MINUTES

Bureau of Land Management (BLM)

Alaska Resource Advisory Council (RAC) Meeting

University of Alaska Library Building\-\-- Anchorage, AK

December 13-14, 2006

**DAY 1-Wednesday, December 13, 2006**

**Council Members Present:** Sandra Key, David van den Berg, Scott Hala,
Phil Driver, Suzanne McCarthy, Greg Beischer, June McAtee, Keith Tryck
(departed at 1:40 p.m.), Susan Olson (joined meeting at 1:25 p.m. via
teleconference). **Council Members Absent:** Denise Michels, Tom
Crafford, Theresa Imm, Barbara Fullmer, Jim Posey, and Charlie Boddy.

**BLM Representatives Present:** Tom Lonnie (DFO), Ramone McCoy, Gary
Reimer, Scott Billing (AFS), Danielle Allen, Leah Dailey, Sharon Wilson,
Bob Schneider, Lon Kelly, Dave Howell, Ramona Chinn, and Jim Ducker.

**Other:** Noah Ashley and Tom Lohman \[North Slope Borough (NSB)\],
Sharon Warren and Hans Neidig \[Department of the Interior (DOI)\], and
Mary Patania (public).

Meeting **CALLED TO ORDER** at 1:25 p.m.by Chair, Sandra Key.

**WELCOME:** Key welcomed everyone and introduced the new BLM-Alaska
State Director, Tom Lonnie. RAC members introduced themselves and
housekeeping issues were addressed.

Key notified the RAC of Charlie Body's resignation as Vice-Chair and
encouraged the RAC to fill the vacancy. The RAC agreed to table the
discussion until day two.

**APRIL 2006 RAC MINUTES:** Discussion. No corrections. Beischer
motioned to approve. Van den Berg seconded. Approved and signed by
Chair.

**JULY 2006 RAC FIELD NOTES:** Discussion. No corrections. Motion to
approve by van den Berg. Seconded by Hala. Approved and signed by Chair.

**VIDEO OF NPR-A SOUTH FIELD TRIP:** Schneider gave each member a DVD.
Field trip attendees discussed trip highlights and memories.

**STATE DIRECTOR'S PERSPECTIVE:**

**I. Introduction:** Tom Lonnie introduced himself and said he was
interested in hearing what the RAC had to say. Van den Berg asked what
Lonnie felt were his top 5 issues as the new State Director. Lonnie said
he was a firm believer in the motto "Do good and avoid evil" and that he
would be involved heavily in the following issues: the conveyance
program, the Northeast National Petroleum Reserve (NE NPR-A) Supplement,
the subsistence program, and the South and Bay Resource Management Plans
(RMP). Lonnie also explained his philosophy of work: proper management
of resources, good public service, and good work environment for
employees. Key asked about the Research and Monitoring Team reports
(RMT). Lonnie explained that monitoring in general is an agency wide
concern especially with increased oil and gas exploration and the agency
being under a continuing resolution. National groups are currently
trying to decide what and how to monitor since energy companies do not
pay for the monitoring. Key urged Lonnie to look at the RMT's work which
included input from energy representatives. Van den berg asked Lonnie
about his RAC experience and Lonnie said this was his first real
experience as the Designated Federal Official (DFO). Lonnie encouraged
the RAC to help him learn the ropes through teamwork. Allen asked about
Lonnie's management style; Lonnie explained he likes to trust and
verify, and that the BLM has field/program managers for a reason. Lonnie
also said he tries to not think out loud unless he has announced it
beforehand and is eager to learn what the staff knows and thinks.

**II. Minerals Resolution:** Key, Beischer, and other RAC members
expressed concern about the time it took for the Minerals Resolution to
go forward from BLM-Alaska. Beischer explained that after initial
authoring and minor changes, the unanimous resolution was signed by the
RAC Chair on Sept. 13, 2006. The RAC's concern is that even as of today
(Dec. 2006), the resolution is still not with the Secretary. Beischer
also expressed a desire to know if the RAC's advice is valued, as in
light of this situation, it seems like the RAC is being totally
disregarded. Lonnie explained that he valued the RAC and expressed his
belief that a unanimous RAC decision is VERY significant. Lonnie
apologized for the resolution languishing in the Alaska State Office
before going to the BLM-Washington Office. Lonnie stated that in
addition to the resolution, a briefing paper detailing the impacts of
the budget cut went back to Washington. Lonnie reassured the RAC that
this would not happen in the future. Lonnie said the resolution was now
at the office of the DOI Assistant Secretary for Lands and Minerals and
would then go to the Secretary.

