by Winona LaDuke
© 2002, 1821 words

A native elder from the Yukon was asked about Sarah James as a child. "She was one mean little girl", is what she said. Sarah's sister, Virginia however, doesn't remember her as such. Maybe it was just scrapping with rival Gwich'in children in Arctic village, in the heart of Alaska. That ability to scrap, whether rumored or fact has served her well. For fourteen years, Ms. Sarah James has fought the largest oil companies in the world as they seek to open oil development in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge- or the heart of the Gwich'in nation. To the Gwich'in, the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is known as "the Place where Life begins." And, in their reckoning, no one should destroy that.

In Washington, things are viewed differently. It's down to the wire. The Administration's Energy bill which would open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge has passed the house. The Senate will have a showdown sometime in March, with a number of Senators still undecided. The Alaskan legislature has pumped $2,5 million thus far into opening up the Refuge, and is just about to put another $l million into a full court press of lobbying in March. I was in Fairbanks, Alaska a week ago, and had the opportunity to have breakfast with Sarah James, Faith Gemmill and other Gwich'in, a good meal was had by all. But, realizing that the oil companies are spending tens of thousands of dollars a day just to get into the Arctic Refuge, I wish I could do more.

So, we put up a wind tower on the White Earth reservation in northwestern Minnesota this past week. A rather small gesture, but, in my mind, sort of what we should be talking about, rather than sucking dry one of the most beautiful and pristine places left on the continent. Just to provide, maybe two months worth of oil, if that. There is no need or justification to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

Even in the case of "national security", there will not be a drop of oil that would come forth from the refuge for ten years or more. Nor would any promised jobs appear for a decade, long after, we should all hope, we would have moved to better sources of both energy and employment, in not only environmental terms, but also economic terms.

( Jobs in the energy sector are by far the most expensive capital investments for the economy, of pretty much any jobs that could be mustered). At best, sixty-two days of oil in the refuge, to meet present US consumption rates, that is all, pretty much a drop in the bucket.

In contrast., if exploited, the loss would be immeasurable. The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is "Vadzaii googii vi dehk'it gwanlii", the Place where Life Begins, in the Gwich'in language. Indeed it is a resting ground for millions of migratory birds (l35 species), as well as year round habitat for many others. It is also the calving grounds of the Porcupine Caribou herd.

When this refuge was created there was good reason and good intent. As well, l987 international management agreements with Canada commit us to protect the Porcupine Caribou Herd. Canada has continued its commitment in this vein, and even expanded the territory protected for them to insure the preservation of the largest migratory herd in North America. Yet the coastal segment of the Refuge is unique, there is no replacement for it. And, particularly considering the size of this herd, there is no habitat to which they could shift, especially since 90% of the remaining Alaskan shoreline is already impacted by oil development. Oil and caribou do not mix.

Studies done on herds in adjacent oil development areas indicate that there is a significant decline in calving, and herd weight as well as herd health. As one Alaskan Department of Natural Resources biologist reports, "...Cows that spent more time in the oil fields gained less weight and had fewer calves than cows that seldom encountered development..."

Additionally, there is already vast oil exploration territory in Alaska, not to mention the National Petroleum Reserve. There are millions of acres under exploration, and indeed the state of Alaska has even proposed to eliminate the citizen's ability to review the drilling permits, in an effort to expedite further development outside the refuge.

There is no such thing as a small footprint, even if Interior Secretary Gale Norton maintains there will be such. Oil development requires workers, airports, production facilities, pipelines, housing, and infrastructure for workers in remote areas. In a region known for its lack of human inhabitants on this scale, the massive influx will alter the ecosystem.

There is no way to protect the region in terms of National Security. Already, this past winter, Daniel Carson Lewis, a 37 year-old man from the area, shot a hole in the Trans Alaska Pipeline, causing an estimated total of 6,800 barrels or 285,600 gallons to spill, before they could even figure out what happened and fix it. Thousands of miles of pipeline are difficult to guard and to monitor. That would, in my simple mind, not be the most stable source of energy for national security.

From 1994 to 1999, approximately 1,600 spills occurred in Alaska, involving more than 1.2 million gallons of oil, diesel fuel, acid, biocide, ethylene glycol, drilling fluid, and other liquids.. A study of diesel spills in Alaska's Arctic found that, after 28 years, substantial hydrocarbons remained in the soil and most of the vegetation in the area of the spills had not recovered. Oil development is not a clean business. Human error, and the environment do not reconcile.

