Concern for the Arctic Environment
Development of the North Should Consider Multiple Perspectives
Correctly planning for the many important development issues faced in the north will positively effect both the environment and its inhabitants.
Pollution in the arctic and subsistence practices are two issues that seem disconnected in any treatment of the debate concerning the arctic environment. There is little argument that pollution is something that we wish to avoid. National politics affect Alaska every day with continuing debate on marine transportation, the Tongass National Forest, safety of wild foods, pollution caused by cruise ships and development of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. People in Alaska often wish the debate would settle elsewhere. Alaska is unique in having many decisions made by people not familiar with the country. Pollution and subsistence are two interdependent topics. These issues come together in a discussion that reflects our cultural bias, ignorance and economic power.
Subsistence Values - Yet, Native cultural has reawakened to the value of gathering food and the support this activity brings to development of cultural identity. Think of it as a circle of dependence. The wild food teaches and nourishes the people. The people are healthier and can return to their cultural values when wild foods are available. Pollution affects the safety of wild foods. Depriving Native people of these foods also deprives them of their culture. Native people are uneasy with political decisions based on their past experiences. The introduction of persistent organic pollutants, heavy metals and petroleum products into the arctic environment could restrict access to wild foods because of safety concerns.
ANWR - Oil exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) is a topic of national importance. Higher oil prices have increased political pressure to develop domestic oil reserves. Oil exploration and the introduction of petroleum hydrocarbons represents a major human related environmental impact for the arctic. There is a wide-ranging gamut of influences. These impacts include the act of exploration itself, construction, production and decommissioning of well sites. Each phase entails unique risks. The Gwich’in people are very concerned with oil development in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and if this development can coexist with a productive caribou herd.
Development Issues - The Gwich’in Steering Committee’s goal is to insure Gwich’in cultural survival is one of the major issues of any discussion of oil development in ANWR. The committee does not believe the oil industries’ environmental record provides any sense of comfort for them in future developments. Gwich’in people have interacted with the Porcupine herd for hundreds of years. The caribou herd provides subsistence and spiritual support for the Gwich’in.
A Lifeway - Tlingit people in Southeast Alaska told me that subsistence living is a “lifeway”. Preserving traditions of food gathering contributes synergy to their cultural identity. While serving as a member of the Federal Subsistence Advisory Council in Southeast Alaska, we adopted this language as part of our mission statement. The very act of collecting subsistence foods brings value to the well being of the people. It is fair to say Native people living to the north of the Tlingits share the same values concerning subsistence foods.
Exploration for oil and accumulation of industrial pollutants need to be factors in making arctic public policy. As with many other things, isolated actions have multiple future consequences that we cannot foresee immediately. Economic pressure and euro-centric bias continues to influence the debate over resource management and the rights of indigenous people. Public environmental policy will improve with active stakeholder involvement in the decision making process.
