Legislature(2021 - 2022)GRUENBERG 120
04/27/2021 10:00 AM House FISHERIES
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB182 | |
| Presentation: Ak-bc Transboundary Salmon Rivers | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 182 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON FISHERIES
April 27, 2021
10:02 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Geran Tarr, Chair
Representative Louise Stutes, Vice Chair
Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins
Representative Andi Story
Representative Sarah Vance
Representative Kevin McCabe
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Dan Ortiz
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 182
"An Act extending the fishery resource landing tax credit for
certain taxpayers that harvest fishery resources under the
provisions of a community development quota; providing for an
effective date by amending the effective date of secs. 16 and
23, ch. 61, SLA 2014; and providing for an effective date."
- MOVED HB 182 OUT OF COMMITTEE
PRESENTATION: AK-BC TRANSBOUNDARY SALMON RIVERS
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 182
SHORT TITLE: EXTEND FISHERY RESOURCE LAND. TAX CREDIT
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) EDGMON
04/19/21 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/19/21 (H) FSH, FIN
04/27/21 (H) FSH AT 10:00 AM GRUENBERG 120
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE BRYCE EDGMON
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: As prime sponsor, introduced HB 182.
SETH WHITTEN, Staff
Representative Bryce Edgmon
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding HB 182 on
behalf of Representative Edgmon, prime sponsor.
NORMAN VAN VACTOR, President & CEO
Bristol Bay Economic Development Corporation
Dillingham, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided invited testimony in support of HB
182.
ANGEL DROBNICA, Director of Fisheries and Government Affairs
Aleutian-Pribilof Island Community Development Association
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided invited testimony in support of HB
182.
CONNOR BELL, Analyst
Legislative Finance Division
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HB 182, answered
questions.
NICOLE REYNOLDS, Deputy Director
Tax Division
Department of Revenue
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HB 182, answered
questions.
JENNIFER WILLIAMS, Government Affairs
Yukon Delta Fisheries Development Association
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 182.
BREANNA WALKER, Campaign Coordinator
Salmon Beyond Borders
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the presentation on AK-BC
Transboundary Salmon River, provided a PowerPoint, titled
"Salmon Beyond Borders."
CHRIS SERGEANT, Research Scientist
Flathead Lake Biological Station
University of Montana
Seattle, Washington
POSITION STATEMENT: During the presentation on AK-BC
Transboundary Salmon River, provided a PowerPoint, titled
"Monitoring the health of rivers shared by Alaska and British
Columbia," dated 4/27/21.
RAYMOND PADDOCK, Environmental Coordinator
Central Council of the Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska
("Tlingit and Haida")
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony during the presentation
regarding AK-BC Transboundary Salmon Rivers.
TIS PETERMAN, Special Projects Consultant
Southeast Alaska Indigenous Transboundary Commission (SEITC)
Wrangell, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony during the presentation
regarding AK-BC Transboundary Salmon Rivers.
FRANCES LEACH, Executive Director
United Fishermen of Alaska (UFA)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony during the presentation
regarding AK-BC Transboundary Salmon Rivers.
ACTION NARRATIVE
10:02:30 AM
CHAIR GERAN TARR called the House Special Committee on Fisheries
meeting to order at 10:02 a.m. Representatives Stutes, Story,
Kreiss-Tomkins, and Tarr were present at the call to order.
Representatives McCabe and Vance arrived as the meeting was in
progress.
HB 182-EXTEND FISHERY RESOURCE LAND. TAX CREDIT
10:03:55 AM
CHAIR TARR announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 182, "An Act extending the fishery resource
landing tax credit for certain taxpayers that harvest fishery
resources under the provisions of a community development quota;
providing for an effective date by amending the effective date
of secs. 16 and 23, ch. 61, SLA 2014; and providing for an
effective date."
10:04:02 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BRYCE EDGMON, Alaska State Legislature, as prime
sponsor, introduced HB 182. He explained HB 182 would extend
the fishery resource landing tax credit. The tax credit
originated in 2014 and expired in 2020 [as scheduled] because
the legislature had a shortened session [due to the COVID-19
pandemic and was unable to act on extending it]. This bill
would extend the tax credit from today until 2030.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON recounted that in 1993 the legislature saw
that the ground fish industry that was fishing outside of Alaska
waters in Three-Mile Zone was getting more prominent. Adopted
in 1993 and implemented in 1994, the fishery landing tax was
instituted because those vessels would come in and use shoreside
facilities. In 2014 a tax credit program was established for
the [Western Alaska] Community Development Quota (CDQ) Program,
which is comprised of six regional organizations that represent
about 65 communities in Western Alaska. This tax credit program
allows many of those harvesters and others that fish outside the
state's waters to contribute to the local CDQ organizations to
help provide for funding for education, employment, research,
and other nonprofit endeavors. It comes to the state with no
unrestricted general fund (UGF) dollars attached to it, and the
bill has a zero fiscal note. This legislation would extend this
successful program that benefits Western Alaska communities to
2030.
10:06:59 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS said it is great to see all six
CDQ groups speaking with a common voice in the supporting
materials. He asked whether litigation is currently ongoing
regarding the constitutionality of the fishery landing tax.
10:07:33 AM
SETH WHITTEN, Staff, Representative Bryce Edgmon, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Representative Edgmon, prime sponsor
of HB 182, confirmed a case is currently before the Alaska
Supreme Court pertaining to the landing tax. He said he is
unsure on when a decision is anticipated.
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS offered his understanding that if
the plaintiffs were to prevail it would strike down the entirety
of the landing tax and then that would render moot this tax
credit program.
MR. WITTEN confirmed that that is correct. If that were to
happen, he said, legislative action might be seen to try to
figure out how to make that tax work within whatever parameters
were established.
10:08:29 AM
CHAIR TARR opened invited testimony on HB 182.
