistence
halibut fishers
Average number of lingcod harvested, subsistence
halibut fishers who harvested lingcod

2004

2005

2006

Percent change

2007

2008

2009

699
6.0%
14.1%
3,298

953
6.9%
15.9%
4,407

862
6.0%
15.3%
2,355

927
6.5%
15.7%
3,486

959
6.4%
16.2%
3,402

854
7.4%
16.1%
3,479

900
7.7%
17.0%
3,390

0.7

0.7

0.4

0.6

0.6

0.7

0.6

4.7

4.6

2.7

3.8

3.5

4.1

3.8

Sources Fall et al. 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007; Fall and Koster 2008, 2009, 2010; ADF&G Division of Subsistence SHARC survey, 2011.

2010

2010
2010 compared
compared to to previous 72009
year average

732
6.7%
14.7%
2,864

-18.7%
-12.9%
-13.7%
-15.5%

-16.8%
-0.3%
-7.0%
-15.8%

0.6

-10.4%

-6.2%

3.9

3.9%

0.7%

77

Table 20.–Percentage of SHARCs that expired, by SHARC type.
Percentage of SHARCs
Tribal
Never responded to harvest survey
Never subsistence fished for halibut
Never harvested halibut
Harvest: low (1 to 100 pounds)
Harvest: medium (101 to 1,000 pounds)
Harvest: high (>1,000 pounds)
All harvesters (any amount)
All fishers (includes never harvested)

Rural

All

Expired

Active

Expired

Active

Expired

Active

29.0%
40.8%
5.3%
11.7%
12.4%
0.8%
24.9%
30.2%

18.4%
21.3%
10.4%
22.4%
25.6%
1.8%
49.8%
60.2%

25.0%
24.9%
8.3%
19.0%
22.1%
0.8%
41.9%
50.2%

12.4%
8.1%
12.2%
28.0%
38.2%
1.1%
67.3%
79.5%

27.1%
32.9%
6.8%
15.3%
17.2%
0.8%
33.3%
40.1%

14.5%
12.6%
11.6%
26.1%
33.9%
1.3%
61.3%
72.9%

78

79
Figure 1.–Regulatory areas for the Pacific halibut fishery.

Returned

Not Returned

12,000

Return rate = 61%

80

Number of surveys/SHARCs

9,000

Return rate = 66%

6,000

3,000

Return Rate = 52%

0
Tribal SHARCs

Rural SHARCs

Figure 2.–Number of surveys returned and return rates for subsistence halibut surveys, by SHARC type, 2010.

Total SHARCs

100%
Rural communities

Tribes
87%

90%

79%

80%

75% 76%

71% 70% 73% 73%

70%
64%

63%

66%

64%

68% 68%

66%

63%

60%
55%

50%
40%

50%

48%
44%

55%

53%

53%

49%

51%

53% 55%

44%
38%

81

30%
20%
10%
0%

Figure 3.–SHARC survey return rates, communities with more than 100 SHARCs issued and tribes with more than 70 SHARCs issued, 2010.

82
40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Figure 4.–Return rate by place of residence, 2010.
34%

50%

69%

78%

80%

75%

71%

71%

66%

61%

59%

54%

64%

68%

67%

70%

88%

90%

50%

47%

46%

47%

60%

54%

70%

62%

Percentage of SHARCs issued

97%

100%

First Mailing

Second Mailing

Staff Administered

8,000

7,000

Return rate = 61%
Return rate = 57%

83

Number of SHARC surveys returned

6,000
Return rate = 47%

5,000

4,000

3,000

2,000

1,000

0

After first mailing (3/16/2011)

After second mailing (5/16/2011)

Figure 5.–Number of survey responses by response category, 2010.

Adding staff administered surveys

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

16,000

11,635

14,000

12,000

11,565
11,733
10,953

13,813
14,306
14,206
15,047

18,000

2,000

4,942
5,984
5,621
5,909
5,933
5,303
5,296
4,991

7,280
7,869
7,083
7,601
7,249
7,724
7,047

6,057

3,106
3,827
3,586
3,580
3,710
3,708
3,748
3,489

4,000

1,836
2,157
2,035
2,329
2,222
1,595
1,549
1,502

6,000

4,316
4,009
3,906

8,000

5,578
6,533
6,437
7,123
7,446

84

Number of SHARCs

10,000

0
SHARCs issued (tribal)

Estimated subsistence
fishers (tribal)

SHARCs issued (rural)

Estimated subsistence
fishers (rural)

SHARCs issued (total)

Figure 6.–Number of SHARCs issued and estimated number of subsistence halibut fishers by SHARC type, 2003–2010.

Estimated subsistence
fishers (total)

Tribal

Rural

Total

16%

14%

85

Percentage of SHARC holders

12%

10%

8%

6%

4%

2%

0%
0–4

5–9

10–14 15 –19 20–24 25–29 30–34 35–39 40–44 45–49 50–54 55–59 60–64 65–69 70–74 75–79 80–84 85–89 90–94
Age cohort (years)

Figure 7.–Age of subsistence halibut registration certificate holders by SHARC type, 2010.

95+

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

3,082

3,500

3,552
3,219
3,298
3,294
3,057
3,187
3,020

4,000

3,000

2,000

1,500

1,185

304
318
305
371
376
143
137
84

26
33
15
22
25
11
8
7

Area 4A
Area 4B
Eastern Aleutians Western Aleutians

105
58
36
47
29
20
20
25

Area 3B
Alaska Peninsula

13
15
10
10
20
10
8
6

500

93
123
142
126
102
96
79
99

1,000

134
235
237
306
268
253
189
176

86

1,650
1,657
1,729
1,818
1,712
1,669
1,574

2,500

0
Area 2C
Southeast Alaska

Area 3A
Southcentral
Alaska

Area 4C
Area 4D
Area 4E
Pribilof Islands Central Bering Sea East Bering Sea
Coast

Figure 8.–Estimated number of Alaska subsistence halibut fishers, 2003–2010 by regulatory area of tribe or rural community.

87
Number of subsistence halibut fishers
400
Average, 255

Average, 203

Average, 237

Average, 57

Average, 65

Average, 67

2009

Average, 70

Average, 80

2008

Average, 83

2007

Average, 92

2006

Average, 95

2005

Average, 100

Average,, 852

2004

Average, 110

Average, 120

200
Average, 245

600

Average, 262

1,000

Average, 421

1,200

Average, 876

2003
2010

800

0

Figure 9.–Estimated number of subsistence halibut fishers by place of residence, 2003–2010, communities with 50 or more fishers in 2010.

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

300,000

334,446

303,632

400,000

279,613

0
Area 2C
Southeast Alaska

Area 3A
Southcentral
Alaska

Area 3B
Area 4A
Area 4B
Area 4C
Area 4D
Alaska Peninsula Eastern Aleutians Western Aleutians Pribilof Islands Central Bering
Sea

Area 4E
East Bering Sea
Coast

Figure 10.–Estimated subsistence halibut harvests, pounds net weight, by regulatory area of tribe and rural community, 2003–2010.

12,250

11,083

54,458
31,328
50,488
71,219
47,583
15,036

1,270

790

4,380
10,923
5,813
8,297
7,810
3,276

10,859

7,280

23,756
9,227
9,783
8,343
14,990
5,657

473

1,107

2,472
1,865
1,791
2,286
1,461
2,100

17,400

14,477

31,518

23,733

100,000

20,727
27,421
35,185
27,562
16,028
18,960

200,000

27,965
37,745
50,656
54,088
51,057
43,239

88

Pounds net weight

500,000

376,121
424,352
361,731
361,134
334,956

600,000

600,155
591,786
532,229
463,764
457,734
430,866

700,000

627,959

698,531

800,000

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

200,000

0
Tribal SHARC holders

Rural resident SHARC holders

Figure 11.–Estimated Alaska subsistence halibut harvests in pounds net weight by SHARC type, 2003–2010.

All SHARC holders

797,560

861,359

886,988

1,032,293

1,125,312

488,990

549,412

564,007

590,787

614,572

681,430

703,715

578,592
308,569

311,947

441,506

510,740

496,792

322,980

400,000

489,446

800,000

462,738

89

Pounds net weight

1,000,000

600,000

1,178,222

1,200,000

1,193,161

1,041,330

1,400,000

40%
36.0%
35%

90

Percentage of total pounds harvested

30%

25%

20%

15%
10.8%
10%

9.8%
7.3%
5.1%

5%

5.0%

4.3%

3.7%

3.4%

3.3%

2.9%

2.8%

2.8%

2.7%

Hoonah

St. Paul

Angoon

Ninilchik

Yakutat

Kenaitze

0%
Central Ketchikan Hydaburg
Council
THI

Sitka

Port
Sun'aq Metlakatka
Graham
Tribe of
Kodiak

Figure 12.–Percentage of tribal subsistence halibut harvest by tribe, 2010.

All
other
tribes

35%
30.7%

91

Percentage of total pounds harvested

30%

25%

20%

18.7%

14.3%

15%

10%

8.9%

5.5%

4.9%

5%

4.8%

4.4%
2.9%

2.4%

2.3%

Seldovia

Thorne Bay

Unalaska

0%
Kodiak

Sitka

Petersburg

Wrangell

Cordova

Craig

Haines

Figure 13.–Percentage of rural community subsistence halibut harvest by community, 2010.

All other
rural
communities

Area 4A
East Aleutians
1.8%

Area 4B
West Aleutians
0.1%

Area 4C
Pribilofs
1.4%

Area 4D
Central Bering Sea
0.1%
Area 4E
East Bering Sea Coast
1.3%

Area 3B
Alaska Peninsula
2.9%

92

Area 2C Southeast
53.3%

Area 3A Southcentral
39.2%

N= 797,560 pounds net weight

Figure 14.–Percentage of subsistence halibut harvest by regulatory area fished, 2010.

300,000

93

Estimated pounds net weight

250,000

200,000

150,000

100,000

50,000

0

Figure 15.–Alaska subsistence halibut harvests by geographic area, 2010.

Prince William Sound
5.3%

All other areas
8.6%

Cook Inlet
8.3%

Southern Southeast Alaska
31.9%

YK Delta and Bristol Bay
1.2%

94

Kodiak Island Other
10.5%

Sitka LAMP Area
9.7%
Kodiak Island Road System
12.9%
Northern Southeast Alaska
11.7%

N = 797,560 pounds net weight

Figure 16.–Percentage of Alaska subsistence halibut harvest by geographic area, 2010.

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

600,000

400,000
285,500

300,000

4,380
10,923
5,848
8,297
3,204
3,131
644
1,171

53,775
28,501
54,119
70,743
52,135
15,898
8,749
10,055

22,881
9,734
7,716
8,527
15,077
5,657
6,323
10,859

2,582
916
1,351
2,761
1,997
4,737
1,175
450

100,000

21,197
28,877
35,615
27,062
14,946
19,553
33,499
14,548

200,000

27,477
33,519
46,225
48,547
47,748
42,248
25,492
23,009

95

Pounds net weight

500,000

403,610
429,275
379,258
372,289
337,403
328,480
312,650

700,000

623,538
677,084
598,072
580,117
524,897
458,360
456,997
424,818

800,000

Area 4D
Central Bering
Sea

Area 4E
East Bering Sea
Coast

0
Area 2C
Southeast Alaska

Area 3A
Southcentral
Alaska

Area 3B
Area 4A
Area 4B
Area 4C
Alaska Peninsula Eastern Aleutians Western Aleutians Pribilof Islands

Figure 17.–Estimated subsistence halibut harvests, pounds net weight, by regulatory area fished, 2003–2010.

100%
82%
80%

72%

96

Change in harvest (pounds net weight)

60%

40%

15%

20%

0%
-7%

-5%

-7%

-10%

-20%

-40%

-60%

-57%
-62%

-80%
Area 2C
Southeast Alaska

Area 3A
Southcentral
Alaska

Area 3B
Area 4A
Alaska Peninsula Eastern Aleutians

Area 4B
Western
Aleutians

Area 4C
Area 4D
Area 4E
Pribilof Islands Central Bering East Bering Sea
Sea
Coast

Figure 18.–Change in Alaska subsistence halibut harvests from 2009 through 2010 by regulatory area fished.

Alaska

50%

97

Change in harvest (pounds net weight)

30%

10%
0%

-10%
-14%
-30%

-24%

-24%

-41%
-50%

-44%

-70%

-80%

-78%

-75%

-90%
Area 2C
Southeast Alaska

Area 3A
Southcentral
Alaska

Area 3B
Area 4A
Area 4B
Area 4C
Area 4D
Alaska Peninsula Eastern Aleutians Western Aleutians Pribilof Islands Central Bering
Sea

Area 4E
East Bering Sea
Coast

Alaska

Figure 19.–Change in Alaska subsistence halibut harvests in 2010 compared to recent 7-year average (2003–2009) by regulatory area fished.

450

428

400

350

98

Pounds of halibut, net weight, per fisher

310
300

250

192

200

160
150

141

135

144

143

100

46

50

0
Area 2C
Southeast
Alaska

Area 3A
Southcentral
Alaska

Area 3B
Alaska
Peninsula

Area 4A
Eastern
Aleutians

Area 4B
Western
Aleutians

Area 4E
Area 4C
Area 4D
Pribilof Islands Central Bering East Bering Sea
Coast
Sea

Figure 20.–Average subsistence harvest of halibut per fisher in Alaska, 2010, by regulatory area, in pounds net weight.

Alaska

25

20.3

99

Number of halibut per fisher

20

15

11.2

11.1
10.0
10

8.9

8.8

8.7

7.1

5
3.6

0
Area 2C
Southeast
Alaska

Area 3A
Southcentral
Alaska

Area 3B
Alaska
Peninsula

Area 4A
Eastern
Aleutians

Area 4B
Western
Aleutians

Area 4E
Area 4C
Area 4D
Pribilof Islands Central Bering East Bering
Sea Coast
Sea

Figure 21.–Average subsistence harvest of halibut per fisher in Alaska, 2010, by regulatory area, in number of fish.

Alaska

Figure 22.–Alaska subsistence halibut harvests by place of residence, 2010.
Non-Alaska

Other Alaska

Port Graham

Kenai

Sand Point

King Cove

Nanwalek

St Paul Island

Kake

Thorne Bay

Unalaska

Anchorage

Angoon

Juneau

Yakutat

Hoonah

Metlakatla

Seldovia

Klawock

Hydaburg

Haines

Cordova

Wrangell

Craig

Ketchikan

Petersburg

Sitka

Kodiak

100
Pounds net weight
180,000

160,000

140,000

120,000

100,000

80,000

60,000

40,000

20,000

0

Setline (stationary) gear

Hand-operated gear

100%
93%
90%
83%

101

Percentage of subsistence halibut harvest

80%

77%
72%

72%

69%

70%

60%
51%
50%

53%

53%
49%

47%

47%

40%
31%

28%

30%

28%
23%

20%

17%

10%

7%

0%
2C

3A

3B

4A

4B

4C

Regulatory Area

Figure 23.–Percentage of subsistence halibut harvest by gear type by regulatory area, 2010.

4D

4E

Alaska

45%
40.4%

40%

102

Percentage of fishers using setline gear

35%

30%

25%

20%
17.1%

15%
10.6%

10%

8.2%
5.9%

5%

3.1%
0.8% 0.5% 0.3%

0.2%

0.9% 0.5%

1.7%
0.2% 0.5% 0.0%

0.4% 0.1% 0.5% 0.1%

0.2% 0.0%

0.2%

0.1% 0.2% 0.3%

0.7%

0.8%

0.7% 0.4%

0%
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

Number of hooks usually fished

Figure 24.–Number of hooks usually fished, percentage of fishers using setline (stationary) gear, Alaska subsistence halibut fishery, 2010.

30

Tribal

Rural

All

8
7.3

7.3

7

6.8

6.8

6.5

6.4

5.9

6

5.6
5.3
5
4.5

4.8

4.7 4.6

4.9

5.2
5.1

5.1

5.0

5.0

4.5

4.4

4.6

103

4
3.5

3

2.0
2

1

0
Area 2C

Area 3A

Area 3B

Area 4A

Area 4B

Area 4C

Area 4D

Figure 25.–Average number of subsistence fishing trips for halibut by regulatory area and SHARC type, 2010.

Area 4E

All

4.7

25%

104

Percentage of responses

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Figure 26.–Number of subsistence fishing trips for halibut, 2010.

10
11
12
Number of trips

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

>20

Tribal

Rural

All

4

3.5
4

3
2.8

2.8

2.6
3

2.3
2.1

2.3

2.1

105

2

1.8

2.0
1.8

1.8

1.7
1.6

1.6

1.6
2

2.1

2.1

2.0

1.5
1.3
1.0

0.9

1

0.9

1.0

1

0
Area 2C

Area 3A

Area 3B

Area 4A

Area 4B

Area 4C

Area 4D

Area 4E

Figure 27.–Average number of halibut harvested per subsistence fishing trip by regulatory area and SHARC type, 2010.

All

2003

2007

2008

2009

2010

11,486
8,958

194
261
152
38
23

31

111
183

19
170
34
0
17

4

4
9

141

0
27
0
13
50

93
0

94

9
5
16
24
0

5
3

337

247
100
132
152
406

952
546

240
325

384

2,000

1,014
666
508
888
242

5,090

3,977
3,706
3,523
3,242
4,426

7,688

3,638

4,000

2006

10,331
9,982

7,764

6,000

3,548

106

Number of rockfish

8,000

9,917

12,000

10,000

2005

12,845

14,000

2004

0
Area 2C
Area 3A
Southeast Alaska Southcentral Alaska

Area 3B
Alaska Peninsula

Area 4A
Eastern Aleutians

Area 4B
Western Aleutians

Area 4C
Pribilof Islands

Area 4D
Area 4E
East
Central Bering Sea
Bering Sea
Coast

Figure 28.–Estimated incidental harvests of rockfish in the Alaska subsistence halibut fishery, number of fish, by regulatory area fished, 2003–
2010.

Area 4A
3.2%

Areas 4B,4C,4D,4E
0.7%

Area 3B
1.9%

107
Area 3A
34.4%

Area 2C
59.8%

N = 12,851 rockfish

Figure 29.–Percentage of incidental harvest of rockfish by regulatory area fished, 2010.

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

1,800

972
880

35
34
3

189
208

38

148
178
19
29
0
0
15

6

0

0
7
0
5
5

9

61

99
0

0

0
15
29
3
0

43

0

51
25
44
37
59

447
361

30

233

202
262

500

221
67
143
303
102

613

735

1,000

810
763

949

1,125

1,311

108

Number of lingcod

1,685

2,000

1,500

2,036

2,057

2,241

2,500

2,466

2,475

3,000

0
Area 2C
Southeast Alaska

Area 3A
Southcentral
Alaska

Area 3B
Area 4A
Alaska Peninsula Eastern Aleutians

Area 4B
Western
Aleutians

Area 4C
Area 4D
Pribilof Islands Central Bering
Sea

Area 4E
East Bering Sea
Coast

Figure 30.–Estimated incidental harvests of lingcod in the Alaska subsistence halibut fishery, number of fish, by regulatory area fished, 2003–
2010.

Area 4A
2.1%
Area 3B
3.6%

Areas 4B,4C,4D,4E
0.8%

109

Area 3A
30.7%

Area 2C
62.9%

N = 2,864 lingcod

Figure 31.–Percentage of incidental harvest of lingcod by regulatory area fished, 2010.

Noncommercial Harvest

Removed from commercial harvest (not available for 2003–2010)

14,000

12,000

110

Total pounds, net weight

10,000
Annual average noncommercial harvest,
excluding 1989 (7,591 lb)

8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

0
1987

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1997

Figure 32.–Estimated harvests of halibut for home use, Port Graham.

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Bycatch
15.4%

Wastage
4.5%

Subsistence
1.3%

111

Commercial
66.8%
Sport
12.1%

N = 63.773 million lb, net weight

Figure 33.–Halibut removals, Alaska, 2010.

