U.S. moves ahead with oil leases near sacred park
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — U.S. land managers will move forward in March with the sale of oil and gas leases that include land near Chaco Culture National Historical Park and other sites sacred to Native American tribes.
The sale comes as Democratic members of Congress, tribal leaders and environmentalists have criticized the federal Bureau of Land Management for pushing ahead with drilling permit reviews and preparations for energy leases despite the recent government shutdown.
With limited staff on duty over the last month, the critics complained that they were locked out of the process because the agency didn't release any information about the sale. They also questioned whether the agency would be able to adequately review the land that's up for bid and whether it would consider protests to the move.
U.S. Sen. Tom Udall told The Associated Press in an email that he's concerned about the latest attempt to lease potentially culturally significant land in New Mexico without a more comprehensive plan in place.
"It's a mistake that while critical public services were shuttered for 35 days during the government shutdown, BLM still moved forward with this opaque process," the New Mexico Democrat said.
Agency spokeswoman Cathy Garber said officials decided to push back the lease sale by a couple of weeks to accommodate a public protest period that was delayed because of the shutdown. The agency quietly confirmed on its website that it would accept comments starting Feb. 11 and that the sale was scheduled for March 28.
Depending on the outcome of the protest period, it's possible for the agency to withdraw the land in question, including nine parcels near Chaco, a world heritage site with massive stone structures, kivas and other features that archaeologists believe offered a religious or ritualistic experience.
Petroglyphs made by Ancient Puebloan People on rocks in the Chaco Culture National Historical Park, New Mexico. Mladen Antonov / AFP/Getty Images file
In all, more than 50 parcels in New Mexico and Oklahoma will be up for bid.
"We cannot help but protest what appears to be an intentional bias in the favoring of oil and gas development over other interests," former Acoma Pueblo Gov. Kurt Riley said last week during a congressional forum.
Riley and others said the shutdown exacerbated an already tense situation over the expansion of oil and gas development in northwestern New Mexico.
In recent years, land managers have declined oil and gas exploration on land within 10 miles of the park, creating somewhat of an informal buffer. In early 2018, then-Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke halted a lease sale over cultural concerns after hundreds of people protested.
The battle over energy development around Chaco has been simmering for years. In 2015, government officials visited the region in hopes of brokering a way forward for the tribes and energy companies.
The Bureau of Land Management and the Bureau of Indian Affairs began working together on revamping the resource management plan for the San Juan Basin, which covers a larger portion of northwestern New Mexico and parts of southern Colorado.
The partnership was meant to ensure tribes would be consulted and that scientific and archaeological analysis would be done to guarantee cultural sensitivity.
Article is LOCKED by moderator [smarty_function_ntUser_get_name: user_id or profile_id parameter required]
Who is online
79 visitors
Disrespecting the indigenous past for oil?
Nothing new, happens all the time...They'll start digging in Apache Leap for copper and it isn't even an American company. There are numerous examples of this across the country and there will continue to be more and more...
I recommend arrows. Lots of them.
No. Using our natural resources outside of the conveniently sacred park.
It is not a conveniently sacred park. It has been established as a scared land, with irreplaceable artifacts and now that is being threatened.
But it’s NOT on the land. Nor does it say how far away it is. “Near” is a very subjective description
is it the normal 10 miles or ???
I would say 10 miles is the min. Would you like to go to your church and pass what is posted at here @ 6
I don’t understand why you think that would be important to them
i recently became pastor of a cowboy church in Arizona (with a few non cowboys included in the membership).
I don’t know what you think they would find vital to them
and BTW, we don’t own any land. We rent a conference center at a large hotel
You are being too literal.
It is and has been 10 miles.
Then what was your point asking if I would share those photos with my church?
Why? What's special about 10 miles?
line of sight?
I suppose it's as good a conjecture as any. Do you know something concrete or is that just a reasonable guess?
As I posted down below, would you want an Oil rig near the Washington monument?
Oil derricks in the fields of Gettysburg?
Washington's Crossing?
I think not, but those are the sacred grounds of our culture. I think there is definitely a double standard.
Do I care if the oil pump is 6 miles from the Washington Monument instead of 10? No. Not particularly.
Are they actually allowing drilling on these sites or just a little closer than they have in the past?
My understanding is that all previous admins kept a 10 mile buffer around National Parks.
They are of course a source of some revenue and would benefit from a lack of industrialization............
Now it seems, that the leases are being offered right up to the n boundaries, trusting that no one will drill horizontally on "our" public property.
Seems a little too trusting to me.
How far away would be acceptable for activities around the sacred site?
The original standard, which was 10 miles. They are still finding artifacts there.
From the article:
"In recent years, land managers have declined oil and gas exploration on land within 10 miles of the park, creating somewhat of an informal buffer. In early 2018, then-Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke halted a lease sale over cultural concerns after hundreds of people protested. "
One of the major concerns is:
"Some like West worry that the experience of visiting the remote ruin of the center of the ancestral Puebloan world will be diminished by the sight of oil and gas rigs, flare stacks and tanker trucks kicking up clouds of dust on the long dirt road leading to the awe-inspiring national park."
Whether it's a valid concern or not depends on your point of view. If I were a Native American who believed that the air my ancestors breathed is still out there, and that their spirits are still there, I suppose I'd be very concerned. The question is what's reasonable to accommodate those concerns.
Frankly, I hate what the Trump administration is doing to reduce our National parklands. Not because I believe in any spirits - I don't - but because I think they're among our greatest treasures and can never be recovered once they're destroyed. I've seen what mountaintop removal and strip mining have done to my state, and there doesn't seem to be much doubt now that fracking is causing earthquakes ... I also don't like how he's allowing more offshore drilling, because of the pollution concerns. We should really be working a lot harder on renewable energy development, IMO. He wants his and Zinke's buddies to get rich from oil and gas, and I assume Zinke will make money as well, and that's all he cares about. But then Trump probably has never gone on a hike in his life, so preserving our natural treasures wouldn't ever cross his mind. Perhaps if there weren't such clear conflicts of interest with many of his Cabinet Secretaries I'd be less skeptical.
