DOCSLIB.ORG

Fiscal Effects of Commercial Fishing, Mining and Tourism What Does Alaska Receive in Revenue? What Does It Spend?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fiscal Effects of Commercial Fishing, Mining and Tourism What Does Alaska Receive in Revenue? What Does It Spend? Fiscal Effects of Commercial Fishing, Mining and Tourism What does Alaska receive in revenue? What does it spend? Prepared for: Division of Economic Development Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development State of Alaska Prepared by: Bob Loeffler and Steve Colt contact: [email protected]; [email protected] Institute of Social and Economic Research University of Alaska Anchorage 3211 Providence Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99508 December 2, 2015 This report was prepared by the authors listed and does not necessarily reflect the views of ISER or the University of Alaska. The report and its findings should be attributed to the authors, rather than to ISER, the University of Alaska Anchorage, or the sponsors of the research. Acknowledgements Steve Colt is a professor of economics at the University of Alaska Anchorage, Institute of Social and Economic Research. Bob Loeffler holds a position as a visiting professor of public policy at UAA/ISER. Mr. Loeffler’s position and therefore his work on this paper are funded by a grant to the University of Alaska Foundation from the Council of Alaska Producers. The opinions and conclusions of this paper are those of the authors and do not represent those of the Council of Alaska Producers, the University of Alaska, or the Institute of Social and Economic Research. Bob Loeffler and Steve Colt would like to thank Jennifer Schmidt, Assistant Professor of Natural Resource Management at ISER, for her work on the Capital Budget portion of the paper. Fiscal Effects of Commercial Fishing, Mining, & Tourism What does Alaska receive in revenue? What does it spend? Table of Contents December 2, 2015 Page 1. Summary. ................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Summary of Results 1.2 Observations and Conclusions 1.3 Cautions and Caveats 2. Methodology .............................................................................................. 9 3. Commercial Fishing Industry ............................................................. 13 4. Mining Industry ..................................................................................... 28 5. Tourism Industry ................................................................................... 40 6. Operating Budget Detail ...................................................................... 55 7. Capital Budget Detail ............................................................................ 77 8. Revenue Detail ....................................................................................... 93 9. Don’t Like Our Assumptions? Try You Own! ............................. 106 10. References ........................................................................................... 108 Appendix A ............................................................................. After Page 111 Fiscal Effects of Commercial Fishing, Mining and Tourism Page i List of Tables Page Table 1. Commercial Fishing: Comparison of Revenue and Expense ........................................... 3 Table 2. Mining: Comparison of Revenue and Expense ...................................................................... 3 Table 3. Tourism: Comparison of Revenue and Expense ................................................................... 3 Table 4. State of Alaska Commercial Fishing Revenue; Average of 2010-2014 .................... 14 Table 5. FY 14 Alaska Commercial Fisheries Management Expenses ...................................... 18 Table 6. Commercial Fishing Capital Projects FY 12-14 ................................................................. 20 Table 7. Local Government Revenue from Commercial Fishing Industry ............................... 22 Table 8. Comparison of State Commercial Fishing Revenue with State Operating Expenditures ........................................................................................................................................ 22 Table 9. Comparison of State Commercial Fishing Revenue with Operating and Capital Expenditures ........................................................................................................................ 23 Table 10. Comparison of State and Local Commercial Fishing Revenues with Operating and Capital Expenditures ......................................................................................... 24 Table 11. State of Alaska Mining Revenue Average of 2010-2014 ............................................. 28 Table 12. FY 14 State Operating Expense due to Mining ............................................................... 32 Table 13. Mining Capital Projects FY 12-14 ......................................................................................... 33 Table 14. Comparison of State Mining Revenue with State Operating Expenditures ....... 35 Table 15. Comparison of State Mining Revenue with Operating and Capital Expenditures ........................................................................................................................................ 36 Table 16. Comparison of State and Local Mining Revenues with Operating and Capital Expenditures ........................................................................................................................................ 37 Table 17. State of Alaska Tourism Revenue. Average of 2010-2014 ........................................ 41 Table 18. FY 14 State Operating Expense due to Tourism ............................................................ 44 Table 19. Tourism Capital Projects FY 12-14 ...................................................................................... 