Legislature(2025 - 2026)BUTROVICH 205
05/12/2025 03:30 PM Senate RESOURCES
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 | |
| SB174 | |
| SJR20 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 174 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SJR 20 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
May 12, 2025
3:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Cathy Giessel, Chair
Senator Bill Wielechowski, Vice Chair
Senator Matt Claman
Senator Forrest Dunbar
Senator Scott Kawasaki
Senator Shelley Hughes
Senator Robert Myers
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 174
"An Act establishing the Alaska Invasive Species Council in the
Department of Fish and Game; relating to management of invasive
species; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 20
Supporting federal, state, and local efforts to clean up and
remove marine debris from the state; urging the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration and the Environmental Protection
Agency to provide additional funding for those efforts and to
remove barriers faced by tribes and rural communities in
accessing those funds; and urging the Alaska Congressional
delegation to advocate for increased federal funding and support
for marine debris prevention, clean up, removal, backhaul, and
education.
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 174
SHORT TITLE: INVASIVE SPECIES MANAGEMENT
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) DUNBAR
04/14/25 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/14/25 (S) RES, FIN
04/28/25 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
04/28/25 (S) Heard & Held
04/28/25 (S) MINUTE(RES)
04/30/25 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
04/30/25 (S) -- MEETING CANCELED --
05/12/25 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: SJR 20
SHORT TITLE: CLEAN UP MARINE DEBRIS
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) BJORKMAN
04/14/25 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/14/25 (S) RES
05/12/25 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
WITNESS REGISTER
TOBIAS SCHWOERER, Research Assistant Professor
Natural Resources Economics
International Arctic Research Center
University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF)
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified by invitation on SB 174.
DANIELLE VERNA, Program Manager
Environmental Monitoring
Prince William Sound Regional Citizens' Advisory Council (RCAC)
Valdez, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified by invitation on SB 174.
SUMMER NAY, Chair
Alaska Invasive Species Partnership
Delta Junction, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified by invitation on SB 174.
SENATOR JESSE BJORKMAN, District D
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SJR 20.
LAUREN DIVINE, Director
Ecosystem Conservation Office
Aleut Community of St. Paul Island
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified by invitation on SJR 20.
MICHAEL LEVINE, Senior Director
Alaska Programs
Ocean Conservancy
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified by invitation on SJR 20.
RALPH WOLFE, Director
Indigenous Stewardship Programs
Native Lands and Resources
Tlingit and Haida
Sitka, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified by invitation on SJR 20.
ACTION NARRATIVE
3:30:58 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL called the Senate Resources Standing Committee
meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. Present at the call to order were
Senators Myers, Dunbar, Kawasaki, Hughes, Wielechowski, Claman
and Chair Giessel.
SB 174-INVASIVE SPECIES MANAGEMENT
3:31:37 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 174
"An Act establishing the Alaska Invasive Species Council in the
Department of Fish and Game; relating to management of invasive
species; and providing for an effective date."
3:32:26 PM
SENATOR FORREST DUNBAR, speaking as sponsor of SB 174, said this
legislation establishes an Alaska Invasive Species Council in
Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G). He said SB 174 is
the result of work done with advocates over the interim. Those
advocates believe Alaska is at an increased risk for invasive
species and that a more effective coordination across state
departments is necessary to respond to that risk.
3:33:58 PM
TOBIAS SCHWOERER, Research Assistant Professor, Natural
Resources Economics, International Arctic Research Center,
University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF), Fairbanks, Alaska,
introduced himself and provided a brief history of his work in
invasive species management.
3:34:54 PM
MR. SCHWOERER advanced to slide 2, containing an infographic
illustrating Alaska's increasing biodiversity risk. He stated
that Elodea research has illustrated the need for a statewide
coordinated response in order to address this risk. He explained
that Zebra mussels and Quagga mussels are highly invasive and
are not native to North America. These mussels have been
confirmed in various states and territories across North America
and are moving northward. Lines on the infographic illustrate
the movement of seasonal vessels from those regions and entering
Alaska. This also applies to vessels that are purchased by
Alaskans and brought by trailer to the state (from state's where
Zebra and Quagga mussels have been detected). He noted that the
infographic shows one port of entry.
