Alaska Wilderness League

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Date: May 19, 2026
Contact: Anja Semanco | anja@alaskawild.org | 724-967-2777 

Alaska Wilderness League Condemns Nomination of Steve Pearce to Lead Bureau of Land Management 

WASHINGTON, D.C. — In response to yesterday’s nomination of former Congressman Steve Pearce to serve as Director of the Bureau of Land Management Alex Cohen, director of government affairs at Alaska Wilderness League, issued the following statement: 

“Time and again, this administration has shown it will go to extremes to sell off Alaska’s iconic public lands to private interests, from buying stakes in foreign mining companies to opening up every acre possible for development,” said Alex Cohen, government affairs director at Alaska Wilderness League. “Public lands belong in public hands, and Steve Pearce’s tenure in Congress — where he repeatedly demonstrated his opposition to protecting our public lands — makes him the wrong man for the top job at the BLM. We urge the Senate to reject his nomination this week, and we’ll oppose every effort he would bring to give away our wildest places if he’s confirmed.” 

The Bureau of Land Management oversees roughly 245 million acres of public lands across the United States, including critical landscapes in Alaska that are central to subsistence traditions, wildlife habitat, recreation, and climate resilience. 

During his time in Congress, Pearce built a record closely aligned with extractive industry interests, repeatedly supporting expanded drilling and mining on public lands while opposing conservation protections and climate action. His nomination comes as the administration intensifies efforts to dismantle protections across Alaska, including renewed attempts to expand drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, weakening protections for the Western Arctic, and rolling back protections for the Tongass National Forest. 

### 

Every time a lease sale looms over the Arctic, we hear a version of the same hopeful, persistent question: Why can’t Alaska Wilderness League—or everyday people—simply show up, bid on the land, and choose not to drill?  

The answer reveals a system that is far less democratic than it should be—and far more focused on corporate profit than the public good.

Lease Sales Are Built for Extraction

Oil and gas lease sales on public lands are not open marketplaces. Lease sales are carefully constructed processes, governed by agencies like the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and built from the ground up to serve the singular purpose of facilitating extraction.  

Caribou near Trans Alaska Pipeline. Photo by Lisa Shon Jodwalis, BLM

To be a qualified bidder, an entity must register with the federal government, demonstrate financial capacity, and have the expertise and intent to actually follow through on oil and gas development. This includes bonding requirements, compliance obligations, and operational expectations layered on top, particularly if seismic exploration or development programs are pursued. 

All of it reinforces the same baseline assumption that oil under federal public lands exist for extraction. There is unfortunately no pathway in this system for someone whose goal is protection when conservation is not considered an eligible use.  

Previous Attempts to Bid 

In 2008, student and climate activist Tim DeChristopher entered a Utah BLM auction and successfully bid on 14 parcels of land, covering 22,500 acres, with the explicit intention of keeping them out of the hands of oil and gas companies. He had no intention of developing the leases and, critically, no ability to pay the $1.8 million he committed to.

DeChristopher was charged, convicted, and ultimately sentenced to federal prison.  Even efforts that attempt to operate within the system’s gray areas reveal its limits.

When the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority (AIDEA) stepped in to bid on Arctic Refuge leases, it raised a new set of questions that cut to the heart of who this process is meant to serve.  

Photo sourced from Northern Alaska Environmental Center

AIDEA is a state-backed financing entity, not an oil company, and its participation blurred the lines between public interest and industrial development. If an entity that doesn’t drill can acquire leases, who is it ultimately acting for? And if the rules can stretch to accommodate certain actors, why do they remain so rigidly closed to others—particularly those seeking to protect rather than exploit?

Whose interests in the Arctic Refuge are recognized as legitimate? 

The Refuge Is Not a “Product” 

The Arctic Refuge is a living, interconnected ecosystem. It supports the Porcupine caribou herd, sustains migratory birds across continents, and holds profound cultural and spiritual significance for the Gwich’in people, who have depended on and protected this land for generations.

Elder Kenneth Frank warming up before the 2014 Gwich’in Gathering that was held in Old Crow, Yukon. Photo sourced from Alaska Magazine / Peter Mather.

Time and again, attempts to industrialize it have faltered. Lease sales have struggled to attract interest. Major oil companies have stayed away. The economic promises used to justify development have not materialized.

Meanwhile, the broader context in which these lease sales are proposed tells its own story.

As global tensions rise, including ongoing conflicts with Iran, oil prices fluctuate and often climb, placing strain on families across the country. But the notion that drilling in the Arctic Refuge would provide relief is misleading and ignores the basic timeline of Arctic development. 