**III. RAC Charter:** Lonnie read from the RAC charter which stated that
personnel and organizational issues are not to be addressed by the RAC
unless they are part of a strategic decision. Lonnie stated that,
arguably, the issues the Minerals Resolution addresses are strategic in
nature. He also explained that according to the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), there is strict guidance when sending an issue to the
Secretary of the Interior. For instance, if the RAC decides the State
Director is being arbitrary in dealing with RAC advice or counsel, then
the RAC can go to the Secretary with a unanimous resolution. Key
explained her concerns over this interpretation of the charter and the
CFRs and asked for a legal opinion on this issue because, if true, this
would be quite different from how the RAC in AK has historically
operated. Olsen agreed. McCarthy explained that a unanimous RAC decision
is additional support for a decision a State Director may forward to the
Secretary if the need arises. Beischer stated that he really wants the
RAC and the BLM to retain the AK Minerals Program and the John Rishel
Mineral Information Center (JRMIC) because they are in real danger of
elimination. Beischer also asked how the BLM proposed to fulfill the
requirement to do minimum investigations in Alaska under section 10-10
of Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) if the
aforementioned programs were eliminated. Lonnie said he understood
employees are involved in these cuts and he had asked his staff to look
at contingencies in case the President's budget is upheld. He explained
that ANILCA authorizes these investigations but provides no funding. For
now, Lonnie said the positive news is that the BLM is under a Continuing
Resolution and funding is equal to last year assuring the jobs for now.

**IV. Managing for Excellence Initiative Discussion:** Lonnie said the
BLM is involved in a futuring exercise called "Managing for Excellence."
BLM-Alaska will forward to the BLM-Washington Office an organizational
tier structuring proposal. The Bureau-wide initiative also centralizes
functions such as the National Business Center, some personnel actions,
and some IRM/IT functions. BLM-Alaska is considering some alternatives
with other DOI partners due to location.

**PLANNING DISCUSSION:** Jim Ducker gave updates on planning issues.

**I. Supplement to the Amendment for NE NPR-A:** Ducker explained the
recent court decisions and their effects on BLM-Alaska. Ducker explained
that the judge's ruling was not based on BLM-Alaska making the wrong
planning decision but that the process that the BLM followed was flawed.
Van den Berg asked if environmental organizations had said beforehand
that they were going to challenge BLM's plan. Ducker said not to his
knowledge. Van den Berg asked what the BLM is hearing about the court
decision; Ducker explained that industry was definitely disappointed as
seismic work to prep for the sale had already been done. Lohman
explained that the North Slope Borough (NSB) had problems with the final
plan and has requested Cooperating Agency status on the supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Schneider explained that a draft
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was sent to the NSB earlier in the
week once the decision was made to go forward. Ducker explained that
with the supplement, the BLM does not need to do formal scoping;
however, the BLM has asked for comments and specific concerns in a
Notice of Intent (NOI) that was recently sent to the Federal Register.
The BLM asked the public to inform the bureau about specific ways to
lessen the environmental concerns and impacts on this area. Ducker
listed the current schedule for the NE NPR-A Supplement: Draft---Mid
June 2007, Final---Feb 2008, Record of Decision (ROD)---30 days after
Final in 2008.

**II. NPR-A South Plan:** Ducker stated the hurdles for the plan right
now are timing and funding. Ducker explained that he will no longer be
the lead planner for the South plan; Mike Kleven will fill this role.
Kelly's staff has been tasked with both plans, so strategies are being
discussed to figure out the timelines for the plans. Ducker explained
that the South plan might have to take second place in the interim.
Ducker thanked the NSB for their participation in the South plan.