I doubt if trmp has ever been to a national park...has he ever actually enjoyed the great outdoors unless it was on a golf course?
He doesn't give a shit about preserving our national beauty.
Ok why not 5 or 15 miles?
Show us wher the President has reduced even 1 square foot of National Park land
and also wher a single company has been permitted to do oil, gas, or mineral extraction on National Park land
i applaud the president on more offshore drilling which I have been an advocate of for many decades
Do you also applaud what the Deep Water Horizon cost the coastal communities when their seal broke? Billions of dollars lost and the water there is still not safe.
We do not know until something happens how far damage can go from drilling and fracking. Also, who wants to go through an oil field to get to their church?
Here are 10 of them this year:
That’s a ridiculous question. Supporting extraction of resources that benefit people doesn’t mean you support negligent actions
i expect better of intelligent people
Thanks for validating my points
not a single point listed said that Trump had reduced a single foot of National PARK land nor did any company receive permission or a lease to extract on National PARK land
My point is that it happens because of human nature. It can't be denied.
He is instead, damaging them. That is my point.
You are wrong. There is not one mention of anything done to damage National Parks. Nearly everything your link cited has NOTHING to do with National PARKS
ive seen nothing in that list that the President has done that is damaging or that I disagree with and I say that as someone who has spent much time in the past 70 years at National Parks, National Forestests, BLM land and state lands enjoying nature
Did you read the same article? Do I need to list them? And if you enjoy them, you should be against opening them up to drilling and logging.
December 4: Eliminating national monuments
By: President Trump and the Department of the Interior
On the recommendation of Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke and Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, President Trump signed proclamations removing protections from more than 2 million acres of national monument land at Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monuments, opening up previously protected land to potential drilling, mining and logging.
Do you know the difference between a national monument and a national PARK?
i support that action
I’m against federal ownership of lands other than those necessary for the Constitutionally required functions of the Federal Government
Ownership should be transferred to the states where it properly belongs
Do you know the difference between a national monument and a national PARK?
Yes I do.
There are national monuments are in the national parks. Do you realize that Devils Tower is considered a national monument?
I really don't care what you're against. I care what Teddy Roosevelt set up for preservation for our nation. He actually understood how the land could be abused by leaving it to the states.
The states could never afford to buy it back from the government. And I am totally against that - that land belongs to all of us, not just the people in the states where the parks or monuments are. But it's great that you want to steal from your fellow Americans! We all know you don't give a rat's ass about anything that doesn't impact you, as you've come right out and stated.
And yes, I know the difference between a National Park and a National Monument. For most people, there's really no noticeable difference except in whether Congress has to intervene in its creation or removal. Both are protected, and for a reason.
I really don’t care what TR thought about it. He held a number of Unconstitutional views and the National Parks system was one of them
Under the Constitution, the federal government has limited powers. The authority for creating national parks is found in the Constitution under the “Property Clause” (Article IV, Section 3). “The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States….”
“Dispose of” is used in the sense of, “the act of transferring care, ownership or possession, or ownership to another”. Congress determined that it was “needful” to conserve certain lands unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations. The authority for creating the National Park Service is found in The “Necessary and Proper Clause” (Article I, Section 8).
Try again.
Why should the states have to buy back land stolen from them by the Federal Government?
the Federal Government has NO Constitutional authority to seize State lands
like most on the left you prefer to ignore that we are a Federal Republic of 50 SOVEREIGN States. The federal government only has the RIGHTS to land in the District of Columbia per the Constitution
Hamilton state Sovereignty
"But as the plan of the convention aims only at a partial union or consolidation, the State governments would clearly retain all the rights of sovereignty which they before had, and which were not, by that act, EXCLUSIVELY delegated to the United States." --Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 32
Alexander Hamilton Speech to the New York Ratifying Convention
Date: June 17, 1788
The State governments possess inherent advantages, which will ever give them an influence and ascendancy over the National Government, and will for ever preclude the possibility of federal encroachments. That their liberties, indeed, can be subverted by the federal head, is repugnant to every rule of political calculation
James Madison Republic of Dual Sovereignty
“James Madison: Essay on Sovereignty
Dec. 1835
For security agst. oppression from abroad we look to the Sovereign power of the U. S. to be exerted according to the compact of Union; for security agst. oppression from within, or domestic oppression, we look to the sovereign power of the State. Now all Sovereigns are equal; the Sovereignty of the State is equal to that of the Union; for the Sovereignty of each is but a moral person. That of the State and that of the Union are each a moral person; & in that respect precisely equal". These are the words, in a speech which more than any other, has analized & elaborated this particular subject; and they express the view of it finally taken by the Speaker*, notwithstanding the previous introductory one, in which he says, "The States whilst the Constitution of the U. S. was forming, were not even shorn of any of their Sovereign power by that process" Tellegraph Mar. 23. 1834 or 3 et sequent in the Enquirer of Apl. 20.”
In Mack/Printz vs USA (Bill Clinton administration) 1997 Justice Scalia wrote for the majority opinion.
It is incontestable that the Constitution established a system of “dual sovereignty” Gregory v Ashcroft, 501 U.S. 452, 457 (1991); Tuflin v Levitt, 493 U.S. 455, 458 (1990). Although the States surrendered many of their powers to the new Federal Government, they retained “a residuary and inviolable sovereignty.” The Federalist No. 39, at 245 (J. Madison).
