CPAWS Yukon
Posts by Adil Darvesh:
- Blog
- BlogArcticRefuge
- BlogBeaverRiver
- BlogDawsonRegion
- BlogMcIntytreCreek
- BlogPeelWatershed
- Campaigns
- Climate Change Campaigns
- Events
- Forest Campaigns
- FrontPageOurWorkSlider
- MDS
- News
- NewsArticles
- our stories
- Protecting our Wilderness
- Protecting our Wildlife
- Publications
- Uncategorized
- Wildlife Campaigns
Why RBC agreed with us on the Arctic Refuge
From left to right: Malkolm Boothroyd (CPAWS Yukon), Chris Rider (CPAWS Yukon), Geraldine Blake (Gwich’in Tribal Council), Cheryl Charlie (Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation), Elizabeth Staples (Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation)
Why RBC agreed with us on the Arctic Refuge
Written by Malkolm Boothroyd, Campaigns Coordinator
Last December I stepped out of an elevator, and onto the fortieth floor of the Royal Bank Plaza. I’d never dreamed that the campaign to protect the Porcupine caribou herd would take me to the heart of Toronto’s financial district. Corporate campaigning was brand new to me, just as it was to the rest of our team: Cheryl Charlie and Liz Staples with the Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation, Geraldine Blake representing the Gwich’in Tribal Council and Chris Rider, CPAWS Yukon’s Executive Director.
We were here to convince Canada’s largest banks to withhold finance for oil drilling in the Arctic Refuge—but maybe this was all a hopeless endeavor. After all, could the few of us really sway banks with sixty storey tall buildings, and combined assets totaling five and a half trillion dollars?
Well, we did! A few weeks ago, the Royal Bank of Canada released a new policy, pledging never to fund drilling in the calving grounds of the Porcupine caribou herd. It’s a huge success, and adds to the growing momentum behind the corporate campaign to protect the Arctic Refuge.
I think three factors were critical in RBC making the right decision. Firstly, Cheryl, Geraldine and Liz compellingly described the cultural and human rights implications of Arctic Refuge drilling. Oil development in the calving grounds would be immensely damaging to the Porcupine caribou herd, which in turn could bring serious impacts to the Gwich’in communities across the north that depend on caribou.
Secondly, the financial arguments for drilling in the Arctic Refuge are dubious. The oil industry across Alaska is in decline. The state produces less than a quarter of the oil it did thirty years ago, and oil majors like British Petroleum are pulling out of Alaska. There’s also tremendous uncertainty about how much oil lies beneath the calving grounds. The only test well ever drilled in the Refuge was reportedly dry, and seismic data is over thirty years old. Meanwhile oil prices are tanking and banks are losing tens of millions of dollars as oil companies default on loans.
Finally, the banking industry is under more scrutiny than ever for its involvement in fossil fuel projects. Banks have taken heavy criticism for funding the tar sands, fracking and the Dakota Access Pipeline. The financial industry is under increasing pressure to bolster efforts to tackle the climate crisis by moving money out of fossil fuels.
We outlined these issues in our meeting with RBC, and were encouraged by their attentive listening, notetaking and questions. We left feeling optimistic about the prospects of RBC agreeing to our request. Liz kept in touch with our contacts at RBC following the meeting, and kept them abreast of the latest developments. At the start of September we convened for a video conference with RBC, and learned that our efforts had convinced the bank. We had to keep a lid on the news until RBC published the policy, but we’re thrilled to share it now.
I’m sure RBC was also swayed by the growing list of banks that have acted on the Arctic Refuge. In recent months Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Citi, Morgan Stanley and Wells Fargo have all pledged to withhold finance from Arctic Refuge drilling—after campaigning from the Gwich’in Steering Committee and Sierra Club. A dozen more banks overseas have released similar policies.
Thanks to these policies, the pool of finance available for Arctic Refuge drilling is quickly drying up. RBC’s announcement adds even more momentum to the campaign, and will hopefully spur the rest of Canada’s banks to act. There’s mounting opposition to drilling from all sides, and I’m sure oil companies are taking note.
