State regulators are breathing a sigh of relief after the federal government on Wednesday decided against listing Gulf of Alaska king salmon with Endangered Species Act protections.
The move comes more than two-and-a-half years after a Washington state environmental group first called on the agency to list kings under the Endangered Species Act.
The Wild Fish Conservancy filed the petition on the grounds that king populations have experienced “significant declines” over the last two decades and face ongoing threats from factors including climate change.
“What we really see is a coast-wide crisis that isn’t unique to Alaska, is not unique to any specific region,” said Emma Helverson, the group’s executive director. “This is something that we need to really seriously think about if we’re going to have chinook salmon anywhere on our coast in 50 or 100 years from now.”
NOAA in 2024 found that the listing may be necessary. But after additional review, the agency said this week that listing Gulf of Alaska kings is “unwarranted.”
While kings across Alaska’s southern coast have seen “some declines in abundance and productivity,” the agency concluded that their populations overall are still large, genetically diverse and well distributed.
State regulators agree. A number of king stocks have fallen short of escapement goals across the region, with around a dozen listed as “stocks of management concern,” said Dani Evenson, of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. But she emphasized that those stocks are “not even close to risk of extinction.”
Evenson also noted that the agency has seen improvement across a range of stocks recently, including in the Chilkat and Alsek Rivers in Southeast Alaska.
Had the listing gone through, it could have impacted fisheries and communities along the state’s sprawling southern coastline. That includes the central Gulf of Alaska, but also all of Southeast and further northwest, including Kodiak and the Aleutians.
NOAA ultimately decided not to list any of those areas. But the agency could have listed any – or all – of the three regions. That move would have had major statewide implications.
“If it was the entirety of the Gulf of Alaska, it would have the potential to affect nearly every fishery in the Gulf, not just those targeting chinook,” Evenson said.
That’s because take of kings would have become prohibited, except in certain situations. The federal definition of “take” is much broader than killing an individual fish. It also means to “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, collect or attempt to engage in any such conduct,” Evenson said.
In a statement Wednesday morning, Alaska Fish and Game Commissioner Doug Vincent-Lang acknowledged that king populations have declined across the state since 2007. But he also said the agency has taken the trend “very seriously” – including by imposing fishing limitations and boosting research on the issue.
U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski likewise applauded NOAA’s decision. In a statement on Thursday, she said kings in Alaska “do need help,” but that the Endangered Species Act is “not the right tool.”
Helverson, of the Wild Fish Conservancy, said the group is still processing the decision – including a 400-page status review released by NOAA.
“Over the coming weeks, we’re going to be reviewing the scientific conclusions and the legal framework, and deciding if there are next steps,” she said.
