Legislature(2013 - 2014)BUTROVICH 205
03/03/2014 03:30 PM Senate RESOURCES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SCR16 | |
| Presentation: Endangered Species Act Activities in Alaska | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SCR 16 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
March 3, 2014
3:31 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Cathy Giessel, Chair
Senator Fred Dyson, Vice Chair
Senator Peter Micciche
Senator Click Bishop
Senator Lesil McGuire
Senator Anna Fairclough
Senator Hollis French
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 16
Requesting the Governor to investigate and report to the
legislature regarding the development of a large coal power
plant and associated electric grid to provide energy to
residents of the state.
- HEARD & HELD
PRESENTATION: ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT ACTIVITIES IN ALASKA
- HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SCR 16
SHORT TITLE: REQ GOV TO INVESTIGATE COAL RESOURCES
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) KELLY
02/24/14 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/24/14 (S) RES
03/03/14 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
WITNESS REGISTER
BRUCE CAMPBELL
Staff for Senator Pete Kelly
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SCR 16 for the sponsor.
LORILEI SIMON, Vice President
External Affairs
Usibelli Coal Mine
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SCR 16.
GENE THERRIAULT
Alaska Energy Authority (AEA)
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on the fiscal note for SCR 16.
ALAN PARKS, representing himself
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SCR 16.
SUE MAUGER, Science Director
Cook Inlet Keeper
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SCR 16.
MARGO REVEIL
Jakolof Bay Oyster Co.
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SCR 16.
DOUG VINCENT-LANG, Director
Division of Wildlife Conservation
Endangered Species Act Coordinator in Alaska
Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G)
POSITION STATEMENT: Gave presentation on Endangered Species Act
(ESA) activities in Alaska.
ACTION NARRATIVE
3:31:15 PM
CHAIR CATHY GIESSEL called the Senate Resources Standing
Committee meeting to order at 3:31 p.m. Present at the call to
order were Senators Bishop, Micciche, Dyson, French, and Chair
Giessel.
SCR 16-REQ GOV TO INVESTIGATE COAL RESOURCES
3:31:44 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL announced SCR 16 to be up for consideration.
BRUCE CAMPBELL, staff for Senator Pete Kelly, sponsor of SCR 16,
explained that the resolution requests the Governor to keep coal
in the dialogue.
3:33:05 PM
SENATOR FAIRCLOUGH joined the committee.
MR. CAMPBELL said that Alaska is blessed with vast quantities of
coal: trillions of tons on the North Slope, billions of tons in
the Interior, and tens of billions of tons in Cook Inlet. It is
some of the cleanest coal on the planet and a cheap way to
create electricity.
3:33:50 PM
LORILEI SIMON, Vice President, External Affairs, Usibelli Coal
Mine, said Usibelli is the only operating coal mine in Alaska
and supplies six coal burning power plants. They appreciate the
continued dialogue of coal being part of the energy mix in the
state.
She said legislators are considering major policy initiatives on
energy and potential solutions for the energy problems that
Alaskans face, and coal remains one of the cheapest energy
sources in the Interior. There is an opportunity for coal to
expand and have a greater presence on the Railbelt grid and
other areas of Alaska, as well.
MS. SIMON said the McDowell Report that came out last year
analyzes the energy and economic impacts of coal to the
Interior. It focuses on the Interior, because that is where coal
is used in Alaska. Coal is half the cost of natural gas, one-
third the cost of naphtha and one-sixth the cost of diesel. So,
without coal on the grid the Interior ratepayers would see more
than a $200 million annual increase in their energy rates.
SENATOR MICCICHE asked what that increase would be on a
percentage basis.
MS. SIMON answered about 20 percent. She said it is also
important to understand how coal impacts the region's economy.
For example, in 2012 Usibelli spent $72 million with 400
different Alaskan businesses. That's 577 Interior jobs and a
payroll of about $44 million a year. The McDowell Report said
that would mean 692 jobs and $52 million in payroll statewide.
3:37:40 PM
SENATOR FRENCH asked how much coal is mined every year.
MS. SIMON replied about 2 million tons per year; this year they
will produce about 1.8 million. Half stays in state for the coal
burning power plants and the other half is exported to Chili,
South Korea, and Japan.
SENATOR FRENCH asked how much coal is in the ground at Usibelli.
MS. SIMON answered hundreds of years of mining; there are about
700 million tons of known reserves in Healy.
