The Impacts of Mining on Indigenous Populations
A look into the past, to understand the future of Bristol Bay, Alaska
"Mining by its very nature causes environmental and social damage, both on a large and small scale...For the indigenous peoples who have suffered the negative impacts of mining, there are sufficient arguments to oppose such activities in their territories." -Luis Vittor, author
Issue Overview
© Garth Lenz
For hundreds of years, the impacts of mining have greatly affected indigenous populations worldwide. By examining previously documented cases in Australia, the Canadian arctic, and Peru, we can start to understand how a currently proposed mine within Alaska could affect many more indigenous tribes. By gaining a thorough understanding of past environmental injustices, we can use such knowledge to look at current movements and future solutions.
Historical Cases
Australia’s northern Kakadu region is home to several aboriginal communities. Since the early 1980s, this area is also home to a nearby uranium mine that has continually put at risk the health of community members. Over the past two decades, over 120 leakages or contaminations have occurred at the mining site. A study by Tatz et al. (2006) looked at the health and safety of aboriginal community members and found that the surrounding communities had a 90% increased presence of cancer.
Photo: Uranium Mine in Kakadu National Park © Dustin Ramsey.
The Canadian Arctic’s aboriginal communities have seen numerous, lesser-known impacts from mining, spanning between the individual, family, and community level(s). An article by Gibson and Klinck (2005) found an increased occurrence of mental stress, increased high-risk behavior, diminished family integrity, and loss of culture. Additionally, some communities were faced with environmental contamination when they were left with 237,000 tonnes of arsenic after mines were abandoned. A more significant mining impact was documented in a study by Herrmann et al. (2014) that found that human-mining infrastructure obstructed Caribou migration paths, resulting in habitat fragmentation and reduction of population productivity; In turn, this greatly affected the food availability and hunting grounds of Canadian indigenous communities.
Photo: Caribou migrating across the Canadian Arctic © Nathan Denette.
Peru has a long history of mining effects on indigenous peoples. From 1573 to 1812, over 200 indigenous communities were forced to send one-seventh of their adult male population to work in the silver and mercury mines. In a study by Dell (2010), census data was used to access social and health related impacts on the indigenous people. It was found that mining districts had historically lower education levels, a higher likelihood of becoming farmers, and an increased presence of stunting in children; Whereas non-mining districts were likely to have increased socio-economic status and own land. A more recent study by Bedoya (2004), looked at the effects of gold mining on Peru’s Amarakaeri peoples; It found that mining construction of roads, dikes, and mining systems fragmented many indigenous areas, depleted resources, and forced many indigenous communities into extreme poverty. Additionally, almost half of the Amarakaeri people lost their lives due to diseases contracted from the outside world.
Photo: Gold mining habitat destruction in Peru © Tomas Munita.
"If we lost salmon, it would be devastating to our people. The rural Alaska communities would be depleted, and there would be nothing here." - Holly Wysocki, Bristol Bay
The Fight for Bristol Bay
The Bristol Bay watershed sits approximately 430 miles to the southwest of Alaska's capital of Anchorage. Roughly the size of West Virginia, Bristol Bay is home to the world’s largest sockeye salmon run.
Photo: Salmon in the Bristol Bay watershed © Ben Knight.
While Bristol Bay is most well-known for its sockeye run, it is home to all five species of salmon. Annually, Bristol Bay will see approximately 67 million salmon during a single season, with 37.5 million of those salmon participating in the inshore river runs.
Photo: Sockeye salmon within the Bristol Bay watershed © Jason Ching.
According to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Bristol Bay Borough is home to over 25 federally recognized tribes, where salmon constitutes roughly 52% of their sustainable harvest. Currently, the Bristol Bay fishery is valued at $1.5 billion annually and supports over 14,000 jobs.
In 2013, the United Tribes of Bristol Bay (UTBB) was founded to help protect the Bristol Bay watershed and oppose a proposed Pebble Mine.
Photo: Yupik woman expressing her love for salmon © Michael Melford.
This map shows the percentiles of minority populations in the Bristol Bay area along with federally-recognized indigenous tribes and their locations.