10:09:21 AM
NORMAN VAN VACTOR, President & CEO, Bristol Bay Economic
Development Corporation (BBEDC), provided invited testimony in
support of HB 182. He stated that BBEDC is one of the six CDQ
entities and represents 17 coastal communities in its region.
He related that the Community Development Program was
established under the Hickel Administration in 1992 and codified
in the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
in 1996. This remarkable program provides Alaska's coastal
communities along the Bering Sea specific harvest quotas in the
federal water fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).
The benefits of harvesting this quota are invested and
reinvested in fisheries development, regional development
programs, and provide employment and educational opportunities
to BBEDC's community residents.
MR. VAN VACTOR specified that the Alaska State Legislature
enacted the fishery resource landing tax in 1993 and the CDQ tax
credit provision was enacted in 2014. The for-profit fishing
partners that harvest BBEDC's CDQ quota are eligible to
participate in the tax credit program and, in return,
redistribute those funds to BBEDC. The [Thirty-First Alaska
State Legislature] considered extending the sunset provision in
Senate Bill 184, but the bill failed to advance due to the chaos
created by the [COVID-19] virus. Presently, BBEDC relies upon
the fishery resource landing tax credit program to supplement
the funds that BBEDC provides to the Bristol Bay Science and
Research Institute (BBSRI), which does critical and
collaborative research work with the Alaska Department of Fish
and Game (ADF&G) under a memorandum of understanding (MOU).
Extending this program through 2030 would provide stability for
BBEDC's long-term planning in the region and would further
solidify BBEDC's collaborative work with ADF&G.
10:12:42 AM
ANGEL DROBNICA, Director of Fisheries and Government Affairs,
Aleutian-Pribilof Island Community Development Association
(APICDA), provided invited testimony in support of HB 182. She
stated that APICDA represents six remote coastal communities in
Southwest Alaska and is one of the six CDQ organizations with a
mission to increase direct participation in Bering Sea and
Aleutian Island fisheries and to help develop sustainable
fisheries-based economies. The revenue generated from APICDA's
quota holdings and fisheries investments is utilized to create
jobs, build infrastructure, provide scholarships and workforce
training, and help support a wide range of local priority
initiatives and projects through grant programs to eligible
community entities.
MS. DROBNICA said she agrees with Mr. Van Vactor regarding this
remarkable program and its crafters on the state and federal
levels. She offered APICDA's strong support for HB 182 and the
continuation of the fishery resource landing tax credit program
through which APICDA's harvest partners are provided an
opportunity to attribute a portion of their landing tax
liability from the harvest of APICDA's CDQ quota for specific
fisheries investments identified in statute. This meaningful
program has been used by APICDA to advance its mission through
supporting training opportunities, direct employment in the
seafood industry, and to help with shoreside facility
improvements.
MS. DROBNICA related the Central Bering Sea Fishermen's
Association's (CBSFA's) support for HB 182, the CDQ group for
St. Paul Island, whose representatives were unable to make the
hearing due to a conflict. Responding to Chair Tarr, she
confirmed she is speaking on behalf of the CBSFA as well as
APICDA, and further noted that a letter [included in the
committee packet] was submitted to the committee on behalf of
all six CDQ organizations.
10:15:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE referred to the fiscal note and offered
his understanding that a portion of this is not designated
general fund (DGF) and a portion is. He further asked whether
the municipalities' part of this or the CDQ's part of this is
sweepable.
10:16:00 AM
CONNOR BELL, Analyst, Legislative Finance Division (LFD), Alaska
State Legislature, noted it is not a standard role for the
Legislative Finance Division to provide recommendations.
However, he continued, this is required by statute, so the
division does recommend continuation of this provision given it
does not affect state revenues; those revenues are separate and
are a municipal share based on AS 43.77.050. The division's
recommendation is based on only the municipal share portion of
the revenue being affected. He deferred to the Tax Division to
speak to what aspect is sweepable.
CHAIR TARR offered her understanding that Mr. Bell is saying the
Legislative Finance Division can give a positive recommendation
for this because the tax credit is used against the municipal
revenue portion of the revenue.
MR. BELL confirmed that is correct.
CHAIR TARR invited the Tax Division to respond.
10:18:11 AM
NICOLE REYNOLDS, Deputy Director, Tax Division, Department of
Revenue (DOR), responded that the CDQ credit can only be used
against the municipal share of the fishery resource landing tax
revenue. The state's share of the proceeds is recorded in the
unrestricted general fund (UGF) and those revenues would remain
the same. The municipal share of the proceeds is reported in
the designated general fund (DGF), which would be reduced by the
CDQ credit, and those amounts are reflected in the Department of
Revenue's fiscal note.
CHAIR TARR offered her understanding that this would not be in
the category of funds that are considered sweepable if the state
portion of the revenue comes in as unrestricted general fund.
MS. REYNOLDS answered she believes that's correct, but she is
not entirely familiar with the term "sweepable" or not. She
explained that these funds in the DGF are what are shared with
the municipalities. So, in the Tax Division's annual report,
those numbers would be reduced but the UGF's numbers would not
be reduced.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON offered his understanding that these
monies would not be sweepable, while Alaska Marine Highway funds
and the 30 or 40 separate statutory driven entities are
sweepable. He said this is different because the money flows
through the Department of Revenue and not through a board that
does something in statute.
10:20:53 AM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE expressed her concern that this would
reduce the money going to municipalities, but the money is still
there, it is essentially a trade. She asked what the added
benefit of that is because obviously the municipalities could
use this funding but it's being utilized in a different way.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON replied that the tax credit has been in
place since 2014 with a one-year standdown because of the
legislature's inability to finish its work last year. While
researching the bill, he related, there was no opposition from
municipalities saying they would like to have this money
redirected back to them. Regarding the benefits to the CDQ
program itself, he said the six regional organizations and their
respective communities receive many benefits from the proceeds
of this tax credit, some years more than $600,000. It is money
that goes towards educational opportunities and research such as
the Bristol Bay Science and Research Institute. There is a
broader good attached to the tax credit that contributes to the
wealth of the communities and the entire swath of Western Alaska
that participates in the CDQ program.
