DOCSLIB.ORG

Phase I Resource Inventory Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Phase I Resource Inventory Report BRISTOL BAY Regional Energy Plan | Phase I Preliminary Planning, Resource Inventory & Data Collection November 2013 Prepared by SWAMC Bristol Bay Native Assoc. Information Insights 3300 Arctic Blvd., Ste. 203 P.O. Box 310 212 Front Street, Ste. 100 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Dillingham, Alaska 99576 Fairbanks, Alaska 99701 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We would like to thank the following individuals and organizations for sharing their time, data and expertise. Their assistance was invaluable. Alaska Center for Power and Energy: Gwen Holdmann, Jack Schmid Alaska Community Development Corporation: Pat Shiflea Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division of Forestry: Doug Hanson Alaska Energy Authority: Alan Baldivieso, Emily Binnian, Josh Craft, Jedidiah Drolet, Cady Lister, Kris Noonan, David Lockard, Douglas Ott, Devany Plentovich, Richard Stromberg, Kirk Warren, Robert Venables, Deborah Vo, Jeffery Williams Alaska Housing Finance Corporation: Jimmy Ord, Scott Waterman Alaska Village Electric Cooperative: Anna Sattler Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation: Starla Fox, Anthony Jett Bristol Bay Housing Authority: David McClure Crowley Maritime Corporation: Bob Cox, Randal Morford Delta Western: P.J. Peterson Denali Commission: Jody Fondy, Karen Johnson Everts Air Fuel: Trevor Crouder Hatch Engineering: Daniel Hertrich Igiugig Village Council: AlexAnna Salmon, Kannon Lee Knight Piésold and Co. Lake and Peninsula Borough: Lamar Cotton, Jordan Keeler Marsh Creek Energy Systems: Connie Fredenberg, Diana Moore Nushagak Electric and Telephone Co.: Michael Favors Polarconsult Alaska: Michael Dahl, Joel Groves Rural Alaska Fuel Service: Del Conrad Tanana Chiefs Conference: Will Putnam USDA National Resources Conservation Service: Jim Loiland University of Alaska Fairbanks: Jifeng Peng Village of Perryville: Gerald Kosbruk Cover photos (from left): National Renewable Energy Laboratory, INN Electric Cooperative, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Clickr Bee Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan | Phase I CONTENTS Executive Summary .............................................................................................................5 Introduction ........................................................................................................................19 1 | Renewable Energy ........................................................................................................20 Biomass ........................................................................................................................21 Geothermal ...................................................................................................................29 Hydro Power .................................................................................................................33 Solar ..............................................................................................................................43 Wind Energy .................................................................................................................48 2 | Energy Efficiency & Conservation ...............................................................................60 3 | Fossil Fuels ...................................................................................................................69 Bulk Fuel ......................................................................................................................69 Diesel Efficiency & Heat Recovery .............................................................................72 Natural Gas ...................................................................................................................79 4 | Food Security ................................................................................................................83 5 | Energy Infrastructure ....................................................................................................89 Transportation Infrastructure ........................................................................................89 Transmission Lines .......................................................................................................93 6 | Energy Demand ...........................................................................................................100 Large Loads & Megaconceptual Projects ...................................................................100 Current Loads .............................................................................................................102 Population Change ......................................................................................................107 7 | Project Economics & Financing..................................................................................111 8 | Project Advisors & Stakeholders ................................................................................135 9 | Community Profiles ....................................................................................................142 Appendix A: Energy Projects Analyzed ......................................................................... A-1 Appendix B: Resource Maps ...........................................................................................B-1 Appendix C: Economic Modeling & Methodologies ......................................................C-1 Appendix D: Past Reports and Studies ........................................................................... D-1 Appendix E: Works Cited ................................................................................................ E-1 Compiled by SWAMC, BBNA & Information Insights Resource Inventory | 1 Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan | Phase I INDEX OF TABLES Table 1: Private Investment Opportunities ................................................................................................... 15 Table 2: Project Benefit-Cost Ratios at $100 per Barrel Oil ........................................................................... 16 Table 3: Per Capita Project Benefits per Capital Dollar Invested................................................................... 17 Table 4: Balancing Per Capita Benefits with State Investment Efficiency ..................................................... 18 Table 5: Technical Potential for Renewable Resources on Native Lands in Bristol Bay Region .................... 20 Table 6: Fish Oil Resource Potential by Community ...................................................................................... 22 Table 7: Potential Wood Biomass Resources by Community ........................................................................ 22 Table 8: Estimated Timber Volumes on Native Allotments ........................................................................... 23 Table 9: Community-sponsored Wood Biomass Projects in the Bristol Bay Region ..................................... 23 Table 10: Hydroelectric and Hydrokinetic Resource Potential by Community ............................................. 34 Table 11: Existing and Proposed Hydro Projects by Community ................................................................... 35 Table 12: Photovoltaic Solar Resource by Community .................................................................................. 43 Table 13: Community- and Utility-operated Solar Projects ........................................................................... 44 Table 14: Energy savings in Dillingham with 4 kW solar PV .......................................................................... 45 Table 15: Wind Resource Assessment Data .................................................................................................. 49 Table 16: Current Wind Energy Projects in the Region ................................................................................. 51 Table 17: Wind Penetration Levels ................................................................................................................ 57 Table 18: Participation by Community in Energy Audit Programs since 2008 .............................................. 62 Table 19: Average Residential EE&C Savings per Household in the Bristol Bay Region ................................ 63 Table 20: Average Residential EE&C Savings per Square Foot in the Bristol Bay Region .............................. 63 Table 21: Benefits by Community of Village-wide Energy Audits .................................................................. 64 Table 22: Savings from Energy Efficient Lighting Upgrades in Bristol Bay Region ......................................... 64 Table 23: Savings from LED Street Lighting Retrofits by Community ............................................................ 65 Table 24: Savings per Community from Water and Sewer Efficiency Measures ........................................... 65 Table 25: Estimated Energy Savings and Potential from Residential EE&C ................................................... 66 Table 26: Fuel Requirements of Interested Entities by Subregion ................................................................ 70 Table 27: Interest in Bulk Fuel Purchasing Group by Subregion.................................................................... 71 Table 28: Diesel Efficiency Metrics by Community........................................................................................ 73 Table 29: Waste Heat Recovery by Community ............................................................................................ 74 Table 30: Energy
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bristol Bay, Alaska