Commercial

Sport

Subsistence

Wastage

Bycatch

100%
90%

112

Percentage of total removals, pounds net weight

82.2%

80%
68.4%

70%
60%

66.8%

55.7%

55.6%

50%
41.6%

40%
31.6%

30%
20%
10%

16.9%

15.4%
10.0%

8.9%
5.3%
4.2%
3.1%

4.8%
1.0%

12.1%

7.4%
0.3%0.2%

2.1%
0.3%0.3%

4.5%
1.3%

0%
Area 2C

Area 3A

Area 3B
Regulatory Area

Figure 34.–Halibut removals in Alaska by regulatory area and removal category, 2010.

Area 4

Alaska

Tribal SHARCs

Rural SHARCs

All SHARCs

80%

70%

60%

50%

49.7%

40.1%

113

40%
33.6%

33.1%

30%

26.9%
24.2%

20%

10%

0%
Percentage of SHARCs that expired

Percentage of SHARCs that fished that expired

Figure 35.–Percentage of SHARC holders, and SHARC holders who fished for halibut, who did not renew their SHARC, by SHARC type,
through 2009.

50%
Never responded

Never fished

Never harvested

Harvest: low (1 to 100 lb)

Harvest: medium (101 to 1,000 lb)

Harvest: high (> 1,000 lb)

45%

40%

35%

30%

25%

114
20%

15%

10%

5%

0%
Tribal expired

Tribal active

Rural expired

Rural active

All expired

Figure 36.–Percentage of SHARCs that were not renewed by survey response type and SHARC type, through 2009.

All active

APPENDICES

115

116

Appendix A.–List of eligible tribes and rural communities, 2003 (from Federal Register).

117

118

119

Appendix B.–Letter sent to tribes about the project.

120

121

Appendix C.–Survey instrument.

122

123

124

125

Appendix D.–Set of frequently asked questions and responses.

126

127

128

Appendix E.–Results from returned surveys.
Appendix E-1.–Results from returned surveys.
Subsistence
Sport fished
Sport harvest
Lingcod bycatch
Rockfish bycatch
harvest
Number
Percent Number Pounds Number Number
Number Number
Regulatory SHARCs Surveys Percent
Number
Percent Number Pounds
issueda returned returned respondents respondents halibut halibutb respondents respondents halibut halibutb respondents lingcod respondents rockfish
area
Return rate

129

Tribal name
Angoon Community
Association
Aukquan Traditional
Council
Central Council
Tlingit and Haida
Indian Tribes
Chilkat Indian Village
Chilkoot Indian
Association
Craig Community
Association
Douglas Indian
Association
Hoonah Indian
Association
Hydaburg
Cooperative
Association
Ketchikan Indian
Corporation
Klawock Cooperative
Association
Metlakatla Indian
Community,
Annette Island
Reserve
Organized Village of
Kake
Organized Village of
Kasaan
Organized Village of
Saxman
Petersburg Indian
Association
Sitka Tribe of Alaska
Skagway Village

2C

92

2C

1

2C

Subsistence fished

73

79.3%

35

47.9%

428

10,603

8

11.0%

43

1,330

1

5

11

97

488

215

44.1%

81

37.7%

894

20,829

36

16.7%

164

3,565

7

56

19

170

2C

23

17

73.9%

4

23.5%

41

775

1

5.9%

10

40

1

2

1

6

2C

48

22

45.8%

10

45.5%

52

2,448

2

9.1%

3

110

0

0

0

0

2C

63

33

52.4%

13

39.4%

152

4,392

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0

5

31

2C

16

3

18.8%

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0

0

0

2C

141

68

48.2%

25

36.8%

249

7,290

5

7.4%

5

130

0

0

1

5

2C

124

108

87.1%

55

50.9%

452

25,210

5

4.6%

9

375

14

50

27

508

2C

503

319

63.4%

87

27.3%

959

28,510

65

20.4%

154

4,142

10

50

31

208

2C

80

31

38.8%

11

35.5%

69

2,315

3

9.7%

3

120

2

21

5

89

2C

172

76

44.2%

23

30.3%

268

8,480

8

10.5%

11

317

10

48

11

149

2C

80

54

67.5%

18

33.3%

165

5,387

1

1.9%

1

40

1

1

3

17

2C

8

4

50.0%

2

50.0%

8

321

2

50.0%

4

120

0

0

1

6

2C

37

18

48.6%

11

61.1%

120

2,505

6

33.3%

77

2,460

1

5

2

4

2C

73

40

54.8%

15

37.5%

132

2,977

11

27.5%

29

720

0

0

1

5

2C
2C

289
3

152

52.6%

70

46.1%

388

11,305

8

5.3%

11

160

16

60

24

210

-continued-

Appendix E-1.–Page 2 of 12.
Subsistence
Sport fished
Sport harvest
Lingcod bycatch
Rockfish bycatch
harvest
Number
Percent Number Pounds Number Number
Number Number
Regulatory SHARCs Surveys Percent
Number
Percent Number Pounds
issueda returned returned respondents respondents halibut halibutb respondents respondents halibut halibutb respondents lingcod respondents rockfish
area
Return rate

Tribal name
Wrangell Cooperative
Association

Subsistence fished

130

2C

94

62

66.0%

28

45.2%

206

6,291

11

17.7%

36

1,095

1

1

6

60

Subtotal, Area 2C
Kenaitze Indian Tribe
3A
Lesnoi Village
3A
(Woody Island)
Native Village of
3A
Afognak
Native Village of
3A
Akhiok
Native Village of
3A
Chenega
Native Village of
3A
Eyak
Native Village of
3A
Karluk
Native Village of
3A
Larsen Bay
Native Village of
3A
Nanwalek
Native Village of
3A
Ouzinkie
Native Village of Port
3A
Graham
Native Village of Port
3A
Lions
Native Village of
3A
Tatitlek
Ninilchik Village
3A
Seldovia Village
3A
Tribe
Sun'aq Tribe of
Kodiak (formerly
3A
Shoonaq')
Village of Kanatak
3A
Village of Old Harbor
3A
Village of Salamatoff
3A
Yakutat Tlingit Tribe
3A
Subtotal, Area 3A

2,335
123

1,298
61

55.6%
49.6%

489
14

37.7%
23.0%

4,585 139,703
173
6,188

172
10

13.3%
16.4%

560
29

14,724
920

64
2

299
6

148
0

1,565
0

71

39

54.9%

4

10.3%

28

760

2

5.1%

3

40

2

3

2

15

24

14

58.3%

9

64.3%

65

1,227

3

21.4%

7

180

0

0

1

12

9

2

22.2%

2

100.0%

13

348

1

50.0%

2

12

0

0

1

10

17

8

47.1%

4

50.0%

58

3,510

2

25.0%

3

160

3

4

4

50

80

41

51.3%

16

39.0%

188

3,660

7

17.1%

13

1,095

2

3

4

31

37

20

54.1%

15

75.0%

141

3,212

8

40.0%

61

2,655

4

42

4

44

44

18

40.9%

18

100.0%

337

7,540

1

5.6%

4

55

4

33

3

110

37

17

45.9%

9

52.9%

72

1,991

6

35.3%

17

500

1

1

1

20

43

25

58.1%

14

56.0%

342

12,478

3

12.0%

13

195

3

22

4

269

32

22

68.8%

13

59.1%

117

2,965

8

36.4%

43

1,340

2

22

2

30

23

11

47.8%

5

45.5%

70

1,410

1

9.1%

6

200

1

3

3

10

81

40

49.4%

10

25.0%

971

5,939

11

27.5%

40

665

0

0

0

0

63

35

55.6%

17

48.6%

264

6,167

4

11.4%

13

175

1

2

4

26

126

48

38.1%

26

54.2%

234

8,383

9

18.8%

60

1,519

4

8

6

67

18
46
21
41
940

5
19
13
21
459

27.8%
41.3%
61.9%
51.2%
48.8%

0
8
3
11
198

0.0%
42.1%
23.1%
52.4%
43.1%

0
52
54
198
3,377

0
1,595
814
6,579
74,766

0
1
1
0
78

0.0%
5.3%
7.7%
0.0%
17.0%

0
4
3
0
1,221

0
100
150
0
9,961

0
1
0
5
35

0
1
0
42
192

0
1
0
3
43

0
20
0
233
947

4

-continued-

Appendix E-1.–Page 3 of 12.
Subsistence
Sport fished
Sport harvest
Lingcod bycatch
Rockfish bycatch
harvest
Number
Percent Number Pounds Number Number
Number Number
Regulatory SHARCs Surveys Percent
Number
Percent Number Pounds
issueda returned returned respondents respondents halibut halibutb respondents respondents halibut halibutb respondents lingcod respondents rockfish
area
Return rate

131

Tribal name
Agdaagux Tribe of
3B
King Cove
Chignik Lake Village
3B
Ivanoff Bay Village
3B
Native Village of
3B
Belkofski
Native Village of
3B
Chignik
Native Village of
3B
Chignik Lagoon
Native Village of
3B
False Pass
Native Village of
3B
Nelson Lagoon
Native Village of
3B
Perryville
Native Village of
3B
Unga
Pauloff Harbor
3B
Village
Qagan Toyagungin
Tribe of Sand Point
3B
Village
Subtotal, Area 3B
Native Village of
4A
Akutan
Qawalingin Tribe of
4A
Unalaska
Subtotal, Area 4A
Native Village of
4B
Atka
Subtotal, Area 4B
Pribilof Islands Aleut
Community of St.
4C
George
Pribilof Islands Aleut
Community of St.
4C
Paul

Subsistence fished

72

38

52.8%

21

55.3%

224

4,487

7

18.4%

32

1,030

1

30

1

20

11
8

1
4

9.1%
50.0%

1
2

100.0%
50.0%

6
2

100
60

0
2

0.0%
50.0%

0
6

0
350

0
1

0
6

0
0

0
0

7

7

100.0%

1

14.3%

5

110

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0

0

0

20

9

45.0%

5

55.6%

41

1,100

1

11.1%

2

80

0

0

2

14

22

14

63.6%

8

57.1%

71

2,025

1

7.1%

1

30

0

0

1

4

8

3

37.5%

1

33.3%

2

50

2

66.7%

2

160

0

0

0

0

48

14

29.2%

6

42.9%

90

1,310

3

21.4%

14

415

0

0

0

0

86

46

53.5%

17

37.0%

104

2,450

1

2.2%

1

20

2

3

5

34

291

141

48.5%

62

44.0%

545

11,692

17

12.1%

58

2,085

4

39

9

72

21

7

33.3%

3

42.9%

30

790

1

14.3%

3

40

1

5

2

30

36

13

36.1%

7

53.8%

37

680

2

15.4%

2

20

0

0

2

12

57

20

35.1%

10

50.0%

67

1,470

3

15.0%

5

60

1

5

4

42

6

4

66.7%

4

100.0%

20

686

0

0.0%

0

0

1

3

2

33

42

13

31.0%

6

46.2%

150

4,425

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0

0

0

5

1
3

5
5

-continued-

Appendix E-1.–Page 4 of 12.
Subsistence
Sport fished
Sport harvest
Lingcod bycatch
Rockfish bycatch
harvest
Number
Percent Number Pounds Number Number
Number Number
Regulatory SHARCs Surveys Percent
Number
Percent Number Pounds
issueda returned returned respondents respondents halibut halibutb respondents respondents halibut halibutb respondents lingcod respondents rockfish
Tribal name
area
Subtotal, Area 4C
48
17
35.4%
10
58.8%
170
5,111
0
0.0%
0
0
1
3
2
33
Native Village of
4D
1
Diomede (Inalik)
Native Village of
4D
1
Gambell
Native Village of
4D
18
10
55.6%
3
30.0%
22
323
0
0.0%
0
0
1
8
1
9
Savoonga
Subtotal, Area 4D
20
11
55.0%
4
36.4%
22
323
0
0.0%
0
0
1
8
1
9
Chevak Native
Village
4E
3
(Kashunamiut)
Chinik Eskimo
4E
1
Community
Egegik Village
4E
1
King Island Native
4E
1
Community
Levelock Village
4E
1
Manokotak Village
4E
1
Naknek Native
4E
8
1
12.5%
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0
0
0
Village
Native Village of
4E
6
3
50.0%
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0
0
0
Aleknagik
Native Village of
4E
1
Brevig Mission
Native Village of
4E
4
Council
Native Village of
Dillingham
4E
16
7
43.8%
1
14.3%
2
300
2
28.6%
6
179
0
0
0
0
(Curyung)
Native Village of Eek
4E
7
3
42.9%
3
100.0%
16
640
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0
0
0
Native Village of
Goodnews Bay
4E
4
2
(Mumtraq)
Native Village of
4E
16
6
37.5%
2
33.3%
12
185
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0
0
0
Hooper Bay
Native Village of
4E
1
Kanakanak
Native Village of
4E
13
2
15.4%
2
100.0%
42
490
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0
0
0
Kipnuk
Return rate

Subsistence fished

132

-continued-

Appendix E-1.–Page 5 of 12.
Subsistence
Sport fished
Sport harvest
Lingcod bycatch
Rockfish bycatch
harvest
Number
Percent Number Pounds Number Number
Number Number
Regulatory SHARCs Surveys Percent
Number
Percent Number Pounds
issueda returned returned respondents respondents halibut halibutb respondents respondents halibut halibutb respondents lingcod respondents rockfish
area
Return rate

133

Tribal name
Native Village of
Kongiganak
Native Village of
Koyuk
Native Village of
Kwigillingok
Native Village of
Kwinhagak
Native Village of
Mekoryuk
Native Village of
Nightmute
Native Village of
Scammon Bay
Native Village of
Shaktoolik
Native Village of
Toksook Bay
(Nunakauyak)
Native Village of
Tununak
Native Village of
Unalakleet
Native Village of
Wales
Newtok Village
Nome Eskimo
Community
Orutsararmuit Native
Village
South Naknek Village
Stebbins Community
Association
Traditional Village of
Togiak
Twin Hills Village
Ugashik Village
Village of Chefornak

4E

5

4E

1

4E

4

4E

3

4E

6

4E

1

4E

3

4E

1

4E

Subsistence fished

3

50.0%

2

66.7%

26

410

1

33.3%

6

150

0

0

0

0

33

12

36.4%

10

83.3%

105

1,250

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0

0

0

4E

13

3

23.1%

2

66.7%

21

190

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0

0

0

4E

3

4E

1

4E

1

4E

15

8

53.3%

2

25.0%

14

480

1

12.5%

10

200

1

4

2

3

4E

9

3

33.3%

1

33.3%

18

230

1

33.3%

8

90

0

0

0

0

4E

1

4E

4

4E

3

4E
4E
4E

1
2
14

6

42.9%

3

50.0%

29

371

0

0.0%

0

0

1

1

1

9

-continued-

Appendix E-1.–Page 6 of 12.
Subsistence
Sport fished
Sport harvest
Lingcod bycatch
Rockfish bycatch
harvest
Number
Percent Number Pounds Number Number
Number Number
Regulatory SHARCs Surveys Percent
Number
Percent Number Pounds
issueda returned returned respondents respondents halibut halibutb respondents respondents halibut halibutb respondents lingcod respondents rockfish
area
Return rate

134

Tribal name
Village of Clark's
4E
Point
Village of Kotlik
4E
Subtotal, Area 4E
Tribal name
subtotals
Rural
Angoon
2C
Coffman Cove
2C
Craig
2C
Edna Bay
2C
Elfin Cove
2C
Gustavus
2C
Haines
2C
Hollis
2C
Hoonah
2C
Hydaburg
2C
Hyder
2C
Juneau
2C
Kake
2C
Kasaan
2C
Ketchikan
2C
Klawock
2C
Klukwan
2C
Meyers Chuck
2C
Metlakatla
2C
Naukati Bay
2C
Pelican
2C
Petersburg
2C
Port Alexander
2C
Port Protection
2C
Pt. Baker
2C
Saxman
2C
Sitka
2C

Subsistence fished

1
1
210

77

36.7%

33

42.9%

3,906

2,025

51.8%

807

39.9%

16
49
376
37
15
61
426
44
99
10
32
3
35
8
5
155
2
9
32
40
40
875
26
16
15
11
1,363

16
41
238
24
11
45
309
35
80
8
24

100.0%
83.7%
63.3%
64.9%
73.3%
73.8%
72.5%
79.5%
80.8%
80.0%
75.0%

9
20
117
17
5
21
190
17
35
5
14

56.3%
48.8%
49.2%
70.8%
45.5%
46.7%
61.5%
48.6%
43.8%
62.5%
58.3%

285
109
962
78
19
94
818
99
307
43
51

27
4

77.1%
50.0%

14
2

51.9%
50.0%

102

65.8%

46

9
21
30
27
623
15
11
11
6
872

100.0%
65.6%
75.0%
67.5%
71.2%
57.7%
68.8%
73.3%
54.5%
64.0%

7
8
18
16
278
12
8
7
2
414

369

6,936

9

11.7%

51

1,059

2

5

3

12

9,142 240,151

280

13.8%

1,896

27,979

108

551

210

2,680

8,078
2,918
23,249
2,161
680
2,655
23,538
5,720
6,513
1,970
1,640

4
16
81
0
2
15
68
5
15
3
6

25.0%
39.0%
34.0%
0.0%
18.2%
33.3%
22.0%
14.3%
18.8%
37.5%
25.0%

11
104
347
0
7
89
111
9
93
7
4

200
1,652
6,207
0
300
2,041
3,058
170
1,900
375
100

1
3
30
3
1
0
11
0
0
1
2

12
13
70
12
10
0
34
0
0
5
8

4
7
58
9
4
0
14
4
3
2
3

118
55
441
68
40
0
83
9
15
13
35

140
2

6,173
90

6
0

22.2%
0.0%

27
0

1,143
0

1
0

3
0

6
0

59
0

45.1%

417

9,359

32

31.4%

160

3,048

20

53

28

251

77.8%
38.1%
60.0%
59.3%
44.6%
80.0%
72.7%
63.6%
33.3%
47.5%

34
69
41
87
1,895
84
78
25
170
2,228

1,638
2,292
1,708
2,409
45,865
3,230
2,155
963
1,850
64,054

0
5
12
7
172
3
2
1
1
141

0.0%
23.8%
40.0%
25.9%
27.6%
20.0%
18.2%
9.1%
16.7%
16.2%

0
17
57
6
561
4
0
1
15
336

0
382
2,070
185
12,801
200
0
25
200
8,419

0
2
0
6
4
5
4
1
2
151

0
5
0
9
6
18
7
1
20
530

3
1
8
11
38
6
7
3
2
201

18
2
22
105
185
72
68
33
70
1,587

-continued-

Appendix E-1.–Page 7 of 12.
Return rate

Subsistence fished

135

Regulatory SHARCs Surveys Percent
Number
Percent
issueda returned returned respondents respondents
Tribal name
area
Skagway
2C
51
36
70.6%
25
69.4%
Tenakee Springs
2C
53
46
86.8%
23
50.0%
Thorne Bay
2C
119
90
75.6%
59
65.6%
Ward Cove
2C
2
Whale Pass
2C
18
18 100.0%
10
55.6%
Wrangell
2C
377
274
72.7%
148
54.0%
Subtotal, Area 2C
4,420
3,062
69.3%
1,552
50.7%
Chenega Bay
3A
7
7 100.0%
5
71.4%
Chiniak
3A
3
Cordova
3A
498
349
70.1%
154
44.1%
Karluk
3A
6
6 100.0%
5
83.3%
Kodiak
3A
1,552
848
54.6%
469
55.3%
Larsen Bay
3A
6
3
50.0%
0
0.0%
Nanwalek
3A
7
4
57.1%
3
75.0%
Old Harbor
3A
7
4
57.1%
4
100.0%
Ouzinkie
3A
13
9
69.2%
9
100.0%
Port Graham
3A
10
6
60.0%
5
83.3%
Port Lions
3A
11
8
72.7%
7
87.5%
Seldovia
3A
144
108
75.0%
62
57.4%
Tatitlek
3A
10
6
60.0%
3
50.0%
Yakutat
3A
74
53
71.6%
24
45.3%
Subtotal, Area 3A
2,348
1,414
60.2%
753
53.3%
Chignik
3B
1
Chignik Lagoon
3B
1
Chignik Lake
3B
1
Cold Bay
3B
32
27
84.4%
15
55.6%
False Pass
3B
1
King Cove
3B
25
15
60.0%
10
66.7%
Nelson Lagoon
3B
1
Perryville
3B
1
Sand Point
3B
15
6
40.0%
3
50.0%
Subtotal, Area 3B
78
50
64.1%
29
58.0%

