Washington, DC -- Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-MA), a senior member of the House Energy and Commerce and Resources Committees, was joined by Rep. Jim Ramstad (R-MN) in introducing the Udall-Eisenhower Arctic Wilderness Act, which would designate the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge as a wilderness area with permanent protections.  Rep. Markey is introducing this bill as H.R. 39, the original bill number given to Rep. Udall’s bill that became law in 1980 doubling the size of the wildlife refuge.

Rep. Markey said, “Our addiction to oil is real and enduring and still largely untreated.  Drilling in the refuge would amount to a declaration that we remain in denial about this addiction, its impact on our planet and our obligation to future generations.”

Rep. Ramstad said, “I am proud to cosponsor this important legislation to permanently protect this pristine wilderness for all Americans.”

Rep. Markey has been the chief Congressional opponent of drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.  Below is his statement introducing the measure to create the wilderness area:

Madame Speaker, The Udall-Eisenhower Arctic Wilderness Act honors two great American visionaries by designating the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge as wilderness in their names and giving permanent protection to this great unspoiled wild place. Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower began the bipartisan legacy of fighting to protect this majestic area for future generations of Americans when he set aside the core of the Refuge in 1960. Twenty years later, in 1980, Democratic Representative Morris Udall succeeded in doubling the size of the Refuge, protecting even more of this untrammeled wilderness from oil drilling.

President Eisenhower and Morris Udall had the vision to protect a remote but very special piece of pristine wilderness. I am proud to introduce legislation today along with Representative Jim Ramstad of Minnesota that would complete the job they began by giving permanent protection to the coastal plain of the Refuge.

I am also proud to introduce this legislation under the bill number H.R.39, a bill number with important historical significance in the effort to preserve the land within the Arctic Refuge. H.R. 39 was the bill number given to Mo Udall’s Alaska Natural Interest Lands Conservation Act that became law in 1980, expanding the area President Eisenhower had set aside and renaming it as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Rep. Udall later began introducing his legislation to designate the coastal plain of the Refuge as wilderness under that same bill number. This bill number offers an important reminder of the history of this special place.

The coastal plain is the biological heart of the Refuge and is central to the survival of many unique species of animals including caribou, polar bears, musk oxen, wolves, and over 160 species of birds. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service calls the coastal plain the “center for wildlife activity” in the Refuge. If we were to allow drilling in the Refuge it would irreparably disrupt this important ecosystem and one of our last great wild places will be forever scared and destroyed.

In this last year, we have seen so-called “environmentally-gentle” oil drilling exposed once and for all as the myth that it is. On March 2, 2006, BP workers discovered a quarter-inch hole in a pipeline on Alaska’s North Slope that had leaked 267,000 gallons of oil onto the arctic tundra. That recent spill was the largest in the history of the North Slope. Subsequent spills led to the discovery that BP had grossly mismanaged and severely neglected its pipelines and North Slope oil drilling operations, which had previously been touted by drilling proponents as the best and most technologically advanced in the world. The reality is that drilling for oil is a dirty business and opening the Arctic Refuge to drilling would forever ruin this untouched special place.

Moreover, if we were to allow drilling in the Arctic Refuge, the crown jewel of the Wildlife Refuge System, it would represent a colossal shift in the policy and precedent governing our wildlife refuges. Prying open the Arctic Refuge for drilling would set a dangerous precedent that would allow the oil companies to select any of the other 544 as the next target for oil drilling.

The Bush Administration has argued that we have no choice – that we are so dependent on oil that we must start defiling our wildlife refuge system to keep feeding our oil addiction.  That is wrong. We have a choice, a better choice, and it is about time that we enact real changes in our energy policy by focusing on conservation rather than seeking to drill for a few short months worth of oil in this pristine refuge.

The United States consumes 25 percent of the world’s oil but controls only 3 percent of the world’s oil reserves. We cannot drill our way out of our dependence on foreign oil but we can choose to harness our technologic genius to do something real about our our dependence on oil.

Two-thirds of the oil we consume everyday in the U.S. goes into the gas tanks of our cars, trucks and SUVs. From an energy standpoint, drilling in the Refuge is completely unnecessary. If our cars, trucks and SUVs traveled just 3 miles more per gallon today, we would save more oil than drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would produce at its peak levels of production. But more than that, if we increased fuel economy to 40 miles per gallon over 10 years, we would save more oil within 15 years than we would ever get out of the Arctic Refuge over its entire 40-50 year production life.

The oil fields on the North Slope already annually produce more air pollution and greenhouse gases than the municipality of Washington, D.C.  The Arctic is showing the strains of global warming. 

Just this last month the Bush Interior Department proposed listing the Polar Bear as an ‘endangered species’ because global warming appears to be so drastically affecting its habitat – particularly the summer ice floes needed to hunt – that the bears are drowning far from shore when the floating ice melts.  Last week scientists confirmed that a giant ice shelf -- the Ayles Ice Shelf — snapped off of its land anchor just 500 miles south of the North Pole in the Canadian Arctic. This is a feature of the Arctic landscape that is thousands of years old.  The remaining ice shelves are 90 percent smaller than when they were first discovered in 1906.  

Our addiction to oil is real and enduring and still largely untreated.  Drilling in the refuge would amount to a declaration that we remain in denial about this addiction, its impact on our planet and our obligation to future generations.

If Congress were to ever turn the coastal plain of the Arctic Refuge into an industrial footprint by allowing oil drilling, the impact on the land and the wildlife would be permanent but the hoped-for energy benefits only temporary. There are some places in our world that are so rare and so special, that we have a responsibility to protect them. The Arctic Refuge is one of those places. As Mo Udall said, “In our lifetime, we have few opportunities to shape the very Earth on which our descendants will live their lives. In each generation, we have carved up more and more of our once-great natural heritage. There ought to be a few places left in the world the way the Almighty made them.” The Udall-Eisenhower Arctic Wilderness Act would ensure that the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is never carved up by the big oil companies but is instead forever protected for future Americans.

For more on Rep. Markey’s work on environmental and energy policy, please visit http://Markey.house.gov