A clear path forward for Alaska — and the next administration

A replacement access bridge at the long-abandoned Tulsequah Chief Mine. (Photo provided by the Government of British Columbia)

By Dan Ortiz

About three weeks ago, Dunleavy administration officials — ADF&G and DEC Commissioners Doug Vincent-Lang and Randy Bates, along with DNR deputy commissioner Brent Goodrum — recently co-authored an opinion piece in the Juneau Independent praising cleanup progress at Canada’s abandoned Tulsequah Chief Mine. That mine has been contaminating international waters flowing into Alaska since before Alaska became a state.

I understand why they’re encouraged. But I also know this issue better than a press release. When it comes to the Tulsequah Chief, it isn’t over until it’s over. Alaska has been receiving promises for years — dating back to the early 2000s—and too often we see progress measured in statements instead of actual cleanup outcomes that protect Alaska’s communities, fisheries, and wild salmon.

I began my service in the Alaska State Legislature in 2014 as a District 1 state representative. This was one of the first issues that came before me. Then-Gov. Bill Walker and Lt. Gov. Byron Mallot hosted British Columbia officials for a summit aimed at addressing the Tulsequah Chief. Commitments were made then that the cleanup would be addressed soon. And yet, Alaskans are still waiting.

Tulsequah is only one example of a much larger, ongoing problem. Even with international treaties and a so-called handshake state-to-province understanding, Alaska has no meaningful say in the future of the salmon rivers that originate in British Columbia and flow into Southeast Alaska — rivers like the Taku, Stikine, Unuk and Salmon.

The Dunleavy administration has repeatedly tried to downplay the risks of British Columbia’s growing slate of transboundary mining development and the broader risks to wild salmon. For Alaskans who know what salmon means, that minimization is unacceptable.

Wild salmon are the foundation of Alaska Native cultures, our food supply, recreation and economies. In Southeast alone, fisheries generate roughly a billion dollars of economic activity every year. And anglers and processors feel it when runs are strong. In 2025, Taku king salmon ran above escapement goals, and Stikine king salmon met escapement goals. That’s why “progress” matters only when it’s paired with a clear, ongoing accounting of what remains — and with an honest recognition of the stakes.

It’s also hard to square their message with how this administration has handled other transboundary impacts. I won’t pretend otherwise: the same commissioners who are praising cleanup outcomes have defended bottom trawling and supported the proposed Pebble Mine. They’ve also traveled to British Columbia to court mining companies while risks move downstream into Alaska — into communities, into fisheries and into salmon-dependent livelihoods.

I agree with the commissioners when they say Alaskans “deserve clear information, reliable data, and an honest accounting of both the progress and the work that remains.” But that’s not what we’ve seen. We haven’t been getting regular, transparent updates tied to real engagement — with fishermen, communities, stakeholders, and tribes. Instead, too often, we’re given occasional opinion pieces.

And there’s more. Commissioner Randy Bates was a no-show at the House State Affairs Transboundary Mining oversight hearing in May. Commissioner Doug Vincent-Lang spoke glowingly about British Columbia’s mine bonding policies at that same hearing — policies that don’t stack up in strength or credibility against Alaska’s approach. He also didn’t mention that heavy metals from British Columbia’s Premier gold mine and tailings dams have been detected on the transboundary Salmon River near Hyder at 886% of allowable levels.

And he didn’t mention that British Columbia recently greenlit the Eskay Creek gold mine and tailings dams in the transboundary Unuk River headwaters near Ketchikan — after Alaska wasn’t given a meaningful opportunity to participate through the public comment process.

This is the reality Alaskans live with: decisions made upstream can carry irreversible consequences downstream. Canada has every right to develop its natural resources, but not at Alaska’s expense.

During my time in the Legislature, I worked to push back against that imbalance. I served as prime sponsor of House Joint Resolution 9 to ensure state resources and communities aren’t harmed by upstream British Columbia mining development. I joined calls for a temporary pause in British Columbia mine permitting and exploration until there is a binding international agreement. I joined press conferences and calls urging immediate cleanup of the Tulsequah Chief Mine. I also helped send a letter to then-B.C. Premier John Horgan, and I urged the state administration to partner with other states facing this same transboundary problem.

Canada’s sovereign rights mean nothing if there are no real safeguards and real enforcement when consequences cross borders. Alaska can’t regulate British Columbia directly — but we can stop being passive. We can build the scientific record, insist on transparency, coordinate with Tribes and stakeholders, and force federal and international action.

That’s why I’m calling on Alaska’s next governor, next Legislature, and next congressional delegation to publicly and forcefully support Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan’s requests to the Trump administration earlier this year. They urged the federal government to ensure four things happen:

– British Columbia immediately cleans up the Tulsequah Chief Mine, which has been spewing acid mine drainage into the Taku River system since 1957.

– The U.S. stops sending taxpayer dollars to Canadian mines until Tulsequah Chief — and other polluting Canadian mines — are cleaned up.

– British Columbia’s transboundary mines post a full cleanup bond before operating, like Alaska requires.

– Existing U.S.-Canada treaties are fully used to address a situation where Alaskans currently have no real say in if or how British Columbia polluting mines and waste dams are built upstream of our communities and fisheries.

It’s time for leadership that doesn’t just describe the problem — it confronts it. It’s time for a state administration that meaningfully defends Alaska’s transboundary wild salmon rivers, the jobs they support, and the ways of life built around them.

The Tulsequah Chief will only become acceptable news when the contamination stops and the cleanup is completed—not when officials give another optimistic update and move on.

• Dan Ortiz is a member of the Ketchikan Borough Assembly and a former District 1 member of the Alaska House.