Rural is not a proxy: Accounting for Indigenous participation in Bristol Bay salmon fisheries

The rise in attention to equity as a goal in fisheries management has revealed a dearth of data related to how certain communities and groups participate in, rely on, and may be impacted by fishery management decisions. Lack of data on impacts to Tribal and Indigenous participants and other underserved communities have been identified as a primary barrier to assessing and improving equity considerations in fishery governance. Data on fishery participation trends, including who benefits from fisheries, is essential to determining if and how fishery management and decision-making are achieving desired management objectives such as providing for intergenerational access and preserving a way of life. Understanding changes in participation trends is also critical for developing effective conservation solutions. In Alaska salmon fisheries, shifts in permit holdings are generally categorized by the residency of permit holders. This means that little is known about how Alaska Native participation, as well as women’s participation, in Alaska commercial fisheries has changed over time. This paper presents a case study on local salmon permit holdings in the Bristol Bay region of southwest Alaska. We discuss the consequences of conflating rural with Alaska Native in data-driven decision-making, and highlight the ways in which official fishery statistics can mask past and ongoing harms to Indigenous communities and peoples. We situate this study in the broader science-policy arena of state and federal fishery governance and data collection efforts that often render invisible impacts to Indigenous communities and livelihoods.