Collage of news headlines on major banks committing to not fund drilling in the Arctic Refuge
If you haven’t already, please click here to send a letter to TD, BMO, CIBC and Sociabank, asking them to not to fund Arctic Refuge drilling. One more interesting note: CIBC has responded to these letters by saying “we do not currently, nor do we intend to finance any project or transaction that involves exploration or development related to oil and gas in the [Arctic National Wildlife Refuge]. We recognize the unique importance of this refuge from both and (sic) environmental and social perspective.” This is promising, but isn’t a concrete policy. We’ll keep pressuring CIBC and the rest of the Canadian banks on the Arctic Refuge.
I’m hugely grateful to Liz Staples, Caribou Coordinator at VGFN. This campaign couldn’t have happened without her. We also received guidance from many other organizations, but particularly the Sierra Club. A shout out for their support.
RBC becomes the first Canadian bank to rule out funding for Arctic Refuge drilling
Whitehorse, Yukon – The Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) announced today that it will withhold financing for oil and gas extraction in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. RBC is the first Canadian bank to enact a policy on the Arctic Refuge, following the lead of major banks in the United States and overseas. RBC’s commitment comes at an important moment in the decades-long campaign to protect the Arctic Refuge. The banking industry is increasingly distancing itself from drilling in the Arctic Refuge, even as the U.S. Government pushes to hold a lease sale there. Last month Gwich’in and environmental groups filed two lawsuits challenging the U.S. Government’s approval of oil leasing.
In its policy RBC recognizes the “particular ecological and social significance and vulnerability” of the Arctic Refuge, and confirms that the bank “will not provide direct financing for any project or transaction that involves exploration or development in the [Arctic National Wildlife Refuge].”
The move follows meetings last December between Canada’s largest banks and representatives from the Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation, Gwich’in Tribal Council and the Yukon Chapter of the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS Yukon). Even though the Arctic Refuge is situated in Alaska, it is critically important to Canada. The Refuge is the calving grounds of the Porcupine caribou herd, which in turn sustains Gwich’in communities across northern Yukon, NWT and Alaska. The Gwich’in know the Arctic Refuge as “The Sacred Place Where Life Begins.”
“The world is shifting away from fossil fuels, and drilling in the Arctic Refuge would be particularly expensive, so it presents a massive financial risk. It would also be devastating for caribou, the Gwich’in and for the climate.” said Chris Rider, Executive Director of CPAWS Yukon. “Refusing to fund Arctic Refuge drilling is the right ethical choice and a good business decision. The pressure is now on the rest of Canada’s banks to step up, and release their own policies.”
A growing list of banks have already refused to fund drilling in the Arctic Refuge, including Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase, Citi, Morgan Stanley, Wells Fargo in the United States, and over a dozen banks overseas. “RBC’s decision shows how skeptical the financial world is about drilling in the Arctic Refuge,” said Malkolm Boothroyd, Campaigns Coordinator at CPAWS Yukon. “this is a warning to oil companies that they will struggle to find financing if they choose to pursue drilling in the Arctic Refuge.”
The full policy can be found here: https://www.rbc.com/community-social-impact/environment/RBC-Policy-Guidelines-for-Sensitive-Sectors-and-Activities_EN.pdf
Contacts
Adil Darvesh, CPAWS Yukon Communications Coordinator
adarvesh@cpawsyukon.org
867-393-8080 x9
Elizabeth Stapes, Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation Caribou Coordinator
estaples@vgfn.net
867-966-3261
Amber Keegan, Gwich’in Tribal Council Policy, Negotiations and Communications Specialist
amber.keegan@gwichintribal.ca
867-777-7923
Yukon’s newly released Parks Strategy sets an important vision for healthy wild spaces
Whitehorse, Yukon – Today the Government of Yukon released the Yukon Parks Strategy, to guide the establishment and management of territorial parks.
As climate change and habitat degradation threatens wildlife populations across the globe, this strategy provides a framework for lessening these impacts and ensuring that the Yukon’s plants, animals, and landscapes can stay healthy for future generations.
Previously, parks were considered on a case-by-case basis. The new strategy shifts to establishing parks as part of a network of protected areas across the territory through “systematic planning, establishment and management.” This approach will benefit wildlife who rely on moving freely across the Yukon’s landscapes. Conservation on a large scale will help provide the Yukon with more of the necessary tools to navigate our current climate emergency.
