LIVE from Kodiak, Alaska | 2026 Alaska Gubernatorial Fisheries Debate

Good evening and welcome everyone to this gubernatorial debate. We have all 4 candidates who are running for governor of Alaska with us tonight. It should be an exciting evening. I'm Gary Stevens, president of the Alaska Senate for a short time more, and your gubernatorial moderator for this debate. So first of all, let me say welcome to all of you.

I'm glad you're here. To everyone here in the Gerald C. Wilson Auditorium here in Kodiak, Alaska, to the KMXT listeners, and to all of those who are tuning in from other public stations around the state, as well as the folks who are watching this online. The forum is hosted by the Kodiak Chamber of Commerce and by KMXT Public Radio. It's the only debate in Alaska devoted exclusively to fisheries, a tradition that probably dates back over 3 decades. So thank you too for our sponsors.

There are so many of them. Madsen, Koniag, Trident Seafood, North Pacific Seafoods, Alaska Whitefish Trawlers, The City of Kodiak, Alaska Pollock Fisheries Alliance, The Truth, Pacific Seafood Processors Association, United Fishermen of Alaska, the Alaska Quota and Permits LLC, and the Freezer Longline Association. Tonight we'll hear from all four of the Alaska gubernatorial candidates: Dave Bronson, Jonathan Krysomkins, Treg Taylor, and Bernadette Wilson. One of them will be the governor of Alaska depending on how you vote. So it's very important that we know what's going on and what those folks think about the various issues that we ask about tonight.

The governor, the next governor, could very well serve 4 years or even 2 years, up to 8 years. So this is a very important evening for us. As we get to each section of the debate, I'll go over the parameters for that round. But to start with, there are just a few ground rules, ladies and gentlemen, that I'd like to remind you of first. We'll be using a timer system that has flashing lights.

The green light will turn on when your time begins. The yellow light will be lit when you have 30 seconds left. And the red light will be lit when your time is up. We ask that you— that once the red light is lit, that you end your comments at that time. The second rule, Please be courteous.

I know you will be. And don't interrupt your fellow candidates. And third, this is a fisheries debate and candidates must stay on the subject of the fishing industry. I would also like a promise from each of you here with us tonight, with a thumbs up if you would, that you will adhere to these ground rules and abide by your time limits. With a thumbs up, can you agree to that, ladies and gentlemen?

Thumbs up, thumbs up. Thank you very much. Okay, all of tonight's questions were submitted by members of the public or by the seafood industry and vetted by our local committee, which is comprised of representatives from all sectors of the fishing industry. Now let's begin, if we can, with some opening statements. Each candidate will have 90 seconds to share with the public why you are the best candidate to represent Alaska's fisheries.

And Mr. Bronson, since you, uh, your last name comes first alphabetically, we'll start with you if you would go first. However, we will rotate through all of the candidates so everyone will have a turn at being first for future questions. Dave Bronson.

Well, thank you very much, and thanks to the hosts of this event. This is a great opportunity. It's good to be back on the rock again. I've been here a couple times this summer, had a hunt in May, and had some events here and very impressive place. So thank you for hosting this.

If you don't know who I am, I'm Dave Bronson. Real quick bio. I grew up in northern Wisconsin on Lake Superior, literally almost on the lake, and then went into the military, flew military for 9 years, active duty, and then came to Alaska after marrying my wife in there and then came to Alaska with the airlines. And then during COVID I became the mayor of Anchorage. And last year I was the director of Ted Stevens International Airport, and last September I decided to run for this office.

Anyways, to answer your question, Senator, directly, why I think I'm the best person for the job, it comes down to, quite frankly, one word, and it's experience. The mayor of Anchorage governs about 40% of the population of the state. It's the job that is closest to the job of governor. When you interview someone, for those of you who hire people in your companies, the first thing you do is you look at a resume and say, do you have any experience in the job that we're looking to hire you for? And that's what you're doing, you're looking to hire us.

One of us is gonna be the governor in a couple months, and governor-elect and sworn into office on December 7th. So again, I just ask that you look at the resumes, and I think that makes a difference. I have the most experience, it's quite clear. Oops, can't see that over there. All right, thanks.

Thank you, Dave. The next would be Jonathan Christomkins for 90 seconds. Jonathan. Thank you very much. It's a real pleasure to be in Kodiak.

I think this is the third time this campaign season, Comfish, Crabfest, and now the Fisheries Debates, the trifecta. I'm born and raised in Sitka, and I spent most of my life in Southeast Alaska. I graduated Sitka High School, is an Eagle Scout. I spent summers in college crewing on a salmon power troller out of Sitka, and I'm very familiar with fisheries growing up in a community that was built by fisheries. And I served for 10 years in the legislature in the House of Representatives, the great fortune of serving alongside Representative Stutes and Representative Osterman in those 10 years, and was a proud member of the bipartisan coalition where you had Republicans and Independents and Democrats working together, finding common ground and trying to solve problems for Alaska.

And that is the same philosophy and spirit of government that I hope to bring to the governor's office that I feel has been missing from the governor's office for the last 8 years. And as someone born and raised in coastal Alaska, I wanna bring that perspective of understanding coastal Alaska and fisheries-dependent communities to the third floor in Juneau as well. Thank you, Jonathan. And we'll move on to Craig Taylor for a 90-second opening statement. Craig.

Thank you. Craig Taylor, I'm running for governor. My running mate, Candy English, is here. I hope you take an opportunity to introduce yourself to her. She is a remarkable person, cut her teeth up with ARCO on the North Slope, worked in the oil and gas industry for many years before putting out her own shingle and runs a very successful uh, business Northern Solutions, which is a huge, huge asset for Alaska.

Does business all around the world, employed— has employed thousands of people in that business. She has a can-do attitude. She doesn't take no for an answer, and I'm so pleased that she's part of the ticket. I should also probably mention that I was grateful for the classic Kodiak welcome when I came in. That airplane didn't know if it wanted to go up, down, or veer right or left.

So thank you for that welcome. I also want to introduce my wife, Jodi Taylor, who's here. We've been married for 27 years and we're raising our 6 children as 4th generation Alaskans. Very proud of them. Obviously, as parents, we care deeply about educational issues, about the future of the state.

We want our children to have the same opportunities. I'm running for governor to make the changes necessary for Alaska to reach its full potential. And give our kids the opportunity to build their lives here. If you want the can-do, get-it-done, proven get-it-done candidates, I hope you select, uh, Craig Taylor for governor and Candy English for lieutenant governor. Thank you.

Thank you, Craig. Moving on then to Bernadette Wilson. Thank you, Bernadette, for being here, and would you do, uh, 90 seconds of opening statement? Well, thank you so much. It's great to be here.

I'm Bernadette Wilson. In roughly 6 weeks, the question that each of you will have to answer when you walk into that voting booth is, what will we do differently this time? We'll sit up on the stage tonight and we will talk about bycatch, we'll talk about allocation issues, we will talk about trawling, we'll talk about conflicts of interest with the Board of Fish, we'll talk about the importance of a Commissioner of Fish and Game. So many of the problems and issues that we will discuss tonight are the same problems and issues that have been discussed on this very stage with numerous gubernatorial candidates in the past. The question that each of us has to answer is, what will we do differently this time?

I was born in Kenai. I grew up in Anchorage, where I raised my 3 children. I come from a long line of family businesses. My grandmother was born in the village of Naknek. My great uncle, Governor Wally Hickel, served as governor twice here in Alaska.

Family businesses that have been in Alaska for decades, including a family business that my dad now owns and runs and operates, that is responsible for hauling all the fish out of Valdez. This is an incredibly important issue. What will we do differently this time?

Thank you very much, Bernadette. So the next round will be sort of fun because it's a yes or no and you all have— does everyone have a paddle in front of them? A paddle is not to be used to hit over the head your opponent but to say yes or no on various very fast questions. It should be fun. So if you'd raise the paddle with, have you ever been commercial fishing?

It looks like one yes, Jonathan Christomkins. Have you ever been sport fishing? And all four yeses. Have you ever been subsistence fishing?

One no and three yeses, Bronson, Taylor, and Christomkins. Have you ever worked in the seafood industry?

One yes, Jonathan. Have you ever Have you ever tried wild Alaska sole?

It is a fish. Yes, it is a fish. I don't know how you'd know that for sure, but— Yeah, maybe. Yeah, sole. Yeah, okay.

Interesting question. All right, and finally, do you plan to increase the EDF&G budget? Yes or no? Very good. We have 4 yeses.

Thank you. Wise, wise in this room and in this town to say that. Now we'll move on to round 2 for our panelists. Toby Sullivan, we have Toby over there with the Kodiak Maritime Museum, and we also have Tina Fairbanks with the Kodiak Regional Aquaculture Association, and they will provide some background on various issues and then ask a series of questions about the topic to the candidates. Each candidate will have 2 minutes to answer each question.

We'll begin with Toby. Good evening. The first topic is about the Alaska Board of Fisheries regarding accountability and process, including recent legislative audit and AG decision and Board of Fish appointments. A little bit of background on before the first question: the Alaska Board of Fisheries is responsible for regulating fisheries and managing between user groups, and the governor is responsible for nominating all board members. In May, the Attorney General, the Alaska Attorney General, voided 5 Board of Fisheries regulations adopted by the board in February 2026 due to violations of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act.

