EPA Confirms Threat that Pebble Mine Poses to Alaska Salmon

Those fighting to protect one of the world’s most valuable salmon fisheries are pleased with a recent assessment by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Basically, the EPA found that, even without a major disaster, the proposed Pebble Mine would destroy up to 90 miles of salmon streams and up to 4,800 acres of wetland salmon habitat in Alaska’s Bristol Bay.

“The science is clear: developing Pebble Mine will harm salmon and destroy streams even if nothing ever goes wrong at the mine,” said Tim Bristol, director of Trout Unlimited’s Alaska Program.

“Pebble is far bigger and more threatening to renewable resource jobs than any other mine proposal in Alaska and it’s planned for the worst location possible: the headwaters of Bristol Bay.

"Clearly, the time for action to protect Bristol Bay under the Clean Water Act is now.”

Save Bristol Bay adds this:

Anglo American, a foreign mining company of luxury metals with a record as one of the world’s biggest polluters, forms half of the Pebble Limited Partnership, which has said it plans to file a permit application for the mine this year. Its partner, Northern Dynasty, filed detailed plans with the SEC to build North America’s largest open-pit mine and the world’s largest earthen dam in Bristol Bay, Alaska, home to America’s most productive salmon streams.

Several representatives from the Save Bristol Bay Coalition were in Washington this week to urge the EPA to quickly release its updated draft Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment. They are part of an unprecedented, bipartisan coalition of lawmakers, more than 900 hunting and fishing groups and businesses, 26,000 retail food stores, 225 chefs and restaurant owners, and 22 jewelers like Tiffany and Co. that believe Bristol Bay should be protected.

Nearly 60% of Alaskans and 80% of Bristol Bay residents oppose the construction of Pebble Mine, particularly Alaska Natives who fear the destruction of their 8,000 year-old culture.

Go here to learn more about the assessment and comment.

PFBC Looks to EPA to Help Save Susquehanna Smallmouth Fishery

 

A “perfect storm” of stressors is destroying one of the best smallmouth fisheries in the nation. Algae blooms, bacteria, viruses, parasites, and pollutants annually decimate young-of-the year bass, leaving the Susquehanna River with a steadily declining number of big fish and little recruitment to replace them.

Since the first disease outbreak in 2005, biologists with the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission (PFBC) have been studying the problem on the river that flows from Otsego Lake in Cooperstown, N.Y., to Chesapeake Bay, draining about half of the state’s land area. Their conclusion: The problem is too complex for them to solve without additional help.

“That’s why we’re trying to convince the EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) to put the Susquehanna on the (impaired waters) list,” said John Arway, PFBC executive director.

Despite the Susquehanna’s biological and recreation impairment, the state Department of Environmental Protection decided not to include the river on the list, forcing the PFBC to look elsewhere for help.

 “We’ve also had meetings with our members of Congress,” Arway said. “This is extremely important. If the river goes on the impaired list, then there’s a time clock to fix it. But that clock doesn’t start until the problem is formally recognized.

"Putting it on the 303D list would mean that there’s a plan and we’d be eligible for grant money and we could prioritize how to spend it.”

The PFBC has support from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for its campaign. In a letter to the EPA, Region 5 Director Wendi Weber wrote the following:

“We concur with recent scientific assessments that indicate a chronic problem exists with recruitment of smallmouth bass in the river.

 “We are also concerned with the recent rise in reported skin lesions on bass, as well as emerging evidence of inter-sex, possibly caused by endocrine disruption compounds in the water. The Service believes the suite of warning signs exhibited by the smallmouth bass population is cause for careful and thorough assessment of environmental conditions in the river. While exact linkages and root causes seem to remain unclear, we believe the evidence suggests that environmental stressors are affecting the biota in the river.”

And just how much have those environmental stressors impacted smallmouth bass? “We’d typically get 1 ½ to 2 good years for every 1 bad year (of reproduction). Now, we will be lucky if we get 1 out of 8,” said Geoff Smith, a biologist who has studied the river.

He added that the number of adult fish in the river “has plateaued to low densities historically.”

 “As the older fish die of old age, we’re not seeing the recruitment we need to replace them,” Arway said

He points to dissolved phosphorus in the river as a “principal stressor.” Right at the time bass are born, he added, “We’re seeing blooms of nuisance algae from the west shore to the east shore.”

That results in low dissolved oxygen, which in turn, compromises the immune system of young bass.

“We need to trace it (phosphorus) to the source,” Arway said. “We need to know where it comes from. That’s why we need to be on the 303D list.”

