Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: Background and Issues

Publication Date: May 2003

Publisher: Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Author(s):

Research Area: Environment

Type:

Abstract:

The rich biological resources and wilderness values of northeastern Alaska have been widely known for about 50 years, and the rich energy resource potential for much of that time. The future of these resources has been debated in Congress for over 40 years. The issue for Congress is whether to open a portion of what is now the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to allow the development of potentially the richest on-shore source of oil remaining in the United States, and if so under what restrictions. Alternatively, Congress might choose to provide further protection for the Refuge’s biological and wilderness resources through statutory wilderness designation or to maintain the current status of the area. Under current law, if Congress chooses not to act, the entire Refuge will remain closed to development under provisions of the 1980 Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act.

The coastal northern plain of the Refuge is the focus of debate. This remote and largely untouched area is an example of an arctic ecosystem that, by virtue of being essentially intact, is increasingly rare. It has been called “America’s Serengeti”, for the vast herd of caribou, for the many nesting and feeding migratory birds, and for its predators such as grizzly bears, polar bears, wolves, and golden eagles.

The area also is an immensely promising oil prospect, which some feel could be as productive as Prudhoe Bay. It is heralded as a place which could help reduce national dependence on foreign oil and keep the Alaskan oil pipeline in use for decades. Advocates for development foresee benefits to the oil industry, the people of Alaska, and the national economy.

For over 20 years, the debate over energy development in the Refuge has been highly polarized and remains so. President George W. Bush is committed to opening the Refuge to development, citing unrest in the Middle East among his reasons. And opposition to development remains strong, as opponents point to other means of achieving national energy goals.

This report does not analyze specific proposals to develop or protect the Refuge. Rather, it provides basic material for analyzing possibilities and implications of the major issues that have been the focus of the legislative debate over its fate. This report will be updated as events warrant.