10:22:47 AM
CHAIR TARR invited Mr. Van Vactor to respond to the question.
MR. VAN VACTOR specified that in BBEDC's case the number in any
given year might be from $80,000-$130,000, but that BBEDC turns
that money into $600,000 by contributing directly towards its
science and research institute and by using share matching and
fundraising. He said BBEDC's pollock partners contributed over
$400,000 last year to education programs in the region. It is
seed money that goes a very long way.
CHAIR TARR asked whether it would be accurate to think of it as
allowing BBEDC to leverage other funds and then be more
strategic in those investments.
MR. VAN VACTOR answered, "Exactly."
10:23:45 AM
CHAIR TARR opened public testimony on HB 182.
10:23:59 AM
JENNIFER WILLIAMS, Government Affairs, Yukon Delta Fisheries
Development Association (YDFDA), testified in support of HB 182.
She noted she is a lifelong Alaskan from Emmonak. She stated
that YDFDA is the CDQ entity representing six communities on the
Yukon River Delta and these member communities represent more
than 3,400 residents who live in one of the most economically
challenged regions of the US. The CDQ program allows YDFDA to
provide fishery and economic benefits to the resident fishermen,
their families, and the entire region. The YDFDA has
participated in the fishery resource landing tax credit program
since its inception. The YDFDA uses this program to partially
offset the amounts that YDFDA spends annually to support fishery
research and monitoring studies of the Yukon River. This
research undertaking is developed in collaboration with the
Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G). The credits greatly
assisted YDFDA's test fishing monitoring activities on the lower
Yukon River for chinook this summer and for fall chum, to
conduct lamprey eel tagging and recovery studies, and to conduct
chinook out-migration and smolt trawl survey studies sponsored
in part by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA). Both subsistence and commercial openings are predicted
on the test fishery results. Without this valuable information
ADF&G would be hard-pressed in YDFDA's management efforts, which
would likely result in a loss of economic opportunity in the
region and/or a request for additional state dollars. None of
the tax credits are used for YDFDA administration or management
fee surcharge. The fishery resource landing tax credit program
is a great benefit to the residents of Western Alaska and the
state of Alaska. She urged the committee to support HB 182.
10:26:30 AM
CHAIR TARR closed public testimony on HB 182 after ascertaining
that no one else wished to testify.
10:26:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON pointed out that the House Special
Committee on Fisheries also serves as a budget subcommittee for
the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. He pointed out that
when the department's budget was considered a few weeks ago, the
UGF portion, the state funding in the department, was at 52
percent and going lower and lower as additional funds are
supplanting the need for state monies, and this tax credit
program is one of those. The BBSRI program mentioned by Mr. Van
Vactor is unique because it allows for some of the proceeds from
this program to supplant what ADF&G would normally provide for
or enhance what the department is able to do with existing
money. So, the role of this program, the tax credit itself, is
providing local benefits and in the larger context helping ADF&G
get its work done.
10:27:51 AM
The committee took a brief at-ease.
10:28:45 AM
CHAIR TARR noted that all six CDQ groups strongly support HB 182
and that it sounds like all committee members are comfortable
with moving the bill to its next committee of referral.
10:29:16 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES moved to report HB 182 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
notes. There being no objection, HB 182 was reported out of the
House Special Committee on Fisheries.
10:29:38 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 10:29 to 10:35 a.m.
^Presentation: AK-BC Transboundary Salmon Rivers
Presentation: AK-BC Transboundary Salmon Rivers
10:35:14 AM
CHAIR TARR announced that the final order of business would be a
presentation on Alaska-British Columbia Transboundary Salmon
Rivers Update.
10:36:17 AM
CHAIR TARR passed the gavel to Vice Chair Stutes.
10:36:24 AM
BREANNA WALKER, Campaign Coordinator, Salmon Beyond Borders,
provided a PowerPoint presentation titled "Salmon Beyond
Borders." She began by acknowledging Juneau as the present and
ancestral lands of the A'akw Kwaan Tlingit people. She stated
that Salmon Beyond Borders works closely with commercial and
sport fishermen, community leaders, tourism and recreation
business owners, and concerned citizens in collaboration with
tribes and First Nations united across the Alaska-British
Columbia (BC) border to defend and sustain transboundary rivers,
jobs, and the salmon way of life.
MS. WALKER turned to the map on the second slide and said the
Taku (T'aakQ), Stikine (Shtax'heen), and Unuk (Joonak) rivers
are world-class transboundary salmon rivers originating in
Northwest British Columbia and flowing into Southeast Alaska.
These rivers have been centers of culture, commerce, and
biodiversity for thousands of years. At the headwaters of these
major river systems the BC government has more than a dozen
large-scale open-pit mines in stages ranging from abandonment to
exploration and development to full operation.
Industrialization at the headwaters of these rivers is the
largest threat to some of the last remaining wild salmon habitat
left on the planet. British Columbia's archaic mining laws are
not strong enough to protect water quality, wild salmon, and the
communities that rely on them.
10:38:07 AM
MS. WALKER displayed the third slide, titled "TAKU STIKINE
UNUK THE RIVERS THAT FEED US," and said that starting in 1998
Alaska lawmakers, including governors, dozens of municipalities
in Southeast Alaska, and the Alaska Congressional Delegation,
along with 15 federally recognized tribes in Southeast Alaska,
hundreds of business owners, tour operators, commercial and
sport fishing groups, and thousands of individual Alaskans have
called for enforceable protections and robust financial
assurance in these transboundary watersheds. Members of the
Alaska State Legislature continue to be leaders on this issue
and there is continued support from the Alaska Congressional
Delegation, with US Senator Lisa Murkowski continuing to lead on
federal appropriations for water quality monitoring in US/BC
transboundary watersheds. The US Congress recently appropriated
almost $4 million for this work in fiscal year 2021. This
funding for water quality monitoring does not just focus on
Alaska-Columbia watersheds but also includes Washington, Idaho,
and Montana. Despite all these important steps forward, she
said she is before the committee today with a sense of urgency.
