ANWR’s future is fuzzy in light of new majority
By Sam Bishop, Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, November 26, 2006

A mob of reporters often rushes forward to catch committee leaders before they duck into offices after hearings, and one such scrum, thicker than usual, gathered in front of Sen. Ted Stevens on Nov. 16.

It was a chance to ask Stevens a few questions for the first time since voters had given a majority to Democrats in both houses of Congress, removing the longtime Alaska senator’s party from control next year.

“Do you think that drilling in ANWR was dealt a death blow by the elections?” a reporter asked.

“No, well, I think,” Stevens said, then chuckled and grinned. “It’s not a death blow, it’s a question of whether the votes are there. Right now, they’re not there.”

Full Story…

Sure, even the pro-drilling senators were up in (BP Execs) Bob Malone and Steve Marshall’s faces about their company’s inability to properly maintain the pipeline infrastructure to prevent corrosion–a feat accomplished while BP raked in billions in profits.

However, instead of seeing Prudhoe Bay’s largest oil spill ever and the shutdown of half the oil field in August as a wake-up call to begin weaning the country off of oil, senators berated the BP execs because…

“We won’t get the votes we had already on ANWR, not to mention moving ahead,” — Sen. Pete Domenici (R-N.M.).

“You have completely set back any hope we had to get that bill [drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge] passed in the Congress of the United States, I hope you know that” — Sen. Jim Bunning, (R-Ky.).

Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) even spent almost her entire opening statement pushing for more drilling in warmer areas such as her home state of Louisiana.

These senators seem to think that the Prudhoe Bay pipeline failure is an anomaly, and that the failure to act in a responsible manner is exclusive to BP. But oil spills are not exactly uncommon–about 1.7 million gallons are spilled into U.S. waters each year (this doesn’t count onshore spills).

We know we can’t rely on oil companies to put the environment at the top of their list of priorities. So why can’t our legislators realize that the time has come to focus on new energy sources?

Up next on the chopping block? Teshekpuk Lake, home to at least 45,000 caribou and countless species of migratory birds. Starting Sept. 27, the Bureau of Land Management is planning on leasing out land surrounding the Arctic’s largest lake for oil and gas development.

The area, which is part of the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (NPR-A), consists of 400,000 acres of coastal lagoons, wet sedge grass meadows and river deltas. It was protected as the Teshekpuk Lake Special Area in 1977–meaning that it would be safe from any future development.

This all changed when the Bush administration–our favorite friend to the environment–decided it was time to remove all those pesky protections.

Even after 80 senators and representatives pled to delay the lease sales of “T-Lake” (as it is commonly called), the Administration is still forging ahead with its plans to destroy one of Alaska’s most diverse wild lands, not to mention a culturally important area for the native peoples of the region.

Put a stop to these lease sales. Urge Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne and J.J. Mulva of ConocoPhillips that T-Lake is too special a place to lease for drilling!