Think Progress : : What Would Brian Boitano Do?
In the wake of the recent vote striking down a measure to prohibit drilling in ANWR, Think Progress raises aspects of the measure not discussed elsewhere: the impact on the protected Porcupine Caribou, and on the indiginous Gwich'in who depend on them.
posted by Management at 8:52 PM
7 Comments:
Days before the Senate passed a fateful vote that set the stage for drilling through the heart of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, the Canadian government released the following statement: “We think it’s a big mistake and we will continue to pressure (Washington) so that it should not happen.” Has the Canadian government decided to undermine our national sovereignty in response to our ambassador threatening theirs? Not at all. Canada was actually calling on America to live up to its side of a bargain.
In 1987, the United States and Canada signed the Agreement on the Conservation of the Porcupine Caribou Herd, pledging to protect the Porcupine Caribou herd and the habitat it grazes. Additionally, the two countries agreed to “consult promptly if either the herd or its habitat were damaged or its migration routes disrupted.” And here is where Canada enters into the Arctic Refuge drilling debate: The drilling area is encompassed by lands covered in the agreement and “U.S. and Canadian scientific experts have concluded that any development in the coastal plain could pose a major threat to the calving and migration patterns of the herd.”
Though conservationism is a reason for Canada’s commitment to the herd and habitat, regard for human rights is at its core. The Gwich’in, a people indigenous to the region, have been telling both nations for years that the herd is “the central focus of their ancestral culture [and] more important still, they rely on the caribou for their very survival.”
The size of Canada’s share of the habitat is “more than double the acreage” of the United States’. Canada has been permanently protecting the area for nearly two decades and entreating us to do the same. It’s time we join with our neighbors up North, eh?
Alaska oil drilling gets boost from Senate
BY JAMES KUHNHENN
FREE PRESS WASHINGTON STAFF
March 17, 2005
WASHINGTON -- By the barest margin Wednesday, the Senate made it easier for Congress to approve oil exploration in an Alaska wildlife refuge, marking a turning point in a decades-long fight between environmentalists and the petroleum industry.
Voting 51-49, the Republican-controlled Senate rejected efforts by Democrats and moderates to strip a provision from the Senate budget resolution that would allow drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. The vote was a victory for President George W. Bush and helped clear the way for broader energy legislation that he seeks.
The budget provision would permit any refuge-drilling legislation later this year to be approved by a simple 51-vote Senate majority. It would prevent opponents from using Senate rules, as they have in the past, to require a 60-vote supermajority on the issue.
Still, several legislative obstacles remain, and even if they're overcome, oil production is not expected to begin for perhaps 10 years.
At issue is the 1.2-million-acre coastal plain region of the 19-million acre wildlife refuge that the U.S. Geological Survey estimates could contain 5.7 billion to 16 billion barrels of crude oil.
Its environmentally sensitive location and vast oil reserves have made it ground zero in a broader struggle between environmentalists and advocates of expanded commercial use of federal lands.
"I'm trying to smile again," said Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, who has fought for decades to open the refuge, commonly known as ANWR, to drilling.
Stevens said that a vote to strip the drilling provision from the budget "is a vote for increasing home heating bills and transportation costs. It's a vote to diminish our national security by relying on rogue nations, foreign nations, unstable regimes."
Environmentalists and a lobbying consortium of oil companies called Arctic Power have spent millions of dollars fighting each other over ANWR drilling. Advocates of drilling cite the potential for up to a million barrels of oil a day to ease U.S. dependence on the volatile Mideast. Critics say it would damage the fragile ecology.
Some analysts say both sides exaggerate the stakes.
"It's not a big environmental hit, and it's not a big energy hit," said Henry Lee, an environment and energy expert at Harvard University. "What's at stake is much less than what either side is willing to tell you."
Lee noted that oil prices would hardly be affected by the projected oil production. At the same time, he noted that technological improvements that allow horizontal drilling below the surface would limit environmental damage.
Alaska Oil Drilling Plan 'Big Mistake': Canada
Thu March 10, 2005 5:22 PM GMT-05:00
By David Ljunggren
OTTAWA (Reuters) - Canada said on Thursday that a U.S. plan to drill for oil in an Alaskan wildlife refuge was "a big mistake" and vowed to keep pressuring Washington to scrap the idea.
