The Natural History of an Arctic Oil Field. Development and the Biota

427 Pages·2000·12.68 MB·English

by  Joe C. Truett and Stephen R. Johnson (Eds.)

srotubirtnoC
Steven C. Arnstrup Robert G. Fechhelm
U.S. Geological Survey LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc.
Biological Resources Division Bryan, TX 77801
Anchorage, AK 99503
Benny J. Gallaway
Warren B. Ballard LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc.
Department of Range, Wildlife, and Bryan, TX 77801
Fisheries Management
Texas Tech University
John C. George
Lubbock, TX 79409 Department of Wildlife Management
and
North Slope Borough
LGL Alaska Research Associates, Inc. Barrow, AK 99723
Anchorage, AK 99508
Michelle A. Gilders
Robert M. Burgess
Canmore, Alberta, Canada
ABR, Inc.
and
Fairbanks, AK 99708
LGL Limited, Sidney, British Columbia,
Canada
Matthew A. Cronin
LGL Alaska Research Associates, Inc.
Anchorage, AK 99508 John Hechtel
and Alaska Department of Fish and Game
Agriculture and Forestry Experiment Fairbanks, AK 99701
Station
University of Alaska Randall L. Howard
Fairbanks, AK 99775 Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Forth Worth, TX 76109
Kenneth H. Dunton
University of Texas Marine Science Stephen R. Johnson
Institute LGL Limited
Port Aransas, TX 78373 Sidney, British Columbia, Canada
xi
xii Contributors
Kenneth Kertell Susan V. Shonberg
SWCA, Inc. Environmental Consultants University of Texas Marine Science
Tucson, AZ 85701 Institute
Port Aransas, TX 78373
James G. King
Juneau, AK 99801 James s. Sedinger
Institute of Arctic Biology
Brian E. Lawhead University of Alaska
ABR, Inc. Fairbanks, AK 99775
Fairbanks, AK 99708
Richard Shideler
Jay D. McKendrick Alaska Department of Fish and Game
University of Alaska Fairbanks Fairbanks, AK 99701
Alaska Agricultural & Forestry Experiment
Station Alice A. Stickney
Palmer Research Center ABR, Inc.
Palmer, AK 99645 Fairbanks, AK 99708
Lawrence L. Moulton Declan M. Troy
MJM Research Troy Ecological Research Associates
Lopez Island, WA 98261 Anchorage, AK 99508
Stephen M. Murphy Joe c. Truett
ABR, Inc. Truett Research
Fairbanks, AK 99708 Glenwood, NM 88039
Robert J. Ritchie Heather A. Whitlaw
ABR, Inc. LGL Alaska Research Associates, Inc.
Fairbanks, AK 99708 Anchorage, AK 99508
droweroF
Over the past 20 years the Prudhoe Bay region of arctic Alaska has been the
focus of much ecological research, probably more so than any other arctic region.
This interest has stemmed in large part from the advent of oil development in the
region and the attendant need to minimize its environmental effects. Basic research
has been necessary because little investigation had taken place in the area when oil
operations began.
BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc. and other oil industry groups have supported basic
research on topics ranging from fish and waterfowl to polar bears and caribou to
revegetation and habitat enhancement. BP operates the western half of the Prud-
hoe Bay Oil Field and several smaller satellite fields such sa Endicott, Milne Point,
and Badami. To develop a better understanding of the effects of operations on the
arctic environment, BP has funded numerous several-year studies and several
longer-term project, including a 19-year study of the fish inhabiting the nearshore
Beaufort Sea and a 14-year investigation of the snow goose nesting colony on
Howe Island adjacent to the Endicott Development. Much of this research has
been conducted in response to the requirements of local, state, and federal moni-
toring agencies whose job it si to ensure that the biological impacts of development
are minimized. Publication of the work was not usually required because a primary
purpose was to answer questions about the impacts of development so that effec-
tive mitigative measures could be fashioned. Consequently, much has remained
unpublished.
Because the results of these investigations have considerable utility to both sci-
ence and industry, BP has supported preparation of this book. Academic Press, a
recognized leader in scientific publications, has collaborated to ensure its wide cir-
culation. Here for the first time much of this important body of arctic research si
assembled in peer-reviewed form readily available to the managers of northern re-
sources, the proponents and regulators of northern development, and the general
public.
