To date, lack of a harbor and onshore servicing has restricted fishing on St. Paul to local subsistence fishing and at-sea harvesting and processing by U.S. and foreign flag vessels. The exception has been the recent development of a halibut day fishery sponsored by the Tanadgusix Corporation (TDX). The first phase of harbor construction on St. Paul has been completed and full harbor facilities should be in operation by 1988. Unfortunately, winter storms in 1984 damaged the site and the delay this will cause in the following timetable has not yet been determined.

Phase I consisted of a 1,000-foot breakwater/wharf providing a 650-foot berthing area with water depths up to 25 feet. This space would be adequate for mooring up to four fishing boats in the 120-foot class if berthed singly, and up to 8-12 boats if rafted four abreast. The wharf can also accomodate 8-12 boats in the 30-foot class. A rollon/roll-off ramp will facilitate loading and unloading of cargo on ocean-going barges. Although Phase I sustained heavy damage in a recent winter storm, Phase II will begin in spring 1985. This will involve the completion of the breakwater/wharf by extension to 1,700 feet to provide additional berthing and improved shelter. This extension will more than double the available berthing space for vessels. A third phase of construction is also planned to improve and expand the inner harbor to increase the capacity and efficiency of the harbor and onshore activities. This work could involve construction of piers and bulkheads and possibly some dredge and fill activity. The first two phases of harbor development on St. Paul are being funded by the State of Alaska. Total costs are estimated at about $20 million. The City of St. Paul will manage these facilities.

In 1981, a small day fishery was started on St. Paul and by 1983 33 local small boats (16 to-32 foot) were fishing for halibut and crab. By 1985 the fleet is expected to consist of 5 small local boats (30-foot), 4 medium-size local boats (90-foot), and a nonresident fleet using St. Paul as a home port. Assuming the completion of the full 1,700-foot breakwater/wharf by 1986, the St. Paul-based fleet will consist of 10 30-foot, 4 90-foot and 4 115-foot boats delivering to shore-based processors and a floating processor moored in the harbor. About 40 medium-size nonresident crabbers would also use the harbor for refuge from storms and provisioning at St. Paul. In 1985, fisheries are expected to supply about $810,000 in income to the Aleut residents of St. Paul. By 1990, 126 jobs and over $5 million could result from the proposed fishery development plans (Table 13).

A small onshore seafood processing facility is available on St. Paul. By 1985 they plan to have a seasonal processing ship in the harbor for crab and by 1986-88, to expand the onshore processor to include facilities for halibut and cod. At least two large floating processors at sea are also planned. Any delay in breakwater/wharf construction, however, could affect this timetable by delaying fishing fleet expansion and demand for fish processing facilities. As shown in Table 13, projected income from seafood processing could grow to $4.3 million by 1990 and employment levels may reach 257.

St. Paul also plans to develop its tourist industry. About 1,000 tourists visit St. Paul each year. St. Paul organizations are working to increase the tour market, train local tour guides and implement arts and crafts programs in the schools for sale to tourists. They also plan to upgrade the tourist accomodations in St. Paul.

4. Potential Impacts of Development Proposals

Details of the initial proposal for major harbor development on St. Paul Island and its possible impacts on island residents and living marine resources of the area are available in the Final Harbor Feasbility Report and EIS, St. Paul Island, Alaska, United States Army Corps of Engineers (COE), December 1982.

The St. Paul harbor development scenario will result in potentially significant social/cultural impacts on island residents. For example, Orbach and Holmes (1981) estimate that as many as 215 year-round new residents could be added to St. Paul (up to 366 in the summer), and about 50 day-use visitors. Since there are now only 562 Aleut residents on St. Paul Island, land use and law enforcement planning will be critical to the orderly development of this isolated community. The COE study concluded that the social impacts of harbor development would be considerable if a commercial fishing service facility is established on St. Paul, and stated that "It appears very likely that harbor development would change the socioeconomic structure from the Federal Government dependency to a self sufficient community. Traditional lifestyles may be lost especially if the fur seal harvest is terminated. Social changes may require a period of time before the new lifestyle becomes stable."

In comments by the Department of Commerce on the COE draft EIS (COE 1982, A29 to A-42), the NMFS provided an assessment of impacts on the fur seal herd, other marine mammals and the Bering Sea fisheries. We concluded that available information does not suggest that harbor construction would present any significant threat to living marine resources. But secondary impacts resulting from harbor construction may occur. These may include increased competition for food sources between the developing fisheries and marine fish and mammals, long term pollution resulting from harbor operations, fuel spills and refuse accumulation, degradation of the marine environment resulting from disposal of fish processing wastes, and possible changes to the behavioral patterns of the northern fur seal. However, it is considered unlikely that development plans on St. Paul could have a significant impact on the amount of groundfish removed from the eastern Bering Sea. The North Pacific Fishery Management Council (NPFMC), established by the Magnuson Act, manages ground fish stocks within the 200 nautical mile EEZ. Since the NPFMC manages on an optimum yield basis, whether taken by domestic or foreign fleets, harbor development could only cause a shift of catch from foreign to domestic, and not an increase in catch. It is possible, however, that a greater proportion of the total catch could be taken closer to the Pribilof Islands.

