Welcome
to the official Fish Heads Website
Sharpen your wits fellow Fish Heads, and
other followers of the Federal Folly known as "rationalization". The time has come for Truth, Justice and the American
Way to triumph.
Bering Sea Crab Rationalization
is now a reality. Those given the resource are being paid 50-70% of the ex-vessel price for the privilege of harvesting
it. Over 800 of the skippers and crew working last year were tossed to the curb. Those crewmen lucky enough to be
left standing will be paid a fraction of last year's share. Write
your Congressmen (see links at left) and curse into your microbrews as we lament these last days of free men,
the end of the hunter/gatherers, the fencing of the open sea, the final ride into the sunset for the water cowboys.
And the loss of what America used
to be.
Ben Stevens is the Paris Hilton of Alaska.
(Reprinted by popular Demand!)
He has it all: the preening arrogance,
the shameless sense of entitlement, the regally upturned nose wrinkling from the stench of lowly constituent trash, be it
Valley, or Fisherman.
All because he holds the golden key to his Dad’s
office.
Yes, (gasp) Ben Stevens’
real job is whispering into the ear of his father, Ted, who is among the world’s most powerful lawmakers. At a time
when Britain’s House of Lords is being phased out, the
best way to have a boon granted by Alaska’s fearsome King Ted is through
bonny prince Benny.
Does anyone really believe that
Ben Stevens has such a commanding knowledge of the inner workings of VECO or CIRI or the Special Olympics that “consultations”
with them should command fees of fifty, seventy and two hundred thousand dollars, respectively? That’s right. Two hundred
thirty six thousand two hundred twenty five dollars and seventy eight cents went into Ben’s palm to help the Special
Olympics kids in 2002. Compare that to your job. But Benny’s best job, the one that keeps on giving, is as “consultant”
for a handful of very large out-of –state fish buying companies.
I saw “Sin
City” last night. The corrupt Senator, played by the growling Powers Boothe,
said something that struck home to me. He said the trick to holding power was to tell a lie that everyone knows is a lie,
and make them pretend to believe it.
Welcome to Senate Bill 113, a lie
from start to finish. All the frilly talk about safety and quality and protecting Alaska’s
fishermen from themselves is a thin veil covering a monumental rip-off. The trail to the truth starts with the Fed. The North
Pacific Fisheries Management Council had put together a perfect fascism, until they tripped on the State Constitution. Their
plan to force “Co-Ops” on groundfishermen is a deal between a few trawlers and processors that will steal the
resource from the rest of the fishermen and the free market from the rest of the processors. Even more egregious than Ted
Stevens’ infamous “crab rider”, the new laws will allow the selected boat owners to pool their gifted quotas
and cut out nine out of ten fishermen now working as skippers and crew. They
will be able to sit on the beach and collect a paycheck while the Federal government buys back their boats. The price they
will pay is that they will never be able to sell their catch on the free market again. Foreign companies will own the exclusive
right to buy Alaska’s groundfish.
The whole scam was going quite
well, including a “public process” that allows the protests of fishermen to be officially ignored. Then NMFS lawyers
pointed out that, because boats drive back and forth over the three mile line, the State needed to mimic the Federal plan
or else the whole thing is on a sand bar.
And so a few members of the Board
of Fish and the NPFMC (whose membership is heavily overweighted with processor employees, most notably the Chair, Stephanie
Madson) approached the State’s most prominent processor lobbyist, Ben Stevens, to put forth a bill with no parameters,
other than vague references to “associations” (read: Co-Ops) and “dedicated access privileges” (read:
take the resource from Peter and give it to Paul). They used Ben Stevens because that’s his job: he gets ten times his
Senator’s pay (a quarter of a million dollars a year) to push State and Federal laws that will make his processor clients
richer.
Senate Bill 113 is
nothing more than the State bending down to kiss the golden ring on the Federal hand. There is no chance for the bill to come
back for a vote. The State Senate has approved a plan about which it knows nothing. The “public process” promised
by the BOF promises nothing more than the gut wrenching experience of flying to meetings for the honor of being ignored, again.
SB 113 has nothing to do with improving
the management of Alaska’s fisheries. It has to do with a payoff that
a few boat owners and fish buyers have been waiting for, a payoff into which they have invested millions of dollars to put
their minions into positions of influence and power. When it finally comes to be, this scheme will decimate coastal communities
and give the fish in their backyards to foreign fish buyers and boat owners living on the golf courses of sunny Arizona.
