Should the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge be open to oil drilling - Research Paper Example

Download file to see previous pages Environmentalists and other interest groups however argue that allowing oil drilling in the region would endanger the wildlife in the region, disrupting their reproductive cycles, their communication, and their endangering their lives. Advocates for oil exploration in the region however insist that the impact of oil drilling in the region on the wildlife would be minimal at best. Opponents to the drilling are not convinced of such contention. Hence, much controversy in this issue is apparent. This paper shall explore this issue and establish a clear and comprehensive discussion on the topic. It shall draw its discussion based on information gathered from scholarly materials and compare it with newspaper and materials from the print media. The discussions in both types of sources shall be analyzed and assessed based on reliability and their applicability to this subject matter. These sources shall serve as both informal and formal scholarly sources for this issue, establishing clear support for the topic based on clearly defined and clearly identified arguments from well-supported write-ups. Side A: Oil drilling should not be allowed in the ANWR Scholarly articles are also polarized on the issue with studies discussing the environmental and others the economic aspect of the issue. In a study by Brown (2005), the author discussed the value of the wilderness which is protected by the ANWR. The author further argued the importance of maintaining the area as a wilderness – an area which must be unexplored and untrammeled by humans (Brown, 2005). These environmentalists are firm in expressing that allowing oil exploration in the ANWR would ruin its pristine condition because human activities would blemish the landscape. The US Congress has even acknowledged the fact that “beauty is in part the glory of seeing moose, caribou, and wolves living in natural habitat, untouched by civilization” (as cited by Brown, 2005). Various studies on environmental positions on the issue set forth that preservation is a priority over any other considerations, and that lands which have been set apart from human exploration must be preserved as such. Most Americans seem to agree with this stance because surveys throughout the years indicate that majority of them do not support drilling in the ANWR. A paper by Kaye (2005) also sets forth similar positions by environmentalists on the issue. This paper also discussed the importance of preserving the ANWR as a wildlife refuge. This study points out that the ANWR provides sanctuaries and benefits which cannot be seen in any other region in the world. They describe it as a place to exercise restraint. It therefore implies that human activities must be fiercely restrained and restricted in this area because it represents the power which people seem to have over the area – a power which must be held back and controlled to a certain extent (Kaye, 2005). In effect, these studies point out the importance of controlling human activities, allowing it to be carried out elsewhere, but to be avoided in this region which has for millions of years been allowed to flourish and to exist as an area untouched by human hands. Other scholarly articles discuss how government officials are clearly recognizing the need for the US to explore its domestic sources of oil, and therefore the need for the ...Download file to see next pagesRead More