Download Date 01/10/2021 05:39:21
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Letter 2 (PDF)
SARAH PALIN, GOVERNOR 410 Willoughby Avenue, Suite 303 Post Office Box 111800 DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION Juneau, Alaska 99811-1800 OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER Phone: 907-465-5066 Fax: 907-465-5070 www.dec.state.ak.us October 20, 2008 Elin Miller, Regional Administrator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900 Mail Code: RA-140 Seattle, WA 98101-3140 Dear Ms. Miller: The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) has reviewed your th August 18 letter regarding EPA’s PM2.5 designations for Alaska and the nonattainment boundaries for the communities of Fairbanks and Juneau. We have carefully considered the available data and analyses. ADEC believes the available scientific evidence does not support EPA’s boundary recommendations which substantially expand upon those recommended by us. ADEC believes public health will be protected and the applicable legal requirements met by taking the actions described in this letter, which include a proposed nonattainment boundary for the Fairbanks area that is larger than originally proposed by ADEC, but smaller than proposed by EPA. For Juneau, we are requesting EPA revisit certain assumptions and include data from 2008 before making a final decision on whether a nonattainment designation is warranted, and if so, the appropriate boundaries of the nonattainment area. Protecting public health is a goal we share with EPA. As you are already aware, we are proactively and expeditiously working with the local governments to address identified PM2.5 concerns in Fairbanks and Juneau. To this end, ADEC does not believe EPA’s proposed boundaries will ultimately assist in protecting public health. -
Understanding the Cultures of Fishing Communities
When Fish is Water: Food Security and Fish in a Coastal Community in The Dominican Republic Item Type Report Authors Stoffle, Richard, W. Publisher Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Download date 08/10/2021 00:41:31 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/292622 Understanding the cultures of fishing communities A key to fisheries management and food security Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Cover photo: Small -scale fishing community, West Indies, by J.R. McGoodwin FAO Understanding the cultures of FISHERIES TECHNICAL fishing communities PAPER A key to fisheries management 401 and food security by James R. McGoodwin Professor Department of Anthropology University of Colorado Boulder, USA Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Rome, 2001 The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. ISBN 92 -5- 104606 -9 All rights reserved. Reproduction and dissemination of material in this information product for educational or other non -commercial purposes are authorized without any prior written permission from the copyright holders provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of material in this information product for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without written permission of the copyright holders. Applications for such permission should be addressed to the Chief, Publishing and Multimedia Service, Information Division, FAO, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00100 Rome, Italy or by e -mail to copyright @fao.org © FAO 2001 111 PREPARATION OF THIS DOCUMENT The Fishery Policy and Planning Division of the FAO Fisheries Department regularly publishes technical documentation relevant for fisheries policy planning and management. -
Flightseeing Noise Study and Mitigation Option Analysis, RFP 00
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Summary………………………………………………………………………………..………...1 1.0 Methodology …………………………………………………………………………….7 1.1 Criteria……………………………………………………………………………..….7 1.1.1 Exclusion Criteria………………………………………………………….. 7 1.1.2 Rating Criteria …………………...…….………………………………….7 1.1.3 Summary Rating Table ……………………………………………………10 1.2 Companies and Flight Lines ………..………………………………...….……..11 TEMSCO Helicopters, Inc. ……………………..……………………………..11 Coastal Helicopters, Inc …………………………………………………...13 ERA Helicopters, Inc …………………………………………………………...14 North Star Trekking, LLC …………………………………………………...14 1.3 Noise Corridors …………………………………………………………………...20 1.4 Sound Modeling and Monitoring …………………………………………………...24 1.4.1 Background …………………………………………………………...24 1.4.2 Noise Measurement Survey Methodology …………………………...24 Measurement Procedures …………………………………………...28 Instrumentation …………………………………………………...28 Measurement and Analysis Procedures …………………………...29 1.4.3 Computer Modeling ………………………………………………….. 29 2.0 Heliport Management And Facility Requirements …………………………………...30 2.1 Heliport Management………………………………………………..30 2.1.1 Capital Funding …………………………………………………...31 2.2 Facility Requirements …………………………………………...32 3.0 Flight Safety …………………………………………………………………………...36 3.1 Airspace And Air Traffic Control …………………………………………………...36 3.1.1Weather Conditions …………………………………………………...38 3.1.2 Flight Rules …………………………………………………………...39 3.2 FAR Part 77…………………………………………………………………………………44 4.0 Alternate Heliport Sites …………………………………………………………………...46 4.1 Recommended Sites …………………………………………………………...46 4.1.1Dupont -