Subsistence
Sport fished
Sport harvest
Lingcod bycatch
Rockfish bycatch
harvest
Number
Percent Number Pounds Number Number
Number Number
Number Pounds
halibut halibutb respondents respondents halibut halibutb respondents lingcod respondents rockfish
62
1,821
9
25.0%
27
935
0
0
0
0
122
3,363
13
28.3%
33
633
0
0
6
25
372 13,193
28
31.1%
221
4,465
7
11
22
138
12
515
1,023 28,139
9,762 268,757
57
1,180

9
67
724
4

50.0%
24.5%
23.6%
57.1%

11
142
2,400
46

445
4,238
55,192
860

0
5
260
1

0
26
853
2

2
20
475
3

23
135
3,686
28

930 25,024
36
595
4,456 120,357
0
0
232
5,340
82
1,960
50
1,215
86
1,985
65
1,387
802 16,121
18
545
225
8,558
7,069 184,947

73
0
285
0
1
0
4
0
8
26
1
9
411

20.9%
0.0%
33.6%
0.0%
25.0%
0.0%
44.4%
0.0%
100.0%
24.1%
16.7%
17.0%
29.1%

180
0
1,327
0
1
0
9
0
70
150
4
44
1,831

5,030
0
34,719
0
20
0
180
0
1,380
3,117
85
1,108
46,499

11
1
54
0
0
1
0
2
2
5
2
13
92

20
2
185
0
0
5
0
13
30
21
11
47
336

29
4
96
0
1
1
1
3
1
6
2
7
154

137
48
1,128
0
20
5
20
31
17
31
27
107
1,599

147

3,685

13

48.1%

21

428

2

35

3

10

67

1,924

3

20.0%

2

40

2

3

2

10

26
246

630
6,439

2
18

33.3%
36.0%

5
28

105
573

0
4

0
38

2
7

38
58

-continued-

Appendix E-1.–Page 8 of 12.
Return rate

136

Regulatory SHARCs Surveys
issueda returned
Tribal name
area
Unalaska
4A
119
76
Subtotal, Area 4A
119
76
Adak
4B
5
Subtotal, Area 4B
5
St. George Island
4C
1
Subtotal, Area 4C
1
Aleknagik
4E
2
Bethel
4E
1
Chefornak
4E
1
Dillingham
4E
23
17
Egegik
4E
1
King Salmon
4E
2
Kongiganak
4E
1
Manokotak
4E
2
Naknek
4E
6
2
Nightmute
4E
1
Nome
4E
20
11
Port Heiden
4E
3
Quinhagak
4E
1
South Naknek
4E
1
Teller
4E
10
2
Togiak
4E
1
Subtotal, Area 4E
76
40

Subsistence
Sport fished
Sport harvest
Lingcod bycatch
Rockfish bycatch
harvest
Number
Percent Number Pounds Number Number
Number Number
Percent
Number
Percent Number Pounds
returned respondents respondents halibut halibutb respondents respondents halibut halibutb respondents lingcod respondents rockfish
63.9%
47
61.8%
479 11,780
30
39.5%
141
2,660
3
32
5
205
63.9%
47
61.8%
479 11,780
30
39.5%
141
2,660
3
32
5
205
Subsistence fished

73.9%

1

5.9%

0

0

1

5.9%

2

150

0

0

0

0

33.3%

1

50.0%

0

0

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0

0

0

55.0%

4

36.4%

30

641

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0

0

0

20.0%

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0

0

0

52.6%

8

20.0%

40

770

1

2.5%

2

150

0

0

0

0

Rural community
subtotals

7,047

4,645

65.9%

2,391

51.5%

17,607 472,843

1,184

25.5%

4,402 105,074

359

1,259

641

5,548

Total
(tribal and rural)

10,953

6,670

60.9%

3,198

47.9%

26,749 712,994

1,464

21.9%

6,298 133,053

467

1,810

851

8,228

-continued-

Appendix E-1.–Page 9 of 12.
Return rate

137

Community name
Adak
Akhiok
Akiachak
Akutan
Aleknagik
Anchor Point
Anchorage
Angoon
Atka
Auke Bay
Barrow
Bethel
Chefornak
Chenega Bay
Chevak
Chignik
Chignik Lagoon
Chignik Lake
Chiniak
Chugiak
Clarks Point
Coffman Cove
Cold Bay
Cordova
Craig
Dillingham
Douglas
Dutch Harbor
Eagle River
Edna Bay
Eek
Egegik
Elfin Cove

Regulatory SHARCs Surveys
issueda returned
area
AK
8
4
AK
6
1
AK
1
AK
16
4
AK
3
AK
12
6
AK
219
102
AK
109
96
AK
1
AK
5
AK
1
AK
8
1
AK
14
6
AK
8
8
AK
2
AK
10
8
AK
13
4
AK
4
AK
18
11
AK
3
AK
1
AK
46
38
AK
35
30
AK
557
381
AK
510
326
AK
30
19
AK
17
4
AK
80
48
AK
8
6
AK
28
18
AK
6
2
AK
1
AK
14
10

Subsistence
Sport fished
Sport harvest
Lingcod bycatch
Rockfish bycatch
harvest
Number
Percent Number Pounds Number Number
Number Number
Percent
Number
Percent Number Pounds
returned respondents respondents halibut halibutb respondents respondents halibut halibutb respondents lingcod respondents rockfish
50.0%
3
75.0%
18
407
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0
0
0
16.7%
1
100.0%
8
320
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0
0
0
Subsistence fished

25.0%

3

75.0%

30

790

0

0.0%

0

0

1

5

2

30

50.0%
46.6%
88.1%

1
27
47

16.7%
26.5%
49.0%

10
349
718

150
14,764
18,751

2
22
14

33.3%
21.6%
14.6%

5
88
63

200
2,297
1,770

0
6
2

0
33
17

0
6
16

0
255
219

12.5%
42.9%
100.0%

1
3
6

100.0%
50.0%
75.0%

14
29
72

560
371
3,440

0
0
4

0.0%
0.0%
50.0%

0
0
41

0
0
860

0
1
2

0
1
3

0
1
4

0
9
54

80.0%
30.8%

2
3

25.0%
75.0%

15
29

560
770

0
0

0.0%
0.0%

0
0

0
0

0
0

0
0

0
2

0
14

61.1%

9

81.8%

110

2,430

2

18.2%

3

90

0

0

0

0

82.6%
85.7%
68.4%
63.9%
63.3%
23.5%
60.0%
75.0%
64.3%
33.3%

19
17
167
166
1
1
28
3
13
2

50.0%
56.7%
43.8%
50.9%
5.3%
25.0%
58.3%
50.0%
72.2%
100.0%

103
158
1,108
1,333
0
22
335
37
60
2

2,678
3,760
28,339
35,041
0
80
8,921
580
1,661
80

13
13
77
95
1
1
23
1
0
0

34.2%
43.3%
20.2%
29.1%
5.3%
25.0%
47.9%
16.7%
0.0%
0.0%

73
21
174
359
2
8
122
8
0
0

1,302
428
5,765
6,442
150
30
2,307
90
0
0

3
2
13
35
0
0
1
0
2
0

13
35
23
83
0
0
26
0
4
0

7
3
33
79
0
0
2
0
6
0

55
10
168
537
0
0
191
0
34
0

71.4%

5

50.0%

19

680

2

20.0%

7

300

1

10

4

40

-continued-

Appendix E-1.–Page 10 of 12.
Subsistence
Sport fished
Sport harvest
Lingcod bycatch
Rockfish bycatch
harvest
Number
Percent Number Pounds Number Number
Number Number
Regulatory SHARCs Surveys Percent
Number
Percent Number Pounds
issueda returned returned respondents respondents halibut halibutb respondents respondents halibut halibutb respondents lingcod respondents rockfish
area
AK
1
AK
1
AK
7
4
57.1%
1
25.0%
4
140
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0
0
0
AK
1
AK
1
AK
1
AK
1
AK
1
AK
1
AK
1
AK
4
AK
58
43
74.1%
20
46.5%
87
2,475
13
30.2%
71
1,683
0
0
0
0
AK
473
334
70.6%
199
59.6%
902 25,562
59
17.7%
66
1,770
11
34
14
83
AK
1
AK
25
14
56.0%
7
50.0%
125
1,922
4
28.6%
19
205
1
2
1
4
AK
236
144
61.0%
60
41.7%
550 13,853
19
13.2%
98
2,030
0
0
4
20
AK
14
6
42.9%
2
33.3%
12
185
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0
0
0
AK
120
116
96.7%
60
51.7%
495 27,180
8
6.9%
16
750
15
55
29
521
AK
31
24
77.4%
14
58.3%
51
1,640
6
25.0%
4
100
2
8
3
35
AK
349
117
33.5%
44
37.6%
468 10,611
26
22.2%
128
3,170
1
2
8
26
AK
110
83
75.5%
32
38.6%
335 11,660
7
8.4%
18
923
3
29
10
86
AK
9
6
66.7%
5
83.3%
36
595
0
0.0%
0
0
1
2
4
48
AK
15
5
33.3%
1
20.0%
1
21
1
20.0%
0
0
0
0
1
6
AK
13
8
61.5%
6
75.0%
124
2,065
2
25.0%
23
300
2
12
1
15
AK
108
54
50.0%
10
18.5%
138
5,453
12
22.2%
38
1,129
1
4
0
0
AK
571
385
67.4%
123
31.9%
1,333 36,437
88
22.9%
332
9,090
15
69
44
297
AK
87
42
48.3%
27
64.3%
268
6,004
8
19.0%
22
830
3
33
3
30
AK
2
AK
12
2
16.7%
2
100.0%
42
490
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0
0
0
AK
237
127
53.6%
55
43.3%
501 15,613
29
22.8%
155
3,123
18
62
28
320
AK
2
AK
1,702
911
53.5%
499
54.8%
4,649 127,954
294
32.3%
1,387 37,077
59
213
104
1,231
AK
6
3
50.0%
1
33.3%
4
150
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0
0
0
Return rate

138

Community name
Elmendorf AFB
Ester
Fairbanks
False Pass
Fritz Creek
Gakona
Gambell
Girdwood
Glennallen
Golovin
Goodnews Bay
Gustavus
Haines
Hollis
Homer
Hoonah
Hooper Bay
Hydaburg
Hyder
Juneau
Kake
Karluk
Kasaan
Kasilof
Kenai
Ketchikan
King Cove
King Salmon
Kipnuk
Klawock
Klukwan
Kodiak
Kongiganak

Subsistence fished

-continued-

Appendix E-1.–Page 11 of 12.
Subsistence
Sport fished
Sport harvest
Lingcod bycatch
Rockfish bycatch
harvest
Number
Percent Number Pounds Number Number
Number Number
Regulatory SHARCs Surveys Percent
Number
Percent Number Pounds
issueda returned returned respondents respondents halibut halibutb respondents respondents halibut halibutb respondents lingcod respondents rockfish
area
AK
1
AK
3
AK
33
19
57.6%
13
68.4%
96
2,617
6
31.6%
36
1,355
3
22
3
24
AK
2
AK
5
AK
193
89
46.1%
31
34.8%
337 10,772
11
12.4%
23
499
12
53
12
151
AK
8
8 100.0%
7
87.5%
34
1,638
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0
3
18
AK
9
3
33.3%
1
33.3%
0
0
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0
0
0
AK
48
21
43.8%
20
95.2%
567 12,865
2
9.5%
5
75
4
33
4
130
AK
25
20
80.0%
11
55.0%
92
2,358
6
30.0%
28
450
1
8
6
97
AK
1
AK
1
AK
2
AK
9
2
22.2%
0
0.0%
0
0
1
50.0%
4
65
0
0
0
0
AK
38
19
50.0%
3
15.8%
99
2,974
7
36.8%
25
475
0
0
0
0
AK
23
14
60.9%
6
42.9%
40
941
0
0.0%
0
0
1
4
1
1
AK
4
AK
41
20
48.8%
13
65.0%
139
3,583
2
10.0%
6
112
2
6
3
35
AK
47
25
53.2%
17
68.0%
109
2,724
9
36.0%
24
569
1
1
2
40
AK
10
3
30.0%
1
33.3%
1
24
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0
0
0
AK
45
31
68.9%
19
61.3%
127
3,589
8
25.8%
6
185
8
25
13
179
AK
18
12
66.7%
7
58.3%
68
1,945
1
8.3%
1
30
0
0
1
4
AK
961
676
70.3%
291
43.0%
2,021 48,357
180
26.6%
579 13,217
4
6
37
175
AK
2
AK
20
15
75.0%
11
73.3%
60
1,893
1
6.7%
1
25
3
6
7
81
AK
28
17
60.7%
14
82.4%
119
4,380
3
17.6%
4
200
5
18
6
72
AK
47
29
61.7%
18
62.1%
318
5,271
3
10.3%
13
195
3
14
6
84
AK
2
AK
39
27
69.2%
19
70.4%
181
3,986
16
59.3%
113
2,720
4
52
3
47
AK
2
AK
1
AK
5
AK
130
61
46.9%
26
42.6%
213
4,220
7
11.5%
20
540
1
1
6
66
Return rate

139

Community name
Kotzebue
Kwigillingok
Larsen Bay
Manokotak
Mekoryuk
Metlakatla
Meyers Chuck
Naknek
Nanwalek
Naukati
Nelson Lagoon
Newtok
Nightmute
Nikiski
Ninilchik
Nome
North Pole
Old Harbor
Ouzinkie
Palmer
Pelican
Perryville
Petersburg
Pilot Point
Point Baker
Port Alexander
Port Graham
Port Heiden
Port Lions
Port Protection
Port William
Quinhagak
Sand Point

Subsistence fished

-continued-

Appendix E-1.–Page 12 of 12.
Return rate

140

Community name
Savoonga
Saxman
Seldovia
Seward
Sitka
Skagway
Soldotna
St. George Island
St. Paul Island
Sterling
Tatitlek
Teller
Tenakee Springs
Thorne Bay
Togiak
Toksook Bay
Trapper Creek
Tununak
Twin Hills
Unalakleet
Unalaska
Valdez
Ward Cove
Wasilla
Whale Pass
Whittier
Willow
Wrangell
Yakutat

Subsistence fished

Regulatory SHARCs Surveys Percent
Number
Percent
issueda returned returned respondents respondents
area
AK
17
9
52.9%
3
33.3%
AK
12
1
8.3%
0
0.0%
AK
152
105
69.1%
65
61.9%
AK
12
3
25.0%
1
33.3%
AK
1,635
1,014
62.0%
480
47.3%
AK
56
41
73.2%
28
68.3%
AK
44
25
56.8%
7
28.0%
AK
4
AK
41
12
29.3%
6
50.0%
AK
4
AK
15
8
53.3%
6
75.0%
AK
10
2
20.0%
0
0.0%
AK
53
46
86.8%
23
50.0%
AK
114
89
78.1%
60
67.4%
AK
4
AK
32
12
37.5%
10
83.3%
AK
1
AK
11
3
27.3%
2
66.7%
AK
2
AK
1
AK
75
43
57.3%
27
62.8%
AK
38
21
55.3%
6
28.6%
AK
32
14
43.8%
4
28.6%
AK
43
16
37.2%
2
12.5%
AK
8
8 100.0%
6
75.0%
AK
2
AK
2
AK
476
339
71.2%
182
53.7%
AK
110
73
66.4%
34
46.6%

Subsistence
Sport fished
Sport harvest
Lingcod bycatch
Rockfish bycatch
harvest
Number
Percent Number Pounds Number Number
Number Number
Number Pounds
halibut halibutb respondents respondents halibut halibutb respondents lingcod respondents rockfish
22
323
0
0.0%
0
0
1
8
1
9
0
0
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0
0
0
846 18,746
23
21.9%
127
2,682
5
21
7
33
5
200
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0
1
10
2,532 73,139
143
14.1%
336
8,234
168
600
226
1,801
74
2,066
9
22.0%
27
935
0
0
0
0
904
2,794
4
16.0%
12
320
0
0
0
0
150

4,425

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0

0

0

76
0
122
374

1,525
0
3,363
13,283

0
0
13
30

0.0%
0.0%
28.3%
33.7%

0
0
33
219

0
0
633
4,430

3
0
0
7

14
0
0
11

4
0
6
22

35
0
25
138

105

1,250

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0

0

0

21

190

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0

0

0

188
42
18
14
6

3,689
1,750
927
80
235

10
3
3
1
2

23.3%
14.3%
21.4%
6.3%
25.0%

22
12
4
0
2

403
385
185
0
80

2
3
0
0
0

6
4
0
0
0

5
4
3
0
0

26
15
19
0
0

1,289
403

35,208
14,337

80
9

23.6%
12.3%

175
44

5,038
1,108

6
18

27
89

25
10

175
340

Alaska subtotal

All

10,804

6,595

61.0%

3,194

48.4%

26,740 712,596

1,442

21.9%

5,256 129,426

467

1,810

850

8,223

Non-Alaska subtotal
Total

All
All

149
10,953

75
6,670

50.3%
60.9%

4
3,198

5.3%
47.9%

9
398
26,749 712,994

22
1,464

29.3%
21.9%

142
3,567
5,398 132,993

0
467

0
1,810

1
851

5
8,228

a.
b.

To protect confidentiality, data for tribes and communities with 5 or fewer SHARCs issued are not reported in this table. Subtotals include all tribes and
communities. Blank cells indicate redacted data.
Pounds of halibut are reported in round weight.