**BREAK at** 2: 45 p.m. **RECONVENED** at 3:10 p.m.

**SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE SECRETARY ON ALASKA ISSUES:** Hans Neidig

introduced himself and talked about his background. Neidig said his role
in Alaska is to educate the folks in Washington, D.C. and to forcefully
advocate for Alaska's unique budgetary and logistical issues. Neidig
said the Secretary cares and wants to help people; furthermore the
Secretary wants open communication. Neidig said that the Secretary
believes that the DOI needs to explore every opportunity to say yes
before it says no. Neidig thanked the RAC members for their involvement
and said that he wanted to hear their views. Van den Berg asked if any
BLM-Alaska lands are a DOI priority for conserving known surface values
and what other DOI priorities existed for Alaska. Neidig said quite a
few Resource Management Plans (RMP) are in the works and that the DOI
needed to look at the feedback from the communities before it could make
any substantive comments. Neidig explained that he is not the BLM-Alaska
State Director's boss. Neidig stated that the Secretary believes
strongly in the environment and conservation and that the DOI has also
been tasked with some energy issues. Neidig explained that these were
not mutually exclusive and that resources need to be developed using all
technology in the best possible way. Neidig said when it comes to the
big picture, no one wants to harm the environment. One priority does not
preclude the other. The DOI has a responsibility to do it RIGHT by using
all the information, science, and technology available.

**NORTH SLOPE COMMUNITY-BASED PLANNING UPDATE (Handout):** Noah Ashley
discussed how the NSB has become a cooperating agency for the South
NPR-A Plan and how a formal MOU has been signed. This MOU lets the NSB
review EIS pre-drafts

before they become public and, by doing so, the NSB can provide
scientific and cultural input and data the BLM may fail to consider. The
NSB has consulted with other communities via funding provided by the
BLM. The NSB wants to offer an alternative to the BLM that is consistent
with North Slope community members' and stakeholders' recommendations
and wishes. Per Schneider, the NSB is aware that their alternative may
not be the alternative that is the BLM's final alternative. Ashley
summarized the actions completed to date and explained the five-phase
process. The NSB's first task was to engage the new Mayor and planning
coordinator of the Northwest Arctic Borough. Currently the NSB is in
phase two: the NSB has held public meetings, recorded and transcribed
public comments for the record, and held mapping sessions to identify
subsistence areas and potential areas that could be developed. No formal
alternative derived through community-based consensus has been developed
at the present, but the goal is to derive one for the BLM's
consideration by March 2007. The RAC asked Ashley questions about
village representation and attendance. Ashley said a report summarizing
community input would be available to the BLM by the end of 2007. Ashley
also explained that the NSB is looking to include Human Health Impact
Assessments (HHIA) in the EIS. The HHIA considers the potential impact
of North Slope development scenarios on human health, and these impacts
can range from diabetes and cardiovascular and respiratory diseases to
substance abuse and domestic violence. Ashley said some residents are
pro oil and gas as long as subsistence resources are not impacted.
Additionally, there is strong opposition against coal and hardrock in
most areas because of worries about impacts upon the Western Arctic
caribou herd calving grounds, access to insect relief areas, and
contamination of river drainages from open-pit mining. Ashley also
presented maps that display spatial data gathered from the public
meetings. Lohman said the BLM had recently hired a Barrow representative
and the BLM needs to be present in the next round of meetings.

