SPECTRUM: Sullivan’s attacks on clean water just plain wrong

I just got back from a bear hunt on the west side of Cook Inlet. But I probably wouldn’t have gotten my bear if Dan Sullivan had his way.

Before the Koch brothers helped him buy his seat in the U.S. Senate, Dan Sullivan was appointed by Gov. Sean Parnell to be the Commissioner of the Alaska Department of Natural Resources (DNR). There, Sullivan supported a massive coal strip mine on the west side of Cook Inlet – the Chuitna coal mine – which would have wiped out over 20,000 acres of prime moose and bear habitat, and miles and miles of wild salmon streams.

I own a cabin near the proposed mine site, and I joined my neighbors in a decade-long fight to protect the incredible resources in the Chuitna watershed. During the course of this battle, we looked at the law, and found a provision that said certain lands and waters could be deemed “unsuitable” for coal strip mining if the area could not be brought back to its pre-mining condition after mining was over.

So, we talked to biologists and we talked to geologists. We talked to experts in hydrology and mining reclamation. We asked them if anyone – anywhere – had built new salmon streams after the streams had been mined-through down to 300 feet.

Not one person said it could be done - except of course the hired guns for the mining company.

That’s when we filed a legal petition with DNR. We said the salmon streams in the proposed mine area were “unsuitable” for strip mining, because they could never be returned to their pre-mining condition. We figured it was a slam dunk.

But we didn’t know Dan Sullivan. In a long and rambling decision, Sullivan used slick lawyer language that ignored basic science to justify mining through salmon streams. I remember thinking at the time, “Maybe Dan thinks he’s still back in Ohio.”

This past year, the mining company packed it bags as global coal markets bottomed-out, and today, the Chuitna watershed still supports bear, moose, fish and a bunch of other critters. The whole episode around the Unsuitable Lands Petition came into my head while I was hunting, however, because Dan Sullivan is up to his old tricks again.

Now, he’s pushing hard to rollback basic protections for salmon habitat across Alaska. Under the Clean Water Act, our wetlands and small streams are currently protected. Under a proposed rule rammed through by EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt – the so-called “Clean Water Rule” - protections for these important waterbodies would be sharply reduced.

Alaskans know how important wetlands and small streams are for spawning and rearing salmon. We understand the water cycle, and how everything is connected. And we know what happens upstream, in the wetlands and headwater streams, effects everything downstream, including our salmon.

The usual corporate players support these disturbing rollbacks – including the Alaska Oil & Gas Association, the Resource Development Council, the Alaska Chamber of Commerce, and of course Dan Sullivan’s major donors, the Koch Brothers. And I understand why – because it costs them money to protect wetlands in the course of development.

I’m not surprised the big corporate interests try to maximize their profits. That’s why they exist. But I expect more from my U.S. Senator.

As one of the last, best salmon strongholds in the world, Alaskans need to be vigilant about habitat protection. Our watersheds are not bottomless pits we can pollute with impunity, and our salmon streams are vital resources that we must actively defend. So, my question for Dan Sullivan is: when are you going to start protecting salmon habitat?