Whalers Fear Effects Of Off-Shore Drilling

As John McCain and Barack Obama debate the benefits and drawbacks of lifting a congressional moratorium on offshore drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf, a battle rages off the coast of northern Alaska, where drilling has been ongoing for decades.

Thomas Napageak, at 25, is the youngest whaling captain in the tiny Alaska Native community of Nuiqsut. The village lies on a serene expanse of tundra just inland of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and 50 miles west of Prudhoe Bay, the largest oilfield in North America.

"We live off the ocean, we live off the land," Napageak says, who hunts the bowhead whale during the fall, as his ancestors have done for centuries. "And that is something I'm definitely going to fight for [for] the rest of my life."

Whaling captain Thomas Napageak, 25, worries
about the impact of expanded offshore drilling
on whales and the environment.

The candidates would do well to consider the perspective of Napageak and his fellow villagers as they decide whether to bow to the interests of oil companies or conservationists. Scouring the frigid waters for their quarry, whalers here have seen the impact of offshore drilling firsthand:

Ship activity from oil drilling and exploration disrupts whale migrations, driving hunters farther out to sea in search of the whales. Just four bowhead whales provide enough spoils to last a year for the roughly 500 villagers in Nuiqsut.

But Napageak has seen large groups of whales fleeing from barges, and no whales are to be found for miles after ships pass. Further, crews search for oil in the Arctic by emitting large underwater blasts of sound. These explosions, according to Napageak and others, are 10 times the volume of a rocket launch and cause considerable damage to whales while disrupting hunting.

Minus the whales and other animals -- caribou, wolverines, seals and geese -- on which they depend, Nuiqsut villagers have little access to adequate sources of food. At the lone store in the village, a small box of dry spaghetti costs $3.85, a box of Cheerios goes for $7.44, and a 12-pack of Coke is marked down to $9.48. It's a stark reminder just how remote this nook is, how removed these people are.

Representatives from Nuiqsut, along with the Alaska Wilderness League and other conservation groups, have successfully sought injunctions blocking oil companies from drilling in the Arctic because of a lack of investigation on their part into the impact of exploration on whales and other wildlife.

Oil companies, who spend millions each year to lessen the environmental disruption, say they can drill more safely than ever, and have long disputed the claims similar to those made by Napageak. But spills, Napageak says, are an inevitability.

And should a spill occur, he and others say, harsh arctic conditions prevent oil companies from doing much more than burning it off the surface of the water.

Onshore drilling is no better, say Nuiqsut residents. Napageak has served as a Subsistence Oversight Board Member for the region -- essentially a conservation police officer. It was his job to observe operations at the Alpine oil and natural gas field, which is primarily operated by ConocoPhillips Alaska Inc., and is situated downstream on the Colville River just 4 miles from Nuiqsut.

There, Napageak says, he observed serious infractions on a daily basis. He saw workers spill oil without cleaning it up. They frequently drove heavy machinery outside of allowed routes, destroying sensitive plants that take 50 years to grow out on the tundra. In general, he says, there is a flagrant disregard for regulations on the part of oilfield workers, and a lack of monitoring by oil companies.

Nuiqsut residents have come to distrust oil companies' promises. Alpine was originally slated to be a smaller operation, on the order of 40,000 barrels of oil per day. But the discovery of so-called "champagne oil," the creme de la creme of crude, prompted a rapid expansion and a ramp-up of production to roughly 100,000 barrels per day.

ConocoPhillips promised they would provide 50 permanent jobs for the village, and would limit flights into the area that have been blamed for scaring off native animals. The company delivered neither, villagers say.

While Alaska Natives receive considerable revenue from oil companies for drilling on their land, the offshore drilling dispute is not about money, Napageak says. Whalers hunt to feed their community, and are not paid for their hefty investment of time and resources during whaling season.

"I'm definitely for the industry [trying] to make our lives better," Napageak says, "but if it's going to impact our traditional way of life I'm definitely going to be against something like offshore drilling."

Comments

[algupta]

We need energy. We can get it by harnessing the wind energy. Please Endorse People's Petition.