SENATOR FRENCH asked how much could be produced there if Alaska
suddenly tripled the amount of coal it was using. Could the
Healy mine provide that coal?
MS. SIMON answered yes.
SENATOR FAIRCLOUGH asked if additives have to be put in the coal
before selling to different folks. She did a tour of a coal
plant at Eielson Air Force Base and was told that the federal
government was requiring treatment of coal and that the
additives were actually driving the fuel costs up significantly.
3:39:32 PM
MS. SIMON said nothing is added at the mine; probably the power
plants would be a better source of the information.
SENATOR BISHOP asked if coal ash was being trucked to Fairbanks
and used in blocks and concrete.
MS. SIMON answered yes; coal ash is considered a usable by-
product and a quality fill material. Coal ash is used in a lot
of the roads and parking lots in Fairbanks.
3:40:29 PM
GENE THERRIAULT, Alaska Energy Authority (AEA), Fairbanks,
Alaska, explained that AEA prepared the fiscal note on behalf of
the administration with the thought that if the resolution were
to pass that the direction would probably come to AEA. They
anticipate $75,000 at a high level view, but the wording in the
resolution is fairly broad and that could be updated as
decisions are made.
Regarding Senator Fairclough's question about additives, it's
very likely she remembered that when the coal is actually
pulverized and combusted, in order to meet federal air emissions
selected catalytic reduction (SCR) or selected non catalytic
reduction (SNCR) agents are injected into the flu stream so the
particles that may impact PM2.5 or whatnot could be taken out of
the exhaust stream.
CHAIR GIESSEL asked if adding the catalyst could be termed the
"clean coal process."
MR. THERRIAULT answered that he was at the edge of not knowing
what he was talking about. With the Healy Clean Coal Plant the
method of combustion and the temperatures at which the
combustion took place were different. Some of the older power
plants have just the injection of urea to help with reduction of
"socks and knocks."
SENATOR FAIRCLOUGH asked if a Finance Committee referral had
been added to this bill.
CHAIR GIESSEL answered not that she knew of.
SENATOR BISHOP asked if AEA had the in-house expertise to do
this or would they have to go to a third party.
MR. THERRIAULT replied that it would be a combination of some of
the regional planning work they are doing in-house, but with an
economic consultant doing some additional work to "really crunch
the numbers" to be able to do some comparisons.
SENATOR BISHOP asked if he had those people at his fingertips.
3:44:59 PM
MR. THERRIAULT replied that they had contracted with UAA
Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER) in the past and
are now contracting with the UAA Automotive Service Educational
Program (ASEP). Because they are a state entity, that is easier
than going out through a competitive process.
3:45:45 PM
ALAN PARKS, representing himself, Homer, Alaska, said he had
been a commercial fisherman since 1975 and there is no such
thing as clean coal. He opposed SCR 16. Healthy fish are
important to him as a fisherman and a father; he hopes to pass
his fishing business on to his children. Spending $75,000 on
studies for more coal-fired plants is going backwards. Science
has settled it that climate change is happening and humans are
causing a significant part of it.
Aside from the climate issue, mercury is a big problem with coal
combustion. Governor Palin put fish consumption advisories
around certain large halibut and other fish due to mercury
contamination. Now the state has a point system for how much
halibut kids and pregnant women should eat. While Alaska coal
may have relatively lower mercury levels compared to other
places, it also has low BTU value, so you need to burn more. He
concluded that coal is an energy of the past and Alaska has a
lot of opportunity for alternative and renewable energy. It
should be a leader in clean energy that protects our wild
fisheries and the people in communities who rely on them.
3:48:06 PM
SENATOR DYSON asked if it's fair to assume that no matter what
information came forward about using coal in an environmentally
sensitive way that he wouldn't change his mind.
MR. PARKS said it's really the technology and the process of
extracting coal [safely] that is a long way out and we should
spend our energy and be a leader into renewable resources
technologies.
3:48:45 PM
SENATOR MCGUIRE joined the meeting.
3:49:27 PM
SENATOR FAIRCLOUGH said she serves on the Alaska's Renewable
Energy Advisory Board and asked with five active volcanoes, did
he have any idea how much particulate matter is ejected in an
eruption.
MR. PARKS answered that he is not a scientist, but humans are
the main cause of CO in the atmosphere. The natural eruptions
2
that occur from volcanoes is really not the issue on the table.
SENATOR MICCICHE said he is a big renewable fan going forward.
He said that part of the study would likely identify scrubbing
coal to compete with other hydrocarbons (natural gas and other
cleaner forms of energy) that they both use every day. Would he
be more likely to support the resolution if the technologies
were otherwise environmentally equal?
MR. PARKS said that was an interesting question, but he thought
efforts should be geared toward transitioning with natural gas
to other fuels (wind, geothermal and tidal energy). Coal has
emission problems as well that destroys habitat that fish need.
It's not just what gets into the air; it's how it gets into the
plants.
SENATOR MICCICHE said he agreed with many of his thoughts, but
he was truly interested in understanding what it would take for
coal to be environmentally neutral with other sources of
hydrocarbon as the renewable technologies get further developed.
3:54:06 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL said renewable energies are wonderful and
certainly winds seem so great; there are 3-5 tons of copper in
every wind turbine.
3:54:24 PM
SUE MAUGER, Science Director, Cook Inlet Keeper, Homer, Alaska,
opposed SCR 16. Her focus had been on salmon streams around
Southcentral Alaska for the last 14 years and recently on stream
temperatures, specifically how current stream temperature
patterns in Cook Inlet might change in the future and how these
changes might impact salmon.
Based on compelling evidence from the climate scientists around
the world and from Alaskan researchers, future climate change
will result in not just warmer summer temperatures in
Southcentral Alaska, but warmer winter temperatures, which will
result in more rain on snow events and a reduced snow pack. With
less water stored in our hills during the winter our summer
water levels will be lower, and since a little bit of water
warms up a lot faster than a lot of water, our summer water
temperatures in non-glacial streams will raise that much faster.
Based on five years of research in Cook Inlet salmon streams,
many of the Kenai Peninsula and Matsu streams are already at
temperatures known to be stressful to salmon.
When she has talked about these climate change outcomes in the
past they seemed very abstract, but we are now experiencing a
remarkably warm winter with high winter temperatures, rain, lack
of snow, the vagueness of climate change impacts are more
tangible. There is still much to learn about basic ocean
dynamics and fresh water habitat requirements for salmon, and we
now must add ocean acidification and changing ocean and river
temperatures into the challenge of obtaining sustainable
fisheries. One thing is certain, the release of more carbon
dioxide, which will occur from new coal development will fast-
forward the timeline for the most drastic and dramatic of
climate change impacts. "For Alaskans living in the state
disproportionately impacted by climate change, coal is a loser."
MS. MAUGER said she had sent some documents as evidence of
climate change across the world, some information about how to
understand the patterns expected for Alaska, and an executive
summary of their five-year statistics report of stream
temperatures in Cook Inlet from last fall.
3:57:26 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE asked if she sent her studies to the committee.
MS. MAUGER said they were faxed.
3:57:48 PM
MARGO REVEIL, Jakolof Bay Oyster Co., Homer, Alaska, opposed SCR
16. She and her husband own an oyster farm in Kachemak Bay and
are deeply concerned about changes due to ocean acidification,
which is directly linked to increased carbon pollution in our
atmosphere. And as more carbon enters the atmosphere, our oceans
absorb more, which then forms acids that eat away at shellfish.
Their spats are especially vulnerable to increased acidity
levels.
Spending money to study more coal-fired plants strikes her as a
very bad idea, because coal is a leading source of carbon
pollution. The greatest threat to her and her family is not
energy costs; shaving a few dollars off their energy bill will
not vastly improve their quality of life, but ocean
acidification directly threatens their livelihood. She cited
where ocean acidification was implicated in a die-off of 90
percent of the mature stock of scallops at a B.C. shellfish
farm.
4:00:22 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL, finding no further questions, closed public
testimony.
MR. CAMPBELL concluded that coal has had a long and bi-partisan
support in the state and two weeks ago he met with Governor
Cowper in Fairbanks and discussed alternative methods for coal
plants that would have no CO emissions. They would actually
2
bottle it up and sell it to Hilcorp for enhanced hydrocarbon
removal in Cook Inlet.
CHAIR GIESSEL thanked him and said they looked forward to
hearing from Senator Kelly on Wednesday and would hold SCR 16
until then.
4:01:54 PM
At ease from 4:01 to 4:03 p.m.
^Presentation: Endangered Species Act Activities in Alaska
Endangered Species Act Activities in Alaska
4:03:05 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL said their next order of business was to hear a
presentation on Endangered Species Act (ESA) activities in
Alaska.