Appendix E-2.–Harvests by return category.
First mailing response

141

Tribal name
Angoon Community
Association
Aukquan Traditional
Council
Central Council Tlingit
and Haida Indian
Tribes
Chilkat Indian Village
Chilkoot Indian
Association
Craig Community
Association
Douglas Indian
Association
Hoonah Indian
Association
Hydaburg Cooperative
Association
Ketchikan Indian
Corporation
Klawock Cooperative
Association
Metlakatla Indian
Community, Annette
Island Reserve
Organized Village of
Kake
Organized Village of
Kasaan
Organized Village of
Saxman
Petersburg Indian
Association
Sitka Tribe of Alaska
Skagway Village
Wrangell Cooperative
Association

2C

Third mailing response

Staff administered

20

12

94

158

64

776

4.7

7.8

2

1

12

4.9 12.1

46

13

105

Mean,
Number
Mean,
those
of
Number
those
who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who
fished harvested returned fished
fished returned

6.0 12.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

51

22

322

2.3

8.1

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

11

3

13

2.0

6.3 14.6

2C
2C

1.2

4.3

2C

15

3

37

2.5 12.3

2

1

4

4.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

2C

18

8

33

1.8

4.1

3

1

18

6.0 18.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

1

1

1

1.0

1.0

2C

27

11

122

4.5 11.1

5

2

30

6.0 15.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

2C

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

2

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

2C

52

19

222

4.3 11.7

15

5

27

1.8

5.4

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

1

1

0

0.0

0.0

2C

27

12

80

6.7

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

81

43

372

4.6

8.7

2C

140

39

466

3.3 11.9

16

3

10

0.6

3.3

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

163

45

483

3.0 10.7

2C

24

8

41

1.7

5.1

7

3

28

4.0

9.3

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

2C

49

16

139

2.8

8.7

24

7

129

5.4 18.4

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

3

0

0

0.0

0.0

2C

41

13

98

2.4

7.5

13

5

67

5.2 13.4

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

2C

3

2

8

2.7

4.0

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

2C

5

4

48

9.6 12.0

1

1

2

2.0

2.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

12

6

70

2C

33

14

127

3.8

9.1

6

1

5

0.8

5.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

2C

105

50

272

2.6

5.4

22

10

80

3.6

8.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

25

9

36

1.4

4.0

58

27

191

3.3

7.1

3

1

15

5.0 15.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

779

303

2,756

3.5

9.1

168

54

532

3.2

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

351

130

1,297

2.8 13.2

3.0

5.8 11.7

2C
2C

Subtotal, Area 2C

Kenaitze Indian Tribe
Lesnoi Village (Woody
Island)
Native Village of
Afognak

Second mailing response

Number
Mean,
Number
Mean,
Number
of
Number
those
of
Number
those
of
Number
Regulatory Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all
a
fished harvested returned
fished harvested returned fished returned
fished harvested returned fished returned
returned
area

9.9

3.7 10.0

3A

51

11

145

10

3

28

2.8

9.3

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

3A

35

4

28

0.8

7.0

4

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

3A

11

8

57

5.2

7.1

3

1

8

2.7

8.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

-continued-

Appendix E-2.–Page 2 of 12.
First mailing response

Second mailing response

Third mailing response

Staff administered

Number
Mean,
Number
Mean,
Number
of
Number
those
of
Number
those
of
Number
Regulatory Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all
a
fished harvested returned
fished harvested returned fished returned
fished harvested returned fished returned
returned
Tribal name
area
Native Village of Akhiok
3A
1
1
5
5.0 5.0
1
1
8
8.0 8.0
0
0
0
0.0
Native Village of
3A
8
4
58
7.3 14.5
0
0
0
0.0 0.0
0
0
0
0.0
Chenega
Native Village of Eyak
3A
32
14
169
5.3 12.1
9
2
19
2.1 9.5
0
0
0
0.0

142

Native Village of Karluk
Native Village of Larsen
Bay
Native Village of
Nanwalek
Native Village of
Ouzinkie
Native Village of Port
Graham
Native Village of Port
Lions
Native Village of
Tatitlek
Ninilchik Village
Seldovia Village Tribe

16

12

103

3A

12

12

237

3A

12

9

72

3A

12

7

266

3A

19

10

75

3A

9

4

3A

32

9

3A

33

16

Sun'aq Tribe of Kodiak
(formerly Shoonaq')

3A

40

24

Village of Kanatak

3A

4

Village of Old Harbor

3A

16

Village of Salamatoff

3A

Yakutat Tlingit Tribe

3A

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

8.6

4

3

38

9.5 12.7

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

19.8 19.8

6

6

100

16.7 16.7

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

8.0

5

0

0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

22.2 38.0

13

7

76

5.8 10.9

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

7.5

3

3

42

14.0 14.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

69

7.7 17.3

2

1

1

1.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

959

30.0 106.6

8

1

12

1.5 12.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

241

7.3 15.1

2

1

23

11.5 23.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

232

5.8

9.7

8

1

2

0.3

2.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0.0

0.0

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

8

52

3.3

6.5

3

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

13

3

54

4.2 18.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

14

8

182

13.0 22.8

7

3

16

2.3

5.3

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

370

164

3,004

8.1 18.3

89

33

373

4.2 11.3

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

3B

28

16

214

7.6 13.4

10

5

10

1.0

2.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

3B

1

1

6

6.0

6.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

3B

4

2

2

0.5

1.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

3B

7

1

5

0.7

5.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

3B

9

5

41

4.6

8.2

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Subtotal, Area 3A

Ivanoff Bay Village
Native Village of
Belkofski
Native Village of
Chignik
Native Village of
Chignik Lagoon
Native Village of False
Pass

0.0
0.0

3A
3A

Agdaagux Tribe of King
Cove
Chignik Lake Village

Mean,
Number
Mean,
those
of
Number
those
who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who
fished harvested returned fished
fished returned
0.0
0
0
0
0.0 0.0

6.4

6.0

3.9

0.0

0.5

3B

3B

-continued-

Appendix E-2.–Page 3 of 12.
First mailing response

Tribal name
Native Village of Nelson
Lagoon
Native Village of
Perryville
Native Village of Unga

Second mailing response

Third mailing response

Staff administered

Number
Mean,
Number
Mean,
Number
of
Number
those
of
Number
those
of
Number
Regulatory Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all
a
fished harvested returned
fished harvested returned fished returned
fished harvested returned fished returned
returned
area

Mean,
Number
Mean,
those
of
Number
those
who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who
fished harvested returned fished
fished returned

3B
3B

11

8

71

6.5

8.9

3

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0.7

3B

3

1

2

2.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Pauloff Harbor Village

3B

13

5

89

6.8 17.8

1

1

1

1.0

1.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Qagan Toyagungin Tribe
of Sand Point Village

3B

34

14

82

2.4

5.9

12

3

22

1.8

7.3

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

114

53

512

4.5

9.7

27

9

33

1.2

3.7

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

4A

5

2

19

3.8

9.5

2

1

11

5.5 11.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

4A

10

4

11

1.1

2.8

3

3

26

8.7

8.7

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

15

6

30

2.0

5.0

5

4

37

7.4

9.3

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

6.7

6.7

1

1

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Subtotal, Area 3B

Native Village of Akutan
Qawalingin Tribe of
Unalaska
Subtotal, Area 4A

Native Village of Atka

4B

143

Subtotal, Area 4B

Pribilof Islands Aleut
Community of St
George

4C

3

3

20

Pribilof Islands Aleut
Community of St Paul

4C

11

6

150

13.6 25.0

2

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

14

9

170

12.1 18.9

3

1

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

8

3

22

2.8

7.3

2

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

9

4

22

2.4

5.5

2

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Subtotal, Area 4C

Native Village of
Diomede (Inalik)
Native Village of
Gambell
Native Village of
Savoonga

4D
4D
4D

Subtotal, Area 4D

Chevak Native Village
(Kashunamiut)
Chinik Eskimo
Community
King Island Native
Community

4E
4E
4E

-continued-

Appendix E-2.–Page 4 of 12.
First mailing response

Tribal name
Levelock Village

Second mailing response

Third mailing response

Staff administered

Number
Mean,
Number
Mean,
Number
of
Number
those
of
Number
those
of
Number
Regulatory Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all
a
fished harvested returned
fished harvested returned fished returned
fished harvested returned fished returned
returned
area
4E

Mean,
Number
Mean,
those
of
Number
those
who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who
fished harvested returned fished
fished returned

Manokotak Village

4E

Naknek Native Village
Native Village of
Aleknagik
Native Village of Brevig
Mission
Native Village of
Council

4E

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

4E

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

2

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

4E

6

1

2

0.3

2.0

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

4E

3

3

16

5.3

5.3

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

6

2

12

2.0

6.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

1

1

17

17.0 17.0

1

1

25

25.0 25.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

3

2

26

8.7 13.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

4E

12

10

105

8.8 10.5

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

4E

3

2

21

7.0 10.5

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Native Village of
Dillingham (Curyung)

144

Native Village of Eek
Native Village of
Goodnews Bay
(Mumtraq)
Native Village of Hooper
Bay
Native Village of
Kanakanak
Native Village of Kipnuk
Native Village of
Kongiganak
Native Village of Koyuk
Native Village of
Kwigillingok
Native Village of
Kwinhagak
Native Village of
Mekoryuk
Native Village of
Nightmute
Native Village of
Scammon Bay
Native Village of
Shaktoolik
Native Village of
Toksook Bay
(Nunakauyak)
Native Village of
Tununak
Native Village of
Unalakleet

4E
4E

4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E
4E

4E

-continued-

Appendix E-2.–Page 5 of 12.
First mailing response

Second mailing response

Third mailing response

Staff administered

Number
Mean,
Number
Mean,
Number
of
Number
those
of
Number
those
of
Number
Regulatory Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all
a
fished harvested returned
fished harvested returned fished returned
fished harvested returned fished returned
returned
Tribal name
area
Native Village of Wales
4E
Newtok Village
Nome Eskimo
Community
Orutsararmuit Native
Village
South Naknek Village
Stebbins Community
Association
Traditional Village of
Togiak
Twin Hills Village

4E

145

4E

7

2

14

2.0

7.0

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

4E

3

1

18

6.0 18.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

6

3

29

4.8

9.7

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

68

32

344

5.1 10.8

8

1

25

3.1 25.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

1,371

572

6,845

5.0 12.0

302

102

1,000

3.3

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

352

130

1,297

4E
4E
4E
4E

Ugashik Village

4E

Village of Chefornak

4E

Village of Clark's Point

4E

Village of Kotlik

4E

Subtotal, 4E

Tribal subtotals

Mean,
Number
Mean,
those
of
Number
those
who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who
fished harvested returned fished
fished returned

-continued-

9.8

3.7 10.0

Appendix E-2.–Page 6 of 12.
First mailing response

Rural community
Angoon

Second mailing response

Third mailing response

Staff administered

Number
Mean,
Number
Mean,
Number
of
Number
those
of
Number
those
of
Number
Regulatory Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all
a
fished harvested returned
fished harvested returned fished returned
fished harvested returned fished returned
returned
area
2C
7
5
231
33.0 46.2
0
0
0
0.0 0.0
0
0
0
0.0

Mean,
Number
Mean,
those
of
Number
those
who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who
fished harvested returned fished
fished returned
0.0
9
4
54
6.0 13.5

146

Coffman Cove

2C

27

13

77

2.9

5.9

14

7

32

2.3

4.6

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Craig

2C

188

95

796

4.2

8.4

48

22

166

3.5

7.5

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

2

0

0

0.0

0.0

Edna Bay

2C

18

14

62

3.4

4.4

5

3

16

3.2

5.3

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

Elfin Cove

2C

6

3

7

1.2

2.3

5

2

12

2.4

6.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Gustavus

2C

37

17

69

1.9

4.1

8

4

25

3.1

6.3

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Haines

2C

258

160

693

2.7

4.3

51

27

125

2.5

4.6

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Hollis

2C

32

14

67

2.1

4.8

3

3

32

10.7 10.7

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Hoonah

2C

67

32

284

4.2

8.9

13

2

8

0.6

4.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Hydaburg

2C

6

4

33

5.5

8.3

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

2

1

10

Hyder

2C

19

13

46

2.4

3.5

5

1

5

1.0

5.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

Juneau

2C

Kake

2C

20

9

90

4.5 10.0

7

4

40

5.7 10.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

1

10

Kasaan

2C

2

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

2

2

2

1.0

1.0

Ketchikan

2C
85

39

368

4.3

9.4

16

7

49

3.1

7.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

1

0

0

0.0

0.0
0.0

Klawock

2C

Klukwan

2C

5.0 10.0
0.0

0.0

0.0 10.0

Metlakatla

2C

19

7

57

3.0

8.1

2

1

12

6.0 12.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

Meyers Chuck

2C

8

7

34

4.3

4.9

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Naukati Bay

2C

24

18

41

1.7

2.3

2

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

4

0

0

0.0

0.0

Pelican

2C

20

10

38

1.9

3.8

7

6

49

7.0

8.2

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Petersburg

2C

516

247

1,660

3.2

6.7

107

30

235

2.2

7.8

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Port Alexander

2C

14

12

84

6.0

7.0

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Port Protection

2C

5

4

29

5.8

7.3

5

4

49

9.8 12.3

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

Pt. Baker

2C

5

3

10

2.0

3.3

6

4

15

2.5

3.8

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Saxman

2C

6

2

170

28.3 85.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Sitka

2C

698

351

1,919

2.7

5.5

114

44

223

2.0

5.1

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

60

15

86

1.4

5.7

Skagway

2C

32

24

60

1.9

2.5

4

1

2

0.5

2.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Tenakee Springs

2C

39

21

114

2.9

5.4

7

2

8

1.1

4.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Thorne Bay

2C

74

52

350

4.7

6.7

16

7

22

1.4

3.1

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Ward Cove

2C

Whale Pass

2C

16

9

12

0.8

1.3

2

1

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

-continued-

Appendix E-2.–Page 7 of 12.
First mailing response

Rural community
Wrangell

Second mailing response

Third mailing response

Staff administered

Number
Mean,
Number
Mean,
Number
of
Number
those
of
Number
those
of
Number
Regulatory Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all
a
fished harvested returned
fished harvested returned fished returned
fished harvested returned fished returned
returned
area
2C
238
130
903
3.8 6.9
36
18
120
3.3 6.7
0
0
0
0.0

Subtotal, Area 2C

Chenega Bay

3A

Chiniak

3A

2,492

1,320

8,340

7

5

57

3.3

Mean,
Number
Mean,
those
of
Number
those
who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who
fished harvested returned fished
fished returned
0.0
0
0
0
0.0 0.0

6.3

486

200

1,245

2.6

6.2

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

84

23

162

1.9

7.0

8.1 11.4

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

6.1

56

23

128

2.3

5.6

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

7.0 10.5

3

3

15

5.0

5.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

147

Cordova

3A

293

131

802

Karluk

3A

3

2

21

2.7

Kodiak

3A

722

402

3,741

5.2

9.3

126

64

705

5.6 11.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Larsen Bay

3A

3

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Nanwalek

3A

4

3

232

58.0 77.3

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Old Harbor

3A

4

4

82

20.5 20.5

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Ouzinkie

3A

9

9

50

5.6

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Port Graham

3A

6

5

86

14.3 17.2

0.0

0.0

Port Lions

3A

6

6

42

Seldovia

3A

77

39

516

5.6

0

0

0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

7.0

2

1

23

11.5 23.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

6.7 13.2

31

22

286

9.2 13.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

7.0

Tatitlek

3A

6

3

18

3.0

6.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Yakutat

3A

43

17

161

3.7

9.5

10

7

64

6.4

9.1

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

1,186

629

5,838

4.9

9.3

228

120

1,221

5.4 10.2

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

23

12

142

6.2 11.8

4

3

5

1.3

1.7

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

11

7

31

2.8

4.4

4

3

36

9.0 12.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

4

1

10

2.5 10.0

2

2

16

8.0

8.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

39

21

189

4.8

9.0

11

8

57

5.2

7.1

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

67

40

340

5.1

8.5

9

6

139

15.4 23.2

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

67

40

340

5.1

8.5

9

6

139

15.4 23.2

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Subtotal, Area 3A

Chignik

3B

Chignik Lagoon

3B

Chignik Lake

3B

Cold Bay

3B

False Pass

3B

King Cove

3B

Nelson Lagoon

3B

Perryville

3B

Sand Point

3B

Subtotal, Area 3B

Unalaska
Subtotal, Area 4A

4A

-continued-

Appendix E-2.–Page 8 of 12.
First mailing response

Rural community
Adak

Second mailing response

Third mailing response

Staff administered

Number
Mean,
Number
Mean,
Number
of
Number
those
of
Number
those
of
Number
Regulatory Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all
a
fished harvested returned
fished harvested returned fished returned
fished harvested returned fished returned
returned
area
4B

Mean,
Number
Mean,
those
of
Number
those
who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who
fished harvested returned fished
fished returned

Subtotal, Area 4B

St. George Island

4C

Subtotal, Area 4C

Aleknagik

4E

Bethel

4E

Chefornak

4E

Dillingham

4E

Egegik

4E

King Salmon

4E

148

13

1

0

0.0

0.0

4

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

2

1

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

10

4

30

3.0

7.5

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

31

7

30

1.0

4.3

9

1

10

1.1 10.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Rural community
subtotal

3,817

2,018

14,748

3.9

7.3

744

335

2,672

0.5

8.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

84

23

162

1.9

7.0

Total (tribal and rural)

5,188

2,590

21,593

4.2

8.3

1,046

437

3,672

3.5

8.4

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

436

153

1,459

3.3

9.5

Kongiganak

4E

Manokotak

4E

Naknek

4E

Nightmute

4E

Nome

4E

Port Heiden

4E

Quinhagak

4E

South Naknek

4E

Teller

4E

Togiak

4E
Subtotal, Area 4E

-continued-

Appendix E-2.–Page 9 of 12.
First mailing response

City
Adak

Second mailing response

Third mailing response

Staff administered

Number
Mean,
Number
Mean,
Number
of
Number
those
of
Number
those
of
Number
Regulatory Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all
a
fished harvested returned
fished harvested returned fished returned
fished harvested returned fished returned
returned
area
AK
3
2
18
6.0 9.0
1
0
0
0.0 0.0
0
0
0
0.0

Akhiok

AK

Akiachak

AK

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

1

1

8

2

2

19

9.5

9.5

2

1

11

8.0

Mean,
Number
Mean,
those
of
Number
those
who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who
fished harvested returned fished
fished returned
0.0
0
0
0
0.0 0.0

8.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

5.5 11.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Akutan

AK

Aleknagik

AK

Anchor Point

AK

6

1

10

1.7 10.0

0

0

0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Anchorage

AK

85

23

305

3.6 13.3

17

4

44

2.6 11.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Angoon

AK

27

17

325

12.0 19.1

4

2

12

3.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

65

28

381

14.0 14.0

Atka

AK

Auke Bay

AK

6.0

5.9 13.6

149

Barrow

AK

Bethel

AK

1

1

14

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Chefornak

AK

6

3

29

4.8

9.7

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Chenega Bay

AK

8

6

72

9.0 12.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Chevak

AK

Chignik

AK

8

2

15

1.9

7.5

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Chignik Lagoon

AK

4

3

29

7.3

9.7

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Chignik Lake

AK

Chiniak

AK

10

8

100

10.0 12.5

1

1

10

10.0 10.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Chugiak

AK
5.9

13

6

26

2.0

4.3

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

5.9 10.9

4

3

5

1.3

1.7

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Clarks Point

AK

Coffman Cove

AK

25

13

77

Cold Bay

AK

26

14

153

3.1

Cordova

AK

317

142

961

3.0

6.8

64

25

147

2.3

5.9

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Craig

AK

273

137

1,100

4.0

8.0

53

28

233

4.4

8.3

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Dillingham

AK

14

1

0

0.0

0.0

5

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Douglas

AK

2

0

0

0.0

0.0

2

1

22

11.0 22.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Dutch Harbor

AK

41

24

266

6.5 11.1

7

3

69

9.9 23.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Eagle River

AK

6

3

37

6.2 12.3

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Edna Bay

AK

15

11

49

3.3

4.5

3

2

11

3.7

5.5

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Eek

AK

2

2

2

1.0

1.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Egegik

AK

Elfin Cove

AK

6

3

7

1.2

2.3

4

2

12

3.0

6.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

-continued-

Appendix E-2.–Page 10 of 12.
First mailing response

City
Elmemdorf AFB

Second mailing response

Third mailing response

Staff administered

Number
Mean,
Number
Mean,
Number
of
Number
those
of
Number
those
of
Number
Regulatory Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all
a
fished harvested returned
fished harvested returned fished returned
fished harvested returned fished returned
returned
area
AK

Ester

AK

Fairbanks

AK

False Pass

AK

Fritz Creek

AK

Gakona

AK

Gambell

AK

Girdwood

AK

Glennallen

AK

4

1

4

1.0

4.0

0

0

Mean,
Number
Mean,
those
of
Number
those
who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who
fished harvested returned fished
fished returned