That SB 113 is a “tool” for better management of our fisheries is a lie that I refuse to pretend to believe.
Paris Hilton always gets what
she wants, and I suppose Ben will too. But don’t try to tell me that either of them has anything but their own interests
in their mercenary little hearts.
Terry Haines. Ben-- Call me at 486-4759
Now here is an opinion piece published in the Anchorage Daily News by Governor Jay Hammond
Ben Stevens: Legislator or lobbyist?
JAY HAMMOND
COMMENT
(Published: May 1, 2005)
What's the difference between a legislator and a lobbyist? A recent article in the Juneau Empire raises
that question in regard to the propriety of Senate President Ben Stevens' legislation reallocating Gulf of Alaska ground fisheries.
The article cites the senator's financial disclosure which evidences he's on the payroll as a consultant to several fisheries
interests for a total last year of a whopping $174,200. Do any of those interests stand to profit from the senator's bill?
I have no idea.
However, further examination of his disclosure forms show that the senator's employers also included
not just the state of Alaska, which paid him $28,040 last year, but Veco Corp., the vocal cords behind "The Voice of the Times."
Veco not only hired him for $47,500 but lavishly lauded him in an editorial for having the courage to do its bidding by introducing
legislation that would invade the heretofore chaste Permanent Fund earnings absent a public vote. Since this has long been
a prime objective of Veco, perhaps it will accord him a pay raise as well.
On the surface these awards make Scott Ogan's involvement with Evergreen seem penny ante. Yet surely
there has to be a substantial difference or fellow legislators would have screamed in envy, if not outrage.
The Veco "Voice of the Times" has lusted for years after Permanent Fund money, realizing that once it
is no longer virginal further assault will be far easier. If they can get into your prospective dividend dollars they believe,
with justification, pressure for increasing oil taxes will decline along with the possibility of, heaven forbid, an income
tax -- even one capped at no more than your dividend. Instead they would impose a "head tax" on all and only Alaskans by reducing
your prospective dividends.
Many of our so-called "conservative" legislators seem delighted that finally someone has had the "courage"
to penetrate Permanent Fund earnings without the public consent the governor has said he would demand. Certainly $47,500 should
buy a lot of courage, especially when the buyer's interests are compatible with one's own. Certainly no "conflict of interest"
can be charged between Veco and Ben.
What started out as a relatively modest $300 million plus nonconsensual ravishing of the once virginal
Permanent Fund earnings has allegedly ballooned to about $1 billion as more and more legislators line up in lustful anticipation
of trophies to take home to their districts.
Apparently, many hope that in the flare of massive capital spending for "motherhood" programs, such
as education, voters will be blind to the fact that many will have broken faith with constituents.
The sad thing is it's so unnecessary. There is a simple and proper way to have the Permanent Fund help
provide essential government services. That's by creating a POMV, which would split up to 5 percent of the fund's annual market
value, 60 percent for dividends and 40 percent for public services. The governor has indicated support for this front-door
approach and opposition to attempts to crack open the back door without voter permission.
Such could even be done this year by statute so long as the corpus of the fund was not invaded. If the
$600 million then made available were to go out in Wally Hickel's proposed "community dividend," no public vote would be required.
After all, the governor's promise was that he'd demand such a vote for any uses other than dividends, therefore the community
dividend would require no such vote, save at the community level.
So, to get back to the original question as to just what the difference is between a lobbyist and a
legislator, my answer remains: "Darned if I know." All I do know is that if as Senate president I had been paid not $47,500
but even a mere $47.50 by, say, the Sierra Club for "consulting," no one would more loudly scream "conflict of interest" and
demand my impeachment than would the Veco "Voice of the Times."
Jay Hammond served as governor of Alaska from 1974 to 1982.
This piece prompted an angry phone call from Ben Stevens. Governor Hammond reported later that he had
never been spoken to in such a manner in all his years of public service. The image of Mr. Hammond, a gentleman, and our finest
example of an Alaska Statesman, being addressed with anything other than the utmost respect should raise the hackles
of every one of us.
Here is Governor Hammond's reply. Read it carefully. Its dry wording is, in its way, more damning than
the letter that preceded it:
(Published: May 4, 2005)
Apologies for implications in article; chalk them up to protective zeal
In a recent article questioning the propriety of Sen. Ben Stevens' alleged introduction
of legislation reallocating Gulf of Alaska ground fisheries, I did not assert he had done anything improper; however, it certainly
suggested to some he may have. Though a quote from an article in the Juneau Empire called the legislation a "Ben Stevens-sponsored
bill," the senator has informed me, in rather heated terms, he had not sponsored the bill.
