Experts discuss Alaska’s economy
Steve Colt, a professor at the University of Alaska Anchorage, spoke about how the environment affects Alaska’s economy on Tuesday.
By John Biberman
Published on Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Although the economic concerns of Alaska residents often conflict with environmental imperatives, those who seek to address local economic issues have utilized the local ecosystem to produce sustainable solutions to these issues, according to University of Alaska Anchorage professor Steve Colt and Alaska Center for the Environment board member Anne Gore ’91. In their Tuesday talk at the Haldeman Center, “Healthy Ecosystems and Healthy Economies: Lessons from Alaska,” Colt and Gore discussed the successes of this approach and argued for its necessity and extension.
“The things that are the most scarce and fragile are the things that not only have the most ecological value, but also the highest economic value,” Colt said. “We must make decisions with the future in mind to maintain those fragile things that have the most value to people.”
Southeastern Alaska’s panhandle was once based around an extractive economy, according to Colt. In the 1950s, the 17 million acre Tongass National Forest was opened to logging, and logging rates increased when native Alaskans received rights to much of the land.
But the rise of cruise ship tourism and what Colt called the “quality of life” industry meant that, by the end of the 20th century, the timber industry’s presence in the local economy had nearly disappeared, according to Colt. It had been superseded by the service sector to support tourism and its associated industries.
Colt emphasized that the shift in employment that accompanied this economic change was associated with pressure from the environmental community to protect the Tongass National Forest. In particular, environmental non-governmental organizations pressured the U.S. Forest Service to consider what Colt called “ecosystem services,” the forest’s economic value beyond its resources.
“Nature provides things that are valuable, and the ecosystem services idea allows a price to be put on the priceless,” Colt said. “We must remember that total economic value comes from both consumption and non-consumption of resources.”
To show the impact of tourism on the regional economy, Colt discussed a study that asked how big the new industry is, what activities are most profitable and where its benefits are dispersed. The results were surprising and encouraging, Colt said.
“The many small industries of tourism contribute $327 million to southeastern Alaska’s economy,” Colt said. “We also found that environmental tourism benefited nearly every community in the region.”
Much of the income from the tourism industry in Alaska comes from unexpected places, according to Colt, such as the $20-million bush piloting industry, the $34-million whale watching industry and the multi-million dollar dogsledding industry. But Colt added that Alaskan tourism will need to keep scale in mind to stay sustainable and effective.
“There is an inherent challenge between the number of people doing something and the quality of their experience,” Colt said. “A tension is already emerging between these two.”
Colt also discussed the difficulty of changing what he called the “timber mindset,” or a preoccupation with an economy based on timber.
Gore used Alaska’s Bristol Bay region as another example of an area where environmentally based economies trump extractive ones. Bristol Bay, the easternmost extension of the Bering Sea, exemplifies the need for a balance between human needs and natural resources, Gore said.
The area’s sockeye salmon population is the cornerstone of both the regional ecosystem and the regional economy, she said. The region supports one-third of Alaska’s grizzly bear population as a result of the large salmon population, and 75 percent of local employment is related to the salmon fishing industry, according to Gore.
The area also has an abundance of other natural resources, including oil, according to Gore. However, these resources have not been explored because of the strength of the local fishing industry and oil exploration in the bay has been restricted for the past several decades, she said.
The latest challenge to the region’s traditional, sustainable economic model came when a massive copper deposit was discovered at the headwaters of two major salmon streams, Gore said. If exploited, the deposit would become the largest open pit copper mine in the world, she said.
Despite the immediate economic opportunities of the mine, called Pebble Mine, most locals are opposed to the project, Gore said. This is because of the prevalence and strength of the fishing industry, which would be damaged by the mine. The mine’s economic benefit would not offset this, she said.
“While Pebble Mine would result in 1,000 per year for 40 years, fishing in Bristol Bay supports 6,000 jobs per year, sustainably,” Gore said.