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

150

Golovin

AK

Goodnews Bay

AK

Gustavus

AK

37

17

69

1.9

4.1

6

3

18

3.0

6.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Haines

AK

276

166

715

2.6

4.3

58

30

187

3.2

6.2

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Hollis

AK

Homer

AK

13

6

113

8.7 18.8

1

1

12

12.0 12.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Hoonah

AK

114

51

500

4.4

9.8

29

7

35

1.2

5.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

1

1

0

0.0

0.0

Hooper Bay

AK

6

2

12

2.0

6.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Hydaburg

AK

32

16

113

3.5

7.1

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

84

44

382

4.5

8.7

Hyder

AK

19

13

46

2.4

3.5

5

1

5

1.0

5.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Juneau

AK

91

36

410

4.5 11.4

26

7

48

1.8

Kake

AK

64

23

228

3.6

9.9

19

9

107

Karluk

AK

3

2

21

7.0 10.5

3

3

15

0.3

6.9

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

1

10

5.6 11.9

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

5.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

5.0

0.0 10.0

Kasaan

AK

4

1

1

1.0

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Kasilof

AK

7

5

122

17.4 24.4

1

1

2

2.0

2.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Kenai

AK

45

8

112

2.5 14.0

9

2

26

2.9 13.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Ketchikan

AK

160

57

696

4.4 12.2

30

11

73

2.4

6.6

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

195

55

564

King Cove

AK

30

19

222

7.4 11.7

12

8

46

3.8

5.8

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

King Salmon

AK

Kipnuk

AK

1

1

17

17.0 17.0

1

1

25

Klawock

AK

104

45

409

3.9

9.1

23

10

92

Klukwan

AK

Kodiak

AK

775

432

3,953

5.1

9.2

136

64

686

Kongiganak

AK

2

1

4

2.0

4.0

1

0

0

25.0 25.0
4.0

9.2

2.9 10.3
0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

5.0 10.7

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

-continued-

0.0

Appendix E-2.–Page 11 of 12.
First mailing response

City
Kotzebue
Kwigillingok

Second mailing response

Third mailing response

Staff administered

Number
Mean,
Number
Mean,
Number
of
Number
those
of
Number
those
of
Number
Regulatory Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all
a
fished harvested returned
fished harvested returned fished returned
fished harvested returned fished returned
returned
area
AK

Mean,
Number
Mean,
those
of
Number
those
who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who
fished harvested returned fished
fished returned

AK

Larsen Bay

AK

Manokotak

AK

Mekoryuk

AK

15

10

58

3.9

5.8

4

3

38

9.5 12.7

Metlakatla

AK

63

23

196

3.1

8.5

26

8

141

Meyers Chuck

AK

7

7

34

4.9

4.9

1

0

0

Naknek

AK

2

1

0

0.0

0.0

1

0

0

Nanwalek

AK

15

14

467

31.1 33.4

6

6

100

Naukati

AK

16

11

92

5.8

8.4

4

0

0

0.0

0.0

Nelson Lagoon

AK

Newtok

AK

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

5.4 17.6

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

16.7 16.7

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

151

Nightmute

AK

Nikiski

AK

1

0

0

0.0

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Ninilchik

AK

16

3

99

6.2 33.0

3

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Nome

AK

13

6

40

3.1

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

North Pole

AK
0.0

6.7

Old Harbor

AK

17

13

139

8.2 10.7

3

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

Ouzinkie

AK

20

16

109

5.5

6.8

5

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Palmer

AK

2

1

1

0.5

1.0

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Pelican

AK

23

13

78

3.4

6.0

8

6

49

6.1

8.2

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Perryville

AK

8

7

68

8.5

9.7

4

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Petersburg

AK

555

260

1,796

3.2

6.9

121

30

225

1.9

7.5

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Pilot Point

AK

Point Baker

AK

7

5

36

5.1

7.2

8

6

24

3.0

4.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Port Alexander

AK

16

14

119

7.4

8.5

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Port Graham

AK

17

12

257

15.1 21.4

12

6

61

5.1 10.2

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Port Heiden

AK
21

14

106

5.0

7.6

6

5

75

12.5 15.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

50

20

174

3.5

8.7

11

6

39

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Port Lions

AK

Port Protection

AK

Port William

AK

Quinhagak

AK

Sand Point

AK

3.5

-continued-

6.5

Appendix E-2.–Page 12 of 12.
First mailing response

Second mailing response

Third mailing response

Staff administered

Number
Mean,
Number
Mean,
Number
of
Number
those
of
Number
those
of
Number
Regulatory Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all
a
fished harvested returned
fished harvested returned fished returned
fished harvested returned fished returned
returned
area
AK
7
3
22
3.1 7.3
2
0
0
0.0 0.0
0
0
0
0.0

City
Savoonga
Saxman

AK

0

0

0

Seldovia

AK

76

42

560

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

7.4 13.3

29

22

286

Seward

AK

3

1

5

1.7

5.0

0

0

Sitka

AK

795

399

2,129

2.7

5.3

131

1.9

0.0

Mean,
Number
Mean,
those
of
Number
those
who Number subsistence halibut Mean, all who
fished harvested returned fished
fished returned
0.0
0
0
0
0.0 0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

9.9 13.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

52

281

2.1

5.4

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

88

24

122

1.4

5.1

152

Skagway

AK

37

27

72

2.7

4

1

2

0.5

2.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Soldotna

AK

22

7

904

41.1 129.1

3

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

St. George Island

AK

St. Paul Island

AK

11

6

150

13.6 25.0

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Sterling

AK

Tatitlek

AK

7

5

75

10.7 15.0

1

1

1

1.0

1.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Teller

AK

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Tenakee Springs

AK

39

21

114

2.9

5.4

7

2

8

1.1

4.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Thorne Bay

AK

74

52

346

4.7

6.7

15

8

28

1.9

3.5

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Togiak

AK

Toksook Bay

AK

12

10

105

8.8 10.5

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Trapper Creek

AK

Tununak

AK

3

2

21

7.0 10.5

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Twin Hills

AK

Unalakleet

AK

Unalaska

AK

37

21

92

2.5

4.4

6

6

96

16.0 16.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Valdez

AK

20

6

42

2.1

7.0

1

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Ward Cove

AK

10

3

16

1.6

5.3

4

1

2

0.5

2.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Wasilla

AK

13

1

0

0.0

0.0

3

1

14

4.7 14.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Whale Pass

AK

8

6

6

0.8

1.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Whittier

AK
3.9

7.1

38

19

135

3.6

7.1

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

2

0

0

0.0

0.0

5.7 13.5

16

10

80

5.0

8.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

Willow

AK

Wrangell

AK

299

163

1,154

Yakutat

AK

57

24

323

5,123

2,586

21,584

4.2

8.3

1,036

437

3,672

3.5

8.4

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

436

153

1,459

3.3

9.5

65

4

9

0.1

2.3

10

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

5,188

2,590

21,593

4.2

8.3

1,046

437

3,672

3.5

8.4

0

0

0

0.0

0.0

436

153

1,459

3.3

9.5

Subtotal, Alaska
Subtotal, non-Alaska
Total

a.

To protect confidentiality, data for tribes and communities with 5 or fewer SHARCs issued are not reported in this table. Subtotals include all tribes and communities. Blank cells indicate redacted data.

Appendix E-3.–Estimated subsistence harvests of halibut by gear type.

153

Tribal name
Angoon
Community
Association
Aukquan
Traditional
Council
Central Council
Tlingit and Haida
Indian Tribes
Chilkat Indian
Village
Chilkoot Indian
Association
Craig Community
Association
Douglas Indian
Association
Hoonah Indian
Association
Hydaburg
Cooperative
Association
Ketchikan Indian
Corporation
Klawock
Cooperative
Association
Metlakatla Indian
Community,
Annette Island
Reserve
Organized Village
of Kake
Organized Village
of Kasaan
Organized Village
of Saxman
Petersburg Indian
Association

Regulatory
area

Number of
SHARCs
issueda

2C

92

2C

1

2C

Estimated
number
respondents
fished

Set hook gear
Estimated Estimated
pounds
number
halibut
halibut
harvested
harvested

Hook and line or handline
Estimated Estimated
Estimated
pounds
number
number
halibut
halibut
respondents
harvested
harvested
fished

Estimated
number
respondents
fished

Estimated
number
halibut
harvested

All gear
Confidence
interval for
number of
halibut

Estimated
pounds
halibut
harvested

Confidence
interval for
pounds of
halibut

35

559

8,130

15

50

904

42

609

2.8%

9,033

2.5%

488

157

1,642

28,807

72

419

4,590

184

2,060

1.0%

33,397

1.0%

2C

23

5

48

684

1

5

18

5

53

13.9%

702

12.6%

2C

48

17

105

3,556

4

6

105

21

111

9.6%

3,661

13.8%

2C

63

24

263

5,447

4

23

329

24

286

5.4%

5,776

4.9%

2C

16

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

2C

141

39

428

8,346

24

77

2,010

51

505

3.8%

10,356

4.2%

2C

124

56

483

19,529

23

52

3,098

63

535

1.3%

22,627

1.3%

2C

503

116

1,156

24,475

54

359

5,910

136

1,515

1.2%

30,385

1.0%

2C

80

22

124

3,417

7

47

609

27

171

6.3%

4,025

7.7%

2C

172

45

574

13,041

11

27

275

52

601

3.3%

13,316

3.4%

2C

80

26

238

5,394

3

3

123

26

241

3.8%

5,517

3.8%

2C

8

3

11

315

2

2

22

3

12

95.4%

337

103.7%

2C

37

16

182

2,737

10

58

770

22

240

8.7%

3,507

8.4%

2C

73

22

150

2,527

20

91

1,276

27

241

4.5%

3,803

4.6%

-continued-

Appendix E-3.–Page 2 of 9.

154

Regulatory
Tribal name
area
Sitka Tribe of
2C
Alaska
Skagway Village
2C
Wrangell
Cooperative
2C
Association
Subtotal, Area 2C
Kenaitze Indian
3A
Tribe
Lesnoi Village
3A
(Woody Island)
Native Village of
3A
Afognak
Native Village of
3A
Akhiok
Native Village of
3A
Chenega
Native Village of
3A
Eyak
Native Village of
3A
Karluk
Native Village of
3A
Larsen Bay
Native Village of
3A
Nanwalek
Native Village of
3A
Ouzinkie
Native Village of
3A
Port Graham
Native Village of
3A
Port Lions
Native Village of
3A
Tatitlek
Ninilchik Village
3A
Seldovia Village
3A
Tribe
Sun'aq Tribe of
Kodiak (formerly
3A
Shoonaq')
Village of Kanatak
3A

Number of
SHARCs
issueda
289

Estimated
number
respondents
fished

Set hook gear
Estimated Estimated
pounds
number
halibut
halibut
harvested
harvested

Hook and line or handline
Estimated Estimated
Estimated
pounds
number
number
halibut
halibut
respondents
harvested
harvested
fished

Estimated
number
respondents
fished

Estimated
number
halibut
harvested

All gear
Confidence
interval for
number of
halibut

Estimated
pounds
halibut
harvested

Confidence
interval for
pounds of
halibut

120

671

14,548

38

81

1,121

131

752

1.3%

15,669

1.1%

94

39

293

6,437

17

17

371

42

309

2.6%

6,809

2.9%

2,335

743

6,926

147,390

306

1,319

21,576

859

8,245

69.3%

168,965

29.6%

123

12

103

1,407

23

234

7,044

27

337

4.5%

8,450

6.5%

71

7

44

841

2

7

127

7

51

8.1%

969

7.9%

24

15

99

1,052

8

22

359

15

121

9.3%

1,411

7.7%

9

5

14

63

9

45

1,033

9

59

91.4%

1,096

332.4%

17

9

104

4,463

6

19

759

9

123

22.9%

5,221

23.6%

80

30

318

4,079

17

36

751

30

355

5.9%

4,830

4.4%

37

11

95

1,424

25

158

2,623

27

254

6.0%

4,047

5.5%

44

11

192

4,044

14

145

1,971

18

337

0.0%

6,015

0.0%

37

17

94

2,025

9

41

598

17

136

9.2%

2,623

9.2%

43

21

379

9,986

12

143

1,515

23

522

6.3%

11,501

3.6%

32

15

129

2,225

7

41

794

19

170

5.1%

3,019

4.4%

23

10

146

2,064

0

0

0

10

146

21.9%

2,064

18.1%

3

4

81

6

842

2,166

20

1,138

6,607

20

1,980

9.3%

8,773

6.1%

63

19

300

5,308

15

164

1,997

28

464

4.7%

7,305

4.8%

126

65

518

12,792

18

94

2,565

68

612

3.3%

15,357

3.8%

18

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

-continued-

Appendix E-3.–Page 3 of 9.

155

Regulatory
Tribal name
area
Village of Old
3A
Harbor
Village of
3A
Salamatoff
Yakutat Tlingit
3A
Tribe
Subtotal, Area 3A
Agdaagux Tribe of
3B
King Cove
Chignik Lake
3B
Village
Ivanoff Bay
3B
Village
Native Village of
3B
Belkofski
Native Village of
3B
Chignik
Native Village of
3B
Chignik Lagoon
Native Village of
3B
False Pass
Native Village of
3B
Nelson Lagoon
Native Village of
3B
Perryville
Native Village of
3B
Unga
Pauloff Harbor
3B
Village
Qagan Toyagungin
Tribe of Sand
3B
Point Village
Subtotal, Area 3B
Native Village of
4A
Akutan
Qawalingin Tribe
4A
of Unalaska
Subtotal, Area 4A

Number of
SHARCs
issueda

Estimated
number
respondents
fished

Set hook gear
Estimated Estimated
pounds
number
halibut
halibut
harvested
harvested

Hook and line or handline
Estimated Estimated
Estimated
pounds
number
number
halibut
halibut
respondents
harvested
harvested
fished

Estimated
number
respondents
fished

Estimated
number
halibut
harvested

All gear
Confidence
interval for
number of
halibut

Estimated
pounds
halibut
harvested

Confidence
interval for
pounds of
halibut

46

7

42

838

15

86

2,384

20

127

7.4%

3,222

8.5%

21

0

0

0

5

86

902

5

86

18.3%

902

18.3%

41

20

319

7,449

9

48

1,104

20

368

8.4%

8,553

7.5%

940

279

3,739

62,225

215

2,508

33,134

372

6,247

0.9%

95,359

0.5%

72

19

213

2,706

31

221

3,380

41

434

4.6%

6,085

4.2%

11

0

0

0

10

60

700

10

60

0.0%

700

0.0%

8

2

0

0

4

4

84

4

4

85.1%

84

85.1%

7

0

0

0

1

5

77

1

5

0.0%

77

0.0%

20

4

34

857

8

53

768

11

87

15.2%

1,626

17.6%

22

11

90

1,711

9

22

517

13

112

11.7%

2,228

12.9%

8

0

0

0

3

5

93

3

5

128.6%

93

128.6%

48

10

223

1,824

17

86

1,320

21

309

16.1%

3,144

11.3%

86

13

107

1,603

22

88

1,603

32

194

3.8%

3,206

4.2%

291

60

666

8,700

106

544

8,543

134

1,209

1.4%

17,243

1.3%

21

3

6

147

9

84

1,512

9

90

21.9%

1,659

21.6%

36

12

35

507

17

72

856

20

107

12.4%

1,363

12.7%

57

15

41

654

26

156

2,368

29

197

7.0%

3,022

7.3%

5

1
3

-continued-

Appendix E-3.–Page 4 of 9.

156

Regulatory
Tribal name
area
Native Village of
4B
Atka
Subtotal, Area 4B
Pribilof Islands
Aleut Community
4C
of St. George
Pribilof Islands
Aleut Community
4C
of St. Paul
Subtotal, Area 4C
Native Village of
4D
Diomede (Inalik)
Native Village of
4D
Gambell
Native Village of
4D
Savoonga
Subtotal, Area 4D
Chevak Native
Village
4E
(Kashunamiut)
Chinik Eskimo
4E
Community
Egegik Village
4E
King Island Native
4E
Community
Levelock Village
4E
Manokotak
4E
Village
Naknek Native
4E
Village
Native Village of
4E
Aleknagik
Native Village of
4E
Brevig Mission
Native Village of
4E
Council
Native Village of
Dillingham
4E
(Curyung)

Number of
SHARCs
issueda

Estimated
number
respondents
fished

Set hook gear
Estimated Estimated
pounds
number
halibut
halibut
harvested
harvested

Hook and line or handline
Estimated Estimated
Estimated
pounds
number
number
halibut
halibut
respondents
harvested
harvested
fished

Estimated
number
respondents
fished

Estimated
number
halibut
harvested

All gear
Confidence
interval for
number of
halibut

Estimated
pounds
halibut
harvested

Confidence
interval for
pounds of
halibut

5
5
6

5

23

563

5

8

158

6

30

54.5%

720

51.9%

42

13

468

9,555

6

16

584

19

485

14.9%

10,139

13.7%

48

17

491

10,118

11

24

742

25

515

10.9%

10,859

10.0%

18

4

36

942

2

6

328

6

42

26.6%

1,270

23.6%

20

5

36

942

2

6

328

7

42

25.3%

1,270

22.5%

8

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

6

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

2

5

480

0

0

0

2

5

47.4%

480

47.4%

1
1

3
1
1
1
1
1

1
4
16

-continued-

Appendix E-3.–Page 5 of 9.

157

Tribal name
Native Village of
Eek
Native Village of
Goodnews Bay
(Mumtraq)
Native Village of
Hooper Bay
Native Village of
Kanakanak
Native Village of
Kipnuk
Native Village of
Kongiganak
Native Village of
Koyuk
Native Village of
Kwigillingok
Native Village of
Kwinhagak
Native Village of
Mekoryuk
Native Village of
Nightmute
Native Village of
Scammon Bay
Native Village of
Shaktoolik
Native Village of
Toksook Bay
(Nunakauyak)
Native Village of
Tununak
Native Village of
Unalakleet
Native Village of
Wales
Newtok Village
Nome Eskimo
Community

Regulatory
area

Number of
SHARCs
issueda

4E

7

4E

4

4E

16

4E

1

4E

13

4E

5

4E

1

4E

4

4E

3

4E

6

4E

1

4E

3

4E

1

4E

Estimated
number
respondents
fished

Set hook gear
Estimated Estimated
pounds
number
halibut
halibut
harvested
harvested

Hook and line or handline
Estimated Estimated
Estimated
pounds
number
number
halibut
halibut
respondents
harvested
harvested
fished

Estimated
number
respondents
fished

Estimated
number
halibut
harvested

All gear
Confidence
interval for
number of
halibut

Estimated
pounds
halibut
harvested

Confidence
interval for
pounds of
halibut

0

0

0

7

37

1,045

7

37

108.8%

1,045

108.8%

0

0

0

5

32

345

5

32

35.8%

345

33.6%

0

0

0

13

273

2,230

13

273

64.3%

2,230

75.7%

4

48

504

2

4

70

4

52

106.2%

574

107.6%

33

5

38

315

10

67

560

10

105

32.6%

875

36.5%

4E

13

0

0

0

9

91

576

9

91

67.8%

576

67.4%

4E

3

4E

1

4

26

630

0

0

0

4

26

31.5%

630

29.4%

4E

1

4E

15

-continued-

Appendix E-3.–Page 6 of 9.

Regulatory
Tribal name
area
Orutsararmuit
4E
Native Village
South Naknek
4E
Village
Stebbins
Community
4E
Association
Traditional Village
4E
of Togiak
Twin Hills Village
4E
Ugashik Village
4E
Village of
4E
Chefornak
Village of Clark's
4E
Point
Village of Kotlik
4E
Subtotal, Area 4E

158

Tribal SHARC
subtotal

All
regulatory
areas

Number of
SHARCs
issueda
9

Estimated
number
respondents
fished

Set hook gear
Estimated Estimated
pounds
number
halibut
halibut
harvested
harvested

Hook and line or handline
Estimated Estimated
Estimated
pounds
number
number
halibut
halibut
respondents
harvested
harvested
fished

Estimated
number
respondents
fished

Estimated
number
halibut
harvested

All gear
Confidence
interval for
number of
halibut

Estimated
pounds
halibut
harvested

Confidence
interval for
pounds of
halibut

3

36

315

3

18

168

3

54

124.2%

483

124.2%

0

0

0

8

75

1,081

8

75

22.6%

1,081

23.3%

1
210

22

233

3,868

65

678

7,721

73

911

3.0%

11,589

4.1%

3,906

1,143

12,137

233,984

734

5,247

74,585

1,502

17,384

1
4
3
1
2
14
1

-continued-

32.8%

308,569

16.2%

Appendix E-3.–Page 7 of 9.

