Bristol Bay Outrage as Trump EPA Scores Backroom Deal With Pebble Mine

Bristol Bay Outrage as Trump EPA Scores Backroom Deal With Pebble Mine

Featured image: Bristol Bay Leadership at a press conference in Dillingham, AK on Pebble & EPA settlement.

     by  / Intercontinental Cry

DILLINGHAM, AK –Bristol Bay leaders are outraged by the Pebble Limited Partnership and Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) settlement concerning the proposed Clean Water Act protections for the Bristol Bay watershed.

In 2010, Bristol Bay’s tribes, joined by Native corporations, commercial fishermen, the sports and recreation industry, and other supporters petitioned the EPA to protect Bristol Bay from the risks posed by the Pebble mine—risks to our salmon, waters, people, and economy. EPA responded by undertaking a multi-year, peer-reviewed scientific study that was subject to extensive public participation. As a result, EPA proposed common sense protections for the Bristol Bay watershed supported by millions of Americans. Sadly, with today’s announcement, these protections, have fallen victim to the petty, partisan politics of our day. The leaders of Bristol Bay issued the following statements at a press conference regarding the settlement:

Speaker of the Alaska House of Representatives Bryce Edgmon stated:

“I am keenly disappointed…Backing away from the agency’s painstaking work and analysis of the 404(c) issue following years of work to carefully construct a position that was not only was supported by a number of tribes in the region but once again the majority of the people in the region. The people of the Bristol Bay region do not need this kind of stress hanging over our heads continuing on year after year.”

Bristol Bay Economic Development Corporation CEO & President, Norman Van Vactor stated:

“You might recall the process of the original 404(c). There were literally dozens of public hearings. Thousands of people in Bristol Bay testified and spoke. Tens of thousands of people in the state of Alaska spoke. Hundreds of thousands of people in the US spoke.  Compare that to what appears to be happening in the last couple weeks closed door meetings between bureaucrats and foreign mining executives. Closed to all of us. And, a decision that will affect our livelihoods and our homes. We will do whatever it takes to protect Bristol Bay.”

Curyung Tribal Council Chief & Commercial Fisherman Robin Samuelsen stated:

“We will continue to fight Pebble for as long as Pebble wants to build a mine in Bristol Bay. I’m 66 years old and I’ll give it my last breath. My two grandsons here, who both testified in Washington D.C., when I’m gone there going be stronger than grandpa ever was fighting against Pebble. And their kids are going fight Pebble. We and Bristol Bay will never give up.”

Bristol Bay Native Corporation Chairman of the Board Joseph Chythlook stated:

“For more than a decade Pebble has created stress and uncertainty among our people and businesses. Bristol Bay needs and deserves certainty that our sustainable industries and world-class salmon fishery will continue- any settlement between EPA and Pebble moves us further away from that potential result.”

Bristol Bay Native Corporation Chairman of the Land Committee Russell Nelson stated:

Responding to the question of Pebble’s recent assertions that it will seek a small mine size – “Pebble can tell you what they want, you just need to look on their website, they’re going to mine it until the end until the last dollar until they can extract the last dollar out of that resource. They can tell you it’s small, but look at the cost of developing. They need to get their money out. They’re in it for the money.”

United Tribes of Bristol Bay Executive Director Alannah Hurley stated:

“Our region couldn’t be more united in our effort to protect Bristol Bay from the Pebble Mine. I sit here today with tribal, Native Corporation, commercial fishermen, economic development and political leaders of Bristol Bay united to protect our home and in continued opposition to the Pebble mine.  If there’s one thing I want you all leave here with today, it’s this:  Pebble may have its short-term victory today.  But, we as indigenous people, have been on this land for over 10,000 years and we’re not going anywhere.”

Nunamta Aulukestai (Caretakers of Our Land) Spokesperson Sharon Clark stated:

“We are here to give a voice to our region. We know what this fight is about. Protecting our home. Protecting our culture. Protecting our food. The Pebble mine PR people will talk about jobs and salmon and culture, too, but make no mistake. They are here to make money. They are here to take what they want and then leave. They will not protect our salmon, our culture and our way of life. If EPA settles today it will be disrespecting everything it gathered from our communities. It will be disrespecting science. It will be disrespecting hundreds of thousands of comments saying yes to Bristol Bay and no to Pebble. It is throwing out the fact that Pebble will destroy Bristol Bay. We are the protectors of our home. And we are not going anywhere. We have said no to this mine for over ten years. Our ancestors have always thought generations ahead and our fight against Pebble is no different- we will stay unified. We will say no to Pebble Mine today, tomorrow, and at every turn.”