Ottawa says drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) in northeast Alaska would ruin the calving ground of the Porcupine caribou herd, on which native Gwich'in Indians in Alaska and Canada have depended on for thousands of years.
U.S. President George W. Bush says drilling in ANWR would help reduce reliance on imports of foreign oil. The Senate, which shelved an earlier drilling proposal two years ago, is due to vote on the plan next week.
"We think it's a big mistake and we will continue to pressure (Washington) so that it should not happen," Canada's environment minister, Stephane Dion, told Reuters.
Ottawa, which says both countries should provide permanent protection for wildlife populations that straddle the border, has banned development in areas frequented by the Porcupine herd on the Canadian side of the border.
"We must be sure the caribou are protected. It's a very frail ecosystem there. I'll meet my (U.S.) counterpart pretty soon and will continue to look at that very carefully," Dion said.
ANWR -- which covers 19 million acres (7.7 million hectares) and is also home to polar bears and 160 species of migratory birds -- is estimated to contain 10 billion to 16 billion barrels of crude.
The Bush plan would open 1.5 million acres on Alaska's north coast for exploration, although only 2,000 acres could be under development at any given time.
Dion said that when he goes to Washington he will also raise plans by North Dakota to divert waters from Devil's Lake into the Red River, which runs north from the U.S. state into the central Canadian province of Manitoba.
Authorities in Manitoba fear the Devil's Lake water could be polluted and contain alien species. They say the diversion plan has the potential to harm the Red River, which flows into Lake Winnipeg -- one of the world's largest fresh water lakes.
"Devil's Lake ... is something I want to put a lot of pressure on to be sure it will not happen. The project is almost 80 percent completed and it's threatening the ecosystem of the 10th largest fresh water lake on Earth and a key one for Manitoba and the whole of Canada," Dion said.
"So these are the kinds of issues we need to look at carefully and tell the United States that they should be respectful of their own ecosystem and our ecosystem."
CTV.ca News Staff
Updated: Fri. Feb. 25 2005 6:02 AM ET
Prime Minister Paul Martin announced Thursday that Canada will not sign on to the controversial U.S. ballistic missile defence program.
"We are announcing today that Canada will not take part in the proposed ballistic missile defence system," Martin told reporters outside the House.
"Let me be clear, we respect the right of the United States to defend itself and its people."
"However, BMD is not where we will concentrate our efforts. Instead, we will act both alone and with our neighbours on defence priorities outlined in yesterday's budget."
Martin's announcement provoked a warning from Washington that Canada had relinquished sovereignty over its airspace.
Paul Cellucci, the U.S. ambassador to Canada, said from now on, the U.S. will decide when to fire at incoming missiles over Canadian territory.
"We will deploy. We will defend North America," Cellucci said. "We simply cannot understand why Canada would in effect give up its sovereignty -- its seat at the table -- to decide what to do about a missile that might be coming towards Canada.''
Martin said that Canada remains steadfast in its support of NORAD which he said is essential to continental security and our national sovereignty.
"That's why we agreed last summer to enhance our long standing agreement to track missiles through NORAD. We stand by that commitment."
He said Canada will continue to work closely with the U.S. and other allies on issues of security and terrorism around the world.
"Canada recognizes the enormous burden that the United States shoulders when it comes to international peace and security. The substantial increases made yesterday to our defence budget are a tangible indication that Canada intends to carry its full share of that responsibility."
Earlier, Foreign Affairs Minister Pierre Pettigrew broke the news to opposition parties in the House of Commons. Pettigrew told the House that "Canada must act in its own interests and must determine where its priorities lie."
While the decision was hailed by the NDP, Conservative MP Kevin Sorenson expressed his disappointment with the announcement, saying the Liberals promised a debate before any decisions were made on the missile-defence program.
Ottawa's decision marks the second time in recent years that Canada has refused to back U.S. military plans. In March, 2003, former prime minister Jean Chretien angered Washington by refusing to join the U.S.-led coalition in Iraq.
CTV's Craig Oliver said Ottawa's decision is of tremendous significance.
"To me it's far more important than our decision not to participate in the war in Iraq because we have broken with the Americans on the issue of continental defence," Oliver said.
"Mr. Martin can say all that he wants about NORAD, but essentially on the issue of who fires at these missiles, who knocked them down, the whole idea of the sharp end of continental defence, Canada is opting out."
