The Class Menagerie

David B. Williams sends dispatches from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge 2

David B. Williams is a freelance natural-history writer based in Seattle. He is the author of The Street-Smart Naturalist: Field Notes from Seattle and has written for Smithsonian, Popular Mechanics, National Parks, and The Seattle Times.

Friday, 29 Jul 2005

SEATTLE, Wash.

The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is at the center of one of the most contentious environmental and political debates of our time. Yet few people know much beyond the rhetoric, and far fewer will actually visit the Arctic Refuge.

The most hotly disputed chunk of land in the U.S. of A.

Photo: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.

The University of Washington, however, is trying to remedy this situation, at least for one group of students. Twelve graduate and undergraduate students are taking part in an intensive, five-week class ("Choices and Change in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge") offered for the first time ever in summer 2005 by the Program on the Environment (POE), an interdisciplinary program on environmental studies.

"Environmental issues are uniquely interdisciplinary in that they draw upon the physical, biological, and social sciences, as well as the arts and humanities, in almost equal measure," says POE co-director and course co-instructor David Secord. "The past, present, and future of the controversy over oil drilling in the refuge forms a perfectly packaged microcosm of critical regional and global sustainability issues."

Central to this interdisciplinary approach is giving students the opportunity to become unusually well-informed about an issue and then providing them an opportunity to share the information. At the end of this course, students will develop a public exhibit to interpret their experiences and share their insights.

We're spending the first week of the class in Seattle, learning about the politics and natural and cultural history of the refuge. Students and faculty will then fly to Alaska and spend a week rafting on either the Jago or Aichilik rivers, which flow out of the Brooks Range across the controversial 1002 area (where drilling would occur in the refuge) to the Beaufort Sea. The class will also meet with members of the two Native groups most affected by potential drilling, the Inupiat and Gwich'in, as well with biologists, geologists, and staff from the offices of Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R) and Washington Sen. Maria Cantwell (D).

As part of the course, they also decided to ask a journalist to tag along -- me.

(One quick note: I will not use the term ANWR throughout these Dispatches. As several people who are deeply involved with the issue told me, ANWR is a term coined by industry, and it sounds too much like war. More important, the acronym ANWR conceals the fact that this landscape is a national wildlife refuge, federally protected "for the purpose of preserving unique wildlife, wilderness, and recreational values.")

"This course is probably unlike any you have taken and is unlike any I have taught," says Nate Mantua in his class introduction. Lead instructor and a research scientist at the NOAA/UW Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean, Mantua's specialty is long-term climate patterns, such as El Niño and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation. "Our goal is to attempt to tackle many difficult issues and wrap them into one package. This is going to be an exciting experiment."

Mantua asks the students to share their backgrounds and state their top issues for the refuge. "Caribou, jobs, native peoples, and energy independence," says Dustin Andres, a senior in the Henry M. Jackson School of International Studies. Others add tourism, ecosystem balance, drilling impacts, climate change, plant and animal sustainability, and wilderness values. The 12 men and women include students in programs as diverse as marine affairs, conservation biology, geology, environmental science and resource management, political science, and economics.

Two nonstudents also sit in on the class and will join the group in the refuge. Ned Backus and Phil Stoller are board members of the Seattle-based Lucky Seven Foundation, which supports social services around Puget Sound. Although the foundation was approached for $5,000, the Lucky Seven ended up providing $13,500 for scholarships for students to participate in the class. "We were already supporting the Subhankar Banerjee show at the Burke [Museum of Natural History and Culture] and this was a logical extension," says Backus. "Plus, we wanted to make sure that students of need could attend." In addition, the UW Earth Initiative, the UW Summer School, and Tom Campion, cofounder of Zumiez, provided funding for the course.

Arctic Village, where life is all about caribou.

For the next six classes, we delve into the issues. Each day revolves around a single subject, beginning with culture. Only 7,500 people live in the North Slope region of Alaska, the area north of the Brooks Range and equal roughly in size to the state of Minnesota. Two towns dominate the issues in the refuge, maritime-oriented Kaktovik, which is on Barter Island in the Beaufort Sea, and caribou-focused Arctic Village, at the southern edge of the Brooks Range. Kaktovik has a little over 250 residents, 85 percent of whom are Inupiat. It is the only community in the refuge. Arctic Village's 150-plus residents are Gwich'in Indians, more closely related to Navajo than Inupiat.

Tuesday we turn to geology. Drilling in the refuge can only occur on the coastal plain, the land between the Beaufort Sea and Brooks Range and commonly referred to as the 1002 ("ten-oh-two") area, because it was designated by section 1002 of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, which created the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

In the words of Bob Swenson, deputy director of research for Alaska's Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, "Things really get complicated" in the 1002 area, in part because two very different geologic systems -- a rift and a convergence zone -- collide along the coastal plain. At least nine studies have been done with estimates of between 100 million and 49.5 billion barrels of oil, not all of which would be economically recoverable. The most recent study, by the U.S. Geological Survey in 1998, estimated a 50/50 chance of 7.7 billion barrels of technically recoverable oil.

Part of the estimation challenge is that only one well has been drilled inside the 1002 boundaries and the information obtained from it is a closely held secret. (Intriguingly, the two companies who do know what came up in that well, ConocoPhillips and BP, have pulled out of funding Arctic Power, an industry financed group that promotes oil development in the refuge.)

The highlight of the first week is a class led by Gordon Orians, UW emeritus professor of biology and chair of an 18-member National Research Council panel that in 2003 assessed the cumulative effects of oil extraction on Alaska's North Slope. In a quiet yet passionate voice, Orians describes how the panel developed an unbiased, rigorously reviewed, scientifically based report. And then he launches into his concerns:

  • Anthropogenic food sources from oil operations have led to an increase in predators, such as arctic fox, ravens, and glaucous gulls, which prey on nesting birds.
  • What happens to lakes when they are drained 85 percent to make ice roads? There are regulations to govern this activity, but no data to support the regulations' requirements.
  • There are pervasive effects from seismic exploration, including disturbance of bowhead whales and polar bears. Again, there is no data to support regulations governing seismic surveys.
  • For reasons unknown, the Porcupine caribou seem especially vulnerable to disturbance.
  • No money has been set aside for cleanup after the oil runs dry.
  • The biggest changes resulting from drilling in the North Slope have been cultural, with a radical alteration in social structure. As one Native told Orians, "We have money and electricity, but at what price?"

He concludes by saying, "One would wish that the debate wasn't about the nutty stuff and would be about the real issues."

Three days from now, 17 of us will be heading to Alaska to continue learning about these "real issues."

Advertisement
Advertisement
  1. Tim Hogan Posted 8:40 am
    17 Aug 2005

    Arctic RefugeDear Friends,
    Thank you for posting the Class Menagerie.
    I am writing because I am deeply concerned about the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.  I spent a month in the Refuge in 2001, and visited Washington DC this spring to lobby on its behalf.  The fate of the Arctic Refuge will likely be determined in the next two months.
    It is critical to realize this fight is not over!  The Bush administration and its allies are working to create a sense of inevitability, and to foster the impression the decision to drill the coastal plain is a done-deal.  In March, a

    Senate amendment to remove the drilling provision from the budget lost by two votes.  In the next step, the resolution process, the budget made it through by the thinnest of margins - five votes in the Senate and three votes in the House.  When Congress reconvenes in September, the Senate and the House will work on the budget reconciliation, that part of the budget process which has the force of law.  The Refuge provision is hanging by a thread, and there are enough Republicans opposed to drilling that it may yet be stripped from the final budget.
    My hope, and the hope of untold others, is that this threat will not only be stopped, but it will mark a turning point in which American conservationists speak out so loudly they cannot be dismissed.  As Tom DeLay (R-TX) so candidly

    admitted, "It's not about drilling the Refuge, it's about being able to drill anywhere."  I would add it's also about despoiling our lands and waters, extirpating plants and animals, undermining wildlands protection, and tearing

    down bedrock environmental laws that have well served our nation for decades.
    There are many things you can do:



           One of the most important is to begin calling and writing the offices of your Senators and Representative, and let them know how strongly you oppose oil development on the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. If members of Congress hear this again and again they will take notice.  Call early, call often. [Capitol switchboard #202.224.3121]  It's always best to write a personal letter or email, rather than sending an automated message.

