Alaska Native villages face some of the highest climate change risks in the nation due to their eroding and flooding shorelines, limited resources, impacts of colonization, and strong connection to traditional lands, waters and wildlife that they do not wish to leave behind. Some Alaska coastal villages are expected to be underwater as early as the 2020s. Every article that appears in Alaska Dispatch News on this subject evokes fierce debate about whether saving these communities merits spending hundreds of millions of dollars for relocation.
Let me first disclose my bias on this issue before moving to a much bigger issue. I believe that climate justice offers a reason for Alaskans and Americans to empower Alaska Native village adaptation. Many Alaska Native villages did not choose to give up their adaptive lifestyles in favor of permanent settlements on lands that were never suitable for this purpose. Settlement was required by U.S. law and policies. Further, the American people as a whole (and particularly Alaskans) have benefited from our historic and current contributions to climate change.
Despite the many legal and practical challenges to relocation that Native villages face, the task is not impossible and need not take away funding from other Alaska communities. The Native village of Eagle was able to completely relocate after an ice jam in 2009, using hazard mitigation funds provided by the Federal Emergency Management Act. Grants offered through FEMA's Pre-Disaster Hazard Mitigation program, the Indian Community Development Block Grant program and the Natural Resources Conservation Service's Emergency Watershed Protection Program may provide a starting point for other Native villages prior to a flooding disaster.
But before we arm ourselves to fight in favor or against government-assisted relocation, let's step back and consider the larger question of the best ways to provide for adaptation. Not every Native village needs to or wants to relocate. Villages like Shaktoolik have been working on practical measures to stay in place as long as possible, including the construction of a coastal berm out of local materials and plans for a local evacuation mound that can provide refuge during a severe flood. Villages like Nulato and Allakaket have been moving on a gradual basis, providing for new housing to be constructed on adjacent high ground not vulnerable to flooding.
While our laws pertaining to climate change and related disasters are certainly ripe for amendments, there is much that can be done within the existing framework. One of the first steps is to better understand how Native villages are actually managing adaptation challenges on their own, instead of just focusing on how difficult climate change impacts can be. The next step is to establish forums where these communities can share strategies with each other and improve communication with outside agencies and entities that can offer assistance with implementing these strategies. Returning to my earlier point about climate justice, it is essential that the voice and knowledge of Alaska Native villages not be lost in the process.
Barrett Ristroph is a lawyer and Ph.D. candidate examining how Alaska Native villages are adapting to climate change and how the law helps or hinders. She lives in Fairbanks.
The views expressed here are the writer's own and are not necessarily endorsed by Alaska Dispatch News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary@alaskadispatch.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to letters@alaskadispatch.com or click here to submit via any web browser.