Syndicated

A Juneau man is dead after a diving accident Monday morning in Funter Bay on the west side of Admiralty Island.

Alaska State Troopers say 35-year-old John Robert Pugh, Jr. didn’t come up from his second dive of the day, sometime before 8 o’ clock Monday morning. An unidentified companion went in after him, administered CPR, and brought Pugh to the Auke Bay boat launch aboard a 21-foot skiff.

Pugh is the son of University of Alaska Southeast Chancellor John Pugh and former Alaska Corrections Commissioner Margaret Pugh. State business records list him as holder of a business license for the Scuba Tank dive shop on Dunn Street and a part owner of the company Johnny’s Oysters for which the business license expired in 2007.

Pugh was reportedly diving in about 20- to 25-feet of water when the accident occurred. He was reportedly found near the bottom with the regulator out of his mouth.

Sergent Tim Birt says troopers have requested an autopsy by the state Medical Examiner’s office in Anchorage, because the death happened in a remote area and was unobserved. An investigation is underway, but the death is not considered suspicious.

Birt says the commercial sea cucumber dive fishery was getting underway in the area Monday, but he says Pugh’s dive was considered recreational in nature.

It looks like the Sealaska land-selection legislation will become part of a larger bill that could be easier to pass. At least that’s the case in the U.S. Senate. Meanwhile, opponents continue lobbying against the measure.

There are a couple of ways to get a bill through Congress.

One is to push the measure through on its merits or its sponsor’s connections – or both. Another is to combine it with similar legislation.

That’s what Senator Lisa Murkowski is trying to do with the Sealaska legislation.

“Historically what the energy committee has done is taken a whole package of lands bill, roll them into what is called an omnibus public lands bill, and then advance them to the floor that way,” she says.

The Alaska Republican is working on such a bill with Natural Resources and Energy Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman. Murkowski says the New Mexico Democrat expressed some concerns she’s trying to address.

She says the timber acreage to be selected is pretty much set. Sections addressing cultural and economic-development areas are more flexible.

“Still some questions remaining on the sacred sites and some of the futures sites. But I would suggest that after years of input from Alaskans and those that have an interest we have gotten to a point where we’ve got a final bill that we can put before the committee,” Murkowski says.

“The idea of the Sealaska land bill being part of an omnibus bill in the Senate has really always been our expectation,” says Rick Harris, executive vice president of Sealaska.

He says bill changes mostly have to do with the futures sites, which could be used for ecotourism or energy development.

“I think they just want to confirm that we’ve done as good a job as we can in the selections to avoid conflict, but to still craft a suitable solution,” he says.

But there’s still plenty of conflict.

“I think it’s a bad idea,” says Davey Lubin, who runs a sea-taxi and ecotourism business in Sitka. He’s opposed to the omnibus approach, or any version of the bill so far.

“There’s some sense that some of the senators from certain states who stand to gain small wilderness areas are willing to throw the Tongass under the bus,” he says.

Lubin traveled to Washington, D.C., last month to lobby against the legislation. He’s concerned about impacts on wildlife, tourism, subsistence, and the overall future of the Tongass National Forest, where the land would be selected.

He says he tells people in Washington that the legislation is a corporate land grab.

“I was giving them a frontline view of what the sentiment here is about privatizing some of the most significant, important, beautiful gems of the Tongass. Most of the time the response was ‘Wow, we didn’t realize that this was anything other than a Native rights bill,” he says.

He’s not alone. Some environmental, tribal and outdoors groups, plus small Southeast communities, have also come out against the measure.

One of the latest to join is the Alaska Outdoor Council. The Fairbanks-based group includes seven Southeast affiliates and is the official state association of the National Rifle Association.

“We’re still battling here in the Interior to try to keep the easements across corporation lands to public lands behind them. And we have not been that successful at keeping that access,” says Rod Arno, the council’s executive director.

He’s among those worried that hunters, hikers and fishermen will be limited by the corporation’s new land ownership.

“The main concern is having more federal Alaska lands legislation when there should be adequate lands in the original withdrawals from ANCSA to meet the needs of the Sealaska Corporation,” he says.

Sealaska could select land now from areas of the Tongass near Southeast communities. Officials say much of that acreage should be protected as fish and wildlife habitat, or community watersheds.

Instead, the corporation wants Congress’ permission to select other lands in the region, much of it valuable timber property. Officials say they will maintain access and be environmentally sensitive.

Murkowski points to support from timber industry, economic development and Native groups, and businesses. She says she hopes the omnibus bill, cosponsored by Alaska Democrat Mark Begich, will move soon.

Meanwhile, Alaska Republican Representative Don Young’s version has cleared its only committee. It could head directly to the House floor, or, like the Senate, also be wrapped into an omnibus lands measure.

Earlier reports:
— Both sides prepare for Sealaska bill’s next stop
— Murkowski, Young post new Sealaska bills
— Sealaska lands bill passes House committee

A federal appeals court on Friday upheld the so-called Roadless Rule in a case brought by the State of Wyoming.

The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling means the controversial decade-old policy, which prevents road construction on certain federal lands, remains in place nationwide.

Wyoming argued that federal agencies violated the 1964 Wilderness Act and the National Environmental Policy Act in implementing the Roadless Rule.

The State of Alaska is currently challenging the rule on two fronts. A lawsuit filed in the District of Columbia argues that the rule itself violated the Alaska National Interest Land Conservation Act and the Tongass Timber Reform Act. Meanwhile, another suit filed with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals seeks to reverse a lower court ruling that removed an exemption for the Tongass National Forest.

Assistant Alaska Attorney General Tom Lenhart says Friday’s decision won’t stop the state from moving forward with those suits.

“We made some of the same claims that was made by Wyoming. But in addition to that we have ANILCA and we have the Tongass Timber Reform Act, both of which apply only in Alaska,” says Lenhart. “And we feel strongly that the Roadless Rule, in fact, violates both of those federal statutes in Alaska.”

Earthjustice Attorney Tom Waldo says it’s unlikely the D.C. court will overrule the other circuit courts, even when it comes to the Alaska-specific arguments.

“The forest service thoroughly considered the application of those laws when it adopted the Roadless Rule,” says Waldo. “And we’re very confident that for the same reason that the 9th and 10th Circuits have rejected all the other challenges to the Roadless Rule, we think the D.C. court will also reject those Alaska-specific challenges to the Roadless Rule.”

Waldo and Lenhart agree that the 10th Circuit decision shouldn’t have any bearing on the Tongass exemption case, since that’s a separate issue from challenges to the rule as a whole.

Legislation sponsored by Alaska’s Congressional delegation would exempt the entire state from the rule.

The Roadless Rule was implemented in 2001, in the last days of the Clinton Administration. The Obama Administration has defended it.

The telephone survey was conducted between April and June of this year. Respondents were limited to English-speaking adult women, who live in the City and Borough of Juneau. Andre Rosay with the University of Alaska Anchorage Justice Center analyzed the data, and says despite those limitations, the survey had a relatively large sample size.

“Our original goal was, I think 550 respondents, and we were able to collect data from 600,” says Rosay.

While he thinks the result is a fairly conservative estimate of the amount of domestic violence and sexual assault in Juneau, Rosay says the survey was designed to get accurate information.

“We identify the survey as a survey of health and injury, and then we slowly get into more serious forms of victimization,” Rosay says. “So, we’ll begin with psychological aggression, then we’ll move on to coercive control, eventually we’ll talk about physical violence, and then towards the end of the interview, we ask about sexual violence.”

Rosay says past domestic violence and sexual assault surveys have been skewed by using legal definitions. This survey addressed specific behaviors.

“We didn’t ask respondents if they were a victim of an assault, instead we asked them, ‘Have your romantic or sexual partners kicked you? Have your romantic or sexual partners hit you with a fist or something hard?'” Rosay says.

The results were weighted to represent the number of women over the age of 18 in Juneau – about 11,700, according to the last Census. Based on those estimates more than 47 percent of women in the Capital City have experienced domestic violence and 35 percent have experienced sexual violence in their lifetime. Estimates for just the past year were shocking: 12 percent of women in Juneau were physically abused by a partner, and one percent were sexually assaulted or raped. Overall, Rosay says 55 percent of women in Juneau have been victims of either domestic abuse or sexual violence, or both.

“Our neighbors, our friends, our co-workers, our mothers, daughters, people that we care about and people that we love,” says Rosay.

Regional surveys like the one in Juneau have been done in Anchorage, Fairbanks and Bristol Bay this year, patterned after a 2010 statewide survey. However, Rosay cautions against comparing data from any of the studies.

“Because you’re talking about different types of assaults that are committed against different types of people, and that are perpetrated by different types of offenders,” Rosay says. “But what I can tell you, is that in all of the regions that we have studied this year, we are finding very high, unacceptably high, rates of violence against adult women.”

Alaska Council on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault Executive Director Lauree Morton says the surveys will provide a baseline for futures studies to be conducted every five years.

“To give some time for community strategies to go into effect,” Morton says.

In Juneau, one of those strategies has been developed by AWARE, a nonprofit domestic violence and sexual assault prevention center. It’s a plan called “Pathways to Prevent Violence.” AWARE Executive Director Saralyn Tabachnick says three of the four pathways are at least in part targeted at young children and teens.

“I think that’s critically important. To give healthy messages early on and to repeat them early on,” Tabachnick says.

The Juneau Police Department also has taken an active role in fighting crimes against women. Julia Erickson is JPD’s police crisis intervention specialist, a social worker position created two years ago to follow up with victims of domestic or sexual abuse.

“To make sure that they get the resources that they need to support them through the court process, through getting into safe shelter, getting a protective order, whatever needs to be done to ensure their safety, and to stop the re-victimization of women,” says Erickson.

The survey of Juneau women was paid for as part of a legislative appropriation to the state Council on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault. It also received support from Governor Sean Parnell’s Choose Respect initiative.

Phone Numbers:

AWARE’s Juneau Crisis Line: (907) 586-1090

AWARE’s Toll-free Crisis Line: 1-800-478-1090

JPD Police Crisis Intervention Specialist: (907) 586-0618

Alaska Council on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault: (907) 465-4356

The U.S. Coast Guard has brought criminal charges against the sole survivor of a 2010 helicopter crash in which three people from Air Station Sitka died. Lieutenant Lance Leone is facing possible court martial for negligence and the death of two of his crewmates — all violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and all charges he intends to fight.

In July of 2010, a newly refit Jayhawk helicopter was flying to Sitka from Astoria, Oregon, when it ran into some power lines strung across a channel and crashed into the water off La Push, Washington.

Three of the four people on board were killed: the pilot, Lieutenant Sean Krueger, Petty Officer First Class Adam Hoke, and Petty Officer Second Class Brett Banks. Co-pilot Lance Leone was injured, and survived.

He’s now facing three charges from the Coast Guard: The first is that he negligently failed to navigate the helicopter away from charted hazards, and failed to make sure it was flying above 500 feet, in accordance with Coast Guard policy. The second charge is for the destruction of military property – the chopper – which was valued at $18.3 million dollars. Both of those charges are misdemeanors.

The third charge is a felony. The Coast Guard says Leone negligently caused the deaths of Hoke and Banks. There are two counts, each carrying a maximum of three years in jail. Leone is not facing charges in connection with the death of the helicopter’s commander, Sean Krueger.

The charging document amounts to what would be a criminal complaint in civilian courts. The Coast Guard intends to convene an Article 32 hearing – which is similar to a grand jury – to determine if Leone should be court martialed.

“The Article 32 hearings are not used to determine guilt or innocence,” says Chief Petty Officer Kip Wadlow, a Coast Guard spokesman. “It is a review of the evidence that’s been collected, along with the potential charges that are being faced by the member.”

Wadlow says an investigation began immediately following the crash of helicopter 6017. The details of that investigation have not been made public, and the Coast Guard says they won’t be released until after the proceedings regarding Leone are concluded.

But a former military lawyer says the damage might already have been done.

“Your career can end without being court martialed; it doesn’t take much. In the military, it doesn’t take much,” said Lt. Col. John Pharr (Ret.).

Pharr is in private practice in Anchorage. But he spent most of his career as a Judge Advocate General in the Army.

He says in cases like this, acquittals are common, but even charges are enough to do serious harm to a military career.

“You’re toast if you’re acquitted, you’re toast if you’re found guilty,” he said. “So as far as your military career, it ends upon the charges in this day and age.”

Leone’s attorneys have asked him not to speak to the media during this phase of the process. In addition to a military-appointed lawyer, Leone is represented by Anchorage attorney Phillip Weidner, who did not return calls for comment.

Efforts in Sitka are underway to establish a legal defense fund to help Leone with expenses.

Pharr says the charges against Leone are extraordinarily serious, but not unprecedented. Military accidents always involve an investigation, and often, officers connected to the incident face some sort of consequence.

“In addition to the tragedy of whatever happened, if a training accident happens on your watch, you know that it’s going to potentially impact your career,” Pharr said. “Not only your career, but the careers of everybody up the chain of command.”

But Pharr also says Leone’s intention to fight the charges is a good move, especially in light of the felony counts.

“Oh, you have to defend yourself,” he said. “If you’re convicted of a felony, there’s a lot of disabilities involved in being a felon. You can’t serve on a jury, you can’t vote, you can’t possess a firearm. There’s a lot of reasons to not be a felon. Because that’s the way our system works, he should fight it. He should definitely fight it all the way.”

Wadlow, the Coast Guard spokesman, says the officer who presides over Leone’s Article 32 hearing will release the findings to Rear Admiral Thomas Ostebo, who commands the Coast Guard district encompassing Alaska. It will be up to Ostebo whether the findings proceed to a court martial, whether the charges are dropped, or whether the matter is handled administratively. Leone’s hearing is tentatively scheduled for December.

Petersburg’s city council plans a more active role in advocating for borough formation. Lands within Petersburg’s proposed borough were previously slated for annexation to the City and Borough of Juneau, which is responding with an annexation proposal of its won. The issue was discussed at length by the Petersburg council on Monday night during both public and private sessions. Matt Lichtenstein reports.