Coastal Management

4-17-13 - More Evidence The Administration Usurps Congressional Authority

17 April 2013 8:15am

Calgary Herald by Sherri Zickefoose.  An anti-oil pipeline art show is being sent packing from City Hall’s atrium after officials yanked the group’s permit over price tags and politics.

Yesterday we editorialized on how the Administration's persistent effort to create a new ocean Drilling Permit Approval Delays, Federal Overreachzoning bureaucracy defies Congressional authority.  Over the last several years, we have documented many instances of this Administration's effort to overreach its authority and expand its jurisdiction and control over the American public.  One of the effects is to diminish jobs, economic recovery and tax/royalty revenue from domestic production on federal lands.  Below, we bring readers more contemporaneous examples of federal obstacles to reinvigorating America's economy.   We were worried yesterday that Congress fiddles while the Administration usurps its authority.  While we stand on that statement (i.e. wishing for a more robust effort to confront Constitutional violations), we do commend a couple of particularly courageous patriots (among a few others), who are trying to hold back the tide of federal overreach: Congressman Doc Hastings and Senator Lisa Murkowski.  -dh

Yesterday, HouseDoc Hastings, Chairman, House Resources, Washington, federal overreach, drilling delay Resources Chairman Doc Hastings (NGP Photo) said, “This final implementation plan raises more questions than answers and provides even less information on what the Obama Administration will impose under the guise of a National Ocean Policy. What is certain is that this policy represents a significant step towards the mandatory zoning of our oceans and is a backdoor attempt to control the way inland, coastal and ocean activities are managed. If implemented, it will inflict red tape and economic damage both onshore and offshore across a wide-range of activities including agriculture, fishing, construction, manufacturing, mining, oil and natural gas, and renewable energy.

Late yesterday we received this message from the National Ocean Policy Council.  We appreciate the diplomacy of their statement but believe that they and all Americans should be demanding that the President rescind the Ocean Zoning effort rather than simply reflecting their collective 'concerns'.  -dh  

NOPC said, "Following an initial review of the National Ocean Policy Final Implementation Plan released earlier today, significant questions and concerns remain about whether continued implementation of this initiative will adversely impact commercial and recreational activities across the United States."

Today, Hastings said, "Today we'll hear the story of two very different methods for energy production here in the United States.   (Photo-l)

The energy production that occurs on state and private lands, and the energy production that occurs on federal lands.  Energy production on state and private lands is flourishing - creating new jobs and thriving, healthy economies. These lands are the epicenter of the energy renaissance we're currently experiencing. On these lands oil and natural gas production has increased dramatically since 2007. The restrictions on these lands are not as onerous, and as a result, the average time to get a drilling permit approved is only 12 -15 days.

Contrast that with federal lands. There the average time to get a drilling permit approved is 307 days. That is nearly double the 154 days the process took in 2005. Regulatory hurdles, long delays, and policies that keep federal lands under lock-and-key have become all too common. As a result, federal oil and natural gas production has declined.
Yesterday, amid a Senate Energy Senator Lisa Murkowski, federal overreach, us forest service, multiple useCommittee hearing on the Forest Service's So-Called Multiple Use Mission and Budget, Senator Lisa Murkowski (NGP Photo) said, "“Our national forests are increasingly being managed like national parks – areas in which no timber harvesting is permitted,” Murkowski said. “The Forest Service must return to its multiple-use mission. The economic viability of hundreds of communities located next to national forests depends on the responsible production of our timber resources.” 
 Meanwhile, yesterday in Washington, the Administration took heat from another quarter, as Water Power Subcommittee Chairman Tom McClintock said: “The administration’s testimony makes it clear that we can expect ... increasingly severe government-induced shortages, higher and higher electricity and water prices, massive taxpayer subsidies to politically well-connected and favored industries, and a permanently declining quality of life for our children, who will be required to stretch and ration every drop of water and every watt of electricity in their bleak and dimly lit homes.  
 
“I believe that this Subcommittee will seek a different path," McClintock added, "one that leads to a new era of clean, cheap and abundant hydro-electricity; great new reservoirs to store water in wet years to assure abundance in dry ones; a future in which families can enjoy the prosperity that abundant water and electricity provides and the quality of life that comes from that prosperity.”

Two Visions of the Arctic

by

Mary Barr 

Former State Senator Drue Pearce sees the Arctic as an opportunity for growth and commerce.  The National Marine Fisheries Service (NFWS) sees the Arctic as a place to be protected, where development must be restricted, to preserve marine mammals and a subsistence lifestyle.  
 
Drue Pearce, Arctic Commission, EIS, Alaska, Federal Coordinator, Alaska State Senate President, Photo by Dave HarbourThese opposing opinions were both on display Thursday April 11th, when the Anchorage Republican Women’s Club hosted Drue Pearce (NGP Photo) as their luncheon speaker, and NOAA in the person of Jolie Harrison from National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) took public testimony on the supplemental draft EIS on the Effects Of Oil And Gas Activities In The Arctic.
 
The portion of the supplemental draft EIS being heard concerned the effect of noise pollution from seismic surveys and drilling in the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas, on marine mammals and subsistence fishing.  The apparent conclusion was that any impact on marine mammals or their habitat must be negligible or mitigated. And any development must be strictly regulated.
 