“There’s a lot to like about the new parks strategy,” says Chris Rider, Executive Director of CPAWS Yukon. “It sets out a strong vision for how the Yukon can move forward as we work to protect wild spaces for future generations.”
“This strategy is a big step forward for making sure the places that matter to wildlife and people continue to thrive,” said Randi Newton, Conservation Manager at CPAWS Yukon “It will help us make better decisions during land use planning processes, including the ongoing Dawson Land Use Plan. “
Many Yukoners depend on healthy wild spaces for subsistence, wellbeing and lifestyle. The Covid-19 pandemic has further emphasized the connection between health of wild spaces and human health. A robust parks strategy will be a key part of a green recovery for the Yukon.
Contact
Adil Darvesh, CPAWS Yukon Communications Coordinator
adarvesh@cpawsyukon.org
867-393-8080 x9
Op-Ed: Why we’re taking the U.S. government to court over the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Written by Malkolm Boothroyd | Aug 27, 2020
Photo by Ken Madsen, Porcupine caribou migration.
Our lawsuit argues the review of oil and gas development failed to value Indigenous rights and threats to wildlife, as Trump moves forward with lease sales in vital cross-border caribou habitat.
Read the full editorial as published in The Narwhal on August 27th, 2020.
—
Op-Ed: Why we’re taking the U.S. government to court over the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Two years ago I sat in a windowless convention hall in Anchorage, Alaska, breathing stale air, waiting my turn to speak about the most vibrant place I’d ever visited, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. High-ranking officials from the U.S. Department of Interior sat at the front of the room, emotionless as speaker after speaker described the importance of the Arctic refuge — for caribou, birds, polar bears, and Indigenous communities across the North that depend on the Porcupine caribou herd.
The Interior Department had just begun its environmental review of oil and gas leasing on the Coastal Plain of the Arctic refuge. But even back then, the outcome seemed to have already been determined. The people in charge of the environmental review were closely tied to the oil industry, and the President of the United States had repeatedly claimed opening the Arctic refuge to drilling as one of his proudest accomplishments. All signs pointed towards a rushed and cursory review.
Last week the Interior Department released its Record of Decision, bringing its environmental review to a close. To nobody’s surprise, the department gave the go-ahead to the most aggressive scenario imaginable: one that would offer up the entire Coastal Plain to oil companies, and place the fewest restrictions on drilling. This week, we responded. Thirteen groups, CPAWS Yukon included, are taking the Department of Interior to court. The lawsuit is led by the Gwich’in Steering Committee, and will be argued by lawyers from Trustees for Alaska, a public interest environmental law group. Earthjustice and the Natural Resources Defence Council have filed a second lawsuit.
Our lawsuit challenges the legality of Interior’s environmental review. For example, the environmental review gave little heed to the seven original purposes of the Arctic refuge, like protecting wildlife, wilderness and subsistence. Instead it shaped its environmental review to accommodate an oil and gas leasing program, an eighth purpose that was only added in 2017 when the U.S. Congress opened the refuge to drilling. We allege that the Department of Interior broke the law by disregarding the refuge’s original purposes and failing to safeguard those purposes through the design of its oil and gas leasing program.
We also contend that the Department of Interior broke the law by not adequately considering alternatives, failing to take a hard look at the consequences of drilling and not adequately addressing the threats to Gwich’in subsistence rights. In total, our lawsuit makes eight claims against the Department of Interior for transgressions in its environmental review and associated actions to authorize leasing in the Arctic refuge. If we prevail, we hope the courts will invalidate the Department of Interior’s environmental review, and any decisions that stem from it.
The Department of Interior could have modelled its environmental review after the Berger Commission. It could have taken the time to visit every Gwich’in community, and learn why oil and gas development in the Arctic refuge poses such a grave threat to the Gwich’in way of life. The Department of Interior could have listened to scientists and the public. It could have written an environmental impact statement that acknowledged the magnitude of damage that drilling would bring. But that didn’t suit the U.S. government’s agenda — since a review in good faith would have found that the dangers of drilling far, far outweighed the pros. Instead, the Department of Interior started with a conclusion in mind, and then wrote an environmental review to justify it.
