Saving Seafood

Pebble Mine developer finances lawsuit against BBRSDA

April 10 2019 — Several Bristol Bay fishermen, with financial backing from the Pebble Limited Partnership, have filed a lawsuit against the Bristol Bay Regional Seafood Association (BBRSDA) for what they allege is misuse of the BBRSDA’s funds.

The lawsuit is challenging more than USD 250,000 (EUR 221,900) in BBRSDA contracts with two organizations – United Tribes of Bristol Bay and SalmonState – that oppose Pebble Mine, a proposed open pit gold, copper, and molybdenum at the headwaters that feed the world’s largest sockeye salmon run.

But Andy Wink, executive director of the BBRSDA, which has the stated purpose of maximizing the value of Bristol Bay’s seafood, said supporting educational campaigns against the proposed Pebble Mine is directly in line with its mission statement.

“Consumers choose to pay more for wild sockeye salmon because it’s a healthy, abundant, premium wild salmon species from a pristine and unspoiled environment. It’s a unique resource unlike anything else in the world,” Wink said in statement released earlier this week. “The Pebble Mine could jeopardize that, and at the very least we believe it’s important to engage in the permitting process so that if the mine does proceed, it’s built with adequate safeguards for fishermen, residents, and sockeye consumers.”

Read the full story at Seafood Source

 

ALASKA: Siding with the mine: Bristol Bay fishermen team up with Pebble

April 10, 2019 — A group of Bristol Bay fishermen has filed suit to stop the region’s seafood marketing group from spending funds that they say are aimed at fighting the development of Pebble Mine. The mine’s developer is footing the bill for the lawsuit.

Gary Nielsen, Trefim Andrew, Tim Anelon, Henry Olympic, and Abe and Braden Williams claim the Bristol Bay Regional Seafood Development Association is using $250,000 on efforts to stop the mine. That money is earmarked for marketing local fish, and is being “unlawfully spent,” they say.

“The mine presents a significant threat to this fishery’s bright future, especially if the process is going to omit rigorous scientific analysis and ignore the inconvenient concerns of downstream stakeholders,” said Andy Wink, the association’s executive director.

Read the full story at National Fisherman

ALASKA: Pebble backs lawsuit to halt Bristol Bay seafood association’s funding for anti-mine groups

April 9, 2019 — Six Bristol Bay commercial fishermen are suing a regional seafood association they belong to, challenging over $250,000 in contracts it made with groups that advocate against the proposed Pebble Mine.

The Pebble Limited Partnership confirmed it is paying for the litigation.

The plaintiffs — Trefim Andrew, Tim Anelon, Gary Nielsen, Henry Olympic, Abe Williams and Braden Williams — are challenging the Bristol Bay Regional Seafood Development Association’s recent contracts with SalmonState and the United Tribes of Bristol Bay. Both SalmonState and UTBB are ardent Pebble opponents.

In their complaint, the plaintiffs allege the lawsuit is justified because BBRSDA can only use its funding to market seafood, based on the state statute that allowed for its creation.

BBRDSA leaders said they believe the lawsuit is designed to limit their participation in the ongoing federal public comment period for the proposed Pebble Mine.

“Consumers choose to pay more for wild sockeye salmon because it’s a healthy, abundant, premium wild salmon species from a pristine and unspoiled environment,” BBRSDA executive director Andy Wink said in a statement. “The Pebble Mine could jeopardize that, and at the very least we believe it’s important to engage in the permitting process so that if the mine does proceed, it’s built with adequate safeguards for fisherman, residents, and sockeye consumers.”

BBRDSA characterized its contracts with SalmonState and UTBB as funding for “educational efforts.”

Read the full story at KTOO

ALASKA: At Iliamna Lake hearings, residents speak out on Pebble Mine

April 8, 2019 — Situated in Southwest Alaska, Lake Iliamna is renowned for its pure water, freshwater seals and fish. Now it is the center of one of the most contentious debates in the state.

The Pebble Mine would sit 17 miles north of the lake. It would tap into large deposits of copper, gold and molybdenum. And it would operate at the headwaters of the largest sockeye salmon run in the world. For some, this spells disaster for that habitat and residents’ traditional way of life. But others say it is a chance at renewed economic vitality.