North Slope Subsistence Study Barrow 1988 .1
I '~ .1 OCS Study i MMS 89-0077 I North Slope Subsistence Study ! Barrow 1988 Social and Economic Studies u.s..Department of the Interior •• ~ Minerals Management Service ,r,rlQ Alaska Outer Continental Shelf Region OCSSTUDY MMS 89-0077 Technical Report No. 135 CONTRACT NO. 14-12-0001-30284 NORTH SLOPE SUBSISTENCE STUDY BARROW, 1988 Submitted To U.S. Department of the Interior Minerals Management Service Alaska OCS Region Anchorage, Alaska Prepared By Stephen R. Braund & Associates with Institute of Social and Economic Research University of Alaska Anchorage December 1989 NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Alaska Outer Continental Shelf Region, in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its content or use thereof. This report has been reviewed by the Minerals Management Service and approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the agency, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. Alaska OCS Environmental Studies Program North Slope Subsistence Study - Barrow, 1988 Princioal Authors: Stephen R. Braund Timothy P. Holmes John A. Kruse Lisa Moorehead Eve Witten David C. Burnham Sam Stoker Stephen R. Braund & Associates P.O. Box 1480 Anchorage, Alaska 99510 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First and foremost, we wish to extend our thanks to the study households who have shared so willingly their time on this project. Without their voluntary cooperation a study of this nature would be impossible. We also recognize the important contributions of Ernest S. -
North Slope Communications Protocol
Exhibit 17 ICAS Petition North Slope Communications Protocol Communication Guidelines to Support Meaningful Involvement of the North Slope Communities in EPA Decision-Making May 2009 Exhibit 17 ICAS Petition 4 2.0 Communication with North Slope Communities Region 10 Protocol Statement: Region 10 will: • Maintain and improve our working relationships with communities on the North Slope of Alaska, • Use communication strategies that take into account the cultural context of the North Slope communities, • Communicate early both internally and with North Slope communities as soon as Region 10 staff learn of a proposed project or issue. Implementing the Protocol: Region 10 will use communication strategies that take into account the cultural context of the North Slope communities by adapting our communications to the values and practices of those communities. In this way, Region 10 will practice culturally appropriate communications for each project related to the North Slope. For each project (or project category) related to the North Slope, there must be a deliberate consideration of whether there is a need to prepare and implement a formal communications strategy. If a formal strategy is not deemed necessary, the Protocol must still be implemented by the program. Communication with North Slope communities can begin as soon as EPA learns of a project (perhaps even before an application is received, for example). This requires EPA program staff to communicate regularly with each other concerning their activities on the North Slope. Development of a communication strategy can also begin as soon as EPA learns of a project. Routine and open communication with the communities is an integral part of the entire project process, beginning at project inception, not from the start of the comment period. -
In Barrow Nalukataq Means
photo by rarbarbarbaraaftwa r ie A lh 4 jaj4 4 4cac irT barrow elder ken toovak eats whale meat during the whaling feAlfestivalival nalukataq more photos center section in barrow nalukataq means sharing whale meat tradition by barbara crane could be any better tundra times portlerreporterre barrows springtime whaling festival nalukataqnalukalaq had begun BARROW laughing with his this is good this is really friends and family ken toovak a something that should be toovak barrow elder sliced off another chunk said this fellowship ties us together of whale meat chewed it for a while and unites our people and said he couldnt imagine how life continued on page fourteen nalukataq is a celebration of whaling continued from page one to feed the whole community oranges successful spring season nalukataq isis sumedfumed at one time and apples were flown inin for the also a family reunion as people come most families brought plastic bags children together from allal I1 over the north slope or containers to take home extras to how much does all this cost the suc- other parts of alaska and even out- be enjoyed later six of barrows 42 whaling captains cessful captain and his crewcrew9crewe side for the festival the guests provided their own plates took whales this spring with their 1 I dont want to even think about theres much visiting laughing and knives or ulus to cut through the success came the traditional respon- it laughed burton rexford whose storytelling and impromptu singing of tough whale skin alaska national sibilitysibi lity of hosting a -
