NWF View - opposition to Bush administration plans to tap resources of National Wildlife Refuges

National Wildlife, June-July, 2002

What the Words Really Mean

WHAT PART of the words "National Wildlife Refuge" don't they understand?

The need to provide healthy habitat for America's wildlife populations inspired the creation of the refuge system, one of the most successful wildlife conservation efforts anywhere. Yet the motivation behind National Wildlife Refuges seems to be lost on some of our leaders.

The world's largest assemblage of lands dedicated to wildlife, America's National Wildlife Refuge System encompasses nearly 95 million acres spread among 538 refuges in all 50 states.

From the first designated refuge at Pelican Island in Florida, to the expansive Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, the system boasts a broad representation of North American ecosystems. It provides habitat for hundreds of species of mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish and plants. Refuges are safe harbors for numerous threatened and endangered species, from Louisiana black bears and manatees to eastern prairie fringed orchids.

Five years ago, Congress recognized the irreplaceable contribution of refuges by strengthening the law that governs the system. It gave the Interior Secretary a mandate to "ensure that the biological integrity, diversity and environmental health of the system are maintained for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans." It made wildlife conservation the refuge system's paramount purpose.

Yet despite its tremendous value and clear mission, the system is being undermined--refuge by refuge--by many in the Bush administration and in Congress who don't understand that, in these special places, they must act in the best interest of wildlife.

The system's chief steward, Interior Secretary Gale Norton, has been a primary cheerleader for opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil development. Misguided drilling plans would mark the first time ever that oil operations would be initiated in an existing wildlife refuge, putting its wild inhabitants at severe risk. Elsewhere, Norton has been weak in defending wildlife against an ill-conceived jetty project threatening Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge in North Carolina.

Serious threats to the refuge system also stem from members of Congress and officials of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Many seem addicted to pork-barrel spending, which fuels ill-conceived efforts to reengineer nature.

In Arkansas, that addiction threatens the 160,000-acre White River and 45,000-acre Cache River National Wildlife Refuges, where immense flocks of wintering ducks converge with 230 Neotropical migrants and other species. The Corps and its congressional backers want to dredge and pump the White River to an extent that would forever disrupt the two refuges. They completely ignore the devastating impact the project would have on wildlife and on the thousand-year-old cypress trees that comprise some of the last vestiges of America's bottomland hardwood forests.

Fortunately, the need to slash costs prompted the Bush administration to remove funding for the White River project from the Corps' budget. But with political pressure to restore pork-barrel projects, the outcome of the funding battles--and ultimately, the fate of the refuges--may well depend on public opposition from those who understand that far more than money is at stake.

The lesson is clear: Public vigilance and involvement are as crucial to sustaining the National Wildlife Refuge System as they are to any other conservation achievement. As the refuge system nears its centennial, it will be up to all of us to make sure our leaders understand what the words "National Wildlife Refuge" really mean.

Mark Van Putten

President & Chief Executive Officer

National Wildlife Federation