Just Another Hypocritical Environmentalist

Jul 24

Jul 24 Just Another Hypocritical Environmentalist

I have seen more than a few internet trolls who, while commenting on articles about the potential opening of the Arctic Refuge to oil and gas development, say that the only people who go to the refuge are rich, “greenie” tourists from the lower-48.

Maybe they just haven’t met any of the hundreds of Alaskans who enjoy hiking, rafting, backpacking, packrafting and hunting in the refuge. I feel lucky to have met a lot of these Alaskans on the banks of the Kongakut River, passing through Arctic Village, hiking along the Hulahula River or spending time in Kaktovik. And while I might be a “greenie”, none of those other adjectives currently apply to me, someone who has now enjoyed nine trips to the Arctic Refuge.

I will concede that a lot of the tourists from the lower-48 visiting the Arctic Refuge are wealthy; but I don’t think we should discourage affluent tourists from America (or anywhere else) from visiting any Alaskan destination. Air taxi pilots, lodge owners and wilderness guides appreciate that these folks spend part of their travel budget in AK, supporting our livelihoods. And part of the reason that those who end up in the Arctic Refuge are disproportionately wealthy is because the cost of access is so high. The refuge is a long way from anywhere and getting there from Fairbanks (the nearest city) can cost between $1500-3000 per person.

Flying out of another work trip in Alaska's Brooks Range.

The cost is so high because the flight times, in small aircraft, are so long. The irony of using large amounts of avgas to access a place that many people are fighting to protect from the destruction of fossil fuel extraction is not lost on me. It parallels the contradiction of being a “greenie” in the 21st century, when the average human’s lifestyle depends on the consumption of renewable and non-renewable resources.

I am still not sure how to reconcile the fact that I don’t think oil and gas extraction should occur in the Arctic Refuge, but my home is partially heated by natural gas (but thankfully mostly by my wood stove). The inherent hypocrisy of giving a shit about the environment, but living a modern life is unavoidable. But I’d rather struggle with this contradiction than not care about the planet at all.

This struggle has informed some of my decisions when considering routes for personal trips. It is undeniably more pleasant to fly into the alpine and begin a trip above brush line. But neither my finances, nor my carbon footprint can handle such flights very often. So instead, these days I’m drawn to routes that start and/or end at roads or villages, where the access is via car or regularly scheduled “mail planes” instead of chartered small aircraft, burning avgas for the sole purpose of facilitating my recreation.

The inescapable juxtaposition of modern convenience, waste and the realities of rural Alaska.

Yes, I’m sure that in the future, I will again fly in a small aircraft for a personal trip. No, I don’t think that there is a way to recreate without consuming. But there are ways to limit my impact (from reducing and eliminating flights to extending the life of the gear, clothing and equipment I use) and I’m just as interested in exploring those opportunities as I am in exploring Alaska’s wilderness.

So no, rich, “greenie” tourists from the lower-48 are not the only people who visit the Arctic Refuge. Many of the people who love this place are a lot like me. I’ll share more details soon on our recent trip in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, but for now I’d like to share that it was road-to-road, human-powered, dirt-cheap and just as lovely as any fly-in trip I’ve ever done.