    EPA 910-R-14-001C | January 2014 An Assessment of Potential Mining Impacts on Salmon Ecosystems of Bristol Bay, Alaska Volume 3 – Appendices E-J Region 10, Seattle, WA www.epa.gov/bristolbay EPA 910-R-14-001C January 2014 AN ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL MINING IMPACTS ON SALMON ECOSYSTEMS OF BRISTOL BAY, ALASKA VOLUME 3—APPENDICES E-J U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10 Seattle, WA CONTENTS VOLUME 1 An Assessment of Potential Mining Impacts on Salmon Ecosystems of Bristol Bay, Alaska VOLUME 2 APPENDIX A: Fishery Resources of the Bristol Bay Region APPENDIX B: Non-Salmon Freshwater Fishes of the Nushagak and Kvichak River Drainages APPENDIX C: Wildlife Resources of the Nushagak and Kvichak River Watersheds, Alaska APPENDIX D: Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Characterization of the Indigenous Cultures of the Nushagak and Kvichak Watersheds, Alaska VOLUME 3 APPENDIX E: Bristol Bay Wild Salmon Ecosystem: Baseline Levels of Economic Activity and Values APPENDIX F: Biological Characterization: Bristol Bay Marine Estuarine Processes, Fish, and Marine Mammal Assemblages APPENDIX G: Foreseeable Environmental Impact of Potential Road and Pipeline Development on Water Quality and Freshwater Fishery Resources of Bristol Bay, Alaska APPENDIX H: Geologic and Environmental Characteristics of Porphyry Copper Deposits with Emphasis on Potential Future Development in the Bristol Bay Watershed, Alaska APPENDIX I: Conventional Water Quality Mitigation Practices for Mine Design, Construction, Operation, and Closure APPENDIX J: Compensatory Mitigation and Large-Scale Hardrock Mining in the Bristol Bay Watershed AN ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL MINING IMPACTS ON SALMON ECOSYSTEMS OF BRISTOL BAY, ALASKA VOLUME 3—APPENDICES E-J Appendix E: Bristol Bay Wild Salmon Ecosystem: Baseline Levels of Economic Activity and Values Bristol Bay Wild Salmon Ecosystem Baseline Levels of Economic Activity and Values John Duffield Chris Neher David Patterson Bioeconomics, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • COMPARISON of the PEBBLE MINE with OTHER ALASKA LARGE HARD ROCK MINES
    COMPARISON of the PEBBLE MINE with OTHER ALASKA LARGE HARD ROCK MINES Stuart Levit and David Chambers Center for Science in Public Participation February, 2012 Summary If permitted, the Pebble mine will be North America’s, and one of the world’s largest mines. It has been suggested that in spite of its size the Pebble mine is comparable to other Alaska mining projects. The amount of ore mined and the area that would be disturbed by development at the Pebble mine is on a scale entirely of its own in Alaska, and even enormous on a global scale. Size alone does not determine impacts, but based on other factors such as acid producing potential, easy movement of water away from the mine, a world class fishery, wet climate regime, etc., the mine’s potential impacts could be significant and irreparable. Several of Alaska’s large mines have potentially acid producing ore, but none are truly comparable with the size of the proposed Pebble mine. The Pebble Mine is unique compared to Alaska’s other large, hard rock mines when looking at characteristics such as size, geochemistry, geomorphology, fisheries, and hydrology. When viewed through the aggregate of these factors, the Pebble mine is distinctly different from any other present or past hard rock mine in Alaska. More important is Pebble’s massive potential to impact the pristine lands with industrial development. The Bristol Bay watershed is unique in Alaska because it comprises Alaska’s, and one of the world’s, greatest salmon fisheries. It supports cultural, subsistence, commercial, recreational, economic, and environmental values that are unparalleled.
    [Show full text]
  • Walrus Hunting at Togiak, Bristol Bay, Soutwest Alaska
    WALRUS HUNTING AT TOGIAK, BRISTOL BAY, SOUTHWEST ALASKA James A. Fall, Molly Chythlook, Janet Schichnes, and Rick Sinnott’ Technical Paper No. 212 ’ Fall: Division of Subsistence, Anchorage Chythlook and Schichnes: Division of Subsistence, Dillingham Sinnott: Division of Wildlife Conservation, Anchorage Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Subsistence Juneau, Alaska October 1991 The Alaska Department of Fish and Game operates all of its public programs and activities free from discrimination on the basis of race, religion, color, national origin, age, sex, or handicap. Because the department receives federal funding, any person who believes he or she has been discriminated against should write to: O.E.D. U.S. Department of the Interior Washington, D.C. 20240 , ABSTRACT The report provides an overview of historic and contemporary uses of Pacific walrus in the Bristol Bay region of southwest Alaska. It focuses on the community of Togiak (population 613) and its traditional use areas, including Round Island (Yup’ik Qayaciq, “place to go in a kayak”). As part of the Walrus Islands State Game Sanctuary, Round Island, a critical haul out site, has been closed to walrus hunting since 1960. In 1991, the Togiak Traditional Council submitted a proposal to the Alaska Board of Game to allow a limited hunt for 10 walrus on Round Island in October. Hunting of walrus and other marine mammals in western Bristol Bay, including Round Island, by the Native people of the Togiak area over the last 2,500 years is documented by archaeological and ethnohistorical evidence. Until the late 1930s and early 1940% well-organized groups of hunters from Togiak traveled in kayaks to Round Island (the most reliable hunting location) and other islands armed with spears and harpoons to harvest walrus.
