THE HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON WORLD TRADE AND STATE/FEDERAL RELATIONS March, 18, 1998 5:17 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT Representative Ramona Barnes, Chair Representative John Cowdery Representative Pete Kott Representative Gene Kubina Representative Gail Phillips MEMBERS ABSENT Representative Alan Austerman, Vice Chair Representative Irene Nicholia COMMITTEE CALENDAR SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 38 Relating to the bombardment of the village of Angoon. - MOVED HCS SJR 38(WTR) OUT OF COMMITTEE HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 54 Relating to establishing maritime boundaries with Canada. - MOVED CSHJR 54(WTR) OUT OF COMMITTEE (* First public hearing) PREVIOUS ACTION BILL: SJR 38 SHORT TITLE: APOLOGY TO VILLAGE OF ANGOON SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) MACKIE, Taylor, Duncan, Leman Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action 2/16/98 2522 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S) 2/16/98 2522 (S) STATE AFFAIRS 2/17/98 2550 (S) COSPONSOR(S): TAYLOR, DUNCAN 3/03/98 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BELTZ ROOM 211 3/03/98 (S) MINUTE(STA) 3/04/98 2732 (S) STA RPT 4DP 3/03/98 2732 (S) DP: GREEN, DUNCAN, MACKIE, WARD 3/03/98 2732 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTE (S.STA) 3/05/98 (S) RLS AT 12:25 PM FAHRENKAMP RM 203 3/05/98 (S) MINUTE(RLS) 3/06/98 2769 (S) RULES TO CALENDAR 3/6/98 3/06/98 2771 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME 3/06/98 2771 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING UNAN CONSENT 3/06/98 2771 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME SJR 38 3/06/98 2771 (S) COSPONSOR: LEMAN 3/06/98 2772 (S) PASSED Y15 N- E4 A1 3/06/98 2776 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H) 3/09/98 2561 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S) 3/09/98 2561 (H) WTR 3/18/98 (H) WTR AT 5:00 PM CAPITOL 120 BILL: HJR 54 SHORT TITLE: ALASKA MARITIME BOUNDARY WITH CANADA SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVES(S) VEZEY, Ryan Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action 1/30/98 2180 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S) 1/30/98 2180 (H) FISHERIES, WTR 2/25/98 (H) FSH AT 5:00 PM CAPITOL 124 2/25/98 (H) MINUTE(FSH) 2/27/98 2455 (H) FSH RPT 3DP 2/27/98 2455 (H) DP: HODGINS, KUBINA, IVAN 2/27/98 2455 (H) ZERO FISCAL NOTE (H.FSH) 3/18/98 (H) WTR AT 5:00 PM CAPITOL 120 WITNESS REGISTER SENATOR JERRY MACKIE Alaska State Legislature Capitol Building, Room 427 Juneau, Alaska 99801 Telephone: (907) 465-4925 POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SJR 38. LEONARD JOHN, Associate Director Kootznoowoo Cultural and Educational Foundation P.O. Box 21683 Juneau, Alaska 99802 Telephone: (907) 790-2992 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of SJR 38. MAXINE THOMPSON, Mayor city of Angoon P.O. Box 189 Angoon, Alaska 99820 Telephone: (907) 788-3653 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of SJR 38. REPRESENTATIVE AL VEZEY Alaska State Legislature Capitol Building, Room 13 Juneau, Alaska 99801 Telephone: (907) 465-3719 POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HJR 54. VINCE O'SHEA, Captain Operations Plans and Policy Branch Maritime Plans and Policy Division Seventeenth Coast Guard District United States Coast Guard 709 West 9th Street Juneau, Alaska 99802 Telephone: (907) 463-2226 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HJR 54. TAPE 98-1, SIDE A Number 0000 REPRESENTATIVE RAMONA BARNES called the House Special Committee on World Trade and State/Federal Relations to order at 5:17 p.m. Members present at the call to order were Representatives Barnes, Kott, Phillips and Cowdery. Representative Kubina arrived at 5:29 p.m. SJR 38 - APOLOGY TO VILLAGE OF ANGOON REPRESENTATIVE BARNES announced the first order of business was SJR 38, Relating to the bombardment of the village of Angoon. REPRESENTATIVE BARNES called on Senator Jerry Mackie, sponsor of the resolution. Number 0076 SENATOR JERRY MACKIE, Alaska State Legislature, read the following sponsor statement: "I introduced SJR 38 to bring closure and finality to an incident that occurred in the early years of Alaska's territorial history that continues to be a painful memory to the people of Angoon. The incident was the naval attack that destroyed the village in the early winter of 1882. The action was caused by a dispute between the village and a whaling company over the accidental death of a tribal member in the company's employment. The U.S. Navy interceded by shelling and burning the village and its food stores. In addition to suffering injuries and loss of life, the residents of Angoon struggled to survive the difficult