3:36:31 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL noted that the Pacific Northwest Economic Region
(PNWER) does work in this area. She said that vessels entering
the state undergo an inspection yet invasive mussels may still
be present. She asked whether there is surveillance at the
Alaska Highway border.
MR. SCHWOERER said slide 3 would address this question.
3:37:16 PM
MR. SCHWOERER advanced to slide 3, containing an infographic
with data related to the number of boats used both within and
outside of Alaskan waters and related invasive mussel activity
by region:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Is Alaska prepared?
Annually, more than 1,000 watercraft from outside
enter Alaska through multiple unprotected / not
monitored ports of entry
Overland
Boats enter Alaska on trailers via Canada/Alaska
border
Southcentral by Sea
Boats enter Alaska on barge/ferry via Southcentral
ports
Southeast by Sea
Boats enter Alaska on barge/ferry via Southeast ports
Total
1260 motorized boats brought to Alaska each year
Used
370 boats previously used in water outside Alaska
Mussels
129 boats previously used in states with invasive
mussels
Freshwater
74 boats used in mussel states and likely destined for
Alaska freshwater.
MR. SCHWOERER said the US Fish and Wildlife Service works with
border protection to inspect vessels crossing the Canada/Alaska
border. This seasonal (summer) inspection service provided the
data from slide 2. He pointed out that there is no port
inspection; therefore, boats arriving via ferry and/or barge to
Southcentral and Southeastern Alaska are not inspected. He
recalled that a high percentage (roughly one-third) of vessels
arriving in Alaska via the Alaska Highway (Alcan) are not
inspected. He emphasized that, despite having inspection
stations in other states and in Canada, many vessels entering
Alaska are not inspected prior to arriving at the Canada/Alaska
border. He noted 2023 estimates that close to 1,000 watercraft
are coming through ports in Southeast and Southcentral Alaska
each year.
3:39:25 PM
MR. SCHWOERER advanced to slide 4:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Example:
Elodea response
? Current cum. damages from Elodea: close to $1
billion
? Current cum. spending managing Elodea: $7 million
? around $1 million in inefficiencies
? Insufficient resources, personnel flat
? Fragmented decision
? Need for strategy, efficiency, and coordination
? Need for resource emergency response plan
MR. SCHWOERER explained that Elodea is an aquatic water weed. He
drew attention to the image on slide 4, which shows the Elodea
infestation in the Chena Slough, and noted that almost 100
percent of the slough is infested. He said the response began in
2013. He explained that the $7 million in spending has included
herbicide and management. He emphasized that Elodea has caused
over $1 billion in damage to Alaska's sockeye fishery. He
asserted that this damage is due to the lack of a statewide
response and statewide eradication of Elodea. He explained that,
when some areas with infestation are left unmanaged, there is a
chance for that infestation to spread to other areas (and back
into and through waterbodies that have just been cleared of the
infestation). He briefly discussed the impact of inefficiencies
in affected regions. He opined that a council could have
provided top-down strategies, increased efficiency and
coordination, thus leading to the use of best-management
practices statewide. He emphasized the need for coordination
between agencies and for a statewide strategy and added that not
having a council in place has increased costs.
3:42:00 PM
MR. SCHWOERER stated that increased biosecurity risks will lead
to more difficult financial decisions related to invasive
species management. He said this will require increasingly
complex decisions about what resources the State of Alaska will
protect - and which will be left to deteriorate. He briefly
discussed the importance having strategies in place that will
prevent fragmented decision-making. He said emergency response
plans are necessary to effectively respond and protect natural
resources. He urged consideration of what this could mean for
salmon fisheries. He explained that salmon will be highly
effected, as Quagga and Zebra mussels impact the salmon food
chain. He noted upcoming research on this topic and said
invasive mussels are a significant up and coming risk for
Alaska's fisheries.
3:44:03 PM
MR. SCHWOERER advanced to slide 5, containing an infographic to
illustrate the status of Elodea infestations across the state.