In Kokhanok, around 50 people attended the meeting on Pebble Mine, though far fewer testified. Marlene Nielsen was one of those who spoke in support of the mine proposal.

“What do we have here?” Nielsen asked. “The village council that only has five, six jobs. The school that only has maybe two or three aides. And the store, maybe two. That’s not very much economy here. We need something going here for our kids. But we also need to make sure it’s safe.”

Across the lake in Iliamna, Chasity Anelon shares those concerns. She has worked as an operations coordinator for the Pebble Project for the past 10 years.

“So I’ve lived in Iliamna all my life. I have a daughter and, you know, I choose to live here. This is my home, this is where I want to be. And I am able to live here because I have a job,” Anelon said.

Read the full story at KTOO

Fight renewed over Pebble Mine in Bristol Bay, Alaska

April 5, 2019 — Opposition is growing to a renewed effort to launch a massive mining project near Bristol Bay, Alaska, home to the world’s largest sockeye salmon run.

Mining conglomerate Pebble Limited Partnership applied for a permit in December 2017 for an open pit copper, gold, and molybdenum mine that would sit near critical headwaters that feed the Bristol Bay fishery. Opponents say the Pebble Mine would undermine the area’s pristine habitat – a calling card of the Bristol Bay brand – and that a tailings dam failure could prove catastrophic to the fishery. The most recent public opinion poll by the BBNC shows 58 percent of Alaskans oppose the mine, with 33 percent supporting it.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers released a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on 20 February, 2019, but the wide-ranging opposition in Alaska and beyond has lambasted the document.

“People around here understand on a very visceral level the importance of fisheries in general and Bristol Bay in particular. Commercial fishermen, sport fishermen, tribal entities that are interested in subsistence, biologists; we’re not always aligned, but we’re certainly aligned on this particular issue,” said Daniel Cheyenne, the vice president of lands and natural resources for the Bristol Bay Native Corporation (BBNC).

Norm Van Vactor, the CEO of the Bristol Bay Economic Development Corporation, said the EIS is incomplete.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

ALASKA: Pushing back on Pebble: Scientific community and Bristol Bay leaders offer testimony

April 3, 2019 — Nobody was fooling at the Alaska State House Resources Committee hearing on Monday, April 1, to address concerns about the proposed plan for Pebble Mine in Bristol Bay.

“If Pebble goes in, the Bristol Bay Sockeye brand and the entire Alaska Seafood brand will be tarnished,” said Norm Van Vactor, CEO of the Bristol Bay Economic Development Corporation. “The state of Alaska has invested millions into building these brands and establishing Alaska as a premium brand in the marketplace. That brand is based on pristine habitat, sustainability, and high quality, not open-pit mining districts and acid mine drainage.”

Bristol Bay residents, fisheries leaders and scientific experts offered testimony about a range of inadequacies in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers draft Environmental Impact Statement, as well as the economic, social and environmental value of Bristol Bay’s salmon watersheds that would be at risk under the proposed plan.

“They did not assess the risk appropriately. The draft Environmental Impact Statement is misleading about the probability of a [catastrophic tailings dam]failure,” said Dr. Cameron Wobus, a senior scientist at Lynker Technologies who authored a report on tailings dam failure scenarios.

The draft’s 20-year time line, scientists say, is too short to evaluate the long-term risks. A 100-year analysis would have been more transparent, because the tailings dam has a 1 in 5 chance of failing over a century.

Read the full story at National Fisherman

 

EPA, Alaska seek to relax water pollution rules

April 3, 2019 — The Trump administration is quietly reviving a long-stalled effort by state regulators to loosen pollution standards where fish spawn. The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation proposed the rule change more than a decade ago to change how it enforces the federal Clean Water Act.

After a dozen-year hiatus, it’s making its way through the Environmental Protection Agency’s rule-making process. But opponents warn if the EPA gives the 2006 “mixing zone” rule the thumbs-up, it could help pave the way for controversial projects like Pebble Mine.

The Clean Water Act is the primary tool used by the feds to regulate water pollution. Industry often argues these standards are difficult to meet.

“Alaska’s a beautiful, pristine place, and there is no pollution and certainly the background water quality is excellent,” said Frank Bergstrom, an Alaska mining consultant with 40 years of experience. “So if you follow the Clean Water Act to the detail, you pretty much have to discharge distilled water.”