The choice of the Village Cove site for the new harbor and limitations on construction activities during times when fur seals are present on the island, substantially reduce the possiblity of direct impacts on fur seals. Increased human activities and potential pollution of the marine environment are our primary concerns.

Environmental reviews performed by the State of Alaska, the COE, and the NMFS suggest that the construction of a breakwater at Zapadni Bay on St. George Island will have no significant effect on fur seals or other living marine resources in this area. Seasonal restrictions have been placed on this work to avoid disturbing the nearby

rookery areas; and the NMFS, DOI, and State wildlife agencies are consulting at every stage of development on recommended mitigation measures. Migratory birds and valuable nesting habitats will be carefully protected. Impacts on the Bering Sea fisheries from St. George's fishery development scenario will be negligible. This small island development will not make a major contribution to the catch of commercial fishery resources in this area.

Braund (1982) examined the potential impacts on subsistence activities from harbor/fisheries development on St. George Island. An increase in the commercial effort for halibut, for example, could cause local subsistence stocks to decline. Alternatively, the new port facilities could help local subsistence halibut fishermen increase their catch. Currently, subsistence resources may comprise up to 50 percent of the local diet. The harbor site at Zapadni Bay could also affect sea lion hunting, and sea bird hunting and egg collecting.

Changes in lifestyle, resulting from the fisheries economic strategies of St. George and St. Paul Islands, could cause an increase in stress-related health problems. A number of other social changes may be associated with the anticipated increased presence on the islands of non-residents. On the other hand, implementation of the fisheries development proposals outlined above, will give the Aleut residents of the Pribilof Islands their first economic independence.

The Pribilofs have been suggested as possible development sites for offshore oil and gas operations in the Bering Sea (Dames and Moore, August 1980; Alaska Consultants, Inc., May 1981; Marine Minerals Service (MMS), Department of the Interior (DOI), August 1982). In August 1982, the DOI proposed the sale of oil and gas leases covering 2.7 million acres in the St. George Basin, 61 to 179 miles offshore in water depths from 322 to 505 feet (Lease Sale No. 70).

Offshore exploration will require temporary shore support bases to provide drilling vessels with fresh water, food, and other supplies. During the exploration phase, oil companies will probably use existing port facilities, if possible; but they may be expected to build, modify or expand facilities if no existing facilities meet their needs. MMS (1982) identifies St. Paul as a potential onshore facilities site for offshore oil and gas exploration and development in the St. George Basin because of its proximity (75 miles) to the northwestern portion of the most likely production area (56°40'N, 168°30'W). St. George is only 38 miles from the northwestern lease sale area, and has been considered a potential crude oil terminal or liquid natural gas (LNG) plant site (Dames and Moore, August 1980). In the final EIS on Lease Sale No. 70 (MMS 1982), MMS considers four development and transportation scenarios to represent the range of possible approaches to producing and shipping oil and gas in the St. George Basin area. One of these scenarios hypothesizes the construction of one or more processing and loading facilities on the Pribilof Islands. MMS estimates, however, that there is only a 28 percent chance that commercial quantities of oil will be found in the area. About 37 new jobs could be created on St. Paul Island, including 17 jobs which could be filled by current St. Paul residents.

Major impacts on living marine resources of the area could occur from a possible oil spill as a result of any oil production and transportation. MMS bases its impact assessments on the assumption that the mean resource estimate is 1.12 billion barrels of oil. For this amount of oil, according to the U.S. Geological Survey, 4.3 to 6.5 oil spills exceeding 1,000 barrels are probable over the 22-year production life of oil fields in the St. George Basin. In comments by the Department of Commerce on the final EIS (MMS 1982, pp. K-95 to K-102), the NMFS assessed the potential for adverse impacts on the marine mammal populations in this area. The NMFS had recommended deletion of tracts from the proposed sale in the area of the Pribilof Islands and Unimak Pass, a major migration route for marine mammals in this region.

Referencing an October 1979 NMFS report entitled, "Living Marine Resources, Commercial Fisheries, and Potential Impacts of Oil and Gas Development in the St. George Basin, Eastern Bering Sea", these comments described in detail the detrimental effects of possible oil spills on marine mammals and endangered species in this area.