.Joe C. Truett
~176176
Xlll
P ce
Oil development commenced 30 years ago on the coastal plain of arctic Alaska.
Since that time development has expanded, and oil fields now encompass a sub-
stantial portion of the central coastal plain and coastal marine environment between
the Colville and Sagavanirktok rivers. Environmental research, stimulated largely
by the desire to minimize impacts on fish and wildlife populations and habitats, es-
calated with development.
Over the years several entities have sponsored portions of this research. The
federal government contributed funding through agencies such sa the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Bureau of Land Management, and
the Minerals Management Service. The State of Alaska conducted research through
existing agencies such sa the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. The oil com-
panies have contributed most of the research funding; BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc.
(BPX), its predecessors Standard Alaska Production Company and SOHIO, and
ARCO Alaska have been the major oil-field operators and the major industry
sponsors of research. EXXON Company sponsored some studies in the early
1980s. Researchers have produced literally hundreds of reports.
In 1996 BPX's Environmental and Regulatory Affairs Department determined
to sponsor a technical book sa a means for more widely disseminating results of this
research. They commissioned contractors to edit the volume and agreed to provide
honoraria to authors. They, in collaboration with the senior editor, developed a list
of fish and wildlife species, groups, and habitats they wished to see addressed, and
they selected senior authors for these topics.
BPX set the book's focus and authorship and ultimately reviewed lla manu-
scripts in near-final form but otherwise did not monitor the book's preparation.
Manuscripts were written and reviewed by outside experts independent of BPX's
purview. The senior editor worked with the authors to promote uniformity in style
and format among manuscripts, objectivity and brevity in presentation, logic in in-
terpretation, and acceptability in grammar and syntax. He obtained one to three
XV
xvi Preface
peer reviews of each manuscript, reviewers being selected on the basis of their
knowledge of the discipline and the editor's judgment of their ability to provide a
thorough and objective review. Three chapters--Introduction, North Slope Oil
Field Development, and Synthesismare not technical presentations of research and
were not peer reviewed.
The senior editor required the author or authors of each technical manuscript to
address reviewers' comments by revising sa appropriate. He then edited each re-
vised manuscript for responsiveness to review and for final details of grammar,
readability, and format before sending it to the publisher. Each senior author re-
viewed page proot~ of his manuscript, which he received directly from the pub-
lisher. The junior editor helped in the final stages of editing and in final
preparations for publication.
We thank the following for their technical reviews of chapters: R. M. Anthony,
W. Ballard, .S Boyd, .P Clarkson, W. B. Collins, E. Cooch, .P Craig, M. Cronin,
J. Davis, .L Dickson, R. Drewein, .S Fancy, H. M. Feder, E. H. Follmann, W. B.
Griffiths, J. E. Hemming, .L Jacobs, M. .S Lindberg, N. Lunn, .P Martin, K. Moi-
teret, .S Murphy, D. Norton, A. Ott, R. E. Schweinsburg, R. Suydam, E. J. Tay-
lor, and K. Whitten.
This book could not have taken shape without the help of numerous organiza-
tions and individuals. BPX provided funding support for the writing, preparation
of final illustrations, and editing. Chris Herlugson and Ray Jakubczak of BPX's En-
vironmental and Regulatory Affairs Department deserve much credit for support-
ing this project. In many cases authors supplemented their BPX honoraria with
support from their employers or with time or money of their own. James Lukin
collated and prepared final versions of artwork. Anne Brown coordinated activities
between BPX and the editors and authors. Michelle Gilders read the entire manu-
script and offered many useful suggestions. Judy Truett supported the editorial
process in many ways.
BPX sponsorship of this book expresses its support for the editorial and peer-
review process that promotes objectivity in science. This sponsorship does not
imply agreement with views expressed by the authors.
eoJ C. Truett
nehpetS R. nosnhoJ
noitcudortnI
Joe c. Truett
Truett Research, Glenwood, New Mexico
Introduction
Physical Environment
Wildlife, Fish, and Habitats
Anthropogenic Changes
The Investigative Focus
References
INTRODUCTION
In June 1968, Atlantic Richfield Company announced the discovery of a major oil
accumulation near Prudhoe Bay, Alaska. Close upon the heels of this news, the
U.S. government passed the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969,
requiring full disclosure of the environmental costs of major development ventures.
This coincidence set the stage for an experiment that in time not only would meas-
ure responses of biota to arctic oil development, but in so doing would test the
ability of intensive scientific investigation to respond to the high hopes of NEPA.
This book presents key findings of that experiment.
Arctic scientists had long anticipated the potential for the scale of development
set in motion by the Prudhoe Bay discovery, and two decades earlier they had
begun to lay the groundwork for measuring impacts of human-induced distur-
bance. In 1947, the Naval Arctic Research Laboratory (NARL) took shape at Point
Barrow, the farthest north landscape in Alaska, and scientists based at NARL initi-
ated studies on the effects of disturbance on soils and nutrient cycling (Shaver,
1996). In 1958 the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission authorized environmental
The Natural History of an Arctic Oil Field
Copyright (cid:14)9 by Academic Press. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.
4 .I Introduction to Arctic smetsysocE
studies near Cape Thompson on the northwestern coast of Alaska in anticipation of
an experimental harbor excavation by nuclear blast (which never materialized)
(Wilimovsky and Wolfe, 1966). In the early 1970s the National Science Founda-
tion initiated two arctic Alaska programs: )1( the International Biological Program
(IBP) and its Coastal Tundra Biome Studies at Barrow (Brown et al., 1980) and
)2( the Research on Arctic Tundra (RATE) program inland from Barrow at Atka-
sook (Batzli and Brown 1976).
Preparations for the development of Prudhoe Bay oil elevated substantially the
level of inquiry into the potential impacts of arctic disturbance. In 1969, the year
following the oil strike, applications filed by industry to develop a trans-Alaska
pipeline system to export the oil southward spawned research along the proposed
pipeline corridor (Alexander and Van Cleve, 1983). In 1975, the U.S. government
initiated the oil-related Alaska marine studies program known sa the Outer Conti-
nental Shelf Environmental Assessment Program (OCSEAP), billed by its director
sa "the largest environmental program in the history of our nation and probably of
the world" (Engelmann, 1976). Between 1976 and 1979, the U.S. Geological Sur-
vey conducted environmental studies on the vast National Petroleum Reserve in
Alaska (NPR-A) west of the Prudhoe Bay region in anticipation of potential oil
development there (USGS, 1979). In 1983-1984 the U.S. Department of Energy
initiated new studies to help assess impacts of arctic energy development; the pro-
gram, called Response, Resistance, Resilience, and Recovery of Arctic Ecosystems
to Disturbance (R4D), centered on a site near Toolik Lake in the Brooks Range
foothills 250 km south of Prudhoe Bay (Reynolds and Tenhunen, 1996). During
1980-1985, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service conducted a baseline study to de-
termine the size and diversity of fish and wildlife populations in a coastal plain por-
tion (the "1002 area") of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge judged vulnerable to
petroleum development (Garner and Reynolds, 1986). In 1987 scientists began to
investigate the potential impacts of petroleum development in the 1002 area on key
fish and wildlife species and their habitats (McCabe, 1994).
The greatest intensity of investigation took place in the oil fields themselves.
Studies here, funded largely by industry and monitored by agencies, distinguished
themselves by one major difference from the other research programs--they over-
lapped temporally and spatially with development. Many researchers built on this
advantage to measure responses of biota to development. The budgets for oil field
environmental studies, which focused strongly on wildlife and fish, have been con-
servatively estimated to have totaled more than $4 million per year since the early
1980s (Maki, 1992).
This book assembles findings of studies sited in and near arctic Alaska oil fields.
The focus si on fish, wildlife, habitats, and communities that are important from
public and agency perspectives; information from outside the oil-field region si in-
corporated sa necessary. The following paragraphs provide an introduction to the
physical and biological characteristics of the oil field region, the general nature of
disturbance, and the investigative approach of the studies.
.1 Introduction 5
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
Producing oil fields in arctic Alaska lie between the Colville and Sagavanirktok
rivers on the arctic coastal plain and extend into nearshore-waters of the Beaufort
Sea (see chapter by Gilders and Cronin, this volume). Land and water intermix to
create a complex wetland in much of the onshore environment. Climate exerts a
major influence on the land and water, not only severely constraining the land-
scape's ability to support wildlife and fish but also imposing landscape changes that
often mimic the changes wrought by development.
