|
Copyright Michael Furtman, 2002 Fishing for Energy Wise-Use In The White House Revisited By Michael Furtman “Conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it is not a sufficient basis for a sound, comprehensive energy policy.” Vice President Dick Cheney You have to wonder about a
man who would make such a statement. Too stupid to true? Of
course it is. This, from the same people that give you a tax rebate
under the theory that our individual purchases will restore the economy,
yet say individual conservation efforts don’t matter. And this from the same man
who met secretly with the top energy industry bigwigs, but refused to
meet with conservationists when drawing up this administration’s
energy. Now normally you wouldn’t
be too surprised that a Republican administration would favor business
over conservation. And normally, you would think that no matter what
they do, it couldn’t have much impact on our fisheries, except in a
very indirect way, such as favoring fossil fuels which generate the air
pollution that trouble some lakes and streams. So while the public has been
focusing on the Bush Administration’s plans to open the Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to oil drilling, the real danger to our
fisheries by the Bush Energy Policy has gone unnoticed. That threat is nothing more
than the view that National Forests, Bureau of Land Management lands,
and even National Monuments are reservoirs of oil, gas, and coal, to be
auctioned off to the highest bidders, regardless of public opinion, or
the fact they contain important fish or wildlife habitat. A little over a year ago,
just after President Bush was selected by the Supreme Court, this column
warned that perhaps we had our first “wise-use” president –
someone who not only did not believe in conservation, but would actually
work against it. This warning was based on his early nominations to key
federal environmental posts, nominations that worried everyone in the
conservation community. Everyone was holding off, though, willing to
give him a chance and the benefit of the doubt. No more. If the appointment
of Gale Norton as Secretary of the Interior was front page stuff because
of her ties to the wise-use movement, Bush’s other appointments, which
received less public scrutiny, have reshaped the view of what public
lands are for. Consider that J. Steven Griles, Deputy Secretary of
Interior, was a lobbyist for coal and oil companies. Rebecca Watson,
Assistant Secretary for Lands and Minerals, spent most of her career as
an attorney for mining, logging and energy interests. Camden Toohey,
special assistant for Alaskan affairs, was executive director of Arctic
Power, the main lobbying organization pushing for drilling in ANWR. These boys and girls have
been very, very busy working, it seems, not only for their new boss, but
for their old bosses, too. This assault spans the continent, from ANWR
to Florida, where the administration has already granted permission to
an oil company to set off thousands of underground explosions within Big
Cypress National Preserve, a national park unit adjacent to the
Everglades, to the coast of California, where George Jr. plans to
reverse the ban on off-shore oil drilling his own father imposed in
1990. So what has any of this to
do with fish and fishing? A lot. Several areas up for grabs contain significant fisheries. Take, for instance, the Bridger-Teton (B-T) National Forest bordering Yellowstone National Park in northwest Wyoming, world famous for its blue ribbon trout streams winding through lush valleys and its vast herds of elk. Even though after years of planning and thousands of public comments, the Forest Service decided that it would be unwise to allow oil and gas exploration, the oil and gas industry, emboldened by the Bush energy plan, are now fighting to open up 370,000 acres for extraction, an area larger than neighboring Grand Teton National Park. This territory includes several blue ribbon trout streams and four rivers eligible for National Wild and Scenic River designation. The industry acknowledges that exploring for oil and gas on this part of
the B-T is a gamble, and estimate that only four days' worth of fossil
fuels at current consumption rates could be extracted from the area. But
a lot of money can be made on that four days of fuel – and a lot of
land will be consumed, diced-up by roads, and over-run by people to get
it. Perhaps the most egregious assault is on the Rocky Mountain Front, a
land of spectacular mountains towering over rolling plains and sparkling
rivers. An integral part of the 5-million-acre Glacier National Park/Bob
Marshall Wilderness ecosystem, the "Front" is part of one of
the largest and most intact wild ecosystems in the United States. That hasn’t stopped this administration, however, from pushing to open it up to energy extraction. The administration seems poised to support an industry led move to reverse the 1997 decision of the Forest Service that banned oil and gas exploration in this sensitive region, a decision made after extensive public comment – 80% of which opposed drilling. The oil industry sued the Forest Service, and ultimately lost. Now they’ve asked the administration to reverse the Forest Service’s decision. Considering that such an action is alluded to in the administration's Energy Plan, with its emphasis on increasing exploration on public lands and reviewing all administratively withdrawn public acres, the odds may be good for oil, but bad for fish. Some other areas on the table for oil, gas and coal exploration are the
Fingers Lake National Forest in New York, the Green River Basin in
Wyoming, the Allegheny National Forest in Pennsylvania, the Uinta Basin
of Utah, and the San Juan National Forest’s roadless areas, in
Colorado. All contain notable fisheries. In the end, though, this really isn’t about just fish. It is about a
significant change in the management of our public lands, and about
decisions made by people who believe they know what’s best for the
rest of us, and are willing to subvert public opinion. And a change that
is largely going on behind our backs, unseen by most of us. "The view that
protections to roadless areas, important fish habitat, and other public
lands are an 'impediment' to energy development runs contrary to law,
tradition, and public opinion,” said Chris Wood, Trout Unlimited’s
Conservation Director of Watershed Programs. “What they are
considering represents nothing less than a fundamental reworking of
public lands management. The Administration is on a short road to
prolonged controversy." If there was a real need for this energy, the story might be quite
different. But there isn’t. The roadless areas of the Rockies contain
only about four-tenths of one percent of the total US oil resources,
both on and off-shore, and only six tenths of one percent of natural gas
resources. Even ANWR would only serve up six months of oil at our
current consumption rate, according to the US Geological Service. No, this is about wise-use at its worst. It is about punching roads into
roadless areas before they can be officially and permanently protected.
It is about trading wildness for profit. A year ago we wondered if George W. Bush would be our first wise-use
president. The answer is yes. (Author's Note: A version of this article appeared in Midwest Fly Fishing magazine.) Copyright
Michael Furtman, 2002. No distribution or reprinting without the
author's written consent.
|