Technology and Greater Sage-grouse Conservation Responding to the Conservation – Responding to the ThreatsThomas ClaysonOctobe 9 2009October 9, 2009

Objectivej

•Demonstrate Technologies That Aid in Conserving Greater Sage-grouse Habitats Greater Sage-grouse Habitats

Wyoming Case Study

2October 15, 2009

Background Informationg

•Western State’s Land Ownership & Major Producing Basins in the Greater Sage-grouse’s HabitatsBasins in the Greater Sage-grouse s Habitats

•Status of Greater Sage-grouse Petition for Listing Under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and Changing g p ( ) g gRegulatory Environment

Federal Land Management of Greater Sage-grouseBureau of Land Management (BLM) Special Status Species Management

Wyoming’s Greater Sage-grouse Habitat Mgt Approach

•Technologies or Best Management Practices

3October 15, 2009

Western Federal Land Ownershipp

State Surface % of State

NV 84.5

UT 57.4

OR 53 1OR 53.1

ID 50.2

AZ 48.1

CA 45.3

WY 42.3

NM 41 8NM 41.8

CO 36.6

WA 30.3

4October 15, 2009

MT 29.9

Greater Sage-grouseg g

5October 15, 2009

Greater Sage-grouse Habitat (USGS)g g ( )

6October 15, 2009

Major Western Producing Basinsj g

MajorProducingBasin

7October 15, 2009

Greater Sage-grouse Status - ESAg g

•Prior to 2005 Numerous Petitions to list Greater-sage Grouse Submitted to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)( )

•USFWS 2005 Decision “Not Warranted”

Federal agencies responsible for managing 66% of sagebrush l dlandscape

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) responsible for management of majority of those lands (46%)

R i d t f th tReview and assessment of threatsOil and gas development

Strong focus on BLM resource management

•Judge Winmill Decision – Idaho Federal District Court 2007

Remanded decision back to USFWS for reconsideration

USFW will issue new listing decision early 2010

8October 15, 2009

•USFW will issue new listing decision early 2010

BLM Management for Greater Sage-Grouseg g

•Special Status Species Management Policy (6840 Manual)

ESA Listed SpeciesESA - Listed Species

ESA - Candidate Species

ESA - Proposed for ListingESA Proposed for Listing

Identified by a State requiring special management

Identified by the BLM State Director

•Endangered or Threatened Species – Management for Recovery

•All other – Conservation to prevent listing

9October 15, 2009

BLM Management Strategiesg g

•Established Permitting Conditions – Point Radii Management

One Quarter (1/4) mile NSO from a lek (strutting)One Quarter (1/4) mile NSO from a lek (strutting)Prevent disturbance that may affect leking activity

2 mile seasonal no surface disturbing activities (March 1 to June 15)

Prevent disturbance in nesting and brood rearing habitats

Siting - Locating infrastructure to minimize impactg g p

Daily timing restrictions – no post dawn and pre sunset travel

R d ti f i t t tiReduction of noise at compressor stations

10October 15, 2009

BLM Management Strategiesg g

•Evolving Permitting Conditions

Limits on well site visitation

Habitat based management rather than point radii

Limitation on surface disturbing activities during critical Limitation on surface disturbing activities during critical periods => 4 mi.

Limits on well pad densities

Seasonal “No Surface Disturbing Activities” Restrictions in Winter Concentration Areas

11October 15, 2009

State of Wyoming Sage-grouse ManagementManagement

•State of Wyoming Executive Order Oil and Gas Management Stipulations(2008)Management Stipulations(2008)

One well pad per 640 acres. No more than 11 well pads within 1.9 miles of the perimeter of occupied sage grouse leks with densities not to exceed 1 pad per 640 acres. Clustering of well pads may be considered and approved on a case-by-case basispp y

Surface disturbance will be limited to < 5% of sagebrush habitat per 640 acres.

12October 15, 2009

State of Wyoming Sage-grouse ManagementManagement

Limitation on disturbance may be considered and approved on a case-by-case basis.pp yNo Surface Occupancy (NSO) within 0.6 mi of the perimeter of occupied sage grouse leks

P li N t Li it d t Oil d G•Policy Not Limited to Oil and GasWind, Mining, etc.

•Demonstration to USFWS that Wyoming is Taking a •Demonstration to USFWS that Wyoming is Taking a Proactive and Leadership Role in Greater Sage-grouse Conservation

C id i i li i d i iConsideration in listing decisionEnsure both Sage-grouse and the state’s economy base is protected.