He said there are 49 infestations statewide, 20 of which have
been eradicated:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Elodea infestations - current status
Alaska Lakes
? Elodea still present (33)
? Elodea treatment, not detected (10)
? No Elodea detected (509)
3:44:25 PM
MR. SCHWOERER advanced to slide 6, containing an infographic
showing how floatplanes contribute to the increasingly complex
and remote infestations of Elodea across Alaska. He pointed out
that there is a large amount of floatplane traffic from
Southcentral Alaska into Bristol Bay. These floatplanes come
from waterbodies (in Southcentral Alaska) that have potentially
be infected with Alodea. He emphasized the risk this poses to
Sockeye salmon fisheries statewide. He stated that, once Elodea
infests Bristol Bay, it is too late. Elodea is increasingly seen
in remote areas (e.g. Alexander Lake), which results in highly
complex, lengthy, and increasingly costly infestations.
3:45:37 PM
MR. SCHWOERER advanced to slide 7, containing a graph to
illustrate infestation response times in Anchorage, Cordova,
Fairbanks, and the Kenai Peninsula from 2015-2024. He emphasized
that an initial, under-resourced response ultimately leads to a
longer, more costly response. He said the cost has doubled or
even tripled during the past 10 years. He expressed concern with
this increasing cost. He explained that the high cost is due to
a combination of an under-resourced response and an infestation
that, over time, impacts more costly locations. He reiterated
that managing Elodea infestations in remote locations is complex
and costly.
3:46:47 PM
SENATOR MYERS observed that the response times on slide 7 vary
based on location. He pointed out faster response times for
Anchorage and Southcentral and slower response times for
Fairbanks and Cordova. He asked if the response time is related
to geography as well as resources.
3:47:29 PM
MR. SCHWOERER agreed with that assessment. He said it also
depends on flow rate (i.e. whether a water body has flow or is
static). He explained that herbicide concentration is relatively
easy to manage in areas where flow is minimal. He contrasted
this with areas with higher flow-through and potentially high
precipitation, both of which impact herbicide concentration. He
emphasized that diluted herbicide is potentially ineffective. He
said this is an issue in Chena Slough. Remoteness is another
factor. He said that, while the distribution on the graph on
slide 7 appears to be regional, it does not tell the full story.
He emphasized that it depends on the complexity of the system
and added that each eradication is different.
3:48:51 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked about the cost per water body to
eradicate Elodea. He also asked how much the State of Alaska
should spend on continued eradication per year.
3:49:09 PM
MR. SCHWOERER addressed the cost per year and indicated that he
could provide a rough estimate. He opined that doubling the
current amount of dedicated funding would be sufficient. He
indicated that he would address this in more detail on an
upcoming slide.
3:49:27 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI repeated his questions related to the cost
per water body and the cost per year.
3:49:37 PM
MR. SCHWOERER replied that the cost for the herbicide is roughly
$1,000/surface acre. He explained that the herbicide must remain
at a specific concentration. Water flow and precipitation can
impact herbicide concentration levels, which can result in
increased costs of over $2,000/surface acre (or more). He
explained that remote locations - which are more difficult to
access in order to apply and monitor herbicide levels - have
even higher costs.
3:50:40 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked whether the herbicide kills fish.
MR. SCHWOERER replied no. He explained that fluridone is the
primary herbicide used to eradicate Elodea. This is a systemic
herbicide that interrupts the plant's ability to
photosynthesize. He added that fluridone is rated as safe to use
in water reservoirs.
3:51:32 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR noted the limited time remaining and said
upcoming invited testimony would address policy and structure
questions. He asked Mr. Schwoerer to advance to slide 10 and
discuss impacted fisheries.
3:52:04 PM
MR. SCHWOERER advanced to slide 10 and discussed the cost of not
eradicating Elodea. Slide 10 contains a graph illustrating the
hidden fisheries damages from 2017-2100. Slide 10 also
references a paper titled, "Elodea mediates juvenile salmon
growth by altering physical structure in freshwater habitats."
He explained that not eradicating Elodea carries a $1 billion
hidden cost. He said this estimate is in line with the latest
research regarding Elodea's impact on juvenile salmon growth. He
reiterated that (based on research in the Copper River Delta)
Elodea has a negative effect on the salmon food web.