10:39:58 AM
MS. WALKER spoke to the photograph of a salmon on the fourth
slide and stated that the Taku, Stikine, and Unuk rivers are
some of the world's last intact wild salmon rivers; collectively
they have historically produced 80 percent of the king salmon in
Southeast Alaska. Yet, this year the Alaska Department of Fish
and Game (ADF&G) is set to add the Taku and Stikine chinook to
the growing list of stocks of concern, which already includes
the Unuk River chinook. The Stikine sockeye runs are forecasted
to not meet subsistence needs this season. Meanwhile, in
British Columbia the mining projects near the headwaters of
these critical salmon rivers move ahead at a faster rate than
they have in previous years and few substantive changes have
been made to BC's mining regulation and permitting policies
following the 2014 Mount Polley waste dam failure despite
recommendations from BC's own auditor general. British Columbia
still has not amended its mine reclamation policy throughout the
province, including mines in transboundary watersheds, despite
former Governor Walker requesting that, at minimum, BC require
mining companies to post a full reclamation bond at permitting,
just as Alaska requires. Moving to the map on the fifth slide,
Ms. Walker stated that this is most clear at the headwaters of
the Stikine River where some of the largest mining companies in
the world are buying claims and projects from the smaller junior
developers. This map highlights the sheer number of potential
mines near the Stikine headwaters in addition to the operational
record of this mine. Almost the entire riparian corridor of the
Iskut River, the largest tributary of the Stikine, is staked for
mining claims.
10:41:37 AM
MS. WALKER addressed the graph on the sixth slide titled,
"Transboundary Mine Tailings Dam Heights." She noted that the
size and scale of these mines and their mine waste dams, which
are meant to last in perpetuity, are significantly increasing in
size, as seen on the graph. The expert panel that reviewed the
Mount Polley mine waste dam failure, which spilled 6.6 billion
gallons of mining waste, found that BC could face an average of
two dam failures every 10 years under the business-as-usual
conditions. The tailings dam heights shown for the Red Chris,
Schaft Creek, and Galore Creek are all within the Stikine
watershed. The cumulative impacts and years of concern
expressed downstream are being ignored as BC continues the mass
industrialization of the US-BC shared watersheds.
MS. WALKER concluded her presentation with the seventh slide.
She said it has been an honor to get to know the people whose
lives are directly tied to these rivers on both sides of the
border. More than just wild salmon rivers, the Taku, Stikine,
and Unuk rivers are living salmon-human river systems where
salmon and people are interconnected. Work is continuing to
elevate this issue at the federal level. The State of Alaska
needs to support both the state and provincial process as well
as the federal process that brings everyone and all relevant
jurisdictions, including and especially the tribes, to the table
to establish enforceable protections for these shared
transboundary salmon rivers.
10:43:37 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE requested Ms. Walker to describe the
effects on salmon six years later from the Mount Polley tailings
dam collapse. He further inquired about what is in the mining
waste itself.
MS. WALKER replied that she is not a fisheries biologist or
hydrologist, so she would be happy to connect members to people
in the community as to what they are seeing after the disaster.
She said the Mount Polley tailings dam failure is an example of
how the mining industry in British Columbia is enforced and
regulated, and it has not been to the benefit of human health
and the environment. Imperial Metals has not been held
accountable and has been permitted to discharge more wastewater
into Quesnel Lake. The expert panel that investigated the Mount
Polley tailings dam failure made a number of recommendations,
but BC has yet to change those rules and regulations to reduce
risks to communities and watersheds. To answer the questions,
she offered to share resources with the committee after the
meeting.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE related that he grew up in northern
Minnesota where he swam in tailings ponds. He offered his
belief that there are different sorts of tailings and tailings
ponds, and some are toxic and some not. He said he is
interested in learning how, six years later, the Mount Polley
dam failure has affected the lake, fish, and humans.
10:46:31 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY thanked Ms. Walker and everyone who has
come together on this issue for their efforts.
10:47:42 AM
The committee took a brief at-ease to deal with audio technical
difficulties.
10:48:06 AM
CHRIS SERGEANT, Research Scientist, Flathead Lake Biological
Station, University of Montana, provided a PowerPoint
presentation, titled "Monitoring the health of rivers shared by
Alaska and British Columbia," dated 4/27/21. He noted that he
spent 10 years in Juneau studying the rivers and salmon in this
transboundary region. He said the good news in the
transboundary region shared by Alaska, British Columbia, and
indigenous governments is that there are still thriving
watersheds. However, he advised, they have reached the point
where cautious management and monitoring of their health is a
necessity and he hopes he can inspire more action in that
direction. There are many mines in the transboundary watershed
in various forms of abandonment, exploration, and operations,
and continuing to improve the quality and coordination of
environmental monitoring on both sides of the border is needed.
MR. SERGEANT moved to the second slide and related that he
contributed to a 22-author letter published in the Journal of
Science involving Canadian and US experts in science and policy.
In that letter the authors agreed that: 1) mine assessments
underestimate risk; 2) mine permitting often relies on
mitigations, such as water quality treatment facilities, that
lack verification in the field; and 3) there is a need for
increased independent, transparent, and peer-reviewed science.
He added that there is also a need for more voices at the table
where decisions are made on how to treat these watersheds.
10:50:08 AM
MR. SERGEANT discussed the third slide, titled "Large-scale
Mining in Alaska-British Columbia Transboundary Watersheds." He
said the aforementioned three points are critically important
for the transboundary region, which includes the Taku, Stikine,
and Unuk rivers. The points on the maps represent key mines
that continue to be in various phases of operation. Several are
proposed to be large open-pit operations.