**SOUTH NPR-A SUBCOMMITTEE DISCUSSION:** Van den Berg suggested it may
not be possible to get a RAC consensus on whether to include or not
include hardrock and coal in the South plan. He suggested the RAC might
resurrect the Beischer's Pros/Cons letter and present it to the
BLM-Alaska State Director as a RAC summary of ideas for and against
including coal and hardrock in the EIS. McAtee agreed that this would be
a better approach as the RAC is a snapshot of society, and if the RAC is
having trouble achieving consensus, this gives the BLM an idea of how
society will view these proposals. Beischer suggested that the BLM may
have already made its own decision about how to handle coal and hardrock
in the EIS. Lonnie said that the BLM had indeed had discussions, but he
wanted to hear what the RAC had to say. Lonnie further suggested that
when planning for resource development, it is a hard call to for the BLM
to expand into areas where it has no administrative authority to open
the area for mineral development. Lonnie suggested a valuable piece of
info is whether or not the RAC reaches an agreement! Lonnie asked if the
BLM should add another layer to the already complex RMP/EIS process.
McAtee stated that it is easy to disregard hardrock mineral resources in
the Northern NPR-A areas as they have not been identified there;
however, there are significant identified mineral resources in the South
area. Lonnie said even if the BLM did consider the alternative to
include the coal and hardrock and later Congress opened the area, the
BLM would have to go through the EIS process again. Driver suggested
that perhaps the BLM could state in the EIS that "if and when the ban on
entry is lifted, then the plan is to do...." Key agreed that the BLM
should discuss the option of coal and hardrock in the EIS but limit the
discussion based on the current legislation. Schneider explained that
doing as Key and Driver suggested could be accomplished in Chapter Three
which details existing environment and resources. Schneider said the BLM
could describe the resources in this chapter but not develop an
alternative and impacts. Per Schneider, the alternative and impacts
would be addressed in a legislative EIS if and when an area is opened.
Beischer stated he believed the BLM needed to do as Schneider said as a
minimum because mineral deposits of significant value may seem
economically unfeasible, but things are changing; for instance, the
biggest mining company in the world has a coal lease in the Arctic.
Beischer stated the BLM has something potentially valuable it is
responsible for administering and the responsible thing to do is to at
the very least capture it in the document and not exclude it from future
development. McAtee agreed that the BLM should not deny the research
efforts and data collection that has already been done and paid for. The
RAC then discussed the surface and scenic resources in the South plan
and how these could and should be captured in the planning documents.
Key suggested that the BLM had been hesitant to recommend conservation
for any areas. Ducker stated that the EIS does not designate wilderness,
but rather describes elements of the land like primitive nature,
solitude, etc. Kelly explained that the BLM discusses in the planning
documents the things that Congress has directed the Bureau to discuss.
After discussion, van den Berg made a motion to resurrect the draft
pros/cons document. Hala seconded. All in favor; none opposed.

Meeting **ADJOURNED** for the day at 5: 07 p.m.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**DAY 2-Thursday, December 14, 2006**

**Council Members Present:** David van den Berg, Scott Hala, Sandra Key,
Greg Beischer, Jim Posey (departed at 2:30 p.m.), Phil Driver, Suzanne
McCarthy, June McAtee, Teresa Imm (arrived at 8:35 a.m.; departed at
2:30 p.m.), and Tom Crafford (arrived at 1:30 p.m.). **Council Members
Absent:** Susan Olsen, Charlie Boddy, Keith Tryck, Barbara Fulmer, and
Denise Michels.

**BLM Representatives Present:** Tom Lonnie (DFO) Danielle Allen, Leah
Dailey, Theresa McPherson (9 a.m.), Lon Kelly, Ramone McCoy, Gary
Reimer, Dave Howell, Jennifer Hrobak (AFS), Ken Taylor, Scott Billing
(AFS).

**Other:** Noah Ashley (NSB), Sharon Warren (DOI), Tom Lohman (NSB),
Hans Neidig (DOI), and Mary Patania (public), Bobby Andrews (Aleknagiv
Natives Limited), Melissa Blair (Alaska Coalition).

Meeting **CALLED TO ORDER** at 8:05 a.m.

**FAIRBANKS DISTRICT OFFICE UPDATE** **(Handout):** Schneider discussed
four main issues:

**I. Winter Exploration in the NPR-A:** Several companies are working in
the NPR-A this winter. Donna Wixon is the point of contact for the
2006-2007 Winter Exploration Program.

**II. JW Well Plugging and Reserve Pit Clean-Up:** This project is now
completed and the clean-up team was one of five departmental award
winners.

**III. Alaska Railroad Extension:** The BLM has a minor role; we have a
reimbursable assistance agreement. Part of the EIS is being written by
contractors with an expected draft release this summer.

**IV. Tundra Hunters:** Hunters drove their trucks into closed tundra to
haul out game; the hunters got their trucks stuck and the vehicles are
currently frozen solidly into the tundra. The BLM is conducting and
Environmental Assessment (EA). The hunters were cited by BLM Law
Enforcement, and in addition to fines and possible jail time, the
hunters will have to pay for the EA.