winter without adequate shelter or food supplies. "Memories and recollections of the injustice are still very much alive among residents of Angoon. Almost every family was deeply affected in some way from the death and destruction. It is the opinion of elders in the community that a simple apology by the U.S. government would bring closure and finality to the incident. It would redress long-standing feelings of disrespect and victimization by the federal government and its lack of acknowledging the unfortunate event. The resolution requests that President Clinton issue an apology to the people of Angoon." SENATOR MACKIE stated, having represented Angoon for the last eight years, it is a community that doesn't ask for anything. It is one of the most traditional communities in the state in regards to its appreciation of its culture, way of life, and families. It struck him when reading the many different accounts of what took place that there has never been an apology. The resolution does not talk about restitution which may bring varying degrees of opinions. SENATOR MACKIE further stated, after discussing the issue with the elders, an apology is a legitimate thing for the state to ask from the U.S. government. The passage of the resolution in the Senate with a unanimous vote, and the early hearing of the resolution in the House Special Committee on World Trade and State/Federal Relations has made the elders feel good. It still has a profound effect on them, even though it was a long time ago. Number 0350 REPRESENTATIVE PETE KOTT asked Senator Mackie whether there was any reason to exclude the Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, from receiving a copy of the resolution. Number 0367 SENATOR MACKIE replied, "No." He would be happy to include any individuals to whom the committee members would like to have a copy sent. Number 0435 LEONARD JOHN, Associate Director, Kootznoowoo Cultural and Educational Foundation, testified in Juneau. The foundation is really glad that the committee is hearing the resolution today. He recently reflected on the 100-year commemoration of the incident that recognized the six lives lost. There is no way to put a dollar value on the loss. One of his grandfathers, Charlie John Senior, chose not to wear his regalia at the commemoration to signify that the hurt was still there. It was his grandfather's passion and desire to see the incident be brought to closure with the U.S. government in order to start healing. There have been a lot of lives impacted by the incident. Number 0560 REPRESENTATIVE GAIL PHILLIPS asked Mr. John whether his grandfather is still alive. MR. JOHN replied, "I wish he were." Number 0599 MAXINE THOMPSON, Mayor, city of Angoon, testified in Juneau. According to her understanding of what happened, it was a cultural misunderstanding. At the time of a wrong doing, the life of a high-ranking Tlingit is worth 200 blankets. Tlingits are known to have a value of property and significance of the position of a person. The incident was tied into the position of the person who died. The person was high-ranking with a value of 200 blankets put on his life, along with a two-day observation. Instead, the U.S. Navy was informed in Sitka that the Indians were operating and threatening to retaliate. The U.S. Navy boats did not immediately start shelling the community. They came to Angoon and waited offshore for two days talking to different individuals without an interpreter. The person in charge of the U.S. Navy at the time was not new to the area. The two other officers ahead of him had recognized the cultural ways of the people and honored them. This commander chose not to and demanded 400 blankets instead of the traditional 200. The community members could only come up with 81 blankets. The Navy tied the canoes up, chopped them then proceeded to shell the community houses that stored the winter food supply. The Navy also destroyed the totem poles and took some artifacts. If this is not put to rest, the story will continue to be passed down. Tlingits are well known for their protocol as part of their culture. The incident that remains unresolved dictates an apology, and it needs to come from the U.S. government. It does not reflect good on the U.S. government by leaving this unresolved for so long. She has a hard time as an American knowing that the Japanese sent to prison camps during the war have been acknowledged and granted payment for their suffering, while other U.S. citizens have yet to get an apology. The only thing that the people from Angoon received when they went to Washington D.C. was a sailor hat. She called it an insult. Number 0949 REPRESENTATIVE KOTT asked Senator Mackie whether he considered including language in the resolution to urge the U.S. government