MR. SERGEANT displayed the fourth slide, titled "Open pits =
low-grade ore," and explained that a common grade of gold for
open-pit operations in this region requires removing about 2,200
pounds of rock for 0.02 ounces of gold. Turning to the fifth
slide he pointed out that to get the gold in his wedding ring
requires the removal of over 23,000 pounds of earth. While this
might be economically feasible for a mining company, it involves
a large environmental trade-off. One critical component to
tracking these trade-offs is the adequate monitoring of
watershed health before, during, and after project operations to
see how the water, land, and animals change in response to these
large disturbances.
MR. SERGEANT spoke to the two maps on the sixth slide. He
related that there is currently one open pit mine actively
operating in the transboundary watershed. He explained that the
map on the right shows a heavily staked area of the Stikine
River watershed where the colors represent mineral claim
ownership by several different companies. The yellow cross
shows the Red Chris Mine, a large open-pit mining operation that
has been in production since 2015.
10:52:07 AM
MR. SERGEANT turned to the satellite image on the seventh slide
[taken in 2011] before the start of full-scale construction. He
said satellite images show how quickly the land was transformed
once the open-pit project began. Moving to the image on the
eighth slide he noted that mine construction began with land
clearing in May 2012. Displaying the nineth slide, he specified
that regular production began in June 2015 and all major pieces
of the project were in place. Showing the tenth slide taken in
2020, he said the open pits visible in the slide will eventually
converge into one; also visible are the growing mine waste
storage reservoirs, also known as tailings storage facilities.
The main dams holding back these tailings have a Canadian Dam
Association consequence classification of "very high," meaning
that a failure would result in significant loss or deterioration
of critical fish or wildlife habitat where restoration or
compensation in-kind is possible but impractical. These images
demonstrate how quickly habitat within a watershed can change
and illuminates the need for collecting environmental monitoring
data early in the process before the operations are built.
MR. SERGEANT addressed the eleventh slide. He stated that in
response to the large number of operating and exploratory mines
in the transboundary region, several government entities have
conducted monitoring. Last year he conducted an independent
data review of government-led monitoring in transboundary
watersheds. While each of these are important pieces of work,
he said he concluded that monitoring efforts tend to be
concentrated in small areas of each watershed or relatively
short-term in effort. Therefore, monitoring the environmental
health of the transboundary region will require commitment to
longer term data collection across a broader number of sites
than currently exists. "Longer term" means at least five years
of consistent and coordinated monitoring, ten years is better.
These time periods are well established for many types of
monitoring programs. For example, Section 7 of the Alaska
Highway Drainage Manual recognizes the importance of long-term
stream flow data collection when designing infrastructure like
bridges and culverts. It states that a complete discharge
record is usually defined as one having at least 10 years of
continuous record; 25 years of record is considered optimal.
The recently completed effort of Alaska Department of
Environmental Conservation (DEC) and BC Ministry of the
Environment, while an important start for monitoring, only spans
a period of two years, and much more information is needed to
accurately assess the current baseline health of transboundary
watersheds.
10:54:54 AM
MR. SERGEANT reviewed the twelfth side, titled "What is the
question you want to answer?" He explained that monitoring in
the transboundary watersheds needs to answer two questions at
the same time. The first question is, How is the overall
condition of the watershed changing over time? This helps to
see how factors unrelated to mining impact change the chemical,
biological, and physical aspects of the overall watershed.
These factors include glacier retreat, changing rain patterns,
and warming water temperatures. This is typically done by
laying grid over the watershed and choosing some random points,
but many approaches are available. The second question is, At
the same time, how does a particular mine impact a watershed?
This involves targeted, non-random points placed at different
distances from the mine to see how the river is affected. To
date, no monitoring efforts in transboundary watersheds have
been designed to answer both these questions.
MR. SERGEANT moved to slide 13 and specified that consistency is
key. He stated that the way data is collected at each place in
the watershed is critical. Just because something like pH or
the amount of copper is measured in the same river two different
times doesn't necessarily mean those two points are comparable.
Many things are measurable, including flow level, time of day,
or season. This means that monitoring needs to keep these
factors as similar as possible across all measurements or that
many, many measurements need to be collected that span all the
ranges of environmental conditions.
MR. SERGEANT displayed slide 14 and explained that many toxic
chemicals are found in higher concentrations in the water during
low flow periods. If water is only collected during higher
river flows, the periods when there are more metals in the water
may be missed and therefore more toxic to fish and other aquatic
organisms. Many monitoring programs don't cover this aspect of
sampling and in many watersheds there isn't sufficient flow
information to examine these differences.
MR. SERGEANT addressed slide 15, titled "Tulsequah River
monitoring." He said this example helps illustrate the scale
and complexity of monitoring transboundary watersheds and leads
into his take-home message. As part of a focused environmental
monitoring program, he works alongside Taku River Tlingit First
Nation's (TRTFN) staff in Atlin, BC, to monitor water sediment,
fish, and insects in the Tulsequah River, the largest tributary
to the Taku River and the Tulsequah Chief Mine. He clarified
that the views he is expressing represent his own, not TRTFN.
Over the past two years TRTFN has monitored 12-17 sites in about
a six-mile stretch of river, a much higher density of sites than
any other effort taking place in transboundary watersheds.
Despite this, and due to broad-scale forces such as glacier
retreats or floods, TRTFN still needs several more years of data
to really understand what is driving the biological and chemical
patterns in the collective data.
MR. SERGEANT concluded his presentation with the sixteenth
slide, titled "Take-home message." He specified that the red
box on the map represents the area of the Tulsequah River shown
in the photograph on slide 15 and shows how small this area is
compared to the rest of the Taku River watershed. He said his
take-home message is:
Considering the complexity of interpreting water
quality patterns in this small section of watershed,
the level of effort needed to characterize an entire
watershed requires long-term funding commitment and
strong collaboration across all governments, where all
parties agree to the monitoring program goals,
objectives, and scientific approach.