Also, I must confess, in my extreme displeasure over the senator's efforts to use Permanent Fund money absent
a public vote, I implied his association with Veco may have influenced those efforts. The senator tells me, however, that
he has been in Veco's employ for years and though his philosophy may parallel theirs regarding this issue, it was in no way
influenced by them.
Though my article may have implied to the contrary, I do not believe Sen. Stevens has done anything illegal
or unethical. He is far too smart for that. However, this whole issue points out the difficulty
of trying to structure meaningful ethics or campaign finance legislation. The way around that legislation
is to simply hire them as consultants.
I am sorry if anything in my article unfairly injures Ben Stevens or Veco. In my zeal to protect the Permanent
Fund, I sometimes get carried away.
---- Jay Hammond
Port Alsworth
EDITOR'S NOTE: Senate Bill 113, "An Act relating to entry into and management of Gulf of
Alaska groundfish fisheries," was introduced by Sen. Ben Stevens "by request," according to the
Legislature's bill-tracking database. After going through committee processes, the bill was approved by the Alaska Senate
on a 15-4 vote Monday.
Japan Finally Captures Alaska-Sixty Years Later
Fascism will direct the economy toward "certain fixed objectives" and will "introduce order
in the economic field." – Mussolini
In Alaska a Japanese processing company can pay less than minimum
wage if it provides room and board to its employees. A corporation without competition can fill a barge with people
desperate for work, load up all the cots and pillows and potatoes and cube steaks for them to sleep and eat on, and park the
darn thing right outside town. Fishermen will be required by law to sell to them, wherever their dock might be. Fishermen
will be required by law to sell to them no matter what price, dock service, tendering contract or courtesy is denied to them.
Processors and fishermen need one another now. After the free market
is gone, processors won’t need fishermen anymore. Feudal lords don’t bend down to sharecroppers.
Nor will processors need the skilled resident work force they have now. With competition removed any company worth
its salt will bust everyone down to 30 hours or less a week, and thus avoid paying benefits. In a competitive market processing
workers are often paid based on recovery. Flatfish, for instance, which is now considered a headache, could be far more profitable
for fishermen, skilled filleters and processing plants, given the extra time afforded
them by rationalization. In a monopolized marketplace it will be far more profitable for the processors only
If
you believe that a fisherman in America deserves more consideration than a fish broker in Japan,
then write your Congressmen. Senator McCain of Arizona has spoken eloquently in defense of freedom in
this matter. Look on the toolbar on the top left of this page for links.
For more direct representation on these issues contact
the following:
Deep Sea Fishermans Union of the Pacific
Phone: (206) 783-2922
Fax: (206)
783-5811
Website: http://www.dsfu.org
Crewmens Association
Contact Steve Branson
Phone: (907) 486-1098
Snail Mail: P.O. Box 8112
Kodiak,
AK
99615
Gulf Groundfish Fishermans Association
Contact Alexus Kwachka
Phone: (907) 486-5558
E-mail: Island1@ptialaska.net
Fish Heads
Contact Terry Haines
Phone: (907) 486-4759
E-mail: yohaines@alaska.com
"Do not go gentle into that good night-- Rage, rage against the dying of the light!
Here's How the System Really Works: Payoffs and Sellouts
Washington fisherman Victor Smith watches in
horror as Southeast Salmon is sold down the river
Coming soon to a fishery near you:
Senator Stevens’ Ocean’s Eleven
On November 13, 2004 in Lynnwood, Washington,
nearly 80 members of the Purse Seine Vessel Owners Association (PSVOA) listened attentively to executive director Rob Zuanich
discuss the annual meeting’s main agenda: the Southeast Seine Buyback. The seine buyback originated with Southeast
Alaska Seiners Association (SEAS) when its board made fleet reduction a priority in 2001, but like the United Fishermen of
Alaska (UFA), SEAS membership has sagged under the heavy-handed leadership of Bob Thorstenson, Jr., who heads both organizations.