Bristol Bay Native Association CEO Ralph Andersen stated:

“Two EPA Administrators visited our region, heard our voices and our concerns. President Obama came to Dillingham, he met with us and saw our region and our fisheries firsthand. EPA Administrator Pruitt has not even bothered to have any discussions or invite us into any conversations into what EPA changes are being planned four our region- that shows disrespect. What you’ve heard today and what you’ve heard from our region in the past isn’t changing- we are resolute in our unity against the Pebble Mine, this types of mining threaten our land, our water, our fish, and our wildlife. Subsistence not an abstract concept. Subsistence is our way of life.”

Nondalton Tribal Council President William Evanoff stated:

“We’ve been fighting for over 10 years to protect our land, water, fish, and animals- they don’t have a voice in any of this and we have to be their voice. Pebble claims they have wide support throughout the communities closest to the mine and I can tell you that couldn’t be farther from the truth. Nondalton is the closest village to the Pebble site –our people will be most impacted if Pebble is allowed to develop. I’m here today to tell you today that Pebble’s lies don’t fit the facts.  Our Tribe has never supported Pebble and does not support this project. Do not be fooled by Pebble’s attempts to mislead the public. When our way of life and everything we hold sacred it at risk we know what we are doing is right fighting this mine- our future generations are depending on us.”

You can find full audio of the press conference by clicking HERE.

Alannah Hurley, United Tribes of Bristol Bay Executive Director, 907-843-1633, ahurley@utbb.org
Representative Bryce Edgmon, Speaker of the Alaska House of Representatives 907-632-3001
Russell Nelson, Bristol Bay Native Corporation Chairman of the Land Committee 907-843-1075
Norm Van Vactor, Bristol Bay Economic Development Corporation
Robin Samuelsen, Curyung Tribal Chief, Executive Board Member of Nunamta Aulukestai, Bristol Bay Native Corporation Board Member, & Chairman of the Board of Bristol Bay Economic Development Corporation.
Sharon Clark, Nunamta Aulukestai (Caretakers of Our Land)
Joseph Chythlook, Bristol Bay Native Corporation Chairman of the Board
Ralph Andersen, Bristol Bay Native Association
William Evanoff, Nondalton Tribal Council

Dahr Jamail interviewed by Derrick Jensen about US Navy’s Northern Edge

This interview was conducted by Derrick Jensen for his Resistance Radio series. Find options to listen to this interview, or any in the series, at the Resistance Radio archive.

Dahr Jamail is an award winning journalist and author who is a full-time staff reporter for Truthout.org. His work is currently focusing on Anthropogenic Climate Disruption. We discuss the harm caused by massive military maneuvers off of Alaska.

Derrick Jensen: Something terrible is happening off the coast of Alaska. Can you tell me about that?

Dahr Jamail: The Navy is poised to begin what they call Northern Edge, a huge, joint exercise they’re doing in conjunction with the Air Force, Marines and Army. The Navy’s aspect is going to focus in a huge area – over 8,000 square nautical miles, off the coast of Alaska, between Cordova and Kodiak. In this giant rectangle they’re permitted to conduct active and passive sonar, weapons testing, and live-fire exercises, including bombs, missiles, bullets and torpedoes. It starts June 15th and continues for at least two weeks. They’re permitted to continue doing this year after year. Plans are in the works for them to request permits up to 2030.

What’s really troubling about this, aside from the obvious, is that the area in question is critical habitat for all five Alaska salmon species, as well as almost a dozen whale species, including the highly endangered North Pacific Right Whale, of which there are only about 30 left. It also includes dolphins and sea lions and hundreds of other marine species in the area. There are a dozen native tribes living along coastal Alaska who are going to be directly impacted by their subsistence living being damaged and poisoned: destroyed. Some of those tribes include the Eskimo, the Eyak, the Athabaskans, Tlingit, and the Shungnak and Aleut tribes,

There have been and continue to be uprisings in the communities in coastal Alaska against this. For example, the cities of both Kodiak and Cordova have passed resolutions opposing the Navy’s plans, but the Navy has basically thumbed their noses at these voices of protest and are loading up their bombs.