Please double click on the link below and sign the Petition.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/windenergycorporation

Thanks. God Bless you.

[seamusnh]

Whaling? This barbarism is still going on? I say protect the whales. There is no product that can come from killing a whale that we can't get elsewhere. It's 2008, not 1808...

I just read Leviathan, a great book. The killing of whales is butchery on the high seas....

Stop killing whales. Drill for oil for short term energy price relief. Invest in alternative energy for the future.,..­.

[LightningJoe]

The whaling in question here is not your father's whaling, and the question is not conducive to a simple knee-jerk stance.

Limited, rationed whale-taking, by Native villages on the North Slope, is literally a life or death issue for the people who do it. Sure, we could stop them taking whales, but then we'd have to replace the whale, in their lives. These cultures were there for thousands of years before Conoco-Phillips sent their first petroleum engineer to the region. They are adapted to the environment nearly as fully as the Polar Bear is. If they can no longer take any whales, they can no longer live as a people.

And -- quite to the point -- what they do is NOT butchery. Their culture is based on respect and appreciation for what they take, not like what the Japanese do, taking meat they don't need, and can't use, just to maintain a justification for takings in the future.

I'm not for commercial whaling any more than you are, nor any other unnecessary abuse of resources. A respectful relationship with the resources that support you is what we should all strive for, and the North Slope tribes have that now, if we don't take it from them.

Everything dies, so that others may live. These people understand that, just leave them be.

[TomAmitai]

I once saw a TV segment about "native" whalers in Canada, who get exemptions from anti-whaling laws because whaling is "necessary for the continuation of their culture". They were using helicopters, radar, and sonar to track the whales, and modern weapons to kill them. The whale's bodies were sold to Japanese dealers.

If people want special privileges that allow them to violate the laws that everyone else must follow, in order to "preserve their culture", then they should be required to hunt the whales as their ancestors did, not with modern equipment.

[gardenbookie]

No more drilling. Period. Anytime. Anywhere. None.
It's not about whales. It's not about the ecology.
It's all about money. Greed. I'm sick of it.

[bannorhill]

So you will swear of using anything that was produced from or uses oil?

[MikeLee7125]

Just read this on CNN Money

http://money.cnn.com/2008/08/13/news/economy/offshore_drilling/index.htm?postversion=2008081315

Just demonstrates the complete magical thinking of drilling supporters. Here's there reasons and why they're all wrong, wrong, wrong.

1) The estimated oil production may be wrong: Yeah, it could be. Could just as easily be wrong going the other way.

2) Spare capacity: Like the article points out, Saudi and Russia will just pump out less. The only surefire way to increase spare capacity is to reduce consumption.

3) Safer Source to protect us from shocks: We use 20 million barrels a day! If there's any shocks or even mild tremors out there we're going to feel them.

4) We need all the oil we can get: This is the biggest piece of magical thinking of the lot. They talk about a million barrels a day coming on line, as if that means anything when worldwide production is 73 million barrels a day. They talk about an immediate stimulus boost, neglecting the 5 to 10 year time its going to take to drill a test well.

They actually claim that all the drilling hype is what's lowered oil prices.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/08/13/news/economy/oil_demand.ap/index.htm?postversion=2008081318
Gee, oil consumption is at a 5 year low. That couldn't possibly have any effect.

All this adds up to is a gigantic case of denial.

[JanP]

Does anyone think that nancy Pelosi's opposition to more oil might be tied more to her substantial investment in T. Boone Picken's wind farms (looking for government subsidies) than her concern for the environment?

I assume that all the people here in opposition to Arctic drilling are also fighting against it in Canada and Russia. Of course, they are against North Sea oil being pumped by England and Norway, no?

I know that I feel a whole lot better knowing that Mrs. Pelosi is getting even wealthier while protecting our environment. Don't you?

[JadedAggie]

Although I don't personally trust Pelosi's intentions I don't think the argument you are making is a valid one. If she wasn't heavily invested in alternative energy she could and would be equally attacked for not really supporting it since she wasn't willing to put her money where her mouth is. It's similar to economic analysts whom can either be seen as pushing a stock because they are invested in it or be questioned why they are pushing a stock if they don't have enough faith to invest in it themselves. You are basically left with a situation where you cannot distinguish between who is trying to con you and who is actually trying to help.

[TomAmitai]

Everyone is trying to con you. No one is trying to help anyone but themselves.

[mjt218]

I find it hard to believe that ConocoPhillips workers would treat the environment with such neglect. If Conoco is fostering a culture that creates this type of environment they should be severely punished with fines. I would suspect that government regulators or Greenpeace itself would have shed light on activities like this.

In the Gulf of Mexico, seismic acquisition follows a very stringent regulation process, in part to protect marine mammals. The Department of the Interior's Minerals Management Service employs marine biologists who analyze programs to prevent detrimental impact. The goverment regulations guiding this process can be found here.

http://www.gomr.mms.gov/homepg/regulate/regs/ntls/2006%20NTLs/06-g12.pdf

I would imagine that Alaska OCS would have similar regulations to protect marine mammals. The communities up there have every right to raise concern about seismic programs, and government regulators must decide if adaquate steps have been taken to protect marine species.

Also, seismic activities are fairly expensive, and surveys are not done routinely. If you have more interest in learning about these surveys here's a few good websites.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflection_seismology
http://www.iagc.org/attachments/contentmanagers/4352/Marine%20Seismic%20Operations%20Overview.pdf

[ranscot]

I wonder how Teddy Roosevelt would feel, watching the heirs to his Republican Party trample on all his hard work to protect the American wilderness.

On February 27, 1909, Theodore Roosevelt signed orders reserving and setting apart Saint Matthew Island, Hall Island and Pinnacle Islet as the Bering Sea Reservation (E.O. No. 1037); Chisik and Egg Islands as the Tuxedni Reservation (E.O. No. 1039); Saint Lazaria Island as the Saint Lazaria Reservation (E.O. No. 1040); and Walrus and Otter Islands as the Pribilof Reservation (E.O. No. 1044). Volcanic Bogoslof Island and its neighboring islets were set apart as the Bogoslof Reservation on March 2, 1909, through Executive Order No. 1049.

Funny how exactly a century later Republicans will run on his name, while squandering his legacy.

[Darwinman]

I completely oppose drilling; however using the argument "Let’s not drill so people can still murder whales" is outrageous! If fact I might even use this as a reason to support drilling! Let the sounds of explosions and drilling scare off the whales so they can’t be hunted, who knows this might actually be beneficial to the species!

[newworldman777]

Do you you eat beef, chicken, or pork? If so, you are directly contributiong toward the killing of innocent animals. Taking 6 bowheads a year will hardly drive the species to extinction. The true threat to the species was your own ancestors, who hunted whales by the thousands annually -- nearly to the point of extinction -- so that they could make lamp oil and cosmetics for your women, and all for capitalism. Many species of whales, especially sperm whales, have yet to recover from that speciocide.

For your information, many indigenous American people signed "treaties" with European Americans, who guarenteed their right to perpetuate certain tribal customs, in return for their relinquishing huge tracts of valuable land to the Europeans. If you want to revoke their right to whale, then perhaps you would also be willing to return to them the ownership of all of their land -- essentially nullifying the treaty.

Remember this: Any threat to any species has ALWAYS been from over-aggressive capitalist Europeans and their posterity who have notoriously hunted and fished countless animal species to the brink of extinction.

[Darwinman]

I can not undo the damage committed by my ancestors, if I could I would do so in a second! The only thing I can do is condemn their actions and do anything I can today to stop the termination of another species. The fact that you would place the maintaining of "tribal customs" over the welfare of a species of animals and an entire ecosystem make you just as culpable for the distruction of this planet as those who still drive SUV's and other gas-guzzlers and claim it as their right to do so.

[Donald Wolberg]

Itr is still remarkably stupid to kill whales or polar bears or seals. This is one instance where archaic nativisim can easily give way to Wal-Mart. The world is 4.5 billion years old and the universe perhaps 13.2; is seems remarkably silly to kill marine mammals, especially whales with a complexity we can hardly understand is a shame that those folks enpowered by documents that give them the right to kill marine mammals, feel the need to continue to do so in the name of some mystic sense that goes unnoticed in a 13.2 billion year old universe. There is no glory in senseless killing of beings with a sense of who they are.