DOUG VINCENT-LANG, Director, Division of Wildlife Conservation,
Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), said he is also the
Endangered Species Act Coordinator in Alaska. Today, he would
give them a brief inventory of the current status of listed
species federally in the State of Alaska, some of the issues the
state is facing with the federal implementation of the ESA, and
finally he would talk about the strategy that the state is using
to address some of those issues.
MR. VINCENT-LANG explained that an "endangered species" is one
that is threatened with extinction in the near term future. The
Eskimo Curlew is listed and was likely extinct before statehood
(so they are trying to remove that species); so are the Short-
tailed Albatross, the Aleutian Shied Fern, Steller Sea Lions
(the western sub-population of the larger species), Cook Inlet
Beluga Whales, Bowhead Whales, Fin Whales, Humpback Whales and a
variety of other rare species that occasionally occupy Alaskan
waters including the North Pacific Right Whale, Blue Whale, the
Sey Whale and the Leatherneck Turtle.
A wide range of species are on this list ranging from Steller
Sea Lions - of which 75,000 - 80,000 are in the world right now
and they are growing by 1.5 percent a year - to Bowhead Whales
that is growing from a population now of 50,000. The state
wouldn't consider any of these as being threatened in the near
term future, but the feds still have them listed.
MR. VINCENT-LANG said the state fully supports the listing of
one species and that is the North Pacific Right Whale with less
than 50 left in the world. We should do everything we can to
ensure that they persist as a species including the designation
of Critical Habitat.
4:06:36 PM
The next group of species that are listed as threatened under
the federal definition of threatened are the Alaska breeding
population of Steller Eiders, Spectacled Eiders, Polar Bears,
Northern Sea Otters, Ring Seals, and Bearded Seals.
4:07:21 PM
For example, there are 3-7 million Ringed Seals in the world,
and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) recently listed
them as a threatened species based on a model projected 100
years into the future that said sea ice may affect the species
to such an extent that they might become threatened with
extinction. It's the exact same case for Bearded Seals; there
are a couple hundred thousand in the world and by their own
models both species face a zero percent chance of becoming
extinct in the next 50 years. However, 100 years and beyond they
show increased risk of extinctions. The state challenged the
Polar Bear listing for that reason, trying to define how the
foreseeable future really could be used in determining a
threatened listing - and lost. In that case they tested it out
to about 50 years; now they're pushing it out to about 100
years.
A couple of species are under petition (meaning an NGO or
federal agency can decide that a species is potentially at risk
of extinction and they can ask a federal agency to actually
evaluate whether that species should be listed as either
threatened or endangered): Yellow-billed Loon, Pacific Walrus,
Alexander Archipelago Wolves, Southeast Alaska Herring, Great
White Sharks, Iliamna Seals, and the Pinto Abalone, and more are
being added daily (Aleutian Terns and Tufted Puffins).
4:09:27 PM
SENATOR BISHOP asked if he has the resources available to argue
the state's position to counter USFWS - Polar Bears, for
instance.
4:10:04 PM
MR. VINCENT-LANG responded that the state lost its legal
challenge, but that doesn't mean the science collection is being
stopped. They are using some coastal impact assessment money to
actually go out and study the Chukchi Sea population because the
basic premise USFWS used to list Polar Bears was that
diminishing sea ice is going to cause a habitat loss, which
would result in some greater extinction probability. The primary
state comment was to say before you list you should have to test
those assumptions to find out whether that causal chain of
evidence is correct. Chukchi has suffered about a 40-50 percent
sea ice loss over the last decade, so vital rates in that
population should be changing. In this instance they
collaborated with USFWS that listed it and found that over the
last two or three years the vital rates are identical if not
better than they were 30 or 40 years ago, despite the sea ice
loss. So, they are trying to test the veracity of these models
to find out whether they can use that information to attack
future listing and modeling assessments.
MR. VINCENT-LANG said they are also looking closely at the
Hudson Bay population that suffered a significant amount of sea
ice loss and by all models and projections that population
should be declining, but what happened is that it recalibrated
at a lower level and stabilized at about 1,000 bears.
SENATOR DYSON remarked that Mark Meyers said one of the problems
with the federal investigation is that they don't make allowance
for natural changing of habitat and migration patterns.
MR. VINCENT-LANG agreed that most of their models are built on
assumptions of current behavior and habitats. However, his
experience has shown him that animals are much more adaptive
than they are given credit for. He said the State of Alaska
should do everything possible to preserve species that are
really facing extinction, but not give the same level of
protection to a species that might be facing extinction based on
a model for 100 or 200 years in the future.