That’s overstating the state’s water quality standards. Basically the limits are designed to prevent water bodies from being degraded. But years ago, Alaska and other states took the industry’s view in mind when it came up with “mixing zones.” This compromise allows things like wastewater plants, mines and oil refineries to exceed water pollution standards in designated areas.

Read and listen to the full story at KTOO

ALASKA: Scientists: Pebble Mine study doesn’t account for all risks

April 2, 2019 — Representatives have been grappling with the a proposal to develop a mine near Bristol Bay.

As a part of the wider discussion, the House Resources committee heard Monday from a group of scientists and advocates who disagree with the Pebble Mine project which proposes developing the Pebble copper-­gold­-molybdenum porphyry deposit (Pebble Deposit) in southwest Alaska as an open-pit mine, with associated infrastructure.

A group of scientists and Bristol Bay residents held a press conference, detailing concerns with the draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) released by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in February. Some critics have said the 90-day comment period for this DEIS is not long enough, considering the length of the document.

The chief concerns were that the DEIS used too short of a time frame to associate the risks of the mine, it used an inappropriate fish habitat assessment, cumulative risks were essentially ignored, there was very little mention of long-term risks associated with climate change and that it used selective use of scientific literature when backing up claims.

Read the full story at the Juneau Empire

EPA Chief Recused From Bristol Bay Mine That His Former Law Firm Represented

March 26, 2019 — EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler is formally recusing himself from agency reviews and permitting decisions on a proposed gold and copper mine near Alaska’s Bristol Bay amid criticism his former law firm represented the developer.

Wheeler promised to steer clear of matters involving the controversial Pebble Mine in an updated March 20 recusal statement, two years after his former employer, Faegre Baker Daniels LLP, had arranged a meeting between former EPA chief Scott Pruitt and project developer Pebble LP.

Weeks after that 2017 meeting, Pruitt moved to withdraw proposed mining restrictions that would make it difficult, if not impossible, for the project to secure an essential Clean Water Act permit. Although Pruitt later backtracked, business groups have recently lobbied the EPA to toss out the five-year-old restrictions, arguing they preemptively block a project that would sustain jobs and extract at least 6.5 billion tons of known minerals. Environmentalists counter that the proposed mine jeopardizes a thriving salmon fishery.

Wheeler cast his decision as a “voluntary recusal” since he never provided services to a Faegre Baker Daniels client on the Pebble Mine and government advisers have said the move isn’t necessary to fulfill federal ethics rules. Wheeler said his recusal would last as long as he leads the Environmental Protection Agency. In the meantime, Wheeler has delegated Pebble issues to EPA General Counsel Matthew Leopold.

The Environmental Protection Agency could still move to lift the restrictions, without Wheeler’s involvement. And in the meantime, the Army Corps of Engineers is taking public comment on a draft environmental impact statement analyzing the mine.

Read the full story at Bloomberg

ALASKA: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers sees no reason now to extend Pebble comment period

March 21, 2019 — An official with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said Wednesday that the agency has not received any compelling reason to extend the 90-day comment period on a draft environmental review of a major mine project in Southwest Alaska.

Shane McCoy is project manager for the corps’ review of the Pebble Limited Partnership’s permit application. The Pebble partnership wants to develop a gold-and-copper mine near a major salmon fishery in Alaska’s Bristol Bay region.

McCoy told reporters that while 45 days is standard for such reviews, the corps decided 90 days was appropriate for the Pebble project given the nature of the project and level of interest in it.

The corps has received requests to extend the 90-day period and is considering those, but so far it has not received a strong reason for an extension, he said. The corps also has received comments saying 90 days is sufficient, he said.

Critics of the project have criticized the substance of the review and say the process has been rushed. When the draft review was released last month, Pebble partnership CEO Tom Collier said the partnership saw “no significant environmental challenges that would preclude the project from getting a permit.”

McCoy said the draft review is not a rubber stamp of the project. If there’s evidence contrary to what the corps’ draft analysis shows, “absolutely provide it to us and allow us to use that to inform a revision if necessary,” he said.

Read the full story from the Associated Press at Anchorage Daily News