Senate Votes Against Drilling in Arctic Refuge

WASHINGTON, DC, March 19, 2003 (ENS) - The U.S. Senate rejected a provision to allow oil drilling within the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) Wednesday, despite an intense lobbying effort by the Bush administration and the Republican leadership to approve the measure.

Conservationists, who have expended considerable effort lobbying against drilling in ANWR, applauded the vote. They consider ANWR the crown jewel of the National Wildlife Refuge System and contend that oil drilling would cause lasting damage to the refuge's wildlife and fragile ecology.

The vote is "a victory for wildlife and all Americans," said Brooks Yeager, WWF's vice president of Global Threats.

Opponents say drilling and ANWR do not mix. (Photo courtesy Arctic Power)

The Senate voted 52-48 in favor of the amendment, with eight Republicans joining 43 Democrats and one Independent.

These eight Republicans were Senators Chafee, Minnesota's Norm Coleman, Maine's Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, Oregon's Gordon Smith, Ohio's Mike DeWine, Arizona's John McCain, and Peter Fitzgerald of Illinois.

The five Democratic Senators who voted to open ANWR were Louisiana's John Breaux and Mary Landrieu, Georgia's Zell Miller, and Hawaii's Daniel Akaka and Daniel Inouye.

"We have defeated similar proposals in the past, and I am pleased that as a bipartisan group we have stood firm in our resolve to protect the refuge," Boxer said.

The move by Republican Senators to tuck the ANWR provision into the budget resolution drew sharp criticism from opponents of drilling.

Supporters of drilling in ANWR contend the environment can sustain Alaskan wildlife and oil drilling. (Photo courtesy Arctic Power)

"It doesn't matter what tactical gimmicks and tricks drilling advocates try to use," said Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut. "We stood on principle, and principle will trump procedure every time."

The Bush administration and supporters of drilling want to open a 1.5 million acre area with the 19.5 million acre refuge's coastal plain.

Opponents believe the coastal plain is the biological heart of the refuge and that oil drilling would have devastating impacts to its wildlife.

More than 100 species of wildlife and birds rely on the coastal plain of ANWR, including caribou, polar bears, wolves, grizzly bears, muskoxen, and arctic foxes.

And opponents of drilling contend that improving fuel efficiency would have a far greater impact on the nation's energy use and its consumption of foreign oil.

"The Senate's vote confirms the American peoples' determination that the nation's most treasured wildlife landscapes must not be sacrificed for short-term gain," said Jamie Rappaport Clark, senior vice president for conservation programs with the National Wildlife Federation.

"The people of this country do not want to exchange an irreplaceable legacy of wildlife and wild places for a few months worth of oil."

Supporters of opening ANWR to oil drilling contend that there are massive oil reserves under the refuge's coastal plain, and believe it can be drilled with minimal damage to the environment.

The coastal plain of ANWR looks like this for much of the year. (Photo courtesy U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS))

Advocates and opponents of drilling cite both ends of the range estimated by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), which runs from under three billion barrels to more than 16 billion barrels.

The mean estimate from USGS finds at least 5.2 billion barrels of oil is economically recoverable at $24 per barrel.

Although oil prices have risen above $35 per barrel in recent days, USGS estimates find that the mean amount of economically recoverable oil at this price is similar to the amount recoverable at $24 per barrel.

Bush administration officials say this oil could help reduce the nation's dependence on foreign oil supplies, which could benefit the nation's security and economy.

The United States consumes some seven billion barrels of oil a year and at least four billion barrels of this total is imported.

Interior Secretary Gale Norton has been the Bush administration's leading proponent of drilling in ANWR and has said Congress can not afford to turn its back on the nation's "single greatest prospect for onshore oil."

As drilling in ANWR is a key part of the Bush administration's energy plan, it is unlikely Wednesday's setback will stop their efforts to open the refuge to oil development.

And Alaska Senator Ted Stevens, a Republican and leading advocate of oil drilling in ANWR, vowed during Wednesday's debate that he will continue fighting to open the refuge.

The debate over ANWR looks set to shift to the House, where a bill sponsored by Representative Don Young, an Alaska Republican, could move out of the House Resources Committee within the next few weeks.

For a few months of the year, ANWR's coastal plain blooms into glory. (Photo by John and Karen Hollingsworth courtesy FWS)

Proponents of opening ANWR "are up against a bipartisan dedication to the environment that gets stronger as our open spaces shrink and the stress on our wildlife increases," said Massachusetts Representative Ed Markey, a Democrat and sponsor of the House bill to protect the refuge.

Markey urged quick action on his bill, which he says will ensure ANWR is "preserved for future generations of Americans."