Residual state sovereignty was also implicit, of course, in the Constitution’s conferral upon Congress of not all governmental powers, but only discrete, enumerated ones, Article I, Section 8, which implication was rendered express by the Tenth Amendment’s assertion that “[t]he powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
As a pastor, you might be familiar with this passage from Jeremiah:
"And I brought you into a plentiful land to enjoy its fruits and its good things. But when you came in, you defiled my land and made my heritage an abomination. "
Yes and the ONLY property under the authority of the US Government is in the District of Columbia and US Territories
See my post 1.4.20
The Federal government bought our Western lands from other countries, or stole them from the Native Americans .... it was not the states who offered the Native lands to homesteaders, because it was FEDERAL land. I assume you've never bothered to read up on the Gadsden purchase, or Seward's Folly, or the Louisiana Purchase ...
There are free online history classes.
That has no relevance. I’ve said nothing about destroying the land. That is your opinion on what is happening, not mine
I have a degree in history and will happily give you free lessons
those were TERRITORIAL grants. The Court has affirmed that once a territory becomes a state, State SOVEREIGNTY takes over
Fort Leavenworth Railroad Co. v. Lowe (1885), is generally consistent with this conclusion. There, Justice Stephen J. Field wrote that the authority of the federal government over territories is "necessarily paramount." But once a territory is organized as a state and admitted to the union on equal footing with other states, the state government assumes general sovereignty over federal lands, and the federal government has the rights only of an "individual proprietor." The federal government can exercise rights of general sovereignty over property only if there has been a formal cession of sovereignty by the state under the Enclave Clause. Justice Field qualified this vision of separated sovereignty, however, by noting that if the federal government acquires land outside the Enclave Clause, any federal forts, buildings, or other installations erected on such land "will be free from any such interference and jurisdiction of the State as would destroy or impair their effective use for the purposes designed."
Deleted duplicate post
But that is NOT what the Constitution says. I posted what it says. Btw.. both the state and federal gov can claim eminent domain. It is also constitutional.
Also, the concept of “dual sovereignty” deals with criminal law and not land.
Wrong again:
The federal government owns roughly 640 million acres of land, about 28% of the 2.27 billion acres in the United States. This land is managed by numerous agencies, but four agencies administer about 95% of federal land, with somewhat differing management emphases. These agencies are the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and National Park Service (NPS) in the Department of the Interior (DOI), and the Forest Service (FS) in the Department of Agriculture. Most federal land is in the West, including Alaska. The total amount of money the federal government spends managing land is not readily available. However, the appropriations for the four major land management agencies totaled $15.47 billion for FY2016. Federal land ownership began when the original 13 states ceded title to more than 40% of their “western” lands to the central government. Subsequently, the federal government acquired lands from foreign countries through purchases and treaties. The Property Clause of the U.S. Constitution, Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2, gives Congress authority over the lands, territories, or other property of the United States. This provision provides Congress broad authority over lands owned by the federal government. The U.S. Supreme Court has described this power as “without limitations.” When Congress exercises its authority over federal land, federal law overrides conflicting state laws under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, Article VI, Clause 2. States can obtain authority to own and manage federal lands within their borders only by federal, not state, law. Congress’s broad authority over federal lands includes the authority to dispose of lands, and Congress can choose to transfer ownership of federal land to states.
Apparently, the states gave up their rights and titles to Federal lands within their borders as a condition for statehood. And the courts have consistently upheld Congress' power to delegate matters regarding Federal lands to Executive agencies.
So apparently Justice Field's opinion isn't widely shared.
Maybe you majored in Victorian era history or something?
Billions of dollars in damages paid, and why do we think the water isn't safe?
But beneath the surface, there's still healing left to do: “For those long-lived things like turtles and sperm whales and dolphins ... they're still in the middle of this,” he says. “And we may not know for another 30 or 40 years where the impacts are.”
At the Harte Research Institute, McKinney is spearheading a “ report card ” project for the Gulf of Mexico, assessing its current health as a baseline for restoration efforts. One challenge to understanding Gulf health, he says, is that we still don’t completely understand the connection between the warm, shallow coastal Gulf and the deep Gulf — a dark, mile-deep “refrigerator” where much of the spilled oil settled.
“We know a little bit about that, but does energy move back and forth between these things at any kind of rate that we can measure easily?” he asks. “If it does, that means that oil can spread here and there. So that’s the biggest question, I think.”
In the years since the spill, McKinney says he and other scientists have learned that the Gulf “is a much more complex place than I think we even imagined, even those of us who have worked on it for almost 50 years.”
He also calls the Gulf “one of the most resilient places” he’s ever seen. “And that’s part of the problem, he says. “We've all come to take for granted that whatever we throw at the Gulf, it can take it. And as we know, that's not always the case. If you take a rubber band and keep stretching it and stretching it, at some point, it will quit snapping back.”
FORE !
Trumpp, it's just anutter drip,
in a prostituted article, all part
ta sipple late tits', doing the breast,
the breast any kitchen
could bever mikm out of
Did anyone notice this part of the article ?
"U.S. land managers will move forward in March with the sale of oil and gas leases that include land "near" Chaco Culture National Historical Park and other sites sacred to Native American tribes, !
Does this "Oil Lease" thingy INCLUDE "Land In" Chaco Culture National Historical Park and other sites sacred to Native American tribes ?
I didn't know that "Near" was a problem now. Is there a "Setback" requirement thing we don't know about ?
Just wondering !
Good questions.
Seems like some are upset because of something happening NEAR sacred grounds.
Are any activities allowed near sacred grounds, and if so, what is deemed acceptable?
Don't ask that !
I see a 100 mile setback requirement coming to our future !
This sounds like a "Don't Touch Me" thing that kids do all the time !
They are worried that the methods used in getting the oil, will cause damage down the line, which it has in other locations. 10 miles is reasonable.
What kind of "Damage" can happen in the middle of "No Where" ?
Do you even know what you are talking about? This is going on not only on Indian lands but national parks for the sake of private industry. These are protected because they hold both cultural and national beauty. So, why not talk about it with some knowledge first of what is going on everywhere for the sake of private business.