Additionally, biologists have identified these contaminants in the river that could cause endocrine disruption:

Thirteen flame retardant compounds, 2 personal care products (triclosan), 14 organochlorine pesticides, and 9 other pesticides.

They’ve also confirmed Largemouth Bass Virus.

“That’s not likely a factor (for abundance). But just carrying that virus might add to the stress,” Smith said.

Possibly most disturbing, though, is that similar problems with smallmouth recruitment now have spread into the Susquehanna’s tributaries and even outside of the basin, to the Allegheny and Delaware.

Anglers, meanwhile, “were madder than a hornet’s nest for a time,” Arway said. That’s because the PFBC implemented mandatory catch-and-release for the middle 98 miles of the Susquehanna and prohibited targeting of bass on nests from May 1 to June 15.

“But now they understand and they’re behind us. They’re working with us,” the PFBC executive director added.

Court Rules EPA Acted Illegally in Pushing Ethanol

Finally, the courts are starting to rule against illegal --- and unconstitutional --- behavior by the Obama Administration and one of those judgments should have anglers and boaters cheering.

First, a federal appeals court ruled that President Obama exceeded his constitutional authority when he made three recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board.

Also, the court decided on the same day that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency abused the law with “an unreasonable exercise of agency discretion” in pushing an ethanol agenda that is costing citizens millions of dollars annually, as the inefficient biofuel damages or destroys boat, car, and other internal combustion engines.

Or, as the Wall Street Journal put it:

“Ethanol is one of the only products in history that Congress subsidizes and mandates at the same time. That sounds pretty generous. Yet now a federal court has ruled the Environmental Protection Agency is illegally giving the lobby extra benefits that Congress never intended. That takes some work.”

Read more here.

Angler Opposition Fierce to Alaska's Pebble Mine

This annual sockeye salmon run at the headwaters of Bristol Bay could be destroyed if Pebble Mine is allowed to proceed.

Anglers and others have spoken out overwhelmingly in opposition to the proposed Pebble Mine in Bristol Bay, Alaska, which would endanger one of the world’s most pristine and productive salmon fisheries.

The U.S. Environmental Protection (EPA) agency received about 185,000 comments about the mine, with 98 percent opposed. More than 180,000 of those comments called for EPA to stop development, utilizing protections provided by the federal Clean Water Act.

“Opponents of the mine consider the risk of environmental damage from the waste material (an estimated 10 billion tons) generated by the mining process too great,” says Angling Trade website.

“If allowed, the mine will be located at the headwaters of the Bristol Bay watershed, the spawning grounds for over 40 million fish annually.  Even without a major disaster, experts predict significant, environmental damage will occur if the mine is developed. 

“The EPA’s draft Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment finds that normal mining practices would destroy as much as 87 miles of rivers and streams and 4,200 acres of wetlands.  A major catastrophe, or reoccurring leaks or spills, could devastate the region.”

To learn more about this issue, check out Alaska Gold.

Buy Better Bass Fishing here.

Former Global Warming Supporter Refutes Preservationist Ideology

Yeah, I know. Polar bears and penguins live thousands of miles apart. That’s what you have trouble with about this picture?

Not long ago, James Lovelock, the godfather of the manmade global warming movement, acknowledged that he had been unduly “alarmist.”

As do I, he still believes that we are contributing to climate change, but he admitted that his doomsday predictions --- and those by Al Gore --- were incorrect.

And now he’s followed up with an interview that is going to make those in the preservationist wing of the environmental movement gnash their teeth and pull out their hair.

For example, Lovelock supports natural gas fracking.

“Gas is almost a give-away in the U.S. at the moment. They’ve gone for fracking in a big way. This is what makes me very cross with the greens for trying to knock it. Let’s be pragmatic and sensible . . .”

By the way, the administrator for the Environmental Protection Agency, Lisa Jackson, said unequivocally that no evidence exists that groundwater has been polluted by the hydraulic fracturing procedure. That doesn’t sit well with the preservationists either.

Lovelock also mocks the idea that economies can be powered by solar panels and wind turbines.

“We rushed into renewable energy without any thought,” he said. “The schemes are largely, hopelessly inefficient and unpleasant. I personally can’t stand windmills at any price.”

And he flatly denies the idea that “the science is settled” regarding manmade global warming.

“One thing that being a scientist has taught me is that you can never be certain about anything. You never know the truth. You can only approach it and hope to get a bit nearer to it each time. You iterate towards the truth. You don’t know it.”

Read the full story here.