What government NUT did that study?!
Posted on 04/02/2002 2:13:53 PM PST by Praetorian
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Opening Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling could harm caribou, snow geese and other wildlife, a new U.S. government study said on Friday, despite the Bush administration's assurances that oil exploration would have little impact.
The report, written by the Interior Department's U.S. Geological Survey, was published 10 days before the U.S. Senate is due to launch a contentious debate on whether to allow drilling in the pristine refuge on Alaska's northern coast.
The remote refuge stretches over 19 million acres and holds up to 16 billion barrels of oil. President Bush, a former Texas oilman, and many of his fellow Republicans back drilling there to boost U.S. energy supplies.
Environmental groups oppose the plan, saying drilling would destroy a scenic place sometimes called "America's Serengeti" and would also fail to yield any sizable amount of oil for several years.
According to the government report, drilling in the refuge could especially hurt the Porcupine River caribou herd, which travels some 400 miles from Canada's Yukon Territory to the Alaskan coastal plain for calving in May and June.
The herd, which has dwindled to an estimated 123,000 animals, uses the entire coastal plain area which the Bush administration wants to open to drilling.
Pregnant caribou avoid roads and pipelines and calves have "repeatedly shown to be sensitive to disturbance," it said.
"Oil development will most likely result in restricting the location of concentrated calving areas, calving sites and annual calving grounds," the report said. "Expected effects that could be observed include reduced survival of calves during June, reduced weight and condition of (pregnant) females and reduced weight of calves in late June."
An Interior Department spokesman downplayed the report, saying it was based on an outdated drilling plan that included a major highway, an airport and "intensive" energy production.
The report's conclusions "are not based on the reality of the current legislation proposed in congress," said Interior spokesman Mark Pfeifle. "Neither the highway or the airport will ever be constructed because ice roads and ice runways will be used. They disappear in the springtime when the caribou are calving."
GEESE, OXEN ALSO AT RISK
Snow geese and musk oxen are among other wildlife that could also be affected, the report said.
The geese have a small area for feeding on the coastal plain, making them vulnerable to oil drilling activities.
Oil exploration may also hurt the area's musk oxen, which survive temperatures as low as minus-40 degrees Fahrenheit by reducing their movements to conserve energy. The estimated 300 oxen living year-round in the plain may be weakened if they are forced to move away from a drilling area, the report said.
The Arctic refuge is also used by pregnant polar bears and as a nesting area for several kinds of migratory birds.
While Bush and many Republicans have repeatedly endorsed drilling, the U.S. Energy Information Administration said recently that it would take about two decades before any crude oil pumped from the refuge could reduce U.S. oil imports.
The Democratic-led Senate is set to debate Alaska drilling when lawmakers return from a spring vacation on April 8.
A Reuters survey of all 100 U.S. senators earlier this month found that the White House proposal to open the refuge to drilling appeared doomed in the Senate. At least 50 senators, including five Republicans, said they opposed drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and 10 others were undecided.
Under the Senate's rules for controversial legislation, 60 votes are required to cut off debate and proceed with a vote.
Sen. John Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat, said the new report showed why drilling is a bad idea.
"The administration should take to heart the conclusive scientific findings of the U.S. Geological Survey and finally put aside plans to drill in the pristine wilderness of the Arctic," Kerry said in a statement.
Bush, Interior Secretary Gale Norton and other Republicans maintain that wildlife in the Arctic refuge would be unaffected if drilling is limited to about 1.5 million acres. They say oil firms have the technology to drill in several directions from a single site, lessening the footprint left by heavy equipment.
The new U.S. Geological Survey report analyzed the impact of drilling on wildlife as well as vegetation, weather, predators and other key habitat elements in the Arctic refuge.
For the love of Pete, who really gives a damn?
/sarcasm (not aimed at you)
I find it odd how not getting an appreciable amount of oil for several years is a valid argument. It would take a few years just to get the operation online once they started. In any case it is a long term project. What do they expect, that the oil will flow immediately and abundantly. This study doesn't seem to provide much in the way of concrete evidence
Hey, this is Alaska, you idiots. The entire Serengeti plain isn't a broom closet in the AWNR. Besides, no self-respecting giraffe would be caught dead in the Arctic.
I wish we had someone to read through this propaganda. I don't doubt unacceptable damage can done, but what does this report show? The oxen moved from point A to Point B, they expended calories doing so, and they are "weakened." This smells like one of those fake lynx hair stories.
Anyway, it's about the Natural Gas, not so much the oil, which the environmentalists are completely clueless about, as are many others.
What government NUT did that study?!
Oh, and it will take a few years to get the oil. So don't get started. And do you think that Bush is motivated by the fact he is a "former oilman," as opposed to his concerns about the United States?
And how could we consider destroying such magnificent scenery. Obviously whole square feet would be disturbed.
I'm with you, if it's gonna take ten years...then get humpin and pumpin.
Interesting story...We bought a large office building and one of the tenants' was a lawyer's office that had never paid rent since moving in six months earlier. When I confronted Mr. Schwartz, the lawyer, I told him that I did not care about the prior six month's rent...only start paying now! He informed me that it would take me approximately one year to evict him...guess what? It did take a year. Glad we sued immediately.
BTW, Mr. Schwartz was very surprised when the sherriff's office showed up one day and started moving all the furniture/equipment to the street...it was SWEET (I took pictures)
ANWR in summer .....
ANWR in spring ....
If only someone in the media would be honest enough to show these pictures, progress might be made on this issue!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.