[Donald Wolberg]

"Sounds of explosions"? How about a harpoon, usually with an explosive charge to propel it and an explosive charge to drive the tip into the whale and killing an animal with 50 million years of evolution and a brain 4 or 5 times as large as a human brain, all in the name of "cultural identity." Similalry what explosions? The footprint of modern drilling is in fact amazingly minimal. Rationality would be appropriate.

[GJKBEAR]

I agree that hunting whales is not the thing that you or I (I am assuming we are both non-natives here) would do. 5 whales will feed this tribe for a whole year. Have you ever been to Alaska? Some of these tiny islands can only be reached by boats or planes. Do you advocate letting them spend $7.40 for a box of cheerios? Should they raise cattle, goats, sheep? Where? Should they become vegetarians? I suspect that not much grows on ice and tundra. They eat caribou and whales - and unlike us not a part of the animals they kill are wasted. This is probably a tiny island.
To those championing Conoco Phillips - do you live there? Unless you do, you should not take the words of a large company whose main interest is their bottom line over people who actually do live in the area and know what they are talking about.
At some point in time, all the oil is going to run out. Where will you advocate drilling then? What other natural resource are you going to plunder to drive your car? At some point, the oceans will become so devoid of life that they will all be a dead sea - WAKE UP PEOPLE! There is a web of life and we should remember it.

[newworldman777]

Well written post. Non-Native "Americans," with their ethnocentric mindsets, are so quick to criticize the cultures of indigenous people. Their argument seems to be, "Okay, my people hunted those aquatic beasts almost to extinction by killing thousands of them annually for commercial purposes; therefore, you cannot continue to practice your native tradition by killing 6 per year to feed your families -- even though our people signed a treaty with your people whereby we agreed to allow you to continue practicing your traditions, in return for a gazillion acres of your land."

[Donald Wolberg]

We live in a complex world and sometimes understanding that complexity is a bit more involved than "impression" or intuition. There really is a difference between political science and the politics of science, and scientific method. Unfortunately Mr. Kroh and his "informants" seem to ignor the later in foavor of the two political flaors. There is a wealth of data that indicates that modern drilling platforms provide new shallow habitat for a host of living forms. In point of fact, new directional and multiple drilling techniques have decreased the footprint of needed pads for development and production--the comparison for the Arctic is a football field size imprint in the State of Indiana. In actually, the impressions of "whales" has not one single data point and most data indicate whale number increases. Of course one might ask why are these folks intent on killing any whales at allin the 21st century to start with--but of course it would not be PC to so inquire. Somewhere in this discussion, rationality must find a place--this is a competitive and industrial world. There are priorities that require participation in that world--most of the 330 million Americans keen on a middle class life style have expressed there desire to remain middle class and not slip into a preindustrial lifestyle.

[lcarliner]

The latest ruling by Dirk (the Jerk) Kempthorne to eviscerate the Endangered Species Act is yet another reason to hold the line on any expansion of offshore drilling. The big oil companies continue to amply demonstrate that their assurances and promises cannot be trusted at all. The Prince William Sound catastrophe was made unnecessarily more severe by the failure of the managing pipeline company and Exxon-Mobil to have in place promised measures to deal with the disaster and by the callous brushoff of offers of the affected fishermen to help with the mitigation and cleanup. The fact that Conoco-Philips have not kept their promises of jobs in some of the other Arctic regions is yet more evidence that unless the companies are required to back up their promises and assurances with their own risk of costly damage awards and penalties, NO FURTHER encroachment of sensitive ares be permitted!

[Donald Wolberg]

What does the endangered species act have to do with offshore drilling? Hunting whales or seals or polar bears under the aegis of "cultural rights" would seem to have greater impact to an organism that drilling on land---there is no offshore Arctic drilling planned. What species have been threatened by any offshore platform, by the wat. The platforms actually seem to provide new habitat for organisms and are not a threat. By the same token, the offshore platforms that the Cubans have issued permits to build by the Chinese and others offshore of Florida do not fall under any U.S. environmental laws.

