PEBBLE PROBLEM

When Kyle was talking a couple weeks ago about Pebble he was talking money only. He asked if BBNA (Bristol Bay Native Association) owned the rights to the Pebble minerals, would they develop it? If they Bristol Bay fishermen owned the rights, would they develop it?  He was intimating that of COURSE Pebble would be mined for the billions at stake.

I remind you of the story of the goose that lays the golden eggs?  It lays golden eggs, and the farmer and his wife are sitting pretty.  The golden eggs provide them with a good living and with wealth.  The farmer and his wife become greedy, want all the eggs immediately and so cut open the goose and kill her.  Surprise, no golden eggs.  The couple sacrificed a sure thing for the prospect of great wealth.  I see Pebble like this.  We are considering killing the goose which has provided a resource and a living for centuries so that a Canadian mining company can benefit, and we might have some jobs for 40-60 years in Alaska.  (A comment about those jobs.  Mining companies must bring in their own highly trained engineers, directors and technicians for much of the work.  Local hiring does take place for the more lowly jobs, but often those positions end up being filled with others when locals bail on a job, or fail somehow.)  Something about Kyle's argument troubles me.  He was speaking only in terms of dollars; billions of dollars.

Can we put a price on the culture that fishing sustains?  Among the Natives, there is great reverence for the fish and animals that give their lives to feed the people.  Fish entrails, skeletons, meat scraps, hides, and even freezer burned fish are taken carefully to the water and given back.  It is done with reverence; almost with ceremony.   Natives are taught by their elders that fish and animals must not be wasted, and what is not used must be given back, lest the animals and fish withhold themselves in future due to disrespect.

I lived with my family in Dillingham for 8 years.  Everything there was related to fishing- commercial, sport and subsistence.  Local businesses gave employees several weeks off in the summer to fish their permits; it was understood that fishing trumped everything.  Town bustled with people gearing up- repairing fishing equipment, stringing nets, purchasing supplies.  The radio buzzed with fishermen angling for help on a boat or trying to lease a permit, and workers seeking positions.   The town population doubled in summer with cannery workers, and fishermen and crew who came just for the fishing season.  There is no reason for Dillingham to be there, were there no fish.  And it is that way all over rural Alaska.  No fish, no reason to be there.  No reason for those communities.  No reason to cling to the old ways of subsistence.  No smoked fish, no ulu knives, no Eskimo dance, no seal gut parkas, no reason to speak Yupik.  When Pebble has taken all it can, Pebble will leave and we will have lost everything.  We are talking about the difference between a resource that can provide for us forever, and a consumable one which has a definite life span.  How can we consider such a gamble?

Dr. Caroline Woody, a biologist doing fish and habitat research regarding the Pebble project tells us that the tiniest elevation of copper in a stream causes salmon to not be able to find their way home to spawn.  With mining's horrendous record, we must consider our salmon industry and our salmon cultures would be put on the line and gambled.

No salmon fishery on earth compares to that of Bristol Bay.  It is healthy, robust, diverse.  It is one of a kind.

We must also think about what a loss of salmon would do down the chain.  No fish for bears, eagles and other predators.  No nutrients delivered upstream so they can enrich the water and soil supporting the microbes and creepy crawlies that complete the food web and keep our land alive.  Salmon are a key in the pyramid of life in rural Alaska.  Without them, other fauna will collapse.

We also must consider the grave energy needs should Pebble move forward.  It is estimated Pebble would need the same amount of energy Anchorage needs.  Where would this come from, and why should they be allowed to use energy we ourselves will need?  (Aren't we coming to a place where energy should be considered to belong to ALL and not only to those who can afford to pay? But that is a topic for another blog.)

Something further;  Pebble calls for a huge land dam in which to store the toxic materials excavated during the mining.  The plan is that someone must be employed to service and watch the dam forever.  Water which will be tainted, must not be allowed to overrun the dam and contaminate the surrounding fish rearing watershed.  Let's do the math- how much will it cost to house, employ, train a team like that to oversee the dam?  How can we even do the math when we have no idea how long this support would be needed?

If nothing happens after all and Alaska says no to Pebble, it will be there.  We can bank it and tap it if we ever need to.  If we tap it now, we lose our fish, along with the business and culture salmon sustains.   Let Pebble be our ace in the corner should we ever be desperate enough to deem mining worth our fish.   And, yes, I say OUR fish.