D.J.: How is this going to harm the creatures who live there?

Dahr J.: The Navy is permitted to release as much as 352,000 pounds of what they call ‘expended material’ every year. That includes the live munitions that I mentioned ― missiles, bombs, torpedoes, etc. ― but also other types of things that will be released into the marine environment. Just by way of example, one of the propellants in one of the missiles and torpedoes they want to use contains cyanide. The EPA’s ‘allowable’ limit of cyanide is one part per billion, and the type of cyanide in the Navy torpedo is going to be introducing cyanide into the waters of Alaska in the range of 140 to 150 parts per billion.

Other impacts include ‘takes’, which are basically a military bureaucratic way of covering over a death. The Navy’s own Environmental Impact Statement estimates that over the five-year period that their war games are going to be conducted, there will be over 182,000 takes.

There are two ways they’ll be killing marine mammals. First is direct impact of them literally being exploded by bombs or shot by bullets or internally hemorrhaged by massive sonar. Secondarily, essential behaviors will be disrupted like surfacing or having babies or nursing.

Over a dozen large ships will be roaming the area, preventing fisherfolks from using it. Natives relying on that area for subsistence fishing and living will not be able to carry that out.

D.J.: You mentioned sonar. Can you talk more about that?

Dahr J.: It’s not your average sonar that a transport vessel or a fisherperson might use to navigate or to track the depth of the water. We’re talking about weapons grade sonar. The Navy regularly conducts underwater sonar weapons testing. They’re developing different types of sonar that they’ve weaponized to use to knock out communications and electronics, and I think they’re aiming towards killing humans in Navy vessels from other countries.

The NRDC won a lawsuit against the Navy down off Southern California for using this type of sonar. They showed the Navy was knowingly, deleteriously impacting over nine million different marine biota ― fish, whales, etc. ― by the use of this sonar. There are well-documented cases around the globe of pods of whales, dolphins, etc., that get hit by this sonar, and then these mammals wash up on the shore. A lot of times you’ll see their ear drums are exploded and it causes internal hemorrhaging. There have been cases of dolphins washing up, literally with blood coming out of their heads because they happened to have been where the Navy is using this type of weapons grade sonar.

To be clear, this sonar is powerful enough to literally explode the eardrums of whales and dolphins. That is how these mammals communicate; that is how they navigate; having that ability destroyed or compromised in any way basically means these mammals are going to die. And when the Navy is using it in a way that literally explodes their internal organs to the point where blood is coming out of their head that gives you an idea of how powerful it is.

D.J.: Here is something I wrote in Endgame about a National Science Foundation ship that was using air guns to fire sonic blasts of up to 260 dB, to use for mapping the ocean floor: “Damage to human hearing begins at 85 dB, a police siren at 30 meters is 100 dB. And decibels are logarithmic, meaning that every 10 dB increase translates to ten times more intensity. And sounds ― because human perception is also logarithmic ― twice as loud.

So what that means is that the blast from those research vessels was ten quadrillion times more intense than a siren at 30 meters, and would sound to humans 16,384 times as loud. The sound of a jet taking off at 600 meters is 110 dB, a rock concert is 120 dB, and whales and other creatures are subjected to sounds 100 trillion times more intense than that. The threshold at which humans die from sound is 160dB.”

Dahr J.: That gives people an idea of what we’re talking about: the military developing sound to use it as a weapon. As though the oceans aren’t already suffering enough, from the extreme amount of plastic pollution you’ve written and talked about for decades that’s now insidious around all the oceans on the planet, to acidification from rising temperatures.

And now on top of that, the military decides to go and use bombs and use sound weapons up in some of the most pristine waters on the planet outside of Antarctica. Bear in mind, these waters are at the end of an undersea current that is an upwelling, and this water is a thousand years old. This is why Alaska salmon are so prized, because they are a clean fish, they’re pure, and the Alaska salmon brand relies on it. Not to commercialize this, but it’s important to think about in regards to the people in Alaska relying so heavily on the salmon for both subsistence and to earn a living up there. All of that is being compromised.

