|
The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Main page | Life on the Coastal Plain | Damage Caused by Oil Development | The Argument for Oil Efficiency
Why destroy America's foremost wildlife refuge for less oil than we consume in a single year? Nestled between the Brooks Mountain Range and the Beaufort Sea in Northeast Alaska, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge's coastal plain is home for nearly 200 wildlife species, including polar bears, musk oxen and caribou. Every summer, millions of tundra swans, snowy owls, eider ducks and other birds migrate there to nest, molt and feed. Because of its abundant and diverse wildlife, the refuge is often likened to Africa's Serengeti. Scientists consider the coastal plain to be the biological heart of the entire refuge. It is this very heart that has been targeted by some members of Congress and oil companies even though there is relatively little oil there, if any. Any amount of oil from the refuge would not significantly reduce U.S. dependence on imported oil and would irreparably harm the wildlife that depend on this unique habitat. If Congress allows oil drilling in the coastal plain, it would set a dangerous precedent. Not only would oil development permanently scar this pristine, fragile wilderness, but it also would open the door to industrializing America's last remaining untouched wildlands. Oil development would permanently harm polar bear denning habitat Oil development would permanently harm bird habitat Oil development would threaten caribou survival The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have concluded that oil development in the coastal plain could destroy this delicate balance, prompting a major decline or displacement of the Porcupine caribou. Industrial facilities, such as roads and pipelines, would force pregnant caribou and nursing mothers to abandon their preferred habitat. The only places left for the herd to go have substantially more predators, less high-quality forage, and significantly less relief from mosquitoes. According to a recent U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) study, even a small reduction in the number of surviving calves -- less than 5 percent in a single year -- could reduce the size of the herd. Advocates of oil development point to the Central Arctic herd, which inhabits the Prudhoe Bay area, as evidence that oil and wildlife can coexist. But Alaska's Department of Fish and Game reports that pregnant caribou have dramatically shifted away from the oil fields, calving instead where there are no industrial disturbances. Studies also show that as roads and pipelines grew closer together in the Central Arctic's Kuparuk oilfields, concentrated calving disappeared from this area and shifted to the south. At 123,000 strong, the Porcupine caribou herd is significantly bigger than the Central Arctic herd, but relies on a calving area, the refuge coastal plain, one-fifth the size of Prudhoe Bay. Furthermore, scientists from the National Academy of Sciences and the USGS have concluded that the Porcupine herd is especially threatened by development not only because of the absence of a safe alternative calving area, but also because of its slow reproduction rate. Oil development would threaten muskoxen A unique wilderness at stake Main page | Life on the Coastal Plain | Damage Caused by Oil Development | The Argument for Oil Efficiency last revised 3.10.05 |











Print this Page
E-mail this Article


