Matt Cronin. NGP file photo by Dave Harbour
Interior Secretary Gail Norton and NGP Publisher Dave Harbour, 6-20-01.
In view of how holdover government employees (i.e. of the ‘deep state’), particularly those of the democrat or socialist persuasion, seek to undermine the work of a new administration, we provide this example from 2001. It is an Anchorage Times Op-Ed penned by one of Alaska’s most distinguished environmental scientists, Dr. Matthew Cronin.
Thursday, November 15, 2001, Voice of the Times, Did federal agency set up Norton? By Matthew A. Cronin
In the Washington Post (Oct. 19) and Anchorage Daily News (Oct. 20) Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton was criticized by anonymous employees of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility. The criticism focused on Secretary Norton’s omission of information provided by the FWS in a letter, and her reference to a scientific paper in the “Wildlife Society Bulletin” in her response to Sen. Frank Murkowski’s questions about oil development in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. In the Post article, the FWS claimed it was careful to send Secretary Norton a complete and balanced portrait of the science in a letter. As I describe below, the FWS did not provide a balanced view, ignored relevant published papers, and gave speculative cause-effect appraisals of oil field impacts. (Scroll down to read full article – or – Find .pdf of Times article here).
 Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke. Northern Gas Pipelines file photo by Dave Harbour Interior Secretary Zinke to Testify at Full Committee Oversight Hearing on President Trump’s Budget Proposal |
||||||||
On Thursday, June 22, 2017 at 9:30 AM in 1324 Longworth House Office Building, the Committee on Natural Resources will hold an oversight hearing titled, “Examining the Department of the Interior’s Spending Priorities and the President’s Fiscal Year 2018 Budget Proposal.”
Visit the Committee Calendar for additional information once it is made available. The meeting is open to the public and a video feed will stream live at House Committee on Natural Resources. |
Chairman Murkowski and Ranking Member Cantwell
Announce Upcoming Committee Schedule
Senator Lisa Murkowski. Northern Gas Pipelines file photo by Dave Harbour
(If we know Senator Murkowski, we are confident that ANWR will be a subject, along with other Alaska issues. Our readers should tune in and support the Senator in this endeavor to work with Secretary Zinke in constructing reasonable federal policies for Alaska and the nation. -dh)
The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources today announced several hearings for the coming weeks. The full committee hearings will examine the president’s budget requests for the U.S. Forest Service, Department of the Interior and Department of Energy for Fiscal Year 2018. Permalink.
Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 10:00 a.m. EDT – Full committee hearing to examine the president’s budget request for the Department of the Interior for Fiscal Year 2018.
Thursday, June 22, 2017 at 10:00 a.m. EDT – Full committee hearing to examine the president’s budget request for the Department of Energy for Fiscal Year 2018.
The full and subcommittee hearings will be held in the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee room, Dirksen 366, and will be webcast live on the committee’s website. For all of the hearings, witness testimony will be available online immediately before the start time.
Thursday, November 15, 2001 Voice of the Times
William J. Tobin, Senior Editor
Did federal agency set up Norton?
By Matthew A. Cronin
In the Washington Post (Oct. 19) and Anchorage Daily News (Oct. 20) Secretary of the Interior was criticized by anonymous employees of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility.
The criticism focused on Secretary Norton’s omission of information provided by the FWS in a letter, and her reference to a scientific paper in the “Wildlife Society Bulletin” in her response to Sen. Frank Murkowski’s questions about oil development in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
In the Post article, the FWS claimed it was careful to send Secretary Norton a complete and balanced portrait of the science in a letter. As I describe below, the FWS did not provide a balanced view, ignored relevant published papers, and gave speculative cause-effect appraisals of oil field impacts.
I am the senior author of the WSB article referenced by Secretary Norton, in which data on caribou in the oil field areas were presented. The data, originally reported by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, were updated in a 2001 issue of the WSB. The numbers of animals in the oil field areas declined between 1991-1995 and then increased between 1995-2000. Secretary Norton’s critics claim that by omitting some of the FWS information, she was not using the best available information. In fact, she did a more thorough review of the issue than the FWS. The FWS ignored scientific papers on caribou and oil fields, while Secretary Norton used the FWS information and other published science.
I will point out shortcomings of the FWS letter, focusing on one specific question: What has been the impact of development in Prudhoe Bay on the Central Arctic Caribou Herd? The FWS letter was selective and did not reference several papers on caribou and Alaskan oil fields in scientific journals. Omission of relevant peer-reviewed literature is a serious flaw, and reflects incompetence, ignorance or a deliberate attempt to mislead the secretary. I will provide these papers to readers (M. Cronin, LGL Alaska Research Associates, 1101 E. 76th, Anchorage, AK 99518). The information in the FWS letter was speculative regarding two primary impacts on caribou: displacement during calving and obstruction of movements, and nutritional/reproductive impacts. Regarding displacement and obstruction, the FWS letter states that calving “essentially ceased” after 1977 in the industrial complex near Prudhoe Bay and Deadhorse. However the extent of calving before development is not well known, and may have been uncommon. The quality and quantity of data supporting the premise that calving ceased is poor, but the FWS presented it without qualification. The FWS letter also states that mid-summer movement of caribou along the coast was blocked by roads, pipes, and facilities. The FWS did not reference three published papers documenting extensive use of, and movements through, the oil fields.