The regulations would have restricted Area M salmon fisheries and ended an adaptive management program that allowed fishing while reducing, reducing June chum salmon harvest to conserve Yukon, Kuskokwim chum salmon stocks. The first question, and it's a two-part question, will go to Jonathan Christ-Thomas. Since the governor nominates all 7 members to the Board of Fish, how would you balance representation between the type of fishery defined as species, gear, and area, and also commercial, sport, and subsistence user groups across the state and region? And the second part of the question is, Are you in favor of having people with commercial fishing experience on the Board of Fish? Mr. Chris Tommins.

Thank you for the, the question. Um, a North Star for me on Board of Fish nominations from the governor is making sure that there's balance on the Board of Fish. Balance. And that has been the guiding principle of the Alaska Board of Fish since it was created. By the legislature that there is balance between subsistence, smort, and commercial, and all user groups have a seat at the table and are able to have a fair hearing, and that those 7 members of the board make the hard management decisions that is left to the board.

But it's very important that all those user groups have fair representation, and I've been concerned in recent years that we have lost balance on the Board of Fish and I'm very committed as governor to nominate Alaskans, qualified Alaskans, to serve on the board from all those user groups to make sure that there is fair and equal balance across those user groups. I also think it's important that there's geographic diversity on the Board of Fish, and as someone from Southeast Alaska, there was a window of time where Southeast Alaska did not have representation on the Board of Fish. It's an incredibly fisheries-dependent region. And it's not just Southeast Alaska. I think it's important that the governor take into account geographic balance across the state of Alaska and across user groups.

To the second part of the question, would I nominate Alaskans with commercial fishing experience? Absolutely. One of the three key user groups you want to have at the table at the Board of Fisheries is the commercial sector. And it's really important when the Board of Fish is deliberating that you have individuals on the board who have firsthand knowledge of the fisheries that they are managing and regulating. And for anyone who's sat in on a Board of Fisheries meeting, you can observe what a difference that makes.

And I think there's conflict of interest rules that fortunately I think the legislature, led by Representative Stutes, has taken positive action to remedy that have prevented certain board members from being able to fully participate. But I do think it is important that commercial fisheries experiences at The same question this time goes to Craig Taylor, and I'll read it again. Since the governor nominates all 7 members of the board, how would you balance representation between gear, species, and management areas, commercial, sport, and subsistence groups? And second part of it, of course, is would you favor having people with commercial fishing experience on the Board of Fish? You have 2 minutes to answer it.

Yeah, thank you. I think First, I want to make sure everybody knows I'm very sympathetic to the plight of the families and the communities along the Yukon and the Kuskokwim Rivers with the depletion of the chum and king salmon runs. It's a disaster for them, uh, and it's, uh, it, it doesn't downplay the hardships that they're going through. But I think that the right decision was that— I want to make sure that people also realize that the board cannot subvert its own promise, the public process, and also its own regulations. To achieve an end.

And so I think they got it right, um, in what, what occurred there. I've also received complaints from Alaskans over and over and over again about the unbalance that currently exists on the board. And as your governor, I promise that I will appoint people to the board that are going to put Alaskans first and that they're going to be fair and open-minded to all users of the resource. I think that's— whenever you get out of balance, that's the problem, right? You have to have that balance on the board.

If in times of plenty, everybody should benefit. In times of downturn, everybody should share equally in that. And we can't have one industry or one user of that resource that benefits to the detriment of all other users. And so on the second part of that question, I think you absolutely need people with knowledge about industry. You absolutely need people with knowledge about, about the fishery.

But I think you, I don't think I would put someone that's actively involved in the commercial fishing industry on the board. Now if you're retired, if you're no longer working in that industry, I think that they bring a lot of expertise, but again, when I have conversations with that individual, it's going to be, can you put Alaska first, and can you be fair and open-minded about all users of that resource? That's going to be the key. Thank you. The same question, and I'll read it again, goes to Bernadette Wilson.

Again, 2 minutes. Since the governor nominates all 7 members of the Board of Fish, how would you balance representation between species, gear, and management area, and commercial sport and subsistence user groups? And the second part of the question is, are you in favor of having people with commercial fishing industry experience on the Board of Fish? Yeah, so there's no doubt that this process has, has had many challenges. The first thing that I will say is we absolutely need to bring balance to the board.

When you have 5 out of 7 members at, you know, any particular point that belong to one industry or another, clearly there's a problem. I do think that we need to appoint and have a review process and committee that can really look at what is the process for appointing, We need to have conversations about, is it time to increase membership from 7 to 9? Is it time to have those representatives be regionally representative of the different areas of the state? We need to make sure that they absolutely do not have conflicts of interest. I have no problem with someone that has experience in the commercial fishing industry, but at the end of the day, we need to make sure that every single one of those board members that's there is not there because of a political payback.

And that they are there managing for abundance, not fighting over allocation. Those are the conversations that we have to have as we look at this board. We absolutely need to make sure that if there are conflicts of interest, that they're absolutely recusing themselves, that that process is very outlined and that it's very clear guidelines on what that looks like. So we have a lot that needs to be done on that front, but we have to have a solid review process, and those are some of the ideas like I said, going from 7 to 9, having regional representation that I think would all benefit that conversation. Thank you.

The same question goes to, this time, Dave Bronson. Again, 2 minutes, and I'll read the question again. Since the governor nominates all 7 members to the Board of Fish, how would you balance representation between gear, species, management area, and commercial sport and subsistence user groups? And of course, are you in favor of having people with commercial fishing experience on the Board of Fish? Well, as you read all of those categories, there's not enough seats on the board to do all that.

So the short answer is yes. Would, would I welcome, uh, commercial experience? Yes, I would. But the board should probably be the same size as the NPFMC. It should be about 11 people so we get that, those, those, all those voices that you just mentioned— sports, subsistence, commercial, uh, and, and you mentioned the first category was gear type.

So there's conflict between gear type. And so again, I support the notion that if the legislature would come and propose legislation, I would be willing to expand the board to 11 members if at all possible, because then that's how you get— without the seats there, you can't get the representation. It's just, it's mathematically not possible. So again, I think I would support having commercial interest on the board. But also more people from other voices too.

We see this problem over in the MPFMC. It's dominated by, by certain folks in the commercial industry and there's no voice for just about anyone else there. And, and that's gotta change. I hate to bring that into it, but it's the same problem. It's not equal and fair representation across the breadth of the board at all.

So thank you.

Okay, um, moving on to the second question under this first topic. Uh, we'll repeat the same process. I'll read the question and each of you will have an opportunity to answer. First goes to Craig Taylor. Please explain your position on science-based fisheries management and how much should the Board of Fisheries rely on science over political and other considerations when making decisions in the board process.

Yeah, first, I'm a big proponent of the science. As Attorney General, it was the data that saved our bacon as a state so many times when we faced onslaught of federal litigation. I can think of the ICL critical habitat designations that would have shut down mass portions of north— northern western Alaska. We beat that with good sound data. Um, we, we had that same issue with polar bear take.

You know, we were able to negotiate a polar bear take that, that, that was able to support our current industry up there. Not much more, but our current industry up on the North Slope. We did that because of data. The data part is, is so important. And I'm— I think when, when we face an onslaught of 70 executive actions targeting Alaska and our way of life from the Biden administration, It was that data that saved, saved us many, many times in that litigation.

And, uh, and during that time, we, we learned a few lessons. We had what we call the Statehood Defense Group, and we asked for additional money from the legislature, which we had about $11 million extra dollars that we put towards the science. The science is the key, um, and you've got to follow the data. But when you follow that data, you also have to look at what is best for Alaska and what is best for every user of that industry or that fish resource, right? And so I think it's two-part.

You can't let, you can't be swayed by politics, but you do have to look about what is going on with every user of that resource, of that fishery, and you do have to do what's best for Alaska.

Okay, thank you.

Second time to Bernadette Wilson. Question is, please explain your position on science-based fisheries management and how much should the Board of Fisheries rely on science over political and other considerations when making decisions in the board process? 2 Minutes. Yeah, so here's the thing, you guys, let's just be very honest, right? Nobody's gonna sit up on the stage and tell you that we shouldn't depend on the science.

I don't know anybody across Alaska that would make such a ridiculous comment. Obviously, yes, we need to depend on the science, but we have a responsibility to make sure that that science that we're depending on has been thorough and that it has been unbiased. Because I've heard in this state, having been born and raised here for the last several years, that we've depended on the science. We've heard that in, in recent years that we've depended on the science. The reality is we have a problem with our fisheries being depleted in Alaska.

So something is not right. Something is not lining up. So do we need to depend on science? Absolutely, yes, we do. But we need to make sure that it's accurate, it's thorough, and it is not biased, and it's done with strong knowledge of Alaska's waters, Alaska's climate, and the situations that we're dealing with here at home.

Okay, thank you. Next up, Dave Bronson. I'll read the question. Please explain your position on science-based fisheries management and how much should the Board of Fisheries rely on science over political and other considerations when making decisions in the board process? Right, as Bernadette said, no one's going to tell you that we don't follow the science.

The science though is based on data. Craig mentioned that, and we just don't have enough data to, to make the scientific discovery that we need to make policy decisions. That's the chain of effect there. And we need to spend far more. I think both the federal government, if they're going to— if they're going to manage from 3 to 200, they've got to pay for the data to do that because essentially it's their— it's their ocean.

It's our fish. We recognize that because most of them, the salmonoids, they come into our rivers. It's our fish. And we're deeply dependent on it. So again, pay more for data and so we can make the best policy decisions absolutely possible.

But we've got to look at something, and this may strike a negative chord with some folks, but we've been following the science for 50 years plus. Where's the salmon? Where's the kings? You know, we're not fishing kings hardly in Cook Inlet. We're not fishing kings.