3:53:49 PM
DANIELLE VERNA, Program Manager, Environmental Monitoring,
Prince William Sound Regional Citizens' Advisory Council (RCAC),
Valdez, Alaska, provided a brief work history and overview of
RCAC. She stated that that commercial shipping is a prevalent
vector of marine invasive species and RCAC supports monitoring
invasive species. In addition, RCAC has advocated for policies
to prevent introducing invasive species. She stated that
invasive species pose a significant threat to the health of the
environment, the economy, and ways of life in Alaska. She
compared invasive species to the damage caused by an oil spill
and emphasized that prevention is the key to mitigating the
impacts. She stated that RCAC supports SB 174.
3:55:00 PM
MS. VERNA said that it took a disaster like the Exxon-Valdez oil
spill to recognize the value of oil spill prevention and
overcome complacency. She stated that Alaska's Prince William
Sound now has one of the most robust spill prevention and
response systems in the world. She said RCAC would like to see
more emphasis on invasive species prevention and rapid response
in Alaska. She stated that an Invasive Species Council is a
proven and effective model that results in increased
coordination for the purposes of prevention and rapid response.
She pointed out that over 18 other states have invasive species
councils. She noted that the Invasive Species Council proposed
by SB 174 would serve in an advisory role, establishing
consistent approaches across state agencies. The council does
not have the authority to direct state agencies or funding. The
council would elevate the discussion of invasive species while
building awareness at higher levels of government. This would
include an annual update to the legislature on invasive species
issues and management in Alaska.
MS. VERNA acknowledged that, for the past few years, the
governor has signed a proclamation recognizing the second full
week of June as Alaska Invasive Species Awareness Week. She
briefly discussed invasive species work across the state, both
by state agencies and by the Alaska Invasive Species Partnership
(AKISP). She stated that RCAC recognizes the need for top-down,
strategic leveraging of resources and stakeholder engagement. An
Invasive Species Council would create the venue for this to
occur. She stated that SB 174 takes previous legislative
feedback regarding council size into consideration. She
explained that the proposed council is made up of five voting
members and includes legislative and state agency participation.
In addition, there is the option to broaden participation by
including advisory members.
3:58:08 PM
SENATOR MYERS noted that SB 174 does not mandate the council to
consult with private industry. He briefly discussed the work
Alyeska does with respect to monitoring and wondered whether
input from private industry might be helpful.
3:58:49 PM
MS. VERNA replied that input from industry is vital to the
successful management of invasive species. She stated that
utility and pipeline rights-of-way are pathways for invasive
species (along with tankers and cruise ships). She explained
that previous legislation related to creating an Invasive
Species Council specified membership. In that legislation, the
size of the council grew to 27 members, which she described as
unwieldy. She explained that in SB 174 reduces the number of
seats on the council; advisory council seats would provide
additional input and could include industry representatives.
4:00:15 PM
SUMMER NAY, Chair, Alaska Invasive Species Partnership (AKISP),
Delta Junction, Alaska, said AKISP strongly supports SB 174. She
briefly described AKISP, which is a statewide coalition united
by the shared mission to prevent and manage invasive species
across Alaska's terrestrial, freshwater, and marine
environments. AKISP provides credible, science-based information
to support sound management decisions and develop effective
policy. She briefly described monthly virtual meetings, annual
workshops, and outreach efforts. She acknowledged that valuable
work is being done across many sectors; however, she stated that
establishing an Invasive Species Council would be foundational,
providing strategic information and statewide perspectives.
MS. NAY stated that a council would help to align efforts,
reduce redundancy, and ensure that resources are used
effectively. It would also improve Alaska's top-down
collaboration. She pointed out that invasive species councils
have proven effective in other states and offered examples. She
emphasized that invasive species threaten ecosystems, cultural
traditions, economies, and recreational resources. She pointed
out that possible vectors for the spread of invasive species
include float planes, recreation, agricultural activities,
highway construction equipment, and commercial shipping, among
others. She stated that a council would help insure rapid,
coordinated responses when prevention is not possible. She urged
support of SB 174, which would help protect Alaska's natural
resources, livelihoods, and ways of life.
4:03:54 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI noted that travelers returning from Hawaii must
pass through a check before entering the state. He opined that
this method is relatively inclusive. He asked how vectors and
points of entry would be addressed.
