Citizens show their love for forests: Will the Obama administration listen?

In regards to House Bill HR2099 and Senate Bill S.881, if the Sealaska Corporation (a for-profit corporation) is allowed to take ownership of the National Forest land they desire on southeast Alaska's Prince Of Wales and Kosciusko Islands that surrounds the communities of Edna Bay, Port Protection, Point Baker, and Naukati it may very well mean the end of our communities. We are extremely remote communities, and depend on subsistence hunting and gathering as much or more than any community in Alaska for our survival. We require an ample population of game animals for food, land to collect wild edibles from, and land to collect road gravel and firewood. If this deal goes through it is most likely that we will have insufficient lands to subsist on.
Kosciusko Island, with it's community of Edna Bay, is unique in all of the United States in that it the only one that consists entirely of a karst topography. A large portion of the largest as-of-yet unmapped cave system in North America lies directly beneath the lands that Sealaksa wishes to have on Kosciusko Island for the purpose of clear-cut logging. Studies have shown that the underground aquifer, the same one that supplies the drinking water for the residents of Edna Bay, flows via tremendously long and winding limestone caves through an unmapped system. Contaminants from large-scale logging or other development activities in the disputed area could easily contaminate the drinking water supply of Edna Bay. It would be irresponsible to allow any development until thorough scientific studies of the Kosciusko Island aquifer had been conducted and development disallowed in all sensitive areas.
The State of Alaska created our communities by laying out the boundaries of our lots and our town in a far-flung island wilderness for the purpose of attracting hard working Americans to live in communities that would by necessity require the natural resources of the surrounding National Forest for their survival. To take those lands away from the stewardship of the American People to give it to a corporation that has no intention of improving the lives of the residents of the affected communities – and seems to care not that we could be very adversely affected, would be to say that the profits of the Sealaska corporation are more important than the lives of the people of Edna Bay, Point Baker, Port Protection, and Naukati.
There must be another way besides HR2099 and S.881 to both give Sealaska the compensation it is owed under the ANCSA agreement, and leave the Tongass National Forest on Prince of Wales and Kosciusko Islands forever untouched by private development. Otherwise, our communities will be decimated and the residents most likely will be forced to abandon their towns they have worked hard for decades to build as they will have no other economically feasible means to acquire the food and supplies they currently harvest from the National Forest.

Please help us stop the give-away and clear-cut logging of the Tongass National Forest, America's Own Rainforest.
Below is a letter sent to the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee from the town of Edna Bay, Alaska regarding the Sealaska land bills S.881/HR.2099 which threaten to give away large portions of the most ecologically sensitive areas of the Tongass National Forest to the for-profit Sealaska Corporation for the stated purpose of clear-cut logging.
----------------------------------------
March 31, 2010
RE: TESTIMONY FOR THE RECORD OF S.881/HR.2099
Honorable Committee Members,
Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony on behalf of the citizens living in Edna Bay,
located on Kosciusko Island, in southeast Alaska. First, we would like to say that Sealaska's
self minded amendment proposal is unanimously opposed. The gravity of this situation is
difficult to convey adequately in the pages of this letter. The best way to portray the inequity of
this proposal with its impact to Edna Bay, and the entire region in general, is to contrast the
unacceptable consequences to our community and the surrounding forest ecosystems should
Sealaska Corporation be allowed their unprecedented request for land selections outside of the
designated withdrawal areas agreed upon during the settlement of ANCSA in 1971.
Sealaska's pursuit of unwarranted amendment to ANCSA has been looming over our isolated
subsistence dependent community for more than seven years. During that time, nearly 1500
letters have gone out to local representatives and members of Congress in regards to the impact
it would have on our future viability. Every attempt possible has been made to petition our
congressional delegation for representation we feel should have been an obligation on their part
to provide. While no one would contest the land entitlement our government must complete for
Sealaska and it's shareholders, the real issue at the heart of local opposition is the severe and
unbalanced displacement that will result if this unconscionable amendment passes from
committee. It should be reasoned unethical to propose the sacrifice of prosperity of a state established
community to provide economic opportunity to a corporation that is already the
largest private landowner in southeast Alaska.
Sealaska was provided with satisfactory
selection areas during the carefully balanced process undertaken by Congress in the passage of
ANCSA in 1971. Their claims of inadequate areas to choose from are disputed by their own
publications, which confirm these lands to be productive for economic purposes and suitable
for selection. This raises the question of why Sealaska continues to delay swift completion of
their conveyances which are available to them without this needless legislation.
Contrary to claims by Sealaska and sponsors of their amendment, rather than reduce migration
out of southeast Alaska, in Edna Bay the continuing threat from the possibility of transfer of
vital public land on this island into private ownership has stifled migration to our community.
While several families await the outcome of this legislation before finalizing plans to relocate
here, others have left following the most recent introduction of further legislation by Sealaska,
afraid to be trapped by falling property values and community collapse should they succeed.
The cost of moving a family into remote regions of Alaska like Edna Bay is staggering. A
serious commitment is made by those who choose to pursue a life in these isolated areas.