North Slope Borough Federal Tax ID: 92-0042378 Project Title: Project Type: Maintenance and Repairs North Slope Borough - Critical Infrastructure Protection
Total Project Snapshot Report 2013 Legislature TPS Report 60238v1 Agency: Commerce, Community and Economic Development Grants to Municipalities (AS 37.05.315) Grant Recipient: North Slope Borough Federal Tax ID: 92-0042378 Project Title: Project Type: Maintenance and Repairs North Slope Borough - Critical Infrastructure Protection State Funding Requested: $6,000,000 House District: 40 / T Future Funding May Be Requested Brief Project Description: This project will provide funding for the design and permitting of revetment to protect essential infrastructure in Barrow and Point Hope. Funding Plan: Total Project Cost: $80,000,000 Funding Already Secured: ($0) FY2014 State Funding Request: ($6,000,000) Project Deficit: $74,000,000 Funding Details: No funds have been appropriated in prior years. Detailed Project Description and Justification: This project will provide beginning funding for the design, permitting, and construction of revetment to protect essential infrastructure in Barrow and Point Hope. The North Slope Borough has an established beach nourishment program, however more permanent solutions need to be pursued in order to continue providing critical services to residents. The extended periods of open water and increased number of severe storms are overtaking current efforts, leading to flooding of low lying areas, and potential permanent damage to assets essential in provision of public services. Revetment off the coast of Barrow will provide additional protection to the coast line, reducing flood related damage and protecting public and private property. The 12-foot option was determined as the best course of action based on the 100 year storm mark, where in 1963 12-foot swells did significant damage to the city. -
Dolly Varden Sport Fishery-Juneau Area
Volume 12 Job No. R-IV-C STATE OF ALASKA William A. Egan" Governor Annual Progress Report for DOLLY VARDEN SPORT FISHERY JUNEAU AREA by Richard D. Reed and Robert H. Armstrong DIVISION OF SPORT FISH Rupert E. Andrews" Director Howard E. Metsker" Coordinator AJaskaResources Library & Information Services Anchorahff' Alaska TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. RECOMMENDATIONS 0 0 2 OBJECTIVES 0 • 0 0 • 4 INTRODUCTION • • 0 • 0 4 TECHNIQUES USED 0 e 0 0 0 0 • 0 5 FINDINGS 0 • 0 0 8 WATERSHED SURVEYS LAKES: Auke 0 10 Cropley 0 •• 0 0 0 ••• • 0 0 0 0 0 16 Dredge • 0 0 0 17 Glacier and Moraine 0 0 0 26 Louie 0 0 0 0 43 Marshall Ponds 0 0 • 44 Mendenhall 0 44 Norton 0 0 0 0 56 Peterson 0 0 0 • 0 0 59 QT 0 0 • 64 Salmon Creek Reservoir 0 0 0 0 67 Windfall 0 0 0 • 0 0 82 STREAMS : Auke Creek 0 8 Auke Nu Creek 0 0 0 12 Bay Creek 0 • 0 •• 0 0 0 14 Bear Creek 0 0 • 0 15 Cove Creek 0 • 0 0 15 Cross Bay Creek 0 0 16 Duck Creek • 18 Eagle Creek 0 • •• 0 19 Eagle River 0 0 20 Elevenmile Creek 0 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 22 0 0 23 Falls Creek 0 0 0 0 • 0 Fish Creek 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 Gold Creek 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 Grant Creek 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 Hendrickson Creek 0 0 0 30 Herbert River • 0 0 0 31 Johnson Creek 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 32 Jordan Creek 0 0 • 0 0 34 i Page No. -
Environmental Justice E.O
National Ocean Service Surveying and Mapping Projects in U.S. Waters for Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Coastal and Marine Data Acquisition 3.13 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE E.O. 12898 “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations” requires that federal agencies consider as a part of their action any disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects to minority and low-income populations. Agencies are required to ensure that these potential effects are identified and addressed. The EPA defines environmental justice as “the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies.” The goal of “fair treatment” is not to shift risks among populations, but to identify potential disproportionately high adverse impacts on minority and low-income communities and identify alternatives to mitigate any adverse impacts. For the purposes of assessing environmental justice under NEPA, the CEQ defines a minority population as one in which the percentage of minorities exceeds 50 percent or is substantially higher than the percentage of minorities in the general population or other appropriate unit of geographic analysis (CEQ, 1997b). Low- income populations are defined as households with incomes below the Federal poverty level. 3.13.1 Affected Environment The majority of the impacts identified in this Draft PEIS are to the aquatic environment, and as such, the environmental justice analysis considers potential disproportionate impacts on minority and low-income populations that utilize resources from the ocean. The analysis focuses on those minority and low-income populations that hunt marine mammals and fish for subsistence uses. -
Why Do We Live Here? Contents in Early 2013, Goldbelt Heritage Foundation Journal-Style Retrospective Comple- Why Do We Live Here?
