Surrounded by a sea of sage, the little black truck veered off the two dirt tracks and came to a stop on the edge of a large basin. Hot air rushed in the cab as the boy opened the door and hesitantly stepped out. A green cooler sat in front of two dog boxes, one made of old scrap wood and the other a tan colored plastic, both of which were equipped with a pair of orange and white Brittanys. A box of shells and two water bottles were placed in the pockets of the weathered vest which had been passed down to him from his grandfather. The vest was a little large, but he knew it would bring him the same luck it brought its previous owner. Adrenaline started to pump a little faster when he heard his father’s voice ring out, “Load your gun on the other side of the fence Son”. As he worked his way through the barbed wires he heard his father once again, “Hurry Brandon, we have a point up ahead.” After loading his gun, he could feel the touch of a hand on his back guiding him to the motionless outline partially blocked by sagebrush. During the walk most things became a blur to the boy, until a large male sage grouse exploded in the air, just twenty feet in front of him. With one quick shot the bird came tumbling down to the ground, and within seconds the process repeated itself and two sage hens lay at his feet.

This was my first introduction to upland bird hunting with my father at the age of twelve. It’s not clear what we said to each other after it was all done, but I do remember the smile on my father’s face, and the first of many handshakes I have received from him. What I didn’t realize at the time was I had just joined four generations of sage grouse hunting in the Moss family. All of us became acquainted to bird hunting in a different way, but we all started with sage grouse.

During the time my father first started to pursue the uplands, Utah had a draw system for sage grouse in which he was successful. He received four leg bands, one for each bird he could harvest that year. Early fall marked the opening of bird season. The land was unique and sat at a rather high elevation for typical sage grouse habitat. On one side sat a large lake, and on the other a mountain covered with timber and scattered aspen, with a sage flat running between them. A dirt road separated the mountain from the large valley and had several streams crossing it over the five-mile stretch it took up. As he thundered through the sage he armed himself with an old J.C. Higgins bolt action 12-gauge which he’d never shot before. Frustration built as each bird sailed off into the distance untouched. The last one revealed itself and once again flew off, but did not follow his predecessors. It landed just short of the edge of the timber where my grandfather sat by the camper waiting. By the time he got back to the truck, my father’s prize lay on the tailgate of the 1959 Chevy. They glanced over the bird together then made one more trip to produce the other three birds to complete the fourteen-year-old’s first season of hunting sage grouse.

In 1909 Eugene Moss (my grandfather), who was nine at the time, traveled three days by horse and wagon for his introduction to this feathered quarry. Not a lot of details were passed down of these hunts but it’s my understanding they used a Winchester Model 97 shotgun. Sometimes they shot from the wagon and the little boy would run out to gather up what they harvested. I can’t imagine they would travel this far for food alone. I think there was some sort of recreation in these trips as well. Eugene hunted up until two years before his death. His last sage hen was shot at the age of eighty-seven in Montana with a light 20-gauge automatic. The gun he used ended up being my first shotgun, and claimed all my birds for the beginning nine years of my hunting endeavors.

Over the years I have come to love all the prairie birds. Although most of my time is spent chasing Huns and sharptails, sage hens still hold a special place in my heart. A big reason is due to the fact that I represent four generations of hunting this giant of the sage. Many memories of hunting sage grouse touch me as I reminisce of my early years following a pointing dog into the field, and I realize that I am still upholding the family tradition to this day.

Sage grouse hunting has changed a lot since my first trip chasing them twenty years ago. Most days would provide birds walking the roads to and from food and water sources in the early mornings and late evenings. During the high temperatures of the midday sun it was normal to find a group of birds under places such as hay bales or old tractors which would provide enough shade to hold these large wings of the prairies. The sight of a gray and black blended bird rising as your truck roared down a dirt country road was not uncommon. Days of thirty to fifty bird flushes would spark the heart of many upland enthusiasts. Now these times are more of a rarity than not, but given the right circumstances can still exist in this present day. Many of the spots I would frequent no longer house birds, but new places where I have not seen them in previous years are producing a good point or two today. During this past year I found some promising signs of increased numbers both on the leks and during the hunting season.

