As the Dems continue to bet on a losing hand, they’ve posited all kinds of reasons why we shouldn’t open ANWR. The one that is focused on the heart strings and gets repeated with both great ignorance and emotion is: “You can’t drill in ANWR! The Caribou will be disrupted and not be able to migrate, mate, make little Caribous etc.”
As I’ve said before, I’d be happy to sell Alaska back to the Russians for the same price we bought it for. I’ll guarantee that the Russians would put a drill through the head of a sleeping baby Caribou to get the oil out.
I was initially suprised that some found my plan “insensitive.” However, when I thought about it more, I see their point. It would be like selling a used car that you knew had a bad head gasket. Why would we want to saddle the Russians with our Envirowhackos? We should be willing to deal with our own problem.
So what about these Caribou? The MSM would have you believe that they will be at big risk should we disrupt them in ANWR. When we show them pictures of Caribou hanging around the Prudhoe Bay facilities and pipeline, they tell us that they gather there because we have disrupted their migration patterns.
Nuts!
Take a look at what the Alaska Department of Natural Resources says about Caribous and oil drilling.
Alaska Department of Natural Resouces says about Caribous and oil drilling:
Population dynamics: There are approximately 950,000 wild caribou in Alaska (including some herds that are shared by Alaska and Canada’s Yukon Territory). Caribou are somewhat cyclic in number, but the timing of declines and increases, and the size to which herds grow is not very predictable. Although overhunting caused some herds to remain low in the past, today, varying weather patterns (climate), overpopulation, predation by wolves and grizzly bears, and disease outbreaks determine whether most herds increase or decrease.
In the 1970s people were concerned about the effect of the trans-Alaska oil pipeline, expanding oil development, and increased disturbance from use of aircraft and snowmobiles on caribou. Although there was some displacement of caribou calving in the Prudhoe Bay oilfield, in general, caribou have not been adversely affected by human activities in Alaska. Pipelines and most other developments are built to allow for caribou movements, and caribou have shown us that they can adapt to the presence of people and machines. As human activities expand in Alaska, the great challenge for caribou management is for man to consider the needs of our caribou herds and ensure that they remain a visible, healthy part of our landscape.
In fact, the myths you hear about the Caribou were based on hypothetical hysteria before any development had been done (sound familiar?) or, as the Heartland Institute shows in this paper, on incomplete studies:
In 1995, Congress considered opening ANWR to oil exploration, but the initiative failed. That same year, an important census was taken of the caribou herd that uses the existing oil fields. Caribou numbers were found to have declined from 23,000 in 1992 to about 18,000 in 1995.
Most notably, the numbers of caribou in the western part of the range (with the oil fields) fell from 14,842 in 1992 to 6,327 in 1995, while numbers in the eastern part of the range (without oil fields) increased from 8,602 to 11,766 during the period.
The results of the census were heralded in a front-page headline in the Anchorage Daily News, “Oil field caribou decline.” The story focused on speculation that something about the oil fields had caused the decline.
…..
The herd was counted again in 1997, and the caribou numbers were found to have increased from the 1995 levels, to over 19,000 caribou. The number of caribou in the western range (with the oil fields) increased to 10,669 between 1995 and 1997, while the numbers in the eastern range (without oil fields) fell to 9,061 caribou.The year 2000 caribou census showed the herd population had increased to 27,128 animals. The number of caribou in both the western (oil field) and eastern (no oil field) ranges increased (to 14,295 in the western range and 12,833 in the eastern range). This provides strong evidence that the oil fields did not cause the decline in caribou numbers between 1992 and 1995.
Incredibly, these dramatic reversals of the negative results of 1995’s census were not reported to the public.
“But Wait,” the Whackos say. “We’re not talking about any ‘ol Caribou this time! We’re talking about the Porcupine Caribous and they are MUCH different!”
Um, no, they aren’t really.
The Porcupine Caribou wander vast areas and move their calving grounds from year to year just like their cousins by Purdhoe Bay. Yes, the proposed drilling area is in part of their known calving area, but so was Purdhoe Bay’s drilling area in a calving area. While Purdhoe Bay was more centrally located in a calving area (this is part of what you’ve heard referred to as the “caribou migration issue”) and much larger, the ANWR drilling area is proposed on the very Western side of a large, annually changing, calving area. Just like their cousins to the West, unless the Porcupine Caribou have become intransigent Democrats, they will adjust and be no worse for the wear…again, just like their cousins.
Perhaps Nancy and Harry could learn something from the Porcupine Caribou. When the Caribou’s circumstances change, they adapt to survive while the Dems refuse to acknowledge reality. Could it be that the Caribous are actually a higher evolved specie than that of a Democrat leader?
I wonder how old Teddy Roosevelt would handle this prickly situation, balancing conservation and industry?
Oh, well we should just turn to John McCain for those burning questions since he has modeled himself off of Mr. Progressive hisself.
OK… not quite the same… but I love the environmentalist who jump up and down blaming shit on others…
It’s like when people blamed the seals for the decline of COD in Canada’s East coast. Turn out it was HUMANs not seals who caused that major issue in the COD population. But of course – the government who allowed this to happen will NEVER step up and admit to it, in spite of all the evidence.
I know… not the same. But it made me think of that.
People need to get their facts straight before spewing forth bullshit like this. Refineries might not be pretty… but they are held to such high standards over everyone else with regards to the impacts to environment and what not – I am still waiting for the reports that actually shows me that they have caused a major impact to our marine and wild life… to the environment – and have yet to see anything.
Big G
I think “balance” is exactly the right word and also the word that we seem to have none of when anything even remotely shaded “green” comes into the picture. I can give examples of oil drilling going on, very safely thank you, in the middle of wet land sanctuaries. I don’t think you can find more “fragile ecosystems” than those, and yet they coexist.
As I was thinking about this later it struck me that ANWR is really not the issue for oil self reliance…we have plenty of other sources. however, as a known significant source, it has become the lightning rod for what could become a battle for existence between the American economy as we’ve known it i.e. inexpensive energy, and the extreme left of the greens.