    [Show full text]
  • Surface Water Quality in the Nushagak, Kvichak, and Chulitna Watersheds, Southwest Alaska 2009-2010
    Investigations of Surface Water Quality in the Nushagak, Kvichak, and Chulitna Watersheds, Southwest Alaska 2009-2010 Kendra L. Zamzow, Ph.D. Center for Science in Public Participation PO Box 54 Sutton, Alaska 99674 July 2011 for The Nature Conservancy 715 L Street Suite 100 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Investigations of Surface Water Quality in the Nushagak, Kvichak, and Chulitna Watersheds, Southwest Alaska 2009-2010 Prepared for: The Nature Conservancy 715 L Street Suite 100 Anchorage, AK 99501 Prepared by: Kendra L. Zamzow, Ph.D. Center for Science in Public Participation PO Box 54 Sutton, AK 99674 with editorial review by: Ann Maest, Ph.D. Stratus Consulting 1881 Ninth St., Ste. 201 Boulder, CO 80302 and Molly Welker Bristol Environmental Remediation Services, LLC 111 W. 16th Avenue, Third Floor Anchorage, AK 99501 July 2011 Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................1 1.0 Introduction .....................................................................................................................1 2.0 Study Area and Sampling Locations ...............................................................................3 3.0 Methods, Data Availability, and Relevant Standards .....................................................7 3.1 Methods .......................................................................................................................7 3.2 Available Data .............................................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Change in Port Heiden, Alaska
    Climate Change in Port Heiden, Alaska Strategies for Community Health Project Contributors: Erica Lujan - Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, Community Environment and Health Mike Brubaker - Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, Community Environment and Health John Warren - Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, Department of Environmental Health and Engineering Jaclyn Christensen - Native Village of Port Heiden, Brownfields Program Scott Anderson - Native Village of Port Heiden, Environmental Program Melissa O’Domin - Native Village of Port Heiden, Environmental Program Jeremy Littell - Alaska Climate Adaptation Science Center Richard Buzard - University of Alaska Fairbanks, Department of Geosciences Jacqueline Overbeck - Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys, Coastal Hazards Program Davin Holen - Alaska Sea Grant, Adapt Alaska Sue Flensburg - Bristol Bay Native Association, Environmental Program Elizabeth Powers - Western Alaska Landscape Conservation Cooperative The writing team would like to thank all of the community and regional contributors to this project. We appreciate your time and support. Port Heiden Contributors: Gerda Kosbruk Scott Anderson Hank Matson Nefuti Orloff Jaclyn Christensen Jimmy Christensen John Christensen Jr. Annie Christensen Tisha Kalmakoff Bruce Bishop Melissa O’Domin Amber Christensen-Fox Delores Anderson © 2018 Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium. Council Members: Gerda Kosbruk - Administrator Paid for with funds from the Bureau of Indian Affairs John Christensen Jr. - President
    [Show full text]
  • Bristol Bay Subarea Contingency Plan
    BRISTOL BAY SUBAREA CONTINGENCY PLAN RESOURCES SECTION RESOURCES: PART ONE – COMMUNITY PROFILES ............................................................. B-1 A. Regional Organizations................................................................................ B-1 B. Community Profiles ..................................................................................... B-6 RESOURCES: PART TWO – EQUIPMENT ................................................................................. B-79 A. Commercially Available Equipment ......................................................... B-81 B. Government Spill Response Equipment .................................................... B-83 C. Industry/Spill Cooperative Equipment ...................................................... B-88 RESOURCES: PART THREE – INFORMATION DIRECTORY .............................................. B-89 A. Airports and Air Services .......................................................................... B-90 B. Bird and other Wildlife Response .............................................................. B-94 C. Contractors: BOA and Term ..................................................................... B-95 D. Historic Properties Protection .................................................................... B-95 E. Emergency Services/Managers .................................................................. B-96 F. Fishing Fleets and Organizations ............................................................... B-96 G. Government Contacts and Information
    [Show full text]
  • Alaska Peninsula Becharof National Wildlife Refuges
    Fishery Management Plan ALASKA PENINSULA BECHAROF NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGES July 1994 Region 7 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • Department of the Interior FISHERY MANAGEMENT PLAN ALASKA PENINSULA AND BECHAROF NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGES Fiscal Years 1994 - 1998 Prepared By: King Salmon Fishery Resource Office U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service P.O. Box 277 King Salmon, Alaska 99613 May 1994 SUMMARY STATEMENT The Alaska Peninsula and Becharof National Wildlife Refuges Fishery Management Plan (Plan) provides the management direction necessary to ensure conservation of fishery resources and habitat. In addition, the Plan provides for continued use of fishery resources by subsistence, commercial, and recreational users consistent with the purposes for which the Alaska Peninsula and Becharof refuges (Complex) were established and are managed. The Complex's biological and physical environment is described and fishery resources, human use, management history, and major issues and concerns are discussed. This information was obtained from the Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plans, a literature search, and discussions with Alaska Department of Fish and Game personnel. Objectives and tasks are developed to address the issues and concerns. Federal tasks are assigned priorities and costs for each year of continuation. The Plan encompasses a five year period, at which time it will be revised. Major issues and concerns identified include the following: competition between user groups; incomplete salmon escapement data bases to refine management of the Complex fish populations; and inadequate fishery law enforcement. In some cases, concerns were identified because of the perception that they would develop into serious problems if current levels of use or consumption were allowed to continue or expand.