159

Regulatory
Rural community
area
Angoon
2C
Coffman Cove
2C
Craig
2C
Edna Bay
2C
Elfin Cove
2C
Gustavus
2C
Haines
2C
Hollis
2C
Hoonah
2C
Hydaburg
2C
Hyder
2C
Juneau
2C
Kake
2C
Kasaan
2C
Ketchikan
2C
Klawock
2C
Klukwan
2C
Metlakatla
2C
Meyers Chuck
2C
Naukati Bay
2C
Pelican
2C
Petersburg
2C
Port Alexander
2C
Port Protection
2C
Pt. Baker
2C
Saxman
2C
Sitka
2C
Skagway
2C
Tenakee Springs
2C
Thorne Bay
2C
Ward Cove
2C
Whale Pass
2C
Wrangell
2C
Subtotal, Area 2C
Chenega Bay
3A
Chiniak
3A
Cordova
3A
Karluk
3A
Kodiak
3A

Number of
SHARCs
issueda
16
49
376
37
15
61
426
44
99
10
32
3
35
8
5
155
2
32
9
40
40
875
26
16
15
11
1,363
51
53
119
2
18
377
4,420
7
3
498
6
1,552

Set hook gear
Hook and line or handline
All gear
Estimated Confidence Estimated Confidence
Estimated
Estimated Estimated
Estimated
Estimated Estimated
Estimated
interval for
pounds
interval for
number
number
pounds
number
number
pounds
number
number
pounds of
halibut
number of
halibut
respondents
halibut
halibut
respondents
halibut
halibut
respondents
halibut
harvested
halibut
harvested
fished
harvested
harvested
fished
harvested
harvested
fished
6
87
1,306
6
198
4,349
9
285
0.0%
5,655
0.0%
12
51
1,113
14
78
1,296
23
129
2.5%
2,409
2.6%
149
1,165
20,122
52
240
3,442
172
1,405
0.8%
23,563
0.8%
24
112
2,228
1
0
0
24
112
7.3%
2,228
6.2%
7
21
510
4
4
109
7
25
17.5%
619
19.0%
15
74
1,597
14
48
800
27
121
3.3%
2,396
3.8%
245
1,007
20,470
65
74
1,282
252
1,080
0.5%
21,753
0.5%
17
103
4,372
6
10
221
20
114
4.3%
4,593
4.1%
30
207
3,377
20
143
1,822
40
350
1.8%
5,200
1.6%
6
48
1,551
1
0
0
6
48
18.9%
1,551
20.1%
18
58
1,346
9
6
102
18
64
7.4%
1,447
5.6%
17
0

162
0

4,956
0

2
4

11
4

402
110

17
4

174
4

5.4%
97.2%

5,358
110

5.2%
97.2%

44

308

5,917

38

332

3,909

65

640

1.5%

9,826

1.7%

11
7
24
23
302
20
9
10
3
586
34
20
68

92
33
56
100
1,784
130
95
29
100
2,933
76
97
375

2,210
1,133
1,590
2,207
31,581
3,606
1,726
694
817
62,454
1,603
1,950
9,963

6
2
8
14
190
3
5
4
3
184
14
11
40

14
1
0
24
790
10
26
5
183
416
11
42
102

258
14
0
458
12,168
162
621
225
1,342
7,324
181
718
1,886

12
7
24
23
384
20
12
10
3
632
35
26
76

106
34
56
125
2,574
140
121
34
283
3,349
87
138
477

7.0%
0.0%
4.3%
5.8%
0.3%
9.5%
13.6%
8.2%
42.7%
0.2%
3.9%
2.2%
1.4%

2,468
1,147
1,590
2,665
43,749
3,768
2,347
919
2,158
69,779
1,785
2,668
11,849

6.8%
0.0%
4.6%
5.1%
0.3%
8.9%
12.0%
10.0%
40.6%
0.2%
3.8%
2.2%
1.5%

7
169
1,887
5

8
1,045
10,373
46

256
20,601
211,784
672

7
83
815
4

4
377
3,218
11

105
6,390
50,117
154

10
197
2,161
5

12
1,422
13,591
57

0.0%
135.1%
20.0%
0.0%

361
26,991
261,900
826

0.0%
47.9%
7.0%
0.0%

183
1
676

989
0
6,157

18,951
0
115,720

106
5
353

271
36
1,739

5,098
417
34,281

211
5
827

1,260
36
7,895

0.5%
0.0%
30.1%

24,049
417
150,002

0.5%
0.0%
38.8%

-continued-

Appendix E-3.–Page 8 of 9.

160

Regulatory
Rural community
area
Larsen Bay
3A
Nanwalek
3A
Old Harbor
3A
Ouzinkie
3A
Port Graham
3A
Port Lions
3A
Seldovia
3A
Tatitlek
3A
Yakutat
3A
Subtotal, Area 3A
Chignik
3B
Chignik Lagoon
3B
Chignik Lake
3B
Cold Bay
3B
False Pass
3B
King Cove
3B
Nelson Lagoon
3B
Perryville
3B
Sand Point
3B
Subtotal, Area 3B
Unalaska
4A
Subtotal, Area 4A
Adak
4B
Subtotal, Area 4B
St. George Island
4C
Subtotal, Area 4C
Aleknagik
4E
Bethel
4E
Chefornak
4E
Dillingham
4E
Egegik
4E
King Salmon
4E
Kongiganak
4E
Manokotak
4E
Naknek
4E
Nightmute
4E
Nome
4E
Port Heiden
4E
Quinhagak
4E
South Naknek
4E

Number of
SHARCs
issueda
6
7
7
13
10
11
144
10
74
2,348
1
1
1
32
1
25
1
1
15
78
119
119
5
5
1
1
2
1
1
23
1
2
1
2
6
1
20
3
1
1

Set hook gear
Hook and line or handline
All gear
Estimated Confidence Estimated Confidence
Estimated
Estimated Estimated
Estimated
Estimated Estimated
Estimated
interval for
pounds
interval for
number
number
pounds
number
number
pounds
number
number
pounds of
halibut
number of
halibut
respondents
halibut
halibut
respondents
halibut
halibut
respondents
halibut
harvested
halibut
harvested
fished
harvested
harvested
fished
harvested
harvested
fished
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
1
200
3,150
3
32
588
3
232
0.0%
3,738
0.0%
3
56
831
5
46
884
5
103
36.5%
1,715
28.8%
3
33
583
11
33
551
12
67
15.0%
1,134
15.6%
3
58
1,260
6
85
895
8
143
24.2%
2,155
26.7%
6
43
637
5
46
690
10
89
11.6%
1,327
9.6%
50
444
6,796
50
563
7,389
79
1,007
1.2%
14,184
1.2%
3
15
292
2
11
224
4
26
28.7%
516
31.6%
26
205
5,523
12
88
2,212
31
293
3.0%
7,735
3.7%
962
8,276
154,891
562
2,961
53,382
1,202
11,237
12.6%
208,273
16.7%

16

142

2,431

10

21

436

17

163

3.9%

2,866

3.8%

6

16

208

12

104

2,129

17

121

13.7%

2,337

13.7%

0
22
43
43

0
158
402
402

0
2,639
6,823
6,823

8
30
40
40

68
199
291
291

1,147
3,851
4,633
4,633

8
42
69
69

68
357
693
693

23.9%
3.1%
2.0%
2.0%

1,147
6,490
11,456
11,456

30.1%
3.1%
2.3%
2.3%

1

0

0

0

0

0

1

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

3

0

0

0

0

0

3

0

0.0%

0

0.0%

5

38

571

0

0

0

5

38

30.4%

571

31.9%

-continued-

Appendix E-3.–Page 9 of 9.

Regulatory
Rural community
area
Teller
4E
Togiak
4E
Subtotal, Area 4E
Rural SHARC
subtotal
Tribal subtotal
Rural community
subtotal
Total

161
Total

All
regulatory
areas
All

Set hook gear
Hook and line or handline
All gear
Estimated Confidence Estimated Confidence
Estimated
Estimated Estimated
Estimated
Estimated Estimated
Estimated
interval for
pounds
interval for
number
number
pounds
number
number
pounds
number
number
Number of
pounds of
halibut
number of
halibut
respondents
halibut
halibut
respondents
halibut
halibut
SHARCs respondents
halibut
harvested
halibut
harvested
fished
harvested
harvested
fished
harvested
harvested
fished
issueda
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
1
76
11
48
661
1
0
0
11
48
13.5%
661
14.4%

7,047

2,928

19,279

377,008

1,449

6,669

111,982

3,489

25,948

10.6%

488,990

4.4%

3,906

1,143

12,137

233,984

734

5,247

74,585

1,502

17,384

32.8%

308,569

16.2%

All

7,047

2,928

19,279

377,008

1,449

6,669

111,982

3,489

25,948

10.6%

488,990

4.4%

All

10,953

4,071

31,416

610,992

2,183

11,916

186,567

4,991

43,332

7.8%

797,560

3.4%

Regulatory
area
2C
3A
3B
4A
4B
4C
4D
4E
All

Number of
SHARCs
issueda
6,755
3,288
369
176
10
49
20
286
10,953

Set hook gear
Hook and line or handline
All gear
Estimated Confidence Estimated Confidence
Estimated
Estimated Estimated
Estimated
Estimated Estimated
Estimated
interval for
pounds
interval for
number
number
pounds
number
number
pounds
number
number
pounds of
halibut
number of
halibut
respondents
halibut
halibut
respondents
halibut
halibut
respondents
halibut
harvested
halibut
harvested
fished
harvested
harvested
fished
harvested
harvested
fished
2,630
17,299
359,173
1,121
4,537
71,692
3,020
21,836
15.1%
430,866
5.3%
1,240
12,015
217,116
777
5,469
86,515
1,574
17,484
8.4%
303,632
11.8%
82
824
11,339
137
743
12,394
176
1,567
1.0%
23,733
0.9%
58
443
7,477
66
447
7,000
99
890
1.8%
14,477
2.0%
6
27
298
4
13
175
6
40
38.0%
473
35.6%
17
491
10,118
11
24
742
25
515
11.1%
10,859
10.1%
5
36
942
2
6
328
7
42
25.3%
1,270
22.5%
33
281
4,529
66
678
7,721
84
959
2.2%
12,250
3.0%
4,071
31,416
610,992
2,183
11,916
186,567
4,991
43,332
7.8%
797,560
3.4%

a. To protect confidentiality, data for tribes and communities with 5 or fewer SHARCs issued are not reported in this table. Subtotals include all tribes and
communities. Blank cells indicate redacted data.

Appendix E-4.–Estimated subsistence harvests of halibut by place of residence.

162

City
Adak
Akhiok
Akiachak
Akutan
Aleknagik
Anchor Point
Anchorage
Angoon
Atka
Auke Bay
Barrow
Bethel
Chefornak
Chenega Bay
Chevak
Chignik
Chignik Lagoon
Chignik Lake
Chiniak
Chugiak
Clarks Point
Coffman Cove
Cold Bay
Cordova
Craig
Dillingham
Douglas
Dutch Harbor
Eagle River
Edna Bay
Eek
Egegik

State
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK

Number
of
SHARCs
Issueda
8
6
1
16
3
12
219
109
1
5
1
8
14
8
2
10
13
4
18
3
1
46
35
557
510
30
17
80
8
28
6
1

Subsistence
fished

Subsistence harvest

Sport fished

Sport harvest

Lingcod bycatch

Rockfish bycatch

Estimated
number
respondents
5
5

Estimated
number
halibut
36
36

Estimated
pounds
halibut
559
1,008

Estimated
number
respondents
0
0

Estimated
number
halibut
0
0

Estimated
pounds
halibut
0
0

Estimated
number
respondents
0
0

Estimated
number
lingcod
0
0

Estimated
number
respondents
0
0

Estimated
number
rockfish
0
0

9

90

1,659

0

0

0

3

15

6

90

2
47
58

17
524
905

179
13,545
14,797

4
39
18

10
157
83

346
2,934
1,647

0
9
2

0
43
18

0
9
20

0
275
245

2
8
8

33
75
125

915
1,081
4,503

0
0
5

0
0
42

0
0
649

0
3
4

0
3
6

0
3
6

0
23
99

4
6

31
61

901
1,138

0
0

0
0

0
0

0
0

0
0

0
4

0
30

13

164

2,524

3

5

105

0

0

0

0

22
21
235
252
1
2
39
7
19
5

121
185
1,596
2,055
0
49
462
92
86
5

2,211
2,968
28,428
37,419
0
125
8,615
967
1,725
131

15
14
106
142
1
2
32
3
0
0

84
23
240
575
3
18
168
24
0
0

1,050
333
5,837
7,140
147
47
2,227
189
0
0

4
2
19
51
0
0
1
0
3
0

15
39
33
121
0
0
36
0
6
0

8
3
46
118
0
0
3
0
9
0

65
11
243
813
0
0
263
0
49
0

-continued-

Appendix E-4.–Page 2 of 5.

163

City
Elfin Cove
Elmemdorf AFB
Ester
Fairbanks
False Pass
Fritz Creek
Gakona
Gambell
Girdwood
Glennallen
Golovin
Goodnews Bay
Gustavus
Haines
Hollis
Homer
Hoonah
Hooper Bay
Hydaburg
Hyder
Juneau
Kake
Karluk
Kasaan
Kasilof
Kenai
Ketchikan
King Cove
King Salmon
Kipnuk
Klawock

State
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK

Number
of
SHARCs
Issueda
14
1
1
7
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
58
473
1
25
236
14
120
31
349
110
9
15
13
108
571
87
2
12
237

Subsistence
fished

Subsistence harvest

Sport fished

Sport harvest

Lingcod bycatch

Rockfish bycatch

Estimated
number
respondents
7

Estimated
number
halibut
25

Estimated
pounds
halibut
619

Estimated
number
respondents
3

Estimated
number
halibut
9

Estimated
pounds
halibut
273

Estimated
number
respondents
1

Estimated
number
lingcod
13

Estimated
number
respondents
5

Estimated
number
rockfish
52

2

9

219

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

26
273

112
1,274

2,234
25,424

17
79

93
88

1,541
1,640

0
15

0
45

0
18

0
109

11
91
5
69
18
92
45
5
2
12
18
198
49

183
853
32
583
64
988
503
36
2
262
244
2,211
510

1,984
15,651
345
24,178
1,447
15,054
11,307
417
22
2,997
7,243
40,799
7,871

8
29
0
9
8
55
10
0
2
4
22
137
15

40
131
0
18
5
252
25
0
0
51
66
541
72

308
1,987
0
597
88
4,305
877
0
0
470
1,436
10,384
1,119

2
0
0
17
3
2
5
1
0
4
2
24
6

3
0
0
63
10
4
61
2
0
26
8
110
63

2
5
0
33
4
18
14
4
2
2
0
70
6

7
27
0
599
44
57
120
48
9
34
0
461
57

13
88

273
838

2,230
18,824

0
44

0
223

0
3,193

0
27

0
109

0
43

0
522

-continued-

Appendix E-4.–Page 3 of 5.

164

City
Klukwan
Kodiak
Kongiganak
Kotzebue
Kwigillingok
Larsen Bay
Manokotak
Mekoryuk
Metlakatla
Meyers Chuck
Naknek
Nanwalek
Naukati
Nelson Lagoon
Newtok
Nightmute
Nikiski
Ninilchik
Nome
North Pole
Old Harbor
Ouzinkie
Palmer
Pelican
Perryville
Petersburg
Pilot Point
Point Baker
Port Alexander
Port Graham
Port Heiden

State
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK

Number
of
SHARCs
Issueda
2
1,702
6
1
3
33
2
5
193
8
9
48
25
1
1
2
9
38
23
4
41
47
10
45
18
961
2
20
28
47
2

Subsistence
fished

Subsistence harvest

Sport fished

Sport harvest

Lingcod bycatch

Rockfish bycatch
Estimated
number
rockfish

Estimated
number
respondents

Estimated
number
halibut

Estimated
pounds
halibut

Estimated
number
respondents

Estimated
number
halibut

Estimated
pounds
halibut

Estimated
number
respondents

Estimated
number
lingcod

Estimated
number
respondents

900
2

8,445
7

164,092
175

539
0

2,580
0

47,646
0

105
0

375
0

187
0

2,271
0

23

173

3,297

11

65

1,707

5

40

5

43

64
7
3
20
15

707
34
0
567
136

15,784
1,147
0
9,743
2,349

22
0
0
2
8

41
0
0
5
41

620
0
0
53
441

26
0
0
4
2

115
0
0
33
12

26
3
0
4
8

337
18
0
130
146

0
6
8

0
200
57

0
4,216
965

2
14
0

6
51
0

68
673
0

0
0
2

0
0
8

0
0
2

0
0
2

29
28
2
29
11
409

252
178
2
214
107
2,817

5,026
3,122
38
4,514
2,140
47,266

7
15
0
12
2
256

19
40
0
9
2
820

209
681
0
186
33
13,251

4
2
0
13
0
5

9
2
0
49
0
8

8
3
0
20
2
54

100
64
0
316
6
258

16
23
30

89
191
555

1,932
4,942
7,222

1
5
5

1
7
23

24
233
267

4
8
5

9
30
21

10
10
10

120
120
150

-continued-

Appendix E-4.–Page 4 of 5.

165

City
Port Lions
Port Protection
Port William
Quinhagak
Sand Point
Savoonga
Saxman
Seldovia
Seward
Sitka
Skagway
Soldotna
St. George Island
St. Paul Island
Sterling
Tatitlek
Teller
Tenakee Springs
Thorne Bay
Togiak
Toksook Bay
Trapper Creek
Tununak
Twin Hills
Unalakleet
Unalaska
Valdez
Ward Cove
Wasilla
Whale Pass
Whittier

State
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK

Number
of
SHARCs
Issueda
39
2
1
5
130
17
12
152
12
1,635
56
44
4
41
4
15
10
53
114
4
32
1
11
2
1
75
38
32
43
8
2

Subsistence
fished

Subsistence harvest

Sport fished

Sport harvest

Lingcod bycatch

Rockfish bycatch

Estimated
number
respondents
27

Estimated
number
halibut
253

Estimated
pounds
halibut
3,932

Estimated
number
respondents
23

Estimated
number
halibut
158

Estimated
pounds
halibut
2,684

Estimated
number
respondents
6

Estimated
number
lingcod
75

Estimated
number
respondents
4

Estimated
number
rockfish
68

61
6
0
86
2
755
40
13

559
42
0
1,155
9
3,951
111
1,813

7,306
1,270
0
17,888
239
82,728
2,109
3,797

18
0
0
31
0
228
13
8

58
0
0
172
0
539
38
23

1,129
0
0
2,650
0
9,257
916
437

2
2
0
6
0
263
0
0

2
15
0
26
0
931
0
0

13
2
0
9
2
355
0
0

151
17
0
42
17
2,805
0
0

19

485

10,139

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

11
0
26
77

151
0
138
479

2,019
0
2,668
11,910

0
0
15
37

0
0
38
279

0
0
504
3,980

5
0
0
9

23
0
0
14

7
0
7
28

59
0
28
177

10

105

875

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

9

91

576

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

53
12
6
4
6

356
80
27
23
6

4,465
2,424
986
94
165

22
6
5
2
2

48
23
6
0
2

503
537
202
0
56

3
6
0
0
0

8
8
0
0
0

10
8
4
0
0

53
31
24
0
0

-continued-

Appendix E-4.–Page 5 of 5.

City
Willow
Wrangell
Yakutat
Alaska subtotal
Non-Alaska subtotal
Total

a.