47 Table 20. Local Commercial Tourism Revenue, Average of 2010-2014 .................................. 50 Table 21. Comparison of Tourism Mining Revenue with State Operating Expenditures ........................................................................................................................................ 51 Table 22. Comparison of State Tourism Revenue with Operating and Capital Expenditures ........................................................................................................................................ 52 Table 23. Comparison of State and Local Tourism Revenues with Operating and Capital Expenditures ........................................................................................................................................ 53 Table 24. Agencies that Expend State Funds for Commercial Fishing, Mining, or Tourism ............................................................................................................................................ 55 Table 25. DEC FY 14 Budget Component Funding and Industry Expense ............................. 57 Table 26. DNR FY 14 Budget Component Funding and Industry Expense ............................. 61 Table 27. DF&G FY 14 Budget Component Funding and Industry Expense .......................... 67 Table 28. DCCED FY 14 Budget Component Funding and Industry Expense ....................... 71 Table 29. DPS Division of Wildlife Troopers FY 14 Budget Component Funding and Industry Expense ............................................................................................................................... 75 Table 30. Capital Project Appropriations. 2012-2014 .................................................................... 81 Table 31. Commercial Fishing Revenue 2010-2014 ........................................................................ 93 Table 32. Mineral Industry Revenue from Alaska Mineral Industry 2013 ............................ 99 Table 33. Mining Revenue 2010-2014 ................................................................................................ 100 Table 34. Tourism Revenue 2010-2014 ............................................................................................. 104 Fiscal Effects of Commercial Fishing, Mining and Tourism Page ii List of Figures Page Figure 1. Commercial Fishing: Comparison of Revenue and Expense ......................................... 2 Figure 2. Mining: Comparison of Revenue and Expense .................................................................... 2 Figure 3. Tourism: Comparison of Revenue and Expense ................................................................. 2 Figure 4. State as a Percent of First Market Value ............................................................................... 6 Figure 5: State Management Costs: Commercial Fishing, Mining, and Tourism ...................... 7 Figure 6. FY 14 State Oil Industry Revenue Compared with State Revenue from Commercial Fishing, Mining, and Tourism ................................................................................ 7 Figure 7. Alaska Capital Budgets ............................................................................................................... 11 Figure 8. Comparison of State Commercial Fishing Revenue with State Operating Expenditures ........................................................................................................................................ 23 Figure 9. Comparison of State Commercial Fishing Revenue with Operating and Capital Expenditures ........................................................................................................................................ 24 Figure 10. Comparison of State and Local Commercial Fishing Revenues with Operating and Capital Expenditures ..............................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SUSTAINABLE FISHERIES and RESPONSIBLE AQUACULTURE: a Guide for USAID Staff and Partners
    SUSTAINABLE FISHERIES AND RESPONSIBLE AQUACULTURE: A Guide for USAID Staff and Partners June 2013 ABOUT THIS GUIDE GOAL This guide provides basic information on how to design programs to reform capture fisheries (also referred to as “wild” fisheries) and aquaculture sectors to ensure sound and effective development, environmental sustainability, economic profitability, and social responsibility. To achieve these objectives, this document focuses on ways to reduce the threats to biodiversity and ecosystem productivity through improved governance and more integrated planning and management practices. In the face of food insecurity, global climate change, and increasing population pressures, it is imperative that development programs help to maintain ecosystem resilience and the multiple goods and services that ecosystems provide. Conserving biodiversity and ecosystem functions are central to maintaining ecosystem integrity, health, and productivity. The intent of the guide is not to suggest that fisheries and aquaculture are interchangeable: these sectors are unique although linked. The world cannot afford to neglect global fisheries and expect aquaculture to fill that void. Global food security will not be achievable without reversing the decline of fisheries, restoring fisheries productivity, and moving towards more environmentally friendly and responsible aquaculture. There is a need for reform in both fisheries and aquaculture to reduce their environmental and social impacts. USAID’s experience has shown that well-designed programs can reform capture fisheries management, reducing threats to biodiversity while leading to increased productivity, incomes, and livelihoods. Agency programs have focused on an ecosystem-based approach to management in conjunction with improved governance, secure tenure and access to resources, and the application of modern management practices.