    [Show full text]
  • BRISTOL BAY Geography Bristol Bay Is Sockeye Salmon Country
    BRISTOL BAY Geography Bristol Bay is sockeye salmon country. The region is a land of great inland lakes, ideally suited to the juvenile life of sockeye salmon that are tied to lakes for growth and survival prior to migrating to the ocean (Hilborn et al. 2003). Variation within sockeye salmon leads to stability and options for all salmon lovers – from caddisflies to rainbow trout and brown bears to people around the world. Bristol Bay offers a pristine and intact ecosystem with a notable absence of mining and offshore oil and gas exploration in the region. Jared Kibele, Rachel Carlson, and Marie Johnson. 2018. Elevation per SASAP region and Hydrologic Unit (HUC8) boundary for Alaskan watersheds. Knowledge Network for Biocomplexity. doi:10.5063/F1D798QQ. SASAP | 1 Numerous networks of stream-connected lakes provide extraordinary sockeye salmon rearing habitat. The variety of lake and riverine spawning and rearing habitats in the region mean that the salmon runs in Bristol Bay are uniquely diverse, which contributes to the long-term sustainability of the salmon resource (Schindler et al. 2010). The long-proposed Pebble Mine, situated at the intersection between the Nushagak River and Kvichak River watersheds, would unquestionably and permanently change this salmon landscape. The landscape that features so prominently in Ellam yua [the Yup’ik belief system] is one of low coastal mountains that give way to rolling tundra. Early people and salmon systems The earliest record of human occupation in the Bristol Bay region dates to 10,000 years before present (Boraas and Knott 2014). Salmon use in the region by Yup’ik peoples has been occurring for at least 4,000 years, based on evidence collected from sites on the Kvichak River near salmon-bearing streams.
    [Show full text]
  • A Special Program for Secondary Schools in Bristol Bay
    DOCUMNNT RNSUPIR RC 003 626 ED 032 173 By-Holthaus, Cary H. Bristol Bay. Teaching Eskimo Culture to Eskimo Students:A Special Program for Secondary Schools in Pub Date May 68 Note -215p. EDRS Price MF -$1.00 HC Not Availablefrom EDRS. *Eskimos.HistoryInstruction, Descriptors -*Biculturalism,CultureConflict.*Curriculum Development. Instructional Materials, LanguageInstruction, *Resource Materials.Rural Areas, Secondary Education, *Social Studies Identifiers-Alaska, Aleuts, Bristol Bay Eskimo youth in Bristol Bay,Alaska. caught between the clashof native and white cultures, have difficultyidentifying with either culture.The curriculum in Indian schools in the area. gearedprimarily to white middle-classstandards. is not relevant to the students. Textbooks andstandardized tests, based onexperiences common to a white culture, hold little meaningfor Eskimo students.Teachers unfamiliar with Eskimo traditions and culture areunable to understand orcommunicate with the native people. Since the existingcurriculum in Bristol Bayschools ignores thestudents' cultural background. theauthor considers the creationof a unified multi-semester social studies curriculumabout the native heritage as amethod of dealing with students' problems. This paper. as afirst step in creating such acurriculum, can and is directed serve as a sourcematerial for informationabout the Bristol Bay area. toward the developmentof a one semester secondarylevel course in native history of the paper consists ofmaterial about the history. and culture. A major portion folklore of geography.