4:13:16 PM
He said that recently, Eastern Steller Sea Lion were recently
delisted and that was a result of a petition filed by the States
of Alaska, Washington, and Oregon to request NMFS to do that,
because it was largely recovered. Kittlitz's Murrelets, Flying
Squirrels, and Queen Charlotte Goshawk were petitions that were
submitted by NGO's and were found to not be warranted. A lot of
that was based on state data they collected. Another recent
action was that the Polar Bear critical habitat designation was
invalidated by the court, and that was based on the division's
analysis in concert with the oil and gas industry and North
Slope Borough data.
4:14:34 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE asked what the objective was of the attempt to
list Kittlitz's Murrelets and Flying Squirrels. Was there a
project or was it a true concern for those two species?
MR. VINCENT-LANG replied for Kittlitz's Murrelets they
identified a couple of different things as threats: commercial
fishing by-catch and ocean acidification changes. There was a
lot of uncertainty with the data; and Glacier Bay was used as a
model population for the rest of Alaska. He went out and
contracted with a sea bird expert and asked their independent
opinion on Kittlitz's Murrelets and found out that the science
wasn't nearly as clear and that that indicator stock wasn't as
good of an indicator stock to use as proof. They showed that
Kittlitz's Murrelets were much better off in the State of Alaska
than what the petition showed.
Flying Squirrels was a concern around timber sales, and they
were able to show through division analysis that they were much
more prevalent on the landscape than what the petitioners had
thought.
4:15:59 PM
SENATOR FAIRCLOUGH asked if those legal proceedings in the
public's interest recoup of all the money spent fighting it.
MR. VINCENT-LANG replied that money spent on litigation in the
public interest is not recouped on those instances - unlike the
NGO community that gets to recoup a certain portion of their
money often entering into settlement discussions, a practice
that is being brought in front of Congress right now.
4:16:45 PM
A couple of things the state is doing in terms of involvement is
staying engaged in Polar Bears, because right now the Polar Bear
Recovery Plan is being written. Even though they don't agree
with the need for listing they are making sure the recovery plan
actually is written in such a way that Polar Bear conservation
on the landscape is written in such a way that assures the
continued persistence of Polar Bears in Alaska and
internationally. They continue to participate in international
agreements on Polar Bears and are doing the same thing with the
Cook Inlet Beluga Recovery Plan.
4:17:39 PM
Right now they are in a 12-month status review of the Yellow
Billed Loon. When that was put out one of the primary threats
identified was high subsistence harvest, but they had
significant doubts that was occurring; so, they spent $130,000
on studying the actual subsistence use of Yellow Billed Loons
and their data has shown that is not nearly as prevalent as what
people thought it was. So, that has been removed as a reason to
list them and it was a primary one. So, he is optimistic they
will not be listed across Alaska's North Slope.
They also stay engaged in biological opinions. He explained that
once a species is listed, take is prohibited, and whenever an
activity is conducted in an area where a species is listed you
have to do a biological opinion to assure that that species
isn't harmed in any way. For all the species that are listed as
threatened or endangered they stay engaged in biological
opinions to make sure the best science is brought forward into
the federal system to ensure that an informed decision is made.
They are currently conducting research on a variety of listed
species.
4:18:39 PM
MR. VINCENT-LANG said the second part of his talk was about some
of the issues they have seen with implementation of the ESA in
Alaska. The first issue is with the precautionary listing of
species, irrespective of current health or abundance, based
solely on models speculating possible extinction sometime in the
distant future - like their challenge with the Polar Bear case.
Right now they are challenging the Bearded Seal listing and
considering challenging the Ringed Seal where the listing
decision was made based on a 100-year foreseeable future
irrespective of their numbers of 3 million to 7 million. He
considers this an unprecedented federalization of species that
removes a species from state jurisdiction and puts it into
federal jurisdiction. He reminded them that since statehood,
Alaska has never had a species go extinct.
Secondly, he said, they are seeing expansive designations of
critical habitat that encompass almost any area potentially
occupied by a species rather than those areas truly critical to
a species' survival: an area the size of California is
designated as critical habitat for the Polar Bear, for instance.
They are now considering challenging the listing of critical
habitat for Northern Sea Otters that includes almost the whole
Aleutian Chain, the Alaskan Peninsula in Cook Inlet and around
Kodiak Island - using the very same approach despite the fact
they identified necessary elements - eel grass beds, shallow
water, and a third one - but never went through the effort of
identifying where those elements occurred in the landscape and
just designating those areas.
