|
The North Aleutian Basin Energy-Fisheries Workshop was a public meeting held March 18–19, 2008, at the Anchorage Marriot Downtown Hotel. The workshop was aimed at continuing a dialogue that began in October 2007, when key stakeholders outlined their positions on development and organized the agenda for the March 2008 meeting. Meeting Outcomes (PowerPoint presentations, meeting transcripts, participant list, evaluations, comment cards, etc.) Read news release Alaska Sea Grant's Position on Energy Development in the North Aleutian BasinAlaska Sea Grant does not take a position on whether to develop the energy resources of the North Aleutian Basin. As is the case in all our activities, Alaska Sea Grant's policy is to remain impartial while seeking to deliver unbiased information and knowledge to Alaska residents, stakeholders, and policy makers. In this initiative, Alaska Sea Grant seeks to create a forum for people on all sides of this controversial issue to communicate and interact in constructive discussions about the potential impacts of possible future energy development. Our overall objective is to identify the possible impacts and research needs of the region, several years ahead of lease sales planned by the federal Minerals Management Service. Read more.
The North Aleutian Basin Energy and Fisheries Steering Commitee met October 19, 2007, at the Anchorage Hilton Hotel to discuss the initiative and set the agenda for the March 2008 public workshop. News release on the North Aleutian Basin Energy and Fisheries Steering Committee Meeting, October 19, 2007. Outcome Highlights: Two questions were asked of each steering committee member during the October 19, 2007, meeting.
1. What is the perspective of the group you represent, and how can that perspective be addressed at the March workshop?
2. What does your constituency want to see as an outcome or product of the March 2008 workshop? To follow are the Steering Committee member's summarized responses.
Dan Sharp, Fisheries Biologist, Minerals Management Service
The perspective of MMS is best reflected in its mission statement: “MMS’s mission is to manage the ocean energy and mineral resources on the Outer Continental Shelf and Federal and Indian mineral revenues to enhance public and trust benefits, promote responsible use, and realize fair value.”
Regardless of the position any of us here in this room today have regarding the ability of oil and gas and fisheries to coexist in the North Aleutian Basin, I believe there are certain aspects we should be able to reach consensus on.
Shirley Marquardt, Mayor, City of Unalaska
Unalaska has always been interested in diversifying its revenue stream, because we are 100 percent commercial fisheries driven. But we would not want to diversify that revenue stream if it came at a risk to our fisheries partners. If exploration leads to an actual project, we feel strongly that Unalaska will have a major role to play for many years as the staging and supply area. We already have major challenges with dock space, labor force, and air transportation infrastructure. They are already performing at their maximum. We have six major fisheries during the year that bring thousands of people in annually. We are going to have to take a hard look at our ten-year port and harbor plan because it takes a very long time to get infrastructure done.
I think the community I represent wants to understand this process, and they want to understand their role in this process. They look for clear and definable goals and answers to their questions. Trust is essential. Getting valid information regularly is essential. I would hope that the March meeting would be an open public discussion of such things as the endangered species act, vessel safety, risks involved in the production and shipping of oil and gas, and the impact of all the new ships it will bring to the area.
Denis Wiesenburg, Dean, School of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences, University of Alaska Fairbanks
Our interest as a university in this is twofold. One is that we educate students, and having students learn from this process as we go forward is important to us. The other is research—understanding what we need to know. One of our objectives is to try and learn—through research the university can provide—the things we need to know to increase our knowledge so we can all make more informed decisions about the future of Alaska.
Gregg Nady, Leader, Alaska Exploration Team, Shell Exploration and Production Company
The offshore oil and gas industry is not new in Alaska, the U.S., or the world. There’s a lot of information out there. This forum can help access that information; help us learn what the process is and what the impacts might be. To be up-front, we believe the two industries can coexist. That’s informed by our experiences in the Gulf of Mexico, Norway, and Cook Inlet. We believe it’s not a question of doing one and sacrificing the other. If we didn’t believe fisheries could be protected, we would not be sitting here at the table.
The key outcome we would like to see from today’s meeting is to determine the important questions that need to be asked to inform the March discussion. I would hope that we bring some of the people who have studied the impacts to the March meeting. We also look at the March workshop as an opportunity to learn more about the fishing industry.
Dale Schwarzmiller, Vice President of Alaska Production, Peter Pan Seafoods
We can see the essential need for oil and gas exploration in the area, and we can see that need is going to become more critical by the time this area even produces oil and gas. We can also see the potential economic benefits to the Aleutian East region from offshore oil and gas exploration and development. Diversification can bring economic stability. Peter Pan Seafood makes its living from the sea. While we support this process going forward, we want to make sure that development is done responsibly. We feel this is the key issue to be addressed at the March 2008 meeting. Specifically we are concerned about the impact of exploration and development on Bering Sea bottomfish and crab stocks, and on salmon. Explaining how research and development will be carried out will be essential. We expect the March meeting to result in people better understanding how to be a part of the process and get their questions answered.