    [Show full text]
  • Vocational Education and Fisheries S, N. Dwivedi & V. Ravindranathan
    Vocational education and fisheries Item Type article Authors Dwivedi, S.N.; Ravindranathan, V. Download date 24/09/2021 18:45:18 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/1834/31676 Journal of the Indian Fisheries Association 8+9, 1978-79, 65-70 VOCATIONAL EDUCATION AND FISHERIES S, N. DWIVEDI & V. RAVINDRANATHAN Central Institute of Fisheries Education Versova, Bombay-400 067. ABSTRACT The knowledge and skill of the poople are important tools for the development of natural resources and for the prosperty of any country. The quality of education is judged not only from the inquistiveness and knowiedge it can impart but also from it's usefulees in meeting the urgent economic problems of the country. Vocational Courses in fisheries are offered in four states. The technologies in fisheries developed offer good scope for Vocational training for self employment. There is an urgent need to have radical revision of the course content to make the students vocationaliy competent. FISHERIES EDUCATION — STATE OF ART : Recognising the need to study, assess and develop the fishery resources of the country, Govt. of India established the Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute (CMFRI) Cochin; Central Inland Fisheries Risearch Institute (CIFRI) Barrackpore, Central Institute of Fisheries Technology (CIFI) Cochin and Deep Sea Fishing Station, Bombay soon after the Independence. Since then, the fish production trend in the country has been encouraing. The annual fish production has increased from 0.5 million tons in 1950, to 2.6 million tons in 1983. Although the rate of increase has been fairly good, the per capita consumption of fish, even now, is less than 5 kg/yr.
    [Show full text]
  • Innovation Management in Seafood Industry Sector
    Development of Innovation Capabilities in the New Zealand Seafood Industry Sector Andrew Jeffs Principal Scientist, National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research, P.O. Box 109-695, Auckland, New Zealand Email: [email protected] Shantha Liyanage Associate Professor, Business School, The University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand Email: [email protected] Abstract: Most seafood industries around the world are founded on wild capture fisheries which have been facing a static or declining resource base due to over exploitation. Achieving growth with this restraint is a challenge that seafood enterprises have struggled with globally for more than 20 years. Innovation efforts in this industry have focused on developing new sources of raw material, increasing financial returns through value-adding, increased efficiency of production and management integration. An early change in the management regime for wild fish stocks is identified as the key factor in encouraging innovation in the New Zealand seafood industry. The greater certainty in raw material supply provided by the management regime has enabled seafood enterprises to shift their attention from competing to secure sufficient raw material toward increasing their returns from the raw materials they know will be available to them. This paper examines the dynamics of innovation capability building and provides management directions for enhancing innovation capability in this industry. Overall, it is hoped that this study may help to act as an exemplar for encouraging innovation in other national or regional seafood industries, and for other industries based on renewable natural resources. Keywords: seafood; innovation; Quota Management System; innovation capability, New Zealand; aquaculture; biotechnology; national innovation system.
    [Show full text]
  • Critique of PPI Study on Shale Gas Job Creation Prepared by Jannette M
    Critique of PPI Study on Shale Gas Job Creation Prepared by Jannette M. Barth, Ph.D. Pepacton Institute LLC January 2, 2012 Supporters of shale gas drilling in New York State frequently reference a report issued by The Public Policy Institute of New York State, Inc. (PPI) titled “Drilling for Jobs: What the Marcellus Shale Could Mean for New York,” July 2011. As with the other industry-funded studies on this subject, this PPI report is one- sided and self-evidently crafted with the sole purpose of supporting the gas industry. Independent academic research not funded by the gas industry reaches vastly different conclusions than do these industry-funded studies. The PPI report does not mention the independent research. Some examples of conclusions made by independent researchers are that areas that once had thriving extractive industries end up suffering the highest rates of long-term poverty (Freudenburg and Wilson); and counties that have focused on energy development underperform economically compared to peer counties with little or no energy development (Headwaters Economics). Independently researched studies include the following: • “Fossil Fuel Extraction as a County Economic Development Strategy: Are Energy-focusing Counties Benefiting?”, Headwaters Economics, September 2008 (Revised 7/11/09). • “Mining the Data: Analyzing the Economic Implications of Mining for Nonmetropolitan Regions,” William R. Freudenberg and Lisa J. Wilson, Sociological Inquiry, Vol. 72, Fall 2002, 549-75. • “The Economic Impact of Shale Gas Extraction: A Review of Existing Studies,” Thomas C. Kinnaman, Ecological Economics, 70 (2011) 1243-1249. • “Hydrofracking a Boom-Bust Endeavor,” Susan Christopherson, August 14, 2011. • “The Local Economic Impacts of Natural Gas Development in the Valle Vidal, New Mexico,” Thomas Michael Power, January 2005.
