FAIRBANKS — The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service confirmed Monday it will consider stricter conservation standards for much of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, including the valued coastal plain.
The “wilderness reviews,” which will cover three distinct areas, come as part of a broader update to the conservation plan covering the refuge. The three areas collectively cover half the refuge’s acreage, said Bruce Woods, an Alaska spokesman for Fish and Wildlife.
Any recommendation from the service’s Alaska offices would face a long haul through the national office, the Interior Department, the White House and Congress.
Just the idea that the coastal plain — including its so-called 1002 Area, representing a huge unexplored oil basin — could be further preserved from future development under formal “wilderness” labels carries an emotional wallop across the state. Many public leaders oppose the idea, but public meetings this spring attracted calls for stronger conservation rules.
The service is updating a comprehensive conservation plan covering the refuge. Woods said the agency will consider, between now and next spring, the question of whether wilderness designations would help “maintain biological integrity” in the 19-million-acre refuge. The review will look at how the areas are used and at the natural resources they contain, he said.
Woods stressed that Congress alone can approve a wilderness designation, if one is recommended from the service and advances beyond federal review.
“All we could do is send the plan forward,” he said. “We can’t designate wilderness or open (areas) to oil and gas development.”
The state’s congressional delegation and the governor had previously objected to suggestions the service might review the three areas. Sen. Lisa Murkowski confirmed that position Monday, saying the agency lacks explicit permission from Congress needed for the work.
Opponents in Alaska point to a “no more” clause in the 1980 Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, which doubled the refuge’s size. They say the clause bars studies on federal lands here “for the single purpose of considering the establishment of a conservation system unit ... unless authorized by this act or a further act of Congress.”
Some federal agencies, backed by environmentalists, interpret the act differently. A separate clause appears to hand the Department of Interior authority to recommend new wilderness designations for federal land in Alaska.
A May public meeting in Fairbanks drew dozens of residents opposed to oil drilling in the 19.6 million-acre refuge, and comments were two-to-one in favor of wilderness designations, according to a Fish and Wildlife tally.
Public comments from beyond Fairbanks strongly encouraged the wilderness review, especially for the refuge’s coastal plain, said Karen Kelly, who directs the Fairbanks-based Northern Alaska Environmental Center.
“The (center) is pleased that USFWS is responding to public input by conducting wilderness reviews in the areas,” Kelly said by e-mail Monday.
Woods said the reviews should wrap up by February. The service would then release new drafts of ANWR’s conservation plan for public comment in March and issue a final plan the following year, he said.
Contact staff writer Christopher Eshleman at 459-7582.
Ever heard of a recently abandoned town called Centralia?
When Henry Ford told a New York Times reporter that ethyl alcohol was "the fuel of the future" in 1925, he was expressing an opinion that was widely shared in the automotive industry. "The fuel of the future is going to come from fruit like that sumach out by the road, or from apples, weeds, sawdust -- almost anything," he said. "There is fuel in every bit of vegetable matter that can be fermented. There's enough alcohol in one year's yield of an acre of potatoes to drive the machinery necessary to cultivate the fields for a hundred years."
Ford recognized the utility of the hemp plant. He constructed a car of resin stiffened hemp fiber, and even ran the car on ethanol made from hemp. Ford knew that hemp could produce vast economic resources if widely cultivated."
And Samm, it doesn't have to be all or nothing. Alaska has a small population and lots of land, so it wouldn't be that difficult to set up enough industrial hemp farms to fuel the state. Algae is also a viable alternative. Watch the video I posted on how easy it is to make fuel from algae in a bio-reactor. If we can spend hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars on sucking toxic fuel out of the ground/sea-bottm, (risking entire ecosystems), shipping it to refineries, (risking entire ecosystems), shipping it to markets, (risking entire ecosystems), and burning it, (risking the global ecosystem), we can surely afford hundreds of MILLIONS of dollars for investing in thousands of local hemp farms and manufacturing facilities. Alaska could be a leader in breaking the chains of the federal government's stranglehold on the very plant they called on American farmers to help win WWII - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jokV8xlJTNE With nearly
Industrial hemp can also be made into thousands of products, including:
plastic - http://www.hempplastic.com/newSite/hp_products_musicalinstruments.htm
"Hempcrete" - http://www.natural-environment.com/blog/2008/02/02/hempcrete-the-future-of-concrete/
building materials - http://www.hemphasis.net/Building/building.htm _
textiles of all varieties - http://www.hemptraders.com/properties_of_hemp_textile_prop.php
AND the seeds are the single most nutritious food on the planet - http://www.ratical.org/renewables/hempseed1.html
There's no reason this incredibly beneficial plant should be outlawed, except pure, unadulterated greed. >:-( http://www.hemphasis.net/
Environmental and health issues
The large impact of surface mining on the topography, vegetation, and water resources has made it highly controversial.