Try researching the topic. Earthquakes and aquifers would be good places to start.
According to YOUR own seed....it's about doing something "Near" this "Sacred" land !
"U.S. land managers will move forward in March with the sale of oil and gas leases that include land near Chaco Culture National Historical Park and other sites sacred to Native American tribes."
Did I miss something in YOUR seed that made you (3.1.4) comment like you did ?
Did the "Seed" say anything about "Fracking" is already going on ?
I must have missed that huh !
The seed talks about getting oil. How do you think that is going to happen. And Katrix is right. They are worried about earthquakes and seepage into aquifers.
Is it me, or just Everybody else....
Don't know. The Seed doesn't get that in depth.
I guess you know though ?
I hear there is a thing called "Just Drilling" for oil, like they still do now !
Is the Oil hard to get in this area ?
Most likely than not ..... It's just You !
Aquifers are somewhat rare in much the deserts of New Mexico and Northern Arizona
What are you talking about?
No contradiction. Most of New Mexico as shown by the map I posted does not have aquifers. The Rio Grande aquifer runs down the center of the state
That link clearly states the New Mexicos water comes from surface and acquires and they are all over the state at different levels. It is not just from the Rio Grand.
So try doing some research before coming up with an opinion.
Yeah, I guess you did miss it. The sale doesn't occur until March, so obviously fracking is not already going on at this particular piece of land.
Duh.
Then don't force folks to stay specifically on track with a seed or article when it suites, if they go off the reservation every once-in-awhile.
All this seed is about, is land use and how NEAR it is to another piece of property ! Nothing about specifics as to pumping, drilling, Fracking, or anything else for that matter !
I didn’t say the Rio Grande river. I mentioned the Rio Grande Basin Aquifer system which runss down the center of the state
Well ME,
I have to agree with me,
cause i'll take this N E dire erection
that something might incline me to point,
with my pointer ,
of course fine refined woodn't it B "special" if u could not defend N E thing,
anything at tall or how small , that this corrupted fcked up POTUS and his abomination administration concisted of a group who in thesis
is the antithesis , of the department , stored where housed, basedn meant,
to systematically, remove the 12 steps, fore hour countries recovery ,
as eye see you, iIt Is ME, in the ICU, iF yoU cOntinue to follow this rouge hoarse heir off his on coarse like he was plastered with Urine, a lot of trouble , when burst does Putin
in TRumppys face
cause the Orange lost cause, should've already maid you make up four paws, to scratch your itches, off the list of the many annoying bitches
that come out n about Trumpp, asz he is a lost cause !
.
Yet, u CoNtinue 2 suPPort all he pisses away or out, like U were He, and some slow motion rushin purchased by
Putin Prostituted Prose
to make this odiferous wreaking prick
feel he smells
like a Rows of Pews
cause A GREED or not, it's all Trumpps GOT
and support all of his auntie what's best for the rest of US
till we say Uncle , well Fester,
stick a light bulb in your ear
and show US All how bright U R
its all Urine now, so don't get pist, own n condone what you N hE cant Defend
Offend
till the End,,, cause his is nearer than you fearer
asz iz the GOP, as they never checked his UNBalanced Beam of Light supported buy the knot too bright,
cause just like the Times
The Demographix "are a changin"
There are in depth maps of New Mexico. There are aquifers everywhere at different levels that the whole state uses.
Try to catch up. The concerns about the land use are because of the impacts from drilling and fracking. Your web browser can have multiple tabs open at a time, you know. That's how Perrie got her link about the aquifers, and how I found out the lease takes effect in March. And some of us actually read real news and do research on a regular basis, so we're aware of the earthquakes in Oklahoma and the groundwater contamination that fracking causes.
www.scientificamerican.com/article/fracking-can-contaminate-drinking-water/
Took about 2 seconds on Google.
He published a comprehensive, peer-reviewed study last week in Environmental Science and Technology that suggests that people’s water wells in Pavillion were contaminated with fracking wastes that are typically stored in unlined pits dug into the ground.
The study also suggests that the entire groundwater resource in the Wind River Basin is contaminated with chemicals linked to hydraulic fracturing, or fracking.
This production technique, which involves cracking shale rock deep underground to extract oil and gas, is popular in the United States. It’s also controversial. There are thousands of wells across the American West and in California that are vulnerable to the kind of threat documented in the study, DiGiulio said. He is now a research scholar at Stanford University.
“We showed that groundwater contamination occurred as a result of hydraulic fracturing,” DiGiulio said in an interview. “It contaminated the Wind River formation.”
EPA found scientific evidence that hydraulic fracturing activities can impact drinking water resources under some circumstances. The report identifies certain conditions under which impacts from hydraulic fracturing activities can be more frequent or severe:
Data gaps and uncertainties limited EPA’s ability to fully assess the potential impacts on drinking water resources locally and nationally. Because of these data gaps and uncertainties, it was not possible to fully characterize the severity of impacts, nor was it possible to calculate or estimate the national frequency of impacts on drinking water resources from activities in the hydraulic fracturing water cycle.
EPA’s report advances the scientific understanding of hydraulic fracturing’s impact on drinking water resources, and can inform decisions by federal, state, tribal, and local officials; industry; and communities to protect drinking water resources now and in the future.
You beat me to it Sandy!
And right in the Seed it says nothing more than this as to concerns:
"We cannot help but protest what appears to be an intentional bias in the favoring of oil and gas development over other interests," former Acoma Pueblo Gov. Kurt Riley said last week during a congressional forum.
and that the land accessing was done during the "Government Shutdown" !
THAT IS WHAT THE SEED NOTES
All too common in PA where apparently it's against the law to defame fracking with billboards showing similar images of flammable tap water ...
It's pretty much accepted that the earthquakes in Oklahoma are caused by fracking.
The fracking wastes are typically stored in unlined pits (which tends to affect shallower wells, not aquifers), the methane also causes contamination. Also, not all shale oil is very deep, although you're correct that they usually are.
