Save the Magic

Former President Jimmy Carter once was vilified in Alaska for signing into law the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, which set aside 104 million acres as national parks, wildlife refuges and wilderness areas. That was in 1980. But when Carter returned for a nostalgic visit to Alaska last week, it was clear that the legislation has been of historic benefit. There’s one remaining action that needs to be done to protect those lands, and there’s no reason why President Clinton can’t do it now.

Bitter opponents of the 1980 conservation legislation, which took two decades to pass Congress, claimed it would devastate the Alaskan economy. In fact, the measure has helped spur a $1-billion annual tourist business. One of the most popular tourist sites is Glacier Bay, in the national park of the same name, which scores of cruise liners visit every year. Another is the Gates of the Arctic in the Brooks Range just south of Alaska’s oil-rich North Slope.

One loose thread left by the Alaska Lands Act in 1980 was whether to allow oil exploration and drilling in the Arctic National Widlife Refuge, which was created on the North Slope to the east of the rich Prudhoe Bay oil field. The bill’s sponsors wanted to declare the refuge off-limits, but that would have doomed the legislation. The controversy continues to simmer. Texas Gov. George W. Bush favors opening the refuge to exploration; Vice President Al Gore opposes it.

Carter is now opposing oil activity in the refuge, the summer range of an estimated 130,000 caribou, millions of migratory birds and wolves, polar bears and other wildlife. He urged President Clinton to put the refuge off-limits to oil drilling by declaring the refuge a national monument. The White House indicated it had no such plans but might reconsider should Bush win the presidency in November. Clinton already has come under fire from Republicans and some western Democrats for his spree of creating national monuments this year, something a president can do under the Antiquities Act without congressional approval.

The question is not timing but whether the serenity of a uniquely magical region bordering the Beaufort Sea should be disrupted by industrial exploitation. It should not. Oil experts claim that the refuge may contain as many as 10 billion barrels of oil, but that estimate has been in dispute ever since the Alaska lands bill was debated. No matter how the November election comes out, the refuge should be preserved as it is. That means no oil.