Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Floyd L. Davidson wrote: Scooby Doo wrote: DSK wrote in : What "value" is being negated? The value as wildlife refuge & habitat. Scooby Doo wrote: The other NINETY-TWO PERCENT REMAINS UNTOUCHED. And if the construction cuts migration routes, then the whole rest of it might as well not be there. As I said, the caribou population has TRIPLED since the Alaska pipeline went in. So please don't dust off moronic arguments that were categorically refuted a generation ago. That isn't true. And in fact all of the biologists who've studied caribou around Prudhoe Bay say that developing ANWR will cause a decline in the Porcupine Caribou Herd. "In summary, 4 research-based ecological arguments indicate that the Porcupine caribou herd may be particularly sensitive to development within the 1002 portion of the calving ground: Low productivity of the Porcupine caribou herd - The Porcupine caribou herd has had the lowest capacity for growth among Alaska barren-ground herds ... the Porcupine caribou herd has less capacity to accommodate ... stresses than other Alaska ... herds. Any absolute effect of development would be expected to have a larger relative effect on the Porcupine caribou herd than on the other herds. For example, an approximate 4.6% reduction in calf survival, all else held equal, would be enough to prevent Porcupine caribou herd growth under the best conditions observed to date ... A similar reduction in calf survival, all else held equal, for other Alaska barren-ground herds, however, would not be sufficient to arrest their growth. Demonstrated shift of concentrated calving areas of the Central Arctic caribou herd away from petroleum development infrastructures - ... the Porcupine caribou herd caribou will avoid roads and pipelines during calving ... Avoidance of petroleum development infrastructure by parturient caribou ... is the most consistently observed behavioral response of caribou to development. Lack of high-quality alternate calving habitat - ... When snow cover reduced access by females to the Arctic Refuge coastal plain and 1002 Area for calving, calf survival during June was 19% lower than when they could calve on the Arctic Refuge coastal plain and 1002 Area. Strong link between calf survival and free movement of females - ... data predict that June calf survival for the Porcupine caribou herd will decline if the calving grounds are displaced ... is a function of displacement: 1) reducing access to the highest quality habitats for foraging and 2) increasing exposure to risk of mortality from predation during calving (first 3 weeks of June). http://www.absc.usgs.gov/1002/section3part5.htm And here's what the head biologist for the Procupine Caribou Herd studies said in testimony to Congress: "Considering of the importance of the Porcupine Caribou Herd to indigenous people in United States and Canada, and the high likelihood that petroleum leasing and development would cause long-term harm to those caribou, 21 arctic caribou biologists from the US and Canada signed a letter to former President Clinton urging permanent protection of the Porcupine Herd calving grounds from development. Over 500 prominent North American scientists signed a letter to President Bush urging protection of the Arctic Refuge Coastal Plain to safeguard caribou and other natural resource values. Protection of the Coastal Plain has also been endorsed by the Alaska Chapter of The Wildlife Society, the American Society of Mammalogists, and the Cooper Ornithological Union. Copies of the letters and resolutions are attached. I urge Congress to heed the advice of these eminent wildlife biologists and ecologists and not allow petroleum development on the Arctic Refuge Coastal Plain." Ken Whitten's statement to Congress http://www.defenders.org/wildlife/ar...ws/whitten.pdf And even if it doesn't, it appears the loonylefty mantra has changed from "People, not profits" to "Caribou, not people". In fact the purpose of protecting the Porcupine Caribou Herd is specifically to protect the Gwich'in culture. It *is* a people issue. And I'm sure you can scan and post a photograh of one such species from the last trip you took to ANWR. Here, I'll provide room for you to post that pictu http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson/anwr/ As I said, since you can't rationally debate ANWR, you're useless. I can. And I'll drown you in facts that can't be disputed too. ;-) The problem is actually that *you* don't have a clue what you are talking about. And I'll be happy to set the record straight. -- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) This can't possibly be true. Rush Limbaugh insists that the caribou are thriving as a direct result of the AK pipeline. (Maybe he thinks they bought stock in Exxon). |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
You all know it doesnt matter how many pipelines we have, how many wells we