YK has got a huge problem, especially the Yukon, and we've been following the science. So what's wrong? What's broken? And there's a— some people say it's the alkalinity of the water, it's the temperature of the water, it's all these different things. And we've got to look at this notion that everyone is dependent on— we're losing whole cultures on the Yukon Kuskokwim.

Fish camps are closed. They've been closed now, I think, for 6 years, and their cultures are being lost there. Because there's no salmon. And we don't have enough data to determine what the cause is, but why are the subsistence users, the sport users, and the personal use folks been taking the hit all of these years, at least 10 years? Limits are reduced, everything is reduced, and some of the commercial fisheries are not taking any hit.

I'm sorry to say that in this crowd, But that's a fact. Something's got to be done because what we're doing under this science isn't working.

Okay, last round on this question to Jonathan Kreis-Thomas. We'll have 2 minutes to answer your— or to give your explanation on your position of science-based fisheries management and how should the Board of Fisheries rely on science over political and other considerations when making decisions in the board process? The short answer is yes, and I think a science and data-driven process for fisheries management is essential and something in many ways Alaska has led on. And absolutely, there are real conservation concerns about certain fishery stocks across Alaska and Cook Inlet Southcentral and the Yukon, the Kuskokwim, and also there are fisheries in Alaska that have been incredibly well managed and are strong and vibrant and successful right now too. And I think there's, you know, real credit due to a conservation-based management approach that the state and federal government have taken to manage those resources as well.

We should absolutely be focused on restoring stocks that have crashed, and I think a strong principle I have is is, you know, a conservation-based approach where the resource comes first. And that means pain in the short term. It means foregone harvest across sectors. And I think sort of another sort of elaboration of that, that principle of conservation is making sure the pain is shared. And I think there are a lot of concerns from Alaskans when it doesn't feel like there is sort of a fair distribution of that conservation burden.

Across user groups. And, you know, certainly if you're on the Yukon and Kuskokwim, I don't think it feels fair to the people on those systems who've, you know, had fish camps for 10,000 years. And I think it's very important that that conservation burden is shared. But ultimately, I think science and data have to be the North Star. And I think equally importantly, as a state, we have to invest in that.

And there are changing ocean conditions that we don't fully appreciate or understand. I think the state needs to take bold investments to better understand what is happening and why some of these stocks are failing. But in the absence of a clear answer, I think we need to take a conservation-based approach. I think we need to fairly share the conservation burden. Okay, thank you.

That brings us to topic 2, which is centered on the governor's cabinet. Policy Advisors and Fisheries Policy. Once again, each of you will have 2 minutes to answer questions, and each of you will be read the questions prior to being asked to answer. For background, the governor has a direct role in developing the state's budget, appointing Alaska Board of Fisheries members, nominating candidates for the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council, and appointing the Commissioner of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. All of these positions have a tremendous impact on coastal communities and the Alaska seafood industry.

First up on the first question under this topic is Bernadette Wilson. As I said, you'll have 2 minutes. The question is, what qualities are you looking for in the Commissioner of Fish and Game, and who are you considering for the role of ADF&G Commissioner? Well, I'll say this. I don't think that it would be appropriate to disclose a specific name for sake of that individual.

Usual, so I hope that you will all give me a little grace on that. I think that it's incredibly important that we have someone in that position that is not there because of a political payback. They need to be there because they understand that department, because they've worked within that department. It needs to be someone who is a good communicator. It needs to be someone who has strong leadership qualities.

I think it needs to be someone that is willing to go in and meet with all of the different groups, someone that is willing to hold public hearings throughout the state for Alaskans that want to step up and have the conversation. I think it's very important that in addition to that, that we have— that we hire a fisheries advisor, and that those— the commissioner and the fisheries advisor are working together. I think that working together, it's important for those individuals, for the state of Alaska to host its own symposium. We have all— this is one of the biggest issues facing Alaska. We provide 60% of the seafood for the country, and Alaska doesn't even have their own symposium.

That needs to change. We need to get everybody to the table. We need to have a commissioner, we need to have a fisheries advisor that will lead that conversation. So the experience within that area is important, but not someone, again, that's there looking out for specific allocation, and not someone that's there because it's a political payback. It needs to be someone who is there working independently for the betterment of the issue.

Okay, thank you. Uh, Dave Bronson, I'll direct this, this question to you next. What qualities are you looking for in the Commissioner of Fish and Game, and who are you considering for the role of ADFNG Commissioner? Well, I, I, you know, I, I talk to people all the time, but I think Burnett hit on the head, it's actually a legal offer a position to someone during a campaign, so I wouldn't do that. But there's some very smart people that are out there.

There's lots of names, actually, but you have to look for someone who is an absolute expert in the field of fisheries, and that's very complex. The thing I would propose is that we need a deputy commissioner for fisheries and a deputy commissioner for game. It's, it's too complex. Fishing, I I was a bit familiar coming into this race with some of the game issues. I get into fisheries here starting a year ago.

It's the most complex thing I've ever seen in my life. And you've got to have somebody that understands holistically the whole picture and can give advice to a governor. But then once they do that, once they give that advice, someone's got to execute that policy. And that's got to be a very strong Deputy Commissioner. For fish under Department of Fish and Game.

You just have to have that because having great policy is one thing. Then the governor is going to have been in this position before. You go to somebody who's an expert, you go, well, how do we execute that? How do we comply with statutory constraints and requirements, regulatory requirements? How do you, how do you comply?

How do you get from A to B? And they go, well, I'm really smart on fisheries, but I don't know how to run government. Well, you got to do both because— and that's why you need a Deputy Commissioner for Fish to do this. And that would be the primary advisor that the governor would go to, that person says, okay, now this is the policy, now you've got to execute. You've advised me, now execute.

Okay, thank you. And last up with this question under this topic. Goes to Jonathan Christ Tompkins. Question is, please explain your position on science-based fisheries management and how much should the Board of Fisheries rely on science over political and other considerations?

Oh, I'm very sorry, I did— I just, I just leaked a question.

Um, what qualities are you looking for in the Commissioner of Fishing game and who are you in the role of ADF&G's commissioner?

Great, thank you. So starting with the commissioner first, someone who is, comes from a background of science-based fisheries management, I think a real premium, and I think this applies to all cabinet appointments, who deeply understands the agency that they are going to be leading, and That sort of institutional knowledge, I think, has a real premium if you're trying to have state government work efficiently and effectively. I think that principle applies to ADF&G especially. And I think another quality I'm looking for in an ADF&G commissioner is someone who's gonna put the resource first and wants to make sure that the resource is conserved for future generations, that it will be in a better place, you know, in 20 years or 50 years than it is now. Even if that means making tough decisions in the short term to conserve the resource.

I think the resource should always come first, and that's a principle that is important to me personally and would be important to our, my administration. On the subject of a fish czar, as I think it's often called, I served under 3 different governors: Parnell, Walker, and Dunleavy. 2 Of those governors had a fisheries advisor or fish czar. One did not. I think we need to bring back the Fisheries Advisor.

I think it's essential to the industry that there's that direct point of communication, coordination. The complexities of fisheries management, especially given state and federal management, different systems, dramatically different systems, being coordinated through one person in the governor's office, I think is in Alaska's best interest, and I would be committed to reinstituting that position that has gone away under the Dunleavy administration.

Okay, refound my place here. We will not get through this question without directing it to Mr. Taylor. The question is, what qualities are you looking for in the Commissioner of Fish and Game, and who are you considering for the role of ADF&G Commissioner? Yeah, that is by far I think the hardest commissioner position in the state, and it's going to take a special individual because if they do their job right, they're probably not going to have many love letters from any user of that industry, especially when we're experiencing a downturn in the fishery. Um, and they've got to have thick skin, and they've got to always be able to put Alaska first, and they've got to keep in mind every user group for that fishery.

So it is an extremely tough, tough job. I will tell you that I agree with Dave. I think we absolutely need a deputy over fishery, over the fisheries, and a deputy over game. It is such a big, big job and so complex and the source of a lot of litigation that I had as the Attorney General. So that just tells you the nature of it, the contentious nature of it, and real lives are at stake.

Those individuals on the Yukon and Kuskokwim Twin Rivers, other aspects throughout Alaska that depend on moose herds and caribou herds— or sorry, caribou herds and moose. Um, your decisions affect a lot of real Alaskans in a real, in a real way. Um, so I, I'm dedicated to putting someone who's going to put Alaska first. It's going to be fair to all the user groups, and then that's going to be open-minded, uh, willing to learn, willing to listen. And I also commit that before I make decisions like this important decisions, nominations for the North Pacific Fisheries Council, appointments to the Fisheries Board, I will consult with all of the users of that, of that fishery.

And that probably will take the form of some written comments from each of those user groups because I think it's so important that we listen to the people that are actually on the ground, or in this case, in the water, doing the job, and we can— we take into note of what their worries are, their concerns, as we make these big decisions.

Okay, thank you. To the next question: The governor is responsible for nominating the Alaska members of the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council, consistent with Ted Stevens' approach to have those with experience or expertise in federal fisheries sit on the council. What qualities are you looking for in a member of the council? Answer, 2 minutes. And the first person to answer this is Dave Bronson.

Well, with the 11 members on the board, 6 from Alaska, uh, if you, if you go through the list of names, some very smart people, but there's conflict of interest on, on too many of them. Uh, where's, where's the subsistence representatives? Uh, where is the sport fishing representative? Where is the personal use representative? If you look at the board, and we have the obligatory statutory appointments of the directors of Washington, Oregon, directors of Fish and Wildlife and Fish and Game in Alaska, but the balance is tipped often, or easily I should say, by just one vote.