Oliver said American taxpayers have essentially subsidized Canada which has for years been spending far less on defence than a country of our size should be.
"We're getting away with that because the Americans give us a nuclear umbrella and then a military umbrella in other ways."
Oliver said he believes that Canada's decision not to join missile defence will cost a lot financially since we will have to dramatically expand our ability to defend ourselves, and our ability to contribute to NATO.
"We can only hope that the U.S. missile defence doesn't begin to absorb NORAD also. If it does then we are right out of continental defence altogether in terms of surveillance.
"It would cost a fortune for Canada to replace what NORAD does in terms of surveillance of our own airspace."
The missile shield program, announced by U.S. President George Bush in 2002, will eventually have the ability to track and destroy incoming ballistic missiles. The goal has been to have a basic ground-based shield in place by the end of last year. But the experimental program has failed a number of tests and is still not operational.
Development in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Canada believes opening up the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska to oil and gas development would seriously disrupt the calving grounds of the Porcupine Caribou herd and threaten other migratory wildlife Canada shares with the United States.
The herd of more than 129,000 caribou ranges across northeastern Alaska, northern Yukon and the Mackenzie Delta in the Northwest Territories. Thousands of Aboriginal people in both countries depend on the herd for food and for the survival of their traditional way of life.
In 1987 Canada and the United States signed the Agreement on the Conservation of the Porcupine Caribou Herd, under which they agreed to protect the herd and its habitat and to consult promptly if either the herd or its habitat were damaged or its migration routes disrupted. U.S. and Canadian scientific experts have concluded that any development in the coastal plain could pose a major threat to the calving and migration patterns of the herd.
Canada believes that the best way to ensure the future of the Porcupine caribou herd is to designate the Arctic coastal plain as wilderness, thereby providing equal protection on both sides of the border for this shared wildlife resource.
In 1984, with the creation of the Northern Yukon (now Ivvavik) National Park, Canada permanently protected as wilderness a large portion of the herd's habitat, including an area of the Yukon coastal plain where the caribou occasionally calve. The creation of Vuntut National Park south of Ivvavik put additional areas of the caribou's habitat off-limits to development. Most of the rest of the herd's Canadian range is located in areas that have either been withdrawn from development or are subject to Aboriginal land claim agreements that place stringent restrictions on development.
Much of the herd's Alaskan habitat lies within the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, created in 1960 and expanded twenty years later under the Alaska National Interest Conservation Lands Act. Although development is prohibited in most of the refuge, the calving grounds lie in an area east of Prudhoe Bay that Congress set aside for possible oil and gas development under Section 1002 of the act. The act instructs the Secretary of the Interior to consult with Canada in evaluating the impact of development,"particularly with respect to the Porcupine Caribou Herd."
The 1.5-million-acre coastal area known as the 1002 lands is home to a rich variety of other wildlife--wolves, wolverines, polar bear, barren-ground grizzlies, muskox and Dall sheep. About 140 species of birds, including bald eagles, tundra swans and snow geese, use the area as a staging ground for migration. Many of these species migrate between Canada and the United States.
Canada is most concerned about the effects of development on the Porcupine caribou, whose life cycle makes it particularly susceptible to disturbance.
In the spring the cows begin their migration from the herd's winter range (located mostly in Canada) to the calving grounds on the coastal plain. Although some calving takes place in the Yukon's Ivvavik National Park, most of the calves are born in Alaska on a narrow band of tundra that lies between the Brooks Mountain Range and the Beaufort Sea--the 1002 lands.
After calving is complete, the rest of the herd joins the cows to form an enormous aggregation along the coast where the caribou graze and gather strength for the fall migration. The density of the herd (up to 50,000 per square mile) provides protection from predators.
A scientific advisory panel to the International Porcupine Caribou Board set up under the Canada-U.S. agreement reported in 1993 that the calving and immediate post-calving period is the most important phase of the caribou life cycle and the time when the animals are most sensitive to human disturbance.
Because the herd's principal calving and post-calving grounds lie within the area proposed for development, this most critical phase of the caribou's life cycle could be severely disrupted. The 1002 lands contain the richest grazing land and the most protection from predators and insects. If the herd were displaced to poorer and less protected feeding grounds, the survival of the cows and newborn calves during migration could be threatened. Canada is also concerned that the pipelines, roads and other infrastructure associated with development could alter the herd's migration routes into Canada.
