Re: IS DRILLING A SOLUTION?

Jim Yanik <jyanik@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
floyd@xxxxxxxxxx (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote in
news:87aca44rik.fld@xxxxxxxxxx:

Jim Yanik <jyanik@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Jackie <ravina@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:Xns97B3B2CA1DE72asdf32123@xxxxxxxxxxxxx:

The Republican congressmen are at it again: they are talking
DRILLING IN ALASKA'S WILDLIFE REFUGE FOR OIL.

The part of ANWR they want to drill in is a barren wasteland.

That is an absurdly ridiculous statement.

Car and Driver writers made a road trip up there,and wrote an article on
it,long ago.they had pictures,too.Note I said "the PART of ANWR they want
to drill in" is a wasteland,not "pristine wilderness".Not "all of ANWR" is
a wasteland.

The part they want to drill in is not a wasteland. I've been
there. It looks just like my back yard.

You don't have a clue what you are talking about, and anyone who
claims it is a wasteland is no different. It is absolutely a
botonists delight, and there are wildlife biologists who have
spent their entire lives studying the animals there.

It *is* a pristine wilderness.

The drill rigs will take up a miniscule portion of land area,and not

More false statements.

No,they alreay have such examples;how big do you thing an ocean drill rig
is?

What has an "ocean drill rig" go to do with it? You don't
really believe that bull*** about building drill rigs off the
coast and tapping ANWR with horizontal drilling to you?

Regardless, you are *still* ignorant. A typical drill pad
covers about 100 acres. But do you understand the impact of 20
such drill pads all connected by roads, surrounded by the
required garbage dumps, airports and gravel pits?

The 1002 Area of ANWR is about 1.5 million acres, and it is
expected that about 75% of it will be significantly impacted.

interfere with wildlife,JUST like the present drilling areas.

We have 30+ years of biology studies, all funded by oil money and
all intended to find ways to increase oil production, which show
otherwise.

And we have caribou and other arctic animals all living around the present
sites in operation.

But they do *not* calve near oil infrastructure. We have before
and after studies done at Milne Point, Kuparuk, and Alpine. We
know that if the Porcupine Herd reacts the same way the Central
Arctic Herd did, it will be a disaster. Virtually *every*
caribou biologist that has done field work on the North Slope
agrees with that, and there have been dozens of them sign
letters to Clinton first and later to Bush requesting that no
drilling be allowed in ANWR.

And they already have proven they can drill up there and be
environmentally sound.

Where is that proof?

Again,we have caribou and other arctic animals all living around the
present sites in operation.

Show me the proof that we can be environmentally sound. Tell us all
about the Super Fund sites within Prudhoe Bay, for example. Tell us
why they don't report polution dumped into the air at Prudhoe Bay?
Tell us who you think will ever clean up the mess at Prudhoe. And
explain the 400+ toxic spills at Prudhoe *every* year.

What we actually have is the very small Central Arctic Caribou
herd that moved calving away from the areas where oil
infrastructure was built. That is a very small herd with a
*huge* area to roam in. The Porcupine herd is 4 to 5 times
larger and has a very small area, with only one prime calving
area. The proposed drilling would block them from use of that
prime calving area.

As noted, the biologist (all of whom are paid with oil money to
research ways to expand oil production) all agree that it is not
a good idea to drill in ANWR.



I don't want to hear the Rush or some other idiot who writes
opinions without facts has said it is. I want you to point out
the actual proof. Show a study by scientist using field work done
on the North Slope that came up with data demonstrating what you
have claimed is fact.

If you want to check the caribou biology, here is what the
biologist actually do say, which refutes everything you have
claimed:

http://www.absc.usgs.gov/1002/index.htm

Specifically, these are the sections to look at,

http://www.absc.usgs.gov/1002/section3part1.htm
http://www.absc.usgs.gov/1002/section4part1.htm
http://www.absc.usgs.gov/1002/section5.htm
http://www.absc.usgs.gov/1002/section6.htm

However, the above is significantly deep! To read only the conclusions
specifically about the Porcupine Caribou herd, go to this URL

http://www.absc.usgs.gov/1002/section3part5.htm

Here is a statement by Ken Whitten (senior biologist in charge
of studying the Porcupine Caribou herd) to Congress:

http://www.defenders.org/wildlife/arctic/news/whitten.pdf

And as for the idea that it is a wasteland, here are two URLs
from the USFWS to help you better understand where all this
takes place,

http://arctic.fws.gov/issues1.htm
http://arctic.fws.gov/content.htm

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@xxxxxxxxxx
.