Investigating Traditional Ecological Knowledge in Áak’w and T’aakú Aaní Richard Carstensen Discovery Southeast for Goldbelt Heritage Foundation & UAS School of Education A high school course Feb—May, 2013 update, 2020 Why do we live here? Contents In early 2013, Goldbelt Heritage Foundation journal-style retrospective comple- Why do we live here? ......................................... 3 Preface (GHF), asked if I was interested in a class on Investigat- ments her outlines and materials A windy walk ..................................................................3 ing Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) for Juneau with some highlights of one of Kaxdigoowu Héen historical series ...........................5 the most memorable educational Gunalchéesh! ................................................................6 high school students. I fondly remembered the GHF Evolution of the TEK class ............................................6 summer academy in 2010, and our course manual What endeavors of my career. Part 1 ● Investigating TEK ............................. 6 would Raven see? (http://www.goldbeltheritage.org/). Etymology of " village" .................................................7 One of our longer-term goals in 2010 had been to extend Preface 2020 With luxury The hunt for t’óok’ .........................................................7 those learning opportunities—piloted in summer immer- of hindsight, one of the more Framing the question: needs and setting ....................13 sion courses—to the rest of the school -
Helicopter Glacier Tours : Draft Environmental Impact Statement
United States Department of Agriculture HELICOPTER Forest Service GLACIER TOURS Alaska Region R10-MB-271 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Alaska Region Tongass National Forest Chatham Area Juneau Ranger District Photograph Copyright O M.Kelley, 1994 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY Chapter 1 - PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION 1 A. Introduction 1 Background: 1984 1 Background: 1987 1 Background: 1989 2 Background: 1992 2 1 . Altitudes 2 2. Montana Creek/Mendenhall Departure 2 3. Lemon Creek Departure 2 Background: 1993 2 Background: 1994 3 B. Purpose and Need 3 C. Proposed Action 3 Temsco 3 Coastal 4 ERA 4 D. Decision to be Made 4 E. Scoping 4 F. Significant Issues 5 G. Existing Management Direction 5 H. Other Laws and Permits 6 Federal Aviation Administration 6 City and Borough of Juneau 7 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 7 Alaska Department of Fish & Game 7 Chapter 2 - ALTERNATIVES 1 A. Introduction - 1 B. Alternative A - No Action 1 C. Alternative B - Proposed Action 1 Table 2-1 - Maximum Number of Landings by Glacier (Temsco) 2 Table 2-2 - Maximum Number of Landings by Glacier (Coastal) 2 Table 2-3 - Maximum Number of Landings by Glacier (ERA) 3 Table 2-4 - Total Number of Landings by Company 3 D. Alternative C - Authorize Current Level of Landings Through 1999 3 Table 2-5 - Maximum Number of Landings by Glacier (Temsco) 4 Table 2-6 - Maximum Number of Landings by Glacier (Coastal) 4 Table 2-7 - Maximum Number of Landings by Glacier (ERA) 5 Table 2-8 - Maximum Number of Landings by Company 5 E. -
Kaktovik” Subsistence Harvest Report (2007-2012)
Technical Report North Slope Borough Subsistence Harvest Documentation Project: Qaaktuġvik, “Kaktovik” Subsistence Harvest Report (2007-2012) Barter Island, May 9, 1948 (Qiñiqtuagaksrat Utuqqanaat Iñuuniaġniaŋisiqun, 1980) Prepared By Qaiyaan Harcharek, Carla Sims Kayotuk, J. Craig George, and Mike Pederson Department of Wildlife Management North Slope Borough P.O. Box 69 Barrow, AK 99723 P a g e | i CONTENTS DEDECATION TO ANDREW AKOOTCHOOK....................................................................iv Rusty Heurlin’s Tribute…………………………………………………………………...v KISISAT “List of Tables”………………………………………………………………………vii QIÑIĠAAT “List of Photographs”……………………………………………………………....ix QUYANAAGUTIT “Acknowledgments”……………………………………………………….xi AULLAĠIISAAĠUN “Introduction”……………………………………………………………1 SIVUNIKSRAT “Objectives”……………………………………………………………………5 ANNIQSUUTILLU ATUĠNIŊIĻĻU SUNAKKIÑIAĠNIKUN KATIQSRAT “Benefits & Uses of Subsistence Harvest Data”………………………………………………………………..5 SAVAAKUN “Methods”…………………………………………………………………………6 Survey Methods…………………………………………………………………………...6 Statistical Methods………………………………………………………………………...7 Conversion Factors………………………………………………………………………..8 Iñupiaq Language………………………………………………………………………….9 Problems with Identification of Species…………………………………………………..9 NALUNAIQSAT “Results”…………...………………………………………….……………..12 TAĠIUĠMIUTAT “Marine Mammals”………………………………………...……...12 NUNAMIUTAT “Terrestrial Mammals”…...…………………………………………..13 IQALUIT “Fish Resources”…………………………………..………………………...15 QAUGIAT “Bird Resources”……...……………………………………………………16 NAURIAT “Plant