The coming months will be pivotal for the Arctic refuge — with lawsuits, a potential lease sale and the U.S. election all looming. At the same time we’re working on a parallel strategy, pressuring Canadian banks to rule out financing for Arctic refuge drilling. Our allies in the United States are pressuring corporations there to do the same, and five of the six largest U.S. banks have agreed.
Autumn is spreading across the Arctic, and most of the caribou have departed from the Coastal Plain. I hope that by the time the caribou return next spring, the future of the Arctic refuge will be much more secure than it is today.
CPAWS Yukon joins litigation on Arctic Refuge
August 24, 2020
For Immediate Release
For Immediate Release
Gwich’in & allied groups sue Trump agencies for illegal lease program in Arctic Refuge Lawsuit charges BLM with failing legal obligation to protect land, water, wildlife, and people
ANCHORAGE (AK)— The Gwich’in Steering Committee and allied groups took Trump’s Secretary of the Interior and the Bureau of Land Management to court today for finalizing an illegal leasing program that would hand over the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to the oil and gas industry.
“BLM’s decision to violate lands sacred to my people and essential to the health of the Porcupine caribou herd is an attack on our rights, our culture and our way of life,” said Bernadette Demientieff, executive director of the Gwich’in Steering Committee. “We have lived and thrived in the Arctic for thousands of years. We have listened and learned from our elders, and we know we must stand united to protect future generations, and that means going to court to protect the caribou herd and sacred lands.”
BLM released its Record of Decision on August 17, allowing the leasing of the entire coastal plain. This biologically rich, over 1.5-million-acre area serves as birthing and calving grounds of the Porcupine caribou herd, feeding and molting grounds for millions of birds, and denning grounds for an array of mammals such as wolves and endangered polar bears. The lawsuit charges BLM with failing to comply with laws governing agency processes and protecting land, water and wildlife.
“BLM rushed its analysis, curtailed public participation, shortchanged Indigenous input and concerns, and omitted science and facts,” said Brook Brisson, senior staff attorney with Trustees for Alaska. “The decision-making process has been fundamentally flawed from day one. It’s no surprise that the outcome is a leasing program that flagrantly breaks the law and fails to respect and protect human rights, the public trust, and one of our nation’s most iconic public lands.”
The lawsuit charges BLM with violating the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, the Wilderness Act, and the Endangered Species Act—all bedrock laws that protect our nation’s public lands, waters, wildlife, and people. Find the full complaint
here.
here.
Law firm Trustees for Alaska represents 13 clients in the lawsuit: Gwich’in Steering Committee, Alaska Wilderness League, Alaska Wildlife Alliance, Canadian Parks & Wilderness Society-Yukon Chapter, Defenders of Wildlife, Environment America, Friends of Alaska National Wildlife Refuges, National Wildlife Federation, National Wildlife Refuge Association, Northern Alaska Environmental Center, Sierra Club, The Wilderness Society, and Wilderness Watch.
The administration has 60 days to respond to the lawsuit. The agencies will likely begin the process for holding a lease sale soon.
The administration has 60 days to respond to the lawsuit. The agencies will likely begin the process for holding a lease sale soon.
Client statements:
“This process has been deeply flawed from the beginning, with the Department of the Interior cutting every possible corner in its rush to sell off the coastal plain to the highest bidders,” said Karlin Itchoak, Alaska director for The Wilderness Society. “Fortunately, the courts stand in the way of this reckless endeavor, and we will pursue every opportunity to defend the wildlife and natural wonder of the coastal plain, and the rights of Indigenous people who depend on this landscape and the Porcupine Caribou Herd that calves there.”
“This process has been deeply flawed from the beginning, with the Department of the Interior cutting every possible corner in its rush to sell off the coastal plain to the highest bidders,” said Karlin Itchoak, Alaska director for The Wilderness Society. “Fortunately, the courts stand in the way of this reckless endeavor, and we will pursue every opportunity to defend the wildlife and natural wonder of the coastal plain, and the rights of Indigenous people who depend on this landscape and the Porcupine Caribou Herd that calves there.”
“Alaskans will not tolerate this administration selling off sacred places,” said Elisabeth Balster Dabney, executive director for the Northern Alaska Environmental Center. “We have a long history of protecting the places we care about, and remain committed to stopping the destruction of these irreplaceable lands and waters. We value them just the way they are: as a Refuge. The coastal plain is not for sale.”
