(no subject)

Apr 22, 2005 10:15

Wallace Stegner wrote that you do not have to travel to a wilderness to know that it is worth saving-simply knowing such a wild sanctuary exists is enough to create a geography of hope. The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is an icon of that hope. We know even without going to the refuge that more than 130,000 caribou thunder across its rushing rivers and tend to their young in its greening tundra. Polar bears amble along its shoreline and wolves trot through its tangled grasses. Natural diversity and grandeur at this scale is something most of us will never see. By preserving it, we preserve the hope that our children will know that wildness and conservation still exist in our land.

For the Bush administration, the Arctic Refuge represents another kind of icon: the next frontier. The administration is poised to let oil and gas companies stake their claim to the refuge. Officials say this will help end our dependence on foreign oil. In reality, there is less than a year's supply of oil in the refuge, and it would take 10 years to access it. The administration's real reason to open the Arctic Refuge is more strategic: if it can violate this sanctuary, then it can invade our other cherished wild places as well.

But Americans do not have to choose between wilderness and energy security. Improving fuel efficiency in cars would do far more to end our oil dependence than drilling. BioGems Defenders have repeatedly helped persuade the U.S. Senate to block the administration's devastating plan for drilling in the Arctic Refuge. But the White House and congressional leaders have vowed to push through their plan in the 109th Congress, even if it means avoiding public debate and attaching the measure to a must-pass budget bill.
Previous post Next post
Up