State
AK
AK
AK

Number
of
SHARCs
Issueda
2
476
110
10,804

Subsistence
fished

Subsistence harvest

Sport fished

Sport harvest

Lingcod bycatch

Rockfish bycatch
Estimated
number
rockfish

Estimated
number
respondents

Estimated
number
halibut

Estimated
pounds
halibut

Estimated
number
respondents

Estimated
number
halibut

Estimated
pounds
halibut

Estimated
number
respondents

Estimated
number
lingcod

Estimated
number
respondents

256
50
4,982

1,928
624
43,312

36,080
15,247
796,957

115
12
2,267

248
57
8,455

4,992
1,004
145,903

9
26
732

54
139
2,864

36
15
1,320

284
563
12,839

149

9

20

603

30

196

3,338

0

0

2

12

10,953

4,991

43,332

797,560

2,297

8,651

149,241

732

2,864

1,322

12,851

To protect confidentiality, data for tribes and communities with 5 or fewer SHARCs issued are not reported in this table. Subtotals include all tribes
and communities. Blank cells indicate redacted data.

166

Appendix E-5.–Estimated subsistence harvests of halibut by gear type and place of residence.
Estimated harvests by gear type
Set hook gear

167

City
Adak
Akhiok
Akiachak
Akutan
Aleknagik
Anchor Point
Anchorage
Angoon
Atka
Auke Bay
Barrow
Bethel
Chefornak
Chenega Bay
Chevak
Chignik
Chignik Lagoon
Chignik Lake
Chiniak
Chugiak
Clarks Point
Coffman Cove
Cold Bay
Cordova
Craig
Dillingham
Douglas
Dutch Harbor

State
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK

Number of
SHARCs
issueda
8
6
1
16
3
12
219
109
1
5
1
8
14
8
2
10
13
4
18
3
1
46
35
557
510
30
17
80

Hook and line or handline

All gear

Estimated
number
respondents
fished
5
0

Estimated
number
fish
harvested
34
0

Estimated
pounds
fish
harvested
515
0

Estimated
number
respondents
fished
3
5

Estimated
number
fish
harvested
2
36

Estimated
pounds
fish
harvested
43
1,008

Estimated
number
respondents
fished
5
5

Estimated
number
fish
harvested
36
36

Estimated
pounds
fish
harvested
559
1,008

3

6

147

9

84

1,512

9

90

1,659

2
30
45

17
340
646

179
10,431
9,435

0
26
23

0
183
259

0
3,113
5,362

2
47
58

17
524
905

179
13,545
14,797

0
0
8

0
0
111

0
0
4,032

2
8
7

33
75
14

915
1,081
471

2
8
8

33
75
125

915
1,081
4,503

3
2

10
21

366
591

4
6

21
40

535
547

4
6

31
61

901
1,138

13

124

1,880

6

40

644

13

164

2,524

12
19
207
224
1
2
22

51
164
1,289
1,714
0
22
229

1,113
2,532
22,579
33,057
0
63
4,845

13
10
121
73
0
2
23

71
21
307
341
0
27
233

1,098
436
5,849
4,363
0
63
3,770

22
21
235
252
1
2
39

121
185
1,596
2,055
0
49
462

2,211
2,968
28,428
37,419
0
125
8,615

-continued-

Appendix E-5.–Page 2 of 5.
Estimated harvests by gear type
Set hook gear

168

City
Eagle River
Edna Bay
Eek
Egegik
Elfin Cove
Elmemdorf AFB
Ester
Fairbanks
False Pass
Fritz Creek
Gakona
Gambell
Girdwood
Glennallen
Golovin
Goodnews Bay
Gustavus
Haines
Hollis
Homer
Hoonah
Hooper Bay
Hydaburg
Hyder
Juneau
Kake
Karluk
Kasaan
Kasilof

State
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK

Number of
SHARCs
issueda
8
28
6
1
14
1
1
7
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
58
473
1
25
236
14
120
31
349
110
9
15
13

Hook and line or handline

All gear

Estimated
number
respondents
fished
5
19
0

Estimated
number
fish
harvested
44
86
0

Estimated
pounds
fish
harvested
480
1,725
0

Estimated
number
respondents
fished
5
0
5

Estimated
number
fish
harvested
48
0
5

Estimated
pounds
fish
harvested
487
0
131

Estimated
number
respondents
fished
7
19
5

Estimated
number
fish
harvested
92
86
5

Estimated
pounds
fish
harvested
967
1,725
131

7

21

510

4

4

109

7

25

619

2

9

219

0

0

0

2

9

219

14
267

64
1,221

1,434
24,530

14
62

48
53

800
895

26
273

112
1,274

2,234
25,424

5
69
0
62
18
72
45
1
2
8

24
656
0
532
58
628
484
0
0
218

293
11,979
0
21,080
1,346
12,087
10,626
0
0
2,379

8
44
5
24
9
41
8
5
2
7

160
197
32
52
6
360
19
36
2
44

1,691
3,672
345
3,098
102
2,967
682
417
22
618

11
91
5
69
18
92
45
5
2
12

183
853
32
583
64
988
503
36
2
262

1,984
15,651
345
24,178
1,447
15,054
11,307
417
22
2,997

-continued-

Appendix E-5.–Page 3 of 5.
Estimated harvests by gear type
Set hook gear

169

City
Kenai
Ketchikan
King Cove
King Salmon
Kipnuk
Klawock
Klukwan
Kodiak
Kongiganak
Kotzebue
Kwigillingok
Larsen Bay
Manokotak
Mekoryuk
Metlakatla
Meyers Chuck
Naknek
Nanwalek
Naukati
Nelson Lagoon
Newtok
Nightmute
Nikiski
Ninilchik
Nome
North Pole
Old Harbor
Ouzinkie
Palmer

State
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK

Number of
SHARCs
issueda
108
571
87
2
12
237
2
1,702
6
1
3
33
2
5
193
8
9
48
25
1
1
2
9
38
23
4
41
47
10

Hook and line or handline

All gear

Estimated
number
respondents
fished
7
164
20

Estimated
number
fish
harvested
41
1,612
196

Estimated
pounds
fish
harvested
853
32,300
2,507

Estimated
number
respondents
fished
16
80
39

Estimated
number
fish
harvested
203
599
314

Estimated
pounds
fish
harvested
6,390
8,499
5,364

Estimated
number
respondents
fished
18
198
49

Estimated
number
fish
harvested
244
2,211
510

Estimated
pounds
fish
harvested
7,243
40,799
7,871

0
65

0
502

0
14,111

13
40

273
336

2,230
4,713

13
88

273
838

2,230
18,824

747
0

6,602
0

127,816
0

374
2

1,843
7

36,275
175

900
2

8,445
7

164,092
175

7

59

895

22

113

2,403

23

173

3,297

56
7
3
12
15

667
33
0
392
101

15,251
1,133
0
7,194
1,979

17
2
0
16
6

41
1
0
175
35

533
14
0
2,549
369

64
7
3
20
15

707
34
0
567
136

15,784
1,147
0
9,743
2,349

0
2
8

0
32
57

0
890
965

0
6
0

0
168
0

0
3,325
0

0
6
8

0
200
57

0
4,216
965

14
18
2

111
109
2

1,733
2,066
38

24
18
0

141
69
0

3,293
1,057
0

29
28
2

252
178
2

5,026
3,122
38

-continued-

Appendix E-5.–Page 4 of 5.
Estimated harvests by gear type
Set hook gear

170

City
Pelican
Perryville
Petersburg
Pilot Point
Point Baker
Port Alexander
Port Graham
Port Heiden
Port Lions
Port Protection
Port William
Quinhagak
Sand Point
Savoonga
Saxman
Seldovia
Seward
Sitka
Skagway
Soldotna
St. George Island
St. Paul Island
Sterling
Tatitlek
Teller
Tenakee Springs
Thorne Bay
Togiak
Toksook Bay

State
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK

Number of
SHARCs
issueda
45
18
961
2
20
28
47
2
39
2
1
5
130
17
12
152
12
1,635
56
44
4
41
4
15
10
53
114
4
32

Hook and line or handline

All gear

Estimated
number
respondents
fished
27
9
323

Estimated
number
fish
harvested
177
86
1,936

Estimated
pounds
fish
harvested
3,570
1,667
33,951

Estimated
number
respondents
fished
18
8
209

Estimated
number
fish
harvested
38
20
881

Estimated
pounds
fish
harvested
944
473
13,315

Estimated
number
respondents
fished
29
11
409

Estimated
number
fish
harvested
214
107
2,817

Estimated
pounds
fish
harvested
4,514
2,140
47,266

14
23
23

64
174
340

1,413
4,624
5,011

7
5
18

24
17
216

519
318
2,211

16
23
30

89
191
555

1,932
4,942
7,222

18

166

2,448

13

86

1,484

27

253

3,932

22
4
0
60
0
700
34
6

316
36
0
675
0
3,460
76
849

3,408
942
0
11,198
0
74,394
1,603
1,330

50
2
0
49
2
218
19
13

243
6
0
480
9
491
35
964

3,898
328
0
6,691
239
8,334
506
2,467

61
6
0
86
2
755
40
13

559
42
0
1,155
9
3,951
111
1,813

7,306
1,270
0
17,888
239
82,728
2,109
3,797

13

468

9,555

6

16

584

19

485

10,139

11
0
20
68

151
0
97
368

2,019
0
1,950
9,801

0
0
11
42

0
0
42
111

0
0
718
2,109

11
0
26
77

151
0
138
479

2,019
0
2,668
11,910

5

38

315

10

67

560

10

105

875

-continued-

Appendix E-5.–Page 5 of 5.
Estimated harvests by gear type
Set hook gear

171

City
Trapper Creek
Tununak
Twin Hills
Unalakleet
Unalaska
Valdez
Ward Cove
Wasilla
Whale Pass
Whittier
Willow
Wrangell
Yakutat
Alaska subtotal
Non-Alaska subtotal
Total

a.

State
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK

Hook and line or handline

All gear

Estimated
number
respondents
fished

Estimated
number
fish
harvested

Estimated
pounds
fish
harvested

Estimated
number
respondents
fished

Estimated
number
fish
harvested

Estimated
pounds
fish
harvested

Estimated
number
respondents
fished

Estimated
number
fish
harvested

Estimated
pounds
fish
harvested

0

0

0

9

91

576

9

91

576

36
10
6
4
4

213
53
27
23
6

2,572
1,701
986
94
165

36
6
2
4
4

143
27
0
0
0

1,893
723
0
0
0

53
12
6
4
6

356
80
27
23
6

4,465
2,424
986
94
165

218
45
4,064

1,503
487
31,404

28,938
11,932
610,563

112
21
2,181

425
136
11,908

7,143
3,316
186,393

256
50
4,982

1,928
624
43,312

36,080
15,247
796,957

149

6

12

429

2

7

174

9

20

603

10,953

4,071

31,416

610,992

2,183

11,916

186,567

4,991

43,332

797,560

Number of
SHARCs
issueda
1
11
2
1
75
38
32
43
8
2
2
476
110
10,804

To protect confidentiality, data for tribes and communities with 5 or fewer SHARCs issued are not reported in this table. Subtotals
include all tribes and communities. Blank cells indicate redacted data.

Appendix E-6.–Estimated number of respondents that subsistence or sport fished, by place of
residence.

City
Adak
Akhiok
Akiachak
Akutan
Aleknagik
Anchor Point
Anchorage
Angoon
Atka
Auke Bay
Barrow
Bethel
Chefornak
Chenega Bay
Chevak
Chignik
Chignik Lagoon
Chignik Lake
Chiniak
Chugiak
Clarks Point
Coffman Cove
Cold Bay
Cordova
Craig
Dillingham
Douglas
Dutch Harbor
Eagle River
Edna Bay
Eek
Egegik
Elfin Cove
Elmemdorf AFB
Ester
Fairbanks
False Pass
Fritz Creek
Gakona
Gambell
Girdwood
Glennallen
Golovin
Goodnews Bay
Gustavus

State
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK

Number of
SHARCs
issueda
8
6
1
16
3
12
219
109
1
5
1
8
14
8
2
10
13
4
18
3
1
46
35
557
510
30
17
80
8
28
6
1
14
1
1
7
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
58

-continued-

172

Estimated
number
subsistence or
sport fished
5
5
0
9
0
4
66
63
0
4
2
2
8
9
0
4
6
10
13
2
0
27
25
261
306
1
2
47
7
19
5
0
8
0
1
2
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
2
41

Appendix E-6.–Page 2 of 3.

City
Haines
Hollis
Homer
Hoonah
Hooper Bay
Hydaburg
Hyder
Juneau
Kake
Karluk
Kasaan
Kasilof
Kenai
Ketchikan
King Cove
King Salmon
Kipnuk
Klawock
Klukwan
Kodiak
Kongiganak
Kotzebue
Kwigillingok
Larsen Bay
Manokotak
Mekoryuk
Metlakatla
Meyers Chuck
Naknek
Nanwalek
Naukati
Nelson Lagoon
Newtok
Nightmute
Nikiski
Ninilchik
Nome
North Pole
Old Harbor
Ouzinkie
Palmer
Pelican
Perryville
Petersburg
Pilot Point

State
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK

Estimated
Number of
number
SHARCs
subsistence or
issueda
sport fished
473
289
1
0
25
14
236
106
14
5
120
69
31
18
349
126
110
45
9
5
15
2
13
14
108
35
571
263
87
55
2
0
12
13
237
107
2
0
1,702
1,074
6
2
1
0
3
0
33
23
2
0
5
4
193
73
8
7
9
3
48
20
25
16
1
0
1
0
2
1
9
2
38
20
23
8
4
0
41
29
47
30
10
2
45
31
18
11
961
501
2
0

-continued-

173

Appendix E-6.–Page 3 of 3.

City
Point Baker
Port Alexander
Port Graham
Port Heiden
Port Lions
Port Protection
Port William
Quinhagak
Sand Point
Savoonga
Saxman
Seldovia
Seward
Sitka
Skagway
Soldotna
St. George Island
St. Paul Island
Sterling
Tatitlek
Teller
Tenakee Springs
Thorne Bay
Togiak
Toksook Bay
Trapper Creek
Tununak
Twin Hills
Unalakleet
Unalaska
Valdez
Ward Cove
Wasilla
Whale Pass
Whittier
Willow
Wrangell
Yakutat
Alaska subtotal
Non-Alaska subtotal
Total

a.

State
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK
AK

Estimated
Number of
number
SHARCs
subsistence or
issueda
sport fished
20
16
28
24
47
30
2
0
39
32
2
0
1
2
5
3
130
67
17
6
12
0
152
93
12
2
1,635
849
56
45
44
19
4
6
41
19
4
2
15
11
10
0
53
34
114
86
4
0
32
10
1
0
11
9
2
0
1
0
75
56
38
15
32
9
43
4
8
6
2
0
2
0
476
293
110
56
10,804
5,796
149
39
10,953

5,835

To protect confidentiality, data for tribes and communities with 5
or fewer SHARCs issued are not reported in this table. Subtotals
include all tribes and communities. Blank cells indicate redacted
data.

174

Appendix E-7.–Estimated subsistence harvests of halibut and sport harvests of halibut, pounds (net weight), and incidental harvests of lingcod
and rockfish, by eligible Alaska tribe and eligible Alaska rural community, 2010.
Return rate

175

Tribal name
Angoon
Community
Association
Aukquan
Traditional
Council
Central Council
Tlingit and
Haida Indian
Tribes
Chilkat Indian
Village
Chilkoot Indian
Association
Craig Community
Association
Douglas Indian
Association
Hoonah Indian
Association
Hydaburg
Cooperative
Association
Ketchikan Indian
Corporation
Klawock
Cooperative
Association
Metlakatla Indian
Community,
Annette Island
Reserve
Organized Village
of Kake
Organized Village
of Kasaan
Organized Village
of Saxman

Subsistence fished
halibut

Subsistence halibut
harvest

Sport fished halibut

Sport halibut harvest

Lingcod bycatch

Rockfish bycatch

Estimated Percent Estimated
Estimated
Estimated
Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated
Regulatory SHARCs Surveys
number
of
number Estimated
number Percent of number Estimated
number
number
number
number
a
issued returned Percent respondents SHARCs
area
fish
pounds respondents SHARCs
fish
pounds respondents
fish
respondents
fish
2C

92

73 79.3%

42

46.0%

609

9,033

10

10.6%

52

1,131

1

6

13

118

2C

1

2C

488

215 44.1%

184

37.6%

2,060

33,397

84

17.1%

373

5,688

16

125

43

381

2C

23

17 73.9%

5

22.5%

53

702

1

5.6%

13

36

1

3

1

8

2C

48

22 45.8%

21

44.5%

111

3,661

4

8.9%

6

165

0

0

0

0

2C

63

33 52.4%

24

38.8%

286

5,776

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0

9

58

2C

16

3 18.8%

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0

0

0

2C

141

68 48.2%

51

36.0%

505

10,356

10

7.2%

10

185

0

0

2

10

2C

124

108 87.1%

63

51.0%

535

22,627

6

4.6%

10

302

16

57

31

584

2C

503

319 63.4%

136

27.0%

1,515

30,385

102

20.2%

243

4,522

16

78

49

325

2C

80

31 38.8%

27

34.2%

171

4,025

7

9.3%

7

209

5

52

12

221

2C

172

76 44.2%

52

30.0%

601

13,316

18

10.4%

25

498

22

108

25

334

2C

80

54 67.5%

26

32.9%

241

5,517

1

1.8%

1

41

1

1

4

25

2C

8

4 50.0%

3

37.5%

12

337

3

37.5%

6

126

0

0

2

9

2C

37

18 48.6%

22

59.5%

240

3,507

12

32.4%

154

3,444

2

10

4

8

-continued-

Appendix E-7.–Page 2 of 10.
Return rate

Subsistence fished
halibut

Subsistence halibut
harvest

Sport fished halibut

Sport halibut harvest

Lingcod bycatch

Rockfish bycatch

Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated
Estimated
Estimated
Estimated Percent Estimated
number
number
number
number
number Percent of number Estimated
number Estimated
of
number
Regulatory SHARCs Surveys
fish
respondents
fish
fish
pounds respondents
fish
pounds respondents SHARCs
issueda returned Percent respondents SHARCs
area

176

Tribal name
Petersburg Indian
2C
Association
Sitka Tribe of
2C
Alaska
Skagway Village
2C
Wrangell
Cooperative
2C
Association
Subtotal, Area 2C
Kenaitze Indian
3A
Tribe
Lesnoi Village
3A
(Woody Island)
Native Village of
3A
Afognak
Native Village of
3A
Akhiok
Native Village of
3A
Chenega
Native Village of
3A
Eyak
Native Village of
3A
Karluk
Native Village of
3A
Larsen Bay
Native Village of
3A
Nanwalek
Native Village of
3A
Ouzinkie
Native Village of
3A
Port Graham
Native Village of
3A
Port Lions
Native Village of
3A
Tatitlek
Ninilchik Village
3A
Seldovia Village
3A
Tribe