10:58:44 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE recalled Mr. Sergeant mentioning having
more voices across the table and asked who those would be.
MR. SERGEANT deferred to indigenous governments to speak to
that. He said that non-academic partners like himself could do
independent science review beyond state agencies, so federal,
state, municipal, and indigenous governments would all be at the
same table.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked about the mines.
MR. SERGEANT replied that they play a large role in these
processes through their permitting processes and the monitoring
that they conduct.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked whether Mr. Sergeant would advocate
that the mines be at the table.
MR. SERGEANT responded that that is a tricky answer because
while the mines play an important role in collecting data around
their projects, they also have a conflict of interest in how
data is collected. He said a two-pronged approach is therefore
needed where there is data collected independent of mining
companies but also the companies are part of the conversation in
different aspects.
11:00:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS asked whether there is any cause
for water quality or ecological concern based on the data
collected and analyzed to-date from the Tulsequah Chief Mine.
MR. SERGEANT answered, "Yes." The data collected to-date are
consistent with historical data showing that directly downstream
of the mine for one or two kilometers there is a very clear
pollution signal in elevated dissolved metals like copper and
arsenic. There is still a question of how far downstream that
persists and what kind of water treatment options should be used
to fully remediate the mine. There is a question about seasonal
patterns as no one is out in the fall or winter because it is so
hard to access and those could be some of the most toxic times
in the water downstream. A few more years of data collection
and getting winter measurements will help illuminate that.
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS surmised it is important to
collect fall and winter data because there is lower flow during
those seasons so the proportion of contaminants could be higher
and therefore the environmental impact higher.
MR. SERGEANT replied, "Yes."
11:03:09 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE noted that copper is a natural substance
that was disturbed. He asked whether the copper would or would
not normally be in the stream.
MR. SERGEANT responded that depending on the geology of an area,
there are natural levels of copper in these rivers. He
explained that rock taken out of the ground and exposed to
oxygen and water will often acidify the water, and water with a
lower pH will dissolve metals like copper and make them more
available to organisms, such as uptake in fish gills or tissue.
That reaction with acidic water will increase the toxicity of a
metal like copper which, for salmon, hurts their nasal passages
so they cannot smell and therefore don't do as well avoiding
predators, or it may cause homing problems back to their waters
for spawning.
11:04:31 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE pointed out that some of the finest red
salmon coming out of Alaska come from the Copper River where
"piles of stuff" from the Kennecott Mine were dumped and yet 50
years later the salmon are thriving. He also referenced the Red
Dog Mine. He said Mr. Sergeant mentioned copper as if it were
not a natural substance, yet it is a natural substance except
that humans disturbed it, although it could also eventually be
disturbed naturally.
MR. SERGEANT pointed out that a fish hatchery would never use
copper pipes because of its known toxicity. He said he doesn't
have deep knowledge of the Copper River and cannot speak to the
toxicity of copper in that river, except that it is a large
river and there is a lot of dilution. It is important to learn
about these impacts in each individual study system, a study
from one place cannot be extrapolated to other places. Salmon
are known for their ability to evolve to their specific home
water conditions and while some might be able to resist a little
bit of elevated copper because it is natural in the watershed,
other populations may not do so well. There are very good
studies on how copper can be toxic to fish like salmon. This
drives home the point about choosing where to study these fish
where there could be copper issues and getting people at the
table to talk about the goals of monitoring these types of
substances. In addition to copper there is a suite of many
other metals in mining.
11:07:25 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS offered his appreciation for
Representative McCabe's question. He asked whether adaptation
naturally occurs in rivers with elevated levels of metals.
MR. SERGEANT replied that it is hard question to answer because
ecologists have not done definitive studies, but the current
overriding scientific opinion is that salmon are very evolved to
the specific waters that they come from. He pointed out that
just because something is toxic doesn't mean it makes fish flip
over and die; it could if the concentration is high enough, but
there are sublethal effects to where predation may be higher
because the salmon cannot smell predators or are not homing back
to their home river as well. System specific knowledge for
individual rivers is needed. Fish living in waters with
naturally high levels of metals may be at the edge of what they
can tolerate, and those fish could be put into trouble if the
levels are raised.
11:10:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY requested an update on which entities are
still conducting monitoring and which are quitting monitoring.
MR. SERGEANT answered that the joint Alaska DEC and BC Ministry
of Environment report states that they will not be continuing
that monitoring program because it would be redundant with
ongoing efforts. He said he personally does not believe it is
redundant and what happens is that Alaska entities tend to
monitor on the Alaska side of the border and the BC entities
tend to monitor on that side of the border and they're not
coordinating the same methods over time, and they are
concentrated such that five or six places are being measured
throughout the watershed. No one is combining the two sets of
points of looking at the overall watershed health and the
specific mining impacts. He related that Mr. Paddock will speak
to the Central Council's monitoring efforts and that the US
Geological Survey (USGS) has extensive efforts at the Alaska-BC
border with its super-gauge that measures streamflow and
different water quality efforts like pH and turbidity. He said
work is being done in too small an area of these watersheds for
too short a period of time; rather, work needs to be expanded to
wider, broader areas throughout the watersheds.
11:13:18 AM
RAYMOND PADDOCK, Environmental Coordinator, Central Council of
the Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska ("Tlingit and
Haida"), stated he is working with the team at Tlingit and Haida
that has been doing monitoring on the Taku and Stikine rivers
and is hoping to add the Unuk River with the USGS this summer.
Sampling is also being done on the Alsek River outside of
Yakutat and the Chilkat and Klehini rivers outside of Klukwan
and Haines. He said Tlingit and Haida samples two locations on
each river, but that is not enough. Samples are taken at the
surface level and at a five-foot depth; physical parameters are
measured, and samples are taken for many dissolved metals, pH,
conductivity, salinity, dissolved oxygen, and temperature.