to erect a memorial for the lost lives. Number 0989 SENATOR MACKIE replied the people who went to Washington D.C. in 1982 to try to receive compensation to replace some of the clan houses received a token gesture. The Navy said it would consider naming one of its ships after the village in their memory. It never happened, however, and they returned with a Navy hat. The Kootznoowoo Corporation continues to work on the issue. He felt that a resolution asking for a simple apology would go a long way to help the people. The citizens of Angoon will probably continue to talk with Senator Stevens and the Navy for those types of options. He didn't want to identify any one particular option in the resolution. The citizens recognize that once the federal government acknowledges the incident their chances for something like that are better. SENATOR MACKIE further stated in no way shape or form is the resolution intended to be disrespectful to the U.S. armed forces. The incident took place a long time ago and things are done differently now. Number 1109 REPRESENTATIVE KOTT made a motion to insert the language "the Honorable Madeleine K. Albright, U.S. Secretary of State" after the word "States" on page 1, line 17. There being no objection, it was so moved. Number 1172 REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS made a motion and asked unanimous consent to move SJR 38, as amended, out of the committee with individual recommendations. There being no objection, HCS SJR 38(WTR) was so moved from the House Special Committee on World Trade and State/Federal Relations. HJR 54 - ALASKA MARITIME BOUNDARY WITH CANADA REPRESENTATIVE BARNES announced the next order of business was HJR 54, Relating to establishing maritime boundaries with Canada. REPRESENTATIVE BARNES called on Representative Al Vezey, sponsor of the resolution. Number 1227 REPRESENTATIVE AL VEZEY, Alaska State Legislature, asked Captain Vince O'Shea to join him from the United States Coast Guard. REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY stated Alaska is the only state in the union that has two maritime boundaries - one with Canada and Russia - yet there is no boundary treaty with either. The boundary between Alaska and Canada stems back to the Anglo-Russo Treaty of 1825. It was a period in history where the Russians and the British just defeated Napoleon in 1814 and Europe was in a period of peace. The treaty was one of the first international disputes settled peacefully. The treaty stemmed from a problem in 1821 when the Russian-American Company started to put restrictions on foreign vessels fishing and trapping in Alaskan waters. Alaska was a territory of Russia at the time. The territorial description of the line of demarcation has not substantially changed since 1825. There were some minor changes in 1903, but there is no maritime boundary. Dixon Entrance is the area with the most disputes. SJR 38 - APOLOGY TO VILLAGE OF ANGOON REPRESENTATIVE BARNES announced the committee will take up SJR 38 again to adopt the fiscal note. Number 1377 REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS made a motion to adopt the zero fiscal note for SJR 38(WTR). There being no objection, it was so adopted. HJR 54 - ALASKA MARITIME BOUNDARY WITH CANADA REPRESENTATIVE BARNES indicated the committee will resume discussing HJR 54. Number 1385 REPRESENTATIVE KOTT made a motion to adopt the proposed committee substitute for HJR 54, version 0-LS1435\B, Bannister, 2/27/98, for consideration. There being no objection, it was so adopted. Number 1401 VINCE O'SHEA, Captain, Operations Plans and Policy Branch, Maritime Plans and Policy Division, Seventeenth Coast Guard District, United States Coast Guard, stated the U.S. and Canada do not have an agreed upon maritime boundary. He referred to a chart that illustrated the boundary lines claimed by the U.S. and Canada. The area in between the two lines is called the disputed area. Both countries have agreed to allow their fishing vessels in that area. The Coast Guard has been patrolling in the Dixon Entrance area for many years during the salmon season - June through September. The purpose is to be available for search and rescue, and to ensure that the U.S. vessels are not harassed by Canadian vessels in the disputed area. In general, there are about one or two minor violation cases. The Coast Guard doesn't have a position on the resolution, but notes that it is consistent with the idea of resolving a maritime boundary, a position that the State Department has taken over the years. Number 1518 REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS asked Captain O'Shea why this boundary wasn't brought up in 1984 when the International Court of Justice set the other questionable boundaries. CAPTAIN O'SHEA replied