“The Arctic Refuge is the calving grounds of the Porcupine caribou herd,” said Chris Rider, executive director of CPAWS Yukon. “Each year, they migrate from Alaska to their wintering grounds in the Yukon and Northwest Territories. They are a keystone species for the Yukon’s delicate wilderness. As one of the last healthy barren-ground herds, any development that threatens their health is a risk to the viability of the entire species. We are joining this lawsuit because we believe it is important to have Canada’s interest in the health of the Porcupine caribou herd represented before the courts.”
“This proposed desecration of the coastal plain of the Arctic Refuge is an outrageous assault on its incomparable wildlife and habitat, the traditional lifestyle and culture of the Gwich’in Nation, and the overwhelming desire of the American people to preserve this intact ecosystem for future generations,” said Dr. David Raskin, president of the Friends of Alaska National Wildlife Refuges. “This misguided effort to line the pockets of the oil industry for political gain will be defeated by the legitimate stakeholders, just as it has been many times since the Refuge was established by ANILCA in 1980. We will not allow the rights of the public to be trampled by this flawed process that flies in the face of the many laws and regulations that are designed to enhance and preserve our national heritage.”
“The scheme to drill this national treasure has always been morally wrong, but the process the Trump administration is utilizing to get development steamrolling ahead is flat out illegal,” said Adam Kolton, executive director of Alaska Wilderness League. “Science has been trampled. The voices of the Gwich’in shunned. Environmental laws and even the bare bones requirements of the Tax Act have been ignored. This is a ruse masquerading as an environmental review and we will not stand idly by while Trump’s Interior Department seeks to auction off the wildest place left in America to the highest bidder.”
“Opening up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas development is reckless and illegal,” said Jamie Rappaport Clark, president and CEO of Defenders of Wildlife. “Industrializing this area could be the death knell for this imperiled polar bear population. We will not back down in the fight to protect this irreplaceable landscape.”
“Oil drilling and wildlife simply do not mix,” said Steve Blackledge, senior director for Environment America’s Conservation Program. “The Trump administration’s slapdash push to start oil exploration and drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge must be stopped. It is foolhardy and blind to the reality that in 2020, clean renewable energy options are rapidly on the rise.”
“The Arctic Refuge stands alone as America’s wildest, most ecologically intact landscape supporting a great diversity of life,” said Fran Mauer, Alaska chapter representative of Wilderness Watch. “It holds an unparalleled place in our nation’s conservation history and in our national conscience. We must protect this national treasure from irreversible harm that will result from this heavily flawed process and decision.”
“The Trump administration’s so-called environmental review process for drilling in the Arctic Refuge has been a sham from the start,” said Lena Moffitt, senior director of the Sierra Club’s Our Wild America campaign. “They’ve suppressed science and ignored the wishes of the American people, and we will not allow this reckless sell-off to go unchallenged.”
“The coastal plain of the Arctic Refuge has immense intrinsic, scientific, and subsistence value to our members and our state,” said Nicole Schmitt, the executive director of the Alaska Wildlife Alliance. “We stand with the Gwich’in people who rely on these sacred lands for their food and culture, and with our members who recreate and appreciate these natural spaces, in opposing any oil and gas activities in the Arctic Refuge. We stand, too, with the majority of Americans who oppose oil and gas extraction on these lands, and with the polar bears, caribou, birds, and other Arctic animals who cannot go to court or speak out to protect their own health and the health of the lands and waters they need to thrive.”
“Drilling in the Arctic will irreparably scar one of the last remaining wild places on earth. Polar bears, porcupine caribou, musk oxen, and millions of migratory birds depend on this pristine habitat for their survival,” said Collin O’Mara, president and CEO of the National Wildlife Federation. “By flagrantly disregarding the advice of the federal government’s top wildlife biologists and failing to follow numerous laws, the Trump administration has left us no choice but to file this lawsuit in solidarity with the Gwich’in Nation to stop this reckless plan to drill in the crown jewel of wildlife refuges.”
