New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Scientists Decry Arctic Oil Expansion in Letter to U.S. Senators

Researchers say that drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would harm critical habitat

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A group of 37 U.S.-based scientists whose research focuses on Arctic wildlife asked two U.S. senators in a letter on Thursday not to open the National Arctic Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas exploration, according to a copy seen by Reuters.

The scientists, including several retired former officials from the Alaska Department of Fish & Game, the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, said in a letter to Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Senator Maria Cantwell of Washington that drilling for oil and gas in the refuge would be "incompatible with the purposes for which the refuge was established," protecting fish and wildlife populations and the environments in which they live.

Murkowski, a Republican, introduced a bill on Wednesday that would create an oil and gas exploration program on the refuge's coastal plain, letting prospectors build any roads and other infrastructure they deemed necessary inside the refuge to carry out their operations. Half of the available drilling royalties would go to the state of Alaska and half to the federal government. The program's administrator would be required to hold at least two lease sales within 10 years after the bill became law.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The scientists said drilling on the coastal plain would be particularly harmful because it contains a "unique compression" of habitats supporting animals like polar bears, grizzly bears, wolverines, representing "the greatest wildlife diversity of any protected area above the Arctic Circle."

A spokesman for Cantwell did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Murkowski's spokeswoman declined to comment and referred a comment request to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

The conflict over whether to allow drilling inside the refuge has deep roots. The U.S. Geological Survey estimates the area on the Prudhoe Bay in Northern Alaska has up to 12 billion barrels of recoverable crude, and Republicans, who now control Congress and the White House, have long wanted to open a portion of the refuge called the 1002 area.

Murkowski, who chairs the Senate Energy Committee, called the 1002 portion a "non wilderness area" because the government put it aside decades ago for petroleum exploration. Last month, Democrats tried and failed to pass legislation blocking drilling there.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe