**REPORT TITLE:** Beaufort Sea Petroleum Development Scenarios: Natural
Physical Environment Impacts. Final Report.

**STUDY TITLE:** Beaufort Sea Development Scenarios: Natural Physical
Environment Impacts (TR-21).

CONTRACT NUMBER(S): BLM: CT6-61; MMS: 14-12-0001-29002

SPONSORING OCS REGION: Alaska.

APPLICABLE PLANNING AREA(S): Beaufort Sea.

FISCAL YEAR(S) OF PROJECT FUNDING: 1978.

COMPLETION DATE OF REPORT: June 1978.

COST(S): FY 1978: \$27,466; CUMULATIVE PROJECT COST: \$27,466.

PROJECT MANAGER(S): W. Pyle.

AFFILIATION: Dames and Moore.

ADDRESS: 510 L Street, Suite 310, Anchorage, Alaska 99501.

PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR(S)\*: P. Hanley, W. Pyle.

KEY WORDS: Beaufort Sea; Alaska; development scenarios; physical
environment; exploratory drilling; development; impacts; socioeconomics;
resource estimates; fish; fauna; water quality; hunting; subsistence;
mining; North Slope; Prudhoe Bay; Sagavanirktok River; Alaska Region.

ACCESS NUMBER: 29002

**BACKGROUND:** The Alaska Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Social and
Economics Studies Program was initiated by the U.S. Department of the
Interior, Bureau of Land Management (now the Minerals Management
Service) to attempt to predict and evaluate the effects of Alaska OCS
petroleum development upon the physical, social, and economic
environments within the State. The OCS development scenarios were
formulated to provide a reasonable range of technological, economic, and
geographic options so that both minimum and maximum development impacts
could be estimated.

**OBJECTIVES:** (1) To identify and assess natural physical environment
impacts associated with petroleum development on the North Slope of
Alaska; (2) To provide a baseline scenario projecting impacts upon water
resources, waste discharges, mineral resources (mainly sand and gravel),
and fish and wildlife on the North Slope of Alaska under the scenario
where OCS development does not occur; and (3) To predict impacts upon
the natural physical environment based upon projections where varying
levels of OCS development do occur.

**DESCRIPTION:** Scenarios covering a range of locations and of
reasonably expected resource deposit sizes were analyzed to provide the
most realistic predictions for socioeconomic and environmental impact.
For each scenario, three environmental impact areas were discussed,
including: (1) fish and wildlife; (2) water quality, water resources,
and sanitation; and (3) sand and gravel resources.

A baseline (i.e., non‑OCS development) scenario was developed for the
North Slope by predicting impacts of forecasted population and
employment increases and changes in the man‑made environment upon local
natural resources, subsistence hunting and fishing, water resources,
water quality, and sanitation. Contrasting scenarios described OCS
development of the North Slope within the context of varying levels of
resource find. The Camden‑Canning scenario (1.3 billion barrels \[Bbbl\]
of oil), two Prudhoe scenarios (Prudhoe‑Small \[0.8 Bbbl of oil\] and
Prudhoe‑Large \[1.9 Bbbl of oil\]), and a Cape Halkett scenario
(0.8 Bbbl of oil) were based on OCS exploration and production, while a
Smith‑Dease scenario was based on exploration only. Tract assumptions,
physical setting, environmental considerations, and facilities were
discussed for each scenario.

**SIGNIFICANT CONCLUSIONS:** The baseline scenario described changes
that would take place in the natural physical environment if OCS
development did not occur. Fish and wildlife resources would be impacted
by current and future subsistence hunting and fishing as well as by an
increase in sport hunting and fishing. Lack of community water supplies,
distribution systems, and sanitation facilities would impact water
quality, water resources, and sanitation. Current and future needs of
local communities and the petroleum industry would impact sand and
gravel resources. Scenarios based on OCS development described expected
conflicts with the natural physical environment due to population
increases and changes in the man‑made environment. Fish and wildlife
resources would be impacted similarly to the baseline scenario, but
additional impacts such as disturbance of critical wildlife habitats or
breeding areas could occur. Increased population and industry would
further impact water quality, water resources, and sanitation, and
demands on sand and gravel resources would increase due to increases in
community and industrial demands.