Climatological extremes prevail. The cold, dark winter months, with January
temperatures commonly averaging between-20 and-90~ contrast sharply with
the continuous daylight of summer, when minimum and maximum July tempera-
tures reach 1 and 8~ respectively. The scanty precipitation averages 13-18 cm
annually with most coming sa snow (Selkregg, 1975, p. 18). Winds blow mainly
from the east and secondarily from the west (Dygas, 1975); they are persistent and
strong (Selkregg, 1975, p. 19).
The temperature regime strongly affects habitat qualities of the landscape. Sur-
face soils remain frozen and snow-covered for 8-9 months each year (Hobbie,
1984; Walker, 1985). Snowmelt and the thawing of surface soil and water com-
mence in May a few to several tens of kilometers inland; these phenomena are de-
layed for 2 weeks or so at the coast because of the cooling effect of the nearby
frozen ocean. In the oil-field area, soil thaw begins in June, reaches 50-100 cm
deep by late summer, and reverses itself such that soils begin to refreeze during
September (Hobbie, 1984; Walker, 1985); biological activity restricts itself to the
thaw layer. Below this, permafrost (permanently frozen ground) extends to depths
of 660 m or more (Walker, 1985). The shortness of the period of thaw in concert
with the blockage of subsurface drainage by permafrost curtails water loss by evap-
oration and percolation so that, despite the meager precipitation, much of the tun-
dra in summer resembles a "marshy grassland" (Hobbie, 1984).
The action of ice strongly molds emergent landforms. Tundra landscapes show
naturally "patterned" ground formed by the wedging effect of ice alternately freez-
ing and thawing at the margins of soil "polygons" 5-10 m or more in diameter
(Walker, 1985). Surface disturbances caused by the freeze-thaw cycle and other
forces often reduce locally the albedo, or surface reflectance, resulting in thermo-
karst, which si surface subsidence caused by thawing of ice-rich soils. Occasional
pingos (ice-cored hills) rise here and there sa much sa 51 m higher than the sur-
rounding tundra (Walker, 1985; Walker and Walker, 1991).
Polygons, thermokarst depressions, and other cryogenic (ice-generated) features
provide microrelief (<1.0 m vertical range) that results in fine-scale horizontal vari-
ation in the moisture content of surface soils. This in turn causes corresponding
horizontal heterogeneity in the composition of the vegetation.
sA with terrestrial habitats, aquatic environments yield to ice. Surface waters of
ponds, lakes, and the coastal ocean remain frozen for about 9 months each year.
6 .I Introduction to Arctic smetsysocE
Typically, ice begins to form on these waters in September or October, reaches a
maximum thickness of 2 m or so by March or April, and completely thaws in June
or July (Kovacs and Mellor, 1974; Hobbie, 1984). In the nearshore ocean during
the open-water period, winds may occasionally bring in ice from the permanent
ice pack offshore. The aquatic food base in general--plankton, benthos, and sessile
plantsmpeaks markedly in productivity and availability to consumers during the
open-water period (Newbury, 1983; Hobbie, 1984).
Water, like ice, can cause major landscape changes. River discharge during
spring breakup erodes and reworks tremendous amounts of peat, gravel, sand, and
finer sediments in floodplains and deltas (Ritchie and Walker, 1974). Movement of
water in the nearshore marine zone transports sediments and reworks coastal islands
and beaches (Short et al., 1974); storm surges at the coast erode shorelines (1Leimnitz
and Maurer, 1979). Because the tidal range si small, winds constitute the primary
driving force behind water movement in the marine system (Dygas, 1975). The
major erosional phenomena caused by water, both in coastal and inland localities,
tend to be episodic.
Natural agents of landscape disturbance often generate changes ecologically
analogous to anthropogenic disturbance, although the scale and conformation of
change may be different (Walker and Walker, 1991). Caribou trails, troughs at poly-
gon margins, and vehicle tracks on tundra resemble each other in their tendency to
cause thermokarst. Both river flooding and the deposition of fill by industry result
in gravel-surfaced features. The thermokarst effects of wave action and heat ab-
sorption in natural lakes resemble those where surface water si impounded by in-
dustry. Both wind-driven water and construction crews rework coastal landforms
and nearshore marine substrates.
WILDLIFE, FISH, AND HABITATS
Public and political consensus hold that the primary measure of arctic Alaska's envi-
ronmental quality si its ability to support wildlife and fish populations (Garner and
Reynolds, 1986, p. ;1 Walker et al., 1987a; Maki, 1992; Jorgenson andJoyce, 1994).