And at the end of the day, the industry is overly representative. And the other users are grossly underrepresented. That, that has got to change. And I would make, and I would make changes. I would nominate, and I don't know if Howard Lutnick would approve of it, but I would nominate people who represent all groups.

It's a common theme you've heard across this field here today is representation, because when one group is stifled and one group dominates, or one group dominates and many groups are stifled, then they lose opportunity to to fish, whether sport or subsistence or personal use. We create these— this culture of animosity, and, and quite frankly, we hear about— I hear more about fishing on the campaign trail than even the PFD issue. This is a really big thing, and I know it impacts folks here, your paycheck, each and every day, but there's a lot of other people that are really hurting here, and we've got a dwindling resource, a critical resource that's dwindling And what are we doing about it? And whatever we're doing, we're not doing right. So the same question, this time to Mr. Chris Tompkins.

What qualities are you looking for in a member of the North Pacific Management Council?

Three qualities that would be important to me for North Pacific Fishery Management Council nominees. And, and I'll add that, you know, the governor really drives the bus on the council, or should drive the bus on the council. And, um, I mean, there's a little bit of gamesmanship, but the governor gets 3 nominations. They go to the Secretary of Commerce, and, um, you can choose all 3 of those nominations and sort of, uh, create a, uh, a guaranteed, somewhat guaranteed outcome in terms of the kind of person you want to get on the council. Um, so that's just to say, you know, Alaska has a lot of influence in the council process, and I think should use that influence.

The, the qualities that are important to me for North Pacific Fishery Management Council nominees are individuals who care about reducing bycatch and protecting habitat. And, and that's something I worked on a lot as a legislator, and I think it's really important that Alaska's council delegation continue to take strides to, to make progress on those incredibly important issues. Another principle that's very important to me is, is a belief in orientation towards science and data-based management, which I think is incredibly important in the council process. The failure to do so just results in council actions being overturned in court. So it's not like some trifling preference.

If you don't go about the council process in, in a thoughtful way, you're going to undo any of your actions in court later, or they'll be nullified by the Secretary of Commerce. And the last principle that's really important to me is making sure that Alaska and Alaska communities benefit from the fisheries resource. Communities like Kodiak and Sitka, um, other communities across coastal Alaska. And I think Alaska's council delegation should be working to make sure that both in terms of sport and subsistence as well as economic value, Alaska benefits from the incredible resource that is out our front doors. And I think there are a variety of policy questions where our council delegation needs to step up.

Very well. The same question, this time to Treg Taylor. What qualities are you looking for in a member of the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council? Yeah, no, absolutely. I'm gonna sound like a broken record when talking about this, as with our Board of Fisheries.

Um, we got to have people that are going to put Alaska first and that they're going to be mindful of all users of the resource. I think that's extremely important. We have to have people, uh, you know, I, I'm about putting the best people in that position. Um, I think, uh, some of those qualities are, are going to even surpass even, um, knowledge. I think people can, can learn and, and, and, and make great decisions on behalf of Alaska.

I also think, you know, we, we have 6 of the 11 of the voting members, right? And, and of course, we, we nominate most— some of those, um, and, and, uh, and I want to make sure that we have a unified voice on the North Pacific Fisheries Council, right? We should not let Oregon and Washington dictate what happens in Alaska waters. So I want a unified voice, people that are going to put Alaska first, like I said, and be mindful of all user groups. Those are the qualifications.

This time and last, the question to Miss Wilson. I'll read it again. What qualities are you looking for in a member of the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council? Again, 2 minutes. Well, much like your commissioner over at Department of Fish and Game, I think you need to have someone that can come in without an agenda.

They need to understand the issues, but they cannot have a conflict of interest. Their priority has to be on the resource and not on the allocation. And I think that that is critical. The conflict of interest component is critical, and keeping the focus on the resource is critical. I also think it's important that we have individuals who are not only unified in putting Alaska first, but also working and understanding the importance of teaming up with our federal delegation and being involved in that level as well.

The reality is, is so many of you know, the governor's got jurisdiction over 3 miles out. This conversation is for naught if we are not making sure that those individuals also understand that federal component. But again, it can't be political paybacks, and unfortunately we've seen that happen far too often. It's not right. The state is suffering.

We've seen conflicts of interest, and it needs to end. It's going to have to be individuals that come in very bold. They will no doubt take a lot of heat if they make the tough decisions. If we are going to change the direction that we're going, it's not going to be easy. So they're going to have to be risk takers and they're going to have to get in there and be willing to take that hard stand and make sure that they're putting that resource first and not a particular allocation area first.

Thank you all for, for your, uh, for your courage. This is Kodiak, it's a fishing community. You all showed up and answered some very tough questions on fisheries. Could we have a round of applause for our 4 candidates?

These are yes or no questions and candidates respond by yes by raising their paddle. Green paddle and by no by raising the red paddle. First question: Do you support the Alaska Marine Highway System?

Thank you. All four candidates raised the green paddle and I see that there's a sigh of relief from Representative Stutes. Thank you. The second question: Until recently, there has always been a dedicated a dedicated fisheries advisor. I know we talked about this, but there has been dedicated fisheries advisor in the Governor's office.

Will you hire a dedicated fisheries advisor?

And all 4 candidates have said yes. Third question, should science be the foundation of commercial fisheries management, even if different from public opinion or misinformation? Yes or no, please. Science, foundation of commercial fisheries. Thank you all.

All 4 say yes. 4, I told you this would be easy, right? The 4th question, should the state use loans, tax incentives, or other assistance to support fishing communities and seafood operations?

And we have 3 yeses, Mr. Taylor, Wilson, and Tompkins. Thank you. 5Th question, does Alaska's seafood industry pay its own way? In taxes and fees?

And we have 3 yeses, Mr. Bronson, Bernadette Wilson, and Jonathan Christ-Tomkins. Finally— no, not finally, this is the next to last question. Do you plan to fund the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute?

And we have all 4 yeses, thank you. And finally, do commercial fishermen Harvest too much fish? Yes or no?

It depends on what kind of fish you're talking about. You know, we're going to pass on that. That's a tough question. Appreciate what you all had to say. So I believe we now will return, go back to our break.

Yes, so give me just a minute here. We'll now take a short 10-minute break before moving into our last and larger topic and set of panel questions. And once we return at 8 PM sharp, again, you are listening to the live broadcast of the Alaska Fisheries Debate from the Gerald C. Wilson Auditorium in Kodiak. Thank you.

Everyone would find their seats. Former mayor, former city mayor, please sit down. Would the former city mayor please stop talking and sit down? Okay, we need to go ahead on this. For the next round, for the very next round— Thank you, thank you.

For the very next round, our two panelists, Toby Sullivan with the Kodiak Maritime Museum and Tina Fairbanks with the Kodiak Regional Agricultural Association. We'll provide some background on an issue and then ask a series of questions about that topic to the candidates. Each candidate will have 2 minutes to answer each question. We'll begin with Toby Sullivan. Thank you, Gary.

Bycatch— here we go— bycatch and user conflicts have been hot-button topics, including in this year's political campaigns. While fisheries management responsibility is vested in the Alaska Board of Fisheries, North Pacific Fisheries Management Council, International Pacific Halibut Commission, and the Federal Subsistence Board. The governor can also play a role. The question— and I'm only going to read it once this time, and if people need it repeated, just, just let me know— Alaska is the only state with sustainability explicitly written into its constitution. How should this principle guide fisheries management when economic development conservation assistance opportunities and the need of fishing communities come into play?

2 Minutes, Mr. Christopkins. Ultimately, the resource should come first, and, and when in doubt, we should make the hard decisions in the short term to conserve the resource so it's there in the long term. And, and I think that's important on a state level with the Board of Fisheries. It's important on a federal level with the North Pacific Fishery Management Council. I think that is something by and large that I think Alaska has done since we became a state, and it would absolutely be a principle I would carry forward in my administration.

I'll leave it right there. Same question to Craig Taylor, 2 minutes. Good. I'm going to take part of that 2 minutes. I misunderstood one of the yes or no questions.

The question actually was, do Alaskan fisheries pay their own way in taxes and fees? The answer is yes. So I apologize for that misunderstanding. But yeah, this is a really important issue. It's a lot to me like, uh, by the way, we're the only state to have an article dedicated to our resources.

That's how important resources are to the state. When we became a state, the only reason they let us become a state is because they wanted us to develop our resources. Since then, they've been, uh, problematic in letting us develop our resources, but It's a little bit to me like the permanent fund. We cannot allow the corpus of the permanent fund to be reduced. We have to protect the corpus of the permanent fund, that as it builds into the future is our future.

And the same way with this fishery, right? We have to manage for sustained yield. We have to manage for abundance. That is the requirements. And that's, by the way, also a requirement of the Magnuson Stevenson Act, a manage for sustained yield.

And but we, above all else, we have to put the health of that resource into play. And so that's why it's so important, you know, we have to end practices that destroy our habitat, period. We have to end practices that destroy our habitat. And we've got to get a handle on, on bycatch issues throughout the state. We cannot have bycatch limits that are more than other user groups are allowed to take legally.

And so those are two huge things, but this industry is so important to so many Alaskans. You know better than anyone else in this state the importance of this fishery, people in the coastal areas, Kodiak, but it's also important to the subsistence users upriver and elsewhere in Alaska. And so this resource has to be managed carefully for all users. Thank you. This time to Bernadette Wilson on the subject of sustainability.

