Talk:Alaska salmon fishery

Alaska High‑importance

	Alaska portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alaska, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Alaska on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AlaskaWikipedia:WikiProject AlaskaTemplate:WikiProject AlaskaAlaska articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Fisheries and Fishing Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fisheries and Fishing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fisheries, aquaculture and fishing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fisheries and FishingWikipedia:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingTemplate:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingFishing articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

POV issues[edit]

This article seems vulnerable to industry marketing and public relations efforts. The lede opens with a bold statement that the fishery has been “saved due to strict mitigation measures.” The only reference for that is a slide presentation that does not include language about saving, increasing, or growing. Does this article need a strong look for balance and comprehensiveness? —Parhamr (talk) 23:33, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After glancing through this article, I would agree that it could be considered a POV fork. First off, there is no mention whatsoever of fish traps, despite the existence of literally tons of sources. The prevalence of fish traps and the political battle to outlaw them corresponds to the 1920–1959 arc in the history section a whole lot more than what is currently found there. Secondly, the more recent, ongoing political battles between commercial and sport fishers, complete with regular accusations of the Fisheries Board favoring one side or the other, is mentioned in a lot fewer sources but is also absent from the article. Not too terribly long ago, Prince William Sound was glutted with pinks for about two or three consecutive years, but is currently considered to be over-fished in general. The same could be said about other fisheries. The political battles over the Pebble mine are largely centered upon the potential impact to Bristol Bay-area fisheries. There is a lot of ground to be covered here which isn't. RadioKAOS – Talk to me, Billy 14:39, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Alaska salmon fishery. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:48, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]