OPINION: Congress should leave the Ambler Road out of military budget bill

I was eight years old when Alaska became a state. It was the same time that conservation efforts in America were just gaining traction. I was lucky enough to learn from an early and incredibly impactful advocate for the movement: my Air Force Academy grammar school teacher. A staunch conservationist, she made such a strong case for the movement, that even a third-grader was hooked. She taught concepts like nature’s final frontier and instilled the values of preservation and conservation. These lessons were validated as I grew up touring the country, the child of a military household, and even more so upon graduating from West Point and beginning my career of military service. These values were reinforced during each and every one of my future trips to Alaska with the military, and then fishing and boating in my retired life.

Which is why I stand against the Ambler Road project, a 211-mile industrial access road extending through the Brooks Range and the Gates of the Arctic National Park and Preserve to the villages of Ambler, Shungnak and Kobuk. It’s intended to support the development of at least four large-scale mines with hundreds of additional smaller mines — but its promises are tenuous at best, and the risks are overwhelming. Additionally, policy riders like this have no place in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

The proposed road would cross 11 major river systems and thousands of smaller waterways critical for indigenous populations. Such construction could have devastating impacts on fishing populations, including at-risk species such as chinook salmon.

You don’t have to take my word for it, the local communities feel the same. During the 12 public hearings held by the federal Bureau of Land Management in Fairbanks, Anchorage and throughout the region, close to 500 Alaskans attended and provided 160 public testimonies. The public response across these hearings was overwhelmingly opposed, with more than 82% of the testimonies outright opposing Ambler industrial mining road and requesting the BLM choose the no-action alternative. Only 20 public testimonies in total were in support of the project, with half of those testimonies coming from only two individuals employed by project proponents.

The Native nations have united as well in opposition to these plans with nine tribal resolutions representing 88 indigenous governments.

With good reason. Time and time again, project leaders have failed to provide evidence for their claims on domestic supplies of critical minerals, economic benefits to Alaskans, or public support for the project in the region. The mining companies’ own reports as well as independent assessments cited by BLM indicate that critical mineral deposits in the region are highly speculative. The mining companies also admit that all minerals, including non-critical copper, would be transported overland many hundreds of miles to the nearest tidewater port, then shipped overseas, likely to East Asia for processing.

The financing and regional economic claims are equally speculative, some estimates show 50 years of continuous mining would be required for Alaska to break even on the cost of road construction alone. Despite project claims, these deposits do not hold significant quantities of “critical minerals.” These deposits will not ensure American mineral security or a clean energy future.

It’s been called a “road to nowhere,” and I can see why. Now, proponents are trying to sneak approval in through the NDAA, likely because they know it’ll never pass on its own.

As a retired general officer with more than 30 years in service, I’ve learned how important it is to listen to the boots on the ground. Alaskans have made it clear that these proposals do little to serve their businesses, communities, or families. Project proponents have everything to gain if these proposals are accepted, but local economies, communities, and families have everything to lose. Congress must listen to their constituents, their communities, and pass the FY25 NDAA bill without the Ambler Road provision.

Major Gen. (Ret.) Paul D. Eaton served more than 30 years in the U.S. Army, including combat and post-combat assignments in Iraq, Bosnia and Somalia. He is now a senior advisor to the Vet Voice Foundation, which mobilizes veterans to become leaders in our nation’s democracy through participation in the civic process.

The views expressed here are the writer’s and are not necessarily endorsed by the Anchorage Daily News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary(at)adn.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Read our full guidelines for letters and commentaries here.