539 



proxiinity to those pathways, documenting where Arctic people 

 gather, harvest, process and share or distribute food and water. 

 These important social, economic and cultural patterns will vary 

 significantly by size and cultural composition of each community. 



As Dr. Alexander indicated, the U.S. interest in part lies in some 

 of the enormous economic as well as ecological and cultural values 

 which would be at risk should radioactive materials be transported 

 into the Bering Sea. The study called for and the monitoring and 

 mitigation which will likely follow will help protect this invaluable 

 ecosystem. There, in the Bering Sea, literally billions of dollars of 

 fish product are harvest annually, representing a significant por- 

 tion of the entire world's fi'esh fish supply. Economic models of the 

 Bering Sea fisheries would need to be built to estimate and distrib- 

 ute these potentially catastrophic losses should in the conclusions 

 of the study this be suggested as warranted. Literally tens of thou- 

 sands of fishermen, processors, boat owners, wholesalers and retail- 

 ers, and hundreds of thousands of consumers throughout the world, 

 all of whom would be impacted potentially should the Bering Sea's 

 bounty be adversely affected. 



As my colleagues indicated, University of Alaska Anchorage re- 

 searchers have over 30 years of experience in social, economic and 

 environmental assessment work in the circumpolar north, conduct- 

 ing large random surveys, geographically mapping resident fishing, 

 hunting and food gathering activities of culturally diverse groups, 

 projecting population emplojnnent and income changes associated 

 with natural disasters or potential large scale development 

 projects, and assessing the relative benefits and costs of alternative 

 mitigation strategies, not to mention organizing an effective pubUc 

 participation in the conduct of sensitive research. 



As was noted by the health panel, the University hosts the head- 

 quarters of the International Union for Circumpolar Hesdth which 

 networks biomedical and epidemiological researchers throughout 

 the circumpolar region. The Institute of Social and Economic Re- 

 search has active, cooperative research agreements, as many of my 

 other colleagues do, with its counterpart institutes in the Russian 

 North. Academician Alexander Gramberg serves as the chairman of 

 the Russian Academy of Science's Arctic Research Commission fo- 

 cused on the Arctic. Dr. Gramberg has been serving as a distin- 

 guished visiting professor with the University for the past two 

 years and will be coming to Alaska this September. 



Similarly cooperative agreements with biomedical and health 

 professional organizations of Russia's Far North and the University 

 of Alaska have been active for several years, as Professor Ebbeson 

 had indicated in his testimony. 



In my closing remarks I'd like to offer two comments on the con- 

 duct of the study. First, speaking fi*om a public perspective, the 

 study should be designed within the context of what can and 

 shoiild be done. As Bill Shipp said, simply assessing the problem 

 is not adequate. A focus should be on the remediation, decon- 

 tamination and other mitigation alternatives as well as the overall 

 goal of prevention of any large-scale future releases. 



Similarly in the approach towards the finalization of rec- 

 ommendation, these alternatives for remediation all warrant care- 

 ful scrutiny of their relative costs and benefits. 