**GLENALLEN FIELD MANAGER UPDATE (Handout):** McCoy discussed issues
relevant to the Glennallen office such as the East Alaska RMP, the
Tangle Lakes Archaeological District (TLAD), the John Babel Cabin, and
the MOU with the Yakutat-Tlingit Tribe. McCoy also explained that the
Glennallen Field Office was utilizing Benefits-Based Planning in its
planning considerations for the Delta Wild and Scenic River and that
this planning strategy had also been used for the TLAD. Van den Berg
asked for clarification on Benefits-Based Planning and McCoy said she
would get him information. McCoy stated the Gulkana River Implementation
level plan was finalized and the office was working on user education.

**ANCHORAGE FIELD MANAGER UPDATE (Handout):** Reimer discussed three
main topics:

**I. Bay RMP/EIS:** Alaska is currently in the public comment period for
this plan and has been conducting meetings. Currently the comment period
will close on Jan. 5, 2007 but a request to extend the comment period by
30 days has been submitted because the BLM has not been able to visit to
New Stuyahok. Van den Berg asked what the preferred alternative was for
the Bay Plan; Riemer stated it was Alternative D. Reimer said that
although some of this land is currently in the process of being
conveyed, his best guess was that the BLM would manage 1.5-1.6 million
acres after conveyance. Beischer said many residents are afraid a mine
will spring up on every plot of land when in reality; little area is
conducive to mining. Reimer discussed alternatives and invited
comment/advice from the RAC about the Alternative C ACEC around New
Stuyahok and the Carter Spit ACEC in Alternative C & D.

**II: Ring of Fire RMP/EIS:** Reimer stated that BLM-Alaska has received
protests from the Alaska Coalition and Lynn Canal and resolution to the
protests will be made by the

BLM-Washington Office. Reimer stated this planning area is huge: the
distance from Ketchikan and Adak is equivalent to Seattle to Boston.
Reimer stated that the recent progress in land conveyance is clarifying
what land the BLM will manage and used a map reflecting the evolving
land pattern around Haines.

**III. Field Trip Location Discussion:** Reimer presented alternatives
for the RAC field trip in July 2007. He explained that Dillingham would
be a good choice due to the Bay planning issues prior to the ROD. This
area also has D1 withdrawals and conveyance issues to address. The
second choice presented was Nome. Reimer explained that this area was a
good choice because there would be no transportation issues and includes
Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC), fish research areas
(Arctic Char), and is territory for the Western Arctic Caribou Herd. The
RAC discussed avoiding the Bay area because the public might confuse the
BLM issues with the controversial Pebble Mine project in the area. RAC
members agreed to revisit the topic later on the agenda after
considering available options.

**TOUR** of Alaska Resources Library Information System (ARLIS) &
**BREAK** at 10:05 a.m.

**RECONVENED** at 11:02 a.m.

**ALASKA FIRE SERVICE PROJECT PRESENTATION (Handout):** Jennifer Hrobak
was introduced by AFS Director Scott Billing. Hroback, a student in the
Environmental Careers Program, has worked for the BLM for the last four
summers with Fire Ecologist Randi Jandt. Hrobak gave a presentation
about the AFS's efforts to monitor response to fuels and vegetation as a
resource with prescribed fire. More information about this project can
be found at:
[htttp://fire.ak.blm.gov/afs/organization/mgmtplan/effects.phs](http://www.what/).
Billing mentioned that RAC members could visit a fire monitoring area
during the summer 2007 RAC field trip to Nome. Key said farewell and
good luck in retirement to Billing on behalf of the RAC.