Yes, well, when it comes to bycatch, you know, if we're going to look at different user groups and say that we're going to, you know, reduce their catch limits by a certain percentage, then absolutely we need to have that conversation when it comes to bycatch as well. In 2022, the governor assigned a bycatch task force. I think that it would make sense to have the governor bring back a task force to look at this issue and really dive into it. In addition to that, I think that we need to have a bycatch advisory council. I think that that's incredibly important.

You know, we need to talk about sensors that are on, on the boats. We need to have a conversation about the gear that's being used, about observers on boats. This is a huge issue, and ultimately the North Star for all of us should be how can we reduce our bycatch? How do we get there? That ought to be an area and an issue that all of us are working collectively to, regardless of whether or not, you know, you're in an industry that has significant amounts of bycatch, or you argue that you do or you don't, surely we can all agree that we need to work towards that end.

In the dawn of AI technology, there's definitely things that we could be doing. I think that the state could be coming in and incentivizing so that we're looking at how can we provide tax incentives so that these companies are taking that money using it to invest in new technologies, experimenting with new technologies. But it's an incredibly important issue. I think that having that Bycatch Advisory Council and then having that task force like we did in 2022 are definitely a step in the right direction. Thank you.

And the question now to Mr. Bronson. Well, I think the question there is when you have a conflict between Article 8, um, and in the management or the commercialization of fish. And this question strikes at the heart of this issue that's in this room here today. The governor takes an oath to a constitution, the Constitution's Article 8, Sections essentially 1 through 4, but primarily Sections 2, 3, and 4. You don't have a choice as governor.

It doesn't say you manage for commercial interest, especially commercial interest that are not Alaskan, out-of-state corporations who've monetized our fisheries. You manage for what's best for the people of Alaska. You are— you swear an oath to that. And, and at the heart of this issue is just this, and bycatch is a byproduct of that problem. Bycatch, call it what it is, it's wasting the most important resources that we have probably in this country.

This is the largest fishery in the world between the Bering Sea and the Gulf. These are the biggest and most important fisheries in the world, and we're throwing really good fish over the edge because they're not the right fish. There's bycatch that are— I mean, there's villages and fish wheels not being run on the Yukon right now because we're taking too many fish in saltwater. And just because saltwater has first bite at this fish, it doesn't mean it's exclusively saltwater fish. Everybody owns the fish.

That's what our Constitution says. This is the heart of the problem, and it's got to get solved.

All right, second question under this topic. Uh, some of you have delved into this direction with your previous answers, but decisions regarding bycatch in the federal fisheries takes place within the North Pacific Fishery Management Council process under federal law. The Alaska Bycatch Task Force identified research data gaps critical to bycatch management. As governor, would you support funding an ADF&G line item prioritizing bycatch research, and if so, what would your research priority be? First answer goes to Treg Taylor, 2 minutes.

Yeah, thank you. Uh, you know, yes, I— first answer is yes. Where I'd like to see the solution, where we are seeing the solutions, is within private industry, within the commercial fishermen. They're the ones coming up with solutions because they, they see the writing on the wall for their, for their occupation, for their communities. If they don't get a handle on bycatch, if we don't increase the health of our fisheries, We're in a world of hurt, especially here in the coastal communities, up the Yukon, up the Kuskokwim.

And guess what? If we don't do it, it's going to be done unto us, right? We've already had a run at listing king salmon as endangered. And so the only way we were able to fend that off was with the data that we've collected over the years. But that train is coming, and there's going to be more and more attempts to list the king salmon as endangered.

And if that occurs, we're going to lose absolute control of the fishery. And so we as Alaskans got to solve this problem before, um, those in DC do it for us. And it's not going to be, uh, they're going to have no concern for the health of our communities, they're going to have no concern for economic development in this area of Alaska, and they're going to have no concern, uh, for Alaskans. It's going to be all about the fish. And so we've got to solve those problems here.

Okay, next up on this question is Bernadette Wilson. This was a long question. If anybody would like me to repeat it, I will. Yes, so as I previously stated, I would absolutely support having Alaska bycatch review committee. I think that we need to have a bycatch task force absolutely.

I think that this is critical. I think that it's also critical as we have the conversation that, you know, when it comes to the bycatch issue, we need to talk about bottom trawlers, the big corporate trawlers where you've got, you know, boats that are up to 295 feet long and 3,000 horsepower, and having a conversation about that versus, you know, the mom and pops. We need to have a conversation about if it's a mid-water trawler that they need to stay mid-water. And so I would think that for that bycatch task force and for that review committee, that that would be an area that they need to lean into. But ultimately, you know, I've talked about the fact that the state really needs to have a full symposium.

The state of Alaska needs to bring everybody to the table and have a conversation. So yes, you can have those task forces and those committees to give those recommendations, to do their reviews, to look at the science, But we really need to have a symposium and get everybody to the table, all in one spot, all of the different user groups. It's incredible to me that for an industry that is such a big part of Alaska, you know, nearly $6 billion per year, and we're not doing that. The state isn't hosting that. That needs to change, and it's going to change.

Okay, thank you. Next up, Dave Bronson, would you like a repeat of the question? Yes. Okay. Decisions regarding bycatch in the federal fisheries management takes place within the NPFMC process under federal law.

The Alaska Bycatch Task Force identified research data gaps critical to bycatch management. As governor, would you support funding an ADF&G line item prioritizing bycatch research, and if so, what would your research priority be? Certainly the state has got to have a place in the funding of this research. But look at the jurisdiction from 3 to 200. It's a federal issue.

Why isn't the federal government paying for this research?

They've got to solve this problem because they helped create this problem. From a more fundamental point is something I really want to get to is, is the priority of fish and who really owns them. We do, but they're managed by the federal government. We see this in our fisheries and we see this in our hunting, and we certainly here in Kodiak, and we see this across the state. There's a real jurisdictional problem, and that's got to be resolved.

So if the federal government wants to keep mismanaging this federal fishery from 3 to 200, then they've got to pay for this research, and the governor needs to stand up and demand that the the federal government pays more, or pay, pay what it takes to get the data so we can make the, the research. But we know right now there's, there is a freight train coming, and, and, and like Craig said, um, it's going to be fixed for us. We're either going to manage this ourselves and fix it, or the federal government's going to step in with their great big clumsy hands, and, and it's going to be brute force. And we've seen this happen in this state before, and it's going to happen not just because of the king salmon, but that'll be the first one. And when they declare that fish an endangered species, all heck's going to break loose because you can't catch any if it's an endangered species.

What does that do to our commercial fisheries?

So, okay, well, thank you. Uh, we'll round this out with Jonathan Christ Tompkins. Do you like a repeat of the question? I think I got it. To the direct question, these research gaps around bycatch, I think perhaps there's a role for the state to play, but most of what we're talking about is in federal water, and I think I would look to the National Marine Fisheries Service and resources in the federal government to lead the charge on research, and I'd look to industry to help lead the charge on research.

I do think industry is a key part of the solution for reducing bycatch, and strides that have already been taken, you know, industry has been a part of that. And more broadly, and to build on my previous answer to the previous question, I think I'm not so bullish on task forces, I'm more bullish on action. And for the 10 years I was in the legislature, I was at council meetings advocating for reductions in bycatch. Two months after I was sworn in, I led a legislative sign-on letter calling for hard Chinook bycatch caps in the Gulf of Alaska, the trawl fishery. In 2015, a legislative sign-on letter to call for a 50% reduction in Bering Sea halibut bycatch.

And in December 2021, working to pass halibut abundance-based management in the Bering Sea. And the way that we can conserve our resource and reduce bycatch and protect habitat is action at the council, and the governor should be a key part of that, and the nominees that the governor puts forward to the North Pacific Council. And that's how you change things. And the progress that has been made to protect habitat and reduce bycatch has been through a lot of hard work, through a lot of Alaskans. And as governor, I want to continue that progress to reduce bycatch and protect habitat.

Thank you all for your answers to some very tough questions. I do need to make a quick thank you to the sponsors of tonight's event. Amadson, Koniag, Trident Seafoods, North Pacific Seafoods, Alaska Whitefish Trawlers, the City of Kodiak, Alaska Pollock Fishery Alliance, The Truth, Pacific Seafood Processors Association, United Fishermen of Alaska, Alaskan Quota and Permits LLC, and the Freezer Longline Association.

If we can go on to Tina. Okay, that brings us to topic 4, competing interests in Alaska salmon management. Background on this— these questions: Alaska salmon is utilized by multiple user groups including commercial, recreational, personal use, and subsistence. In addition to competing uses, there has been a lot of recent attention on declines in Chinook and chum salmon, and a recent NOAA study that pointed to marine and freshwater conditions as primary causes for Chinook declines. Fewer salmon in some areas of the state exacerbates conflict among users.

So the first question that will go to Bernadette Wilson first is, given Alaska's significant declines in king and chum salmon in many regions with serious consequences for subsistence users, fishing communities, and Alaska's fisheries economy. What do you believe are the primary causes of these declines? And as governor, what actions would you prioritize to support the recovery and long-term sustainability of these salmon populations?

So, you know, I've heard all kinds of conversations about, you know, are there things we need to be doing with our hatcheries? You know, the— some will tell you that hatcheries saved their particular industry. You have others that will tell you that the hatcheries you know, killed off the natural stock. We've had a whole array of different back and forth as far as what is responsible. I'm going to tell you guys that I'm not going to sit up here and claim that I have every answer on how to solve that.

And quite frankly, anybody who does is full of crap. All right, we need to get a group of people together from all the different areas to dive into the— this issue, to get to the very root of it once and for because for decades now we have had governors and candidates sit up in front of you and tell you that they have all the answers, that they've got the solution. It's not working. It hasn't worked. We have to get the arrogance out of the way.