Any decline in the herd would significantly alter the lifestyles of Aboriginal people who have depended on the Porcupine caribou for thousands of years. The herd is the primary source of food and an essential element of social structure for the 7,000 members of the Gwitch'in Nation in Canada and Alaska. Unlike Aboriginal groups who live on the Alaskan coastal plain, the inland Gwitch'in would have few alternative sources of food if the caribou herd were diminished or its migration routes altered.
Because of the potential consequences for Canadian wildlife and Aboriginal people of developing the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge coastal plain, Canada has repeatedly urged the U.S. government to permanently protect the area by designating it as wilderness, as Canada has done for the area in Yukon Territory where the herd occasionally calves.
Statement by Environment Minister David Anderson on Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
August 3, 2001 - Environment Minister David Anderson released the following statement today in response to yesterday's vote by the U.S. House of Representatives to allow for drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
"I am disappointed that the House of Representatives of the United States has accepted provisions to open up the "1002 Area" of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) for hydrocarbon exploration and development as part of its consideration of a comprehensive energy plan.
Canada's view on drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge coastal plain is simple: both countries should provide permanent protection for the important wildlife populations shared between Canada and the U.S.
Since first learning of this proposal more than 14 years ago, Canada has consistently urged the U.S. to recognize the environmental implications of drilling on the sensitive arctic coastal plain, and to accord wilderness protection for the 1002 Area.
Canada supports sustainable development activities, including responsible hydrocarbon exploration and development, in habitats that are not critical to wildlife.
However, the 1002 Area of ANWR contains the core of the critically important calving area for the Porcupine Caribou Herd, and Canada is convinced that only permanent protection of the plain will assure the herd's long-term sustainability.
The indigenous people of the region, the Gwich'in, have sent both the U.S. and Canadian governments a consistent message over the years: they wish to protect the herd. The caribou are the central focus of their ancestral culture; more important still, they rely on the caribou for their very survival.
Canada has permanently protected from development those sensitive calving areas in the Canadian portion of the herd's range.
As the U.S. Senate considers this legislation, Canada will continue to press for protection of the coastal plain of the ANWR from oil and gas development."
Canada's concerns about oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Dear Congressman,
I would like to take this opportunity to share with you Canada's longstanding concerns about oil drilling in the calving grounds of the Porcupine Caribou Herd in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and to ask that you consider opposing any legislation which would permit such drilling.
The Porcupine Caribou migrate through Canada and the United States. Wildlife biologists in both Canada and the United States have identified the coastal plain of Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge as the optimum calving and post-calving habitat for these caribou. The calving grounds in Alaska are therefore a critical habitat for the herd, and in those years when heavy snows prevent them from reaching the vital coastal plain, the Herd suffers a significant loss of numbers. Only permanent protection of the plain will assure the Herd's sustainability.
Both our countries share the responsibility to preserve the herd and its habitat, and we are both committed to do so as recognized in the 1987 Canada-United States Agreement on the Conservation of the Porcupine Caribou Herd.
Canada has permanently protected from development those sensitive calving areas in the Canadian portion of the herd's range. Canada's protection measures include: in the 1970s, prohibition on development of all lands in the Yukon Territory north of the Porcupine and Bell Rivers; and in the 1980s, establishing the Ivvavik and Vuntut National Parks, despite the significant oil and gas development potential of these areas. These two National Parks encompass an area of approximately 3.5 million acres. This is more than double the acreage of the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
The indigenous First Nations people of the region, the Gwich'in, have sent both our governments a consistent message over the years: they wish to protect the herd. The caribou are the central focus of their ancestral culture; more important still, they rely on the caribou for their very survival.
Canada supports sustainable development in habitats that are not critical to wildlife. For many years, Canada and the United States have successfully cooperated on energy resource development to our mutual benefit and indeed our relationship in this regard has been an example to the rest of the world. We can continue to do so, confident in our ability to preserve our shared environment, while securing a reliable energy supply.
With these points in mind, Canada's view on drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge coastal plain is simple: both countries are obligated to provide the same level of permanent protection for the Porcupine Caribou Herd.
The staff of our Embassy would be very happy to share further information with you or your staff, should you so wish.
Yours sincerely,
Michael Kergin
Ambassador
Post a Comment
<< Home