Yes, we often talk about managing fisheries in the context of trade-offs, oftentimes in the context of efficiencies. In the case of Alaska, I feel like our managers know very well the broader costs associated with the loss of access to local fisheries, and that includes not only income and local employment. We want our communities to be self-sufficient and thriving, but there are food security issues related to that with regard to access to subsistence fisheries and the role that our commercial fishery permit holders play in harvesting subsistence resources in rural communities.
There's local opportunity around the single most important employment opportunity in the community and what comes with that: The ability for your children to be able to stay in the community if they want to, to continue on in the livelihood if they want to. There are social roles and responsibilities. There are attachments to your community, to your place. There are a lot of quantifiable and also unquantifiable values and losses associated with closing access to fisheries.