Pennsylvania and Wyoming are two examples of contamination from fracking. I seem to recall the EPA under Obama downplaying any risks since Obama wanted to promote the use of natural gas.
There isn't any source of clean energy, of course. It's all about balancing the risks with our need for energy - and also our dependence on oil from other countries.
I'm sure Kurt Riley said more than one sentence at the forum, as did the others who spoke. This seed is not a transcript. And this topic is very complex.
Perhaps this seed is the first thing you've ever read about this issue, which is fine. But many of us are familiar with the various concerns in this situation; there has been a lot of information published about it. Heritage and history, pollution, safety, the beauty of our national parks and monuments, the laws around the national park system ... I realize those aren't the type of articles Fox tends to publish, but I'm pretty well read. I do read foxnews.com but I also read a ton of other things.
I wonder if anyone does any studies on wildlife. People love to go hunting yet I wonder about the deer and other wildlife drinking contaminated water.
Do you even understand that drilling and high traffic tends to destroy these sites? I doubt you do. Trump and his swamp want to destroy all of America's history and substitute his bullshit for it
If you don't know the answer to your own comment why are you even talking about oil and gas drilling. Especially when fracking is part of the picture, which it will be.
Why?
As a small child I was actually on site for the launch of Apollo 11. The public was not allowed within three miles. We knew some people in the press corps, so we got to 2 miles.
If a Saturn V rocket going up is safe at 3 miles....why 10? Why not 3? Or 8? Or 12?
Sorry, not interested in overdramatics.
With a Saturn V 3 miles was the predicted absolute safe distance if they had a catastrophic failure.... The media got a two mile distance cause it was reasoned that their job also embodied a bit of risk so they were allowed closer 2 miles only had a 10 % chance of injury in a catastrophic failure....
There is very little chance, (almost zero, measured in the thousandths of a percent) of such a catastrophic failure with fracking.
Apples to oranges.....
Why 10 miles?
Hydraulic fracturing is a horizontal drilling technique, they drill down to the shale layer then turn the bit horizontal and bore out the passages which are then pressurized to break the rock that has the trapped resources.... I believe that 8 miles is the maximum distance they are allowed by current tech to drill sideways.....
When you put that on top of current mineral rights laws, it becomes self explanatory.....
OK that sounds plausible.
That's got nothing to do with fracking.
It is comparing apples to oranges
i can't understand it then
Because seismic activity is hard to predict. It would be like drilling and fracking by the pyramids or the Roman Coliseum.
You mean those of others, but, not your own.
I wrote what I meant. Had I meant something different, I would have written something different.
Do you think you know me well enough to post for me?
Overpopulation will put pressure on sacred sites
Indeedy. It is also doing it to our national park system.
The National Park System has been controversial since it started. It's a shame that so many people don't give a crap about preserving the natural beauty of our country before it's too late. And the residents of the land are going to deal with yet more pollution ... in July, some fracking storage tanks exploded on the Navaho Nation and burned for 5 days. The earthquakes that fracking causes, the pollution of the people's water wells ... fracking sucks.
As for the drilling and fracking, it's our land, so why are oil companies allowed to get rich from it? I'd be interested in knowing how much they're paying for the leases, and how rich Zinke and his cronies are getting from it.
It amazes me that people cheer this on even though they will never see a dime of it.
Only be left with the aftermath.
It's very sad.
First of all, your "study" comes from the oil industry. Do you also believe the tobacco industry that cigarettes don't cause cancer?
Here is one from the EPA:
EPA found scientific evidence that hydraulic fracturing activities can impact drinking water resources under some circumstances. The report identifies certain conditions under which impacts from hydraulic fracturing activities can be more frequent or severe:
Data gaps and uncertainties limited EPA’s ability to fully assess the potential impacts on drinking water resources locally and nationally. Because of these data gaps and uncertainties, it was not possible to fully characterize the severity of impacts, nor was it possible to calculate or estimate the national frequency of impacts on drinking water resources from activities in the hydraulic fracturing water cycle.
EPA’s report advances the scientific understanding of hydraulic fracturing’s impact on drinking water resources, and can inform decisions by federal, state, tribal, and local officials; industry; and communities to protect drinking water resources now and in the future.
perhaps no one would object to putting one of these up alongside the Washington Monument?
Or draining the Constitution Gardens for this?
and of course this could never happen in America drenching hundreds of square miles with soot and poisonous fumes.
I saw a piece just the other day how they built a fracking site 1000 yards from a public school. The ethnicity of the school was about 83% Latino, etc.
They wouldn't built the fracking site 1000 yards from the majority white school.
Hmmmmmmmmmm
Thank goodness that in Maryland, they banned fracking.
That's good to know. I'm a Marylander
Pretty sure that would be against zoning laws
That's an actual picture of an oil rig next to one of the municipal water wells in Midland.
I would say that since they are the same height, the picture is from the far side of the oil rig and gives the impression that they are on top of one another
when in actuality they are about 200 yards apart on the same elevation.
The Midland Tower sports the Midland slogan, "Feel the Energy"
I can't publish this picture without paying for it but it shows the relative position of the oil rig to the water tower.
So I'm assuming that not only did it clear zoning, but that Midland itself, is making $$ on the oil rig production as well.
There was a time in Midland where the odor of cow manure permeated each and every thing.
Now you have to be shoveling the manure to get over the fumes of oil and volatile gases from the drilling and fracking.
Y'all got some messed up drinking water regulations in Texas. Pretty sure that would never have been allowed here in Arkansas
But we can't avoid fracking releasing cyanide into wells....
A water tower is not necessarily where the well is. We have a water tower in a city near me that gets its supply 10 miles away and 50 miles to the furthest city the same line supplies to towers along the way.
And sometimes the water tower is right where the well is. I've seen that lots of times
Yep, but that fact is tough on the "i hate Texas narrative" so don't be too hard on em.
