Opinion
It started in Hood Bay. Goldbelt Inc. could not select its entire land entitlement in the Juneau area and was mandated to select lands elsewhere. Goldbelt chose lands in Hood Bay just south of Angoon. Southeast Alaska Conservation Council opposed the selection, threatened a lawsuit and enlisted local Native opposition, demanding that lands elsewhere be selected.
My turn: SEACC: Enough is enough 041708 OPINION 1 My turn It started in Hood Bay. Goldbelt Inc. could not select its entire land entitlement in the Juneau area and was mandated to select lands elsewhere. Goldbelt chose lands in Hood Bay just south of Angoon. Southeast Alaska Conservation Council opposed the selection, threatened a lawsuit and enlisted local Native opposition, demanding that lands elsewhere be selected.
Thursday, April 17, 2008

Story last updated at 4/17/2008 - 9:38 am

My turn: SEACC: Enough is enough

It started in Hood Bay. Goldbelt Inc. could not select its entire land entitlement in the Juneau area and was mandated to select lands elsewhere. Goldbelt chose lands in Hood Bay just south of Angoon. Southeast Alaska Conservation Council opposed the selection, threatened a lawsuit and enlisted local Native opposition, demanding that lands elsewhere be selected.

Proposed land selections, in an area later selected by Shee Atika, were suggested by Goldbelt only to see vigorous opposition from SEACC, citing what has now become a well-worn litany of "protecting public resources." SEACC indicated they may not resist selections in other areas.

Goldbelt chose lands in and around Hobart Bay and Port Houghton. Despite earlier indications, once again the selections were protested by SEACC. Disgusted with these tactics, Goldbelt went directly to Congress and negotiated a land trade that resulted in a fair trade of Hobart Bay selections in exchange for off-Admiralty Island land selections. Goldbelt also received rights to select lands in west Douglas and Echo Cove.

In the late-1990s, Goldbelt sought a permit to build a small port facility that could serve as a port to transport Kensington Mine construction, mine and mill workers when that facility opened. Moreover, start up of a tourist cruise attraction could be done with no addition of personnel or facilities. Everything needed, including buses, drivers, boat, crew, and harbor facilities would already be there. Enter SEACC. The permit application was denied because the mine was not operating.

Goldbelt then started a painful and expensive environmental impact statement that included studies of everything one could think of. The result was a permit to build a breakwater, dock, ramp and float at Cascade Point - a location that was the best location for transporting workers based on cost, safety and impacts.

Then, right in the middle of construction, SEACC won its case before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Tucked away in that decision was a puzzling point - that transportation of workers from Cascade Point was dependent upon the method of tailings disposal. In other words, if Lower Slate Lake could not be used as a tailings disposal site, then Cascade Point could not be used to transport miners.

It didn't make sense then and it doesn't now. But the result was an immediate halt to construction and loss of the opportunity for jobs and other benefits for Goldbelt and its shareholders.

We're left with a half-completed breakwater that could provide habitat as an artificial reef instead of the sandy bottom that is there. The state recently spent a lot of money and effort creating artificial reefs at Yankee Cove. Yet, when Goldbelt and Channel Construction applied for a permit to complete the breakwater so it can be used as a barge landing, SEACC once again trots out its tired old arguments that this facility will damage or threaten the area.

When will it stop? These lands were given to the Native people of Juneau as rightful compensation for loss of their traditional lands. What right does SEACC have to deny every effort by Goldbelt to develop its lands for the benefit of its shareholders who are predominantly Natives?

The Alaska Constitution guarantees right of access from uplands to tidelands, the very access that SEACC claims will damage or threaten the tidelands. SEACC's dealings with Native people smacks of the old "trading post" mentality, where Natives were fair game to many unscrupulous people. SEACC's actions with Native people tread on our livelihood, our subsistence activities, our economic future and that of our children and grandchildren.

Indeed, SEACC treads on our very civil rights and they do it with the blessing and funding of outside interests that have no knowledge of Native people, their history, their culture and their needs.

It's time for SEACC to stop its campaign against Native people. It's time for SEACC to acknowledge the damage it has done to Native people throughout Southeast Alaska and to make amends. It's time for SEACC's donors to see and learn about the terrible damage they and their donated dollars have done not just to Goldbelt, but to all Native communities in Southeast. Enough is enough.

• Joe Kahklen is chairman of Goldbelt Inc.

ARTICLE LINKS: Printer Friendly Version| Email This Article| Commenting Policy

AP Video and News

Updated 7:29 PM ET
Man held in Fla. on charge of threatening Obama
Iraqis: Deal close on plan for US troops to leave
Gitmo jury gives bin Laden driver 5 1/2 years
Flight attendant: Osteen's wife pushed co-worker
McCain says Obama wants to forfeit war in Iraq
Detroit mayor ordered jailed after bond violation
For unexplained infertility, 2 methods don't help
More News

Classifieds






Top Jobs

Loading...

Top Homes

Loading...

Top Rentals

Loading...

Top Boats

Loading...

Top Autos

Loading...
Labor Day 08 Celebration 08 Graduation 08
Activote 08



News
Share
Shop
Life
Visit