Epa region x4/3/2023 ![]() ![]() Her family fishes for salmon in the summer and fall, and she wants her daughter, Stormi, to be able to live and harvest there. ![]() And this would be a great opportunity for that,” she said.Īnelon was thankful that Administrator Sixkiller visited Iliamna. “I was just very disappointed in the EPA, because there are people that live in rural Alaska that need to have jobs to be able to support their families to live here. One of those opposed to a ban is Chasity Anelon, who lives in Iliamna and works for Pebble Limited Partnership, the company looking to develop the mine. But it doesn’t mean you need to break personal ties over opinions,” Salmon said. “Of course we have friends, family members, fellow villagers, and we all have different views. And it was really great to see that our emotion and our responsibilities were able to be shared with him so he can understand the detriment a mine would propose to the region and be able to move the 404 forward,” Salmon said, referring to the section of the Clean Water Act that gives the EPA the authority to block the mine.ĭebates around the potential merits and drawbacks of Pebble have gone on for years. “They got to talk to us and we gave them a tour of Igiugig and who we are and why we’re there. They visited his small home village, Igiugig, earlier this year. He said EPA officials, including Region 10 Administrator Sixkiller, made an effort to get to know the area. Jonathan Salmon was attending the state Board of Fisheries meeting for Bristol Bay when the recommendation was announced. And then when your voice is heard of what we are protecting and how we’ve been sustained on salmon for generations after generations, and as we are here today to make sure the protections that are here today, that they continue into the future.” “Because that’s the time that we can actually sit down and have the dialogue back and forth to have our voices heard from a tribal perspective. “I want to encourage tribes to take advantage of that government-to-government opportunity that we have,” she said. Hoseth said tribal consultation with the EPA has been a critical part of this process. “That we were finally this far, that we got this far with the recommendation.”Ī broad coalition has worked to oppose Pebble over the years, from tribes and community groups to commercial and sport fishing organizations. “When the information came out yesterday it took a while to actually absorb it,” Hoseth said. The action would effectively kill the mine.ĮPA Region 10 Administrator Casey Sixkiller said that if the agency’s Office of Water approves the recommendation, it will provide protections for both commercial and sport fisheries and a way of life for “one of the last intact wild salmon-based cultures in the world.” It would extend that prohibition to any future proposals to develop a mine at the Pebble deposit that could result in a similar loss of aquatic resources. The agency cites its authority under the Clean Water Act to do so. The EPA wants to prohibit the discharge of mining materials in the North and South Fork Koktuli River watersheds, as proposed in Pebble’s permit application. She said those opposed to the mine have wanted this decision for a long time. “I think it sends a real strong message that the science is there that it’s going to have unacceptable adverse effects on our watershed,” said Gayla Hoseth, the second chief of the Curyung Tribal Council and the natural resources director for the Bristol Bay Native Association. People across Bristol Bay are now waiting for a final decision on the future of the controversial copper and gold prospect. The Environmental Protection Agency has recommended a ban on mining activities in the area around the Pebble deposit. An attendee wears a “No Pebble” hat at the Bristol Bay Board of Fisheries meeting on Dec. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |