Previous :: Next Topic |
Author |
Message |
iron Member
Joined: 10 Aug 2008 Posts: 6392 | TRs | Pics Location: southeast kootenays |
|
iron
Member
|
Tue Nov 28, 2017 12:09 pm
|
|
|
isn't the way to end this back and forth about drilling in the alaska national wildlife refuge simply to designate the area as wilderness?
|
Back to top |
|
|
MtnGoat Member
Joined: 17 Dec 2001 Posts: 11992 | TRs | Pics Location: Lyle, WA |
|
MtnGoat
Member
|
Tue Nov 28, 2017 12:13 pm
|
|
|
That will just intensify the back and forth, won't it? I'm not sure a massive regulatory taking is the right move if the idea is to get away from a back and forth situation.
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
|
Back to top |
|
|
Randito Snarky Member
Joined: 27 Jul 2008 Posts: 9512 | TRs | Pics Location: Bellevue at the moment. |
|
Randito
Snarky Member
|
Tue Nov 28, 2017 12:47 pm
|
|
|
It's not a designated wilderness area because Congress never voted for a bill to designate it as such.
Areas typically get designated when there is support for a bill from the congressional delegation from that state.
Alaska's delegation is keen on oil development, so they haven't supported such a designation.
With oil prices down and thus oil tax revenues the Alaska State government is facing big deficits and is contemplating some sort of tax imposed on citizens. Which would upend the Alaska economy and politics as currently there are no state level sales or income taxes and Alaska residents are used to receiving thousands of dollars FROM the Permanent Fund every year.
So the Alaska congressional delegation is keen to permit oil exploration in ANWR in the hopes of keeping state coffers funded without disrupting the status quo
|
Back to top |
|
|
jinx'sboy Member
Joined: 30 Jul 2008 Posts: 929 | TRs | Pics Location: on a great circle route |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kim Brown Member
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 Posts: 6899 | TRs | Pics
|
A good book to read about the battles to keep wilderness and other conservation designations out of Alaska is Jack Ward Thomas' The Journals of a Forest Service Chief. Sounds like it'd be a boring read, but it is far from boring. You'll throw up a little in your mouth when you read the ugly b.s.that goes on. Alaska's Sen Murkowski re: ANWR in particular.
Here's a quick story from 1995 Newsweek re: ANWR and how insane it was getting to be. It don't come easy.
"..living on the east side of the Sierra world be ideal - except for harsher winters and the chance of apocalyptic fires burning the whole area."
Bosterson, NWHiker's marketing expert
"..living on the east side of the Sierra world be ideal - except for harsher winters and the chance of apocalyptic fires burning the whole area."
Bosterson, NWHiker's marketing expert
|
Back to top |
|
|
JVesquire Member
Joined: 28 Jun 2006 Posts: 993 | TRs | Pics Location: Pasco, WA |
Just to clarify, large parts of ANWR are wilderness, just not the North Slope, which is what I think you are asking about. See:
http://www.wilderness.net/map
|
Back to top |
|
|
drm Member
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 1376 | TRs | Pics Location: The Dalles, OR |
|
drm
Member
|
Wed Nov 29, 2017 11:53 am
|
|
|
Just as Republicans have wanted to open 10-02 to drilling, others have wanted to give it wilderness designation, but so far both have failed to change the current status.
I have to wonder if the low price of oil will undermine attempts to put out leases if it is legally opened up, at least in the short run.
|
Back to top |
|
|
|