Even under the most aggressive scenarios, oil extracted from this region would not reach the market for decades. It would do nothing to lower prices today, tomorrow, or in the near future. What it would do is lock in long-term industrialization of one of the last intact ecosystems in the United States, all while oil and gas companies continue to post enormous profits driven in part by the very instability used to justify their expansion. 

How You Can Take a Stand

We believe that if people were given the opportunity to bid on the Arctic for the purpose of protecting it, they would. And while the current system doesn’t allow for that kind of participation, we’re creating a way to make that collective will visible.

By contributing “$25 per acre” to Alaska Wilderness League, you can show how much land you would choose to protect if the rules were different. This is a symbolic action, not a literal bid. But it sends a powerful message: the Arctic’s value is not measured in barrels of oil. It’s measured in caribou migrations, intact ecosystems, and the right of future generations to inherit a thriving, wild landscape.

Take a Stand

We know that the reason you can’t simply “bid to protect” the Arctic Refuge is not a lack of care, creativity, or commitment on the part of the public. The system was just never built to accommodate those things in the first place. Changing that reality will take persistence, pressure, and a reimagining of what we believe public lands should be.

Until then, we will keep fighting—for the Arctic, and for the principle that some places are too important to be reduced to a line item in a lease sale.

On June 5, the administration plans to move forward with a new oil and gas lease sale in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. It’s a decision that, on its face, feels like a step backward—opening the door to industrial development in one of the most intact and ecologically important landscapes in the United States. 

But let’s zoom out for a moment. Because yes, the Arctic Refuge is facing a single bad decision right now. But it has also been at the center of a decades-long effort to answer a much bigger question: What do we choose to protect, and why? 

For more than 40 years, people all over the country have come together to defend the Refuge. Indigenous leaders, scientists, outdoor enthusiasts, veterans, faith communities, and everyday advocates have all played a role in shaping a shared understanding that this place absolutely cannot be measured in barrels of oil. 

At the heart of the Refuge is the coastal plain, often described as its biological core. Each spring, the Porcupine Caribou herd migrates hundreds of miles to this narrow stretch of land to give birth, drawn by the conditions that have sustained them for generations. The Gwich’in people, whose culture and food security are deeply tied to the caribou, call this place “the sacred place where life begins.” Polar bears den along its coastline, while millions of migratory birds fan out from here to every corner of the country. 

Photo: Alaska Wilderness League Staff

It’s a powerful reminder that even the most remote landscapes are connected to our daily lives in ways we don’t always see. 

That’s why this year we’re asking people to take their advocacy beyond their backyards. You don’t have to live in Alaska—or ever set foot in the Arctic Refuge—to have a stake in what happens there. If you care about public lands, local communities, clean water, wildlife, and a stable climate, this fight is yours too. Decisions made about leasing in the Arctic don’t stay contained to one place; they shape how public lands are managed across the country. And we’re already seeing that ripple effect.  

Just last week, protections for the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness were rolled back, opening the door to mining in one of the most beloved landscapes in the Lower 48. When an administration is willing to put a place as ecologically rich and culturally sacred as the Arctic Refuge on the table for drilling, it sends a clear signal: no place is off-limits.  

Protecting the Arctic Refuge is about setting a standard for every wild place we value. 

Efforts to industrialize the Refuge have consistently run into real-world barriers. Previous lease sales failed to generate significant interest from the oil and gas industry. Major financial institutions have pulled back from Arctic drilling, in a sign that they are aware of both economic and reputational risks. And as energy markets continue to evolve, the long-term viability of projects like this looks increasingly uncertain. 

Which is to say, this push to lease the Refuge isn’t only at odds with public opinion, but also out of step with where the world is headed. 

That doesn’t make the lease sale any less serious. But it does remind us that change is already emerging, and that sustained public pressure has played a meaningful role in getting us here.  

For AWL, this moment is one chapter in a much longer story. For decades, we’ve worked alongside the Gwich’in people and partners across the country to protect the Refuge—through advocacy, education, and organizing that connects people to what’s at stake. 

Photo: Michael Block for the Arctic Defense Campaign

The upcoming lease sale is a reminder that progress isn’t always linear. Wins can be followed by setbacks, and protections can be challenged. But it’s also a reminder of how much has already been built: A broad, diverse movement that recognizes the Arctic Refuge is not a distant wilderness, but a shared responsibility. 

So while June 5 may mark another attempt to open this landscape to drilling, it doesn’t define the outcome. 

The future of the Arctic Refuge is still being written—by the people who care about it, speak up for it, and continue to show that some places are worth more than what can be extracted from them. 

And that’s something worth holding onto.