    [Show full text]
  • Technological Modernization and Its Impact on Agriculture, Fisheries And
    Publications 2017 Technological Modernization and Its Impact on Agriculture, Fisheries and Fossil Fuel Utilization in the Asia Pacific Countries with Emphasis on Sustainability Perspective Rajee Olaganathan Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, [email protected] Kathleen Quigley Embry Riddle Aeronautical University Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.erau.edu/publication Part of the Agriculture Commons, Aquaculture and Fisheries Commons, Oil, Gas, and Energy Commons, and the Sustainability Commons Scholarly Commons Citation Olaganathan, R., & Quigley, K. (2017). Technological Modernization and Its Impact on Agriculture, Fisheries and Fossil Fuel Utilization in the Asia Pacific Countries with Emphasis on Sustainability Perspective. International Journal of Advanced Biotechnology and Research (IJBR), 8(2). Retrieved from https://commons.erau.edu/publication/839 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Publications by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. International Journal of Advanced Biotechnology and Research (IJBR) ISSN 0976-2612, Online ISSN 2278–599X, Vol-8, Issue-2, 2017, pp422-441 http://www.bipublication.com Research Article Technological modernization and its impact on Agriculture, Fisheries and Fossil fuel utilization in the Asia Pacific Countries with emphasis on sustainability perspective Olaganathan Rajee* and Kathleen Quigley College of Arts and Sciences and College of Business Embry Riddle Aeronautical University Worldwide, 75 Bukit Timah Road, #02-01/02 Boon Siew Building, Singapore. 229833 * Corresponding Author E-mail: [email protected]; Phone: +1 626 236 2254 ABSTRACT Modernization is a process that moves towards efficiency. This affects most of the fields such as agriculture, fisheries, forestry, urban planning, policy, fossil fuel usage, manufacturing, technology, economic growth etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Challenges and Opportunities of the US Fishing Industry
    Advancing Opportunity, Prosperity, and Growth WWW.HAMILTONPROJECT.ORG What’s the Catch? Challenges and Opportunities of the U.S. Fishing Industry By Melissa S. Kearney, Benjamin H. Harris, Brad Hershbein, David Boddy, Lucie Parker, and Katherine Di Lucido SEPTEMBER 2014 he economic importance of the fishing sector extends well beyond the coastal communities for which it is a vital industry. Commercial fishing operations, including seafood wholesalers, processors, and retailers, all contribute billions of dollars annually to the U.S. economy. Recreational fishing— Temploying both fishing guides and manufacturers of fishing equipment—is a major industry in the Gulf Coast and South Atlantic. Estimates suggest that the economic contribution of the U.S. fishing industry is nearly $90 billion annually, and supports over one and a half million jobs (National Marine Fisheries Service [NMFS] 2014). A host of challenges threaten fishing’s viability as an American industry. Resource management, in particular, is a key concern facing U.S. fisheries. Since fish are a shared natural resource, fisheries face traditional “tragedy of the commons” challenges in which the ineffective management of the resource can result in its depletion. In the United States, advances in ocean fishery management over the past four decades have led to improved sustainability, but more remains to be done: 17 percent of U.S. fisheries are classified as overfished (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA] 2014), and even those with adequate fish stocks may benefit economically from more-efficient management structures. Meeting the resource management challenge can lead to improved economic activity and better sustainability in the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Fisheries Management: an Historical Overview
    Fisheries Management: An Historical Overview CLINTON E. ATKINSON Introduction lowed by most other countries: Here we diseases of fish" (Brice 1898:138). have always considered that manage­ Although much of our early informa­ At this 50th Anniversary of the Mont­ ment of fisheries was a state's right and tion on the fisheries of the Pacific coast lake Laboratory we have heard accounts the jurisdiction of the Federal govern­ came from the first surveys of the vari­ of its role in studies of the fisheries re­ ment has been generally limited to 0us salmon streams in a search for source and its environment, fishing and Territories, the high seas, and manage­ suitable locations for hatcheries, the fishing methods, and utilization of the ment under international treaty and/or Smithsonian Institution and the u.S. catch. Now we will explore the manage­ administration and, in the case of sal­ Commission of Fish and Fisheries un­ ment of the fishery and marine mam­ mon and certain other freshwater fishes, dertook a comprehensive survey of the mal resources. access and protection of fish in navig­ fish and fisheries of the United States, If we examine the history of these able waters. Needless to say, this frag­ directed by Congress as a part of the management practices, we can recog­ mentation of management authority over 10th census (1880). The series of reports nize at least three stages of development fish and fisheries that share the waters generated by the survey still provide a or goals: 1) To stop the decline and of the several states or go beyond their wealth of information on the histories simply maintain the existing level of coastal zones has been the source of in­ of the various fisheries, their records of yield, 2) to determine, theoretically or numerable conflicts between the states exploitation, and the early efforts at empirically at least, the maximum sus­ or between the states and the Federal management.