Thus, the relationships of animals to habitats, and the alteration of habitats by
people, become of central concern to management. The research forming the basis
for this book originated largely from the perceived need to protect animal popula-
tions and maintain habitat quality in the face of increased human activity. Although
not intended sa impact assessments, the contributions herein provide the kinds of in-
formation useful for managing species and habitats influenced by human activities.
From an ecological viewpoint, mammal, bird, and fish species of arctic Alaska
may be categorized broadly by their food-chain and habitat affiliations. Thus clas-
sified, major animal groups are )1( herbivorous mammals, )2( carnivorous and om-
nivorous mammals, )3( herbivorous waterfowl, (4)"carnivorous" waterfowl
(including loons), )5( shorebirds, )6( freshwater fishes, and )7( anadromous fishes.
.1 Introduction 7
Herbivorous mammals of arctic Alaska range in size from lemmings (e.g., Lem-
mus sibericus, Dicrostonyx spp.) and arctic ground squirrels (Spermophilus parryO to
caribou (Rangifer tarandus), moose (Alces alces), and muskoxen (Ovibos moschatus)
(Brooks et al., 1971; Garner and Reynolds, 1986). The smaller species occupy small
home ranges year-round; the larger ones range widely, typically occupying differ-
ent areas and habitats seasonally. In this book we focus on caribou, the only large
obligate herbivore common in the oil-field region.
Carnivorous and omnivorous mammals that characterize coastal arctic Alaska
include polar bear (Ursus maritimus), the "grizzly" subspecies of brown bear (Ursus
sotcra horribilis), wolf (Canis lupus), and arctic fox (Alopex lagopus) (Brooks et al.,
1971; Garner and Reynolds, 1986). Polar bears occupy the coastal zone primarily
in winter but also occasionally in summer. Grizzly bears occur in the oil-field area
year-round but hibernate in winter. Arctic foxes are the most abundant and ubiq-
uitous of this group. Wolves have been scarce in the oil-field region during the pe-
riod of development, perhaps because of rabies (Maki, 1992). This book addresses
polar bears, grizzly bears, and arctic foxes.
Herbivorous waterfowl, and indeed nearly all birds found in coastal arctic
Alaska, use the region mainly for breeding and brood-rearing and are present only
during summer (Derksen et al., 1981; Garner and Reynolds, 1986). Tundra swans
(Cygnus columbianus), brant (Branta bernicla), snow geese (Chen caerulescens), Canada
geese (Branta canadensis), and white-fronted geese (Anser albifrons) dominate this
group of obligate herbivores. Swans, brant, and snow geese are the most conspicu-
ous in the oil-field region and have received the largest amount of study; this book
addresses all three of these.
Large waterbirds relying mainly on animal foods include diving ducks and
loons (Derksen et al., 1981; Garner and Reynolds, 1986). The most abundant
diver in arctic coastal Alaska si oldsquaw (Clangula hyemalis); less abundant are
common eider (Somateria mollissima), spectacled eider (S. fischeri), and king eider .S(
spectabilis). Three loons breed regularly in or near the oil fieldsmPacific loon
(Gavia pacifica), red-throated loon (G. stellata), and yellow-billed loon (G. adamsii)
Derksen et al., 1981; Garner and Reynolds, 1986; Troy Ecological Research Asso-
ciates (TERA), 1992. Contributions in this volume address common eider and Pa-
cific loon.
More than a dozen shorebird species nest on the arctic coastal plain (Derksen et
al., 1981). sA a group they are the most abundant of the waterbirds. They consume
mainly macroinvertebrates in tundra, littoral-zone, and coastal lagoon habitats
(Connors and Risebrough, 1979; Johnsgard, 1981). In the oil-field region the most
common of these include black-bellied plover (Pluvialis squatarola), American
golden-plover .2/( dominica), semipalmated sandpiper (Calidris pusilla), pectoral sand-
piper (C. melanotos), dunlin (C. alpina), stilt sandpiper (C. himantopus), buff-breasted
sandpiper (Tryngites ,)sillocif;urbus red-necked phalarope (Phalaropus lobatus), and red
phalarope .P( fulicaria) (TERA, 1990, 1992). These species arrive in the oil fields in
early summer and nest in tundra habitats; adults and young typically depart the oil