73

40 54.8%

27

37.5%

241

3,803

20

27.5%

53

920

0

0

2

9

289

152 52.6%

131

45.4%

752

15,669

15

5.2%

21

211

30

113

45

396

94

62 66.0%

42

45.1%

309

6,809

17

17.9%

55

1,175

2

2

9

92

2,335

1,298 55.6%

859

36.8%

8,245

168,965

310

13.3%

1,032

18,652

112

556

252

2,578

123

61 49.6%

27

22.2%

337

8,450

20

15.9%

57

1,256

4

12

0

0

71

39 54.9%

7

10.3%

51

969

4

5.1%

5

121

4

5

4

27

24

14 58.3%

15

61.6%

121

1,411

5

20.5%

12

207

0

0

2

20

9

2 22.2%

9 100.0%

59

1,096

5

50.0%

9

38

0

0

5

45

17

8 47.1%

9

50.0%

123

5,221

4

25.0%

6

238

6

9

9

106

80

41 51.3%

30

36.9%

355

4,830

13

16.6%

25

1,456

4

6

8

59

37

20 54.1%

27

73.0%

254

4,047

14

38.9%

110

3,345

7

76

7

79

44

18 40.9%

18

40.9%

337

6,015

1

2.3%

4

39

4

33

3

110

37

17 45.9%

17

45.8%

136

2,623

11

30.5%

32

659

2

2

2

38

43

25 58.1%

23

54.4%

522

11,501

5

12.4%

23

267

4

23

6

310

32

22 68.8%

19

59.1%

170

3,019

12

36.4%

63

1,364

3

32

3

44

23

11 47.8%

10

45.5%

146

2,064

2

9.1%

13

293

2

6

6

21

81

40 49.4%

20

25.0%

1,980

8,773

22

27.5%

81

943

0

0

0

0

63

35 55.6%

28

44.9%

464

7,305

7

10.8%

22

209

2

3

7

44

3

4

-continued-

Appendix E-7.–Page 3 of 10.
Subsistence fished
halibut

Return rate

Subsistence halibut
harvest

Sport fished halibut

Sport halibut harvest

Lingcod bycatch

Rockfish bycatch

Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated
Estimated
Estimated
Estimated Percent Estimated
number
number
number
number
number Percent of number Estimated
number Estimated
of
number
Regulatory SHARCs Surveys
fish
respondents
fish
fish
pounds respondents
fish
pounds respondents SHARCs
issueda returned Percent respondents SHARCs
area

177

Tribal name
Sun'aq Tribe of
Kodiak
3A
(formerly
Shoonaq')
Village of Kanatak
3A
Village of Old
3A
Harbor
Village of
3A
Salamatoff
Yakutat Tlingit
3A
Tribe
Subtotal, Area 3A
Agdaagux Tribe of
3B
King Cove
Chignik Lake
3B
Village
Ivanoff Bay
3B
Village
Native Village of
3B
Belkofski
Native Village of
3B
Chignik
Native Village of
3B
Chignik Lagoon
Native Village of
3B
False Pass
Native Village of
3B
Nelson Lagoon
Native Village of
3B
Perryville
Native Village of
3B
Unga
Pauloff Harbor
3B
Village
Qagan Toyagungin
Tribe of Sand
3B
Point Village
Subtotal, Area 3B

126

48 38.1%

68

54.0%

612

15,357

24

18.7%

157

2,783

10

21

16

175

18

5 27.8%

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0

0

0

46

19 41.3%

20

42.5%

127

3,222

2

5.3%

10

171

2

2

2

49

21

13 61.9%

5

22.6%

86

902

2

7.5%

5

166

0

0

0

0

41

21 51.2%

20

49.8%

368

8,553

0

0.0%

0

0

9

78

6

433

940

459 48.8%

372

39.6%

6,247

95,359

153

16.2%

632

13,555

63

308

84

1,560

72

38 52.8%

41

56.5%

434

6,085

14

19.0%

93

1,406

2

58

2

39

9.1%

10

90.9%

60

700

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0

0

0

4 50.0%

4

50.0%

4

84

4

50.0%

12

490

2

12

0

0

7

7 100.0%

1

14.3%

5

77

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0

0

0

20

9 45.0%

11

52.8%

87

1,626

2

10.6%

4

118

0

0

4

30

22

14 63.6%

13

57.1%

112

2,228

2

7.1%

2

33

0

0

2

6

8

3 37.5%

3

33.3%

5

93

5

66.7%

5

299

0

0

0

0

48

14 29.2%

21

42.9%

309

3,144

10

21.4%

48

996

0

0

0

0

86

46 53.5%

32

37.0%

194

3,206

2

2.2%

2

26

4

6

9

64

291

141 48.5%

134

46.0%

1,209

17,243

39

13.4%

166

3,368

8

76

17

138

11
8

1

5

1
3

-continued-

Appendix E-7.–Page 4 of 10.
Return rate

Subsistence fished
halibut

Subsistence halibut
harvest

Sport fished halibut

Sport halibut harvest

Lingcod bycatch

Rockfish bycatch

Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated
Estimated
Estimated
Estimated Percent Estimated
number
number
number
number
number Percent of number Estimated
number Estimated
of
number
Regulatory SHARCs Surveys
fish
respondents
fish
fish
pounds respondents
fish
pounds respondents SHARCs
issueda returned Percent respondents SHARCs
area

178

Tribal name
Native Village of
4A
Akutan
Qawalingin Tribe
4A
of Unalaska
Subtotal, Area 4A
Native Village of
4B
Atka
Subtotal, Area 4B
Pribilof Islands
Aleut
4C
Community of
St. George
Pribilof Islands
Aleut
4C
Community of
St. Paul
Subtotal, Area 4C
Native Village of
Diomede
4D
(Inalik)
Native Village of
4D
Gambell
Native Village of
4D
Savoonga
Subtotal, Area 4D
Chevak Native
Village
4E
(Kashunamiut)
Chinik Eskimo
4E
Community
Egegik Village
4E
King Island Native
4E
Community
Levelock Village
4E
Manokotak Village
4E
Naknek Native
4E
Village

21

7 33.3%

9

42.9%

90

1,659

3

14.3%

9

84

3

15

6

90

36

13 36.1%

20

56.0%

107

1,363

6

15.4%

6

39

0

0

6

33

57

20 35.1%

29

51.2%

197

3,022

9

15.0%

15

123

3

15

12

123

6 100.0%

30

720

0

0.0%

0

0

2

5

3

50

5
5
6

4 66.7%

42

13 31.0%

19

46.2%

485

10,139

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0

0

0

48

17 35.4%

25

52.9%

515

10,859

0

0.0%

0

0

2

5

3

50

1
1
18

10 55.6%

6

31.5%

42

1,270

0

0.0%

0

0

2

15

2

17

20

11 55.0%

7

33.3%

42

1,270

0

0.0%

0

0

2

15

2

17

1 12.5%

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0

0

0

3
1
1
1
1
1
8

-continued-

Appendix E-7.–Page 5 of 10.
Return rate

179

Tribal name
Native Village of
Aleknagik
Native Village of
Brevig Mission
Native Village of
Council
Native Village of
Dillingham
(Curyung)
Native Village of
Eek
Native Village of
Goodnews Bay
(Mumtraq)
Native Village of
Hooper Bay
Native Village of
Kanakanak
Native Village of
Kipnuk
Native Village of
Kongiganak
Native Village of
Koyuk
Native Village of
Kwigillingok
Native Village of
Kwinhagak
Native Village of
Mekoryuk
Native Village of
Nightmute
Native Village of
Scammon Bay
Native Village of
Shaktoolik
Native Village of
Toksook Bay
(Nunakauyak)

Subsistence fished
halibut

Subsistence halibut
harvest

Sport fished halibut

Sport halibut harvest

Lingcod bycatch

Rockfish bycatch

Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated
Estimated
Estimated
Estimated Percent Estimated
number
number
number
number
number Percent of number Estimated
number Estimated
of
number
Regulatory SHARCs Surveys
fish
respondents
fish
fish
pounds respondents
fish
pounds respondents SHARCs
issueda returned Percent respondents SHARCs
area
4E

6

3 50.0%

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0

0

0

4E

1

4E

4

4E

16

7 43.8%

2

14.3%

5

480

5

28.6%

14

286

0

0

0

0

4E

7

3 42.9%

7 100.0%

37

1,045

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0

0

0

4E

4

4E

16

6 37.5%

5

33.3%

32

345

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0

0

0

4E

1

4E

13

13 100.0%

273

2,230

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0

0

0

4E

5

4E

1

4E

4

4E

3

4E

6

4E

1

4E

3

4E

1

4E

33

2 15.4%

3 50.0%

4

66.7%

52

574

2

33.3%

12

210

0

0

0

0

12 36.4%

10

30.3%

105

875

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0

0

0

-continued-

Appendix E-7.–Page 6 of 10.
Return rate

Subsistence fished
halibut

Subsistence halibut
harvest

Sport fished halibut

Sport halibut harvest

Lingcod bycatch

Rockfish bycatch

Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated
Estimated
Estimated
Estimated Percent Estimated
number
number
number
number
number Percent of number Estimated
number Estimated
of
number
Regulatory SHARCs Surveys
fish
respondents
fish
fish
pounds respondents
fish
pounds respondents SHARCs
issueda returned Percent respondents SHARCs
area

180

Tribal name
Native Village of
4E
Tununak
Native Village of
4E
Unalakleet
Native Village of
4E
Wales
Newtok Village
4E
Nome Eskimo
4E
Community
Orutsararmuit
4E
Native Village
South Naknek
4E
Village
Stebbins
Community
4E
Association
Traditional Village
4E
of Togiak
Twin Hills Village
4E
Ugashik Village
4E
Village of
4E
Chefornak
Village of Clark's
4E
Point
Village of Kotlik
4E
Subtotal, Area 4E
Tribal subtotal

13

3 23.1%

9

66.7%

91

576

0

0.0%

0

0

0

0

0

0

15

8 53.3%

4

25.0%

26

630

2

12.5%

19

263

2

8

4

6

9

3 33.3%

3

33.3%

54

483

3

33.3%

24

189

0

0

0

0

6 42.9%

8

55.7%

75

1,081

0

0.0%

0

0

3

3

3

23

1
210

77 36.7%

73

34.8%

911

11,589

17

8.3%

106

1,518

4

10

6

29

3,906

2,025 51.8%

1,502

38.5%

17,384

308,569

530

13.6%

1,953

37,268

194

984

376

4,496

3
1
1

1
4
3
1
2
14
1

-continued-

Appendix E-7.–Page 7 of 10.
Return rate

181

Rural community
Angoon
Coffman Cove
Craig
Edna Bay
Elfin Cove
Gustavus
Haines
Hollis
Hoonah
Hydaburg
Hyder
Juneau
Kake
Kasaan
Ketchikan
Klawock
Klukwan
Metlakatla
Meyers Chuck
Naukati Bay
Pelican
Petersburg
Port Alexander
Port Protection
Pt. Baker
Saxman
Sitka
Skagway
Tenakee Springs
Thorne Bay
Ward Cove
Whale Pass

Subsistence fished
halibut

Subsistence halibut
harvest

Sport fished halibut

Sport halibut harvest

Lingcod bycatch

Rockfish bycatch

Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated
Estimated
Estimated
Estimated Percent Estimated
number
number
number
number
number Percent of number Estimated
number Estimated
of
number
Regulatory SHARCs Surveys
fish
respondents
fish
fish
pounds respondents
fish
pounds respondents SHARCs
issueda returned Percent respondents SHARCs
area
2C
16
16 100.0%
9 56.3%
285
5,655
4
25.0%
11
140
1
12
4
118
2C
49
41 83.7%
23 47.8%
129
2,409
19
38.1%
121
1,339
4
15
8
65
2C
376
238 63.3%
172 45.7%
1,405
23,563
123
32.7%
561
6,953
44
102
85
642
2C
37
24 64.9%
24 65.9%
112
2,228
0
0.0%
0
0
4
17
13
98
2C
15
11 73.3%
7 43.3%
25
619
3
17.3%
9
273
1
13
5
52
2C
61
45 73.8%
27 44.4%
121
2,396
20
32.6%
116
1,864
0
0
0
0
2C
426
309 72.5%
252 59.1%
1,080
21,753
90
21.1%
146
2,823
15
45
18
109
2C
44
35 79.5%
20 44.3%
114
4,593
6
13.0%
10
137
0
0
5
10
2C
99
80 80.8%
40 40.3%
350
5,200
20
20.3%
121
1,802
0
0
3
17
2C
10
8 80.0%
6 56.3%
48
1,551
3
33.8%
8
295
1
6
2
15
2C
32
24 75.0%
18 55.2%
64
1,447
8
23.6%
5
88
3
10
4
44
2C
3
2C
35
27 77.1%
17 49.6%
174
5,358
7
21.3%
33
992
1
4
7
73
2C
8
4 50.0%
4 43.8%
4
110
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0
0
0
2C
5
2C
155
102 65.8%
65 41.8%
640
9,826
45
29.3%
227
3,026
28
74
39
335
2C
2
2C
32
21 65.6%
12 38.5%
106
2,468
7
22.4%
25
393
3
8
2
3
2C
9
9 100.0%
7 77.8%
34
1,147
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0
3
18
2C
40
30 75.0%
24 60.4%
56
1,590
16
39.6%
75
1,915
0
0
11
29
2C
40
27 67.5%
23 57.4%
125
2,665
10
25.1%
9
186
9
13
16
151
2C
875
623 71.2%
384 43.8%
2,574
43,749
238
27.2%
768
12,217
5
8
56
271
2C
26
15 57.7%
20 76.9%
140
3,768
5
19.2%
7
233
8
30
10
120
2C
16
11 68.8%
12 77.8%
121
2,347
3
19.4%
0
0
6
11
11
106
2C
15
11 73.3%
10 63.6%
34
919
1
9.1%
1
24
1
1
4
45
2C
11
6 54.5%
3 30.3%
283
2,158
2
15.2%
25
233
3
33
3
117
2C
1,363
872 64.0%
632 46.3%
3,349
69,779
222
16.3%
534
9,405
231
802
307
2,402
2C
51
36 70.6%
35 68.6%
87
1,785
13
24.7%
38
916
0
0
0
0
2C
53
46 86.8%
26 49.1%
138
2,668
15
27.9%
38
504
0
0
7
28
2C
119
90 75.6%
76 63.6%
477
11,849
35
29.7%
283
4,028
9
14
28
177
2C
2
2C
18
18 100.0%
10 55.6%
12
361
9
50.0%
11
312
0
0
2
23

-continued-

Appendix E-7.–Page 8 of 10.
Return rate

Subsistence fished
halibut

Subsistence halibut
harvest

Sport fished halibut

Sport halibut harvest

Lingcod bycatch

Rockfish bycatch

182

Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated
Estimated
Estimated
Estimated Percent Estimated
number
number
number
number
number Percent of number Estimated
number Estimated
of
number
Regulatory SHARCs Surveys
fish
respondents
fish
fish
pounds respondents
fish
pounds respondents SHARCs
issueda returned Percent respondents SHARCs
Rural community
area
Wrangell
2C
377
274 72.7%
197 52.3%
1,422
26,991
89
23.7%
190
3,968
8
53
28
223
Subtotal, Area 2C
4,420
3,062 69.3%
2,161 48.9%
13,591 261,900
1,014
22.9%
3,372
54,065
385
1,271
685
5,308
Chenega Bay
3A
7
7 100.0%
5 71.4%
57
826
4
57.1%
46
602
1
2
3
28
Chiniak
3A
3
Cordova
3A
498
349 70.1%
211 42.4%
1,260
24,049
98
19.6%
241
4,718
15
27
39
184
Karluk
3A
6
6 100.0%
5 83.3%
36
417
0
0.0%
0
0
1
2
4
48
Kodiak
3A
1,552
848 54.6%
827 53.3%
7,895 150,002
515
33.2%
2,419
43,678
92
318
168
2,035
Larsen Bay
3A
6
3 50.0%
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0
0
0
Nanwalek
3A
7
4 57.1%
3 42.9%
232
3,738
1
14.3%
1
14
0
0
1
20
Old Harbor
3A
7
4 57.1%
5 71.4%
103
1,715
0
0.0%
0
0
1
6
1
6
Ouzinkie
3A
13
9 69.2%
12 92.3%
67
1,134
5
41.0%
12
168
0
0
1
27
Port Graham
3A
10
6 60.0%
8 76.0%
143
2,155
0
0.0%
0
0
3
19
5
55
Port Lions
3A
11
8 72.7%
10 87.0%
89
1,327
11 100.0%
96
1,320
3
43
1
24
Seldovia
3A
144
108 75.0%
79 54.7%
1,007
14,184
35
24.2%
201
3,037
6
26
7
38
Tatitlek
3A
10
6 60.0%
4 42.0%
26
516
2
16.0%
6
95
3
17
3
42
Yakutat
3A
74
53 71.6%
31 42.3%
293
7,735
12
15.8%
57
1,004
17
61
9
130
Subtotal, Area 3A
2,348
1,414 60.2%
1,202 51.2%
11,237 208,273
682
29.1%
3,080
54,636
142
521
242
2,637
Chignik
3B
1
Chignik Lagoon
3B
1
Chignik Lake
3B
1
Cold Bay
3B
32
27 84.4%
17 52.1%
163
2,866
14
45.1%
23
333
2
39
3
11
False Pass
3B
1
King Cove
3B
25
15 60.0%
17 66.2%
121
2,337
5
19.4%
3
45
4
5
4
18
Nelson Lagoon
3B
1
Perryville
3B
1
Sand Point
3B
15
6 40.0%
8 52.0%
68
1,147
4
24.0%
8
107
0
0
5
99
Subtotal, Area 3B
78
50 64.1%
42 53.9%
357
6,490
23
29.3%
35
485
6
44
12
128
Unalaska
4A
119
76 63.9%
69 58.4%
693
11,456
46
38.6%
208
2,638
4
44
7
283
Subtotal, Area 4A
119
76 63.9%
69 58.4%
693
11,456
46
38.6%
208
2,638
4
44
7
283
Adak
4B
5
Subtotal, Area 4B
5

-continued-

Appendix E-7.–Page 9 of 10.
Return rate

Subsistence fished
halibut

Subsistence halibut
harvest

Sport fished halibut

Sport halibut harvest

Lingcod bycatch

Rockfish bycatch

183

Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated
Estimated
Estimated
Estimated Percent Estimated
number
number
number
number
number Percent of number Estimated
number Estimated
of
number
Regulatory SHARCs Surveys
fish
respondents
fish
fish
pounds respondents
fish
pounds respondents SHARCs
issueda returned Percent respondents SHARCs
Rural community
area
St. George Island
4C
1
Subtotal, Area 4C
1
Aleknagik
4E
2
Bethel
4E
1
Chefornak
4E
1
Dillingham
4E
23
17 73.9%
1
6.1%
0
0
1
6.1%
3
147
0
0
0
0
Egegik
4E
1
King Salmon
4E
2
Kongiganak
4E
1
Manokotak
4E
2
Naknek
4E
6
2 33.3%
3 41.7%
0
0
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0
0
0
Nightmute
4E
1
Nome
4E
20
11 55.0%
5 25.5%
38
571
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0
0
0
Port Heiden
4E
3
Quinhagak
4E
1
South Naknek
4E
1
Teller
4E
10
2 20.0%
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0.0%
0
0
0
0
0
0
Togiak
4E
1
Subtotal, Area 4E
76
40 52.6%
11 14.5%
48
661
1
1.8%
3
147
0
0
0
0
Rural community
subtotal

All

7,047

4,645 65.9%

3,489

49.5%

25,948

488,990

-continued-

1,767

25.1%

6,698

111,972

537

1,880

947

8,356

Appendix E-7.–Page 10 of 10.
Return rate

Alaska
Tribal subtotal
Rural community
subtotal
Total

a.

Subsistence fished
halibut

Subsistence halibut
harvest

Sport fished halibut

Sport halibut harvest

Lingcod bycatch

Rockfish bycatch

Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated
Estimated
Estimated
Estimated Percent Estimated
number
number
number
number
number Percent of number Estimated
number Estimated
of
number
Regulatory SHARCs Surveys
fish
respondents
fish
fish
pounds respondents
fish
pounds respondents SHARCs
issueda returned Percent respondents SHARCs
area
All
3,906
2,025 51.8%
1,502 38.5%
17,384 308,569
530
13.6%
1,953
37,268
194
984
376
4,496
All

7,047

4,645 65.9%

3,489

49.5%

25,948

488,990

1,767

25.1%

6,698

111,972

537

1,880

947

8,356

All

10,953

6,670 60.9%

4,991

45.6%

43,332

797,560

2,297

21.0%

8,651

149,241

732

2,864

1,322

12,851

To protect confidentiality, data for tribes and communities with 5 or fewer SHARCs issued are not reported in this table. Subtotals include all tribes and
communities. Blank cells indicate redacted data.

184

Appendix F.–Project findings summary.

185

186

187

188