4:04:36 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR deferred the question. He explained that SB 174
would create a more coordinated response and would elevate the
issue through the creation of the council. He stated that he is
unsure what recommendations the council would make. He surmised
that, due to Alaska's size, monitoring the various points of
entry could pose a challenge.
MS. NAY asked to hear the question again.
4:05:41 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked how the Invasive Species Council would
respond to various vectors and points of entry once they are
identified. He wondered if the response could include inspectors
at every port.
4:06:13 PM
MS. NAY replied that currently there is a check station at the
Alaska-Canada border. She stated that the response would include
more checks and inspections of that kind. She briefly noted
related research in Valdez.
4:06:49 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL held SB 174 in committee.
SJR 20-CLEAN UP MARINE DEBRIS
4:07:09 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL announced the consideration of SENATE JOINT
RESOLUTION NO. 20 Supporting federal, state, and local efforts
to clean up and remove marine debris from the state; urging the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the
Environmental Protection Agency to provide additional funding
for those efforts and to remove barriers faced by tribes and
rural communities in accessing those funds; and urging the
Alaska Congressional delegation to advocate for increased
federal funding and support for marine debris prevention, clean
up, removal, backhaul, and education.
4:07:33 PM
SENATOR JESSE BJORKMAN, District D, Alaska State Legislature,
Juneau, Alaska, paraphrased the sponsor statement for SJR 20:
[Original punctuation provided.]
SJR 20 Clean Up Marine Debris
Sponsor Statement
Version N
Alaska's culture revolves around a healthy ocean and
ecosystem, the ocean provides us with food, jobs, and
tradition. Alaskans use the ocean to provide for
themselves every single day.
Foreign trash floating through Federal water collects
in remote areas where it pollutes beaches and kills
wildlife. Distance, expense, and rugged conditions
make cleanup a challenge. Allowing marine debris to
continue to collect around the state's shorelines is
detrimental to our way of life.
Since 2006, NOAA has directly funded projects in
Alaska that have removed over two million pounds of
debris. Federal agencies like NOAA and the EPA can
continue to help Alaska get on track to clean up the
state's waters. The state of Alaska has an estimated
44,000 miles of shoreline, almost as much as the
entirety of the United States combined. Based on the
estimate of shoreline, only around 6 percent of the
coastline in Alaska has been cleaned since efforts
begun.
It is extremely difficult to properly dispose of
marine debris after removal, leaving communities with
messes they did not create. SJR 20 urges the Alaska
Congressional Delegation to advocate for increased
federal funding to support marine debris cleanup,
backhaul, prevention, and education.
We urge members support of SJR 20. This Foreign debris
must not trash Alaska any longer!
4:09:42 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL announced invited testimony on SJR 20.
4:10:12 PM
LAUREN DIVINE, Director, Ecosystem Conservation Office, Aleut
Community of St. Paul Island, Anchorage, Alaska, expressed
appreciation for SJR 20. She described the decades of extensive
work done by the Aleut Community of St. Paul to remove marine
debris from its remote shorelines. She emphasized the time,
resources, capacity, and financial investment. She stated that
this is a never-ending battle. She pointed out that the debris
is not locally sourced; tens of thousands of pounds of marine
debris are brought to Alaska via ocean currents. Over 80 percent
of the debris on the St. Paul shoreline is fishing-industry
related. This includes nets, ropes, fishing lines, and buoys,
among others. She emphasized the negative impact marine debris
has on wildlife.
MS. DIVINE pointed out that St. Paul Island is home to the
majority of the world's breeding population of northern fur
seals. She emphasized that this fur seal population is an
important subsistence resource and adds to the island's
biodiversity. She stated that, in the Bering Sea, millions of
seabirds and other marine wildlife are at risk due to exposure
to marine debris. She said that the Aleut Community of St. Paul
has worked to strengthen state and local partnerships to address
the challenges of clearing marine debris. She emphasized the
need for partnerships and financial assistance - and the
important role SJR 20 would play in bringing greater attention
and support to this issue. She added that this would benefit
both remote and tribal communities and would aid statewide
efforts.
