Posted by Jamie in Endangered Animals | 0 Comments
ANWR controversy
Cited by environmentalists as the largest untainted ecosystem in the Arctic, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) is protected territory in Alaska’s northeast, just north of the Arctic Circle. It has been set apart since President Dwight Eisenhower’s declaration in 1960.
Sprawling for approximately 7.7 million hectares, ANWR is one of the most ecologically prolific wildernesses in America. As a wildlife haven, ANWR harbors the most diverse flora and fauna among all refuges in the circumpolar Arctic, its wildlife including the caribou, musk ox, moose, wolf, grizzly bear and polar bear. Around 194 species of migratory birds flit around these areas. The meeting point for most animals in ANWR is the Coastal Plain or the 1002 Lands; this is also the irreplaceable nursery area of the immense Porcupine caribou herd.
Human beings also thrive in this relatively frosty region. One finds around 200 of the Inupiat people, who live in Kaktovik village on Barter Island while around 150 Gwich’in Native Americans live 230 kilometers due south. The caribou herd figures extensively in the Gwich’in people’s diet.
To this day, ANWR has been the subject of a years-long grueling debate among American lawmakers, whether to drill the area for oil or preserve its sensitive ecosystem.
Many of those in support of oil drilling, let alone exploration, insist that development is not detrimental. Representing only 8% of ANWR, supposedly only 1.5 million acres is considered for activities potentially disturbing to the environment. Many proponents of development also contend that it does not affect animals negatively. In fact, wildlife is shown to coexist well with oil and gas developments in the Arctic. Many also argue that late advancements in technology allow any oil development to tread with a less destructive “environmental footprint.”
Global market prices for oil have ascended to historic highs, yet another reason to support development in ANWR. Likewise, oil production in the North Slope, presently the leading source of oil in America, has declined. Ordinarily, the U.S. can be counted on to import at least $150 billion in oil.
Proponents believe more than anything that ANWR holds the country’s best prospects for a tremendous oil discovery. If the U.S. Department of Interior were to let on, there may be a” super field” here brimming with 16 billion barrels of oil.
All told, exploration in ANWR has not been sufficient to corroborate such claims. The sole drilling in the area transpired in 1984, but the results were not publicized yet. For most environmentalists, the estimates of the Interior Department are dubious. According to their own research, only three billion barrels may be found in ANWR.
Granted, there might be a super field, but further oil supply from ANWR would only augment 0.4 percent to total oil supply in the world. In contrast, Americans account for 26 percent of total oil consumption in the world. Somehow it underscores how America’s consumption far outweighs anything else. Any discovery in ANWR would not hinder Americans from falling back on imports anytime soon.
Any benefit from an increase in oil production would be temporary too. Conservationists insist that oil extraction in ANWR would not trickle down to the market at hand for 15 years. At the rate Americans expend oil, this might not be very much.
As for popular support, proponents claim that 75% of Alaskans are in favor of oil development in ANWR. Conservationists believe otherwise—Eskimos and residents near the North Slope have criticized oil extraction.
One way or the other, development in ANWR would harm wildlife. Although proponents insist that the footprint in question is narrower, conservationists argue that it would inevitably widen to 1.5 million acres. No less than polar bears, migratory birds like the snow geese, and various fauna are wont to be affected.
Offering verdant grazing and the most optimal protection from predators, the 1002 lands—the object of desire for proponents—harbors the calves of the caribou. For the caribou, the time between calving and thereafter is when the animals are most sensitive to human disturbances. Once displaced, the herd’s chances of survival are reduced.
While it is true that their numbers are relatively strong, disturbing human activities could compromise their survival. Food security would then be immediately endangered among the Gwitch’in people.
More information on ANWR:
Defenders of Wildlife have a profile of ANWR.
A study shows that drilling in ANWR will have little impact on America’s dependence on foreign oil.
Related Posts