MR. PADDOCK qualified that he is not a scientist, so he will
defer any questions that he cannot answer to the rest of his
team. He related that for the past five or six years, Tlingit
and Haida has been sampling for baseline water quality data on
the transboundary rivers in Southeast Alaska. However, this
data was not included in the recently released joint data report
that the State of Alaska and BC sent out. Tlingit and Haida is
advocating for federal government appropriation to complete a
comprehensive baseline study of the transboundary water
ecosystems and water basins, along with key indicators to
identify pollutants from mining projects in BC that are on the
headwaters of [Southeast Alaska's] rivers. While the data
report and work of the Bilateral Working Group is a step forward
to ensure the environmental, cultural, and economic values of
our rivers and communities are protected, Tlingit and Haida has
not been engaged with the Alaska-BC Bilateral Working Group or
its technical working group on monitoring since 2018 during the
Walker Administration, which diminishes the collaborative effort
described in the data report.
11:16:21 AM
MR. PADDOCK stated, "Our way of life depends upon our health of
the transboundary waters and it's important for Alaska tribes
and BC First Nations to be fully engaged for true collaboration
to exist." He said this data should not be viewed as a final
report but essentially as the beginning. Tlingit and Haida
feels it was a gross underestimation to the impact on the waters
by saying water sampling on these rivers is complete. Tlingit
and Haida hopes to continue to be able, through federal
appropriation, to conduct a much broader scale of sampling on
each of the rivers in Southeast Alaska.
11:17:07 AM
VICE CHAIR STUTES returned the gavel to Chair Tarr.
11:17:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE requested Mr. Paddock to provide a list of
the metals that Tlingit and Haida is sampling for, the
concentrations, and the baseline from before the mines started.
He offered his belief that there are some concentration levels
published by the US government.
MR. PADDOCK replied that Tlingit and Haida is happy to share
that data. He said the number of samples for the Taku and
Stikine rivers are 35 and 38 over the past five or six years and
this data will be made public shortly. He explained that
sampling in the winter is hazardous and difficult and so some
winter and fall samplings have been missed.
11:18:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS requested Mr. Paddock to speak
more about the likelihood of the USGS coming in as a partner
with funding to commence monitoring on the Unuk River.
MR. PADDOCK responded that it is being worked on right now. He
said Tlingit and Haida has sent its sampling schedules to the
USGS to correlate when USGS is sampling so that sampling can be
done at a partnership level. It will also include the Ketchikan
Indian Community, given the Unuk River is their homeland. When
sampling rivers that are not in the Juneau area, Tlingit and
Haida works with the partnering tribes to build up their
capacity to sample in their traditional areas and then return
the data to Tlingit and Haida.
11:20:37 AM
CHAIR TARR asked how it came about that Tlingit and Haida has
not been in the working group since 2018.
MR. PADDOCK answered that Tlingit and Haida has requested a seat
at the table, and he believes other tribes in Southeast Alaska
and First Nations have asked as well.
11:22:17 AM
TIS PETERMAN, Special Projects Consultant, Southeast Alaska
Indigenous Transboundary Commission (SEITC), stated that SEITC
consists of representatives by resolution of 15 federally
recognized tribal governments in Southeast Alaska. She said she
has lived her entire life in Wrangell at the mouth of the
Stikine River. On 3/31/21 SEITC sent a letter to Premier Horgan
of BC which brought to his attention SEITC's earlier request to
enter into an agreement regarding the participation in ongoing
permitting discussions and decisions throughout BC's
environmental process pursuant to the United Nations (UN)
declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples. The earlier
request was to the Ministry of Energy, Mines, and Low Carbon
Innovation and the reply was that the ministries needed time to
conduct comprehensive internal reviews to fully respond to
SEITC's request. The request to Premier Horgan was a new
request from SEITC to have a pause in new permits and approval
of new mining projects in BC until such time as the completion
of the aforementioned comprehensive internal reviews. The
request was received, and the ministry will respond at it its
earliest opportunity.
11:24:13 AM
MS. PETERMAN related that on 12/6/19 SEITC submitted a petition
to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights which stated
that the transboundary mining will have devastating effects on
the way of life and downstream communities. That petition was
rejected based on BC stating it was unaware of downstream
concerns. The SEITC appealed and this past week heard back on
the appeal and the Human Rights Commission has forwarded parts
of the petition to the Canadian government, which will then be
given three months to submit its observations on the petition.
MS. PETERMAN said that in 2019 SEITC held its second
international summit between First Nations and tribes. A salmon
emergency was declared by all 34 participants at the event. A
third summit will be held virtually in [2021] with the goal of
building on the relationships between First Nations and tribes
to build a framework on watershed management, which will address
free, prior, and informed consent by indigenous people. For the
first time, tribes from Washington, Montana, and Idaho are
interested in joining the next summit since they are fighting
the same types of issues on their transboundary borders.
MS. PETERMAN stated that prior to COVID-19, SEITC interviewed a
host of First Nations during several trips to BC. These
interviews were developed into a virtual production called "When
the Salmon Spoke" that aired online in May 2020 and put faces of
the people who live along the Stikine River and over 1,000
people viewed the premier production.
11:26:54 AM
MS. PETERMAN shared that a gathering in Wrangell is being
planned between the Tahltan and the Tlingit; historically the
Stikine watershed was managed by these two nations. A meeting
will be attended by descendants of the Chief Nanaka of the
Tahltan and descendants of Chief Shakes of the Tlingit. This
type of meeting has not been held in over 100 years. Since all
three transboundary rivers originate in Tahltan territory it is
imperative to keep the channels of communication open.
MS. PETERMAN offered her agreement with Mr. Paddock that
indigenous people need to be sitting at the table whenever
transboundary issues are discussed.
11:28:08 AM
CHAIR TARR said it sounds like what is happening now is the
Bilateral Working Group has the traditional government entities
participating, but because it is such a significant need,
organizations like SEITC are also working with tribal entities
to coordinate, but maybe the two need to be connect.
