Team Proposal

(Click here for Word document)

Summaries of Main Arguments

(Click here to see a basic breakdown of each group's views on certain key topics)

Summaries of Individual Research Topics

(Click on topic to see all research available)

[Native Americans] [Alaskan Citizens] [Alaskan Corporations] [Alaskan Environmentalists]

Native Americans:

There are two different groups of Native Alaskans in ANWR, each with its own motives and concerns.

Gwich’in Perspective:
A pipeline through 1002 area would disturb calving caribou and deter them from feeding off the coastal plain, which is their main source of nourishment and ideal calving ground.
Since the Gwich’in survive off the caribou, they view any tampering with the north slope “sacred ground” as a threat to their subsistence.

Inupiat of Kaktovik Perspective:
The Inupiat primarily subsist off marine mammals and fish, and use land mammals and fowl to supplement their subsistence. While the Inupiat are concerned with the caribou, their subsistence strategy will not be annihilated by adverse affect to the Porcupine Caribou herd as their main form of subsistence is bowhead whales. Instead, the Inupiat Eskimos are in dire need of jobs due to the high cost of living and high unemployment rates. Drilling would be the mechanism to revitalize their economy, and they embrace it as long as the drilling is offshore.

Here is a broader scope of my research and sources:
Native Alaskan Perspectives

[top]

Alaskan Citizens:

My role in Team 10 is to find the average Alaskan citizen's view and opinion on Artic National Wildlife Refuge drilling.

So far I have found that:
1) Alaskans get money from oil revenues. This can be a large incentive for them to be pro-drilling because they their economy currently is not sufficient.
2) Some Alaskans have expressed sentiment that they feel they should have the right to do what they want to with their land and not be stopped by environmentalists in the States that don't even live in Alaska.

I will continue to find:
1) Percentages of Pro and Anti Drilling of Alaskan Citizens.
2) Which reasons among Alaskan citizens have greater weight.

[top]

Alaskan Corporations:

I have been looking almost exclusively on how the corporations and the government view drilling for oil in this region. They both believe that the potential costs towards the environment and natural order of life in this region, is outweighed by the fact that the oil is in demand currently, and this reserve will be able to alliviate the need somewhat for at least ten years and even projected to as much as twenty to thirty years in the future. The potential risks to the environment have also lessoned, due to new cleaning techniques and prevention measure.

I believe that the corporations and the government viewpoints that I have looked at so far, have been sincere to what they believe, but also contain much of what they want to listen to. I cannot tell if the numbers that they are giving me are the ones that are completely accurate to the fact that I would be able to tell both where both sides of the argument are coming from. I know that statistics given by a certain group will have a more positive outlook on the result that that group wants you to reach. I do not know to what extent these groups go into to get this end result. This is something that I am interested in looking into more, but am not sure if this subject pertains to the group so much. I am looking more into what other views are out there that pertain to how the government and the corporations interact with each other with prospects of oil, and how their relationship changes or stays the same when drilling begins.

[top]

Alaskan Environmentalists:

[Summary/Conclusions][Research] [Goals] [Reflection]

Summary/Conclusions

Two page summary of findings and conclusions about the impact of oil drilling on Alaskan environmentalists is now available.

Alaskan Environmentalists (.doc)

Research

HEART OF ARGUMENT: "You can't have development and wilderness—it's either one or the other. No matter how well done, oil development will industrialize a unique, wild area that is the biological heart of the Refuge."

The goals of these groups include continued protection of the natural resources in the refuge, and none of them advocate allowing any amount of drilling. The specific actions that they suggest individuals take vary a little, but most suggest writing letters to representatives in Washington, DC. There exists a contrast in the support for dilling between Americans in general and Alaskans specifically, with the state's citizens being supportive of drilling while the nation's citizens are generally not. Some green groups are allying themselves with churches which gives them much greater clout on Capitol Hill. Since 1992, the environmental groups have become more radical in nature because of their new reliance on foundations for monetary support.

-Interesting arguments have been made about the way environmentalists see places like refuges and reserves since they are public lands.

-There are many counterpoints and critiques that the environmentalists have devised to combat big corporations' positions.

-The most important thing I have discovered is that any amount of drilling will lead to immediate litigation by the environmental groups which will be both costly and time-consuming. This issue will not be easily dropped.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE DETAILED INFORMATION.

Goals

I want to make sure other groups understand that the Alaskan environmentalists are not willing to compromise on the issue of drilling in ANWR. The litigation that will inevitably be a result of such steadfastness must be factored into the cost-benefit analysis, as both a monetary and time cost. Also, I want to see what the other groups find as arguments fro drilling and sort out which reports, the pro-drilling or pro-environmental reports, are more factual (if either is).

Reflection

As the research phase of this project comes to a close, I have come to a better conclusion about what exactly environmentalists advocate and support. More importantly, I have determined what their impact will be if drilling is allowed in ANWR. I hope that I can contribute this information to our group and Mission so that this position will be seen in the final presentation.

The topic I chose to research was slightly narrower than I expected. Still, I have managed to research, evaluate, and present this information in a concise and informative way. I feel that I have captured the environmentalists' position and hope that I can integrate that into the final Mission presentation, even if it is only a small portion of the entire proposal.

[top]