[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 164 (Monday, October 23, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S15502-S15503]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




         DECLINING CARIBOU HERD/ARCTIC NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE

 Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, later this week, the Senate 
will be voting on amendments to the budget reconciliation bill, which 
the Senate Budget Committee approved today. One of those amendments 
will be to strike the provision that opens up the Arctic National 
Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas drilling.
  I strongly oppose drilling in ANWR and will support that amendment. 
If we allow drilling in the coastal plain, we are destroying what the 
Fish and Wildlife Service calls the biological heart of the only 
complete Arctic ecosystem protected in North America. We will be 
destroying that resource for a one in five chance of finding any 
economically recoverable oil in the coastal plain. And, even worse, we 
will destroy that biological heart in an effort to recover what many 
experts suggest will be only 200 days worth of oil for the Nation.
  Mr. President, I do not intend to argue all the issues surrounding 
the decision to drill in ANWR, or to keep it as it is. Instead, I want 
to only focus on one issue: caribou.
  On Saturday, the Anchorage Daily News reported that a new State 
survey produced by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game revealed a 
sharp decline in the central Arctic caribou herd, which calves and 
ranges in the Prudhoe Bay and Kuparuk oil fields, from 23,400 animals 
in 1992 to about 18,100 this summer. The census also revealed that the 
herd that stays away from the oil and gas development has not suffered 
as much decline.
  The State and Federal wildlife biologists do not know what caused the 
decline, but one thing is sure. The article paraphrases a State 
wildlife biologist.

       [A]lmost all of the decline has occurred in that part of 
     the herd that ranges near the oil fields. It could be due to 
     noise, traffic or some other disruption of caribou grazing, 
     or to some natural cycle.

  Mr. President, I raise this because there has been some dispute 
involving the effects of the proposed drilling on wildlife, and 
particularly on caribou. Supporters of drilling in ANWR contend that 
caribou are flourishing and the caribou may even benefit from 
development. Opponents of drilling contend that the impact will 
negatively affect caribou, particularly the porcupine caribou, which 
calve on the 1002 area and on which the Gwich'in people depend for 
their food and culture.
  Two herds occupy ANWR: the porcupine herd and the central Arctic 
herd. There are significant differences between the two herds, but, 
according to industry, the basic features of the ecology are similar. 
Industry publications boast that the central Arctic herd caribou are 
healthy and increasing in the Prudhoe Bay region, and that oil 
development has not adversely affected caribou. Opponents of drilling 
believe otherwise.
  Reasonable people can and do differ on this point. However, this 
recent study raises some serious questions as to the health of the 
central Arctic herd. More importantly, the fact that the herd is 
declining on those lands where there is current oil and gas 
development, raises critical questions about the effects of proposed 
oil and gas drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
  Environmentalists have contended that the effects will be severe to 
the caribou herd. This survey suggests that they may be right. The 
Anchorage Daily News article cites recent research by a University of 
Alaska Fairbanks biologist, which found that caribou living near the 
oil fields have far fewer calves.
  And, a Federal Arctic National Wildlife Refuge biologist is 
paraphrased as saying:

       If oil activity is to blame, such impacts would be 
     magnified in the wildlife refuge. There, the porcupine herd 
     is much larger--about 150,000 animals--but there is less 
     coastal habitat and the calving grounds are much smaller.

  Mr. President, when the Senate votes on the fate of the Arctic 
National Wildlife Refuge, every Member should put politics aside and 
vote on facts. This report is serious. We ought not take a chance on 
the pristine ecosystem and its wildlife by drilling in ANWR.
  I ask that the text of the article be printed in the Record.

             [From the Anchorage Daily News, Oct. 21, 1995]

      Oil Field Caribou Decline--State Finds Fewer in Arctic Herd

                          (By Steve Rinehart)