Thorstenson has long partnered with Zuanich and is also a nepotistic stockholder in Icicle Seafoods, a major processor who
recently shared a record fine of $3.44 million for its misbehaviors in busting through crab limits under the American Fisheries
Act. Thorstenson’s $5,000 monthly salary will nearly consume SEAS’s 2005 budget necessitating
PSVOA’s financial assistance with buyback efforts. Zuanich expressed cautious optimism that seiners might get a fleet
reduction plan before the start of the 2005 salmon season. He also expressed confidence that buyback could be kept under control,
in U.S. Senator Ted Stevens’ hands, despite jurisdictional protests from the National Marine Fisheries Service over
its administration. Then it became known that Ted’s son, Alaska state senator Ben Stevens was in the middle of the deal.
An astute question was fired from the audience, “How are we going to pay the $500,000 administration fee to Ben Stevens?”
Zuanich replied it would “take some convoluted accounting” but he was “confident the payments could be kept
off the books.” He then approached the questioning fisherman, suggesting that a public meeting might not be the
place for more such questions. Why is it deemed necessary to use convoluted accounting to hide the payments
to Ben Stevens; and why would fishermen choose to hire a prominent fish processor lobbyist to represent them in the first
place? Why does processor-conflicted Thorstenson lead our associations, and use them to avoid a fleet-wide buyback process
supervised by NMFS and the State of Alaska? A senior member of SEAS board admitted, “Hiring Ben Stevens was something
I don’t understand. It rubbed a lot of us wrong that we hired him; (but) he got the crab buyback program funded. He
used that approach, ‘I got this one to my credit, hire me, and I’ll get dad to fund you guys too.’ We’ve
been paying him monthly since last June.” Asked how Ben gets paid, he added, “The idea was some convoluted [there’s
that word again!] plan to take money from the buyback’s administration to pay the overhead to free up money from the
other pocket to pay Ben. This was Rob and Bob’s proposal. Bob was supposed to sign it, but I’m not sure there
was a signed copy—that it wasn’t just done on a handshake. I’ve never seen adequate minutes of the meeting
to make it clear what happened. We’ve been trying to find out who signed it.” Alleged to currently
be $5,000, Ben’s monthly payments double to $10,000, for five years, after a buyback plan is funded and approved. I
spoke to several board members and none disputed that there was an agreement to hire Ben Stevens, or that he is being paid
that amount. Several confirmed they saw the contract one saying it had space for SEAS president, Dan Castle’s signature.
One suggested payments to Ben started last March and that up to $150,000 for administration costs were allegedly received
by SEAS from another source last year. Ben’s convoluted payments may be intended to come from the $500,000 that Ted
Stevens separately tagged for administration of the `Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Plan.' It’s line-itemed in a recently
passed Omnibus bill in the Appropriations rider written by Ted that also funded the $50,000,000 seiners’ buyback. It’s
speculated those payments will be funneled through the Southeast Revitalization Committee, a group created by SEAS to administer
the buyback as part of the recovery plan. Confirming that the proposal “came from Rob and Bob”, another
board member simply said, “It was a product of the Calhoun Building,” in Juneau, recently purchased by Zuanich
and Thorstenson, which houses the Southeast Revitalization Committee, and their personal apartments. The rider lands another
$10,000,000 at the new Alaska Seafood Marketing Board also housed there. .The board member added, “The way it was being
pursued by our lobbyist, there were a lot of hopes. When they wrote it [the rider] they just did it quick and dirty...through
a reference to the NMFS program, which would legitimize the way to do the buyback. We never wanted to be in the system, we
wanted a system we could control...I don’t know if they just didn’t do their homework or what their thinking was,
or lack of thinking. This thing’s going nowhere because appropriating through NMFS won’t work the way we had it
structured. [SEAS] doesn’t have a buyback plan right now.” Why keep their buyback in the Stevens’
hands if seiners wanted to control it themselves? Didn’t Ted’s crab plan result in individual processor quota
shares? Contrary to pleasing stories told in the media, like the December Fishermen’s News cover article proclaiming
the crab buyout was a raging success, wasn’t forcing crabbers to join ‘cooperatives’ selling exclusively
to a handful of processors the major result of that combined deal, which only reduced a 313 boat fleet by 25 boats? There
will be no 10% benefit to the remaining fleet—the 5% loan payment cuts that in half. It’s going to get real interesting
when someone tries to do something on their own with their crab. But it seems the public just isn't getting it yet. “The
