Letter: We all win by harvesting crude from ANWR

Monday, Aug. 21, 2006 | 7:21 a.m.

The Las Vegas Sun's Aug. 16 editorial, "ANWR not a money maker," flabbergasted me. I would think the Sun would support a win-win proposal like this.

Rep. Devin Nunes' bill to dedicate federal revenues generated by minor developments in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to investments in renewable energy technologies is a great idea. It would be a small step toward the day the free world could cease to be a major funding source for worldwide terrorism.

Anyone informed about the impact of harvesting the resources available in ANWR knows that the cost-benefit ratio is win-win! Millions, perhaps billions of barrels of light sweet crude would flow from American soil. Every one of those barrels represents $70-$100 the American consumer would not be paying to terror-sponsoring, totalitarian and communist regimes.

Only about 2,000 out of over 19 million acres would actually be altered in any way and the wildlife in ANWR will benefit. The Central Arctic Herd (North Slope's herd) grew from 3,000 before drilling and pipeline construction at the North Slope to about 32,000 today. The bear, fox and bird populations flourished similarly. Perhaps the porcupine herd (ANWR's herd) and the other wildlife that uses ANWR will flourish as well.

Congress and the American public are being hoodwinked by the tree-hugging (let's all live in caves), zero-development faction. Harvesting the oil in ANWR and dedicating the federal funds to developing alternative energy sources would be a win-win for the American consumer, American independence, the war on terrorism, and Mother Nature.

F. Jay Harrell, Las Vegas