The Department of the Interior has made headlines with a proposal that could cancel protections over 13 million acres of land in Alaska’s National Petroleum Reserve.
This vast acreage is critical to more than 40 Indigenous communities who rely on it for clean water and vital subsistence resources, including caribou and fish.
For millennia, these Indigenous peoples have called this land home, and as climate change increasingly disrupts life in the Arctic, the importance of protected public lands only grows.
The proposal emerged during the Alaska Sustainable Energy Conference, which saw the state’s Republican governor, Mike Dunleavy, alongside Energy Secretary Chris Wright, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin.
These federal officials participated in a multi-day tour of Alaska, including a stop at the North Slope, a focal point for drilling and mining activities.
While there were voices endorsing the potential economic benefits of increased resource extraction, a significant number of attendees expressed their concerns regarding the adverse effects on their lives and livelihoods.
“This push for pipelines, drilling, mining, and logging has real implications for us,” stated Rochelle Adams, director of the Yukon River Protectors, an Indigenous nonprofit organization.
She stressed that these initiatives could lead to health issues, increased medical bills, and the heartbreak of burying loved ones.
The proposed rule aims to rescind a 2024 Bureau of Land Management (BLM) regulation that heightened protections for designated “special areas” in Alaska, thereby allowing more extensive oil and gas development.
These special areas, part of the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska (NPR-A), encompass 23 million acres of BLM land, of which 13 million acres were deemed necessary to shield wildlife and critical subsistence resources.
Interested parties can submit public comments on the proposal until August 4, 2025, as noted in the Federal Register.
The conference showcased Dunleavy seated on a chair significantly higher than his fellow speakers, visually extending his influence over the day’s conversations.
Throughout the conference, he echoed party slogans such as “Make Alaska great again” and “unleashing energy dominance,” referencing President Donald Trump’s January executive order aimed at reversing restrictions instituted by the Biden administration.
“Under the previous administration, we were more sanctioning Alaska than we were sanctioning Iran,” said Burgum, echoing sentiments that resonated in a ballroom filled with supporters.
The cabinet members condemned the Biden administration’s conservation efforts, assuring rural Alaskans of increased energy, jobs, and improved infrastructure.
Alaska Natives find themselves divided on the issue of fossil fuel development, which has historically underpinned the state’s economy.
“As we discuss more development and infrastructure, it’s evident we struggle to manage our communities’ current needs,” remarked Deilah Johnson, tribal resources director for the Village of Solomon.
She emphasized her preference for renewable energy, citing the unique challenges of building infrastructure in Alaska—short construction seasons and high material and labor costs.
Mayor Josiah Patkotak of North Slope Borough championed the prospect of replacing diesel drums with a natural gas pipeline to improve community living standards, praising the cabinet’s decision to stay in his community instead of the usual brief visits.
Dunleavy claimed he was reflecting public opinion—both in Alaska and nationwide— citing a Dittman Research poll that found 77 percent of Alaskans favoring a natural gas pipeline and 61 percent of national respondents supporting the cabinet’s energy expansion agenda.
Dunleavy and Burgum voiced their concerns about relying on imported energy sources, cautioning against obtaining minerals and energy from less stable regions.
The ballroom atmosphere was evidently mixed, featuring a divide between supporters and dissenters of the administration’s energy policies.
When Zeldin proclaimed that developing North Slope could lead to “a golden age of American prosperity and freedom,” he received enthusiastic applause from some tables, while others remained silent.
Burgum directed a message toward environmentalists present, claiming, “If you care about the environment, then you should want every drop of oil, every cubic foot of gas, and every electron made in the United States because we do it cleaner, smarter, and safer than anybody else in the world.”
However, many environmentalists strongly opposed this viewpoint.
Matt Jackson, a native Alaskan and senior manager with The Wilderness Society, countered, asserting, “Oil and gas pollute the environment and cause climate change, period.”
He advocated for the U.S. to lead in clean energy technologies, critiquing Burgum’s perspective as outdated in the face of global advancements toward renewable energy.
In a press briefing post-conference, officials highlighted another angle for their development strategy: exporting natural gas to Asian markets.
Wright, with a background in the oil and gas industry, noted the goal was to attract Asian energy consumers to explore Alaskan infrastructure, emphasizing the need for buyers of Alaskan natural gas.
Outside the convention center, around 50 protesters gathered, brandishing signs with slogans such as “We can’t eat money” and “Hands off our public lands.”
Adams from Yukon River Protectors made her voice heard, declaring, “You are not welcome here!” and expressing her firm opposition to the push for extraction throughout the state.
Inside the conference, attendees focused on sustainability shared a sense of disappointment over the government officials’ narrow perspective on Alaska’s history and the NPR-A, as voiced by Jackson.
The Interior Department’s recent announcement referenced the original Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act of 1976 that established the reserve, but pointed out that the current proposal conflicts with the act’s conservation intentions.
The Biden administration’s regulation from 2024 had expanded protections for special areas in the western Arctic, as well as allowed avenues for increasing protected spaces and restricting future drilling and industrial activities in vital habitats.
This original act was introduced to address oil shortages during the 1973 Arab oil embargo, yet it also contained conservation requirements.
Notably, the act mentioned maximum protection for areas possessing high “surface values,” which encapsulated aspects like significant subsistence, recreational, and wildlife values.
Over the years, the act has undergone numerous amendments amid public and legal scrutiny, notably during the George W. Bush administration’s attempts to increase oil and gas access, which faced significant obstacles.
Similarly, the Trump administration’s approval of the Willow Project, a controversial oil drilling initiative, has seen its fate debated even under the current Biden administration.
Johnson noted a troubling trend: “We’re just selling Alaska, and this disregard for communities shows a lack of consideration for the people who call this land home.”
For her, the award-winning climate narrative lacks the necessary acknowledgment of Alaskans’ fears and the need to safeguard their unique environment and way of life.
image source from：https://insideclimatenews.org/news/14062025/trump-interior-department-pushes-proposal-rescinding-arctic-protections/
