I have been watching the Clarion publish article after article regarding our king salmon problem here in Alaska. I have seen the following pro-commercial fishing articles and letters to the editor published: “Sport group targets set netters,” Nov. 7; “Sport group targets set netters, Alliance looks to ban set nets in ‘urban’ areas of state,” Nov. 8; “Commercial fishing groups worried about initiative,” Nov. 12; “Initiative reflects incorrect diagnosis,” Nov. 14. While watching the Clarion publish these mostly opinionated, gossip and non-factual stories I also observed few if any articles or information being published which actually reveled any real solid factual or scientific information regarding our king salmon problem.
Is it possible that Peninsula Clarion editors, staff and reporters are not able to make a single call to our ADF&G and ask them if we have a Kenai River king salmon problem or a statewide king salmon problem? I ask this question because I have made that call to our local ADF&G. When I made that call the ADF&G very quickly informed me that the Kenai River is experiencing the very same king salmon problem which all of our other rivers in Alaska are experiencing. Please excuse my lack of understanding but I do not understand how the Clarion can publish multiple articles in an attempt to address our statewide king problem, without informing the public that we have a statewide king salmon problem? Please review the articles which you have published on this issue. The articles you are publishing are full of unsupported non-scientific information and personal opinions regarding this issue and basically ignore the simple fact that we have a huge statewide king salmon problem. I for one would like to know why the Clarion has deliberately decided to allow mis-facts, opinion and gossip to replace the actual reality that our king salmon problems do not source from a single river or stream within our state? Are Clarion reporters unable to contact our ADF&G on this issue and then print the actual facts on the issue? Instead Clarion readers have been forced to endure article after article of personal opinions based on mostly non-scientific information. What will it take to get the Clarion to actually do some research on this important issue? It appears that the Clarion is only interested in non-scientific, one sided opinion which is flowing mostly from the commercial fishing industry. Has the Clarion become a purely gossip publication?