We have to recognize that it's time to pull everybody together, to sit down and to really dive into this issue, to look at the data, to look at the science, to bring all the user groups to the table once and for all so that we can get to the root of it.

Okay, thank you. Next up is Mr. Bronson. Would you like a repeat of the question? Sure. Okay.

Given Alaska's significant declines in king and chum salmon in many regions, with serious consequences for subsistence users, fishing communities, and Alaska's fisheries economy, what do you believe are the primary causes of these declines? And as Governor, what actions would you prioritize to support the recovery and long-term sustainability of these salmon populations? Probably couldn't answer that one in 2 hours. The issue of hatcheries was mentioned. Hatcheries work in a very specific— if there is a fishery that's very depleted and it's in, it's in crisis mode.

You've got a river out here in Kodiak that's in— you bring on a hatchery online to restore that single fishery, but the carrying capacity of the ecosystem has got to be considered. And when— if we dump too many fish into an ecosystem, especially pinks, because they're highly predatory, highly aggressive, you dump that in, the carrying capacity isn't there. So this notion that you can just do what Argentina does or do what British Columbia does and just dump all these hatchery fish into the water, that's not necessarily the solution. And very often it is not the solution. It's counterintuitive.

It doesn't, it doesn't fix your problem.

I think at the end of the day, we need to capture as much data as we can, even as we make policy decisions based on the data that we already have. Right now, it seems to me You know, we blame, we blame water temperature, we blame other things like this that we can't control. That doesn't mean you, you don't control the things that you, you can control. So times, means, and method and location, you— we can control those things and we do, but we've got to be far more aggressive in that. The data is not there.

And but control what we can, even as the water is getting warmer, the water is getting colder. There's indications that that the chum are going to recover here quite well, another 4 or 5 years because of trends in water temperature cooling. I don't know if that's true, but we got to do, we got to do what we can do right now to save the king and king crabs as well. So. Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Price. Tompkins, you're up. Would you like a repeat of the question? Yes, please. Okay.

Given Alaska's significant declines in king and chum salmon in many regions, with serious consequences for subsistence users, fishing communities, and Alaska's fisheries economy, what do you believe are the primary causes of these declines? And as governor, what actions would you prioritize to support the recovery and long-term sustainability of these salmon populations?

I think I have a lot of, a lot of humility with trying to answer this question because it's incredibly complex and, you know, fishery scientists who know far more than me, I don't think necessarily would speak to an answer with confidence. I mean, I can certainly speak to factors that I think sort of surface in a lot of conversations as to why Chinook and chum have crashed, not sort of asserting with 100% confidence that these are the reasons, 'cause I think broadly speaking, we're all struggling to learn more why this is happening, 'cause it concerns all of us.

Number one, rates of Chinook and chum bycatch, especially 10 or 20 years ago, were extremely elevated. They've come down a lot since, but in past decades, very, very high rates of Chinook and chum bycatch I think if we had a time machine, fisheries managers would go back and we'd institute harder caps and reductions in bycatch that probably hurt escapement and hurt those runs. Second factor, changing ocean conditions. And the oceans are unfortunately changing, ocean chemistry, ocean temperature. ADF&G is doing research in the Bering Sea with juvenile Chinook.

One of the conclusions is they're really struggling when they leave their natal rivers, and we need to learn a lot more, but it's very clear that changing ocean conditions are a factor. And a third factor that's surfaced that, you know, again, I can't claim to speak to with any authority, but, you know, salmon don't observe, you know, as though they were, you know, lines on the map that, you know, we've drawn international boundaries and borders, and what happens in the high seas and beyond US federal waters is a little bit of a black box. And, you know, there are high seas fishing fleets. What happens in Russian waters, what happens in Japanese waters is a bit of a black box. And I think that's another sort of unknown factor that we can't really assess.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you. And finally, for this question, Mr. Taylor, would you like a repeat? No, thanks.

Briefly, I just want to touch on the last— and the last question we got, the dependency on Federal research is not in Alaska's best interest, I can promise you that. We have to do our own research. This is our fishery, our communities rely on this. We have to be in the game, at least partnered with the federal, federal government when they do the research. I've seen far too— I'll just give you the, the case scenario.

I've seen the research the federal government did to try to claim that vast portions of Alaska were critical habitat for the ice seal, which doesn't have a declining population. It's a healthy population of over 2 million of ice seals, yet we were going to designate massive swaths of Alaska's critical habitat, limiting any economic development in those areas. Um, that's the kind of science you get from DC at times. So we've got to be at least partners with federal government. It's very dangerous to rely on the federal government for that research because they don't have Alaska's fisheries at best interest at heart.

Now obviously there's a lot of factors, and even the experts in this area disagree on what going on with our fisheries. Obviously, predation is an issue. Anybody out there in the audience with a boat knows the increased amount of predators is probably likely one of the factors. You know, that NOAA study that you said, it was, you know, the marine heat waves that really affect older juvenile Chinook and adults Chinook salmon, right? We know that's probably a factor.

And at times, it seems like the state has the ability to pull these little levers in this big environmental problem that we have, but we have to be willing to pull those levers. We have to be willing to try different things. You know, there is no reason why we can't try something on the Yukon that's different than what we're doing on the Kuskokwim, which is different than what we're doing on the Kenai. Find out what works. And again, we need to invest in the research.

We need to know where these Chinook salmon go. We need to know what their migratory patterns are, what they're facing out in the open ocean. And without that knowledge, it's really hard to address this problem. And so I just am incredibly dedicated to increasing the quality and type of research we have to better this fishery.

Next question: Given that Alaska salmon move between state and federal waters, how would you promote cooperation between state and federal agencies to gain effective salmon management? Mr. Bronson, you're first on this, 2 minutes. Well, jurisdictional issues on North Pacific fishery is about the most complex thing I've ever seen. I've seen a lot of complex things in my day. At the end of the day, you pick the right people, people that are willing to cooperate and communicate with their people, their other agency or other boards or other commissions across the aisle.

And this isn't political, this isn't Republican versus Democrat, this is more jurisdictional. You've gotta reach across those jurisdictions and just talk to people. You know, you can't go to Juneau and scream at politicians and expect them to support you. You can't go work with federal agencies and accuse them and fight with them and expect them to cooperate with you. And again, it all falls back to the data, which creates a science, which allows us allows us as policymakers to make the policy on, on what's the best thing for our, for Alaskans and, and for Alaskan fish.

The one thing, and it's more of a concept than anything, is this is— and I say this time and time again, we've been trying to fix this by pushing all these little buttons. We reduce limits on sport, on subsistence, and we're doing all this and it's not working. Where are the kings? Where are the king crabs? Where are the fish?

They're gone. It's time to start pulling the big levers, the big ones. And it's going to devastate some people. But if we don't do it, we've said it time and time again up here, the federal government's going to come in and fix it for us. And that's really bad.

So same question. How would you promote cooperation between state and federal agencies in salmon management? And this goes to Mr. Mr. Christ Tompkins.

4 Answers. Answer number 1: State of Alaska should have a fisheries advisor, as previously discussed. We don't right now. That went away under this current governor. I think that was a mistake.

We need to bring it back. Um, I think, uh, Kodiak's own Alan Osterman was the fisheries advisor under Governor Murkowski. There's a long line of amazing Alaskans who have served the state well in that role, and one of the ways that role creates value to Alaskans coordinating state and federal management. Answer number 2: ADF&G needs to be resourced and be able to hold its own relative to federal managers. And right now, ADF&G is hemorrhaging talent and biologists and fishery scientists, has a high vacancy factor.

And in order for the state to sort of pursue dual management with federal government, we need to have a well-resourced management of our own, and I have real concern that ADF&G is not where it needs to be through cuts and inability to retain professionals in the agency. Answer number 3, the Board of Fish and North Desert Fishery Management Council should have joint work sessions, and the left hand should know what the right hand is doing. Fish, of course, travel over the 3-mile boundary, and, you know, there are complex dual management questions, and those two regulatory bodies should be coordinated and, to the extent possible, cooperate. In answer number 4, the state of Alaska and the governor of Alaska should have a strong working relationship with key federal officials such as the NIMS regional administrator. For years and decades, it was Jim Balsinger, an amazing Alaskan who lived in Juneau, um, and that should be a positive cooperative relationship, not an antagonistic relationship.

So The state and the governor investing in those relationships, whether it's the NIMS regional administrator or the U.S. Secretary of Commerce, is an important role and responsibility for the governor of Alaska and one I would execute.

Mr. Taylor, how would you promote cooperation between state and federal agencies in salmon management? Yeah, you know, that, that's already been challenged, right? When I was the attorney general, I defended the state's jurisdiction in the inlet against challenges to that jurisdiction, wanting to unify that fishery under federal management. We absolutely have to defend that. We have to defend our right to, to manage our own waters, but there has to be communication between those groups.

And that's why it's so important that those we nominate for, um, the North Pacific Fisheries Council are unified in putting Alaska first, right? We got to have an Alaska contingent on there that are unified and that are talking. I agree 100% with JKT, they've got to be communicating with our Fish Board, and whether it's the entire North Pacific Fisheries Council that, that have those joint sessions, or it's just the Alaska contingent to that, that communicate and effectively meet and compare notes with our state fisheries management, I think that's the key to the process. It's going to have to be communication, it's going to have to be sharing of knowledge, sharing of data, and working to, to better this fishery. And Miss Wilson, how would you promote cooperation between federal and state agencies in salmon management?