That isn't a picture of any well I have ever seen in my 60 years on the planet.
It is a water tower, which is vastly different.
Even your own source says it is a tower, not a well.
That style of storage almost always has a well involved at the bottom wih most if not all of the mechanicals inside the tower'
While this older style is typically just storage, it can also be used with a separate well or a system of linked wells.
I've seen towers of all sorts practically on top of the well and treatment plant. Mostly what I see are wells that have chlorinators only with the water storage just a few feet away
Not true. Not in most municipal water systems i've worked with and i've been in this field for nearly 40 years.
Midland gets the majority of its water from the Colorado River Municipal Water District.
And how do you confuse a well with a water tower?
There are currently 45 water wells on the T Bar Ranch and yes, that tower appears to be all storage. there are pictures of iy under construction in this article.
The fact that they are drilling for oil 200 yards away is still disturbing.
The tower shown with the oil rig gets its water from a resavoir 400 miles away, they do have a supplemental well system along the way though.
Besides that, all the water lines are pressurized so no way to contaminate the water in the system.
I live in Texas and have family in Midland TX as well as other places in Texas.
Sure, but what happens when there's a line break?
You lose a lot of water.
I don't think you read about this much.
The T Bar Ranch project was years in the making. The ranch isn't even located ion the same county as Midland. It has 67 miles of pipeline to get the water to Midland.
This project has supplied water to Midland for several years now.
Drilling near a water tower is perfectly safe.
That wasn't meant specifically for you.
But i do suggest that you do better research before you make comments like you've made here.
Disingenuous comments like that do nothing to progress a clearly anti-fracking agenda.
How does your family in Midland feel about not having water restrictions or worrying about if there will be enough water since the T Bar project?
And possibly introduce contamination.
I know. ( 59 miles )
I disagree. how much does 2 million gallons of water weigh? That's like 11 million pounds. Doesn't seem 'diligent'.
Which is why they don't pump the spilled water back into the lines/s, also there is usually an advisory of "do not drink" or "boil the water before use" until water tests show clear of all contaminants after the break is fixed.
Actually 16 million pounds and the towers are built that way to support that weight through earthquakes and wind loads.
It's a very large ranch and no one wants to buy it because of the odors and sights of the rigs and derricks all around it.
Someday the Aunt will pass on and the cousins will probably cover the property with more rigs and derricks. It's Midland.
it will be like that until the oil runs out I suppose.
Actually, it is over 16 million pounds.
Do you think city officials in Midland are utterly incapable?
Duh....I know that. Was my job for a long time to make sure that the water samples were collected and the samples were absent for total coliform and E coli
Unfortunately, they don't test for contaminants like oil before they put the line(s) back in service
I can ask you the same thing.
And no, zoning and engineering seem to be a thing that has only come to Texas in the past few decades. IMHO.
I can only say that SC was worse, much worse, lol.
I think the city's leaders are doing fine.
After all, they had enough foresight to buy that land the ranch is on, so really not sure why they would be attempting to sell it. How much they asking?
here it is.....
That still isn't very far.......
Sorry my friend....
It is an oil well drilling rig next to a water tower.....
Right...a water tower, not water well.
Based on the information provided in the article, no tribal "lands" will be impacted. Definition of tribal "lands" are lands granted per treaty rights or set aside for tribal usage by Congress/BIA.
But, nothing has been said regarding the tribal "Aboriginal" land rights, i.e. meaning lands that the tribes/nations have established aboriginal title by actual, continuous, and exclusive use and occupancy for a "long time." Unless Congress has abrogated aboriginal title, the tribes can still file suit for violation of usage.
The Chaco Canyon Heritage Site has gone through extensive Cultural/Natural evaluations.
The property is comprised of the acreage to which the federal government had surface title in 1987 located within seven components: Chaco Canyon, formerly a National Monument (1907) and now Chaco Culture National Historical Park (1980); Aztec Ruins, a National Monument (1923, expanded in 1928, 1930, 1948, 1988); and five Chaco Culture Archaeological Protection Sites (1980). The inclusion of Chaco Canyon and Aztec Ruins in the National Park system gives them the highest possible level of protection, and assures them a high standard of interpretation and public access. The legislation designating these components requires that the preservation of cultural resources be given high priority. Each Park unit has a General Management Plan and other related documents that address resource and land management and visitor use. The National Park Service’s general policies in these areas supplement the site-specific plans. The five Chaco Culture Archaeological Protection Sites are owned and managed for conservation by the Bureau of Land Management, a sister agency in the U.S. Department of the Interior. The property is subject to a suite of federal laws protecting archaeological properties. An Interagency Management Group established by federal law represents all federal, state, tribal, and local governments managing the property’s components. This group assures consistent and coordinated management through review of management decisions, sharing of technical expertise, and assistance with necessary legislation.
A long-term goal for the property is to ensure that interventions that may occur within or adjacent to the property – including development, energy exploration, extraction, and transportation projects – Do Not have a negative impact on the property’s Outstanding Universal Value, authenticity and integrity.
Granted, some folks will probably say that the Feds have completed their NEPA evaluations, up to and including an Environmental Impact Statement (required by the law), which is why BLM is allowing the Comment Period to run until the latter part of February. If they have, then you can betchur Bippy some really strong arguments from the Pueblos, NCAI, NARF, and other Native American resources are gonna weigh real heavy in the decision making.
What some refuse to realize is the drill doesn't just impact the small area it sits on.
They can set up a drill site next to indigenous lands and turn the drills under their lands.
Not true - the tribes have "ownership" from the middle of the earth to the back of the universe - and there have been a couple of suits where SCOTUS agreed.
Absolutely correct!
Part of the standard package of "rights" that land ownership actually is..... doesn't matter who's land it is.....
