Last week, Rep. Rob Bishop (UT) and Rep. Steve Pearce (NM) sent a letter to Speaker of the House John Boehner, claiming that selling off public land and taking more public land for drilling will help solve our budget crises. This isn’t a unique idea—Paul Ryan’s House-passed budget proposal also calls for selling our public land to the highest bidder.

It’s true that Congress will need to come up with ideas on how to reduce our deficit, but selling cherished parks, forests, and wilderness isn’t the right one. Auctioning away America’s natural wonders is a reckless endeavor that will only hurt local economies, destroy wildlife habitat, and obstruct access to millions of people who enjoy hiking, fishing, hunting, and exploring our country’s public lands.

Whether its through direct jobs, tourism, or gear for outdoor activities, public lands pump billions of dollars into our economy. According to the Outdoor Industry Association, the outdoor recreation economy supports 6.1 million direct American jobs and $646 billion in direct consumer spending each year.

Public lands also provide critical wildlife habitat and are necessary for cleaning our air, providing clean water, and sequestering carbon pollution. Sacrificing these things now is a short sighted move that will hurt future generations.

Polar bears in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge // Susanne Miller/USFWS

Reps. Bishop and Pearce’s proposal to take over public lands for drilling is out of touch with American voters, including individuals that hunt, fish, and recreate on our public lands:

• A recent poll found that sportsmen prioritize protecting public lands above energy production. Given a choice between protecting America’s public lands and prioritizing the production of oil, gas and coal, 49 percent want to protect public lands and just 35 percent choose fossil fuel production.
• Another post-election Zogby poll found that independent voters favor wind and solar over fossil fuels by a 4-to-1 margin: 48 percent pick renewable energy while only 11 percent prioritize more oil and gas drilling on America’s public lands.

Tackling our budget is a serious issue — but it shouldn’t lead to the destruction and disappearance of our public lands. Congress should work together to protect programs that safeguard our air, water, and wildlife while finding a balanced approach to the deficit.

Do your part—ask your Members of Congress to preserve funding for our public lands and wildlife conservation programs.

Shell’s Kulluk Oil Rig, credit Tom Doyle/Flickr

Shell’s rig is not simply another rig.  It is the pioneer, intended to open a new frontier and convert an unspoiled aquatic wilderness into the next big oil rush. These waters are vital habitat for an abundance of wildlife such as ringed seals, as well as whales that travel the world’s oceans and birds that migrate across North America every year.

Shell Oil:  A Large Spill is Not “Reasonably Foreseeable.”

As a team of oil spill experts warned in a thorough report of Arctic ocean drilling the risks are being minimized and ignored now just as they have been ignored before, as we witnessed so tragically with BP’s ultra deepwater operations. In the Gulf, we had the largest spill response infrastructure in the country to support a dense concentration of long term operations.  In the remote Arctic waters, there is nothing except rough seas and sea ice that can close waters to recovery operations for long periods of time.  Shell is bringing up a single spill response barge.  It’s hard enough to cast a crab pot in these waters, let alone contain millions of barrels of spilled oil.  NWF’s Peter Lafontaine noted last summer this statement by US Coast Guard Commandant Robert Papp:

“If the company fails, if the response plan fails, the federal government must in some way be able to back it up with some resources. We had plenty of resources, from bases to communication systems to helicopters, in the Gulf of Mexico. And if this were to happen off the North Slope of Alaska, we’d have nothing.”

So we are crossing our fingers and trusting that Shell can mobilize the resources to handle a spill.  At least they are taking the risk seriously, right?  Well, no:

“A large oil spill, such as a crude release from a blowout, is extremely rare and not
considered a reasonably foreseeable impact.” — Shell Alaska Chukchi Sea Exploration Plan

Sound familiar?  Here’s what BP said in their Gulf drilling plans prior to the Deepwater Horizon blowout:

“In the event of an unanticipated blowout resulting in an oil spill, it is unlikely to
have an impact based on the industry-wide standards for using proven equipment
and technology for such responses.” –Oil Spill Response Plan for BP Deepwater Horizon Drilling

Should we trust an oil company to begin drilling in these unspoiled waters when their plans are based on the premise that a large oil spill isn’t “reasonably forseeable?” No, we know better.  But they received a green light, anyway.

Does Wildlife Matter to Government Drilling Regulators?

Bearded Seal, via Kerry Ritz/Flickr

No evidence?!  Here are some of BOEMRE’s conclusions from their own environmental assessment of what could happen in a major spill (one that significantly underestimates the potential for a long-running blow-out like we saw in the Gulf):

Assuming that all young ringed and bearded seals exposed to the oil died because of absorption (through the skin), inhalation, and/or ingestion of toxic hydrocarbons in the oil, this loss could take these marine mammal populations more than one to two generations to recover Shell (p. 131-2).