The Navy’s action is creating some interesting collaborations between people across the political spectrum that normally wouldn’t mix.

D.J.: Leaving aside this culture’s death urge, why is the military doing this? What is their rationale?

Dahr J.: I mentioned in my article, Destroying What Remains: How the US Navy Plans to War Game the Arctic, that the Navy is increasingly focused on possible climate change wars up in the melting waters of the Arctic. In that context, it has no intentions of caretaking the environment when conducting its military exercises.

This connection was made amazingly clear to me in the course of writing this piece. I was in Alaska getting the ground data for this story, doing interviews. I went to Cordova, went over to Kodiak, passed through Anchorage, talking to people all along the way, and then I came back home to Washington State to write.

I live on Puget Sound, right on the Strait of Juan de Fuca. I’m writing this story about the impending Naval exercise up in the Gulf of Alaska, the largest of its kind in the more than 30 years the Navy has been doing them in that area. Meanwhile, about two miles from my house, out on the Strait of Juan de Fuca, Shell is bringing their giant drilling rig over to the port of Seattle where it’s going to tie up. So we have the military exercises at the same time they’re positioning these rigs in Seattle, getting them ready to take up to Alaska to start drilling.

It doesn’t take a genius to see the writing on the wall as to the timings of these. It’s not a coincidence. The Navy is getting ready to protect so-called US interests to go up into the Arctic. They’re racing Russia; they’re racing Scandinavian countries. Basically anyone who has any kind of border with the Arctic is in full preparation to go up there, in a race for what’s left, to try to tap into the oil that’s been inaccessible under the ice.

Over a year ago I wrote about the Navy conducting their own study and estimating we would see ice-free periods in the summer in the Arctic starting by 2016. A couple of weeks ago, the current satellite data mapping Arctic ice, both in extent and volume, showed Arctic ice at its lowest volume on record. So it’s certainly possible that by late summer of 2016, meaning late August, early September, we’ll see ice-free periods.

So that’s the context in which all of this is happening. The military is getting ready. That’s why there’s this massive uptick in war-gaming across the entire country ― not just the Navy, but on land, the Air Force is doing things, the Marines are doing things ― because the military is positioning itself for potential war against Russia and China, but also, the race for the Arctic resources is clearly very high on their agenda.

D.J.: This is a great example of something I’ve long thought: that this culture will not have a voluntary transformation to a sane and sustainable way of living. Instead of being horrified that the Arctic will soon be ice-free, they are looking at it with what can only be deemed ‘lust’ for the resources that will be made available. I find it impossible to express through words the disgust, contempt, and hatred that that makes me feel.

Dahr J.: One reason I wanted to do this article was that I lived up in Anchorage for ten years. That’s where I was living when the Iraq war broke out, and my work as a journalist is ultimately what brought me to move out of Alaska. But I love the state, meaning I love the nature there, and I loved going into the mountains and camping and climbing, and going out on boats with people into the waters. I reveled in the powerful natural beauty of the state. And of course, that includes the oceans and the marine mammals. When I learned of the Navy’s plans, I wanted to go up there and report on it, kind of out of a protective urge for this place that is so close to my heart. And when I was up there working on this story and talking to all these people who were going to be impacted by these Navy exercises, I felt that same kind of anger.

Or maybe first I just felt mystified: not only are we going off the cliff as a species, because of the industrial growth society and what it’s done to the planet and what it’s doing and continues to do, but we’re accelerating! The planet is showing us every distress signal it possibly can; we’re watching huge parts of the ecosystem die, increasingly vast numbers of species go extinct, even more and more public awareness of the possibility of our own species rendering itself extinct; but instead of taking a precautionary approach, slowing down, pausing a minute to think that maybe what we’re doing isn’t the best thing, it’s ‘let’s accelerate as fast as possible’ into this dark, death-giving future of ‘we’re going to war game, we’re going to drop more ordinance, we’re going to get ready to go into one of the most pristine areas left on the planet, pollute it like it’s never been polluted before, all for the sake of drilling it, sucking out more oil that shouldn’t even be burned in the first place, because it’s only going to further accelerate what we’re already doing to the planet!’ It really is stupefying; it’s almost beyond imagination. It’s something out of a really bad sci-fi novel, but, unfortunately, it’s the reality.