    [Show full text]
  • Major Drainages of Bristol Bay
    BRISTOL BAY SALT AND FRESH WATER 12 Major Drainages of Bristol Bay k See the Northern ar Cl Alaska Sport Fish e Regulation Summary Lak Port Alsworth es ag in ra Iliamna D Wood River er age Togiak River iv rain Ungalikthluk Drainage R r D Drainage a ive River Drainage tn R Lake Iliamna a k h a lc h u ic M v / K k a g a Riv Dillingham gnak er Drain h Ala ag s e See the Southcentral u Alaska Sport Fish N Regulation Summary Cape Newenham King Salmon Naknek Rive r Dra B inag ris e to l Ege Ba gik y Ri S ver alt D wa ra te in rs a ge Cape Menshikof U ga sh ik R i Dr ve ain r ag Alaska Peninsula & e Kodiak Island Aleutian Islands See pages 24 - 28 Miles See pages 22 - 23 0 25 50 ARCTIC CHAR AND DOLLY VARDEN LINGCOD General Regulations - Bristol Bay • Season: June 8–October 31 . • No limit . • 3 per day, 3 in possession . ROCKFISH Inclusive waters: All fresh waters draining into Bristol Bay between Cape Menshikof and Cape Newenham, and • Season: November 1–June 7 . • No limit . all salt waters east of a line from Cape Newenham to • 10 per day, 10 in possession. KING CRAB Cape Menshikof . RAINBOW TROUT • Season: June 1–January 31 . The fishing season for all species is open year-round • Season: June 8–October 31 . • Males only: unless otherwise noted below. • 2 per day, 2 in possession, only 1 of which may • 6½ inches or more: 6 per day, 6 in possession.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021-2022 Alaska Hunting Regulations Effective July 1, 2021 Through June 30, 2022 Unit 9 Alaska Peninsula See Map on Page 64 for State Restricted Areas in Unit 9
    State restricted areas: 1 McNeil River State Game Sanctuary: including approximately the lower six miles of the Paint River drain- age, the McNeil River drainage, Mikfik Creek, and all drainages into McNeil Cove from Akjemguiga Cove to McNeil Head, all drainages in to Horseshoe and Pinkidulia Coves, approximately the lower seven miles of the Little Ka- mishak River drainage and approximately the lower 1 1/2 miles of the Kamishak River drainage, is closed to all hunting. 2 Additional McNeil River Area Closures: McNeil State Game Refuge and state-managed lands south and east of the McNeil River State Game Sanctuary are closed to taking brown bear. 3 Naknek Controlled Use Area: the Naknek River drainage upstream from and including the King Salmon Creek drainage, is closed to the use of any motorized vehicle except an aircraft, boat, or snowmachine for hunting, including transportation of hunters, their hunting gear, and/or parts of game, from Aug 1-Nov 30; however, this does not apply to a motorized vehicle on the Naknek-King Salmon, Lake Camp and Rapids Camp roads and on the Pike Ridge and King Salmon C r e e k T r a i l s , a n d o n f r o z e n s u r f a c e s o f t h e N a k n e k R i v e r a n d B i g C r e e k . 4 Izembek Controlled Use Area: t h e l e f t a n d r i g h t h a n d v a l l e y s o f t h e I z e m b e k N a t i o n a l W i l d l i f e R e f u g e b o u n d e d o n t h e w e s t b y a l i n e b e g i n n i n g a t M o f f e t P o i n t a n d c o n t i n u i n g e a s t e r l y a n d southerly around Moffet Lagoon along the mean high tide line to Blaine Point (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Characterization: an Overview of Bristol, Nushagak, and Kvichak Bays; Essential Fish Habitat, Processes, and Species Assemblages
    AN ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL MINING IMPACTS ON SALMON ECOSYSTEMS OF BRISTOL BAY, ALASKA VOLUME 3—APPENDICES E-J Appendix F: Biological Characterization: Bristol Bay Marine Estuarine Processes, Fish and Marine Mammal Assemblages Biological Characterization: An Overview of Bristol, Nushagak, and Kvichak Bays; Essential Fish Habitat, Processes, and Species Assemblages December 2013 Prepared by National Marine Fisheries Service, Alaska Region National Marine Fisheries Service, Alaska Region ii PREFACE The Bristol Bay watershed supports abundant populations of all five species of Pacific salmon found in North America (sockeye, Chinook, chum, coho, and pink), including nearly half of the world’s commercial sockeye salmon harvest. This abundance results from and, in turn, contributes to the healthy condition of the watershed’s habitat. In addition to these fisheries resources, the Bristol Bay region has been found to contain extensive deposits of low-grade porphyry copper, gold, and molybdenum in the Nushagak and Kvichak River watersheds. Exploration of these deposits suggests that the region has the potential to become one of the largest mining developments in the world. The potential environmental impacts from large-scale mining activities in these salmon habitats raise concerns about the sustainability of these fisheries for Alaska Natives who maintain a salmon-based culture and a subsistence lifestyle. Nine federally recognized tribes in Bristol Bay along with other tribal organizations, groups, and individuals have petitioned the U.S. Environmental
    [Show full text]