       A new state caribou survey has found a sharp decline in the 
     Central Arctic caribou herd, which ranges in and around the 
     Prudhoe Bay oil fields.
       State and federal biologists said they don't know what 
     caused the decline but said it could have been brought on by 
     interference from the oil fields, or by some unknown natural 
     cause. In any case, the caribou count released late Friday by 
     the Alaska Department of Fish and Game may strengthen 
     arguments against opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge 
     just east of Prudhoe to oil drilling.
       The effect of oil development on caribou is one of the core 
     issues in the statewide and national debate over drilling in 
     ANWR. There, the much larger Porcupine caribou herd calves in 
     areas that are thought to be hot oil prospects.
       The Central Arctic herd has dropped from about 23,400 
     animals in 1992, the most recent prior survey, to about 
     18,100 this summer, according to the count released late 
     Friday. Low calf production brought on by undernourished cows 
     is thought to be the cause of that 23 percent decline, but 
     the reasons behind it are not known, according to state Fish 
     and Game biologist Ken Whitten of Fairbanks, who conducted 
     the survey.
       However, Whitten said, almost all of the decline has 
     occurred in that part of the herd that ranges near the oil 
     fields. It could be due to noise, traffic or some other 
     disruption of caribou grazing, or to some natural cycle, 
     he said.
       The department's first accurate count, coinciding with the 
     early days of oil production in 1978, placed the herd at 
     about 6,000 animals. The herd more than doubled in the next 
     five years, then climbed steadily to its peak.
       The most recent survey was scheduled to be conducted in 
     1994, but was delayed until this year by bad weather. In a 
     memo dated Friday, Whitten said the census was based on 
     ``high quality'' aerial photographs taken July 15.
       ``Weather conditions and carbou behavior were ideal for the 
     photo-census effort,'' Whitten wrote. ``It is unlikely that 
     many caribou were missed.''
       The kind of change noticed in the Central herd is not 
     extraordinary for cribou, Whitten said in an interview. ``The 
     fact that it is happening around the oil field is what is 
     drawing attention,'' Whitten said.
       Biologists for the major oil producers could not be reached 
     for comment Friday evening. However, at a wildlife conference 
     in Fairbanks this summer, before the census was completed, 
     British Petroleum scientist Chris Herlugson said his 
     observations indicate the Central Arctic caribou may benefit 
     from some oil field improvements.
       Thousands of caribou ``come right into the fields on sunny, 
     calm days when the mosquitoes and flies are abundant,'' he 
     said at the time, ``Those gravel roads and pads will provide 
     a little bit of relief.''
       Arco spokesman Ronnie Chappell said his company would 
     ``delay comment until we have had an opportunity to talk to 
     the biologists who conducted the census.''
       Fran Mauer, a federal Arctic National Wildlife Refuge 
     biologist who has worked with state Fish and Game on caribou 
     studies, said he was not surprised by the findings. Recent 
     research by a University of Alaska Fairbanks biologist found 
     that caribou living near the oil fields have far fewer 
     calves, he said.
       ``There are a myriad of potential factors,'' he said, but 
     one part of the census stands out: The part of the Central 
     Arctic herd that keeps away from Prudhoe has not suffered 
     near as much decline,
       If oil activity is to blame, he said, such impacts would be 
     magnified in the wildlife refuge. There, the Porcupine herd 
     is much larger--about 150,000 animals--but there is less 
     coastal habitat and the calving grounds are much smaller, he 
     said.
       The census got plenty of attention late Friday. For, 
     although the biological significance of the new caribou count 
     is uncertain, the political weight may be considerable.
       In lobbying to open ANWR to drilling, the Knowles 
     administration, the oil industry and development groups have 
     made much of the fact that the Central herd has grown 
     dramatically during the 20-year history of Prudhoe Bay. 
     Oil exploration ``will not hurt the wildlife or the 
     land,'' declared an advertisement in a Washington, D.C., 
     newspaper this week, placed by the state- and industry-
     funded group Arctic Power.
       The new census does not contradict that, said Arctic Power 
     director Debbie Reinwand.
       ``We could still say that the number of caribou have 
     tripled since Prudhoe Bay,'' she said. ``I think if (oil 
     development) was going to hurt the caribou we would have seen 
     it in that 20-year period.''
       She said she did not think the new information would sway 
     Congress, which is days away from voting on a major budget 
     bill that includes the ANWR drilling provision.
       ANWR drilling opponents, though, said the census supports 
     their arguments, and could affect the debate.
       ``It makes an opening for people to listen who were not 
     inclined to listen before,'' said Bob Childers of the 
     Gwich'in Steering Committee, which represents some Interior 
     Alaska Natives who oppose drilling.

[[Page S 15503]]

       ``Senators and congressmen have been assured by everyone 
     that the herd is growing and all is nifty-keen. This raises a 
     caution flag,'' he said.
       Teri Camery of the Alaska Wilderness League said, ``This 
     demonstrates that oil and wilderness don't mix.'' If the 
     experience of the Central herd is applied to the Porcupine 
     herd, she said, ``we're likely to see an even more severe 
     decline.''
       ``It is really interesting in that the state has denied 
     there is a conflict between caribou and oil development,'' 
     said Pam Miller of the Alaska Coalition.
       A spokeswoman for Gov. Tony Knowles, Claire Richardson, 
     said Knowles would not comment until reviewing the report, 
     which was released after the close of business Friday at the 
     request of the Daily News.

                          ____________________