In late 2017 Congress passed a law requiring the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to hold oil and gas lease sales in the Coastal Plain of the Arctic Refuge. The second of these lease sales must be held by the end of 2024. BLM recently released a draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) analyzing the impacts of the leasing program and seeking comments from the public. You can read the draft SEIS and learn about comment opportunities here: https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/2015144/570.
What are the impacts of this potential action on Indigenous ways of life?
BLM acknowledges that caribou will be displaced from the Coastal Plain and their movements will be altered by oil and gas activities.
BLM acknowledges that development could lower calf survival rates, reducing the Porcupine Caribou herd’s population.
In addition to caribou, BLM acknowledges impacts to birds, terrestrial mammals, and marine mammals, as well as to the people who rely on these animals.
BLM acknowledges that the leasing program will contribute to climate change, which is already affecting Indigenous practices and the land and animals we depend on in countless ways.
BLM acknowledges that the leasing program may harm water and air quality.
Gwich’in and Iñupiaq ways of life, based on respectful relationships with the land and animals, would be severely impacted.
What are the problems with BLM’s analysis of impacts to Indigenous ways of life in the SEIS?
BLM’s Conclusion That There Will Not be Significant Impacts to Gwich’in Subsistence is FALSE: Under section 810 of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA), BLM must evaluate the impacts of the leasing program on subsistence uses and seek alternatives to the proposed action that would reduce or eliminate impacts.
The Gwich’in of Alaska and Canada are culturally and spiritually connected to the Porcupine Caribou Herd, which in turn relies on the Coastal Plain for calving and post-calving habitat.
Because of this connection, the Coastal Plain is sacred to the Gwich’in, and protecting it is vital to their human rights and food security.
BLM’s conclusion that oil and gas activities on the Coastal Plain will not significantly impact Gwich’in subsistence use is incorrect. BLM relied on a very narrow view of impacts to caribou and important caribou habitat; BLM based its conclusion on incomplete information and unproven measures to protect the herd.
Drilling on the Coastal Plain will result in a failure to Protect the Wildlife and Subsistence Purposes of the Arctic Refuge: The Coastal Plain is an essential part of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. BLM failed to consider how the oil and gas program and activities will interfere with the conservation and subsistence purposes for which the Arctic Refuge was established. Three specific purposes are highly relevant to traditional ways of life: conserving wildlife populations and habitat, providing continued subsistence use, and fulfilling international treaty obligations for wildlife and habitat. BLM must clearly explain how it will ensure that these primary purposes will be met if it moves forward with leasing and oil and gas development.
BLM Must Comply with International Treaty Obligations: There is a treaty between the United States and Canada regarding conservation of the Porcupine Caribou Herd and its habitat: the 1987 Porcupine Caribou Herd Conservation Agreement. While the draft SEIS acknowledges this treaty, the document fails to explain what steps BLM is taking to comply with the treaty. One of the core requirements of the treaty is that consultation between the U.S. and Canada must take place if an activity is proposed that would significantly impact the herd or its habitat. As part of this consultation, the Treaty Board makes recommendations for the conservation of the herd and its habitat. The draft SEIS does not explain if or how the BLM is considering the recommendations from the Board and the input of Canada, including Gwich’in First Nations.
BLM Lacks Important Information and Ignores Indigenous Knowledge: BLM is required to ensure scientific integrity and be clear in its analysis about where it lacks information, and in some cases, obtain that information. BLM failed to acknowledge how much information is outdated or missing entirely in its analysis. The agency also failed to take the time to conduct new studies or obtain that missing information, calling into question its analysis and conclusions. And it failed completely to incorporate Indigenous knowledge in its analysis.
The SEIS does not adequately consider international Indigenous rights of free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) for any development on ancestral lands. This consent is not merely a moral obligation, it is a legal necessity with regards to Indigenous sovereignty.