Re: NANFA-- Fwd: Environment down the tubes
Mon, 18 Nov 2002 15:25:28 -0500

In a message dated 11/18/2002 10:21:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, writes:

> One big problem with drilling
> is AK is the oil companies will not gain that much oil in the long
> run. Is it worth to ruin one of the last great places on the planet
> to gain a little oil? To gain support and justify destroying the
> environment, I heard a Congressman give his views on drilling in
> Alaska, I am paraphrasing here, but it went something like this:
> "The new oil rigs and pipelines that will result from drill in the
> ANWR will benefit the elk greatly... it will create a wind vacuum
> that will keep the mosquitos off of them, and reduce their
> chances of
> contracting West Nile."

I don't know how many of you have been to or flown over the ANWR, but I have both been in & flown over a portion of ANWR. This, of course does not make me an expert or anything close to it. Also, I own land in northern British Columbia with active oil wells & pump stations with pipe lines on it; which once again does not make me an expert on oil exploration. With that said, I do have a few insights from my observations in these two areas. Actual oil exploration & extraction can & has, in my opinion, been done with a minimum impact of environment - we had wolves, caribou, moose, beaver, fox, deer, grizzley, etc. etc. on our land prior to oil exploration and still do. Not as many, perhaps, as 30 years ago, but that's definitely due to the clearing & development for farms around our land, not from the mineral extraction activity. As to ANWR, most of what I saw was muskeg in the creek/river bottoms & windblown shrubs & grasses on the relatively barren hills. It's not like
a bunch of forest or some other really majestic landscape there - and I realize that isn't a valid reason to do or not do something. As I see it, oil exploration & extraction would have such a miniscule impact upon this area that most of one's opposition has to based up emotional information not factual information. And to answer the question about how the pipeline benefits the caribou, it acts as a windbreak; if you've ever been up there, you realize the wind blows most of the time & most of that land is without any kind of natural windbreak except down in the riverbreaks.

I nearly forgot to address the bogus congressman referenced in the above post: I doubt that congressman knew much less about oil exploration or the ANWR than most of you do & you'll notice how ignorant he sounds! [Ignorant = uninformed] This post is not intended to inflame nor defame, just gives one person's perspective.

Bruce Scott
Meridian, Idaho
/"Unless stated otherwise, comments made on this list do not necessarily
/ reflect the beliefs or goals of the North American Native Fishes
/ Association"
/ This is the discussion list of the North American Native Fishes Association
/ To subscribe, unsubscribe, or get help, send the word
/ subscribe, unsubscribe, or help in the body (not subject) of an email to
/ For a digest version, send the command to
/ instead.
/ For more information about NANFA, visit our web page,