How about a discussion of New Hampshire’s economy? What are the fundamental reasons for New Hampshire’s economic success and what has that done for the people of the state and for those who have chosen to move to New Hampshire to live, to start a business, or to move to New Hampshire for a job with one of the expanding businesses. Low taxes, realistic regulation, a state government that is run by people who are not professional full time politicians? New Hampshire has twice the population of Alaska, this is not to say Alaska isn’t important, in terms of natural resources Alaska is far more important than New Hampshire, but N.H. is far outperforming any state in the northeastern U.S., including the other 5 New England states in population growth, business growth, per capita income growth, after taxes income growth as well as maintaining one of the highest achieving public school systems in the country with nowhere near the most money applied to the system per student. This means that New Hampshire goes about its' business efficiently. Try researching the stats on it and put together a report. The College could make itself useful in its' neighborhood and it could be a good guide for government in other states and the federal government as well.
By Brandon Lachner on Nov 17 | 5:44 pm
Here are the population increase numbers for the period 1950 to 2009 for all six New England states plus NY and NJ. NY +32%, RI +33%, MA +41%, ME+44%, VT +65%, CT +75%, NJ +80%, NH +149%. NH is also now 6th in the nation in median income. Vermont and NH, two similarly situated states where VT actually had more population than NH had in 1850, from 1950 to 2009 NH added 169,573 more people than VT has current population. Something has to account for this besides NH having nice woods and mountains.
By Jim on Nov 17 | 6:31 pm
Interesting discussion, but apparently lacking awareness of the following:
1) Tourism has recently been in, and will predictably continue to be, locked into decline, as a result of (let’s face it) a permanent recession.
2) There’s been a reversal of principles by bought-off environmental organizations on the Tongass ever since the Tongass Futures Roundtable (TFR) was convened almost 5 years ago. These ENGOs have already signed-off on a whole new paradigm for an expanded timber industry (90 mmbf/yr): “Short rotation, intensive timber harvest, and using biomass (under the rubric of "carbon-neutral, renewable energy”) as a new way of funding shortfalls in silvicultural treatments.
3) The first significant policy product of the TFR has recently been released by the USFS, called the “Integrated 5 year Vegetation Plan 2011-2014”. http://www.fs.fed.us/r10/tongass/newsroom/newsroom_specialreports_5YearPlan.shtml
It consists of little more than vague large-scale maps, a spreadsheet of timber sales and familiar greenwashing eco-speak such as “stewardship and restoration”. It is completely devoid of specifics or scientific rationale.
4) As a result of previous unsustainable timber harvest by the USFS and native corporations, a petition for the listing of Alexander Archipelago (ligoni) wolf is imminent, TFR consensus on “restoration and stewardship” notwithstanding.
5) The recent reelection of Senator Lisa Murkowski will ensure a revival of S. 881 which attempts to privatize 85,000 acres of the most biologically productive areas of the Tongass in the name of finalizing the remaining ANCSA entitlements to Sealaska Inc.— one of the most notorious timber harvesters in the history of the Tongass.
This should register on everyone’s radar — especially those who are truly concerned about economic sustainability on the Tongass.
By David Beebe on Nov 18 | 1:22 am
A permanent recession? Nothing is permanent. Where did you got to school?
By Brandon Lachner on Nov 18 | 11:29 pm
Maybe VT’s population hasn’t increased to such an extent as the state has realised that population growth should not be seen as a marker of its success. Population growth puts pressure on resources, from housing and education to natural resources of land and water. A higher quality of life results from a lower population density. Why is NH making a growing population an ambition?
By smartvt on Nov 19 | 3:12 pm
Vermont may have a high quality of life for NY retirees. It is less clear for a young family facing few job opportunities in the face of an anti-business legislative climate, high taxes on all of income, property, and sales, and an education system that is crumbling under organizational inefficiencies. If one wants to live in an agrarian Disneyland in retirement, VT is fantastic; it is also a fine place to visit or have a second home. But its liberal policies, as evidenced in going against the national trend in the Nov elections, have made it a very challenging place for working-class families. This is the reason for little population growth, especially among the younger age groups. Apparently, quality of life is a relative thing.
By NotSoSmartVT on Nov 19 | 5:46 pm
There is an excellent article about the Pebble mine vs. the Bristol Bay fishery in the new National Geographic this month. Lots of good pictures too!
By j47d47 on Nov 20 | 10:15 am