Alaskan Wildlife Refuge Should Not Be Held Hostage to Greed
Alaskans, especially residents of communities in and near the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge, have good reason to oppose the proposed land swap between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Doyon Ltd.
This land exchange will dramatically alter the livelihoods of local residents. Many are Doyon shareholders who oppose the exchange and who have been unfairly deprived of a voice in the deal through a rushed public comment process.
The Yukon Flats refuge encompasses 11 million acres of some of the most productive wildlife habitat in North America. It includes the highest density of breeding ducks in Alaska and as well as three species of salmon and hundreds of other species of birds, mammals and fish.
Gwich'in Athabascan people have relied on these resources for thousands of years. Subsistence activities continue to define the cultural and social fabric of the eight Native villages in and near the refuge. This rich ecological breeding ground is also valued by waterfowl hunters and birdwatchers around the world and by the commercial and sport fishing industries that depend on the Yukon River watershed.
The Yukon Flats refuge was established to protect the area's unique fish and wildlife resources, to fulfill international treaty obligations, to provide for continued subsistence uses and to ensure necessary water quality and quantity. Neither fragmenting the refuge -- an inevitable result of the proposed exchange -- nor oil and gas development are compatible with these purposes. Indeed, the Fish and Wildlife Service currently does not allow oil and gas development on the refuge.
The proposed swap would exchange 110,000 acres of refuge land and 97,000 acres of subsurface rights on the refuge for 150,000 acres of Doyon-owned land. At first glance it may appear that the agency stands to gain from this exchange because it would receive additional lowland, wetland acres. In fact, those lowlands would almost certainly be threatened by the inevitable infrastructure associated with oil and gas facilities upstream.
In addition to groundwater contamination and pollutants traveling downstream, the large water withdrawals required by oil development would surely compromise lowland wetlands. Lowland lakes in the Yukon Flats refuge are already drying up due to climate change. And the Fish and Wildlife Service admits it would take no more than three days for a large oil spill on the proposed exchange lands to reach the Yukon River.
The agency's proposed giveaway includes lands within its own recommended wilderness area and lands adjacent to Beaver Creek, a designated "wild" river and popular recreation destination.
Doyon, the largest private landholder in Alaska, wants to acquire the lands with the highest potential for producing oil and gas, even if it adversely affects Native residents and recreational visitors. Without these lands there is little chance Doyon will attract industry partners. Also, if the land exchange is approved and infrastructure is built here, it will be easier for Doyon to expand its operations into other parts of the refuge. Perhaps this is why the corporation is willing to go against the wishes of its shareholders to gain approval for this project.
The Exxon Valdez case currently before the U.S. Supreme Court reminds us of how an oil company can operate. Like Exxon, Doyon has a poor track record when it comes to pollution violations. Doyon pleaded guilty to 15 violations of the Oil Pollution Act for dumping hazardous wastes down wells, and one of its drilling rigs violated air quality permits at the Alpine oil field. It seems clear that Doyon is the only winner in this land exchange. The people who depend on the rich resources of the refuge, and the wildlife that call this land home, will be the big losers.
Nicole Whittington-Evans is associate regional director for The Wilderness Society in Anchorage.
© Copyright 2008, The Anchorage Daily News
Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
11 Comments so far
Show AllOops, I posited a universal truth, "Universal truths are dangerous postulates.."
"Who cares what hunters and sports fishermen think? They kill for fun."
Universal statements positing 'truth' often represent abuses of power. Think of how the doctrine of 'Manifest Destiny' authorized the whites and deauthorized, marginalized, and peripherialized non-whites based upon a polemic racialized ideology of inclusion and exclusion categories.
I live in Northwest Arctic Alaska. I subsistence hunt for caribou, moose, musk ox and other animals. Other than limited hydroponics, I am not able to grow my own food during the winter time.
Kelmer, please do not represent my views for me. I, nor my do most in my community hunt so much for "fun", but instead prefer a way of life you casually dismiss. My subsistence lifestyle (including berry picking and fishing during the summer and fall seasons) as a way of life; a way of maintaining strong cultural ties to my environment, and means to share scarce food resources.
Please think before you post. Universal truths are dangerous postulates, because they tend to claim categorical truths based upon porous foundations.
Whoa- what is happining in the great white north while America sleeps lulled to bed with corperate media bedtime stories- here's a sexed up scandel that's ongoing with daily developments breaking - really just the tip of the frickin' iceberg:
http://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/200803/lol.asp
Another reason why the human race needs a mass extinction.
Just another example of the US Plutocracy at work. Who cares about the environment or poor people when there's profit to be made. That's the American way! Profit before People.
The Native Americans had some of the right ideas. They had some philosophies about respecting wildlife and avoiding waste. Nature was important to most of them. It is unfortunate that they couldn't unite. It's more unfortunate that we learned nothing from them. Now with our pockets stuffed with dollars, drooling over the prospect of more, we turn to the Alaskan wilderness to exploit. We destroy life to get money, knowing even as we count the dollars that it will not be enough. No amount of money will ever be enough. We turn our back as the Grouse and the Muskox lay dying in the poisoned sludge fens. What will it take to open up our eyes to what we are doing?
ANOTHER public giveaway for private profit. "take from the many and give to the few"-Baron Bush
Subsistence hunting is not about "bloodlust". Its about survival, and there is no such thing as an all-vegan diet in Alaska. How much do you pay for a gallon of Gas where you live? I live in Alaska and I just paid $3.62 per gallon.
We do alot of walking here. The last thing I want to do is pay even MORE for grocery sold meat full of crappy preservatives and growth hormones, or soy products grown after tearing down half a rain forest. I am not against vegans, I respect their life choices. But it is just not something that would work here. As an Alaskan for over 20 years, I can safely say I have never "blasted" a duck or goose. Hunted, yes. "blasted", no, that would ruin the meat!
If the federal gov't and corporations are involved, they will surely beat out the little guy (natives) and have hidden, or not so hidden, agendas (ie- profits). I'm all for subsistence hunting and fishing by native peoples. Even if you don't support groups such as Ducks Unlimited, they have helped save some wetlands. I know, I know, save a wetland so we can blast ducks and geese...
Who cares what hunters and sports fishermen think? They kill for fun.
As long as we care what they think, you wont be able to protect wild places because it shows that humans dont respect nature. Greed isnt just about money, its also about bloodlust.
No kidding, the north slope is industrialized, they want the remaining 5%. (the breeding place for much of wildlife)