**WORKING LUNCH** with presentations.

**NORTH SLOPE SCIENCE INITIATIVE (NSSI) (Handout**): Taylor addressed
the RAC about recent NSSI happenings. He mentioned that BLM had hired
Adam Mehlhorn as an assistant to work on the NSSI program; Mehlhorn has
been updating the NSSI Web site. Taylor reviewed activities of the
recent Science Technical Group (STG) Oct. 2006 meeting where three study
subgroups were formed. Imm stated that she believed progress had been
made at the Nov. 2006 meeting of the Oversight Group as the group came
to consensus on program direction and is defining processes for future
proceedings. (Imm is a member of the NSSI Oversight Group). Taylor
announced a Jan./early Feb. 2007 NSSI staff contacts meeting focusing on
prioritizing issues and funding. Driver asked how the NSSI decided on
research subjects. Taylor explained that the BLM's RMT identified
several priorities and that much of the initial focus of NSSI reflects
those. The NSSI is developing a database of 500+ current projects which
will enable researchers to quickly determine who is doing what and where
and will facilitate collaboration. Additionally, Taylor announced dates
for the upcoming Caribou Workshop in Anchorage (Feb 21-22, 2007). Driver
asked Taylor how caribou were monitored; Taylor said primary monitoring
is through the use of transmitters and GPS devices but secondary
monitoring is also accomplished via survey of habitat, weather, and
infrastructure. Driver inquired about forage studies, and Taylor said
the Park Service and the BLM were conducting studies.

**KOBUK SEWARD PLANNING UPDATE (Handout):** Jeannie Cole discussed
deadlines, comments, and plan revisions. RAC members discussed issues
about the plan. Imm explained that the caribou are migrating to
different routes because of the increased hunting and recreation in the
area and thet Natives with allotments along the Squirrel River were
frustrated with the changing patterns. Schneider explained that he, too,
had heard of the frustration in the area through talks with the Mayor of
the Northwest Arctic Borough. The Mayor explained to Schneider the
tremendous hunting pressures in the area and the impact on
hunting/subsistence costs when folks have to travel further to reach
subsistence areas. Schneider said one planning option was to get a
special area designation and then address the situation in a Recreation
Area Management Plan (RAMP). The RAC discussed inclusion or exclusion of
the issue in the plan vs. a RAMP as well as how the BLM would deal with
specific issues based on comments from the public, mineral potential,
and D1 withdrawals. Van den Berg asked about the total amount of D1
lands in the plan that could be withdrawn, and Cole said it was less
than one percent of the plan, maybe even less. Beischer asked if a D1
withdrawal is imposed, could the BLM replace it with a new withdrawal.
Cole said this could be accomplished through a public land order. Van
den Berg asked what the total ACEC acreage was for the area and Cole
said it was about 3 million acres that could be managed through Required
Operating Procedures (ROPs).

**PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD** at 1 p.m.

**I. Melissa Blair of the Alaska Coalition (Handout):** Blair's said she
would like the

BLM to institute better quality control on the information it
disseminates at public meetings and in planning documents as she had
found discrepancies in information. Blair suggested that presenting
inaccurate information is a potential National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) violation and she would like the situation remedied. Blair
suggested that BLM-Alaska contact all that were present at the public
meeting to notify them that they had received erroneous information. Key
asked if BLM-Alaska could notify the people. Reimer responded that he
would see what he could do and he could also use the opportunity for
point-specific comment. Blair further stated that the BLM should not
recommend lifting withdrawals but should wait until the Pebble Mine
project is completed and then get data on watershed management issues.
Blair feels residents are concerned about the Pebble Mine and feel
threatened that the Bay Plan is happening simultaneously. The people see
the Bay Plan as a BLM recommendation that another million acres of land
will be available for mineral development. Blair also mentioned that
most of the public comment on the plan asked that D1 withdrawals be
addressed. Beischer suggested that although the Bay plan may seem like
bad timing, Alaska has waited 25 years for this plan. According to
Beischer, this plan also gives the BLM the ability to designate special
areas and to put permanent protections on some areas previously
unprotected. Beischer stated that the sooner the issue of ownership is
resolved, the better Alaska will be.