Likewise in the many days I have spent in the field chasing birds and working dogs I have seen sage grouse numbers drop. The time I noticed the most extreme decline was when the West Nile Virus came into play. They dropped at a high rate during this time period. Also the quantity and quality of sagebrush has greatly diminished over the past fifty years. Only 56% of their original habitat exists today. The survival of sage grouse is entirely linked to sagebrush and sagebrush habitat as this is 100% of their diet during the long winter months. Sage grouse are still at huntable populations in many western states. Just this year, Montana transplanted a group of sage grouse to Alberta to help boost their dwindling population.

This majestic bird of the prairies has become a major topic for many groups around the country. Environmentalists use them as a tool to stop energy development in the western states. Anti-hunting groups use the population concern as a tool to place them on the endangered species list as they have already done in Canada.

Through all the controversy many hunters have found the need to “place” a sage grouse in their game bag for fear that one day they will not be able to hunt them. Although they have not been placed on the Endangered Species list, they have been declared a candidate for it. If they did get placed this will have a rippling effect not only to hunters, but will greatly impact the farming and ranching communities. Organizations such as Sage Grouse Initiative are working in partnership to ensure our next generations will be able to enjoy the same way of life as we have. Through conservation work, land easements, and reduction of invasive plants, much land has been improved not only for sage grouse but all animal life living within the sage.

Today, in order to successfully harvest sage grouse a hunter will need a good pair of boots, dogs that can cover some ground, and a lot of determination. The will to walk far and cover many miles of desolate land the bird inhabits, will only increase your chances of encountering this king of the prairies. Heat, snakes, four-legged critters, and loss of habitat are a few of the oppositions you will face when hunting them. Is it worth it? Still to this day my heart skips a beat as a seven-pound bird erupts in front of me, just after walking through a brace of pointing dogs only to watch the rhythmic beat of their wings set sail over the horizon. Harvesting sage grouse does not excite me as much these days, but instead I watch them fly into a vast sage-covered valley, or over the crest of a hill, so that one day our greetings can reoccur. The biggest thrill of all is being able to watch a young hunter or huntress take their first sage grouse and know they just had the same amazing feeling I received as that young boy many years ago.

]]> http://synergystation.com/environment/kings-of-the-prairies/feed/ 0 http://synergystation.com/environment/the-politics-economics-big-bird/ http://synergystation.com/environment/the-politics-economics-big-bird/#comments Mon, 08 Oct 2012 23:20:46 +0000 Brandon Moss http://synergystation.com/?p=7366 In the aftermath of the biggest political upset since the Reagan presidential debate of 1980, Sesame Street’s Big Bird has taken the stage front and center on the national scene.  Yet in Montana as well as in many other western states, another bird is gaining political and economic importance.

If you have spent much time in the outdoors of Montana, chances are you have run into a sage grouse or two. Talk to any “old timer” and he will be able to tell you how many they saw growing up and how very abundant they use to be. Also that same person will be able to tell you why they don’t see as many as they did so many years ago. While some of these reasons might be true, I have learned not to argue with someone who is more than twice your age. You never win !

Over the past 30 or 40 years, sage grouse populations have declined  an estimated 33 %, and currently dwell in 56 % of their original habitat.  These statistics have caused many to become concerned. While these figures may seem significant, there still exists a large population of sage grouse.

Much research and time has been and is being devoted to the grouse population, in an effort to determine why their numbers have dropped.  It concerns me to see so much emphasis placed on stopping ranching and energy development, rather then improving what we have to work with. Certain groups of people have latched on to the idea if these two subjects where eliminated, the sage grouse populations would increase on their own, and mother nature would be able to take control of the situation. As appealing as this sounds to let her do the work, it’s just not feasible today. It is important to know even though numbers are down they are still thriving in a lot of places.