[mjt218]

Donny . . . Shell is acquiring permits for offshore Arctic drilling in the Beaufort Sea. Several companies are doing the same on the Canadian side of the border. Seismic has been going on since at least 1981 offshore in the area.

Platforms may be good artificial reefs for fish and plankton, but I doubt they have a positive impact on whales. Any new facility needs to be evaluated independently for environmental impact by regulatory authorities.

Also, endangered species protection goes both ways. Permits for solar mirror power plants in the US SW are currently being held up in order for endangered species impact to be determined (I believe it's some type of mouse).

[newworldman777]

No surprise that people aren't posting here. Because they are demanding cheaper oil to satisfy their need to continue with their greedy and wasteful lifestyles, they don't want to hear about the harsh reality of drilling for oil in Alaska. News flash: the reality is far different -- and much more disturbing and destructive to the environment -- than what the oil companies would like for us to believe.

We keep hearing that the amount of land that they want to drill in ANWAR is equivalent to a postage stamp on a tennis court; therefore, the environmental impact will be minimal. Yeah, right. They would undoubtedly destroy much more territory than their current estimations. We simply cannot trust those peple, because they will tell us anything for the chance to get their drilling equipment -- their "weapons of mass environmental destruction" -- into that pristine wilderness, destroying it forever, for oil revenues.

Americans who have children have a responsibility to leave their posterity at least some unspoiled wilderness to enjoy, as they themselves currently enjoy. To destroy the last remaining pristine wilderness area in America, preserving our wasteful status quo, would be despicable. We should all be ashamed of ourselves for even discussing the possibility of implementing ANWAR drilling. Get a bicycle! Get off your fat arse and walk to the store! Do whatever you have to do, but forget about any more Alaska drilling. Alaska is our crown jewel, yet we are beginning to treat her as a polluted

[DS1Roger]

Where is the divide line between normal usage and greedy and wasteful usage?
If there is such a thing our politicians waste much more than most of us can imagine. Does anyone cry for them to stop their overseas junkets,cross country trips ect as paid by the government?
The sum and total of the average US person while greater than the rest of the world has also yielded advances in the rest of the worlds lifestyle.
Feeding 500 people from 4 whales a year is a very minor hit on the total population. Why does that bother? I used to hunt when I was in the country. I wasn't supporting a family with the results though. More got away than I ever got. That is the nature of hunting in any environment you get a few and lose a lot.

[newworldman777]

When Americans comprise 4% of the world's population, yet consume 25% of the world's oil, then I don't think that you need me to say that we are the most wasteful country on earth. We drive somewhere when we could either ride a bicycle or walk. Our unwillingness to resort to "foot power" to get from point A to point B is probably why Americans are the fattest people on earth. Nuff said.

[JanP]

You are completely free to move into a log cabin and not avail yourself of any technology including metal. Knapp stones and let them be your "natural" tools.

I'll stick with my wasteful air conditioned house, 320 HP car and two computers, thank you.

[newworldman777]

Well, bless your heart. Do you have children, Jan? In the future, when your grandchildren ask you if you were willing to sacrifice any part of your spoiled lifestyle in order to help save the planet -- by then which will probably be doomed -- I hope that you show them a copy of your post here. Americans' unwillingness to alter their wasteful lifestyles is a sure-fire way to ruin what little is left of our planet. And for you very people to have children, to whom you will leave this mess, is beyond my simple ability to comprehend.

[LightningJoe]

Right on!

And while you're at it, stop watching television, which programs you to think that humans (and only humans) are the flower of creation.

One poster here was upset about killing whales, calling it butchery. Sure, it's butchery, but so is, well, butchery. Most people DON'T eat whales, so they have the luxury of being squeemish about it. But dollars to donuts, most of those folks eat cattle, chickens, fish.

We all get so tight-focused that we can't open our minds. This is what the TV cult-of-th­e-autonomo­us individual does to us, makes us think that we are the (only!) special one, of the (only!) special species on Earth.

It's time to open up to reality, which I guarantee has more to show you, than you have a clue about.

----
Kill televisions!