|
|
|
|
Alaska Wild Update #193 - Nov 26, 2002 QUOTE OF THE WEEK "If
there is any real chance of avoiding legislative disaster it rests with
a handful of responsible Republican senators. Working together and in
tandem with the Democrats, they can reject President Bush's zealots
and, with any luck, begin to steer their party back to its Rooseveltian
traditions of strong environmental stewardship." HEADLINES 107th CONGRESS GOES HOME WITHOUT TAKING A PIECE OF ALASKA BP PULLS OUT OF PRO-DRILLING LOBBY GROUP MAJORITY OF AMERICANS STILL OPPOSE ARCTIC DRILLING LAST CHANCE FOR COMMENTS ON POINT THOMSON
As the 107th Congress drew to a close, there was a predictable end of the session scramble to win approval for pet projects and to sneak legislation through that would normally not have any chance anywhere. For the Alaska delegation, pet projects meant two potentially disastrous land exchanges. In the first one, the Cape Fox corporation would have been able to exchange 3,000 heavily logged acres for roughly 12,000 acres of pristine old growth along the incomparable Berners Bay, just north of Juneau. In the second, the University of Alaska would have been granted up to 500,000 acres of public land to use however they saw fit (in the past, they’ve leased parts of their original land grant for logging and mining as a way of generating income). Most of the year, both of these bills had various holds on them from Senators opposed to giving away public land for private profit. At the end of a session however, both sides of the aisle generally are finagling ways to get things done before time runs out, and even our champions can get rolled. In the end, both bill passed the Senate as the Senate left town, but neither saw the light of day on the House side. On Friday, November 22, the House adjourned without acting on either the Cape Fox bill or the University Lands bill, and prevented one of the single largest land giveaways ever. Other good news from the end of the 107th Congress was that drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge also never made it out. After being passed on the House side during the summer of 2001, the Senate rejected Arctic drilling in spring of this year. Despite repeated attempts by Conference Committee Chair Billy Tauzin (R-LA) to have the drilling proposal reinserted into the Energy Bill during the energy conference committee, Senate conferees made it clear that the proposal was a non-starter. In part because of controversy surrounding Arctic drilling and in part due to other controversial issues, the entire energy bill eventually stalled and died in the conference committee. For
everyone who has written to their Representatives and Senators about
Alaska, thank you! Your hard work prevented any major legislative proposal
from damaging public lands in Alaska during this session of Congress. During this past summer and fall alone, the Alaska delegation had at least 4 major proposals out, many of which would have resulted in huge give-aways of public lands to private interests. While our work is certainly going to be cut out for us in to prevent many of these same proposals from passing in the 108th Congress, we can all be satisfied with our collective accomplishments over the past two years. The
first day of the 108th Congress will be January 7, 2003 at 12 noon for
swearing in. BP PULLS OUT OF PRO-DRILLING LOBBY GROUP On Friday, November 22, BP, the second largest oil company operating in Alaska, announced that the London-based company was dropping out of Arctic Power. Arctic Power is a single-issue lobbying group that promotes opening the coastal plain of the Arctic Refuge for oil and gas drilling. According to BP, their last contribution of $50,000 was in 2001. Arctic Power gets most of its funding from the state of Alaska. Last year the Alaska Legislature granted it $3.5 million “We commend BP for listening to the American people and their shareholders from around the world and dropping out of Arctic Power,” said U.S. PIRG’s Arctic Wilderness Campaign director Athan Manuel. “BP figured out that drilling in the Arctic Refuge, one of America’s last wild places, contradicts their carefully cultivated green image. This is a great win for America’s Arctic.” Over the last few years, oil executives have repeatedly said in private that drilling in the refuge is not a priority. Proponents of drilling have said that 16 billion barrels of oil, a huge amount in industry terms, lies below the tundra of the refuge's coastal plain. But a study by the United States Geological Survey estimated that there are 3.2 billion barrels of economically recoverable oil at $20 a barrel, and only slightly more at higher prices. BP is one of two oil companies to have drilled exploratory wells in the area about 20 years ago, but the results are proprietary. The company said that its decision to leave Arctic Power had nothing to do with those findings, but other parties in the debate said the refuge's economic prospects were likely to have figured in the decision.
