Chapter IV — International 



The ministerial declaration signed by the Arctic 

 Council in Iqaluit, among other things, 



• called for the four working groups established 

 under the Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy 

 to continue their work and provided additional 

 direction to each group; 



• adopted rules of procedure for the Arctic Council 

 and terms of reference for the sustainable develop- 

 ment program; 



• approved for further work four projects under the 

 sustainable development program, including one on 

 telemedicine proposed by the United States, one on 

 children and youth of the Arctic proposed by 

 Canada, and two on fisheries proposed by the 

 Saami Council; 



• established a sustainable development working 

 group to develop a range of other proposals by 

 Arctic nations and permanent participants; 



• welcomed the creation of the University of the 

 Arctic as a means of linking educational institu- 

 tions and opportunities throughout the region; and 



• accepted the U.S. offer to host the Arctic Council 

 meeting in 2000 and to provide secretarial support 

 through the conclusion of that meeting. 



As host of the Arctic Council in the next two years 

 the United States has an opportunity to make its 

 activities more productive while adhering to the more 

 rigorous procedures called for in the rules of proce- 

 dure. The United States also has an opportunity to 

 strengthen its contributions to work undertaken within 

 the Arctic Council and its working groups. To this 

 end, the U.S. senior Arctic official sent a letter on 30 

 November 1998 to his counterparts in the other Arctic 

 countries outlining U.S. plans. The letter was pre- 

 pared with extensive interagency review and input and 

 describes three main areas of activity. First, in the 

 sustainable development program, the United States 

 will emphasize public health issues, including humani- 

 tarian aid to northern Russia. Second, the United 

 States remains committed to the environmental protec- 

 tion work of the Arctic Council and will work to 

 improve coordination among the four working groups 

 in this area. Third, the United States will consider a 

 public affairs strategy to improve education and 

 awareness about the Arctic Council and its activities 

 and areas of concern. 



The Arctic Monitoring and 

 Assessment Program 



The Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program 

 Working Group under the Arctic Council is charged 

 with reporting on sources, levels, and effects of 

 environmental pollutants in the Arctic. The National 

 Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has lead 

 responsibility for U.S. participation in the working 

 group. 



In 1997 the working group delivered a report on 

 Arctic pollution issues to the ministers of the Arctic 

 Environmental Protection Strategy at their meeting in 

 Alta, Norway. This was a non-technical report 

 describing what is currently known about a wide 

 range of pollutants and their effects on the environ- 

 ment and on human health. The full scientific report, 

 which provides referenced substantiation for the non- 

 technical report, was delivered to the Arctic Council 

 in Iqaluit in September 1998. This report, TheAMAP 

 Assessment Report: Arctic Pollution Issues, is a 

 comprehensive summary of available knowledge 

 through 1997 about pollution issues in the Arctic. 



In response to recommendations contained in the 

 published reports, the working group was instructed 

 by the Arctic Council to produce assessments on a 

 variety of specific subjects. The assessments will 

 update information on topics covered in the initial 

 reports and will also address emerging topics, such as 

 the anti-fouling paint additive tributyltin, that were not 

 covered in the initial reports. To plan for these 

 assessments and to develop its overall strategic plan 

 for the next five-year period, the working group met 

 twice in 1998. The first meeting was held in April in 

 Girdwood, Alaska, and served as preparation for the 

 Arctic Council meeting in Iqaluit. The second meet- 

 ing, held in Helsinki, Finland, in December, allowed 

 working group members to focus on the direction 

 provided by the Arctic Council. 



The Marine Mammal Commission contractor noted 

 earlier attended both of these meetings. The contrac- 

 tor's final report on the Helsinki meeting will be 

 available early in 1999. Both reports noted that 

 coordination among the working groups under the 

 Arctic Council remains problematic and that United 



151 



