Ecosystem, Fishery and Social Changes in West and Southwest Alaska

LawrenceLawrence HamiltonHamilton University of New Hampshire http://pubpages.unh.edu/~lch/ PICES, Dalian, China October 2008 Social indicators: measuring change in fisheries-dependent communities • Social indicators in general – Why use social indicators? – Example health and population indicators – Demographics of fishing communities – Impacts of fisheries decline • Bristol Bay salmon fishing communities • Kodiak Island groundfish and halibut impacts Why use social indicators?

• To quantitatively compare different places, or different kinds of places (such as fishing and non-fishing communities) • Time series track change over time – Evaluate effects of programs or policies – See impacts of social, economic, environmental change — such as fisheries resources • Community-level indicators may be available through routinely collected official statistics • To study subpopulations (e.g., fishermen only) targeted surveys or interviews are needed Examples: health indicators (Hamilton et al. forthcoming)

• Public health 16 – Infant mortality 12 – Child mortality – Access to health care 8 Infant mortality rate 4 • Mental health NW Arctic North Slope all Alaska 0

– Suicide rate 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Year – Self-assessed health Infant mortality trends for 2 • Chronic disease rural Alaska regions, and for all – Obesity Alaska, 1993–2003 –Smoking Examples: population indicators (Hamilton et al. forthcoming)

• Total population East Northeast Northwest 100 •Births 0 -100

– Crude birth rate South Southwest West 100

– Fertility rate 0

– Teenage birth rate -100 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Net migration,total • Deaths Westfjords 100

– Crude death rate 0 -100

– Infant mortality rate 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 • Net migration Year • Age–sex structure Net migration rates for 7 rural – Sex ratio Iceland regions, 1986–2007 – % over 65 – % under 15 Demographics of commercial fishing communities in Alaska (Package & Sepez 2005)

• Commercial fishing activities most substantial in a small number of hub communities with shoreside processing capacity • But many more large & small communities have commercial fishing involvement • Two common population pyramids – Labor shape, with bulge of males age 20–60, characteristic of communities w/processors – Family shape, relatively more women, children and elders, characteristic of Bering Sea Native communities A social-indicators view of 1990s codfish collapse on Newfoundland’s Northern Peninsula

• Percentage of labor force in fishing fell from 20.5% to 14.4% in just five years, 1991–96. • Reversing previous growth trends, population dropped by 3.6% over 1986–91, then plunged a further 8.7% over 1991–96. • Reflecting its high birth rate, the Northern Peninsula’s under-15 population was proportionately greater than Canada’s in 1986 (30.4% v. 25.9%). A decade later, however, it had fallen slightly below national levels (20.2% v. 20.5%). • Meanwhile the proportion 65 and over grew twice as fast on the Northern Peninsula (from 7.2% to 10.2%) as it did in Canada as a whole (10.7% to 12.2%). • Mean family size remained unchanged (3.1) for Canada during this period, while on the Northern Peninsula it dropped from a high level (3.7 in 1986) to one near the Canadian average (3.2 in 1996). http://www.docurights.com/drmaker.cgi?vid=3899&objid=271121 A social-indicators view of 1990s codfish collapse on Newfoundland’s Northern Peninsula

• Starting out far behind the rest of Canada, the Northern Peninsula saw progress in education and income. – But in 1996 the Northern Peninsula still had more than twice Canada’s proportion not completing 9th grade, and less than half the proportion with college degrees. – The gap in median household income, $5,200 in 1986, had widened to $9,300 by 1996. • Perhaps the most telling indicator is the proportion of income from government transfer payments. – Even in 1986, at the height of the glory years, this amounted to 32.2% on the Northern Peninsula, and 21.2% in Newfoundland — compared with 11.1% in Canada. – Transfer support increased slightly by 1991, but jumped up to 40% of all income after the codfish collapse. Bristol Bay, Alaska salmon fishing communities Collapse of Kvichak sockeye salmon production brood years 1991–1999 (Ruggerone and Link 2006)

• Kvichak River watershed in Bristol Bay is largest producer of sockeye salmon in world • During 1996–2005 run size declined by 84% – Created economic hardship in region – Other Bristol Bay salmon stocks declined too, especially Egegik and Ugashik • Harvests recovered substantially in 2006 and 2007, but not to mid-1990s levels salmon value,1990–2007 Bristol Baysockeyesalmoncatch,andall-Alaska Bristol Bay sockeye catch, millions of fish 0 10 20 30 40 50 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 AK salmon value AK salmon BB catch 2004 2006