4:21:22 PM
Another one is the USFWS routinely under-estimates the cost of
critical habitat designations. The state found that out in both
the Polar Bear and Cook Inlet Beluga investigations when the
state independently went out and assessed the cost of critical
habitat designations.
He said states are not involved in a wide range of ESA decision
processes including designations of both the Polar Bear critical
habitat listing decision, the Steller Sea Lion Biological
Opinion, and the Cook Inlet Beluga.
He explained that the Western Steller Sea Lion stock is
somewhere between 75,000 and 80,000 and growing at about 1.5
percent per year. NMFS several years ago did a biological
opinion on the impact of fishing on this stock in a small area
in the middle of the Aleutians where you wouldn't expect them to
recover at the same rate as other in some other areas. They
determined fishing was impacting their recovery and completely
closed commercial fishing in the area of the Western Aleutians.
The state challenged it and contracted with the States of
Washington and Oregon to do an independent review, which
concluded it wasn't right. NMFS didn't trust that and contracted
with the Center for Independent Experts who also concluded that
NMFS science wasn't right, and the fishery still remains closed
today. The state continues to challenge that listing.
4:23:39 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE remarked that that closure took essentially the
State of Alaska commercial fisheries out of the large cod
business.
MR. LAND said it had a significant impact on local communities
in Western Alaska.
SENATOR MICCICHE commented that he hadn't seen an accurate cost
of the supply chain for almost everyone that is affected by that
change.
MR. VINCENT-LANG responded that some of that information is
available in their court filings, which he would try to get to
him. The most troubling thing about the decision process was
that no matter how much science the state seems to have on its
side on this case, it was left up to the discretion of the
federal agency to make that decision. It came down to one
hearing they were at where a federal agency staff member said
well as long as we think this might be the case, we have to act
- despite overwhelming scientific evidence.
4:25:05 PM
Another concern he had was that recovery goals are often set to
fully recover a species rather than simply remove the risk of
extinction and contain non-related ecosystem goals. This is
critical. Steller Sea Lions, for instance, at 75,000 to 80,000
animals he thinks that the threat of extinction has been
removed, and the Marine Mammal Protection Act that can manage
that species to some optimal sustained population under
recovery. "The recovery goals for the ESA should be to remove
the risk of extinction that the species should get off the list.
It shouldn't be to fully recover it back up to some historic
high level...."
MR. VINCENT-LANG said they are also seeing the inclusion of eco-
system goals. Northern Sea Otters, as an example; you had to not
only remove the risk of extinction, but before the Southwest
population can be removed from the ESA, you also have to restore
50 percent of the kelp forests across their historic range. If
you think about it, if something happens to kelp besides Sea
Otters, you could end up with numerically getting the goal for
Sea Otter numbers but not delist, because something else is
affecting kelp. So, they think the goal should be back to the
species level rather than ecosystem-type goals.
4:27:15 PM
Another of his concerns was that the states are not fully
allowed to participate in the recovery plan development. Alaska
was told it had to limit its participation on the Cook Inlet
Beluga recovery team, because all of our scientists had to act
independently rather than as agents of the state bringing the
best available science into that decision-making.
He said the state is addressing these issues by building
partnerships with the Western Governors Association to develop a
policy statement that talks about critical habitat designations,
over-expansiveness, precautionary principles, and the need to
get best science into the process. Most importantly, from his
perspective, it talks about the need to get "foreseeable future"
defined. He is also working with the Western Association of Fish
and Wildlife Agencies looking mostly at the modeling aspects. He
said he was personally talking to NMFS people to try to resolve
some of these policy issues and he had provided testimony on a
couple occasions to Congress on these issues and possible
solutions.
4:28:16 PM
They are legally challenging bad decisions, and right now are
challenging the Bearded Seal listing in concert with the North
Slope Borough and a couple other partners and the Steller Sea
Lion Biological Opinion. They were able to remove an ESA
component of the CD5 Coleville Delta litigation. They are also
joining other state challenges: for instance, a couple of
decisions regarding experimental populations that New Mexico got
challenged on, and they are considering challenging the Sea
Otter Critical Habitat Recovery Plan.
4:29:00 PM
SENATOR FRENCH said he mentioned that the state won when it
challenged the Polar Bear critical habitat ruling and asked what
the state's win/loss record has been in general in these legal
challenges.
