Emerging cooperative institutions for fisheries management: Equity and empowerment of indigenous peoples of Washington and Alaska

This study examines the relationship between the indigenous peoples of North America and the Pacific Salmon, evaluating the ways salmon are valued, utilized and managed, in two areas where cooperative approaches to salmon management exist. In Washington, based on the language of treaties and extensive litigation, co-management has been established between the tribes and state management agencies. In contrast, the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act legally extinguished the aboriginal fishing rights of Alaska Natives. However, since 1988, a cooperative organization, the Kuskokwim River Salmon Management Working Group (KRSMWG), has operated on the Kuskokwim River.;Data collection proceeded through participant observation, interviews with fishermen and co-managers, and review of management documents. The results demonstrate the diverse ways in which different groups of people value salmon and salmon fishing. Salmon fishing was found to be tightly linked with Native cultures and identities. The results also underscored the different cognitive realities and discourses that participants may bring to the co-management table.;The nature of stakeholder participation and representation, the production, validation and distribution of management information, decision-making, management authority, jurisdiction, objectives and spheres of interest and action in the two regimes were examined and found to have salient structural differences. The KRSMWG follows a "consultative" model of co-management which derives from theories of participatory democracy. It has a limited jurisdiction, involved primarily in the inseason management of Kuskokwim River fisheries. The Puget Sound regime derives its legitimacy from legal rights which have been reaffirmed by the courts. The scope of management in Puget Sound is broader and encompasses involvement in enforcement, habitat, and enhancement activities. In addition, co-managers have formalized institutional links with other coastwide management fora, thereby extending their effective jurisdictional scope.;Since the emergence of co-management regimes there have been significant redistributions of salmon harvests between different fisheries in the two areas, however, procedural factors associated with changes in participation appear to have more influence over perceptions of equity than do the distributive aspects of allocation. Direct involvement appears to enhance perceptions of equity.;In both areas, co-management regimes emerged out of conflict over natural resources. Participants redefined conflict to increase and legitimate their power resources, thereby advancing their interests and objectives. With increased participation and formalized ways of addressing conflicts, co-management transformed the way in which conflicts are addressed. In doing so, comanagers are changing the way in which the "problem" of fisheries management is defined.