In the opinion of Senator Pearce, the Arctic is an area of opportunity.  Fifteen years ago, Canada turned management of their federal lands over to the governing body of the Northwest Territories, a devolution as she termed it, and the NW Territories are beginning to experience a boom.  She stated that with the glut of oil and gas the lower 48 states are currently experiencing, Alaska cannot rely solely on our natural resources to see us into the future.  She urged us to see and to promote Alaska as the Gateway to the Arctic, to find a new path forward and to become more involved in the Arctic Council.

 

Categories:

8-30-12 Murkowski Lauds Feds For Shell Decision

30 August 2012 7:31am

U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski's (NGP Photo) office this morning U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski, Shell Decision, BSEE, Chukchi, Beaufort, Arctic OCS, Photo by  released the following comment regarding a decision by the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) to allow Shell to conduct preparatory work in the Chukchi Sea this summer.  “Today’s decision is a positive step that will allow Shell to begin necessary preparatory work, while maintaining the highest environmental standards to ensure the protection of the Arctic,” Murkowski said. “While we would all like to see a discovery this summer, the most important thing is for Shell to continue to make progress and demonstrate once again that Arctic drilling can be done safely.”  Thursday’s BSEE announcement will allow Shell to build a mudline cellar and install pre-drilling infrastructure in the Chukchi Sea before the Coast Guard gives final approval of its containment vessel.  “While many environmental activists continue to cast doubt on Arctic production, we know from experience that development can be carried out safely – more than 100 wells have been drilled in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas since the 1970s,” said Murkowski, the ranking Republican on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.  The Arctic waters off Alaska’s northern coast contain an Senator Mark Begich, Chukchi, Salazar, Shell approval, Photo by Dave Harbourestimated 27 billion barrels of oil and 132 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, according to the federal government.     *      NGP received another statement from U.S. Senator Mark Begich (NGP Photo) this afternoon. -dh  "U.S. Sen. Mark Begich today released the following statement after Interior Sec. Ken Salazar announced a permit is being issued to Shell for limited preparatory activities in relation to the company’s exploration plan in the Chukchi Sea:  'I am pleased to see the Interior Department recognizes the importance of moving ahead with exploratory drilling this summer.  'Today’s decision shows flexibility while not sacrificing safety. This allows us to get one step closer to understanding and moving forward on the energy potential of the Arctic.'"

Calgary Herald, by James Wood.  Finance Minister Doug Horner said even with ongoing price volatility, the government's finances aren't about to run off the rails.

Commentary: Yesterday we commended two Legislators for consistently defending Alaska's constitution and natural resource economic base against federal overreach.  Most recently, they urged the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to issue a timely Record of Decision on the Point Thomson Project.  Today, we note that DNR Commissioner Dan Sullivan (NGP Photo)  and North Slope Mayor Charlotte Brower dispatched a similar message, found in this letter, and released a memorandum of understanding encouraging inhanced collaboration between the State and Borough.  Cheers for all.  But the Point Thomson ball is still in the Feds' court and we harbor no illusions that the Corps' overlords will be more supportive now than in the past, in allowing just and reasonable adjudication of Alaska natural resource issues.   -dh

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commentary (Note that we are always open to additions or corrections and rebuttals):

  • Today the Alaska Dispatch continued what can be expected (based on its commentary over the last year) to grow into its own media blitz against reform of Alaska's predatory oil and gas tax regime.
  • Yesterday, the Alaska Dispatch provided a news report/commentary piece covering results of a Coastal Management Ballot Initiative that could have dealt a mortal blow to natural resource development in Alaska, and ultimately to the State's economy.  Below is our review of that piece:
Commentary:  We have great admiration for the amazing progress and communication contributions of the Alaska Dispatch but grow more and more disappointed with its criticism of the way Alaska makes a living--resource development.  We would also prefer that news reports be objective and that editorials be separated from news reports and properly labeled--lest they be thought of a propagandistic.  
 
Yesterday's Alaska Dispatch report on Tuesday's election was thorough but somewhat one-sided and wandered from factual reporting to editorializing on behalf of what appeared to be its own special interest favorites.  
 
We have openly editorialized here about how yesterday's vote on Proposition 2 would challenge Alaska's Constitution by usurping roles of the Legislative and Administrative branches of government.  We have always tried to identify our opinion as commentary and never as factual reporting.  
 
The Dispatch writers first name major business supporters for defeat of Proposition 2 (as if they were demons), make short shrift of the special interests supporting the proposition -- and their consistently anti-resource development views -- then conclude, editorially, that "In the end, it would appear that the money may have won out."  
 
The editorial/news writers quote an environmental spokesman but not one representing the successful "No on 2" effort.  They conveniently ignore the history of the issue, namely that the a coastal management program passed the House with stunning bipartisan support, was stopped by the Senate and a new, unworkable version recreated in the form of Proposition 2 after the Legislature adjourned.  Finally, the editorial/news writers do not admit even the shred of possibility that the folks who voted 'No' (i.e. the majority) could have been persuaded by the merits and not by advertising money.   
 
We hope for consistency's -- if not integrity's -- sake that had the supporters of Proposition 2 won and raised more money than opponents, the Dispatch writers would have commented that the proposition won not on the merits, but because, 'it would appear that the money may have won out'.   -dh 
Categories:
Syndicate content