Gale Norton and the Bush Administration have secured passage of their interests by promising hundreds of thousands of jobs to teamsters, bolstering support in the labor movement. Lobbyists for the Teamsters and other unions jumped into the energy bill with an 11th-hour claim that developing ANWR would produce 750,000 jobs nationwide.

These estimates were grossly exaggerated. It turns out that the Teamsters' projection was off the mark by over 700,000 jobs. Environmental groups say the unions relied on faulty research and that only 46,000 jobs would result from drilling in ANWR.

The Administration, and indeed Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell, are quick to point out that some Alaskan Natives, particularly Inupiats are in favor of oil development in the Refuge. Nighthorse- Campbell for instance, a Republican Senator from Colorado has levied his attacks on "environmental fanaticism", attacks the Kyoto Accord as "inflexible and unreasonable" ( although signed on by over l50 nations),and states that in terms of the position of the Inupiat in the region, "The Federal government should not tell a Native people what to do with it's land." My thinking on this Ben, "Excellent point, maybe this would have been good twenty years ago, or even applied to the Gwich'in."

I must beg to differ with my Native colleague Nighthorse Campbell and the Administration. Both gloss over a number of significant issues. . First of all, yes, there are Inupiats in the region, particularly in the village of Kaktovik. A few points to consider: First of all, the state of Alaska has given the village of Kaktovik hundreds of thousands of dollars in "hospitality money" to host Senators like Ben Nighthorse Campbell, and members of the media, to make it appear that there is a strong measure of Native support for opening up ANWR. No corresponding money was given to the Gwich'in. The Inupiat are right, for instance when Tara Katuk Sweeney (lobbying from the "war room" of Arctic Power, the oil company's interest group in Washington says, "We're human, and we're willing to work for the luxuries that people take for granted. The only thing that brought our people out of Third World living conditions was the Prudoe Bay development", she says, referring to the spread of oil development about 66 miles to the west of her village. The luxuries which spilled over from Prudoe Bay included flush toilets, running water, heat, and a few other modern day conveniences.

One might ask if Native people in 2002, should have to trade their ecosystem for running water and electricity, or... if in the wealthiest country in the world, and a state with a huge amount of energy resources, these "luxuries" might trickle down. As well, reporters and Campbell have not noted that many Inupiat in the area are in favor of exploitation of the Arctic Refuge, because they have been promised by officials that this will mean a diminishment of off-shore oil exploitation. The off shore oil development is what devastates the marine environment: the heart of Inupiat Culture. In the end, we can be sure that all the ecosystems will lose. Additionally, the Inupiats have some land which is rich in oil, that is not, presently accessible. That land could easily be traded with other oil rich lands to both preserve the refuge and provide some income sources for the Inupiats.

Alternatives are at hand. The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 mandated the sale of oxygenated fuels in areas with unhealthy levels of carbon monoxide. The most feasible alternative is to replace that gas with clean-burning ethanol. Fuel ethanol blends are successfully used in all types of vehicles and engines that require gasoline.

Ethanol is already penetrating the transportation market as gasohol. Iowa alone is capable of supplying more than 440 million gallons of ethanol today. And across the Midwest, farmers' coops and agriculture corporations are expanding capacity, anticipating demand. South Dakota has nine ethanol plants in production or development and expects to soon produce more than 220 million gallons a year. Minnesota has 15 ethanol plants, capable of cranking out more than 225 million gallons a year. The growth of the ethanol industry has been based on the idea that development of domestic renewable fuels can reduce dependence on foreign energy sources, and of course on ANWR.

It comes down to, do I want to see millions of dollars invested, and thousands of acres devastated for oil company profits ( British Petroleum, for instance is, the largest Alaskan oil company right now), or would I rather see that money be invested in American farmers. I feel far more "secure" with farmers.

Then of course, there is the wind generator on the White Earth reservation. Whatever the choice, the reality is that there are a multitude of alternatives, and most of those alternatives would provide far more jobs, at far less negative impact. The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is worth saving. And, that Sarah James isn't such a mean little girl after all, just a fifty year old woman concerned about the world around her.