In a letter mailed on August 2, 2002, U.S. PIRG and World Wildlife Fund urged BP to drop out of Arctic Power. The letter stated dropping out of Arctic Power “would demonstrate to the socially responsible investment and conservation community that BP is no longer actively advocating drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.” The
August 2 letter was sent as part of the PIRG Arctic Wilderness Campaign.
For the last four and half years the campaign has targeted the four
oil companies that have expressed interest in drilling in the Arctic
Refuge. Since 1998 the PIRG campaign has filed 12 shareholder resolutions
and generated more than 45,000 e-mails, phone calls, and letters to
BP, ExxonMobil, Chevron Texaco and Phillips Conoco. For more on the
campaign, visit the Save The
Arctic site. MAJORITY
OF AMERICANS STILL OPPOSE ARCTIC DRILLING “It’s clear that the American people are not swayed by the false arguments being pushed by drilling supporters. Most Americans are not willing to sacrifice this last great wilderness for a speculative six-month supply of oil,” said Cindy Shogan, Executive Director for the Alaska Wilderness League. The results of the New York Times-CBS News poll reflect the consistent public sentiment that oil and gas exploration is not compatible with wilderness. Over the past several years, poll after poll has demonstrated that the public wants to keep oil drilling out of the Arctic Refuge. According to the U.S. Geological Survey, the oil most likely to be recovered from the Arctic Refuge would amount to less than a six-month supply for the United States. In addition, it would take 10 years to do the exploration, construction and drilling necessary to get to the U.S. markets. These are the questions that the poll was asking: Currently, drilling for oil and natural gas is prohibited in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Do you approve or disapprove of the proposal to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska for oil and natural gas drilling? Fifty five percent said they disapproved and only 39 percent said they approved. The poll also looked at whether or not attaching the president’s name to the proposal changed the outcome: Do you approve or disapprove of George W. Bush’s proposal to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska for oil and natural gas drilling? The answer didn’t significantly change and was still a majority of 52% disapproving. LAST CHANCE FOR COMMENTS ON POINT THOMSON The oil and gas industry is moving ever closer to the coastal plain of the Arctic Refuge. While most of the focus on the Refuge remains on the stalled energy legislation, ExxonMobile is knocking on the door of the Arctic. With a less then stellar track record in Alaska, ExxonMobile is making a bold attempt to move as close the Refuge as possible in the so called "Point Thompson Project". This represents a major extension of North Slope infrastructure - right to the doorstep of the Arctic Refuge - and could be a severe threat to the wilderness qualities and wildlife of the Refuge. This project - put forward by ExxonMobil as their first major North Slope project - includes a drilling pad that is less than one mile west from the Arctic Refuge boundary along the coast. The project also includes a dock that could ultimately be used for Arctic Refuge drilling. The Pt. Thomson area is part of the post-calving and summering grounds of the Porcupine caribou herd as well as a high use area for denning polar bears and could have negative effects on both species. In addition, the dock could have major impacts on migrating fish along the shore and could be used as an access site for future development within the Refuge. WHAT YOU CAN DO See
the Action Page on this site for details. With Congress adjourned until January 7, now is the perfect time to go meet with them without having to come to Washington DC to do it! Senators and House Representative all are home for the holidays. We know that drilling proponents are already planning their legislative strategy to yet again attempt to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Our members need to be reminded that the majority of the American people still do not want this magnificent treasure plundered for the speculative amount of oil that might be there. People
all over the country have been great about writing, sending emails,
making phone calls and doing what needs to be done to protect the Arctic.
What needs to be done now is that even our champions need people to
go in and remind them that their constituents support what they are
doing. If your member voted wrong (to find out how your member voted,
click
here and look up their vote.) they really need to be educated on
the issue and to know that people in their district want them to do
the right thing this time around! No need to go alone – bring friends
from church, or from your PTA, or your book club! Whatever organizations
you’re a part of, get them to talk about the Arctic and then call
your Congressmember’s office to schedule a meeting. This is the
best possible way to communicate with Congress, by going in and talking In
the spring, our champions Ed Markey (D-MA) and Nancy Johnson (R-CT)
will be reintroducing the Mo Udall Arctic Wilderness Bill. This bill
will need co-sponsors. If your member voted well in the past, go in
and tell them that you want them to be an ORIGINAL CO-SPONSOR of the
bill. |