MR. VINCENT-LANG answered they lost the Polar Bear listing
decision, the decision on Cook Inlet Beluga, and one other -
about one-third win/two-thirds losses. But he is very optimistic
about the Bearded Seal decision, because at 50 years the court
determined there was the discretion of the federal agency, but
the state has a much better record of their persistence as a
species in periods when the Arctic has been ice free and is
testing whether they can go out to 100 years versus 50 years.
4:30:10 PM
SENATOR DYSON asked if any of Alaska's Native groups weighed in
against ESA listings.
MR. VINCENT-LANG answered the North Slope Borough had weighed in
on both the Polar Bear critical habitat designation and the
Bearded Seal listing decision.
SENATOR DYSON asked if any Native groups had weighed in on the
restrictions on fishing or whaling.
MR. VINCENT-LANG said the state basically carried the discussion
with respect to the Steller Sea Lion litigation.
SENATOR DYSON said some of the Native Corporations in Southeast
are pretty interested in logging going forward with something
like the Flying Squirrel. Have they shown any willingness to
weigh in with the state on any of these issues in fighting the
feds?
MR. VINCENT-LANG replied if Alexander Archipelago wolves are
listed then they would seek partners if they determined
litigation was necessary. He said state research is making a
difference in these listing decisions even after a species has
been listed.
4:32:36 PM
They are focusing on Yellow-billed Loons, the subsistence survey
and some base line research on the habitats that are important
to them on the North Slope. They (and NMFS) are studying Pacific
Walrus that is scheduled for a status review in about three
years by looking for ways to count them and ways to remove the
threat that is associated with Walrus when they move to land,
and may ask the legislature for a regulatory packet that gives
the state greater ability to deal with preventing stampedes when
Walrus move to shore because of retreating ice.
MR. VINCENT-LANG said they are looking closely at the
nutritional stress theory around Western Steller Sea Lions, so
that can be removed as a threat. And they are looking very hard
at Cook Inlet Beluga by getting NMFS to allow them to do some
satellite tagging of those animals as well as darting to look at
nutritional stress. And they are spending a lot of money in the
next three years studying Alexander Archipelago Wolves. They
want to understand whether those are a distinct population
segment and if they are facing some risk of extinction over the
next several years. They know that wolf populations are robust
across the state and want to use more than just speculation and
modeling.
The division is also looking at Southeast Alaska herring and
Iliamna seals related to a petition that was filed by an NGO
community for a small population of seals in Lake Iliamna. The
petition asks the federal government to list Iliamna seals and
one aspect was the lack of regulatory control associated if
Pebble Mine would go. It's a precautionary listing based on
speculation that the federal regulatory system is inadequate for
protecting the seal population. They are out there looking at
the seal population right now and trying to find out if it is
distinct or common.
4:35:23 PM
His division is also submitting petitions to delist species like
the Central North Pacific stock of Humpback Whales, working on a
petition with the North Slope Borough to delist Spectacled
Eiders in Alaska, and considering petitions to delist Bowhead
Whales that have a population of 50,000 and a proposal to delist
Western Steller Sea Lions.
4:36:00 PM
He summarized that he worried about the precautionary listing of
currently health species based solely on models speculating
possible future impacts and associated expansive critical
habitat designations. They think this represents an
unprecedented federalization of species on land and sea across
Alaska.
4:36:46 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL referred to their recovery goals slide and asked
him to describe what "ecosystem-based management" means.
MR. VINCENT-LANG explained that a species needs to be able to
persist in its ecosystem and humans are an integral part of that
ecosystem; the state practices that now. But he wasn't sure a
fully functional ecosystem was needed in order to delist a
species, and that is what the state and federal agencies are
doing.
CHAIR GIESSEL said adaptation is another aspect of all this.
4:38:40 PM
SENATOR MCGUIRE said the Arctic Policy Commission decided to
table the term, because there are so many definitions of it, and
it looks like the federal definition might be different from the
state's. So, she wanted to see how the state describes it,
because it sounds like it includes human beings. She also wanted
his opinion about how the federal government views ecosystem-
based management with respect to endangered species.
MR. VINCENT-LANG replied that the federal approach to ecosystem
management is precautionary and the state approach is based on
active management.
4:40:10 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE asked if the state supported the listing of the
Spectacled Eider by NMFS as threatened and has there been a
substantial recovery that would cause us to request a delisting
or did the state not agree with the listing initially.