have, the problem is we dont have the refineries to produce the gas. We can have a surplus of oil and we will still have this problem. We havent built a new refinery in over 20 years. wrote in message ups.com... Floyd L. Davidson wrote: Scooby Doo wrote: DSK wrote in : What "value" is being negated? The value as wildlife refuge & habitat. Scooby Doo wrote: The other NINETY-TWO PERCENT REMAINS UNTOUCHED. And if the construction cuts migration routes, then the whole rest of it might as well not be there. As I said, the caribou population has TRIPLED since the Alaska pipeline went in. So please don't dust off moronic arguments that were categorically refuted a generation ago. That isn't true. And in fact all of the biologists who've studied caribou around Prudhoe Bay say that developing ANWR will cause a decline in the Porcupine Caribou Herd. "In summary, 4 research-based ecological arguments indicate that the Porcupine caribou herd may be particularly sensitive to development within the 1002 portion of the calving ground: Low productivity of the Porcupine caribou herd - The Porcupine caribou herd has had the lowest capacity for growth among Alaska barren-ground herds ... the Porcupine caribou herd has less capacity to accommodate ... stresses than other Alaska ... herds. Any absolute effect of development would be expected to have a larger relative effect on the Porcupine caribou herd than on the other herds. For example, an approximate 4.6% reduction in calf survival, all else held equal, would be enough to prevent Porcupine caribou herd growth under the best conditions observed to date ... A similar reduction in calf survival, all else held equal, for other Alaska barren-ground herds, however, would not be sufficient to arrest their growth. Demonstrated shift of concentrated calving areas of the Central Arctic caribou herd away from petroleum development infrastructures - ... the Porcupine caribou herd caribou will avoid roads and pipelines during calving ... Avoidance of petroleum development infrastructure by parturient caribou ... is the most consistently observed behavioral response of caribou to development. Lack of high-quality alternate calving habitat - ... When snow cover reduced access by females to the Arctic Refuge coastal plain and 1002 Area for calving, calf survival during June was 19% lower than when they could calve on the Arctic Refuge coastal plain and 1002 Area. Strong link between calf survival and free movement of females - ... data predict that June calf survival for the Porcupine caribou herd will decline if the calving grounds are displaced ... is a function of displacement: 1) reducing access to the highest quality habitats for foraging and 2) increasing exposure to risk of mortality from predation during calving (first 3 weeks of June). http://www.absc.usgs.gov/1002/section3part5.htm And here's what the head biologist for the Procupine Caribou Herd studies said in testimony to Congress: "Considering of the importance of the Porcupine Caribou Herd to indigenous people in United States and Canada, and the high likelihood that petroleum leasing and development would cause long-term harm to those caribou, 21 arctic caribou biologists from the US and Canada signed a letter to former President Clinton urging permanent protection of the Porcupine Herd calving grounds from development. Over 500 prominent North American scientists signed a letter to President Bush urging protection of the Arctic Refuge Coastal Plain to safeguard caribou and other natural resource values. Protection of the Coastal Plain has also been endorsed by the Alaska Chapter of The Wildlife Society, the American Society of Mammalogists, and the Cooper Ornithological Union. Copies of the letters and resolutions are attached. I urge Congress to heed the advice of these eminent wildlife biologists and ecologists and not allow petroleum development on the Arctic Refuge Coastal Plain." Ken Whitten's statement to Congress http://www.defenders.org/wildlife/ar...ws/whitten.pdf And even if it doesn't, it appears the loonylefty mantra has changed from "People, not profits" to "Caribou, not people". In fact the purpose of protecting the Porcupine Caribou Herd is specifically to protect the Gwich'in culture. It *is* a people issue. And I'm sure you can scan and post a photograh of one such species from the last trip you took to ANWR. Here, I'll provide room for you to post that pictu http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson/anwr/ As I said, since you can't rationally debate ANWR, you're useless. I can. And I'll drown you in facts that can't be disputed too. ;-) The problem is actually that *you* don't have a clue what you are talking about. And I'll be happy to set the record straight. -- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) This can't possibly be true. Rush Limbaugh insists that the caribou are thriving as a direct result of the AK pipeline. (Maybe he thinks they bought stock in Exxon). |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"ed" wrote:
You all know it doesnt matter how many pipelines we have, how many wells we have, the problem is we dont have the refineries to produce the gas. We can have a surplus of oil and we will still have this problem. We havent built a new refinery in over 20 years. That's a red hering. We *have* expanded nearly every currently operating refinery, and we *could* expand them even more. The oil companies don't want to. In addition, they have been shutting off refineries by the dozens... As to the process for building new refineries or new capacity at old refineries, it isn't all that difficult. For example, the last new refinery in the US was built by Petro Star in Valdez Alaska. They brag about how fast that went from a gleam in the Board's eye to reality... The idea was conceived in 1991, and the refinery was online in early 1993. If we don't have enough refinery capacity, it is clearly a fault of the industry. Now... why would they do that??? :-) -- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Let there be heat! | General | |||
"Heatshield" - More reefer (well, insulation) questions | Boat Building | |||
Diesel Fuel Decontamination Units Give Stored Fuel Longer Life. | General | |||
Diesel Fuel Decontamination Units Give Stored Fuel Longer Life. | Boat Building | |||
ANNOUNCEMENT: Diesel Fuel Decontamination Units Give Stored Fuel Longer Life. | Marketplace |