Well, as I've mentioned earlier, I would absolutely support and intend to have a fisheries advisor. I talked earlier about the importance of the state having a symposium. I think that there is indeed a federal component to that. Absolutely, communication is key, but here's the thing, you know, you guys all— I'm going to turn to oil and gas for for a minute. When you look at the oil and gas industry across Alaska, you see huge collaboration between the governor and even our federal delegation.

We see it in joint press releases, we see it in work sessions that are being held together, we see it in, you know, symposiums, for example, that are being held. Yet we don't see that in this particular industry, and that needs to change. We need to get not just with the federal groups, but with our own federal delegation. We've got to get that communication going with them. They are your lobbyist back in DC for you.

And I think that if we look at the collaboration that we have in other industries, for as big as this industry is here in Alaska, we need to work to have that collaboration, that same type of collaboration, brought to this industry as well.

Okay, that brings us to our third question under this topic, which is also long. Um, mixed stock salmon fisheries are common in Alaska and often comprise multiple stocks, including stocks in critical population decline. Currently, fishery managers have had to greatly exceed spawning escapements— escapement requirements for one or more stocks to protect very small numbers of critically low stocks, which can result in lost harvest opportunity. How do you ensure ADF&G has the authority and tools to uphold sustainable management policies? And that goes to Jonathan Kreis Tompkins first.

You have 2 minutes. Wow, what a question. What region of Alaska could we be talking about with this question? I do think overescapement is something that, from what I'm aware, is a concern in fishery science and to the extent possible should be avoided. I mean, mixed stock fisheries are incredibly complex to manage.

I think to the greatest extent possible, want to trust the managers and try to keep politics out of the management of those fisheries.

So, you know, like give the manager space to do what they do.

But the notion of overescapement is a concern to me, given what I know from talking with fisheries managers. And I think the extent to which it can be avoided, it should. And I think by and large, that sort of speaks to ADF&G's approach over the years and decades in Alaska and should be upheld in the years to come.

Okay, next up, Mr. Taylor, would you like a repeat of any or all of that question? Please. Okay, that's a complicated question. Mixed stock salmon fisheries are common in Alaska and often comprise multiple stocks, including stocks in critical population decline. Current fishery managers have had to greatly exceed spawning escapement requirements for one or more stocks to protect very small numbers of critically low stocks, which can result in lost harvest opportunity.

How do you ensure ADFNG has the authority and tools to uphold sustainable management policies? I think this is a budget question, and we have to make sure that they're adequately funded in order to do their jobs. For—. On behalf of all Alaskans, on behalf of Alaska communities. Um, and that is my answer.

Very efficient. Um, up next for that question would be Bernadette Wilson. Would you like all or part of that question repeated? No, that's all right. Well, I'll tell you what, if there is, uh, any group of Alaskans out there that has the answers to all of these questions, step on up.

We've been looking for you. All right, um, but there's no doubt that obviously escapement is a huge issue. I do agree that it does come down to a budget issue. You know, I think that for every dollar that we put in, we get that money back. And so it's coming back when they can study what do those runs look like, you know, what do those counts look like.

And so I think it is making sure that we have the finances there, that we also— when you bring in your commissioner, that the governor right out of the gate is hiring a commissioner that they have full faith and confidence in, and that they are going to work with and going to trust, and not constantly trying to second-guess their commissioner or doubt that it's for political reasons that someone is making that decision. And so I think that it really goes back to having that security and that peace of mind that you— the commissioner that you hire is there to manage that resource, that they're not there just to figure out the allocation of one industry or another. And that they are indeed committed and grounded to not doing the easy political way out or taking whatever is, uh, political expediency perhaps.

Okay, thank you. And Mr. Bronson? Right, well, it is a budgetary issue because you don't know what escapement is if you don't have adequate sonar to count the fish. You just don't know. The trouble is it's a moving target through throughout the season.

Like last year, we had an overabundance of reds in the Kenai River, and then this year they showed up real late and it was a much lower, uh, much lower thing. So I wouldn't want to be a forecaster of, of how many fish are coming back to a fishery in any, in any given year, because that's a tough thing to do. But let's not forget the big issue here, the notion of sustainability as it relates to anything, including this which is over-escapement. Constitutionally, you're required to manage for sustainability. There's no question about that.

And everybody wants to do that, I think. I do. I want every last fisherman in this room, I want them, I want their kids, and I want their grandkids to be able to keep fishing, and because it's a cultural thing and it's a historical thing, I want you to keep doing it. But if we don't do a better job at what we're doing, I'm sounding like a broken record, I get it, it's going to be taken out of our hands, and then we've got serious problems, and it won't be fixed for— it'll be a generational fix if the federal government steps in.

Thank you all very much. Thank you for your answers, and thank you Toby Sullivan, Tina Fairbanks, for those great questions. We're going to now move on to what is called a lightning round, and where we ask candidates for a brief response. Please limit your answers to 30 seconds or less, if you will. So Alaska seafood industry employs more than 41,800 workers annually and contributes $5.2 billion to Alaska's economy.

In 2023, seafood generated almost $60 million in tax revenue for coastal fishing communities where commercial fishing is often the main economic driver according to the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute. So here's the question: What is your long-term vision for Alaska's seafood industry? Are there any fishery issues you will prioritize or be particularly interested in, and why does this rise to the top? We'll begin with Mr. Taylor. Yeah, I think we all want the same thing for this fishery.

We all want to do our constitutional part to manage for sustainability and manage for abasence. That's what future generations of Alaskan, our children, expect from us. And so that's the key, right? We've got to figure out what the issues are and address those issues, and we've got to do it quickly. Otherwise, those decisions are going to be pulled from Alaskans.

Thank you, Trey. On to you, Bernadette Wilson, asking you what is, what is the long-term vision that you have? Yes, so, you know, right now Alaska provides 60% of the seafood for the rest of the country. You know, you think about that, that's Washington, California, Hawaii, the entire East Coast. I would hope that in generations from now that our kids and our grandkids look back and that they're still able to brag about the fact that Alaska provides 60% of that, of that seafood to the rest of the country.

I would hope that those economic numbers would stay the same. I would hope that the jobs would increase and that at the end of the day, all of us still have those opportunities.

Thank you. We'll move on to Dave Bronson.

Well, could you repeat the question? Uh, the question is really your long-term vision for Alaska's seafood industry Are there any fishery issues that you would prioritize or be particularly interested in, and why do they rise at the top? Well, I think I answered in my last statement was this, is I want in the interest of sustainability— sustainability is good for absolutely everyone. I want all the commercial fishermen in this town to keep doing it for generations. We're on a path that that's not going to happen.

It's just not.

What do we do about that? I think that's where we might be in disagreement on how we make these fixes. But again, I'll come back to this one issue. The one metaphor is this: the little buttons that we've been pressing for the last 20 or 30 years aren't working. We got to grab some big levers, and they're going to be painful levers to fix this.

Thank you. And Jonathan Christopkins. A long-term goal I have is that as close to 100% of Alaska limited entry fishing permits and quota are fished or owned by Alaskans. I want Alaskans to get as much benefit from our fisheries resource as possible. And I think it is a sign of success when kids are graduating Kodiak High School and buying a seine permit for Kodiak and fishing summer after summer, year after year, or that the harbor in Old Harbor is full of working fishing boats like it used to be and no longer is.

That is a goal. Of mine. Thank you all. When talking about statewide infrastructure, the seawood industry is often overlooked. How important are ports, harbors, and the marine highway system to Alaska in comparison to other state infrastructure needs?

And we'll begin with Bernadette Wilson. Yes, so I think that we absolutely need to invest in our ports and our harbors. I think that we need to lobby our federal government to help with that infrastructure and the finances of it. I also think that the state needs to look at offering tax incentives so that we can now turn around and take that money and reinvest it.

Thank you. Move on to Dave Bronson. One of the most important things we can do with Marine Highway System is simply stick with the plan. Every governor that comes in, they want to make a change and it delays things. They want to change the design of the boat— they want— of the boats that are coming online.

We've got to stick with what's called the 2045 plan, and I've talked to Craig Tronga about that. He says if you, if you get in, he says just stick with the plan, and that's the best thing we can do even as we revitalize the infrastructure, the ports themselves. Thank you. Jonathan. Number one, make sure the ferry system is working again because it no longer is.

Number two, the state should invest in the harbor grant program, which has been a key way for coastal communities to to be able to develop their harbor infrastructure, which is absolutely essential for working commercial fishing fleets. Number 3, ADA should be prioritizing infrastructure in coastal communities. I was talking with someone in the seafood industry, they couldn't even get a return call from ADA. So we need to reform ADA and make sure ADA is working in the interest of coastal Alaska. Number 4, a general obligation bond that can help build out working waterfronts and harbor infrastructure in Alaska.

Thank you. Trey. You know, I love the programs like DOT's harbor, grant program where there's 50/50 match with, with municipalities. I love to see the $410 million grant that our Marine Highway System recently received. You know, one of the, the government's core responsibilities, when you look at the exact core of what a government is supposed to accomplish, infrastructure is one of those things.

And we haven't had seen a big infrastructure project in the state in many, many decades, and that's, that is on us. And that is inhibiting our ability to responsibly develop our resources and provide excellent jobs for Alaskan families. It should be a priority of any administration. Thank you. Thanks so much.

Moving on to the next question. The state of Alaska does not have a bycatch policy in state waters, although the need has been discussed for many years. Is it time to implement a bycatch policy in state waters? And if so, What considerations do you think are important? Dave Bronson.