D.J.: Can we talk now about some of those surprising alliances you mentioned?

Dahr J.: There have been many. For example, the commercial fishing community in Alaska aren’t known for being ‘lefty/greeny’ environmentalists. They’re there to catch the maximum amount of fish allowed by law every season, and make as much money as they can. But when this news of the Navy’s plans started to spread around coastal Alaska, people from these very, very politically conservative fisherfolk across two different unions in the state started to band together, and literally everyone I spoke with about the Navy exercise ― every fisherperson, every person in the fishermen’s union across the state ― was opposed to the Navy’s plans.

And when the Navy played the national security card, saying they’re doing this to protect the state and the waters, the people in Alaska called B.S. Not just environmentalists, but people from all these other groups from the Alaska Marine Conservation Council to the Alaskans First! Coalition to fishermen’s unions to everyone banding together and saying look, we’re absolutely opposed to this.

It’s hard to find a silver lining to this story, but if there is one, that might be it: we’re starting to witness a coalescing of groups across the political spectrum who are seeing the madness perpetrated by the industrial growth society and who are starting to stand up against it together.

D.J.: Are people making that connection between these destructive activities and the industrial growth society? And were they making the connections that you were making, about how we’re going over a cliff and just accelerating?

Dahr J.: Not so much, unfortunately.. One of the most important voices in the story, however, does. Emily Stolarcyk works for the Eyak Preservation Council out of Cordova. It’s an environmental and social justice non-profit with a primary aim to protect wild salmon habitat, period.

Emily sees the bigger picture. She’s gone out of her way to sound the alarm bell on this and has therefore, of course, been targeted by the government of Alaska and the Navy itself. People are really coming after her now.

Unfortunately, the average person I spoke with tended not to see beyond the immediate economic impact. For a lot of folks, their prime motivation was not losing the Alaska salmon brand, in that they can’t have news come out that the salmon are contaminated in any way, because if that market tanks, they’re in big trouble.

D.J.: How is she being targeted?

Dahr J.: For example, the Navy has tried to discredit her, even though she has gone out of her way to quote directly from the Navy’s own Environmental Impact Statement. It’s online, people can look it up themselves, and she literally is using quotes. The Navy tells people she is not giving accurate information, that she’s inflating figures, and so on. The military is deified by mainstream America and by the corporate media as a benevolent force that is only there to protect us. Of course that’s absolute nonsense, but because of that misperception, most people still tend to believe the military.

Emily has also been targeted by Senator Lisa Murkowski, a hardcore right-wing, anti-environment, pro-corporate profit, pro-fossil fuel industry, pro-military senator up there in Alaska. She sent the state fisheries person down to meet with Emily. The fisheries person called Emily on her personal cell phone at night to cuss her out and threaten her. It was bad enough he later emailed her an apology for it. So there have been bellicose threats, bellicose language used against her from this person, and from the Navy itself.

The Navy has found anyone in these communities who could potentially be on their side and actively worked to turn them against Emily Stolarcyk and the Eyak Preservation Council. They’ve demonized them, putting out false statements, trying to make it seem the Eyak Preservation Council isn’t actually working for their stated purpose of preserving critical salmon habitat. Basically negative propaganda campaigns run against her and the organization she works for.

D.J.: How can people support her?

Dahr J: Other people need to take up the fight against the Navy. They need to get up on the facts of the story, understand what the Navy is planning on doing, and join in the fight. They don’t necessarily need to come work alongside Emily Stolarcyk, but to understand the relevance of her work and the importance of it. These types of Navy war games are happening off the coast of Alaska, Washington, Oregon and California, and have been for a long time. So, anyone in proximity to those coasts, this is our fight, too. And all of us need to be talking about this, all of us need to be getting this into the media and getting as many activists involved as possible, people who might have other ideas about how they can help.

D.J.: You mentioned Lisa Murkowski. Is the problem there individual politicians, that if she were replaced these atrocities might not occur? Or is the problem more institutional, and widespread?