With the looming threat of placing the sage grouse on the endangered species list (Endangered Species Act (ESA) many are fearful.  The result of such an action would have a far reaching, ripple effect.  With a current unemployment rate hovering @ 8% nationally, we cannot afford to lose the thousands of jobs associated with domestic energy development. The adverse impact to ranching and rural communities would also be profound. Not only will it lead to the loss of a family farming/raching operations it would circle back to you and I and our bank accounts. 

In general, sage grouse have a few major obstacles affecting them today. For example:  invasive species of plant life, like conifers, cheat grass, and other noxious weeds.   Over grassing, lose of habitat, fire, and accidental mortality also play a role.

In 2010, in large part due to the farm bill and partnerships, the Sage Grouse Initiative (SGI) was developed. It trickles down through the Department of Agriculture; utilizing various partnerships with the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, the Mule Deer Foundation, the National Cattleman’s Beef Association, as well as many others.  Conoco Phillips has been a great supporter and partner for SGI.

The main goal of SGI is to keep sage grouse off the Endangered Species Act, and by doing so shore up the best private, and public land habitat for sage grouse. This is achieved by helping landowners make improvements so their livelihood will be healthy, and give them stability in their future. The Sage Grouse Initiative does this by improving grazing systems, removing encroaching conifers, and adding conservation easements to ranchers. The good part of this not only benefits the sage grouse, but positively impacts all habitat wildlife;  including upland birds, antelope, mule deer, elk, and many more. It is a great program for land owners, sage grouse, and is a tremendous opportunity for oil and gas industry to protect their investments, to insure the economic future of rural western communities being impacted by energy development.

By 2015, Fish and Wildlife Services must make the decision to place or not to place the Sage Grouse on the endangered species list (ESA).   If they are not listed, the Sage Grouse Initiative efforts must continue.  Even though SGI has been around a relatively short period of time, the initiative has proven to have a strong, positive impact on the conservation of sage grouse.  Additionally, by securing the future viability of the species the adverse economic ripple effects can be avoided.

To learn more about the Sage Grouse Initiate visit their website.  

Today there is a common misconception stating sage grouse are at a dangerous population and should be placed on the Endangered Species List. I don’t think it’s a secret that their numbers are down from what they were twenty, or thirty years ago.  It’s also no secret everyone has a explanation why their numbers are down. Theories range from over grazing, predators, hunting, drought, and even energy development. Many speculate with the numbers dropping we will one day see a massive change in the western states they inhabit. It is also said we will never see them like  they were  so many years ago.

Late one September evening I received a call from my father asking if I wanted to get together the next morning to run out for a quick bird  hunt before I had to head into work, which I agreed to. The next morning I loaded the dogs and headed over to pick him up around day break. The drive to the area we wanted to hunt took about a half an hour. Along the way my father told a few stories about hunting birds which took place in 60′s, 70′s, and 80′s, most I had heard but a few I were new to me. One thing they all had in common was how many birds they saw and how they seemed to be very plentiful then. To be honest it set the presentence of “The good old days” in my mind.

Soon we found ourselves  turning of the pavement to hear the sound of the tires hitting the gravel, only to see a mail box about three quarters of a mile down the road. I pointed it out and as this is where we needed to turn to get to the ranchers place. Half way down the drive way we were greeted by and entourage of cow dogs, not one looking alike. When we pulled up to the house the sound of a wooden screen door slamming rang out followed by a stout old man hobbling down the stairs. “Lee” I called out. “Last I knew that was me. You must be Brandon and Larry.” Hand shakes where exchanged and a little small talk. After a bit I could hear my dogs wrestling in their kennels and could relate to their shortage of patience while listening a conversation only two older men could have. I learned about the economy for the last 40 years, old trucks  and how much power they had, harvests and weather for every decade, and even got a little education of when Regan was president.

