Rep. Mary Peltola introduced the Bristol Bay Protection Act, new legislation that would codify an agency-level 2023 Environmental Protection Agency decision to preemptively veto mining in the Bristol Bay region.
The move comes after Peltola suddenly flipped her position on the proposed Donlin Mine. Earlier in her career as a fish activist, she worked against the mine, but recently she reversed her position and now says she favors it. Her position-flipping has cost her some support in the Western Alaska region.
Although the new Pebble bill has “Bristol Bay Protection” in its title, the bill actually targets one company, the Pebble Partnership, and its project, a proposed copper-gold-molybdenum mining project that is far inland from Bristol Bay, but that is considered within the watershed of the salmon fishery.
The bill was drafted back in January, but appears to have been held for a time when it could be politically helpful.
May 1 was the day to get some media cover for other votes. In addition to this bill being filed on Wednesday, Peltola controversially voted against oil and gas development in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, vote sure to upset many of her constituents.
“I came to DC to stand up for fish – to make fishing and the livelihoods of our fishing communities the national issue it deserves to be,” said Peltola, in a statement about Pebble. “Whole communities rely on Bristol Bay’s watershed for subsistence and as a deeply interwoven part of their social and cultural practices. In introducing this bill, we’re moving to protect our fisheries and streams, water supply, and the deep value that these waters have had to Alaska Natives who have relied on them for thousands of years.”
The Pebble Partnership commented that the bill is bad public policy to put in law a regulatory action. It’s interfering in an active court case the State of Alaska has over the EPA decision. The Pebble Project also has its own lawsuit.
“This legislation attempts to codify what many in Alaska’s development community view as a concerning and legally questionable action by the EPA. It is poor public policy and will be of great concern to people in Alaska who support responsible development and fair process for evaluating projects. It is worth noting that Alaska’s two senators remain very opposed to this EPA action. Pebble and the state of Alaska have challenged EPAs action in court and we believe that is the best place to sort out the many policy issues generated by the EPA against the project,” the company said in a statement.
Pebble is located on state-owned land set aside for mining, but the EPA has exerted its authority through its interpretation of the Clean Water Act.