Thus, the FWS letter selectively presented information. The FWS letter also states that cows with young calves were displaced from developed areas by four or more kilometers. In fact, in the study cited, displacement was from only one road at Milne Point, and was statistically significant only within one kilometer of the road. The FWS letter is inaccurate regarding calving distributions and development. Regarding nutrition and reproductive impacts, the FWS letter refers to data in an abstract and unpublished reports and suggests that under some combinations of weather and animal density the oil fields impacted calf production, and under other conditions, they did not.
This is possible, but speculative and not the only interpretation. Colleagues and I addressed these issues in the Journal of Wildlife Research in 1997 and the WSB articles noted above. First, the numbers of caribou in the oil fields were high in 1992, declined between 1992 and 1995, and increased from 1995-2001. Attributing the decline in 1995 to oil fields is a limited interpretation. First, movements between the developed and undeveloped ranges can be as high as 18 percent and account for the changes in numbers. Second, the density of animals in the developed ranges was higher than in the undeveloped ranges in some years so density or oil fields may have contributed to low calf production. Third, I am not aware of any published analysis of impacts of weather in the early 1990’s.
The potential for the oil fields to impact calf production is a legitimate hypothesis, but the FWS gave a speculative cause-effect interpretation and ignored published alternatives. A final point, not included in the FWS letter, is that dual management objectives of producing oil and maintaining the caribou herd have been met during the period of oil field development. These points were emphasized in a paper by colleagues and I in “Biological Conservation” in 1998. In summary, I believe the FWS gave Secretary Norton incomplete and biased information for her presentation to Congress. The Secretary used additional information for which she should be commended. Rather than considering Secretary Norton as unethical as she was accused, I submit that the FWS acted at best incompetently, and at worst unethically, in this case.
Matthew A. Cronin, Ph.D. is a Senior Biologist with LGL Alaska Research Asssociates, and Affiliate Professor at the University of Alaska.
Canadian Yukoners Are Weighing In On ANWR (Scroll down for story)
Commentary by Dave Harbour.
We know that some enviro-activist-inspired northern Yukoners hold a position much different than the larger Inuvialuit and Inuvik and some Gwitchin populations in the adjacent NWT. We ask all parties to remember that oil and gas activity in ANWR (19.6 million acres) could only occur in a refuge the size of South Carolina, limited to the small sliver called the ANILCA 1002 area (1.5 million acres), and further isolated to an area the size of Dulles Airport, and further restricted to times when the migratory wildlife are absent. The caribou can only benefit — as has been proved at Prudhoe Bay — by the presence of oil company activity. We, therefore, are a more reliable “voice for the caribou and other migratory species” than are agenda driven enviro-activists.
1) The ‘Refuge’ designation does not prohibit reasonable oil and gas activity.
See the point? The 2,000 acre Dulles Airport area, within a 1.5 million acre area, within a 19.6 million acre area, restricted to winter when caribou and migratory birds are absent…. Unreasonable? No. Allowed by law with Congressional approval.
2) The Democrats tightened environmental controls on Alaska in the 1980 Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA). In addition to increasing environmental controls and access restrictions imposed on the state since its birth in 1959, ANICLA further restricted natural resource development in a state whose statehood status and constitution (…and plebiscites approving the Constitution and Statehood Act) depend on natural resource development.
Governor Walter J. Hickel lambasted the Federal government for promises broken. Senate leaders, Jackson and Tsongas promised Alaska Senator Ted Stevens that Congress would support oil and gas development access in the so-called 1002 area of ANWR, a small sliver on the coast. Exploration and development would only occur in the winter when the Porcupine Caribou herd is absent. True wildlife supporters should agree that when the herd is present, the survival of spring-born calves is improved. The oil industry’s hunting prohibitions along with the presence of gravel pads enable the animals to be above the mosquito infested tundra bogs.
Even so, only 2,000 acres within the 1002 area is anticipated for accessing the oil and gas — an area the size of Dulles airport in a vast expanse the size of South Carolina. ANILCA allowed access to that area upon a subsequent act of Congress, but President Clinton vetoed that authorization. ANILCA included a ‘no more’ clause (p.4-ANILCA) limiting even more land access restrictions, followed by more broken promises.
The Obama administration again broke the ANILCA and Statehood promises by having the US Fish and Wildlife Service ‘manage the area like a wilderness area…which in an end-run around Congress prohibits energy exploration and development.
CBC News: Yukoners Weigh In On ANWR
Yukon Premier Sandy Silver says he’s been bending the ears of U.S. representatives and senators in Washington, D.C. this week, talking about the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR)…. But it’s not clear whether he’ll be coming home with anything more concrete than a collection of business cards.
Silver said he met with Republican Representative Don Young and Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, to talk about ANWR and stress the importance on the Porcupine caribou herd to Yukon.
NWT Premier bob McLeod. Northern Gas Pipelines file photo by Dave Harbour
MLA Scott Kent is also quoted saying Silver’s trip “produced nothing more than hotel bills and photo-ops”….
Silver, along with N.W.T. Premier Bob McLeod and other Western Canadian premiers, were also in the U.S. capitol to talk about NAFTA ….
Leave A Comment