13October 15, 2009

p

Wyoming Core Areasy g

14October 15, 2009

Wyoming Game and Fish Dept Management Recommendations Outside Core AreaRecommendations Outside Core Area

•Recommendations for Development of Oil and Gas Resources within Important Wildlife Habitats (2009)Resources within Important Wildlife Habitats (2009)

No surface occupancy (NSO) within 1/4 mile of the perimeter of each lek. Thresholds and mitigation apply to all development within 2 miles of a lek, and within identified nesting/brood-rearing habitats > 2 miles from a lek. In addition, seasonal use restrictions should apply to leks at all impact thresholds.

Greater than 3 well pad locations should be avoided to the extent practicablep

15October 15, 2009

Identified Interactions of Concern for Oil and Gas Development and Greater Sage-grouseDevelopment and Greater Sage-grouse

•Habitat loss

Surface disturbance

Invasive species

N i•Noise

Compressors and other facilities

O h d St t•Overhead Structures

Power lines, towers, etc.

T ffi•Traffic

Volume, timing, frequency

16October 15, 2009

Technology Solutionsgy

•All Oil and Gas Fields not Created Equal

ConsiderationsTechnically feasibility

EconomicsEconomics

•All Greater Sage-grouse Habitat not Created Equal

ConsiderationsHigh Quality Habitats Utilized

High Quality Habitat not Utilized

M i l H bit t Utili dMarginal Habitats Utilized

Marginal Habitats not Utilized

17October 15, 2009

Technology Solutionsgy

•Bottom LineConsiderations Must Be BalancedConsiderations Must Be Balanced

Energy productionSocialE i t lEnvironmentalEconomic

Shared GoalsReduced Surface Disturbance

Construction and Reclamation Costs ReducedReduction in Temporary Habitat Loss

Reduced TrafficReduced TrafficWell Site and Facility Visits Cost $$$Reduction Interaction with Wildlife

Increased Operational Efficiency

18October 15, 2009

Drill and Complete Wells Quicker

Technology Solutionsgy

•Environmentally Friendly Drilling Systems (EFD)

“To integrate advanced technologies into a drilling rig system that significantly reduces the environmental impact of petroleum drilling and production” (Houston Advanced Research Center)

Anadarko Petroleum and partners are incorporating dual engineering and environmental research programs dual engineering and environmental research programs specifically to reduce the environmental impacts on ecologically sensitive areas from extraction activities

Transportation

Drilling

Production and Completion Systems

19October 15, 2009

Applied Technologiespp g

•Directional Drillingd d & d Reduces road & pad construction

Related dust and emissions

Reduces road network

Reduces truck traffic dust and emissions

20October 15, 2009

Applied Technologies

•Telemetry & Well AutomationRed ction in Vehicle TrafficReduction in Vehicle Traffic

21October 15, 2009

Applied Technologies

•Off-site Centralization of Production and Liquids Gathering Systems

Reduces Vehicle TrafficCan Site Facilities Near High Volume Roads

22October 15, 2009 22

Applied Technologies

• Centralized Fracturing FarmsReduction in Vehicle TrafficReduced Surface Disturbance

23October 15, 2009

Applied Technologies

•Burying Lines & UtilitiesReduction in Surface DisturbanceReduction in Surface DisturbanceFaster Reclamation

Plow mark

24October 15, 2009

Applied Technologies

•Utilization of Noise Reduction

25October 15, 2009

Applied Technologies pp g

•Rotary – Steerable Drills

Reduced Drilling Timeframes

•Fit for Purpose Rigs

R d d S f Di bReduced Surface Disturbance

Reduced Drilling Timeframes

I d S f tIncreased Safety

•3D Seismic

C Eli i t U W llCan Eliminate Unnecessary Wells

26October 15, 2009

Applied Best Management Practicespp g

•Industry Applied Strategies Conserving Sage-grouse and Their Habitat

http://www.pawyo.org/html/management.htmAdministrative – RegulatoryAdministrative – Internal to OperatorpPlanningHabitat MappingReclamationReclamationDrillingOperationsProduced Water ManagementMonitoring; andCommunication and Cooperation

27October 15, 2009

p

Conclusions

•New Technologies Must Play a Role

Meet Future Energy DemandsContinue to Explore and Operate in Sensitive Environments

Continue to Safeguard the Environment in All AreasContinue to Safeguard the Environment in All Areas

•Their Application Must Be

Proven to be Effective in Reducing Environmental gImpacts

Balanced with Economic, Social and Environmental CostsCosts

Be Technically Feasible

• They All Do Not Need to Be Elegant

28October 15, 2009

• They All Do Not Need to Be Elegant