Everyone who own the rights to a parcel of land controls every aspect of title from the center of the earth to the far reaches of space above. Unless there is an established easement as there is for the airspace above a parcel. OR, a specific right is negotiated or sold off the land like mineral rights or water rights.... Then the lease holder who purchased them holds those specific rights.......
Reservation land always has the rights to the minerals on and under it unless the specific treaty establishing the reservation removed them......
Published February 1, 2019
SALT LAKE CITY, Utah — Less than three business days after the end of the partial government shutdown, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) announced plans to sell more than 217,000 acres of oil and gas leases on federal public lands throughout Utah during its upcoming March 2019 lease sale. The BLM plans to auction off 156 oil and gas lease parcels, including parcels in Utah’s culturally significant Four Corners region near Bears Ears, Hovenweep and Canyons of the Ancients National Monuments, as well as the wild and remote Book Cliffs.
Utah BLM staff worked during the federal government shutdown to prepare for this lease sale. Taken together, the parcels cut a wide swath through Utah’s cultural, hunting, and wilderness legacy.
Throughout the course of three lease sales conducted over the past 12 months, the Trump administration’s BLM has systematically leased more than 112,000 acres in southeast Utah’s Four Corners Region, blanketing one of the densest accumulations of cultural resources in the country with oil and gas leases and setting the stage for the area to be drilled and developed. A map illustrating the BLM’s all-out assault on this fragile region is here .
"The BLM is placing the final pieces to complete its puzzle of oil and gas leases near Bears Ears, Hovenweep and Canyons of the Ancients national monuments," said Landon Newell, staff attorney for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance . “The BLM has done so without considering the big-picture impacts to these national monuments and surrounding landscapes, including impacts to dark night skies, air quality, and the region's rich cultural heritage."
The National Park Service, the BLM’s sister agency in the Interior Department, has written the BLM on two occasions – before the March 2018 and now the March 2019 lease sale – urging the BLM to not lease parcels on the doorstep of Hovenweep National Monument. The BLM has not deferred any parcels in response to these concerns.
In response to the BLM’s notice of the March 2019 sale, the All Pueblo Council of Governors and Pueblo of Acoma have demanded that the BLM defer selling leases in the area until the agency conducts a thorough cultural resources review of the region. The Hopi Tribe has previously written the BLM demanding the same review. The BLM has not deferred any parcels in response to these concerns, either.
"The Trump administration is following a well-worn path of ‘leasing first, and thinking later,’ the same approach taken by the George W. Bush administration’s 'drill here, drill now’ policies," said Stephen Bloch, legal director for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance . "This approach has riddled Utah’s wild and culturally significant public lands with leases, which should come as no surprise given that it’s the same Bush political appointee – David Bernhardt – now steering the Trump Interior Department."
In addition to the sell-off of wilderness-caliber and culturally rich lands, the BLM plans to lease nearly 100 parcels in eastern Utah’s Uinta Basin and Book Cliffs region, which the Environmental Protection Agency recently designated in "nonattainment" of national air quality standards for ozone. The Uinta Basin suffers from some of the worst air quality in the nation, largely due to the BLM’s ineffective and lax management of oil and gas leasing and development. Rather than take steps to bring the Uinta Basin into compliance with air quality standards, the BLM is rushing forward faster than ever to sell off public lands in the Basin for exploration and development. The Book Cliffs are a wild and remote region prized by hunters and guides for trophy big game.
"With BLM staff already stretched thin, it’s hard to believe that the six days the government was open since comments were submitted on this lease sale could be sufficient to address the many risks to wildlife, wilderness and archaeological resources on 217,000 acres of public lands," said Nada Culver, Director of The Wilderness Society’s BLM Action Center . "And the fact that all of these parcels are still in the sale raises some red flags.”
"How many times can we say this? This is another egregious example of short term profit margins being put ahead of invaluable cultural and archeological resources - with areas near Bears Ears, Hovenweep, and Canyons of the Ancient national monuments being put back on the chopping block for the third time in a year,” said Utah Sierra Club Director Ashley Soltysiak . "Once lost, these incredible places are gone forever."
There is no need to sacrifice Utah’s remarkable wild places for oil and gas leasing and development. Utah, like most western states, has a surplus of BLM-managed lands that are under lease but not in development,with only forty-five percent of its total leased land in development. There were approximately 2.5 million acres of federal public land in Utah leased for oil and gas development (see here and follow hyperlink for Table 2, Acreage in Effect) at the close of BLM’s 2017 fiscal year – the last year in which BLM has provided oil and gas statistics. At the same time, oil and gas companies had less than 1.2 million acres of those leased lands in production ( here – follow hyperlink for Table 6, Acreage of Producing Leases).
More information regarding BLM’s March 2019 lease sale is available here .
And the worst part is that this is for private industry that will make the money, while these national treasures are lost in the process. Amazing how things can get done in this government even during a shutdown when profit is to be had. I wonder who made these payoffs?
Private industry makes millions/billions and the public and tribes are left with the aftermath of the destruction that they caused.
For example the ''largest toxic spill'' in US history was on the Navajo reservation and was only a few months after Three Mile Island, yet most of America has no idea of this horrendous spill and these many decades later it is still a ''Super Fund'' site.
The deadly affects of uranium mining on the Navajo reservation are still felt today.
Some don't think of the whole impact that will be made. It is more than just a well or drilling site. There will be heavy equipment moving around, roads being built, transport trucks constantly moving, stations set up.
Not to mention the flaring and waste water, etc. All to benefit a select few while leaving destruction in its wake.
Nothing is being threatened. That land is free to be developed even if the neighbors object.
As stated in comment 8 above there is a procedure that must be followed.
Why bother? The opponents will reject the science like they always do...
This is not about science. This is about some corporation making money. This is a national treasure. In fact, the real science is still going on in these fields even now. There are findings there daily.