the Canadians didn't want to bring the issue up because they would not have prevailed. Number 1537 REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS asked Captain O'Shea where the boundary is in the Beaufort Sea. CAPTAIN O'SHEA replied it is way up north. He did not bring a chart to illustrate that boundary. REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS asked Captain O'Shea how has the Beaufort Sea boundary changed from what is perceived to be the Alaska- Canadian boundary today. CAPTAIN O'SHEA replied, "I don't know." He suspects that the issue up there relates to the oil underneath the boundary. REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS stated that is what she is concerned about. Number 1561 REPRESENTATIVE JOHN COWDERY asked Captain O'Shea whether the boundary in Dixon Entrance has anything to do with the current fishery dispute with Canada. CAPTAIN O'SHEA replied it has a connection. It is an intense symbol of sovereignty for the Canadians. It represents a potential pressure point for people on both sides as a means of stirring up controversy. Number 1616 REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY asked Captain O'Shea whether the proposed new boundary is acceptable to Canada. CAPTAIN O'SHEA replied, "Absolutely not." It is not a new proposal. The U.S. claims the equidistant line between the land masses in Dixon Entrance. The U.S. took the line drawn in 1903 as a means to separate the islands in Dixon Entrance. In other words, the islands north of the line belong to the U.S. and the islands south of the line belong to Canada. Canada took the line drawn in 1903 as applying to the maritime boundary. The U.S. for many years has claimed the equidistant line which is not acceptable to Canada. Number 1682 REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY asked Captain O'Shea whether the U.S. line is disputed by Canada. CAPTAIN O'SHEA replied, "Yes." Canada does not recognize it. It recognizes that it is the equidistant line, but holds that the 1903 tribunal line is the maritime boundary, while the U.S. does not recognize it as the maritime boundary. Number 1729 REPRESENTATIVE COWDERY asked Captain O'Shea whether the area is heavily used for commercial fishing. CAPTAIN O'SHEA replied there are several areas fished by trollers. More Canadian vessels fish the area than U.S. vessels. There is a concentration of U.S. gillnetters at Tree Point. Once in a while there are seiners there as well. There are some black cod and halibut fishers in the disputed area. Generally, the Canadians have not had a problem with the U.S. fishers. They do have a problem with the U.S. trollers operating within the disputed area. Last year, they also said that they have a problem with charters operating off of Newnez Rocks (ph). Number 1779 REPRESENTATIVE KOTT asked Captain O'Shea whether he is aware of any problems that the state of Washington is facing similar to what Alaska is facing. CAPTAIN O'SHEA replied there is an unresolved area in the Strait of Juan de Fuca. It is a smaller sliver of water and the fishing issues aren't as contentious, however. There is a boundary near Blaine, Washington that is agreed upon and there is a good relationship between the U.S. and Canada from an enforcement standpoint. In fact, Canada cooperated with the U.S. in putting up a giant range marker to make it easier for fishers to know where the line is. Number 1850 REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY stated, in reference to Representative Phillips' earlier question, there is no dispute along the Beaufort Sea because there isn't a lot of activity at the moment, but the maritime boundary is totally unresolved, including the line of demarcation. REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY further stated that the Canadians have nothing to win if they negotiate. The best the Canadians could hope for is to hold the status quo. The Anglo-Russo Treaty of 1825 merely states that the territory ceded starts from the southernmost point of the Prince of Wales Island to Portland Channel. It doesn't talk about a maritime boundary - a concept that didn't even exist in 1825. Most international courts would either establish a 12-mile limit or an equidistant line. Number 1942 REPRESENTATIVE KOTT made a motion to move the proposed committee substitute for HJR 54, version 0-LS1435\B, Bannister, 2/27/98, out of the committee with individual recommendations and the attached fiscal note(s). There being no objection, CSHJR 54(WTR) was so moved from the House Special Committee on World Trade and State/Federal Relations. ADJOURNMENT Number 1976 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES adjourned the House Special Committee on World Trade and State/Federal Relations meeting at 5:50 p.m.