crab fleet reduction plan was a big success,” one SEAS board member said. “They voted for it overwhelmingly and
they successfully reduced their fleet. I don’t know about processor quota shares being part of the plan.” With
news articles that amount to no more than propaganda, who does? In spite of Ben Stevens so far only getting
seiners an ineffectual 130-word bill seemingly destined to fail, the SEAS board member said, “We [SEAS] had another
vote in December to continue the deal with Ben to get a grant in the next Congress.” “We are ready to sell our
souls to the devil to get that buyback.” Certainly SEAS and PSVOA can go to the devil if they choose, but the
question for everyone else is, must we be dragged along with them? And why are ‘Rob and Bob’ going to be in control
of the program’s qualifying criteria, instead of the entire fleet through NMFS supervised public input? Is
there anyone who still believes the system isn’t broken? At the top there’s the manipulations of the eleven-member
North Pacific Fisheries Management Council, (NPFMC) Senator Stevens’ own Ocean’s Eleven and its misrepresentations
to Congress. In the middle, there lies tier upon tier of ‘experts’ like economist, WSU’s
Professor Scott Matulich, who is either so biased or in the bag that he refers to fishermen as “those most egregious
rent seekers.” And at the bottom, there are the insider misrepresentations made to fishermen by the likes of
Bobby Thorstenson and Rob Zuanich. Do they have any credibility left? According to one fisherman
(a member of UFA), on Thortenson’s watch, Pacific Seafood Processors Association’s lobbyist (and chair of the
NPFMC), Stephanie Madsen has figuratively been given the keys to UFA’s inner office. Madsen, you may recall, has suggested
processor quotas may be just what the salmon industry needs. Disgusted and distrustful of this conflict of interest, one fisherman
recently ceased efforts to run for leadership in UFA.The dissatisfaction with Thorstenson runs so deep among seiners that
one SEAS board member said he was “thinking about going back through e-mails and correspondence to make the case to
the board that Bob is both a liar and out of control, and should be replaced.” And the dissatisfaction
isn’t confined to seiners. Two years ago Thorstenson complained about a “membership lag” at UFA. Realizing
they are being sold out, that ‘lag’ has turned into an exodus as real fishermen like the Alaska Trollers Association
are now leaving in droves. It is rumored that the Seafood Producers Coop, USAG, and ALFA have been considering doing
the same, their only restraint being the fear of having no organization at all. All told, these groups are said to represent
4,000 to 5,000 fishermen. Only some high level federal prosecutions will stop this process, and I’m not referring to
the recent much ballyhooed NOAA fisheries violation cases that in the big picture amount to little more than giving speeding
tickets to bank robbers’ wheel men. No, what many are hoping for is an investigation of the undeniably clear pattern
of collusion that exists now between industry and some Alaskan politicians to defraud the public of fully utilized public
resources; a RICO investigation. So many have either stood by and watched, or been complicit in letting the value of these
resources tank. Now they are coming forth with absurd proposals shabbily disguised as solutions that are being snapped up
by an industry desperate for relief. Is it possible that the seine buyback was allowed to stall because Federal law couldn’t
impose processor shares on a state fishery? Is Alaska’s legislature letting a few players hoodwink them about the seafood
industry and not protecting the Public from these carpetbaggers? It’s time fishermen speak out,
change ‘leaders’ and stop this exodus, eradicate processor influence over our associations, and demand the Legislature
do what’s best for our coastal communities. One of the underhanded solutions to watch for
will be an effort to change Alaskan law to allow limited processor licenses, or quota shares, in Alaskan State waters. If
they do that, it will be interesting to follow industry spin-masters’ attempts to make palatable the demoting of salmon
fishermen to the status of the permanently indentured share croppers.
Victor Smith
And, as State Senator Ben Stevens drives through a
State management plan that mimics the Feds like an organ grinders monkey, it must be admitted that a very effective, well
funded and well- connected coalition of insiders has this process in a headlock.
But they count on the fact that we are
sheep.
If you think your voice doesn't count, you are wrong! The Council
wants to hear your views. Write, email, phone, or better yet fax the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council. If
you visit Kodiak join us for a political beer at Tony's. Call (907) 486-4759
North Pacific Fisheries Management Council
Contact Info:
Phone: (907) 271- 2809
Fax: (907) 271-2817
A fax can be added as official testimony to the Council's
records.
Website: www.fakr.noaa.gov/npfmc
Send questions and comments to: yohaines@alaska.com
Mailing Address:
P.O. Box 8112
Kodiak, Ak
99615
Phone: 907-486-4759
|