“The National Wildlife Refuge Association stands firmly against the attempt to open any portion the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas development, including lease sales,” said Geoffrey L. Haskett, president, National Wildlife Refuge Association. “This landscape is protected for a reason: for the Gwich’in people who depend on this land for life, for the tremendous biodiversity and wildlife that call the refuge home, and for all the Americans who do not live nearby, but cherish and value this iconic and pristine land and everything it offers us all. The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge should be left untouched. This place is wild and remote and valuable beyond measure, and we cannot bear the risk of drilling there.”
Contacts:
Bernadette Demientieff, executive director, Gwich’in Steering Committee, bernadette@gwichinsteering.com, 907-371-8028
Bernadette Demientieff, executive director, Gwich’in Steering Committee, bernadette@gwichinsteering.com
Tim Woody, Alaska communications manager, The Wilderness Society, tim_woody@tws.org, 907-223-2443
David C. Raskin, president, Friends of Alaska National Wildlife Refuges, (425)-209-9009, davidc.raskin@me.com
Corey Himrod, senior communications manager, Alaska Wilderness League, (202) 266-0426, corey@alaskawild.org
Erica Watson, communications manager, Northern Alaska Environmental Center, (907)-452-5093, erica@northern.org
Josh Chetwynd, communications manager, The Public Interest Network, (303) 573-5558 or (310) 779-1049, jchetwynd@publicinterestnetwork.org
Fran Mauer, Alaska chapter representative, Wilderness Watch, (907) 455-6829 or (907) 978-1109, fmauer@mosquitonet.com
Gabby Brown, senior press secretary, Sierra Club, (914) 261-4626, gabby.brown@sierraclub.org
Chris Rider, executive director, CPAWS Yukon, (867)-393-8080 or (867) 332-5300 (cell), crider@cpawsyukon.org
Dawnell Smith, communications director, Trustees for Alaska, (907) 433-2013, dsmith@trustees.org
U.S. releases Record of Decision on Arctic Refuge drilling
August 17th 2020 (WHITEHORSE, YT) Today the U.S. Department of Interior released its Record of Decision, authorizing oil leasing on the Coastal Plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR).
The Arctic Refuge is the calving grounds of the Porcupine Caribou Herd, one of the world’s last great caribou herds, who migrate between Alaska and Canada each year. The Porcupine Caribou Herd sustains Gwich’in communities across northern Yukon, NWT and Alaska. If the Arctic Refuge is opened for drilling, it could have catastrophic impacts on the health of the herd, and the lives of the people who depend on them.
The Record of Decision closes the chapter on the U.S. Government’s environmental review of oil and gas development in the Arctic Refuge, but drilling remains far from inevitable. The Record of Decision faces certain legal scrutiny, stemming from serious shortcomings in the environmental review of oil and gas leasing in the Arctic Refuge.
The move sets in motion the next phase in the U.S. Government’s push for Arctic Refuge drilling, which could culminate in a lease sale this year. “It’s upsetting, but unsurprising, that the U.S. Government released this decision to proceed with oil development in the Arctic Refuge,” said Chris Rider, Executive Director of the Yukon chapter of the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS Yukon).
Of the over 1 million comments submitted on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, an estimated 99 percent opposed drilling. Over 15,oo0 Canadians and 500 Yukoners registered their support for protecting the Arctic Refuge, including many Gwich’in voices. In spite of this, the U.S. Government chose the most aggressive oil and gas leasing option possible: one that would open the entire Coastal Plain for leasing, and place the fewest limitations on drilling.
CPAWS Yukon is the only Canadian organization in the coalition of environmental and Indigenous groups that is working to defend the Arctic Refuge from oil and gas development. CPAWS Yukon has worked with the Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation and Gwich’in Tribal Council to encourage Canadian participation throughout the environmental review process, and to urge Canada’s largest banks to withhold funding for Arctic Refuge drilling.
“It was inevitable that the Record of Decision would come out strongly in favour of drilling, and we are not surprised to see that they have recommended the most destructive scenario,” said Rider. “Fortunately the U.S. Government must abide by its own environmental laws and the environmental review of drilling in the Arctic Refuge is full of red flags. Our lawyers are currently reviewing the ROD and we are preparing for potential litigation.” Shortcomings include the U.S. Government’s failure to properly address impacts of drilling on the Porcupine caribou, or the Gwich’in communities that rely on the herd. The U.S. Department of Interior also refused calls to hold hearings in Canada.