Far
from being “freeloading squatters”, as residents have recently been referred to by those angered
over opposition to this current legislation, the majority of people already residing and those
potentially relocating to Edna Bay are college educated individuals who have made a well
thought out, conscious decision to pursue a subsistence-based lifestyle. The opportunity to do
so at this time in our country's rapidly developing urban environment is rare. Individuals
desiring to do so must work for years to be able to achieve their goal of living in a place as
unique as Edna Bay. If only the possibility of losing access to the public lands on Kosciusko
affects the population potential of this community in such a negative way, what would be the
result of Sealaska succeeding in its pursuit of these highly valuable, vital public lands
surrounding us?
To say it will destroy the integrity of our community is not an exaggeration as some would
have you believe. Small, developing communities like those on North Prince of Wales now
threatened by Sealaska's overreaching legislation depend on a viable amount of population to
maintain the limited services available to residents in these remote areas of the state; our
phones, mail service, internet, school, church, store, and post office must be supported by a
sustainable amount of residents. If people were cut off from the historical access to the island
and its resources this community has developed around, one by one residents would be forced
to leave. The immediate loss of vital subsistence resources would start the exodus. In an area
as remote as Edna Bay providing food, heat, and building resources at a reasonable price is
crucial. Residents rely heavily on hunting, gathering, and utilization of these publicly available
resources maintained by U.S. Forest Service management of the surrounding federal lands to
provide sustenance for their families. Many livelihoods are being supported by these lands as
well. If population numbers drop low enough to cause the failure of the community's crucial
services, even residents who are retired or working through internet based opportunities would
be forced to move. The inevitable collapse of property values would leave most residents
financially destroyed and faced with rebuilding their lives, some after decades of investment to
their properties in Edna Bay. A virtually impossible task in these current economic conditions.
Sealaska's long standing record of clear cut harvesting and export of timber in round log form
to overseas markets offers no benefit to local economies or long term health of this community.
Instead it threatens our very existence and economic integrity. Their plan to swap forest land
they are entitled to use, for selections in areas considered more valuable, are touted to help
preserve roadless old-growth forest that serve as watersheds and hunting grounds. This plan
would instead cause the inevitable destruction of delicate karst areas necessary to productive
hydrology function on our island, threatening the water supply for the entire area. The
ecological devastation wrought by these brutal harvesting practices leaves a barren wasteland
unable to support wildlife, food resources, or healthy fish habitat. Could this be the reason
Sealaska says it wants to protect native villages by swapping adjacent land for land farther
away? Their intended use of these 'farther away' lands on Kosciusko Island, which are
documented to be ecologically sensitive, biologically active and supportive of a diverse
ecosystem will destroy the carefully managed forest that currently supports an entire web of
life, and our community.
In contrast to the devastating effects of this inequitable, unsustainable economic development
solution initiated on behalf of Sealaska, this community looks forward to a future that holds
the promise of becoming an example of the ability of southeast Alaska to transition into a
sustainable eco friendly economy that is widely supported not only by Americans, but people
the world over. The Tongass National Forest, with its uniquely karsted areas of old growth
reserves like those on Kosciusko Island, represents a rare and priceless treasure to both the
national and international communities.
Pursuing an economy based on wise sustainable use
and development of environmentally responsible industries is an attitude being quickly adopted
by all forward thinking peoples on the planet. Edna Bay has already been moving toward that
sustainable reality for nearly a decade. The recent investment by the State of Alaska and U.S.
Department of Agriculture to provide broadband internet access to our community has opened
the door to an even wider array of economic opportunities that meet the qualifications of
environmentally sustainable industries. With it's development of eco tourism based lodges and
cabin rentals, Edna Bay is following along a path now being encouraged across the entire
region. Disrupting this type of development in favor of short term profit potential that would
leave the forests surrounding this community irreparably destroyed defies years of effort to
move away from the understandably unpopular logging enterprises of past decades.
Many well documented reasons exist for this request of acreage on Kosciusko Island to be
denied. Years of work and study by the international community into the significance of karst
hydrology in supporting old growth reserves now being credited with the ability to contribute
to large volumes of carbon sequestration, along with potential discovery of unique invertebrate
life forms within this same network of limestone caves and caverns on this island, clearly
support claims of unacceptable risk posed by unregulated private logging practices. Under
current federal management these as yet unmapped areas are protected by the Federal Cave
Protection Act of 1988. The surrounding forests currently managed for multiple-resource use
through federal processes such as NEPA requires taking into account a balanced approach to
utilizing timber resources.
The Karst Waters Institute has ranked Kosciusko Island one of the
top ten most endangered karst communities in the world. These limestone-based systems are
believed to contribute to viability of coho salmon; scientific studies have indicated a positive
relationship between alkalinity of streams flowing from karst areas and enhanced density of
coho salmon fry. Continued use of boundary to boundary clear cut logging and road building
like those Sealaska practices undoubtedly represent a significant threat to Kosciusko Island.
The associated soil disruption results in sedimentation and erosion that degrades the quality of
surface water and streams. The impact from Sealaska's requested amendment would therefore
threaten the well managed commercial fishing industry as well as now established aquaculture
enterprises which have developed in the surrounding area within the past decade.
