iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Jamie Rappaport Clark

GET UPDATES FROM Jamie Rappaport Clark

The Arctic Refuge: A Place Worth Fighting For

Posted: 08/16/11 01:11 PM ET

The ashes of my good friend Mollie Beattie rode the winds before settling slowly beneath the surface of the crystal blue mountain lake in the heart of the Brooks Range in northern Alaska. A few tears were shed among the close friends and family members gathered along the shore, but many let a smile creep across their face. As she had wished, Mollie was now at rest in one of North America's wildest places, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

The Arctic refuge is not your typical resting place for a dear friend's ashes, nor is it your typical travel destination. Most folks never set eyes on this vast land tucked away on Alaska's North Slope. But for the few who do, it is a humbling and life-changing experience. That was true for Mollie, the first female director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and it was certainly true for me.

When Mollie passed away in 1996, I traveled to the refuge with a small number of her closest friends and family to help spread some of her ashes in a place she loved dearly and worked so hard to protect. And during my all-too-short time there, I came to see what Mollie saw. I came to understand that this unique national wildlife refuge is a place worth fighting for.

As the National Wildlife Refuge System's largest land-based refuge, the Arctic refuge supports a vast array of wildlife. Its coastal plain is the most important onshore denning habitat for America's vanishing polar bears, as well as the calving ground of the renowned Porcupine caribou herd. And, each year, millions of birds from six continents and every state in the U.S. make their way to this special place to nest.

But the refuge is undergoing a dangerous transition. Disappearing sea ice and melting snow cover are making it harder for animals to find food and shelter. Entire ecosystems are expected to shift northward, bringing with them new species competing for a limited amount of resources. For the 38 different mammal species who call the Arctic refuge home, these changes could have dire implications. New research from Defenders of Wildlife reveals 16 of those mammals to be extremely or highly vulnerable to the changes warming temperatures will bring, including the polar bear, Arctic fox, lynx and North Slope herds of caribou. Without help, these specialized mammals may not survive the changes a shifting climate will bring.

Fortunately, we have a unique opportunity to increase the chances of their survival now. This prospect comes by way of revisions now being considered to the Arctic refuge's Comprehensive Conservation Plan, a management plan currently being developed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. One of the key recommendations of this plan could be for Congress to formally designate the refuge's coastal plain a wilderness area. Such a designation would prevent oil and gas development in the coastal plain, thereby avoiding even greater peril to the survival of species on the refuge due to climate change.

Without a doubt, Big Oil and its lobbyists in Congress will decry such a suggestion. They've been after the Arctic refuge for development purposes for decades, falsely claiming that the amount of oil that lies beneath the refuge will solve our country's energy crisis. Never mind that any oil that might be found on the refuge wouldn't make it to market for 10 years, nor would it make a dent in the price at the pump. And despite oil companies' misleading claims about developing oil fields with only "small footprints," the fact remains that industrial scale oil and gas development would destroy the wilderness character of the Arctic refuge forever. Already, this summer has seen the risks of oil and gas development played out, including Exxon Mobil's 42,000-gallon-oil spill in the Yellowstone River and a BP pipeline leak in Alaska that spilled 2,100 to 4,200 gallons of a methanol and oily mixture onto the plant life on the tundra. The evidence is clear: oil companies cannot be trusted with our treasured places -- and that includes the Arctic refuge.

Like Mollie Beattie, I have fought relentlessly to protect the refuge's pristine coastal plain -- both as her successor as the director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and in my role here at Defenders. And I will continue to work to protect the refuge and the wildlife it supports, whether the threat is from climate change or oil companies, or both. The Obama administration should do the same, and pursue a wilderness recommendation for the coastal plain of the refuge. Because, as one of America's most unique natural treasures, the Arctic refuge is indeed a place worth fighting for.

 
 
 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 6
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
11:45 AM on 08/30/2011
Life-long Alaska resident and I do not work for an oil company. I love my state and its beauty. However:

"Its coastal plain is the most important onshore denning habitat for America's vanishing polar bears." There is now credible evidence that the Polar Bear population has increased by 40% and they were mistakenly or prematurely placed on the "Threatened Species" list. ANWR is so vast, as is described here, that the few well heads needed combined with the angular drilling technology would have less than a 1% land use impact. I love your passion, but your facts are inaccurate and you cannot grasp the scale of ANWR without flying over its entirety. Merely standing at the edge does not give you the perspective required to make an opinion.
Dayne
People are people
08:15 PM on 08/18/2011
Land based drilling is quite safe and the environmental laws are incredibly stringent. The biggest thing people need to understand is that the proposed area to be drilled is insignificant compared to the total area. Second, most animals completely ignor or take advantage of human intervention on the North Slope. By following the various guidelines which control drilling/pumping, the amount of damage done to the Refuge would be negligible at best.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
littlerabbit
04:51 PM on 08/17/2011
I live in and vote in Alaska and am encouraged by the interest many citizens of this country have in wanting to protect that area of our state!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lambdin1
What's this?
03:17 PM on 08/17/2011
Yep! Now all you need to do is convince those with GREED writen across their forheads to stay out!
09:43 AM on 08/17/2011
As only one of us is an environmental professional with over 25 years of experience, the claim by the oil companies are exactly correct. They could harvest with very minimal impact. The fact is no oil company wants to spill anything because it costs them money and its bad for business. Trust in that! Do not trust in a political ploy that directs us to use the type of energy NO ONE CAN CLEAN UP! I hate to pop your bubble but a polar bear would be as affected by a pump jack as they would a rock. Keeping America from energy independance is ecconomic suicide. Every field takes time to develop and the fact is domestic production dedicated for domestic refining which is excluded from market speculation can and will bring down the price of gas. Its nice that your friends ashes were spread there but the fact is billions of years of ashes are what made the reserve in the first place. Sentiment for a friend and the illogical claims of distrust and eminent harm should not prevent energy independance. If you want to place distrust in a well founded place, place it in the government whose response to the BP spill was to send lawyers instead of true industry professionals.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Micheal Johnson
01:14 PM on 08/18/2011
While I'm sure you believe what you say; indeed you may even be right. The fact is they haven't been doing a very good job of it.There is too much damn the torpedoes, (wildlife) full speed (oil) ahead.