**STUDY RESULTS:** In the absence of future OCS development, major
impacts upon fish and wildlife resources were identified as subsistence
hunting and fishing, sport hunting and fishing, and wildlife habitat
disturbance. Subsistence hunting has deceased since the 1960s when snow
machines were introduced in the Arctic, reducing greatly the number of
game animals harvested by Arctic residents to feed their sled dogs.
However, subsistence hunting remains an activity of major importance to
native North Slope residents as a way to preserve traditional culture
and village life. Sport hunting greatly increased between 1965 and 1975
and is expected to continue to increase. Wildlife disturbance has
occurred in the case of caribou being displaced from calving areas, and
habitat disturbance may be the most serious impact on fish and wildlife
in the future.

Assuming no OCS development occurs, impacts on water resources will be a
result of population growth and planned improvements in water treatment
facilities and waste disposal practices. Even without further OCS
development, gravel and sand resources of the North Slope may be
significantly impacted by local and construction demands. Sand and
gravel mining may also impact fish populations through a siltation of
feeding and spawning areas as a result of the mining process.

In the case of OCS development in the Camden‑Canning area, direct
disturbance from motorized vehicles may affect seals, caribou, and
waterfowl. Foxes and wolves will be attracted by direct feeding and
incorrect garbage disposal, and increased mortality from motor vehicles
could result. Polar bears, musk oxen, and whales show minimal potential
for disturbance. Fish may be impacted by modification of groundwater
flow to overwintering areas and siltation of feeding and spawning areas
caused by gravel mining. Water quality and sanitation should only
experience minor disturbances if State and Federal disposal regulations
are followed. Water resources may be stressed by further development and
create conflict between village and industry needs. Increased water
withdrawal from rivers may affect overwintering fish. Gravel
requirements for the Camden‑Canning development are estimated at
13,353,211 m^3^. Although sufficient onshore borrow exists, waterfowl
and shorebird habitats as well as fish overwintering areas need to be
avoided.

In both Prudhoe‑Large and Prudhoe‑Small scenarios, seals, waterfowl, and
caribou calving may experience direct disturbance. Foxes and wolves will
again be attracted to the area, increasing mortality. Polar bears and
whales should be minimally impacted. Impacts on fish would be very
similar to those described by the Camden‑Canning scenario. Water quality
and sanitation will be only minimally impacted, however, the possibility
exists of increased turbidity and contaminants. Although minor conflicts
may arise between village and industry water needs, the proposed Webster
reservoir may provide sufficient water. Increased water withdrawal from
the Sagavanirktok River could impact both the river and the fish that
overwinter there. Gravel requirements for the Prudhoe‑Large and
Prudhoe‑Small scenarios were estimated to be 5,100,223 m^3^ and
4,986,733 m^3^, respectively. It was estimated that sufficient onshore
borrow exists. The Sagavanirktok River has already been heavily mined
and important waterfowl, shorebird, and fish habitats need to be
avoided.

In the final development scenario, seals, whales, caribou, and waterfowl
in the Cape Halkett area will all potentially experience direct
disturbance from human and vehicular activity. Increased mortality of
foxes and wolves attributed to vehicular traffic is probable. Fish may
be impacted by siltation and habitat loss. In turn, local fisherman
could be affected by reduced harvests, and whales, waterfowl, and
caribou used by natives may be displaced from traditional hunting areas.

**STUDY PRODUCT(S):** Dames & Moore. 1978. Beaufort Sea Petroleum
Development Scenarios: Natural Physical Environment Impacts. Final
Report. A final report for the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau
of Land Management Alaska OCS Office, Anchorage, AK. NTIS No. PB-291917.
Social and Economic Studies Program Technical Report No. 21. Contract
No. 14-12-0001-29002. xiv + 100 pp.

\*P.I.\'s affiliation may be different than that listed for Project
Manager(s).