Dahr J.: Lisa Murkowski is of course terrible, as is Congressman Don Young. No matter what, those two are always full steam ahead with anything the military and the fossil fuel industry want. They are villains in this story: they are actively working against the interest of nature and the planet in every possible, conceivable way. But the problem really is institutional.

Let’s use Washington state as a case study. Governor Jay Inslee paints himself as the ‘green’ governor, and when I first moved here I thought, ‘yeah, this guy is doing a lot of good stuff. He’s taking the climate change issue head on, he’s saying a lot of the right things and sometimes doing some of the right things.’

But because of how deeply embedded the military is in this state and how much money the state gets from their presence, this is a governor who knowingly accepts what the Navy is doing here. He refuses to take a stance directly against the wargaming that’s already going on here or against future wargame plans for the state of Washington, and is basically in their back pocket. The same for Derek Kilmer, one of the representatives here. And the same is true for numerous other political so-called representatives.

I’m sure the same can be said for California. I think many people hear about these military exercises, and think, “The Democrats are in charge, and they wouldn’t do this.” But political party is irrelevant in this story with the military. The military is so embedded in these states and there’s so much money being brought into the states by their presence that you’d be hard-pressed to find a political so-called representative who is not on the take. That gives you an idea why there isn’t any real political pushback against these exercises.

D.J.: We all know that the military is a form for massive corporate welfare. It’s a giant Keynesian stimulus. And we all know capitalism relies on subsidies. But that always leads to the question: why can’t they just subsidize nice things instead of bad things?

During the 1970s, liberal George McGovern asked somebody at one of the military contractors, “Since all you care about is making money, could we just subsidize your corporation to make school buses instead of bombers? Would you do that?”

The military contractor said, “Sure!” and then they both burst out laughing because they knew that Congress would never allow that in the budget.

Dahr J.: At this point the US military is in the final stage of empire. When we look through history, empires use numerous ways to maintain control and power. There’s the economy, there’s propaganda, there are appeals to people’s morality, etc. The final stage – and the weakest and the shortest – is using military might, pushing the military frontiers out as far as possible and putting all their resources into maintaining and growing the military. Then they collapse relatively shortly thereafter. That’s exactly what the US is doing.

Today, while we do this interview, we have news of them setting up yet another new US base in Iraq and sending more troops over there. Domestic military exercises are pushing new bounds of what’s ever been done before, looking at expanding up into the Arctic, and preparing for war gaming against Russia and China in the future.

Over 50% of all US taxpayer money is going directly to the Pentagon in one way or another. I think that underscores what you just said, Derrick, about the preposterous idea that something could be done differently. I don’t think anyone in the government could really take seriously any attempts to significantly defund the military. At this stage of the game everyone understands the military is the final weapon the US government is using geopolitically at this point. I think anyone who challenges that and thinks they’re going to change how the government and economy function at this stage of the game is not living in reality.

D.J.: Apart from the environmental degradation, do we know the numbers on how much this military exercise is going to cost?

Dahr J.: No. The military is very careful not to release total figures of these types of exercises. You always have to try to puzzle figures out from hints. For example, the Navy is trying to push through electromagnetic warfare training out on the Olympic Peninsula, planning on starting early next year. They want to use these jet aircraft called Growlers, maybe because they’re the loudest aircraft ever built. Extremely loud – ear-splittingly loud.

To fly one of those costs over $12,000 an hour. That’s just one jet. That’s not a war ship. It’s difficult to get the numbers, but I think it’s safe to say that a two-week joint military exercise involving a dozen ships, however many aircraft are going to be on those ships, all the personnel, all the weapons that are going to be used, all the fuel burned, will very easily cost hundreds of millions of dollars.

D.J.: What can people do if they are in Alaska or elsewhere, to prevent this from happening again?

Dahr J.: People need to recognize this is happening not just in and around Alaska, but all over. There’s a massive domestic military expansion happening everywhere. People need to become aware of this and make others aware of it. They need to get this information out there. And then they need to start raising hell. They need to start fighting it.

We’re starting to see people standing up, and we’re starting to see them work together.