It's long overdue. We gotta control what we can within 3 miles. I have, and this won't be popular here obviously, but I've called for a ban on trawling, especially bottom trawling, in the 3-mile zone. I know that's gonna be painful for some folks. Will it make a massive, it's about 1% of the total, trawl catch.

But we've got to start where we can. We can't leave anything on the table here or the feds again will solve our problem for us. Thank you. Jonathan Christonkins. I think reducing bycatch in all fisheries should be a goal for the state of Alaska.

You know, I think it should be approached on a fishery-by-fishery basis, what the rates of bycatch are, if there's a conservation or resource concern, and ADFNG and Board of Fish should lead on those decisions. Thank you. And on to Craig Taylor. Uh, yes, absolutely. Um, we need to be leading in this area in the state fisheries.

I, you know, we've got to end practices that destroy habitat, and we need, uh, to drastically reduce bycatch, because if we don't, we're going to see an end to the fishery, and that doesn't serve anyone in this room, and I really think that the solution really lies with industry. I would love to see partnerships between the public and private sector to address this issue and work jointly together to get it done. Thank you. And Bernadette Wilson. So absolutely, we need to reduce bycatch.

I think that we need to work with industry to incentivize them to make sure that we are all working to make that our north star. We need to talk about the gear that's being used. We need to talk about observers that are on boats. We need to talk about how we can bring AI into that conversation. And as I stated earlier, we also need to make sure that we're differentiating between, you know, people that are dragging the bottom, the corporate trawlers with 295-foot boats, versus your mom and pops.

And so it's an incredibly important conversation.

Thank you. Next question is, who is currently advising you? On fisheries issues, and what sources are you using to inform your fisheries positions? Beginning with Shawn Christopkins. I've spoken with probably dozens of Alaskans over the course of this year on fisheries issues.

Subsistence leaders on the Yukon and Kuskokwim, small boat commercial fisheries leaders from across coastal Alaska representing all gear groups, salmon, gillnets, SANE, Longline. I've spoken with federal fisheries managers. I think more information is better, and I think, you know, you want to have sort of 360-degree perspective on all fisheries issues, and that's been my commitment as a candidate. Thank you. Uh, Trigg Taylor.

Yeah, this is admittedly an area that I'm not an expert in. I had experience with this as a trustee of the Exxon I was on Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council, I had experience with fisheries as the Attorney General, but I am no, by no means an expert. I have reached out just in preparation for this debate alone to probably 35 individuals, and many of them are in this room, and thank you. And I've, by the way, learned a ton during this debate listening to the responses from the other candidates up here, and I'm looking forward to learning more as I talk to you in the audience afterwards. Thank you.

Bernadette Wilson. Yeah, I mean, same here. I've talked with people all over the state that have worked in all different industries. I mean, coming into this governor's race, I talked with former commissioners, people that had served on the governor's Fish Advisory Council, people that have served in other roles and responsibilities. And again, just with Alaskans all over the state and several of you here in Kodiak, so I also owe you a Thank you.

Thank you. And finally, Dave Bronson. Spoken with everybody in this state that I can, that I can, from NPFC members to NPFMC staff to NOAA staff throughout this state and in the federal government for the Board of Fish, trying to get to the best possible decision-making area that I can. And that's what it's going to take. You got to talk to everyone on this.

And there are conflicts. There's people that disagree with each other on the data. They disagree with each other on the facts. But again, you got to talk to everyone and I would never mention their name, by the way, anyway. So—.

Thank you. The state is experiencing more volatility in ocean conditions, including overall ocean warming, reduced sea ice, and cold pool in the eastern and northern Bering Sea. And most frequently in marine heat waves. How can the state help make coastal communities and fishing management more resilient and better able to successfully cope with these challenging conditions? And we'll begin with Drake Taylor.

It's a little bit to me like AI, bad data and bad, bad, bad answers from AI. Good data in, you get good answers, and that's exactly why we need to invest as a state in getting the best data, understanding what's actually happening in our fisheries. Again, some of these are out of our control, environmental conditions out of our control, but there are things that we can and should be doing, and we need to understand what those things are so that we can correct the direction of this fishery. Thank you. Bernadette Wilson.

Yeah, so I mentioned earlier that my grandmother was born in the village of Naknek, and we were always taught and told that the waters were constantly warming and cooling, and that different runs of a particular species of fish on any given year, some would be higher, some would be lower, but this has been an ongoing economic, or excuse me, environmental issue that we've been well aware of for decades. There are things that we can control, but there are also things that we can't control. And so having good data, having good science is helpful.

Thank you. Dave Bronson. Well, whether it's the North Pacific or North Atlantic or any other body of ocean, oceanic body of water, the temperature is always on cycles and it's always changing. It's dependent on El Niño versus La Niña. It's depending on a lot of things.

But just because there's things again that we can't control doesn't mean we do not control the things we can control. So time, place, methodology, means— we can control them to save our fisheries.

Thank you. On Kodiak Island— I'm sorry, JKT, I'm very sorry. Not at all. Thank you, Senator Stevens. My answer would be invest in research and This is the one thing that the state can lead on.

I think ADF&G is already doing important research on, you know, juvenile Chinook survival in the Bering Sea. The National Marine Fisheries Service and NOAA is also doing important research. I think the state should partner, and we should also have our academic institutions be working on this problem. UAF College of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences has incredible capacity and, and worldwide renown, so making sure our research institutions are tackling this problem, and that would be my approach. Well, thank you.

This is the last segment of the forum. Each candidate will have 1 minute to present closing statements, and we'll begin with Bernadette Wilson, if you'll go first. Well, thank you all so much for having us up here. It no doubt is an incredibly important issue. The question is, what are we going to do differently this time?

These are the same questions, you guys, that you've been asking of gubernatorial candidates for different races for I don't even know how many years. But who is going to be bold enough? Who is going to come in without the political ties and the individual that has the ability to take the risk and to say, you know what, I'm going to do what's right for Alaska, not what's easy. That's the question each of you has to answer. I was born and raised here.

I mentioned my family hauls all the fish out of Valdez. This is an issue that is incredibly close to us. It's time to do something differently. Career politicians have failed us. Thank you.

Thank you. Dave Bronson, your closing statement, please. Well, this is going to take a whole-of-government approach to solving this. Going down to Juneau, I look forward to working with folks like Louise and others to solve these problems, especially with her special expertise in the area of fishing. Experience matters.

Making government do, an administration, a government do for you what you want it to do is difficult. It's very difficult because there's people in every bureaucracy that has their own agenda and they want to stop you. And you've got to know how to weed that out, stop that, interrupt that, and move your policy forward working with the legislature. Thank you. Jonathan Christ Tongren, your closing statement please.

I'm running to be a fish-first governor and a governor who takes the time to understand how our fisheries are managed and make sure that they continue to be the powerhouse of coastal Alaska. Alaska, and, and really the sort of common denominator for the Alaskan way of life across this state. And I want to make sure that ADFNG is fully funded under my administration. I want to make sure that there are meaningful reductions of bycatch in federal fisheries in my administration. I want to make sure that limited entry permits and quota are fished by Alaskans and creating economic opportunity for a new generation of fishermen across Alaska.

I want to make sure fisheries have a bright future in the state and there's administration that cares about coastal communities, that cares about fish, and that cares about fishermen. Thank you. And Trey Taylor, your closing statement, please. Our next governor has to be a fighter and a collaborator. I know that's an interesting combination, but I'm a prover fighter on behalf of Alaska.

As the chief prosecutor of the state, I collaborated with law enforcement. We brought crime levels down to 40-year lows in Alaska. Sex assaults, sexual assaults down 25, 26% during, during my tenure. I'm proud of that record, but it took collaboration working with law enforcement, but it also took fighting on behalf of us. I fought Biden's 70 executive actions and one that were designed to shut down Alaska in our way of life.

I'm a collaborator. I was unanimously elected to represent the bipartisan coalition of attorneys general by Democrats Democrats and Republicans. We accomplished a lot. We took on Big Pharma. I got over $100 million to, to, uh, to combat addiction recovery— addiction in the state.

We also took on big social media, making sure there was adequate parental controls and adequate controls to keep children off of social media sites. I'm a proven entity when it comes to fighting on behalf of Alaska and collaborating. Please check out Andy Kandi and I, and I hope to earn your vote. Thank you. Thank you all.

Thank you to everyone who has listened from KMXT, other stations in the Alaska Public Radio Network, as well as the viewers who streamed the debate online. And thank you to everyone here in the audience today. And thank you to everyone who submitted questions and topics to the chamber. Thank you to the Kodiak Chamber of Commerce Fisheries Debate Committee. Members of that committee for their work on this debate.

They are Ryan McNeill, Tracy Welch, Brian Himmelblum, Julie Madwayu, Julianne Curry, David Hovey— Davis Hovey sitting next to me— and Mary Beth Lowen. Thank you again to all of our sponsors for helping to make this event possible. Madsen Cognac, Trident Seafoods, North Pacific Seafoods, The Alaska Whitefish Trawlers, the City of Kodiak, Alaska Pollock Fishery Alliance, The Truth, Pacific Seafood Processors Association, United Fishermen of Alaska, Alaskan Quota and Permits LLC, and the Freezer Longline Association. Again, this fisheries forum has been a collaboration between the Kodiak Chamber of Commerce and KMXT Public Radio, the only event of its kind completely focused on Alaska's seafood industry. We hope you leave this program feeling more informed about the issues and motivated to cast your ballot.

Again, one of these four people sitting before you will be the governor of Alaska. So good night to you. Good fishing. Thanks for tuning in. And let's thank our candidates.