Stanley Mack, Mayor, Aleutians East Borough
My constituents are very concerned about the possibility of oil and gas exploration in a vital fisheries region. Foremost is that they want protection of their community lifestyle and fishing, because this is all we do. The other issue is that we have seen a lot of out-migration of folks from the area, because of the lack of jobs. My job is to find a way to bring economic stability to the communities of the borough, so the younger generation won’t want to move out; to see our communities survive. My big concerns are protecting the natural resources while finding ways for the younger generation to stay and live in these communities. We are not one to close the door on development, but we want to protect what we have.
Bubba Cook, Senior Bering Sea Fisheries Program Officer, World Wildlife Federation
Our perspective with respect to the North Aleutian Basin is that the risks of oil and gas development simply outweigh any possible benefits. The reasons were clearly stated by the residents of the region over a decade ago when the moratorium was established, and that reasoning is no less relevant today.
As an ecological engine for an annual multibillion dollar fishery, it simply doesn’t make sense to jeopardize the prolific renewable, sustainable, and profitable resource that could last in perpetuity for the short-term benefits of oil and gas activity. The numbers simply don’t pencil out.
All federal agencies are required to use information that meets the standards of quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity under the Information Quality Act. The science associated with oil and gas activity’s relationship to fisheries is lacking in every respect. The gaps in the basic understanding of the ecosystem components are overshadowed only by the lack of understanding of the acute and chronic effects of oil and gas activity on those components individually or in sum.
As a science-based conservation organization, our perspective would be addressed if this forum is used to highlight the disconnects and uncertainties in the science and seeks to connect those data points in an objective, inclusive, and transparent manner; culminating in a genuine assessment of the existing science as an outcome of the March 2008 workshop. If the connections in those data gaps cannot be made, then oil and gas activity should be postponed until such time that Minerals Management Service and the industry can reasonably prove that there will be no net effect on the fisheries ecosystem of the North Aleutian Basin. This would be consistent with the conditional support of many of the communities and organizations in the region that did not oppose the activity outright.
There are a lot of questions that remain unanswered and there is great potential within this steering committee and workshop to identify those data gaps. The World Wildlife Fund looks forward to being part of that process.
Stephanie Madsen, Executive Director, At-Sea Processors Association
We are cautiously concerned. Clearly we are very dependent on the cod and pollock resources. Any impact on Alaska as far as infrastructure is concerned is going to have an impact on us. I am here to learn and to make sure our voices are heard. There are a lot of questions, many of which we do not yet know. I’m sure that this development can be done well. But it is only going to be done well if we are sitting at the table and if we are right there as it develops. I think it’s very important that we be at this table and that we continue to be at the table.
Justine Gundersen, Administrator, Nelson Lagoon Tribal Council
We are guarded about fisheries. Fishing is a way of life in our area. But we are open—we will not fight oil development. Fishing is not as prosperous as before. We want diversification. These meetings are so important for learning. We want to protect everything we have, and so we must be at the table.
Marilyn Crockett, Executive Director, Alaska Oil and Gas Association
We have a great deal of confidence, based on the experiences of the oil and gas producers in places like Cook Inlet, and other offshore areas in the United States and around the world, that operations can in fact be conducted cooperatively and with a high level of protection for local fisheries concerns. So we see this meeting, the March workshop, and continued discussions as an opportunity to satisfy the Missouri “Show Me” state slogan. This provides an opportunity for us to show you how our operations are conducted; the measures we take to make sure our operations are conducted in an environmentally sensitive and protective manner. It also provides and excellent opportunity for us to learn more about how fisheries are conducted. We need to have a really good understanding as we go into that area of everything that is important to you so that we can make sure that the operations we conduct are in concert with and protective of your activities. The number two objective is to build communication and trust. That doesn’t come overnight. So this is a good starting point for us to understand and work together and build the trust we both need.
Bill Popp, President and CEO, Anchorage Economic Development Corporation
Throughout this process, it will be important to take a look at the experiences of other communities. The Cook Inlet experience has a lot of lessons that should be offered through the March meeting. The 16 platforms in Cook Inlet offer a good baseline of the Alaska experience with offshore gas exploration and development. There are more than 50 years of experience there.