MR. VINCENT-LANG said there was a lot of confusion when they
were listed as to whether that was a global population or the
Alaska population, and there were a lot of threats in Russia,
but not a lot of information to determine the extent of the
Russian population. New information suggests that the Russian
population is much larger than originally thought and there is
probably no difference between the Alaskan and Russian
population in terms of their being distinct.
4:41:13 PM
SENATOR FRENCH asked him to comment on what role the Coastal
Zone Management (CZM) played in the state's ability to protect
species here.
MR. VINCENT-LANG said a lot of regulatory methods can be used to
protect species and CZM was one of them, but the state has
sufficient regulatory structures in place right now to protect
species without it.
SENATOR FRENCH asked if not having a state coastal zone policy
undermined our credibility at all with the federal government.
MR. VINCENT-LANG answered that he didn't think so and that the
feds were focused on precautionary listings based on long term
models rather than saying you have lack of regulatory control in
the near term.
SENATOR FRENCH asked what role the CZM program presence or lack
thereof played in the Beluga controversy.
MR. VINCENT-LANG answered that the Beluga controversy was very
interesting in that it centered on modeling: what was the risk
of extinction to this population of whales in Cook Inlet and how
long would it take for over-hunting to be mitigated by the whale
population. It certainly pointed to coastal zone and other types
of issues, but it fundamentally came down to whether or not that
population viability was going to be there after 100 years. In
this case, the NMFS actually modeled the ability of the
population to remain viable based on a 12-year data set 300
years into the future. When the Marine Mammal staff ran their
model, the risk of extinction for Beluga Whales in Cook Inlet
was less than 1 percent of 100 years. They said that was okay,
but they needed to run it out to 300 years and all of a sudden
the risk of extinction went up to 25 percent.
He said the Cook Inlet Beluga are listed as endangered now, but
they are managed under the MMPA, exactly the same as before they
were listed. So why list it? The risk of extinction is very
small over the next 50-100 years for that population.
4:44:25 PM
SENATOR FRENCH asked who he was referring to as "they" when
pointing at the CZM program.
MR. VINCENT-LANG replied probably during the NMFS listing,
elimination of the CZM program was cited as causing some impact
to regulatory oversight of habitat associated with Beluga's, but
the state argued that just because CZM went away, it still had
adequate regulatory measures in place to protect that stock.
SENATOR FRENCH asked if it wasn't the other way around, that the
Parnell administration used the presence of the CZM to argue
that we didn't need ESA protections.
MR. VINCENT-LANG said he would have to go back and read that
part of the record and get back to him.
CHAIR GIESSEL thanked him for the presentation.
4:45:50 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL adjourned the Senate Resources Standing Committee
meeting at 4:45 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SCR 16 vs A.pdf |
SRES 3/3/2014 3:30:00 PM |
SCR 16 |
| SCR 16 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SRES 3/3/2014 3:30:00 PM |
SCR 16 |
| SCR 16 Fiscal Note DCCED.pdf |
SRES 3/3/2014 3:30:00 PM |
SCR 16 |
| SCR 16 McDowell Coal Econ Impacts Final Report 20131121.pdf |
SRES 3/3/2014 3:30:00 PM |
SCR 16 |
| SCR 16 Supp Doc Emma Creek Coal.pdf |
SRES 3/3/2014 3:30:00 PM |
SCR 16 |
| SCR 16 USGS Mercury In Coal 200109.pdf |
SRES 3/3/2014 3:30:00 PM |
SCR 16 |
| SCR 16 Supp Document Lisa Bradley_NRMCA_CoalAshMaterialSafety_20130502.pdf |
SRES 3/3/2014 3:30:00 PM |
SCR 16 |
| SCR 16 Supp Document Ganguli Tables.pdf |
SRES 3/3/2014 3:30:00 PM |
SCR 16 |
| SCR 16 Supp Letter AMA 20140303.pdf |
SRES 3/3/2014 3:30:00 PM |
SCR 16 |
| SRES ESA ADF&G 20140303.pdf |
SRES 3/3/2014 3:30:00 PM |
|
| SCR 16 Supp Letter RDC 20140303.pdf |
SRES 3/3/2014 3:30:00 PM |
SCR 16 |
| SCR 16 AlanParks Flyer 20140303.pdf |
SRES 3/3/2014 3:30:00 PM |
SCR 16 |
| SCR 16 Written Testimony SueMauger 20140303.pdf |
SRES 3/3/2014 3:30:00 PM |
SCR 16 |