**II.** **Bobby Andrew, Board of Directors, Aleknagib Natives Limited
(Handout):**

Andrew presented two resolutions from different non-profit organizations
that supported designation of lands in the Bay Plan area for subsistence
use only. Andrew explained that many residents of the Bristol Area
testified at a recent Fish Board meeting in Dillingham. Andrew suggested
that the BLM and the State of Alaska are impacted by choices of land
owning Native corporations. Andrew stated that he would like the BLM and
the RAC to proceed carefully and to address the issues at hand. He
stated that if the land in the planning area is opened to mineral or oil
extraction, it will affect subsistence. Beischer asked how many hunters
from outside use these lands; Andrew suggested that hunters are
competing for moose, caribou, and renewable water resources (fish);
however, Andrew said the village corporations could not stop outsiders
because of the economic benefits to the villages. Beischer reiterated
that most of hunting pressure is on the state owned-land and based on a
recent experience, guides were looking for animals by airplane, marking
the spot by GPS, and then taking the hunters to those animals. Beischer
agreed with Andrew since he believes hunters will be moving to BLM lands
and be in competition and that a subsistence priority might be useful.
Key agreed that hunting activities were on the move. Schneider and
Reimer said they have seen hunting activity migrating to BLM lands and
had testimony about use conflicts. Biescher asked if there is precedence
for doing this. Reimer explained that this is not in the range of
alternatives right now and that he was not sure if it was legally
possible but that he would research it. Beischer then asked about the
possibility of creating a step-down plan and Schneider explained that
BLM-Alaska can manage wildlife in Alaska because of Sec. 8 of ANILCA
whereas this can not happen in other states as it is specifically the
responsibility of the State. Kelly agreed that BLM-AK had never
conceived that we could manage an area of land for a specific subset of
the public. Beischer agreed that getting a subsistence priority might be
difficult but the BLM has some other prescriptions such as the "Special
Area" designations that might be useful.

**III. A third member of the public commented via the email submission
below:**

21 Dec 2006

From: sgumlickpuk@knw.swrsd.org

Subject: Bay plan

To: <sandrakey8@msn.com>

Hi, my name is Sally Gumlickpuk, Stuyahok Limited President. We, as the
Stuyahok Limited Corporation would like to keep the BLM lands closed to
mining and the oil and gas leases. We are VERY interested in learning
more on the Bay plan and would like presentations done in

the village to keep us and our people informed of what is going on at
BLM. The people would like the BLM lands near our village to remain
closed because they don\'t want any harm coming to our renewable
resources and subsistence to be lost to our future generations to come.

We had discussed these BLM lands of possibly being opened during our
Town meeting with the shareholders and these again were discussed at our
New Stuyahok Tribal Council Annual meeting and the responses are always
the same. Keep the lands closed because the Elders and people want to
keep the renewable resources and subsistence safe. They stressed that
very loudly in both meetings.

The people were wanting to testify at the BLM meeting that was supposed
to happen December 4 but was cancelled due to the funeral. They are
happy to get their opportunity on January 15. Thank you for your time
and understanding on this sensitive subject.

**QUORUM** established at 1:30 p.m. upon the arrival of Tom Crafford.

**INTERIM ELECTION:** Key reiterated Boddy's resignation as Vice-Chair.
Key made a motion to nominate and elect Beischer as the Vice-Chair.
Seconded by Imm. All in favor; none opposed. Greg Beischer elected as
Vice-Chair.

**DISCUSSION ON MINERAL ENTRY IN SOUTH NPR-A:** Beischer's Pros/Cons of
Mineral Entry in South NPR-A document was resurrected from previous
meeting files. Key called for thoughts on rewriting it and proceeding as
previously discussed. Key wanted the BLM to proceed with caution based
on the early data collected by the NSB. Crafford said mineral entry
issues are the issues and that the BLM should not develop an EIS based
on simplicity. Van den Berg reiterated earlier suggestions from Ducker
about including mineral entry in Chapter Three, the discussion about the
physical environment. Imm stated that ASRC was not in favor of mineral
entry in the South NPR-A since there is not enough understood in
regarding other issues across the North Slope. She suggested that the
history of NPR-A speaks for itself---there was no activity in NPR-A for
20 years and now there is leasing and exploration occurring from the
Colville River to just south of Barrow. Imm suggested that the Artic
Slope Regional Corporation (ASRC) and others are just trying to catch up
with recent lease sale issues in the NE and NW NPR-A and are evaluating
the changes. Some of the concerns about opening the southern NPR-A are
not only with the pipelines, but serious consideration needs to be made
with respect to open pits, roads, etc. that would come if the areas was
opened to coal and mineral leasing. Van den Berg suggested that Imm was
saying that the ASRC's stand was to go slow and that he would add that
position to the letter. Van den Berg will rewrite the letter to
delineate the issues; the letter will then be transmitted to the BLM-AK
State Director. December 25, 2006 is the deadline for comments.