It’s also important to establish and quantify realistic expectations for all participants. There will be lots of promises from people promoting development, and dire consequences from people opposing development. This is the start for dialogue and understanding of the process. There are many issues that will need to be explored by participants. The fishing industry understands the federal permitting process, but municipalities in the region may not; they have not had to deal with this sort of development before. Municipal governments will need to have realistic expectations about such things as revenue expectations and infrastructure requirements, and jobs creation. The industries, fishing and energy, need to clearly understand both the conflicts and the opportunities that will come from this development; and such things as conflicting government regulations. Communities will need to have a realistic expectation of the impacts on their communities, and understand that their communities will change significantly. Change is going to happen; it’s up to this conference to set the stage for anticipating these changes.
Joe Childers, President, United Fishermen of Alaska
The nature of fishing is as hunting and gathering. That requires that fishermen have free access to the ocean. Limits on our activities make it difficult for us. We know only that in the future where we fish and how we fish is going to change. For fishing to exist we need to have access and as few access limits as possible. Access is our main concern.
Arni Thomson, Executive Director, Alaska Crab Coalition
There is a pressing need for economic development to slow or stop the out-migration of people from coastal communities on the Aleutian Peninsula and in Bristol Bay. The ACC has concerns that it would like to see addressed. We support the Aleutian East Borough proposed mitigation measures for Outer Continental Shelf leasing in the North Aleutian Basin, and would like these to be addressed. The Aleutian East Borough has developed some very substantial comments about fisheries protection, transportation, utility corridors, coastal habitat protection, local hire, air and water pollution, marine mammal essential habitat, social systems, good neighbor policy, cultural and historic site protection, and seismic design. The ACC would like to see a commitment to long-term scientific monitoring to assess the potential impacts to the marine environment and resources of the North Aleutian Basin. There is a need for a clear description of the plan for oil and gas development: the size and number of offshore installations, seismic activity impacts, discharge, gas and oil spill response and mitigation measures, and ways for timely involvement of coastal residents in the event of a disruption of fisheries. There’s also a need to describe the potential economic benefits to the state of Alaska in terms of revenue sharing from the extraction of oil and gas, the value and number of jobs that could result from oil and gas development and extraction, and a commitment to local hire.
As for desired outcomes of the March 2008 workshop, we concur with the others who have spoken today. In addition, we want to see a discussion commitment from the potential leaseholders on environmental protections, fisheries compensation, commitments to AEB mitigation measures, and funding in whole or in part to a scientific monitoring system and funding of other research and data needs decided by the Steering Committee.
Tiel Smith, Land and Resource Manager, Bristol Bay Native Corporation
I would very much like to preserve the heritage and culture of the place where I was raised. But I also have the challenge and opportunity to understand all of the viable resources within our Bristol Bay region. We recognize the potential of our region’s oil and gas to reduce our nation’s dependence on foreign oil. Currently, the support in the region lies with onshore oil and gas development. But we also recognize that industry is clearly focused on the outer continental shelf.
Our perspective on the March 2008 workshop is that we would like to see solutions that address the energy issues and fishery issues discussed here today. We also want to urge Minerals Management Service to develop and incorporate comprehensive mitigation measures to provide adequate protections without overly restricting necessary industry operations. We also wish for MMS to develop these protections with input from the communities in the region.
Eric Olson, Chair, North Pacific Fishery Management Council
The main perspective I bring to these discussions is as a lifelong commercial fisherman. I do not speak for the council. But I can say that the council will likely monitor the development of this project and the likely impacts of development on the fisheries it has under its jurisdiction.
My perspective is that I would like to see discussion of the impacts of this project as a whole. This could potentially affect a broad cross-section of Western Alaska. I’d like to see a socioeconomic impact study of this project on the coastal communities, as well as fisheries and the environment. I’d also like to have a better understanding of the risks of a spill occurring, and what measures would be in place to prevent spills. Lastly, I would like to hear about the mitigations that would be in place if and when a spill should occur.
I don’t have any expectations for the March meeting other than to hope the dialogue occurs and continues to occur long after the March meeting.
Steering Committee members not present:
Kevin Banks, Acting Director, Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division of Oil and Gas
Troy Johnson, Chair, Aleut Corporation
Daniel O’Hara, Mayor, Bristol Bay Borough
Brent Paine, Executive Director, United Catcher Boats
Alice Ruby, Mayor, City of Dillingham, and President, Bristol Bay Coastal Resource Service Area Board
Ken Taylor, Deputy Commissioner, Alaska Department of Fish and Game
Summary of May 2006 Marine Advisory Program-Bristol Bay Hydrocarbon Exploration Meeting in Dillingham
|