    [Show full text]
  • Sustainable Fisheries and Aquaculture Management
    African Great Lakes Conference 2–5 May 2017 Entebbe, Uganda Sustainable Fisheries and Aquaculture Management Convenors: Richard Ogutu-Ohwayo Ian G. Cowx Theme objectives Sustainable Fisheries and Aquaculture Management underlying fishery biology and exploitation patterns fishery management and fishing rights/tenure livelihoods analysis and adaptation strategies to future changes in the fisheries from environmental and climate change; linkages between fisheries and aquaculture development; the food security and nutritional contribution; future management and adaptation strategies Handout Can fisheries management in the Great Lakes of Africa contribute to achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals? Ian G. Cowx & Martin van der Knaap Hull International Fisheries Institute & FAO, Ghana Outline • Inland fisheries and the UN Sustainable Development Goals • Contribution of African Great Lakes fisheries to society • Pressures on African Great Lakes fish and fisheries • Management for sustainable fisheries and aquaculture in AGL UN Sustainable Development goals Aim: to end poverty, protect the planet and ensure prosperity for all SDG 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development Appears that inland fisheries are largely ignored Inland fisheries as an ecosystem service • 11.2 – 41.1 million tonnes of fish caught globally from inland waters : Provide 20% of all global captured food fish • 90 percent of global inland fisheries catch from developing countries • Fundamental to nutrition, food security, livelihoods and societal well-being • 60 million people directly involved in small-scale inland fisheries (30 million of which are women) • 20 grams of a small river fish contains the daily iron and zinc needs for a child. Wild & cultured fish, Inle Lake, Shan State, Myanmar Dependence on inland fish 90% of inland fish is caught in developing countries and 65% is caught in Low Income Food Deficient countries.
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Benefits of the Bristol Bay Salmon Industry
    ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF THE BRISTOL BAY SALMON INDUSTRY PREPARED BY WINK RESEARCH & CONSULTING JULY 2018 PREPARED FOR RESEARCH CONDUCTED FOR This project was commissioned by the Bristol Bay Regional Seafood Development Association, Bristol Bay Economic Development Corporation, and Bristol Bay Native Corporation. These organizations are committed to developing regional salmon resources for the benefit of their respective stakeholders. RESEARCH CONDUCTED BY Wink Research & Consulting, LLC provides economic research and consulting services. Research and study findings contained in this report were conducted by Andy Wink. Mr. Wink has extensive experience researching markets for Bristol Bay seafood products and is an expert on economic benefits provided by the Alaska seafood industry. TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 3 Glossary of Terms & Abbreviations ............................................................................................ 4 Chapter 1. Resource Profile............................................................................................................. 6 Chapter 2. Supply Chain & Market Profile ................................................................................... 13 Chapter 3. Value of Resource & Assets .......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Mainstreaming Biodiversity in Fisheries
    Marine Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Marine Policy journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/marpol Mainstreaming biodiversity in fisheries ⁎ K. Friedmana,b, , S.M. Garciac, J. Riced a FAO, Fisheries and Aquaculture Department, Rome, Italy b The University of Western Australia Oceans Institute, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia c Fisheries Expert Group, IUCN Commission on Ecosystem Management, Italy d Fisheries Expert Group, IUCN Commission on Ecosystem Management, Emeritus Scientist, DFO, Canada ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Biodiversity mainstreaming, the consideration of biodiversity across fisheries and the range of actions taken by Biodiversity both fisheries and conservation governance streams is the subject of this paper. Evidence is presented that the Mainstreaming global fishery community incrementally adopted sustainable development principles from both before and after Sustainable development the 1992 adoption of the Convention on Biological Diversity, integrating