Polar bears exposed to petroleum hydrocarbons through direct contact or by ingesting oiled prey would probably not survive (p. 132)

In lagoon habitats, long-tailed duck densities suggest that when large concentrations of molting individuals are present, tens of thousands could be contacted by spilled oil. This would constitute a substantial loss to the regional population. Notable losses would also be experienced by post-breeding common eiders concentrated near barrier islands and in lagoons. A spill …would be expected to contact several other species present in substantial numbers, including the king eider, scoters, northern pintail, Pacific loon, and glaucous gull. (p. 130-1)

Oil Disasters: An Acceptable Cost of Doing Business?

Everyone knows where this story ends up…it really comes down to how often and how big the spills will be off Alaska’s northern shores, and how badly wildlife is impacted.  But the risks of a wildlife disaster are all an acceptable cost of doing business for oil companies.  After all, BP pocketed $24 billion in profits in 2011.  Deepwater Horizon was a financial blip for them, but the damages to marine life will be long-lasting.

According to the Alaska Dispatch, a well being drilled by Spanish company Repsol hit a methane gas pocket, which triggered the blowout.  A crew of specialists all the way from Texas is traveling to the site, but meanwhile the well is spewing drilling mud–42,000 gallons and counting.  An expert from the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation explained that the drilling mud “is hazardous to the tundra.”

Should Big Oil Be Allowed to Drill (And Spill) in Places Like the Arctic Refuge?

credit, Susanne Miller/USFWS

Some misguided members of Congress are using the excuse that extracting dirty fuels from a beautiful and untouched national treasure will pay for highway projects.  But, thanks to people voicing their outrage across the country, some elected officials are standing up against the transportation and energy bill (H.R. 3408) that would bring ruin to wildlife and wild places.

The “terrible” transportation package in Congress opens up new drilling areas on the East and West Coast, off the coast of Alaska, and in the pristine coastal plain of the Arctic Refuge, which is home to iconic wildlife like polar bears, caribou, Arctic fox, wolves, and more. House Republican leadership are using rare procedural tricks to split the bill up because many Members take serious issue with drilling impacts, so they may lack the votes to pass it all at once.

Representatives object to drilling off the coast of places like California and along the Atlantic coast, where oil spills and well blowouts, like in the Gulf spill and right now in Alaska, threaten communities that depend on tourism. Other lawmakers worry that a provision to grant industry 2 million acres of public land for oil shale speculation would generate zero energy, zero revenue, and zero jobs. A group of House Republicans even sent Speaker Boehner a letter requesting that Arctic Refuge drilling be taken out of the bill, continuing a legacy of moderate support for this pristine wilderness.

All of this new drilling revenue is supposed to pay for a chunk of the $260 billion transportation bill.  But there’s one minor detail:  much of this revenue is speculative and wouldn’t even pay for 1% of the total cost.  Groups like Club for Growth, Competitive Enterprise Institute, and Taxpayers for Common Sense agree that it is a fiscally irresponsible approach to paying for highways, bridges, and mass transit with imaginary money.

But Pipelines Transport Oil, Not People

The transportation package also requires approval of the controversial Keystone XL tar sands pipeline permit within 30 days,  which irresponsibly overturns a recent decision by the President to deny the permit.  This pipeline would move dirty Canadian tar sludge through the heartland of the U.S. to export to foreign countries, making the America complicit in the destruction of wilderness habitat in Alberta’s boreal forests and the senseless  poisoning of wildlife to make room for the pipeline. The transportation legislation, if passed in its current state, would also fuel  climate change that is already causing severe drought and economic damage in the United States.   Building the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline would threaten America’s clean water supplies, raise gas prices in the U.S. and result in a net loss to American jobs.

The legislation also waives environmental review for many projects, takes away dedicated dollars for public transportation and even defunds a program to establish safe routes for kids to get to school.

Big Oil is already double-dipping into our wallets.  It is making record profit through taxpayer-funded subsidies and every time we pay at the pump–the industry doesn’t need another expensive gift from us.

Help Protect Wildlife from Arctic Drilling

Arctic wildlife are already suffering from loss of sea ice from global warming.  The lives of species like the ringed seal and the polar bear would be at even greater risk from an oil spill in the Arctic Ocean, which would be virtually impossible to clean up in the remote and rough, frigid waters.  The blowout on Alaska’s North Slope is a perfect example: a crew of specialists had to be called up from Texas to try and control the well.

Wildlife need you to speak up for them and tell their member of Congress that the entire transportation package is a bad deal for wildlife, our clean air and water, and the future of public transportation.

