Sulphurets Creek, which drains naturally occurring rusty water from the KSM mine prospect, enters Mitchell Creek upstream from Southeast Alaska in 2014. Tribal officials worry mining will send polluted water into British Columbia rivers that flow into Alaska. (File photo by Ed Schoenfeld/CoastAlaska)

A 22-page final report released on Thursday culminates two years of data collected from water, sediment and fish tissue in three transboundary watersheds that straddle the frontier. And now, Alaska and British Columbia governments say their work is done.

“Given the existence of other sampling programs planned by state, federal or provincial agencies throughout the transboundary region, there is no need to continue the joint program,” the state and province said in a joint-statement.

Congress appropriated more than $3 million for renewed stream monitoring at border stream gauges operated by the U.S. Geological Survey.

“With all the resources didn’t feel like it was necessary for multiple agencies to be collecting the same thing,” Terri Lomax, a program manager with the state Department of Conservation, told CoastAlaska.

She’s been part of the cross-border effort ever since Gov. Bill Walker signed a landmark agreement in 2015 with B.C. to set up joint water quality monitoring for a shared watershed that hosts a booming Canadian mining sector that drains into Southeast Alaska.

“We’ve developed a lot of partnerships and a lot of relationships over the last couple of years,” she said. “We didn’t have these relationships with British Columbia.”

Provincial officials say they agree that the program has run its course.

“Because of these established sampling programs in the region,” said Greg Tamblyn of  the B.C.’s Ministry of Environment and Climate Change’s regional water quality section, “continuation of the joint sampling program would really be redundant.”

Transboundary watersheds as critical salmon habitat

But not everyone is convinced. And those that had pushed for the monitoring in the first place say they feel the state and province are letting themselves off the hook.

United Fishermen of Alaska says the state isn’t taking its responsibility seriously. The Taku and Stikine are significant salmon producing rivers that have struggled in recent years. These fisheries are a key subsistence food source for Southeast Alaskans. And, they’re prized for the cash value for commercial and charter fleets though they’ve struggled in recent years.

“We have made every attempt possible to engage the State of Alaska on this issue, and the fact that they arrived at these premature conclusions is a disservice to Alaskans and the fishing communities of Southeast Alaska,” UFA’s Executive Director Frances Leach said in a statement on Friday. “We need our federal delegation to elevate this issue to the highest levels.”

The final report says that two years of data found that water quality standards weren’t exceeded on Alaska’s side of the border. It found times when certain heavy metals were over limits in sediment but noted there’s a lot of natural occurring minerals in the region.

Scientists who have studied these watersheds say a couple of years is a blink of an eye for dynamic river systems.

“You can’t measure a given site once or twice a year for two years and claim that you know the baseline watershed health of that area,” Chris Sergeant, a freshwater ecologist University of Montana’s Flathead Lake Biological Station.

The final report noted there was little evidence of contamination and aquatic life appeared healthy. But Sergeant says many of the mines that Alaskans downstream are worried about haven’t been built yet.

“We have a lot of potential mines coming down the pike that are very large projects such as KSM, or Shaft Creek or Galore Creek,” Sergeant told CoastAlaska by phone from Seattle. “And so I’m looking at like, ‘Well, do we know what these metal patterns look like right now and these rivers in case those big projects are built and things change?’ And I just don’t think we’re set up for success to answer that question yet.”

The stream gauges such as those on the Unuk River operated by the U.S. Geological Survey are important, Sergeant says, but he says they are on Alaska’s side of the border but they are not getting the data further upstream to gather baseline data that could be an early warning if discrete levels of contaminants enter a watershed.

“The salmon swim right past that border, they go way up in those streams,” he said. “And there’s a lot of other, less catastrophic contaminants that can harm fish, and we’re just not measuring those things.”

Indigenous tribes push for more monitoring

It was Southeast Alaska tribes that helped spur the Walker administration to engage B.C. over transboundary mining. And they say the that commitment hasn’t survived a political transition following the election of Republican Gov. Mike Dunleavy.

“You know, we need we definitely need water quality sampling,” said Fred Olsen Jr., executive director of the 15-tribe Southeast Alaska Indigenous Transboundary Commission. “But we need ongoing, seasonal, sustainable sampling, we don’t need a couple years of hit and miss cherry picking the data, and then saying everything’s OK.”

The joint report cited a “well-established” monitoring program run by tribes, including Central Council of the Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska as ongoing efforts to collect data in the region.

The tribe released a statement the following day saying it hadn’t been involved in the joint monitoring project since 2018. It urged the state and province to continues its efforts even after the release of two years of data.

Tlingit & Haida vice president Will Micklin says the state and province’s two years of sampling is far from comprehensive.

“It is one step forward, it is not the end of the journey,”  Micklin told CoastAlaska. “This should not indicate to anyone that the testing is complete and more actions need not be pursued.”