           Perhaps even more important, is to begin contacting sympathetic friends and relatives around the country and ask them to write and call their delegation.  It is imperative that people not get suckered by the ploy of this administration into thinking the Refuge has been opened to drilling.  Many people are anxious to help and just need a little direction toward effective action.

           Support the efforts of those who are taking to the streets of DC in defense of the Arctic Refuge.  Or better yet, COME TO THE CAPITAL AND JOIN THE MARCH ON SEPTEMBER 20TH!! This action has the potential to be very large - people are frustrated and are poised to act.  Contributions can be made to the Alaska Wilderness League, 122 C Street, NW, Suite 240, Washington DC 20001 and earmarked for "Arctic Action Day".

           Visit http://www.ArcticRefugeAction.org for more information.


    The scale of the environmental crisis now goes beyond any individual's ability to fully comprehend.  Many of you are working on issues ranging from endangered species, to wilderness designation, to legislative issues in state

    government, while also raising families, taking care of your health, and trying to find time to do the things you love.  Sometimes it all seems too much.  I sincerely appreciate any help you can give in defense of the Arctic Refuge and

    wild nature.
    Thanks ...
    ... Tim Hogan

  2. nickaster Posted 7:41 am
    18 Aug 2005

    Treasure AmericaThanks for the great report. I'm glad you guys got to experience the refuge!
    We rafted the Canning River in June and spent some time in Kaktovik.  The purpose of the trip (in addition to having a great time) was to look at some of the economic reasons why opening the refuge is a backwards idea, as well as to debunk some of the myths that drilling advocates have been passing off as truth.  Among them:
    1) Myth - ANWR will lower gas prices.

    Truth - Drilling in the Arctic Refuge will have no noticiable effect on gas prices.  Even oil industry execs admit that the Arctic Refuge contains a maximum of less than a 3 year's supply of crude. With worldwide demand surging, the impact of that amount of oil is likely to mean less than a nickle off a gallon at the pump.
    2) Myth - ANWR will reduce dependenceon Middle Eastern Oil.
    Fact - Only 31% of US oil imports come from Arab Countries.  Most is from Mexico, Canada, Venezuela and Domestic Sources.

    Source - http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/saudigas.asp   Any small impact ANWR has will be dominated by reductions outside the mideast.
    3) Myth - ANWR means a stronger economy.
    Fact - Better fuel efficiency standards are much more important in keeping America strong.  If cars got 20% better mileage, the average person would have $500 more in their pocket every year.  Compare that to the one-time $300 Bush tax credit.  ANWR does nothing to encourage better fuel economy, in fact it moves us directly in the opposite direction - away from strength, and away from growth.
    4) Myth - ANWR oil will be used for the domestic American demand
    Fact - With China and India embracing a car culture, there is a strong likely hood that much, and possibly all, ANWR oil will be shipped overseas.
    Source - http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002245699_export17m.html

    Source - http://www.ncseonline.org/NLE/CRSreports/natural/nrgen-25.cfm
    5) Myth ANWR has no environmental/health impact
    Fact - Drilling in ANWR may or may not hurt wildlife.  But continued burning of petroleum products has immensly negative health effects for Americans in all areas of the country.  From asthma to cancer, many costly diseases can be traced directly to combusting gasoline.  Even in the pristine north slope, there is currently a smog cloud (caused by Prudhoe Bay operations) as brown as any over a major city.
    We have a video in the final stages of production and would be very interested in having it shown on Grist and other sites.  Please check out www.treasureamerica.org.
    Thank you!

Add a Comment

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Hello, Visitor!    Why not register?

Advertisement