a broader set of ecosystems goals into Fisheries fisheries. Actions taken by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and regional and Conservation national fishery agencies to fulfil their mandate are discussed, in addition to objectives for more sustainable Cooperation fisheries that have led to significant expansions in legal frameworks, policies and practices in terms of biodi- versity conservation. The paper also highlights the growing importance of cross-sectoral cooperation in the resolution of historical disagreements between fisheries and environmental interests, in spite of the various sectoral interests. In this evolution, despite many target stocks not yet being sustainably managed, fisheries approaches are progressively focusing on a broader range of biodiversity considerations, whereas conservation interests are increasingly adopting more socially inclusive approaches.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake District Fisheries Management
    SUMMER 2009 Protecting& Rehabilitating for HEALTHIER LAKES A PUBLICATION FROM AMERY LAKES PROTECTION AND REHABILITATION DISTRICT WHAT’S INSIDE LAKE LITTER IT’S A PROBLEM ...... P. 2 BOARD NOTICES & MEETINGS ......... P. 2 LAKE NEWS ......... P. 3 CLEAN LAKES City of Amery… PROJECT ............ P. 4 COMPLETES STORMWATER ARMC: ENSURING THE MANAGEMENT PLAN HEALTH OF AMERY’S RESIDENTS AND WATER RESOURCES .. P. 5 The Amery City Council approved the Stormwater LAKE DISTRICT Management Plan at its Q&A FISHERIES March 2009 meeting. The WHO PAID FOR THE STORMWATER plan examines the sources of MANAGEMENT ...... P. 6 MANAGEMENT PLAN, AND WHO WILL PAY TO pollution to Amery Lakes and IMPLEMENT THE PLAN? the Apple River and provides The stormwater management plan and initial specific recommendations for implementation is funded by two Department of If you have issues or concerns, addressing these sources. The Natural Resources grants to the City of Amery. A stormwater planning grant allowed the city to please join us at one of our major goal of the stormwater hire the engineering firm SEH to develop the plan plan is to protect and improve scheduled meetings or call one with the help of a local stormwater committee. A of our board members. the water quality of the Amery lake protection grant provides funds to educate See page 2 for details. Lakes: Pike, North Twin, and city residents and pay for technical and financial South Twin. Recommendations assistance to put clean water practices in place. in the plan will also provide The grants are matched in large part by the Amery water quality improvement for Lakes District.
    [Show full text]
  • Overcoming Overexploitation of Fisheries: Creating a More Sustainable Fishing Industry Along the Gulf of Mexico Coast
    OVERCOMING OVEREXPLOITATION OF FISHERIES: CREATING A MORE SUSTAINABLE FISHING INDUSTRY ALONG THE GULF OF MEXICO COAST By Gwendolyn Ricco University of Colorado at Boulder A thesis submitted to the University of Colorado at Boulder in partial fulfillment Of the requirements to receive Honors designation in Environmental Studies May 2013 Thesis Advisors: Nancy Billica, Political Science, Committee Chair Dale Miller, Environmental Studies Sam Fitch, Political Science © 2013 by Gwendolyn Ricco Abstract With increasing global population coupled with high levels of consumption, natural resource scarcity is a vital issue in the management and restructuring of commercial industries. Resource conservation is a widely studied field to determine the current and past trends of resource availability. As oceans comprise 70 percent of our planet’s surface, the study of marine ecosystems and human impacts due to fishing enterprises is becoming increasingly important, especially as fishing stocks across the world are in danger of collapse. This study focuses on the role of fishery management policies and practices in the United States and in particular, how these policies can be changed to establish industries that promote long-term sustainability. Specifically, a policy recommendation for the Gulf of Mexico fishery system is advanced, drawing from the lessons learned through examination of Alaskan and New England fisheries. This Gulf of Mexico case study is designed to produce a dialogue considering the sustainability of our fishing industries in the United States by considering biological, political, and economic factors of each region in order to create a more local and contextualized policy recommendation for the Gulf of Mexico to transition effectively and efficiently towards a more sustainable future.
    [Show full text]