Oh please. What makes these areas outside the "sacred" areas a national treasure? Also, our nation benefits from the extraction not just EVIL corporations. Finally, such protests are anti science because they discount the EISs.
The major winners are the oil companies.
And there is nothing scientific about drilling and fracking.
Don't make this about anything else other than oil. I'm all for being self-sufficient but not at the cost of our national treasures. Once they are gone, they are gone.
I have to wonder what would happen and what the outcry would be if the government gave out oil leases in and around Jamestown and other landmark European settlements and Monuments? I feel quite sure that there would be a huge outcry and demand for the government to keep hands off. After all, those would be real American sacre treasures. Right?
Nah. We understand that you can't isolate all land that comes within miles of some historical novelty. Nice try with the false conjecture though.
Nah....but, nice try at trying to sound erudite about what is actually involved.
It's just another anti-science appeal to emotion from the left. I've seen it countless times in my career. It bores me now, [deleted]
Anti-science? That makes no sense
Not true.
Just for your clarification it isn't some historical novelty. If you trying to insult that was a rather childish attempt by you.
i protestith too much about Budlites,
less filling is the vacancy between ears of
corny as tastes grate, ain't always tasty.
.
Did you ever consider THe GOP, Republicans, The Farr 'Right', n off course POTUS
are all apparently Budlites, as they attempt to wall of America, due to those advanced illegal immigrants and their technology, from taking America's jobs...
and giving them to Central and Southern Americas'
other Americans, in other words
Think U have a case of Luddites' no filling, less taste
to each their own unless you rent as it's the lease u could do
Since you think that it's a novelty I suppose that the Colosseum or other world heritage sites must be a historical novelty as well.
Here are a few photos of the area..
To you, clearly.
Pretty. And an oil well somewhere else will have no effect on it.
The Earth is riddled with archaeological remains. That's no reason to freeze civilization .
Yeah, it's a novelty. The planet is riddled with the remains of extinct civilizations.
[Deleted]
Ahhhh....but....you see, Native Americans are NOT extinct civilizations, although you may think so. We are alive and still a viable part of humanity, regardless of what some people might think of them.
Civilization isn't be frozen at all...Did you not read and comprehend that currently in Utah there are 2.5 million acres of federal public land with gas and oil leases on them. Of that 1.2 million acres are in production leaving 1.3 million acres that have yet to be explored and brought to production..
Doesn't look like civilization is frozen at all.
Lol... So the Roman Empire is not extinct because Italians still live?! How is the Aztec Empire doing? Are they in the UN?
Wow, the Zuni, Navajo, Pueblo and Hopi people will be really interested that they are extinct.
Good. Then we agree that natural resources may be exploited for the benefit of our nation.
That's Bad Ass stuff there
The natural resources in Utah are already being exploited without having to drill in this area...
Not in all cases. In too many cases today OUR natural resources are being exploited for the benefit of OTHER nations, with nothing but the damages left for OUR nation to deal with, and no monetary compensation form the other country with which to do so. Thus, it is OUR environments that are being damaged for only God knows how many millions of years, and OUR taxpayers who have to pay for the cleanup.
And yet the Italians respect the artifacts left by the Romans, as do the Greeks and even the Egyptians.
Only the Taliban blow up historical sites like the two great Buddhas.
Do our Islamic friends make sure to blow up area separate from archaeological sites? Or do they destroy known artifacts? That's a pretty big difference that invalidates your analogy.
Sorry but that's not true. Our nation profits from any extraction of our natural resources despite the false liberal talking points.
And now even more resources can benefit our nation. Huzzah!
i've never read that novel ty
The planet Will Be Far Better Off
when
WE R EXTINCT,
cause muther frackers like Trump N Cump, N those with blind 20/20 incite s of the guns, focused in upon their tiny little minds, make for an easy game, as they especially N joy those of faith, as it seems easier to prey on those that pray, N, i prey it never happens to me, U C, N my prayers have never been answered, so i never question, i just X claim my POINTS iN Every direction as once they hit, Physics demeands misdirection and deflection, as energy is a continuum, so i continum to store inertia, at my local Convenience store, for lnConvenience Sakes Alive,,, till dead on accurate
are my inaccuracies
but, i'm supposin u find that accurate never accu sed of rating
so i just B rate till i A rate, or is it erie, that i irritate ? ill let you rate or berate it
No it doesn't because you still don't see Italians putting oil rigs ( or any other kind of structure modern) near the coliseum.
This is my seed. If you have nothing better to do than to try to antagonize, leave.
The is a oversupply of oil and has been for quite some time. Additionally there are millions of acres that have oil and gas leases through out the US that have not been explored and brought to production...
HUZZAH.
Cool strawman! Are they seated at the UN? Where is their capital?
What are you talking about?
Strawman arguements make me laugh n snort, then shoot it out like a spitball, i n joy, making them swallow, but prefer humming
birds, named Robin, who's bobbin, like allure ing as it may seem, may i ask,
y do you wish to be mean and Demean , F U Know what i dOn't meen on Average , U No I Be leave it Is unacceptable to B little the original inhabitants of this country , cuz we all Illegal Immigrants accept for very few, exceptions.
They R UNseated at the Nations United
Their Capitol was spent on small letters written to DC, but too short, a circuit quart,
wear U can't handle the Punishment, cause
it's the CAPITOL
I enjoy Electric chairs, and long walks on the beech...
are U courting me ? or should i Judge ? as i prefer bean jury n executioner
of semantics , but, iv'e gotta go, sew yourin luck, N Joy
And the French ! There's a small, ancient roman amphitheater on the grounds of the Matisse Museum.
Interesting story:
Jimmy Page of Zep fame, is in a war with his neighbor over a pool his neighbor wants to put underground. Page is worried that the excavation will ruin his Grade A historic home. London, sided with Page. We are talking about a building that is about 200 years old, not our oldest Acoma Pueblo is the oldest, a continuously inhabited community in the US.
btw: Learn more about it here: