KEEPING THE BAY IN GLACIER BAY NATIONAL PARK – INTRODUCING GLACIER SCIENCE TO THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT

In June 2000, seventy-five years after the creation of Glacier Bay National Monument, the United States Supreme Court authorized the State of Alaska to initiate legal proceedings related to the ownership of ‘certain marine submerged lands in southeast Alaska’ including the submerged lands contained within what is now Glacier Bay National Park (GLBA). Alaska prepared a ‘Bill of Complaint’ contending that ‘certain marine submerged lands in southeast Alaska’ should be owned by the State, rather than by the Federal Government. The Alaska claim was based on the Equal Footing Doctrine and the Submerged Lands Act of 1953, leading to the presumption that title to the disputed submerged lands beneath Glacier Bay passed to the new State of Alaska at statehood in 1958.

Alaska’s Complaint presented specific legal and scientific arguments unique to the submerged lands within GLBA, attempting to justify the Alaska claim of ownership. A critical question in the litigation concerned whether the Monument's submerged lands were inherently included in two phrases used by President Coolidge in his 1925 Proclamation establishing the original Monument: (1) "… around Glacier Bay on the Southeast coast of Alaska (are) a number of tidewater glaciers of the first rank in a magnificent setting of lofty peaks" … and (2) "This area presents a unique opportunity for the scientific study of glacial behavior and of resulting movements…".

This narrative presents a summary of how glacier science became an integral part of the successful argument prepared and presented to the US Supreme Court by the US Government in response to the Alaska Complaint. Specifically, as a subject matter expert, I prepared a report for the Department of Justice summarizing the investigations and expeditions that contributed to the conduct and content of glacier science during the period from the late 18th century through the early 20th century, as practiced in the United States, with a particular focus on the glaciers of Alaska. A primary task of this report was to characterize the development of the knowledge base that led to an understanding of the association of tidewater and terrestrial glaciers with the submerged lands located beneath them and adjacent to their tidewater and terrestrial termini. Ultimately in 2006, the Court dismissed Alaska’s complaint and ruled in favor of the United States.