Urge your decision-makers to make the right choice to protect wildlife from drilling >>

Photo Credit: Kelsey Bensch, The Wilderness Society

The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is home to a diverse ecosystem that provides habitat for polar bears and Arctic terns as well as other species such as caribou, Arctic Fox, and musk oxen.  A wilderness designation for the Arctic Refuge’s coastal plain — the area that is constantly under threat of drilling — is needed protect this habitat forever from development and help increase resiliency to the impacts of climate change.

National Wildlife Federation joined groups like Alaska Wilderness League, The Wilderness Society, Defenders of Wildlife and more to deliver 860,000 comments urging wilderness protection for the coastal plain of the refuge to the Fish and Wildlife Service.  Only Congress can designate wilderness through legislation, but a recommendation in Fish and Wildlife Service’s Comprehensive Conservation Plan would send a strong signal to Congress that oil and gas drilling is incompatible with the Refuge’s purpose.

Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, Big Oil’s friends in Congress are still pushing a dirty energy agenda that includes open up the refuge to drilling and putting wildlife at risk.  They are even pulling out their own costumes.  Alaska Representative Don Young ‘donned’ a propeller beanie cap in a House Resources committee hearing in order to drive home the point that he favors more drilling on federal lands and waters.

Rep. Young wasn’t done there.  He also got into a heated exchange with famous author and historian Douglas Brinkley (author of “The Wilderness Warrior” about President Teddy Roosevelt) at an oversight hearing on “ANWR (Arctic Refuge): Jobs, Energy and Deficit Reduction.”  Clips from that hearing can be viewed here.

It’s clear that the pressure is on for the future of the Arctic Refuge and other sensitive areas at risk from drilling.  If you would like to make a difference to protect wildlife by pushing back against drilling proponents, take action by weighing in with federal decision makers.

USFWS/Arctic National Wildlife Refuge

The Alaskan Arctic is a place most people only dream about.

Endless daylight alternates with constant, freezing night. The Northern Lights illuminate wilderness rivers flowing from the Brooks Range to the Arctic Ocean. Polar bears, caribou, moose, grizzlies, Arctic fox, and seals depend on this extraordinary, but harsh environment for their survival.

>> Speak up for the Arctic Refuge by Nov. 15, 2011

Even with all the unique beauty and diversity the Alaskan landscape has to offer, it has been a political battleground for over 30 years. The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is a national treasure which sustains more biological diversity than any other Arctic protected region, yet is constantly under attack by the oil industry. Big Oil wants to move their big drill rigs into the Arctic refuge, and are throwing around their big money on Capitol Hill to try to get their way. Under current law, Congress must approve any resource extraction activity on the refuge, including oil and gas drilling.

Right now, there are several proposals in Congress to drill for oil and gas in 1 million acres of the Arctic Refuge’s Coastal Plain. That’s why this region (a.k.a. the 1002 Area) is in desperate need of wilderness protection. In addition to supporting distinctive wildlife like muskoxen, a variety of waterfowl, diverse insects, and thousands of migratory birds, the Coastal Plain is critical for caribou herds that travel there in the summer months to birth and raise their calves.In fact, the Coastal Plain is known as the “Sacred Place Where Life Begins” to the native Gwich’in Nation, who have occupied this area for as long as 20,000 years and depend on the Porcupine caribou herd for their survival.

Arctic Fox

This fall, the Fish & Wildlife Service released a revised draft of the Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) for the Arctic Refuge. These documents are reworked periodically for each refuge and contain necessary guidelines for long-term management. The draft CCP for the Arctic Refuge lists several management plan alternatives, including a recommendation that the Arctic Refuge’s coastal plain be designated a wilderness area, protecting it from oil and gas extraction.

The Fish & Wildlife Service will consider public comments before selecting a preferred plan, giving Americans everywhere the opportunity to protect this critical calving ground and diverse habitat from unnecessary resource extraction. The Coastal Plain is in serious jeopardy from the proposed drilling and the more comments sent in, the more of an impact we can make on the decision.

If you feel the Arctic Refuge’s Coastal Plain deserves wilderness protection from big oil, we need YOU to send the Fish and Wildlife Service a comment. Please submit a comment by November 15th, 2011 and together we can keep Alaska wild!

BP said on Monday that a pipeline at its 30,000 barrel per day Lisburne field, which is currently closed for maintenance, ruptured during testing and spilled a mixture of methanol and oily water onto the tundra.

The London-based company has a long history of oil spills at its Alaskan pipelines – accidents which have hurt its public image in the U.S., where around 40 percent of its assets are based.

The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation said the spill occurred on Saturday and amounted to 2,100 to 4,200 gallons.

Big Oil is constantly pushing to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Why should we trust them not to spoil this pristine wilderness?