But Alaska and B.C. will remain in constant contact.

Greg Tamblyn of the environment ministry office in Smithers, B.C. says the existing cooperation pact remains standing. Even after the joint-monitoring work ends.

“So that’ll help ensure a collaboration between the two parties and the long term protection of the transboundary waters,” he told CoastAlaska.

The cross-border work group established during Gov. Walker’s administration will continue to meet twice a year.

The post Tribes, fishermen decry Alaska and B.C.’s decision not to extend transboundary monitoring appeared first on KRBD.

The cruise ship Infinity is seen leaving Ketchikan’s Berth 4 in 2016. (Photo by Leila Kheiry)

The state Department of Environmental Conservation is looking to hire environmental monitors to inspect cruise ships over a six-week period in May and June. It comes via a recent contract proposal to field marine engineers on commercial passenger vessels during the early part of the cruise season.

“We’re going to get onboard 100% of the cruise vessels that are coming in the state,” DEC’s Water Division Director Randy Bates told CoastAlaska on Tuesday.

The proposal would include the megaships with thousands of passengers and crew. But unlike the Ocean Ranger program, it would also cover smaller, high-end 60-person cruises operated by boutique lines like National Geographic Expeditions and UnCruise.

“DEC is committed to environmental oversight of cruise ships, and we expect the cruise ships to comply with our existing laws while they’re in Alaska waters,” Bates said.

The agency is offering up to $400,000 annually for marine engineers to inspect 30 to 40 ships. The money would come from a head tax paid by cruise ship passengers.

But it’s a fraction of the $3.4 million Ocean Ranger program that was funded out of that same head tax money. That program had marine engineers on more than half of all voyages by large cruise ships.

Gov. Mike Dunleavy has twice defunded the Ocean Rangers through line item vetoes over the objections of state lawmakers. His administrator’s legislative proposal to repeal and replace the program has stalled in the legislature.

Rep. Zack Fields (D-Anchorage) says blocking that program goes against the will of voters who approved the Ocean Rangers program in 2006.

“What I’ve heard is very strong support for the Ocean Ranger program, both from the public and for members of the legislature,” Fields said Tuesday. “Because the cruise industry is an important part of our economy. And it’s important that the public have confidence that there aren’t going to be illegal discharges.”

Fields says lawmakers support modernizing the Ocean Rangers program but wants to see widespread coverage on large ships.

“We were actually working on legislation to update the Ocean Ranger program to include the capacity for remote monitoring that is electronic monitoring, complementing in person inspections,” Fields said. “So I would like to return that legislation when we get organized.”

The DEC contract also makes allowances for monitors to ride along but prevents them from booking berths on what are often overnight trips.

One of the authors of the original 2006 ballot measure says that violates the spirit of the original law which seeks to maximize coverage of cruise ships.

“This seems to be yet another example of the Department of Environmental Conservation’s lackadaisical approach towards enforcement of Alaska’s laws designed to protect the water,” Juneau attorney Joe Geldhof said.

Cruise Lines International Association Alaska‘s Mike Tibbles released a brief statement on the proposal.

“The industry is committed to meet or exceed environmental regulations and is continuously investing in new technology to further reduce environmental impacts,” Tibbles wrote late Tuesday. “As new technology and compliance systems evolve, we appreciate the state’s effort to consider more effective and modern ways to monitor and ensure compliance with state environmental laws.”

Industry veterans say a mix of qualified engineers and electronic monitoring could probably be an efficient way to police cruise ship pollution.

“I was in the Coast Guard when we first came up with the oversight when they discovered they were doing overboard discharges,” Ed Page, executive director of the Marine Exchange of Alaska. He’s referring to the 1990s when cruise lines were accused of illegally dumping in Alaska waters.

“I look at it 20 years later, I’m going, ‘There’s some pretty good technology that could be coming into play,'” he said. “I still think you need a human, though.”

Ed White helped develop and run the Ocean Rangers program as head of DEC’s cruise ship program. He left the agency in 2019 after more than a decade.

“The proposal in some ways reminds me of 2007 when there was a partial Ocean Ranger program immediately after the ballot measure when there wasn’t much time to prepare the contract or to hire,” he wrote in an email to CoastAlaska. “It was difficult to hire, train, and transport Ocean Rangers each year, but a lot of hard work by contractors and staff made the program possible.”

It remains unclear how many cruise ships will return to Alaska in 2021. The pandemic erased last year’s season and so far cruise lines have announced early cancellations suggesting that if cruises do resume they’ll be later in the season.

This article has been updated to include comment from CLIA’s Mike Tibbles.

The post DEC proposes early cruise ship inspections to replace Ocean Rangers appeared first on KRBD.