This whole struggle dovetails with what’s happening in the battles against the pipelines and against fracking that we’re seeing down in Texas now, and across the Midwest, where really interesting alliances are being formed between some pretty right-wing political groups as well as some pretty hard-core left-leaning groups of environmentalists and other activists.

Just like those movements draw these alliances, people who are opposed to this military expansion—and that should be all of us—need to work together to stop this. People need to get involved. The sooner the better.

Land Grab Bill Passes U.S. House Threatening Wilderness Areas

Land Grab Bill Passes U.S. House Threatening Wilderness Areas

By The Wilderness Society

Today the U.S. House of Representatives passed a package of anti-wilderness bills (H.R. 2578), including H.R. 1505, the “National Security and Federal Lands Protection Act.”

H.R. 1505 would hand over “operational control” of federal public lands within 100 miles of the Canadian and Mexican borders to the U.S. border patrol, and could open national parks, wildlife refuges, wilderness and other public lands to development, such as construction and road building. Rep. Raul Grijalva’s (D, AZ-7) amendment to strike H.R. 1505 from the package was unfortunately defeated. This package of bills now awaits movement in the Senate.

Prior to the House vote, a coalition of Hispanic and immigration reform advocates, Native American tribal organizations, sportsmen, businesses and conservation groups, sent a letter to members of Congress voicing their opposition and asking members to vote against the bill.

“H.R. 1505 is an overreach that would adversely affect everyone who enjoys America’s public lands,” said David Moulton, senior legislative director at The Wilderness Society. “The bill would allow road building, construction and development on lands that are loved for hunting, fishing, hiking and other recreational activities. This vote was not in the best interest of the people who enjoy the land for its natural beauty.”

H.R. 1505 is part of an anti-wilderness package that includes, among other destructive bills:

• The Sealaska bill would give away tens of thousands of acres of high-value public land from the Tongass National Forest to the Sealaska Corporation. This would allow the corporation to clear-cut valuable forest land and take ownership of the best recreation sites at the heads of bays or mouths of salmon streams. This land giveaway would effectively prevent a long-planned transition out of old growth logging on the national forest, and privatize prime recreation spots that are currently open to the American public for fishing, hunting, and recreation and are relied upon by many small tourism, outfitter and fisheries businesses.

• Title XI, the “Grazing Improvement Act,” is a virtual giveaway of over 247 million acres of Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and National Forest rangelands to the approximately 27,000 livestock producers who have grazing privileges on the lands managed by these two agencies. The bill would change the term of federal livestock grazing leases from the current ten years to 20 years.  No other government entity in the U.S. issues 20-year livestock grazing permits.   In addition, Title XI reduces the level of environmental scrutiny of livestock grazing practices on BLM and National Forest lands by allowing these agencies to exempt the issuance of grazing permits from National Environmental Policy Act review.

• The Quincy Library Group bill would take an unsuccessful and outmoded forest management pilot program and expand it across much of northern California, while simultaneously authorizing logging in roadless areas, spotted owl habitat, salmon habitat and other areas of critical environmental importance and mandating minimum annual timber cuts.

Opposed by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), H.R. 1505 could endanger personal freedoms by closing without notice our lands to hunting, fishing, tourism and recreation, all multi-million dollar industries that support small businesses.  DHS Secretary Napolitano testified before Congress in opposition to H.R. 1505, saying it “is unnecessary, and it’s bad policy.” DHS benefits from their close collaboration with law enforcement counterparts in the land management agencies. In addition to threatening lands, the bill threatens this collaboration.

H.R. 1505 is an extreme and radical measure that would put at risk 49 million acres of public lands in 17 states, sweeping away 16 bedrock environmental and land management laws in Joshua Tree National Park, Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness, Acadia National Park and any other protected land that sits within 100 miles of the border.

The Wilderness Society recently updated the report, “Wilderness Under Siege,” to reflect the movement of these and other bills and what they would mean to America’s lands, waters and natural legacy. Also mentioned in the report is H.R. 4089 — a Trojan horse bill that includes a sneak attack on wilderness. H.R. 4089 recently passed the House, and awaits passage in the Senate.