MS. PETERMAN agreed that that would be most effective. She said
SEITC has reached out to the First Nations to find out how the
people felt on the other side of the border about the
transboundary issues. In listening to the mining companies
everything is perfect, but SEITC is hearing quite differently
from the people on the ground in BC. As many tribal
representatives as possible are brought into these summits.
11:30:24 AM
CHAIR TARR played the video trailer for "When the Salmon Spoke."
MS. PETERMAN, responding to Chair Tarr, stated that she will
provide links to the committee for playing the entire video.
11:32:13 AM
FRANCES LEACH, Executive Director, United Fishermen of Alaska
(UFA), explained that UFA is a statewide commercial fishing and
trade association representing 37 commercial fishing
organizations and 500 individuals who participate in fisheries
throughout the state and federal waters along Alaska's coast.
She said UFA is increasingly concerned with potential impacts to
fish habitat and water resources from at least 12 large-scale
open-pit and underground metal mines in British Columbia (BC)
that are abandoned, permitted, or operating in the headwaters of
transboundary waters that flow downstream into Southeast Alaska,
some rivaling the size of the [proposed] Pebble Mine in Bristol
Bay.
MS. LEACH pointed out that UFA is not opposed to mining but is
for responsible mining that is held to strict scientific
standards, just as the commercial fishing industry is monitored
for protection of the resources.
MS. LEACH noted that the transboundary Taku, Stikine, Iskut, and
Unuk-Nass are world class salmon producing rivers, contributing
$48 million to the Alaska economy, and producing 80 percent of
Southeast Alaska's king salmon. She said the health and
productivity of these rivers is integral to the overall $1
billion annual salmon fishing industry and the $1 billion annual
visitors' industry in Southeast Alaska. In 1957 Tech Resources
abandoned the Tulsequah Chief Mine in the Taku River watershed,
which is 33.5 miles, or 55 miles as the salmon swim, from
Alaska's capital city. The damage caused by the abandoned
Tulsequah Chief Mine had a direct impact on the wild salmon that
inhabited this river. Commercial fishermen have been up in arms
about this project for more than 60 years, and because of BC's
laws this mine site has been leaching acid mine drainage into
the largest salmon river in Southeast Alaska for 60 years. This
year the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) will list
the Taku, Stikine, and Unuk king salmon runs as stocks of
concern, and impacts and devastation are continuing to be seen.
MS. LEACH stated that the best way to avoid lost livelihoods and
cultural ways of life is for them not to be lost in the first
place. She said UFA has been engaged in this matter over the
past several years and has written several letters to the State
of Alaska and Alaska Congressional Delegation. However, in
recent years UFA has seen a diminished response to this subject
from the State of Alaska, but now is not the time to be putting
transboundary issues on the back burner. The UFA is asking the
State of Alaska to join the Alaska Congressional Delegation and
call for federal engagement and international binding
protections. She urged the committee to engage on this
important issue that will affect commercial fishermen and all of
Southeast Alaska and Alaskans.
11:36:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked whether UFA has thought this through
to its logical end. He said if lawmakers put huge restrictions
on the mines the price of the base metal would go up, then the
price of fishing boats would go up, and then the price of fish
would go up. Only fish people were heard from today, so there
is no balance in today's hearing. The raw materials for
building wind turbines and solar panels come from mining, and
there needs to be a balance. Mines need to be part of the voice
and know that they will be held accountable, but their needs
must also be understood.
MS. LEACH responded that the point is taken. She said UFA has
worked closely with the Alaska Mining Association (AMA) and
always invites them to have conversations and a seat at the
table. She noted that AMA has had the ability to give
presentations to the Alaska State Legislature just as [fish
people] are today. The committee is only hearing from fish-
focused people because that is what today's presentation is
about. Regarding boat prices going up if mines are shut down,
UFA is not asking for mines to be shut down, UFA is asking for
mines to be responsible. If they aren't responsible there won't
be fish and then there will be no need for boats. She agreed
there is a balance and room at the table for everyone to have an
open discussion but currently there is nothing facilitating this
discussion, which is why it is being asked for today.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE offered his appreciation that UFA is
involved with AMA. He said he is pro-development and pro-
fisheries development and that everyone needs to be a steward of
the environment and have a seat at the table.
11:40:37 AM
CHAIR TARR stated it is interesting to think about abandoned
versus permitted versus operating [mines]. She said there are
lessons to be learned from abandoned mines and mistakes to not
be repeated. She related that the committee's role is being
discussed, such as whether a letter can be written or something
done on this issue to encourage that coordination and ensuring
all voices are included, including the mining industry. She
offered her belief that Representative Ortiz might be working on
something related to that. Regarding the committee's role, she
said the message she is getting today is [the need for] better
coordination and tribal involvement in government-to-government
discussions so there is a better plan in place. She invited the
testifiers to provide closing comments if they wished to do so.
MS. LEACH said she has nothing more to add and thanked the
committee for listening.
MS. WALKER concurred with Chair Tarr's summary. She stated that
the wild salmon populations are dropping dramatically in the
Taku, Stikine, and Unuk rivers, so it is imperative that
everyone work together to develop binding international
watershed-scale framework that will protect the health of these
significant salmon watersheds and the communities that depend on
them. Multiple jurisdictions are linked to these iconic salmon
rivers, including and especially the indigenous nations of this
region, the State of Alaska, the province of British Columbia,
the US, Canadian federal governments, and the communities on
both sides of the border. All these jurisdictions need to play
a role in the development and implementation of binding measures
for these watersheds.
CHAIR TARR stated that updates are valuable given the change of
people in the legislature, the governor's office, and federal
positions on both sides of the border. She said coordination is
important so that as the people change the effort and the
progress can continue.
11:45:24 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Special Committee on Fisheries meeting was adjourned at 11:45
a.m.