|
|
| The Audubon
Society and The Nature Conservancy, Hypocrites on Oil Drilling? |
By Rob Latham, The Independent Institute
OAKLAND, Calif. - Prompted by new concerns about America's reliance on
oil imports from the Middle East, many are revisiting the issue over
whether to allow oil exploration in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge (ANWR). In response, many environmental groups, most notably the
Audubon Society, have renewed their strong opposition to drilling in the
ANWR.
In the fall 2001 issue of THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW, Professor Dwight R.
Lee, Ph.D. argues that if environmentalists owned ANWR, they would
probably allow drilling. The Independent Institute shares the following
excerpts from Lee's article "To Drill or Not to Drill: Let the
Environmentalists Decide":
The Audubon Society owns the Rainey Wildlife Sanctuary, a 26,000-acre
preserve in Louisiana. It has allowed thirty-seven wells to pump gas and
oil from the Rainey Sanctuary. In return, it has received royalties of
more than $25 million. .One should not conclude that the Audubon Society
has acted hypocritically by putting crass monetary considerations above
its stated concerns for protecting wilderness and wildlife.
Because of private ownership, the Society has a strong incentive to
consider the benefits as well as the costs of drilling on its property.
Certainly, environmental risks exist, and the society considers them,
but it also
responsibly weighs the costs of those risks against the benefits as
measured by the income derived from drilling. Obviously, the Audubon
Society appraises the benefits from drilling as greater than the costs,
and it acts in accordance with that appraisal."
The Nature Conservancy of Texas owns the Galveston Bay Prairie Preserve
in Texas City, a 2,263-acre refuge that is home to the Attwater's
prairie chicken, a highly endangered species. The conservancy has
entered into an agreement to drill for oil and natural gas in the
preserve."
Environmentalists would immediately see the advantages of drilling in
ANWR if they were responsible for the benefits petroleum production. The
environmentalists might easily conclude that although ANWR is an
"environmental treasure," that other environmental
treasures in other parts of the country (or the world) are more
valuable"
Environmentalists are concerned about protecting wildlife and wilderness
areas in which they have ownership interest, but the debate over any
threat from drilling and development in those areas is far more
productive and less acrimonious than in the case of ANWR and other
publicly owned wilderness areas."
Consider seriously what an environmental group would do if it owned ANWR.
The willingness of environmental groups such as the Audubon Society and
the Nature Conservancy to allow drilling for oil on environmentally
sensitive land that they own suggests strongly that their adamant
opposition to drilling in ANWR is a poor representation of what they
would do if they owned even a small fraction of the ANWR territory
containing oil.
Dr. Dwight R. Lee.is a research fellow at The Independent Institute and
the Ramsey Professor of Economics in the Terry College of Business at
the University of Georgia.
Distribution of this Article made possible by the Paragon Foundation,
Alamogordo, NM 1-877-847-3443 |
|
|
|