From The Wilderness Society: http://wilderness.org/content/land-grab-masked-national-security-measure-passes-us-house-representatives

Photo by CDC on Unsplash

Scientists raise estimate for methane releases after studying seeps in Arctic

By Sara Reardon / New Scientist

Melting Arctic permafrost could put even more methane – a potent greenhouse gas – into the atmosphere than previously thought, with worrying implications for the pace of global warming.

Many ice sheets that sit like caps over rock crevices trap natural seeps of methane; when they melt, the gas can quickly be released into the atmosphere in “burps”. Geologists have long suspected that iced-over geological structures might entrap vast stores of ancient methane that seep from coal and gas deposits, although no one knows exactly how much is there.

These stores, along with deep-water stores and shallow (more recent) deposits of decaying plant material in frozen soil, might open as the Arctic warms, releasing vast amounts of methane. Then, as the climate warms, more methane seeps could open and warming could accelerate.

During the winter, when Alaska was covered with ice, Katey Walter Anthony of the University of Alaska in Fairbanks and her colleagues flew planes over 6700 lakes in the state, looking for holes in the ice that might indicate lakes with methane seeps. They analysed gas from 50 holes and carbon dated the methane leaking from them to determine the age of the gas. They did a similar survey of 25 lakes in Greenland.

Ancient gas

At boundaries where permafrost cover is melting or glaciers are retreating, the researchers found old methane, indicating that it came from deep in the Earth and is only now being released. The team then created a model that extrapolated where these natural pockets would be located in lakes throughout Alaska. They found the likeliest locations at the edges of ice sheets.

The team estimate that Alaska is emitting 50 to 70 per cent more methane into the atmosphere than previously thought. Geological records indicate that the model would also apply to deep methane stores in Canada and Siberia, currently covered by ice.

Walter Anthony says that the presence of oil and gas in the Antarctic indicates it may hold ancient methane as well. “This is a far more nuanced study than has been done,” says Carolyn Ruppel of the US Geological Survey in Woods Hole, Massachusetts. Although she praises Walter Anthony’s modelling work, she points out that extrapolating the findings to draw conclusions about methane seeps on other continents is very difficult.

Any release of methane could accelerate warming at the poles and speed the entire process, Walter Anthony says, but it’s hard to predict exactly how soon this could happen. To answer this, her group plans to look at how methane is captured and stored in permafrost, and the pattern in which it melts.

From New Scientist: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn21830-release-of-arctic-methane-could-accelerate-warming.html

Climate change forcing Yup’ik Eskimo community in western Alaska to evacuate

By Thin Lei Win / AlertNet

The 400-strong Eskimo community in Newtok in western Alaska is living on shaky ground. Literally.

The permafrost – the permanently frozen subsoil – on which the village is located is melting as temperatures warm.

Advanced erosion caused by the Ninglick River next to the village and seasonal flooding and storm surges are further threats to its existence.

The Arctic Sea ice which normally acts as a buffer to storm surges is also reducing, making the village vulnerable to future extreme weather events, said Robin Bronen from the University of Alaska who has been working with the community for five years.

“We don’t have hurricanes in Alaska but we’ve been experiencing hurricane-force winds,” she told AlertNet at the sixth International Conference on Community-Based Adaptation to Climate Change in the Vietnamese capital Hanoi.

Newtok, which is below sea-level, is already facing problems with saline intrusion in the water systems, she said.

“They have serious issues with sanitation too because the sewage lagoon is eroding. It was on top of frozen earth and it’s now melting,” added Bronen, who is also a human rights lawyer.

For this Yup’ik-speaking Eskimo community of subsistence hunters and fishermen, the only option left for adapting to the changing climate is to relocate.

The Newtok Planning Group, made up of community elders, federal and state agencies and non-government organisations, has chosen a spot nine miles south on Nelson Island called Mertarvik – it means “getting water from the spring” in Yup’ik.

“Their vision of their community is to be sustainable and resilient for the long-term so they’re looking at alternative technologies to get the electricity they need and alternative forms of housing so they use less energy,” said Bronen.

Like the residents of Newtok many other people around the world are likely to become climate refugees in the coming decades. Experts say Newtok’s experience underlines the urgent need to come up with a co-ordinated approach for relocating communities forced to abandon their homes because of rising sea levels and changing weather patterns.

Read more from AlertNet