Photo: Environmental Justice Mapping Tool © Environmental Protection Agency
Just northeast of the prolific Bristol Bay, lies a Pebble deposit that is said to be one of the largest known accumulations of gold and copper in the world.
A proposed Pebble mine would destroy over 3,000 acres of wetland and 21 miles of streams at the site alone. Storage and port facilities, treatment ponds, dams, bridges, and a barge system are also designated for development. In addition, three power plants and a 188-mile pipeline would have to be constructed and run for nearly 100 years. An associated 10 sq. mi. containment pond would hold anywhere from 2 – 10 billion tons of mine waste.
Photo: The proposed site of the Bristol Bay Pebble Mine © Jason Sear.
In 2014, the Environmental Protect Agency released a risk assessment that addresses a disaster scenario, in which elevated copper levels would have a direct effect on salmon, ranging from aversion, to rapid death of all fish within the area (Hébert, 2016).
Such a scenario, or any other mine failure, could threaten the Bristol Bay watershed and salmon runs with devastating consequences, and severely affect the livelihood of the surrounding rural Bristol Bay tribes.
Photo: Sockeye salmon in a Bristol Bay stream © Keenan Troll.
For more than a decade, state and federal support or opposition for the mine has consistently wavered, likely due to political engagements and personal investments.
As of 2019, Bristol Bay sits in an environmental litigation middle-ground as the current federal administration supports the Pebble Mine plan. Several tribal organizations and international conservation groups have sued the EPA, the state of Alaska, and the federal government for failing to protect the surrounding Bristol Bay lands, water, and native sovereignty. These lawsuits are currently on-going.
On January 21, 2020, the Bristol Bay Proclamation was signed uniting national and international tribes in solidarity and support for the protection of Bristol Bay.
Photo: Shipping container art in Alaska © Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation.
“Bristol Bay is one of the last places on Earth with such bountiful and sustainable harvests of wild salmon.” - Environmental Protection Agency
Moving Forward
From the historical cases in Australia, the Canadian Arctic, and Peru, we see that the impacts of mining have affected indigenous communities for hundreds of years. So how do we prevent this from occurring in Bristol Bay or other indigenous areas around the world?
While there may be many ideas, there is never one perfect solution for all environmental injustices. A 2002 article by T.E. Downing may offer some suggestions:
- Providing legal power to indigenous communities
- Delegation of negotiation to local and/or international levels
- Inclusion of cultural brokers to assist with language or indigenous barriers
- Extension of the Environmental Precautionary Principle
While all environmental injustice issues are complex, these “solutions” could provide assistance to indigenous communities currently and into the future.
How to Become Involved
Please visit the link below to learn more about the proposed Pebble Mine and sign a petition to President Trump to stop the Pebble Mine permit:
Thank you!
References
Bedoya, M. (2004). Gold mining and indigenous conflict in Peru: Lessons from the Amarakaeri. Beyond the Silencing of the Guns, 184.
Dell, M. (2010). The persistent effects of Peru's mining mita. Econometrica, 78(6), 1863-1903.
Downing, T. E., Moles, J., McIntosh, I., & Garcia-Downing, C. (2002). Indigenous peoples and mining encounters: Strategies and tactics. IIED and WBCSD, Mining, Minerals and Sustainable Development, Report, 57, 41.
Gibson, G., & Klinck, J. (2005). Canada’s Resilient North: The Impact of Mining on Aboriginal Communities. Pimatisiwin, 3, 1.
Hébert, K. (2016). Chronicle of a disaster foretold: scientific risk assessment, public participation, and the politics of imperilment in Bristol Bay, Alaska. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 22(S1), 108-126.
Herrmann, T. M., Sandström, P., Granqvist, K., D’Astous, N., Vannar, J., Asselin, H., ... & Cuciurean, R. (2014). Effects of mining on reindeer/caribou populations and indigenous livelihoods: community-based monitoring by Sami reindeer herders in Sweden and First Nations in Canada. The Polar Journal, 4(1), 28-51.
Tatz, C., Cass, A., Condon, J., & Tippett, G. (2006). Aborigines and uranium: monitoring the health hazards. Australia: AIATSIS Research Discussion Paper.
Vittor, L. (2014). Indigenous people and resistance to mining projects. ReVista (Cambridge), 13(2), 50.