200 400 600 800 Salmon value, 2006 Salmon catch, millions of 2006 USD 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 1980 1985 Dillingham Census AreaDillingham 1990 Year 1995 2000 2005 Dillingham Census Area, Alaska 5000 4800 4600

Vertical lines show

Population estimated net

4400 migration effects 4200 4000 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Year Dillingham, Dillingham Census Area, Alaska 2500 Vertical lines show estimated net

2400 migration effects 2300 2200 2100 Population 50 2000 0 Births and deaths deaths and Births -50 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Year Togiak, Dillingham Census Area, Alaska 840

800 Vertical lines show estimated net migration effects 760 720 680 Population 640 30 600 10 Births and deaths deaths and Births -10 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Year Kodiak Island, Alaska Kodiak village fishing trends (Carothers 2006) • Community depopulation – Lost access to fishing – Little economic diversification — no work – Education — no place for the young people – 18–30 year old gap • Significant decrease in fishing involvement – Salmon price decrease – High entry costs — permits, IFQs, safety measures – Exxon Valdez oil spill – Crewmen’s wages have decreased/Few good crew jobs available • Younger generation — “the lost generation” – Loss of fishing identity, lifestyle, knowledge transfer Kodiak village depopulation: Evidence from survey (Carothers 2006) and demographics (Hamilton & Mitiguy 2008) Survey: brothers/sisters moved Larsen Bay, Kodiak Island Borough, Alaska due to decreased fishing (F) 170 Vertical lines show or education (E)? estimated net 150 – Larsen Bay (F 8%, E 50%) migration effects

– Old Harbor (F 44%, E 33%) 130 – Ouzinkie (F 21%, E 46%) 110 Population 5

Many people report that their 90 0 Births and deaths

own fishing involvement -5 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 decreased Year

Ouzinkie, Kodiak Island Borough, Alaska Old Harbor, Kodiak Island Borough, Alaska 270 310 250 290 230 270 Vertical lines show Vertical lines show estimated net estimated net 210 250 migration effects migration effects 230 190 Population Population 210 10 170 0 10 190 Births and deaths 0 Births and deaths -10

-10 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Year Year atr eigSaplokcatchandbiomass Eastern BeringSea pollock

Pollock catch, million tons 0 .5 1 1.5 2 1980 Catch Biomass 1985 1990 Year 1995 2000 2005

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Pollock biomass, million tons Alaska fisheries value (USD) by type, 1970–2006

Salmon

1200 Shellfish 1989 regime shift Groundfish 1000 800 600 400 Value in millions of USD (2006) USD of millions in Value 200 0

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 and crab fisheries,have beenlosing value since1989. Kodiak Island-based fisheries, incl

All fish catch, millions of 2006 USD 0 50 100 150 200 250 1980 1985 Kodiak Island Borough Island Kodiak 1990 uding groundfish, salmon, halibut Year 1995 2000 2005 outmigration after 1995. after outmigration The population ofKodiak IslandBorough hasdeclined duetonet

Population 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 1970 1975 1980 Kodiak Island Borough Island Kodiak 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Kodiak, Kodiak Island Borough, Alaska

Vertical lines show 7200 estimated net migration effects 6800 6400 Population 300 6000 100 Births and deaths deaths and Births -100 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Year

Kodiak City, the main port of Kodiak Island, has lost population since 1994 despite a strong pressures for natural increase (an excess of births over deaths). From “Population dynamics of Arctic Alaska” website: http://www.carseyinstitute.unh.edu/alaska-indicators.htm References

Carothers, C. (2006) “Impacts of halibut IFQs and changing Kodiak communities.” Alaska Fishing Communities Conference, Anchorage. Hamilton, L.C. and M.J. Butler (2001). “Outport adaptations: Social indicators through Newfoundland’s cod crisis.” Human Ecology Review 8(2):1–11. Hamilton, L.C., R.L. Haedrich and C.M. Duncan (2004). “Above and below the water: Social/ecological transformation in northwest Newfoundland.” Population and Environment 25(3):195–215. Hamilton, L.C. and A. Mitiguy (2008). “Population dynamics of Arctic Alaska,” http://www.carseyinstitute.unh.edu/alaska-indicators.htm Hamilton, L.C., P. Bjerregaard and B. Poppel (forthcoming). “Health and population indicators.” Chapter for the Arctic Social Indicators report. Package, C. and J. Sepez (2005). “Demographics of commercial fishing communities in Alaska.” NOAA. Ruggerone, G.T. and M.R. Link (2006). “Collapse of Kvichak sockeye salmon production brood years 1991–1999.” North Pacific Research Board. Questions?