To further contrast this unacceptable legislation, the extensive process undertaken by the U.S.
Forest Service to develop the Tongass Land Management Plan has produced a transitioning
effort towards moving into second growth timber harvest on Kosciusko Island that takes into
consideration the delicate balance necessary to protect multiple stakeholder interests. The
recently introduced Kosciusko Vegetation Management Project represents a restoration
program that will ensure and enhance wildlife habitat, hydrology, fisheries habitat, and
economic opportunities for Edna Bay, while supporting continued subsistence resources given
priority consideration through federally mandated ANILCA Title VIII law. This proposal from
the Forest Service represents a future ready forward thinking effort unanimously supported by
Edna Bay residents that will sustain and support economic prosperity for our community,
while Sealaska's self-minded destructive amendment request is unanimously opposed.
Those pushing agendas to privatize the Tongass to continue providing timber to an obviously
unsustainable industry must be stopped at all costs. Readily available evidence portrays this
picture all too well. Sealaska has already harvested over 290,000 acres of old growth forest in
the last thirty years, and yet complains about the eminent failure of their timber corporation if
access to new areas is not granted. As valuable as these forests are to the future health and
economic well being of the region, how can they possibly be sacrificed for the short term gains
of this irresponsible corporation? All past timber harvests by Sealaska have suffered huge net
operating losses; the most recent in 2009 of $40.9 million dollars. With over 70% of old
growth timber in the Tongass National Forest already harvested, it should be considered totally
ludicrous and criminally irresponsible to propose transfer of any federal lands in the Tongass to
private ownership for the further destruction of this irreplaceable, unique temperate rainforest.
At a time on our planet when rapidly vanishing forests are causing destabilization of weather
systems and water distribution the world over, how can members of Congress even consider
such a proposal?
Clearly too much time has passed between establishment of ANCSA and final conveyance to
allow an amendment of this magnitude nearly 39 years into the ongoing development of
southeast Alaska. Far from creating economic stimulus to this region, the resulting area-wide
displacement from selections this amendment proposes will create needless social disparity and
economic hardship throughout southeast for decades to come. Sealaska's claims to bring an
estimated 210 jobs to the region cannot possibly offset financial losses suffered by already
established businesses that stand to lose access to public lands they have developed around and
benefited from for decades. The net losses to American tax payers cannot be defended on any
level either. Within these same years of time, tens of millions of dollars have been invested in
roads, bridges, log transfer sites, and public facilities also included in the language of these
bills. No justifiable reason can be cited for Sealaska to reap such an unprecedented benefit
from this extensive public investment. These lands must remain in the public domain where
they can continue to be used and enjoyed by native and non native Americans alike. The best
solution is already in place; determined the finalization of native land claims, ANCSA was
passed into law in 1971. There is no justification or need for unnecessary amendment. These
repeated rounds of legislation by Sealaska Corporation have affected economic development
for our community and the entire region for too long. Their most recent efforts, now identified
as S.881 and HR.2099 should be removed from consideration, allowing for timely completion
of their final conveyances. Sealaska needs to move forward and pursue it's development
potential from inside the designated withdrawal boundaries, thereby contributing to a net
increase in the roaded areas of access and available infrastructure of southeast Alaska in a more
positive way, while allowing the rest of the region to progress on a path toward a sustainable
future in a peaceful and prosperous manner.
We sincerely beseech this committee and any others reviewing this proposed amendment to
consider the needs of other residents and stakeholders living and working in southeast Alaska.
Many lives, livelihoods, and years of hard work and investment are hanging in the balance and
will suffer in the wake of this one sided unwarranted amendment. The community of Edna
Bay, Alaska is looking to you for a wise and carefully measured decision. One that will allow
truly 'equitable' prosperity for all who call this area home.
Thank you for hearing our concerns, in closing we ask for dismissal of this unprecedented
amendment. The overwhelming region wide opposition clearly displays the inequity in what it
proposes. Continued open access to public lands in southeast Alaska provides equal opportunity
to all who live here. The Tongass National Forest is a priceless treasure to the American public
and world at large. Protections guaranteed under current federal management already offer the
most promise for producing a stable economy and healthy environment for communities in the
region. The best solution is already in place and has been for almost 40 years. Please find the
attached signature sheet endorsed by members of our community demonstrating our unanimous
opposition to S.881/HR.2099 – Southeast Alaska Native Land Entitlement Finalization Act.
Sincerely,
Edna Bay Community
Kosciusko Island, Alaska
cc: Senator Lisa Murkowski, Alaska Congressional Delegation
Senator Mark Begich, Alaska Congressional Delegation
Congressman Don Young, Alaska Congressional Delegation
Governor Sean Parnell, State of Alaska
Senator Jeff Bingaman, Chairman, Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee
Senator Ron Wyden, Chairman, Subcommittee on Public Lands & Forests
Congressman Nick J. Rahall, Chairman, House Natural Resources Committee
Congressman Raul Grijalva, Chairman, Subcommittee Forests, Parks, & Lands
Deputy Under Secretary Jay Jensen, U.S. Dept of Agriculture
Marcilynn Burke, Deputy Director, Bureau of Land Management