Surface mining is subject to state and federal reclamation requirements, but adequacy of the requirements is a constant source of contention. Unless reclaimed, surface mining can leave behind large areas of infertile waste rock, as 70% of material excavated is waste.[citation needed]
In the United States, the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 mandates reclamation of surface coal mines. Reclamation for non-coal mines is regulated by state and local laws, which may vary widely.
[edit]Human health
The United Mine Workers of America has spoken against the use of human sewage sludge to reclaim surface mining sites in Appalachia. The UMWA launched its campaign against the use of sludge on mine sites in 1999 after eight UMWA workers became ill from exposure to Class B sludge spread near their workplace.[8]
On August 20, 2004 at 2:30 a.m. a boulder accidentally pushed off an A&G Coal surface mine above the town of Inman, Virginia rolled 649 feet (198 m) down the mountain and into a home. Three-year-old Jeremy Davidson was crushed in his bed while he slept. The Davidson family settled with A&G Coal for $3 million in 2006, and left the region.[9]
[edit]Environmental impact
According to a 2010 report in the journal Science, mountaintop mining has caused numerous environmental problems which mitigation practices have not successfully addressed. For example, valley fills frequently bury headwater streams causing permanent loss of ecosystems. In addition, the destruction of large tracts of deciduous forests has threatened several endangered species and led to a loss of biodiversity.[10]
I live on ground and have farmed ground that was strip mined. Ground that is quite productive. As for the EPA, I can say from personal experience that they cannot be trusted. Just another political tool. But think what you want.
@TeaPartyPatriot>I don't even know what you are talking about. When you talk about living in AK before the discovery of Prudhoe Bay, it sounds like a lot of people in Fairbanks and other places are still living THE SAME EXACT WAY. Come on. Log cabin you built? Hauling water? Burning green wood? Are you serious? You're talking about soft toilet paper?? We make do with what we have. Oh and no, I've never attended the sermon you're talking about, but I do know that a human can go up to 60 days without food and about a week without water (with the proper mental attitude). Toughen up.
Alaska has a lot of resources left that don't require drilling in ANWR like wind, solar, geothermail, hydro, etc. And as for nothing living there - there is a lot of wildlife like the caribou the Gwichin depend on for instance. How about the birds? I have a beautiful book entitled Arctic Wings: Birds of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Surely they are worth worrying about?
Btw, if you're wiping with Angel Soft or Quilted Northern, you're wiping with the Koch Bros. (Sorry, just couldn't resist)
I really don't mean to judge anyone but in a constantly progressing world this country needs it's natural recources. If that weren't so, the economy would not have supported it from the start. I live in a big coal mining state (PA)I do not see evedince of the earth being permanantly damaged here.
How quickly you forget that at one time people lived perfectly fine without electricity OR gasoline, long before either were invented. Someone has to care about protecting nature, trees and wildlife while everyone else is sucking the lifeblood out of the land for money and greed or conveniences to accommodate our lifestyles.
the state government uses the revenue generated from selling this oil to run the state. if the pipeline should go dry? how does the state replace this revenue? well, it doesn't. they'll have to raid and end the PFD program. they will have to institute such things as income taxes and greatly reduce services. we could close the rural schools and have the parents in the bush send their kids to sitka all winter for education. what else can we think of that we can cut? university of alaska system could be gutted. alaska students can go outside for quality college education. we will need to find even more to cut.
our extraction resoure economy is the only thing we have going for us. you have seen what little tourism does, and now with this recession the tourists are not coming that much anymore. we are just too far away from any market for any alaskan value added industry to compete with places much closer to that market. we are stuck with doing nothing but digging valuable stuff out of the ground and sending it south. the feds seem bent on stopping all of that.
Just because our politicians have sold out and can only think of oil and what "resource" we can squeeze out of the land, doesn't mean we have to think that way.
@TeaPartyPatriot>boil the water, like everyone else would do.
@AlaskaO>Hopefully someone in your family doesn't have the dream of becoming an Entomologist or a Botanist.