YUKON FLATS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE LAND EXCHANGE, ALASKA. [Part 1 of 3]
Dates
Year
2008
Citation
2008, YUKON FLATS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE LAND EXCHANGE, ALASKA. [Part 1 of 3]: v. 1.
Summary
PURPOSE: The exchange of lands between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and Doyon, Limited is proposed to enhance the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge of Alaska. Since the refuge was established in 1980, Doyon has been interested in acquiring federal oil and gas interests in the south-central portion of dedicated area. Under the terms of an agreement in principle between the FWS and Doyon, the U.S. government would receive fee title to at least 150,000 acres of Doyon lands, including both surface and subsurface rights, with priority fish and wildlife habitats that can be incorporated into the refuge. Doyon would receive fee title to approximately 110,000 acres of refuge lands, including both surface and subsurface rights, [...]
Summary
PURPOSE: The exchange of lands between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and Doyon, Limited is proposed to enhance the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge of Alaska. Since the refuge was established in 1980, Doyon has been interested in acquiring federal oil and gas interests in the south-central portion of dedicated area. Under the terms of an agreement in principle between the FWS and Doyon, the U.S. government would receive fee title to at least 150,000 acres of Doyon lands, including both surface and subsurface rights, with priority fish and wildlife habitats that can be incorporated into the refuge. Doyon would receive fee title to approximately 110,000 acres of refuge lands, including both surface and subsurface rights, and oil and gas rights over approximately 97,000 acres of subsurface adjacent to the transferred fee title lands. Doyon would reallocate most of its remaining entitlement of 56,500 under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act to areas outside the refuge. If Doyon produces oil and/or gas on the lands acquired from the FWS, Doyon would be obliged to pay the federal government a perpetual production payment of 1.25 percent of the resource value at the wellhead. These payments would increase to 1.5 percent if a transportation corridor we constructed across refuge lands. These funds, deposited into a special account in the U.S. Treasury, could be used by the FWS to acquire additional lands within national wildlife refuges in Alaska and/or to construct needed refuge facilities. If the wells began production, Doyon would sell to the federal government an additional 120,000 acres of lands, including surface and subsurface rights, within refuge boundaries. If a pipeline rights-of-way were granted across the refuge, Doyon would convey to the FWS 640 acres of land for every linear mile of pipeline crossing the refuge. Both parties would exchange additional land to consolidate ownerships and facilitate land management. This consolidation exchange would be on an equal-value basis and would include approximately 132,000 acres on the part of each party. If approved, the exchange could be completed by the end of 2008, and oil and gas exploration on the lands received by Doyon could follow within a few years. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS considers land exchange with non-development easements, under which Doyon would grant non-development easements on 120,0000 acres, but would not sell land to the FWS and a land exchange excluding the White-Crazy Mountains that would exclude from the exchange an area within the refuge that the FWS has recommended for wilderness designation. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The exchange would increase the total extent of public lands managed in accordance with refuge purposes and the National Wildlife Refuge System mission; add priority wildlife habitat to the refuge, and consolidate landownership patterns in the refuge. Oil and gas developments would create a significant number of jobs and otherwise boost the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Oil and gas development following the exchange would begin with seismic surveys and exploratory drilling. Oil field developments would follow if economically viable. Seismic survey lines, extending 100 to 200 miles, would and roads a accessing drill sites would destroy 450 to 640 acres of wildlife habitat and disturb small burrowing mammals and denning bears. Survey lines would degrade visual aesthetics. Drilling would destroy vegetation and damage wildlife habitat. In general, oil and gas developments would alter the hydrological landscape of Yukon Flats, degrade air quality, increase greenhouse gas emissions, displace soil, increase consumption of water in the area, exacerbate soil erosion and sedimentation of receiving waters, further degrade water quality in the likely event of oil spills, alter drainage patterns, displace or degrade wetlands and floodplains, damage fish habitat, increase the spread of invasive plant species, and degrade wilderness values and visual aesthetics. LEGAL MANDATES: Alaska Native Claims Settle ent Act of 1971 (43 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.).
