Will the Environment Become
A Casualty of Sept. 11?

Will the environment become a casualty of the terrorist attacks?

by Ben White
15 Sep 2001
<www.gristmagazine.com>

Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska) flew right over the cuckoo's nest and straight
into nutville with his widely mocked decision to add "eco-terrorists" to the
list of possible suspects responsible for the horrific attacks on the World
Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Don Young getting restless.

For the unlucky few who missed the Alaska congressman's appalling
bloviation, here's what he told the Anchorage Daily News: "If you watched
what happened [at past protests] in Genoa, in Italy, and even in Seattle,
there's some expertise in that field. ... I'm not sure they're that
dedicated but eco-terrorists -- which are really based in Seattle -- there's
a strong possibility that could be one of the groups."

We can all have a good laugh -- heaven knows we need it -- at this inanity.
But the cold reality is that the environmental movement may take a big hit
in the wake of this week's tragedy. The conventional wisdom among some green
group leaders: "ANWR is toast" (referring, of course, to the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge).

If oil prices spike (and they may not) and bombs begin to rain on the Arab
world (and they probably will) the thinking goes that environmentalists and
aligned politicians won't be able to resist a riptide of public sentiment in
favor of jamming a diamond-sharp drill into any piece of U.S. land capable
of spitting out a single drop of fuel.

Arctic Refuge river on the run.
Photo: USFWS.

Rumors flew fast on the Hill on Friday: Oil industry lobbyists were roaming
the halls, making the case for immediate Arctic drilling, some said. Sen.
Frank Murkowski (R-Alaska) was prepared to attach language to "every bill
that moves" to open up the refuge, claimed others. (Murkowski's office,
oddly, was closed Friday afternoon.)

Meanwhile, in the halls and offices of leading environmental groups, the
question was, What do we do? How, in a time of national tragedy, do you keep
up the pressure on important issues and not get swept up in all the talk of
political unity and national security at whatever expense?

"We are very respectful of the fact that the nation needs to be focused on
the emergency at hand and respectful of the grief that hundreds of thousands
of people are going through across this country," said League of
Conservation Voters President Deb Callahan.

"But we are facing a dilemma," she continued, "because the question [of
drilling in the Arctic Refuge] may be getting called more quickly than we
ever dreamed. We will be looking to our allies and friends in the Senate
leadership to give us signals as to when it would be appropriate to once
again engage in the debate."

One early signal came on Friday from the office of Sen. James Jeffords
(I-Vt.), the chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.
Told that Murkowski may be ready to let fly with the riders to open the
refuge, Jeffords spokesperson Erik Smulson had this to say:

I think it would be very unwise to open the Pandora's box. I think that it
is going to be incredibly controversial, and we are not going to want to
touch it during these trying times. We are going to take things slowly and
prudently. The bipartisan cooperation has been unprecedented to this point
and we need to make sure that goodwill remains intact.

Callahan, for her part, didn't believe any kind of public sentiment in favor
of Arctic drilling would materialize. "I believe what the country wants to
see is leadership and focus," she said. "To the extent that there is a sense
that anybody is trying to move their special interest agenda by taking
advantage of this tragic situation, they will ultimately hurt themselves. I
think the public could in fact become quite angry if there is any attempt to
take advantage."

In need of refuge.
Photo: Alaska Wilderness League.

Another prominent environmentalist, who asked not to be identified, said the
Arctic drilling issue depends mainly on what the administration does.

"Is this just Murkowski pushing this or is it Murkowski and the
administration?" the prominent environmentalist asked. "If it's just
Murkowski, it's just going to be more of the same. He tried to do this in
the wake of the Gulf War and he did not succeed then. If the administration
joins in, it's going to be a much more serious threat."

This environmentalist said it was too early to tell whether arguments that
we need Arctic oil now more than ever would be effective.

"Those arguments are untested," he said. "It's too early to do polling in
any meaningful way. Somebody took a poll right after John F. Kennedy was
killed and 70 percent said they voted for him."

Unilateral Disarmament?

Meanwhile, many enviornmentalists are buzzing about a memo allegedly penned
by Sierra Club spokesman Allen Mattison, a Muckraker friend. We tried to
reach Mattison on Friday evening but, like any sane human being, he had gone
home by 7:00 p.m. EST. So we don't know if he actually wrote it, and if he
did, whether he would like to say anything more about it. (We also don't
know, at this late hour, whether there is any truth to the rumor that the
Natural Resources Defense Council had also decided to go publicly mum in the
wake of the tragedy. Anyone know?)

Here's the Sierra Club memo:

To: Sierra Club staff
From: Allen Mattison
Date: Sept. 12, 2001
Re: Club message change in response to national crisis

In response to the attacks on America, we are shifting our communications
strategy for the immediate future. We have taken all of our ads off the air;
halted our phone banks; removed any material from the web that people could
perceive as anti-Bush, and are taking other steps to prevent the Sierra Club
from being perceived as controversial during this crisis. We will
re-evaluate as the national climate shifts.

For now, we are going to stop aggressively pushing our agenda and will cease
bashing President Bush. We strongly need to avoid any perceptions that we
are being disrespectful to President Bush. Now is a time for rallying
together as a nation; the public will judge very harshly any groups whom
they view as violating this need for unity.

If you are asked about what this terrorism does to the Sierra Club's agenda,
please respond simply by saying that right now the public needs to focus on
comforting each other and strengthening our national security to deal with
the crisis at hand. When debate on other issues resumes, we will rejoin
those debates.

Muck It Up

Got hot tips? Startling memos? Strange connections? Send all news and gossip
to muck@gristmagazine.com, fax to 253.423.6487, or call 202.334.5543.
- - - - - - - - -

Ben White is a contributing reporter at the Washington Post and assistant to
columnist David Broder. Previously, he was a writer for the Hotline and
editor of the Hotline Weekly.