4:13:19 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI directed attention to an Ocean Conservancy map
of the Alaska shoreline. He noted that the map indicates storm
currents in the Gulf of Alaska and the [Alaska Stream], which
could bring debris to Alaska. He recalled Ms. Divine's testimony
that most of the debris does not originate in Alaska and asked
for more information about where the debris is coming from.
4:13:56 PM
MS. DIVINE replied that Alaska currents carry debris from global
currents. She explained that the debris can and does originate
from outside of Alaska. Marine debris can come from beyond the
Arctic and sub-Arctic areas. She said that St. Paul sees debris
from countries across the Pacific Ocean. This includes large,
commercial-scale debris. She noted that the debris often
contains foreign language labels indicating its origins. She
said the debris finds its way into currents around the Bering
Sea and the Bering Sea shelf and float, which bring it to St.
Paul Island. St. Paul Island shares debris sources and problems
with Western Alaska and the Northern Bering Sea (i.e. the debris
travels across the Pacific Ocean), while debris in the Gulf of
Alaska has different origins. She invited others to note where
debris in their regions is coming from.
4:15:39 PM
MICHAEL LEVINE, Senior Director, Alaska Programs, Ocean
Conservancy, Juneau, Alaska, expressed gratitude for SJR 20. He
briefly described Ocean Conservancy's work in Alaska, which
includes programs focused on fisheries, shipping, clean ocean
energy, and marine debris. Ocean Conservancy has worked on
marine debris issues for close to 40 years. He briefly described
the International Coastal Cleanup program, which began in 1986
and has engaged more than 18 million volunteers and cleaned up
440 million pounds of trash in 155 countries.
4:17:18 PM
MR. LEVINE said the International Coastal Cleanup program - and
the Ocean Conservancy's work in Alaska - is built on providing
support to communities (including tribes, individuals, and local
organizations) that are working to clean up local beaches. He
explained that Ocean Conservancy provides technical expertise,
raise funding, and build connections among individuals working
on marine debris issues. He emphasized that marine debris is
prevalent and unique in Alaska. He explained that debris washes
up on Alaskan shores in amazing quantities. He directed
attention to SJR 20, page 2, lines 16-18, which states that as
of 2014, tribes, communities, and organizations around the state
have removed more than 3,000,000 pounds of debris in documented
cleanups.
MR. LEVINE estimated that this amount has increased by hundreds
of thousands of pounds since that time. He turned to Senator
Kawasaki's question about where the debris originates and
confirmed that the debris comes from faraway places. He
explained that debris from the Fukushima nuclear accident
(Fukushima, Japan, 2011) has crossed the Pacific Ocean and
washed up on Alaskan shores. He shared his belief that this
issue is uniquely Alaskan, cutting across geographies and
political lines. He noted that marine debris is a larger problem
in Alaska than in other states, in part due to Alaska's large
coastline. He emphasized partnerships with many organizations
across multiple industries and said this is a lesson in what
Alaskan's can do if they work together.
4:19:29 PM
MR. LEVINE emphasized that the work is extremely expensive. He
explained that debris cleanups in remote locations (e.g. St.
Paul Island) require equipment, manpower, and technical
expertise in order to transport the debris to the landfill. He
pointed out that the debris then takes up space in the landfill,
which creates another issue. He said Ocean Conservancy and other
organizations are working to create a "back haul" program to
transport the debris from remote communities to recycling and
disposal facilities (largely in the Lower 48). He said Ocean
Conservancy received a federal grant from the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) to begin a back haul pilot program in
Alaska. He noted support from Alaska's Senate delegation and
others across the state. He reiterated that this is a non-
partisan issue that requires an "all hands on deck" approach. He
encouraged the legislature's support and passage of SJR 20.
4:20:50 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI recalled funding that was allocated for Pacific
states to use for cleanup after the Fukushima disaster occurred.
He asked how the money was divided and what it was used for. He
surmised that it was not enough to address all the associated
cleanup needs.
4:21:23 PM
MR. LEVINE replied that he does not know how all the money was
spent. He recalled surveys to discover debris "hot spots." He
said he would research this question and provide additional
information to the committee. He pointed out that large
quantities of debris have washed up on shore after recent
weather events, including after Typhoon Merbok in 2022. He
commented that, regardless of how the funds from the Fukushima
disaster were spent, additional assistance is needed to clean up
Alaska's shoreline.