During the birth and breeding season when the seals' focal point is St. Paul and St. George Islands, they are no doubt particularly vulnerable to oil contamination since almost the entire Pribilof fur seal population, except for most 1-year old animals, is assembled in a relatively small area for up to 7 or 8 months (May-December). Oil spills in the St. George Basin area during May-November could have a disasterous effect on the fur seals of the Pribilof Islands. Oil drifting ashore on the Pribilof Islands during July and August could have a serious impact on fur seal pups. Any contact with oil at any time of the year would have a profound influence on the health of individual northern fur seals through an increase in pelt conductance and concommitant increase in metabolic rate. That death would inevitably follow such contact cannot be verified. However, considering that (a) oiled animals have greatly increased maintenance cost, and (b) they are extremely reluctant to enter sea water (where their food is found), it is clear that the health of oiled animals would be in serious jeopardy. Light crude oils, although coating the fur heavily enough to have a severe metalbolic impact, may not be visibly detectable on the pelt. Therefore, oiled animals on the rookery may not be obvious, which would make ineffective any rehabilitation program following an oil spill.

Unimak Pass is a natural funnel for marine mammals and shipping traffic between the Gulf of Alaska and the Bering Sea. Unimak Pass has a steady flow of traffic yearround, as well as some migration concentrations (such as gray whales) that are not defined accurately due to lack of information. Shipping related to oil facility construction and field development will add significantly to the present congestion that includes fishing fleets and freight transport as well as the marine mammal migrations.

5. Subsistence Use of Fur Seals

Veltre and Veltre (1983) provide details of the prehistoric utilization of fur seals by Aleuts. Knowledge of Aleut use of fur seals in the prehistoric and early historic periods in the Aleutian Islands comes from both archaeology and early contact period documentary materials. Archaeological remains of fur seals are more common in the eastern Aleutian Islands than in the central or western portions of the archipelago. For example, at one site on Umnak Island, dated about A.D.200-1700, the amount of fur seal

meat in the diet was second only to that of sea lions among marine mammals excluding whales. Fur seal bones found at the site came from both sexes and all ages, implying that hunting took place during the spring and fall migrations of this species through the island passes. Since fur seals rarely haul out in the Aleutians, it has been assumed that fur seal hunting in the Aleutians was done by Aleut men hurling spears from their baidarkas (skin-covered, kayak-like boats). The village of Nikolski on southwestern Umnak Island has yielded a record of fur seal use extending back nearly 4,000 years.

Since the first Aleuts came to the Pribilofs in the late 1700s, fur seal meat has been a dietary stable. Pribilovians use many parts of the fur seal for food, including meat and various internal organs. Expecially prized are the foreflippers, which are often salt cured. St. George Island residents have claimed an annual subsistence need of about 3,000 animals. Since the termination of the St. George Island commercial harvest in 1973, St. George residents have been allowed a small subsistence harvest (350 in 1984). They can also share in the over 20,000 carcasses available on St. Paul Island. There are approximately three times as many Aleut residents on St. Paul Island, as on St. George Island. Based on the 3,000 annual estimate for St. George, St. Paul Island residents may need up to 9,000 fur seals annually for subsistence purposes. One estimate of the current subsistence needs of Pribilof Aleuts for fur seals, therefore, may be as high as 12,000 animals each year.

6. Economics of the Seal Harvest

Until 1984, the NMFS employed about 80 local residents for 5-11 weeks to harvest fur seals and process the skins for shipment. The annual harvest operation was funded at about $500,000. Some of the carcasses are used by local residents for food and native handicrafts. The remainder of the carcasses are the property of the Tanadgusix Corporation which processes the meat and internal organs for crab bait, dog food, fox food, and human consumption. The male reproductive organs, "seal sticks", are processed and sold to markets in Asia. The new harbor will reduce the transportation costs involved in shipping products off the island and may enhance the development of further markets. The seal by-products operation could eventually become a significant part of the local economy.

Initial processing of seal skins employs about 30-40 local residents during the summer months. After the blubber is removed, the skins are washed, soaked in brine, dried, rolled in salt and borax, and packed in boxes. They are shipped to Seattle, then by rail to The Fouke Company in Greenville, South Carolina. The Fouke Company processes the skins into finished pelts which are sold to manufacturers in the garment industry.

For over 50 years, The Fouke Company was the exclusive bidder for the U.S. Government contract for processing and marketing fur seal skins. The Tanadgusix Corporation, who now has ownership of the U.S. share of skins harvested through 1983, has continued the contractual arrangements with the Fouke Company since Fouke has an exclusive processing method that has yet to be duplicated. Table 14 shows the revenues from skin sales that have been deposited into the U.S. Treasury.