For the latest ocean news, subscribe to Ocean Update and our other free newsletters.

Other Ocean Voices>>

Interview with Renewable Resource Advocate Bob Waldrop

Mining Alaska's Precious Resources

Bob Waldrop

"There is a biological resource and an economic resource in the [sockeye salmon] fishery that in our minds trump any benefit from a 30-year mine." —Bob Waldrop

The Pebble Mine Project is a proposed copper, gold and molybdenum mine that would sit near the headwaters above Bristol Bay in southwest Alaska. The mine's resources are estimated to be worth billions of dollars, but the project's close proximity to Bristol Bay, home to some of the largest salmon runs in the world, has raised concerns. Bob Waldrop, executive director of the Bristol Bay Regional Seafood Development Association, spoke to SeaWeb about the project and its potential effects on Bristol Bay's fisheries.

SeaWeb: The Pebble Mine is proposed to be built at a headwater source. Why was this spot chosen for the mine, and where does it lie in relation to Bristol Bay?

Bob Waldrop: It was chosen because of a very unfortunate matrix of mineralization. There's a huge, ancient caldera there that has created an area of very diffuse but economically valuable mineralization. It's diffuse because it's a metallic sulfide mine of very low concentrations, which means that the mining activity must be massive in scale to be economically feasible. It's unfortunate that it's located on top of the world's most valuable sockeye salmon fishery, but that's where the metals are.

You couldn't have a metallic mining development in a worse place. It straddles two of the most abundant wild salmon–producing rivers in the world—the Kvichak River and the Nushagak River. It's right at the headwaters, and just about anything they do in the area that has this mineralization is going to affect both watersheds.

Salmon in the Bristol Bay area are a valuable source of protein for wildlife, such as this brown bear. Bob Waldrop

SW: Why is the bay a valuable fishing resource and what part does the salmon play in the ecosystem?

BW: The salmon are an indicator species, and a valuable economic and social resource. They also provide an awful lot of nutrients. These fish result from spawning in the headwaters. They go out to the ocean as fry and then come back as mature adults, spawn and die. When they come back they're bringing a very important source of nutrients for the entire ecosystem. Their carcasses feed bears, and they're intercepted as they return to the spawning area and feed the indigenous people and support the commercial fishing industry. There are some 12,000 jobs created as a result of the fishing activity there, worth in excess of $300 million at wholesale, and it goes on year after year. This year we had more than 40 million fish return to the bay.

SW: What potential environmental effects would this copper, gold and molybdenum mine have on the water, the rest of the environment and the fish?

BW: There are both direct and indirect effects anticipated and documented in other similar mines. The direct impact pertains to mostly water quality issues and habitat disturbance. The potential for this mine to expose sulfide-bearing rock to water and air, thereby creating a dilute sulfuric acid, is significant. If this mine were to be called by the dominant ore that is going to be mined, it would be called a sulfur mine, because there's more sulfur in there than there is gold or copper. That acid would leach out heavy metals and acidify areas immediately within the mining footprint as well as the waters downstream of there. In the process of doing that, critical water habitat for salmon is polluted. Very weak concentrations of copper, for example, have been shown to affect salmon's ability to detect predators, to navigate and return to their natal streams and to rear from egg to fry to smolt in the freshwater habitat.

SW: Proponents of the mine say it is important for the economic livelihood of the local area. How does this potential economic opportunity compare to that of the current fishing industry in Bristol Bay?

A deckhand offloads salmon from a fishing vessel in Nushagak Bay, Bristol Bay Alaska. Bob Waldrop

BW: The local people here don't believe they're economically depressed; they feel like they live in the richest area in the world, and they'd like to see that richness perpetuate. The fishing industry creates 12,000 seasonal jobs, which is roughly equivalent to 3,600 year-round jobs. I have seen presentations from the Pebble Limited Partnership that say as many as 1,000 people will be employed fulltime at the mine, and about 134 of those are expected to be local people. If you're going to compare the value of the two industries, across the board there is no comparison between what the mine will generate for the people of the area and what the commercial fishery is currently producing and has for the last 130 years.

SW: How important is the salmon in this area to the national and state supply of sockeye salmon and the economic vitality of Alaska?

BW: The sockeye that come out of Bristol Bay, on average, constitute roughly 50 percent of the world's supply of sockeye. It's about 60 to 70 percent of Alaska's sockeye. Virtually all the sockeye that are harvested in the world are from Alaska. There are substantial sockeye fisheries in Russia and Canada, but Bristol Bay dominates the world's sockeye production.

SW: At its core, is this a question of mining versus fishing in the area, or can both industries coexist and still be successful?

BW: The two coexisting successfully hasn't really happened before. There are no breakthrough ways of operating a mine such as the one that's being proposed. It will be mined in the same manner that has been done in other areas, and in those areas there are rare examples of mines like this one would be that have avoided water pollution issues. All of the environmental impact statements that have been written prior to mining development have indicated that these issues are controllable, but something like 72 percent of the time that has not been the case. The promises don't live up to the impacts.

A local commercial fisher prepares salmon at her home in Naknek, Alaska. Bob Waldrop

SW: What is the next step before the mining can happen and when will there be a vote on whether the mine can get a permit to operate?

BW: People [against the mine] are very concerned that when we get to permitting, which could be as little as six months away or so, these permits will be about specific ways to manage and build a mine—they are going to be about how a mine should be built, how much pollution is tolerable, how big the mine should be and how big the culvert should be. The real question we should be asking right now is whether this is the right time and place for this mine, or for any mine. There are some areas that, regardless of the mineral resources, have an overriding value as a renewable resource, and we think this is the case. There is a biological resource and an economic resource in the fishery that in our minds trump any benefit from a 30-year mine.

Interview conducted by Alex Danoff, Media Assistant, SeaWeb