4:22:47 PM
RALPH WOLFE, Director, Indigenous Stewardship Programs, Native
Lands and Resources, Tlingit and Haida, Sitka, Alaska, discussed
the important role partnerships play in clearing marine debris.
He stated that Tlingit and Haida partners with organizations
like Ocean Conservancy to clean up marine debris in communities
throughout Southeast Alaska. Over the past year, Tlingit & Haida
has picked up nearly 10,000 pounds of debris across 4
communities (with two days spent by 10-15 people in each
community). He said this does not cover a fraction of the debris
that is present and in need of cleaning. He explained that
coordination and logistics are often a challenge, as many of the
locations are remote. He explained that time and funding pose a
challenge. He said cleanup events must account for tide,
weather, hazards, and arranging disposal. He stated that items
left in Southeast Alaska dumps are at risk of ending up back in
the ocean.
4:25:13 PM
MR. WOLFE said that the coordination continues once the cleanup
event is complete. He said the hope is to recycle the debris,
rather than move it from one location to another. He emphasized
the intention to find an ethical way to dispose of the debris.
He said nets and fishing equipment washes up on beaches. He
explained that large fishing nets are difficult to remove and
offered a personal anecdote to illustrate this. He shared his
belief that SJR 20 would help organizations like Tlingit and
Haida find additional funding sources outside of Alaska. He
opined that Alaskans should not have to deal with this issue but
acknowledged that Alaskans are the ones on the ground and
feeling the direct impacts. He briefly discussed microplastics
and the impact they have on wildlife such as seals, sea otters,
and sea lions. Microplastics are found throughout the marine
food chain and pose a significant risk to the ecosystem. This
negatively impacts sea life as well as those who rely on the
ocean for subsistence and challenges indigenous ways of life. He
indicated that Tlingit & Haida will continue to do this work
regardless, but emphasized the importance of partnerships that
can offer financial support. He stated that it is not simply
"picking up trash" - rather, it is about safeguarding
livelihoods, restoring ecosystems, and honoring the connection
between people and place. He commented that SJR 20 would
encourage investment in marine debris cleanup and would support
partnerships throughout Alaska. He said Tlingit & Haida has
partners from the southernmost coast of Southeast Alaska up to
Kodiak and beyond.
4:27:39 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL opened public testimony on SJR 20; finding none,
she closed public testimony.
4:28:03 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI shared that Japan provided a goodwill gift to
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to
collect marine debris after the Fukushima disaster. He asked if
there are other (national or international) avenues to address
marine debris. He opined that each country should be responsible
for its own debris - and should not be required to clean up
debris from other countries. He asked if there are any
international treaties that address this issue. He expressed
uncertainty regarding whether the United Nations Convention on
the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) would apply in this case, as the
United States is not party to that treaty.
4:28:50 PM
SENATOR BJORKMAN deferred the question.
4:29:12 PM
MR. LEVINE replied that he does not know. He said he would
research this alongside Senator Kawasaki's earlier question
related to Fukushima funding and provide any additional
information to the committee.
4:30:11 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL asked if Mr. Levine would also investigate whether
the Arctic Council has any related policies or activities and
provide this information to the committee.
4:30:45 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL held SJR 20 in committee.
4:31:22 PM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair Giessel adjourned the Senate Resources Standing Committee
meeting at 4:31 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 174 International Arctic Research Center Invited Testimony.pdf |
SRES 5/12/2025 3:30:00 PM |
SB 174 |
| SJR20 Support Document-Debris Cleanup on Remote Islands 09.21.23.pdf |
SRES 5/12/2025 3:30:00 PM |
SJR 20 |
| SJR 20 Sponsor Statement ver. N.pdf |
SRES 5/12/2025 3:30:00 PM |
SJR 20 |
| SJR20 Support Document-Statewide Cleanup Data 12.2024.pdf |
SRES 5/12/2025 3:30:00 PM |
SJR 20 |
| SJR20 ver. N.pdf |
SRES 5/12/2025 3:30:00 PM |
SJR 20 |
| SJR20 Support Document-OC Marine Debris in AK.pdf |
SRES 5/12/2025 3:30:00 PM |
SJR 20 |