Contact
Chris Rider | Executive Director, CPAWS Yukon
crider@cpawsyukon.org | Phone: 867 393 8080 | Cell: 867 332 5300
Resource roads threaten wildlife and wilderness: CPAWS Yukon report
Whitehorse, YT – New resource road projects could transform the Yukon’s wilderness and jeopardize wildlife—warns a report released today by CPAWS Yukon. Titled Eroding the Yukon’s wild character, the report describes the ecological impacts of roads and the challenges they pose to the Yukon’s environmental review system.
Ecologists have called roads a sleeping giant among humankind’s impacts on the planet. Roads can disrupt animal migrations, help invasive species spread and cut ecosystems into isolated fragments of habitat. Roads can be especially damaging to wide-ranging species such as caribou, wolverines and grizzly bears.
Roads that would make the ‘first cut’ into roadless areas should be treated cautiously, especially roads proposed in areas of high ecological and cultural significance. “Roads make it easier for resource extraction industries to access lands,” said Malkolm Boothroyd, author of the report. “Once a road makes the ‘first cut’ into a roadless landscape waves of development can follow.” However, the Yukon’s environmental review process isn’t mandated to look at the domino effects of roads. “Road after road could be approved by low-level environmental reviews, and spiderwebs of roads could slowly erode the Yukon’s wildness,” said Boothroyd.
The report offers recommendations for how to make stronger decisions around road developments. Key among them is for the Yukon to complete regional land use planning before major road projects go ahead. Land use planning is suited to making big-picture decisions like where roads are acceptable, and what areas should stay roadless. CPAWS Yukon also recommends the scope of environmental reviews be expanded to better address cumulative impacts and induced developments associated with resource roads.
-30-
Malkolm Boothroyd | Campaigns Coordinator, CPAWS Yukon
mboothroyd@cpawsyukon.org | Phone: 867 332 0310
Images
Images can be found here: https://drive.google.com/open?
Image credits to Malkolm Boothroyd. Descriptions can be found in the “Details” metadata.
Eroding the Yukon’s wild character
Eroding the Yukon’s wild character
People have complicated feelings about roads. On one hand, roads help Yukoners explore forests, lakes, rivers and mountains. On the other, we value the remoteness of places far removed from the rumble of engines. Lucky travellers might glimpse a lynx slipping across a highway, but we also see the carcassess of porcupines and songbirds along the shoulder. Roads bring many services to human societies, but are also a driving factor behind the biodiversity crisis. Roads have been called a “sleeping giant” in the understanding of humankind’s impact on the planet.
The Yukon is fortunate to still have a wealth of roadless areas—where wolves and grizzly bears can still roam freely. These are lands engraved by creeks and caribou trails, not exploration roads and seismic lines. Large, intact landscapes are essential for sustaining healthy wildlife populations, and strengthening the resilience of ecosystems in the face of the climate emergency.
A new push for road development is happening in the Yukon. These roads wouldn’t connect communities or people. Instead they would serve the needs of resource extraction companies. Resource roads would open the territory’s wild spaces to cascades of new development.
We have the right tools to make thoughtful decisions about resource road developments. The problem is that the tools are being used out of order. Land use planning is designed to lay out a broad vision for the land, and can settle the big questions around roads and other developments. However, in most of the Yukon, planning isn’t finished yet—or hasn’t even begun. Without guidance from land use plans, the territory’s environmental review process can’t adequately address the far-reaching implications of resource roads. Road after road could be approved, with little consideration for cumulative impacts. Spiderwebs of roads could slowly erode the Yukon’s wild character.
Here are a few key recommendations:
● Roads that would make the ‘first cut’ into roadless areas should be treated cautiously, especially roads proposed in areas of high ecological and cultural significance.
● Decisions about where roads are and aren’t acceptable should be made through land use planning, and in conjunction with Yukon First Nations.
● Road proponents should fund independent baseline data collection, so that YESAB can have solid information on ecological and cultural values as it reviews road proposals.
● The Yukon government should require companies to post sufficient financial security to cover the costs of resource road reclamation. Reclamation outcomes should be time-bound, and well-defined in advance of road construction.
● The scope of YESAB reviews should be expanded to better address cumulative impacts and induced developments associated with resource roads.