2016 April The Arctic Ahead Conservation and Management in Arctic Alaska Milo Burcham Produced in collaboration with Ocean Conservancy works with people around the world to protect the ocean from today’s greatest global challenges. Working together, we create science- based solutions for a healthy ocean and the wildlife and communities that depend on it. Ocean Conservancy The Arctic Ahead: Conservation and Management in Arctic Alaska | 2 Suggested citation: Hartsig, A. 2016. The Arctic Ahead: Conservation and Management in Arctic Alaska. Ocean Conservancy, Washington, D.C., 94 p. Ocean Conservancy The Arctic Ahead: Conservation and Management in Arctic Alaska | 3 Introduction Bob Wick (BLM) Introduction In recent years, Arctic wildlife and Arctic peoples such as Point Thomson near the border of the have faced rapid and dramatic environmental Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. In 2015, oil and changes related to global climate change. While gas companies proposed development plans for the region has always experienced fluctuations, prospects in federal waters in the Beaufort Sea³ and the changes taking place now are happening at announced the first production from leases in the an unprecedented pace and scale. The Arctic is federal National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (NPR-A).⁴ recognized as one of the fastest-warming regions on Hundreds of oil and gas leases in the Chukchi Sea⁵ the globe. Air and sea temperatures are rising, tundra remain on the books, even if oil companies have no fires are occurring more frequently, ocean waters immediate plans to explore in that region. In addition are becoming more acidic, seasonal sea ice cover to oil and gas activities, vessel traffic in the Arctic is is diminishing, permafrost is thawing and coastal increasing⁶ as ships take advantage of increasingly erosion is increasing. These changes are already ice-free waters to travel the Northern Sea Route being felt in the U.S. Arctic and are predicted to from Europe to Asia via the Arctic waters north of continue far into the future. Russia, and the Northwest Passage through the archipelagic waters north of mainland Canada. While Beyond these environmental changes, commercial commercial fishing is currently prohibited in the U.S. and industrial operators are increasingly interested Chukchi and Beaufort seas, new information could in Arctic Alaska¹. Energy companies have produced become available that may lead to changes in the oil and gas at Prudhoe Bay since 1969², and have management regime.⁷ recently pushed operations toward new areas Ocean Conservancy The Arctic Ahead: Conservation and Management in Arctic Alaska | 4 Introduction The combination of rapid environmental change and increasing industrialization has the potential to transform the Arctic. Successful management will require careful thought and long-term, integrated planning at a regional scale. This combination of rapid environmental change marine environments is divided among federal and and increasing industrialization has the potential state government agencies and departments with to transform the Arctic. Of course, not all changes widely varying missions, operating under an array of taking place in the region will have negative effects. statutory mandates. Different industrial sectors and But as climate change and industrial activities activities fall under a range of regulatory jurisdictions. continue to intersect, the pace and scale of Efforts to bridge these jurisdictional divides, change will accelerate in ways that could cause and to understand and minimize the synergistic irreversible adverse impacts to Arctic ecosystems, or cumulative effects of individual and multiple including important habitat areas that support both development projects, have been relatively modest. communities and wildlife. These adverse impacts Even co-management agreements, which provide a could affect the ability of Arctic peoples to continue way for Alaska Native organizations to engage more subsistence practices that are central to their fully in some decision-making processes, are limited culture and livelihood. in scope and do not address all aspects of management. Some drivers of change – such as the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide and increasing ocean More broadly, management decisions in Arctic acidification – are already “locked in.”¹⁸ Impacts Alaska are not guided by an overall, landscape level from these drivers cannot be avoided, but they can vision of what the region should look like in the be anticipated. Other drivers of change – such as future. In the absence of an overall vision, planners infrastructure to support industrial developments and managers may inadvertently allow the impacts – can be managed and directed in ways to reduce of individual industrial activities to accumulate in negative impacts and maximize positive impacts. To ways that severely diminish ecosystem functioning do this successfully will require careful thought and or community access to resources. long-term, integrated planning at a regional scale. Fortunately, there is growing interest in implementing To date, however, most management decisions in integrated and long term decision-making in the the Arctic have been made on a piecemeal basis. Arctic, as evidenced by the current administration’s Responsibility for the management of terrestrial and commitment to Integrated Arctic Management.⁹ Ocean Conservancy The Arctic Ahead: Conservation and Management in Arctic Alaska | 5 Introduction Bob Wick (BLM) Integrated Arctic Management requires a solid use and culturally important areas. While there understanding of the ways in which individual are alternative ways to confront this management management decisions may interact. The use challenge, Integrated Arctic Management offers a of scenarios can facilitate this understanding.14 promising approach that is pragmatic, inclusive and Scenarios are “plausible, alternative hypotheses grounded by science-based decision-making that is about how the world might unfold, specifically “focused on ensuring the sustainability and continuity designed to highlight risks and opportunities…” 15 of ecosystem functions and services.”16 This report uses three different scenarios to explore Section 01 reviews this report’s scope and the potential effects associated with differing levels methodology. Section 03 provides background of industrial development. Maps depict medium- and context, including general information on the and high-development scenarios relative to selected region’s boroughs and communities, ecosystem natural, cultural, and industry-related values and values and the status and trends of key industrial attributes in the region, underscoring areas of sectors. Section 04 presents scenario maps and potential conflict and risk. accompanying discussion. Section 05 proposes alternative management strategies for the region, These spatial depictions make clear that continued and Section 06 suggests a path toward industrial infrastructure and activity in Arctic Alaska – implementation of Integrated Arctic Management if not managed carefully – could jeopardize important in one key portion of the project area. ecosystem values and/or interfere with subsistence Ocean Conservancy The Arctic Ahead: Conservation and Management in Arctic Alaska | 6 Introduction INTEGRATED ARCTIC MANAGEMENT The concept of Integrated Arctic Management is articulated and explained in a 2013 report to the President by the Interagency Working Group on Coordination of Domestic Energy Development and Permitting in Alaska.¹⁰ The report defines Integrated Arctic Management as: “a science-based, whole-of-government approach to stewardship and planning in the U.S. Arctic that integrates and balances environmental, economic, and cultural needs and objectives. It is an adaptive,stakeholder -informed means for looking holistically at impacts and sensitivities across the U.S. Arctic and generating sustainable solutions.” ¹¹ Integrated Arctic Management is characterized by a set of guiding principles, including the following: 12 ! A “whole-of-government” approach designed • using precaution in decision-making, especially to improve efficiency, assess cumulative impacts, where the health, productivity, and resilience streamline decision-making, reduce uncertainty of ecosystems may be compromised. and facilitate participation. ! Direct and meaningful partnerships among ! Transparent, respectful, and consistent stakeholders including Alaska Natives, communities, consultation and engagement with tribal the State of Alaska, industry, non-governmental governments. organizations and federal agencies. ! Adaptive management that uses baseline ! Science-based decision-making focused on information and monitoring data to detect trends ensuring sustainable ecosystems and continuity and make adjustments. of ecosystem functions and services by ! Region-wide planning that crosses jurisdictional • identifying and protecting areas of significant boundaries to identify areas that merit protection, ecological or cultural importance; areas vulnerable to change, and areas that can support development and infrastructure goals. • using the best available science to understand ecological processes, to identify and measure ! Assessment of cumulative impacts associated indicators of change, and to make policy and with development activities throughout the Arctic. management decisions; • utilizing and integrating traditional knowledge The 2013 report to the President recommends into decision-making; that the U.S. government