**CONVEYANCES UPDATE (HANDOUTS):** Ramona Chinn discussed FY07 targets
and Native allotments. She stated that there are currently 75 villages
that need to file their final priorities. She discussed dual selections
by ANCSA and the State. Chinn stated there are 12 million acres to
convey to the State of Alaska but the State is last in line for
precedence.

**2007 FIELD TRIP AND YEARLY MEETING PLANNING DISCUSSION:** Pros and
cons of each proposed field trip location were discussed. The majority
voted for Nome. Key and Reimer will call RAC member Denise Michels since
she is also the Mayor of Nome. Key suggested that the BLM-Alaska office
pursue the possibility of a conveyance signing ceremony in the Nome area
in conjunction with the field trip. RAC members agreed to pursue Barrow
as the location for the Feb. 2007 meeting as long as lodging and
transportation is available.

**WORK PLAN DISCUSSION:** Key suggested that the JRMIC remain an action
item for now but eventually become an information item; wildland fire
management will now become an information item. Key suggested that a
written Solicitor's Opinion on the roles and process of the RAC in
regards to sending unanimous resolutions to the Secretary be added as an
action item; Allen and Wilson assigned as leads. Beischer and Crafford
will investigate the history of the RAC's belief that all unanimous
resolutions go forward to the Secretary by contacting Tom Hawkins and
Gary Gustafson. Crafford will review notes from his attendance at a
nationwide RAC meeting. Key said McCoy had invited the RAC to Glennallen
and suggested the RAC go to Glenallen in for its May 2007 meeting.

Motion to **ADJOURN** by van den Berg. Seconded by Driver. **ADJOURNED**
at 4 p.m.

**Handouts and Presentations (source in parenthesis)**

RAC Agenda, Dec. 13-14 (AK912)

GFO Highlights, Fall 2006 (Ramone McCoy)

BLM Anchorage Field Office RAC Update, Dec. 2006 (Gary Reimer)

Fairbanks District Office End of Fiscal Year 06 Report (Bob Schneider)

Resource Advisory Council Minutes, Feb. 2006 (AK912)

Technically Recoverable Undiscovered Oil Handout (Bob Schneider)

Bay RMP/EIS-Sept. 29, 2006 (Anchorage Field Office)

RAC Resolution 06-03, Alaska Minerals Program (AK912)

NPR-A South Field Trip Photos (Suzanne McCarthy)

DRAFT Pros and Cons of Mineral Entry in NPR-A South Letter Apr. 2006
(AK912)

North Slope Science Initiative Update, June 15, 2006 (Ken Taylor)

Talking Points Paper for FDO Update (Bob Schneider)

BLM-Alaska Fire Service Projects Handout (Jennifer Hrobak)

North Slope Borough Community-Based Planning for South NPR-A (Noah
Ashley)

Alaska Major Issues, Dec. 2006 (AK912)

Memo: Info Request Pursuant to Summer Field Visit to South NPR-A (Bob
Schneider)

Federal Register Notice for Supplement to NPR-A NE Plan (AK912)

South NPR-A Planning Timeline (Bob Schneider)

South NPR-A Field Trip Video CD (Bob Schneider)

RAC Field Notes, July 2006 (AK912)

Briefing to BLM RAC on Kobuk- Seward RMP (Jeanne Cole)

BLM Denali Highway Priorities Map (Ramone McCoy)

RAC Conveyance Briefing FY07 Targets (Ramona Chinn)

Bristol Pay Planning Area Map (Gary Reimer)

Sign In Sheets

**Items from Public Comment**

Board of Directors of Stuyahok Limited Resolution 06-03 (Bobby Andrew)

Board of Directors, Aleknagik Natives Limited Resolution 2006-3 (Bobby
Andrew)

Email Comments (Melissa Blair)

Email Comments (Sally Gumlickpuk)