The cruise ship Norwegian Pearl sails south through Chatham Strait on its final voyage of 2013. The ship is one of six permitted to release treated sewage into Alaska harbors this summer. (Ed Schoenfeld/CoastAlaska News)

Did you know some cruise ships are allowed to discharge wastewater while anchored or tied up in port? State officials and industry representatives say it’s safe. But critics fear it’s fouling local harbors.

The Norwegian Pearl pulls up at one of Ketchikan’s cruise-ship berths. Many of its nearly 2,400 passengers head out onto the docks.

Toby Hatcher of Portland, Oregon, is one. He says the ship encourages environmental awareness through recycling, low-flush toilets and other means.

“You have to request for your sheets to be changed or reuse your towel, so I hang up my towels and my washcloth. So you just save one for the whole week,” he says.

A regular Alaska cruiser, he’s aware of other efforts to control pollution.

But he says he hasn’t thought much about how this and other ships discharge what comes out of the floating city’s toilets, sinks and laundries.

Tourists disembark from the Ruby Princess this spring, beginning the 2015 tour season in Ketchikan. It’s permitted to discharge graywater while docked. (KRBD file photo).

“I guess I’d prefer them not to do it in general at all. However, if they are going to do it, I’d prefer them not to do it right here, where they’re dock,” he says.

But, in fact, they do.

The Pearl is one of a dozen large cruise ships allowed to discharge treated wastewater in Ketchikan, Juneau and some other Alaska harbors this year.

Six, including the Pearl, have permits covering treated sewage, called blackwater. Those ships, plus six others, also have permits to discharge kitchen, laundry and shower runoff, also known as graywater.

The state Department of Environmental Conservation issues the permits for “stationary discharges” under new rules that took effect late last summer.

“It has to be treated wastewater through an advanced wastewater treatment system,” says DEC Environmental Program Specialist Ed White.

He says that technology makes it possible to discharge while stationary. Some ships were even allowed to do it under an older, more restrictive permit system. That measured pollutants coming directly out of the ships.

The Volendam cruise ship docks in Ketchikan. It’s allowed to discharge treated sewage while in port. (KRBD file photo)

White says the new system allows samples to be taken after being diluted in what’s called a mixing zone. That was proposed by former Gov. Sean Parnell and approved by the Legislature in 2013, at the urging of the industry.

“We have some additional requirements for those ships that discharge while stationary. They have to take water samples both on board the ship and also in the water (to measure) what happens in that mixing zone,” he says.

The zone for most harbors is 90 yards from the point of discharge. That’s about a third the length of the Norwegian Pearl.

White says the ships may be stationary, but tides and currents mean the water is not.

“We do have some restrictions. For example, in Skagway, there’s a dock where there would be an overlap. So they either can’t discharge there or they’d get a much smaller mixing zone if they can meet those requirements,” he says.

The dozen ships were issued individual permits while a new general permit system is on appeal.

“We feel that this new general permit does do the citizens of Alaska and the clean water of Alaska a big disservice,” says Daven Hafey of the Southeast Alaska Conservation Council, the region’s largest environmental group.

He says new wastewater treatment systems are an improvement. But they’re not good enough to fully protect fish, shellfish and people.

“Our research shows that Alaska would really be the only place in the entire world that would allow cruise ships of this size to dump those wastes and partially treated waste while tied up to a dock,” he says.

The cruise industry disagrees.

“The water really is virtually drinking water quality when it’s discharged now from the vessels,” says John Binkley, president of the Cruise Lines International Association’s Alaska chapter.

He says releasing treated wastewater in harbors poses no threat.

“It’s a pretty advanced system. The final process in there is sterilization of the water, similar to what they use in hospitals and what-not. And so it’s really pretty pure water that comes out,” he says.

In addition to the 12 ships granted stationary discharge permits, another six are allowed to discharge while underway, which dilutes the waste further.

In all, 18 ships have the OK to release wastewater this summer. White, of the state Department of Environmental Conservation, says another 14 don’t.

Former Gov. Sean Parnell watches as industry leader John Binkley speaks at the signing of a bill lowering Alaska’s cruise ship passenger head tax in 2010. Strict wastewater standards that were part of the 2006 Cruise Ship Initiative have also been changed. (Photo by Ed Schoenfeld/CoastAlaska)

“Typically about half the ships in the last few years hold their wastewater and then treat it in whatever way they have and discharge it offshore,” he says.

That’s beyond Alaska’s regulatory reach.

White says copper and ammonia are among the pollutants measured.

“There’s always going to be impacts of any human activity, so the goal is to minimize those impacts and to restrict any impacts that could cause significant harm,” he says.

Stronger wastewater treatment standards were part of an initiative passed by Alaska voters in 2006. The current permitting system basically replaces those standards.

SEACC appealed the general permit, though the state rejected all but one of its points. Officials say they don’t know when that will be heard. Meanwhile, individual permits allow the same thing.

The post Six cruise ships release treated sewage into harbors appeared first on KRBD.