Being very confident the two could talk well into the day I gracefully pulled out the map and asked “Where do you think we should go to find some birds? We’re looking for huns, sharptail, or sage hens”. “Sage hens, haven’t seen them for a while. Only a few here and there.” His weathered hands, traced roads from the house to different areas where we might see some birds. One thing stood out, which caused me to interrupt him. “Alfalfa field, can we hunt there”? “Sure, it’s all yours.” Again handshakes were in order and we were on our way.

Upon arriving, the field proved to be enough for us to handle for the whole day, so we had to figure where our best chance to encounter birds would be. Both of us agreed the far west corner looked the best. We drove in as far as we could then unloaded the dogs. I remarked how nice it was to see my young dog having so much fun and enjoying herself, and how it was starting to heat up. The last quarter mile I could feel the sun starting to cut on my arms a little, but It all went away when I called out “Point’, which meant one of the dogs found a bird. I distinctly remember my father saying “Which dog are you talking about” as all three dogs were pointing in different directions. Just as I passed the first dog, one sage grouse rose, followed by another, and then another, and then my mouth dropped. We literally had birds all around us. I’m not brave enough to spit out a number for fear of the wrath from the unbelievers. On the walk back one of my fathers remarks stuck with me. “I haven’t seen anything like that since the 70′s”.

Not that long ago (although admittedly longer for some than others), most of us in this part of the world believed in Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny. As children it was culturally acceptable to operate in “a world of make-believe”.  Simply put, truth is limited by one’s ability to reason. Broken down a bit further, reason is systematically built on experience and understanding both of which develop with age. Beliefs, which were unquestioned as children, are measured with a much greater level of scrutiny as we move into adulthood.

Yet, somewhere along the line, we all reach a point wherein we are confronted with new tales of wonder that stir something deep in our hearts. Suddenly, a challenge is put to our minds in a way that stirs a childlike excitement and tests the limits of our ability to reason for ourselves. Amazingly, if a story is told with a full measure of passion, a half-cup of restorative justice and a mere 1/4 teaspoon of truth all to many of us return again to the same childish ways that we once abandoned.

Each and every day we draw conclusions from a collection of information, which lead us to action based exclusively on our ability to reason. This is life.

If this is life, why then is there so much written, spoken, and taught based on an understanding that is absent of reason. One area where this pattern of reaching conclusions apart from reason is becoming increasingly evident is in the global discussion regarding energy.

This article is not a scholarly argument based on carefully conducted studies or tenable scientific positions. Rather, it simply seeks to challenge those involved in the discussion at the local level to allow reason to be our guide.

Far too many times in the past few months I have listened to arguments that have no basis in reason whatsoever. This is not a blanket statement, decrying any and all positions that differ from my own thoughts on the need for conventional energy. Nor am I arguing that a global shift to less conventional or currently unknown forms of energy will one day become necessary. My point is simple, for discussion on any complex issue to be productive it must be based on reason rather than emotion and supported by specifics rather than sweeping statements.

Over the past few months I have had the privilege to be part of numerous discussions on several topics regarding the impact of energy development in the region. Several of those conversations have centered on the impact of coal development in Montana. Although I could produce a long laundry list of arguments supporting my position to do so would fall outside the scope of this article. The point I want to make is this, discussions about future of coal as viable resource are well worth having. However, the value of the conversation is immediately diminished when unsupportable assertions are the basis of the conversation.

One example of this is the ongoing discussion on coal trains expected to pass through the state. As a long time resident of Montana I am convinced that this is a must have discussion. Yet, for the discussion to produce a sustainable solution the conversation must be based on foundation of factual information.

For the purpose of this article I will speak only to the issue of the specific number of coal trains required to ship Montana coal to out of state domestic and overseas markets. If a solution is to be reached doesn’t it make sense to know the parameters of the problem?

If someone asked me to cook a meal for a large banquet one of the first questions I would ask would be how large is large? In other words how many do you want me to prepare for? Should I plan the meal for 50 or 500? The meal plan, the supplies needed, and preparation details would vary greatly depending on how many people were expected to attend.

Thus, developing appropriate solutions for each challenge that might arise would be dependent on the attendance expectations. In the same manner, meeting the challenges presented by an increase in coal train traffic would depend heavily on the number of coal trains actually expected to be put into service.

I have seen numbers in print that range from 30 to 60 additional trains a day moving through Billings. At a recent State Oil and Gas Board hearing, it was purported that 90 additional trains would soon be running through the state. In reality, the numbers will be determined by rail capacity. As such, organizations like BNSF and MRL are far more accurate sources of information than studies, which reach conclusions based on speculation without any input from the companies responsible for rail operation through the state. According to MRL, total capacity through Montana could be increased by 16 trains a day if a significant investment was made in the additional infrastructure.

A prosperous future is only possible when productive conversations lead to productive solutions. Productive conversations are only possible when reason prevails.

Energy & Natural Resource:

I am not ashamed to call Montana the Treasure State. With an abundance of natural resources that other states can only dream of, Montana has the potential to supply energy and natural resource commodities to our entire nation and the global economy beyond. We should be on the cutting edge of developing new technologies in wind energy, clean coal, oil and gas development. Utilizing our natural resource wealth translates directly into new jobs for Montanans and a more robust tax base.

I was the original driving force behind the push to develop the Otter Creek Coal tracks as part of the New World Mine agreement. And I’m ready to do more. There are many other opportunities for oil, gas, coal, and wind development in our state that have the potential to revolutionize our economy.

Oil & Gas:

Wyoming, with 46 rigs and North Dakota, with 150, have been able to benefit from the extensive development of their oil and gas resources, Montana’s oil and gas development has remained stagnant at a rig count of eight.

We must utilize our oil and gas resources to their full extent and work to minimize frivilous lawsuits and restrictive federal regulations that inhibit development.

The development of Montana’s oil shale is essential to the growth of the industry and to increasing the availability to high-tech, high-wage jobs for Montanans. The use of hydraulic fracturing, known as fraccing, to efficiently gain access to larger amounts of oil in Montana has opened the door to energy supplies that were formerly unavailable.

Amid the beat of bongo drums and a smoky haze of questionable origin, they plan to confront Montanans with a choice about our economic future.  They want our massive coal resources left in the ground forever. The out-of-state environmental groups organizing this protest recognize the same fact that has many Montanans excited—our state has more coal than almost anywhere else in the world, and right now we don’t produce very much of it.

Montana has more coal than any other state; in fact we have twice as much coal as the number two state, Wyoming. And among coal-producing states, Montana produces far less of our reserves annually than anyone else. Add those two facts together, and Montana has by far the most potential in the country to significantly increase coal production.

Montana has historically been a minor coal producer for a number of reasons. One is transportation—other states, Wyoming among them, are closer to big Eastern and Midwestern coal markets. But Montana has also put up significant regulatory barriers that have discouraged coal development. For instance, Montana has an effective coal severance tax rate nearly four times greater than any other state, and Montana has what is considered by many to be the most inefficient legal system in the country.

But now, the landscape seems to be shifting in Montana’s favor. Markets to the west of Montana, including over-seas markets in Asia, are seeing a rapidly-expanding demand for coal. That puts us in a geographic advantage over all other coal-producing states.

These developments have not been lost on environmental groups, and that’s why they’ve made Montana ground zero for their anti-coal campaign.  To go the way of the environmental protesters would be an incredible detriment to our state. The proposed Otter Creek mine would create over 2,000 new jobs and result in $200 million in economic activity each year. Tax revenues from Otter Creek would add $92 million to state and local governments annually—allowing for tax relief for homeowners and new investment in education and infrastructure.

And that’s just one new mine. The potential is so much greater than that. Montana has so much coal that we’ll never be able to use it all. At our current production rate, we’ll be digging coal in Montana for nearly 1,700 years. We have enough coal to supply the entire U.S. electricity demand for over a century.

Since we have more coal than we’ll ever need, it’s in our best interest to sell a tiny fraction of it to foreign markets where the demand is growing.

Increasing coal development in Montana will have a transformative effect on our entire state’s economy. The opportunity is huge, it’s here, and it’s now. To say “no”, as the environmentalists would have us do, would be like tearing up a jackpot lottery ticket.

Yet to turn down this opportunity is not so far-fetched. Already there are elected officials in Montana who have sided with the environmentalists in their war against Montana’s coal.

Most notable is Steve Bullock, who led the opposition on the State Land Board against Otter Creek. Now Bullock is raising a significant portion of his campaign cash from those same environmental groups who will be protesting in Helena this month. They’re organizing on Bullock’s behalf because they know he’s their best chance to keep Montana’s coal in the ground.

The great irony is, though, that if Montana were to take the advice of the out-of-state environmental groups and shut down our coal production, we will have done absolutely nothing to reduce carbon emissions. That’s because emissions are driven by demand, not supply. If Asian markets can’t get Montana coal, then they will continue to buy coal from suppliers in Australia, Indonesia, and South Africa.

Reducing Montana’s coal production hurts our state’s economy, but doesn’t accomplish much else.

The anti-coal protest is aimed at voters in Montana. The environmentalists are making their case that Montana can do without more coal production. What voters really need to recognize is the incredible economic opportunity our state will be giving up if we elect the environmentalists’ anti-coal candidates.

Senator Ed Walker serves on the Montana Senate Energy and Natural Resources committees. He represents Senate District 29 in Yellowstone County.

Lawsuits filed to stop projects on federal lands have become as common as down days for the Dow. Last week, we noted with interest that timber producers under siege by environmental groups were proposing that a “loser pays” approach to lawsuits might put a halt to some of the frivolous litigation and get more Americans back to work.

The newsletter prompted a lot of feedback. Many felt a “loser pays” approach was right on target. And just as many said it would never work. The “loser pays” concept, which carries its own set of unintended consequences, is certainly worthy of thoughtful review and perhaps some tailoring. But in a lawsuit-crazed culture, trying to settle on which set of rules is most likely to reduce frivolous litigation can also be like playing an endless game of “whack a mole.”

And it should not detract from the real issue: how best to responsibly and efficiently manage federal land resources. Too much is at stake. It is no consolation for those who lost homes and businesses to the massive fires in Colorado to know that the timber industry there had recommended for years a more aggressive approach to diverse forest regeneration to mitigate the problems of wildfires and pine beetle kill-off. And yet, through the 1990s and beyond, they got pushback at every turn from environmentalists and little support from the U.S. Forest Service. Today, professional foresters would tell you the same volatile mix of fire risk and environmental pushback is at play in Montana.

The volume of feedback from our last message underscores the concern Montanans have across the State that our natural resources are being wasted by obstructionist lawsuits ultimately paid for with their tax dollars. Our forests are burning when they could be salvaged. Montanans are without jobs or under employed while needed forest projects are halted.

These lawsuits don’t just affect the timber industry. They hurt oil and gas developers, miners, ranchers and others who put federal lands to responsible use. These industries provide jobs for our families, give our children employment opportunities at home and provide royalties and taxes to fund schools and government. But too often, responsible land use plans, even after they have acquired all of the required regulatory approvals, still are undermined by eleventh hour litigation.

One third of the State of Montana is owned and managed by the federal government. A quarter of those lands are permanently off limits now, but the rest are intended to accommodate multiple uses. The time for better, more litigation-resistant solutions is now. We need to put our federal lands, and our people, back to work —and not let our future go up in flames.

Democratic Governor Brian Schweitzer is siding with the oil and gas industry in its fight against drilling regulations that some would say could devastate Montana’s economy.  The Bureau of Land Management, a bureaucratic subsidiary of the U S Department of the Interior, is eying new regulations for hydraulic fracturing on all federal lands.

Fracturing is the process of pushing a chemical mixture thousands of feet below the earth’s surface to release oil and gas.  Most of the chemical compound returns to the surface, along with the fossil fuels.  The Department of the Interior claims national uniform standards are necessary for safety’s sake, but Schweitzer contends that the states should monitor the activity, saying the federal rules are redundant, onerous, and burdensome.

Dave Galt, executive director of the Montana Petroleum Association, Inc., a trade non profit that represents oil and natural gas producers, said the new rules are designed to regulate oil and gas companies out of business.

Carl Graham, president of the Bozeman based Montana Policy Institute, a free market think tank, said the anti fracking push is simply an effort by environmental radicals to cut off access to cheap energy.  “More than 99 percent of the fluid used is water and sand,” Graham said of the fracking fluid.  Graham is also concerned with the economic slowdown the state would experience, if federal regulations scare off drilling companies.

Environmental groups supporting the federal proposal include Sierra Club, Northern Plains Resource Council, and Montana Environmental Information Center.

Tom Doll, Wyoming’s top oil and gas regulator’s resignation comes within a week of his remarks that Pavillion’s “greed” was fueling residents to demand a new water distribution system in light of the alleged groundwater contamination near the town due to hydraulic fracturing.  A spokesman from the governor’s office declined to say that the resignation was prompted by Doll’s earlier comments, but did acknowledge that it was “in the best interests of the state”.  Doll’s resignation is effective July 3^rd.

Doll’s comments were delivered to the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission on June 5^th in Vancouver, British Columbia during a discussion on Pavillion’s groundwater contamination.  Doll contended that the rural community’s demand for a $3 million water distribution system in response to the state’s proposed $750,000 water cisterns proposal was predicated upon “greed”.  In tandem with the comments on Pavillion residents behavior, Doll also criticized the Environmental Protection Agency’s December 2011 draft report which linked the water contamination in Pavillion to hydraulic fracking. It’s Doll’s belief that the EPA’s investigation was flawed and inept; that no scientific basis exists to draw the conclusion that Pavillion’s tainted water was due to fracking.

Such are the circumstances Wyoming State Oil & Gas Conservation Commission Supervisor Tom Doll found himself in this past week.  Doll who recently spoke at the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission in Vancouver, British Columbia was discussing a December 2011 EPA draft report linking hydraulic fracturing to well water contamination in Pavillion, Wyoming.   Doll stated that the EPA’s study of the groundwater was based on a single sample from a test well drilled far below where residents draw water.  His contention, the EPA draft report was “politically motivated” and based on “bad science”. 

But, that wasn’t what fuelled the brouhaha or compelled the apology from Doll.  The state’s top regulator for oil and gas development argued that “greed” was a motivating factor for Pavillion residents who blame hydraulic fracturing for polluting the groundwater around the small central Wyoming community, “I really believe greed is driving a lot of this” and people around Pavillion are “just looking to be compensated.”  Unfortunately for Mr. Doll, his comments are inconsistent with Wyoming Governor Matt Mead who has directed state agencies and staffers to assure and “open and transparent process” as the concerns of Pavillion area residents are addressed.  The governor’s office called Doll’s words, ”inappropriate and inconsiderate.”   In spite of Doll’s public apology, John Fenton, the chairman of the “Pavillion Area Concerned Citizens” is suspect of Doll’s “objectivity” and “support of an industry no matter what goes on”.

Doll is not alone in his repudiation of the 2011 EPA draft report.  Several other Wyoming state officials dispute the EPA study’s findings. Wyoming regulators and the EPA have since agreed to additional testing which began in the spring of 2012 in the Pavillion-area.  Additionally, Wyoming officials are working along side the US Geological Survey to follow up on the results of the EPA study with new water sampling.  Wyoming will submit the results, along with the public comments from state agencies, to a peer review panel EPA has established to examine the draft document to ensure its scientific integrity.  “The peer review panel will make recommendations as to what the next steps ought to be,” Doll said.

In the interim, the Wyoming state legislature has appropriated $750,000 to construct cisterns for Pavillion area residents who maintain drinking water contamination.

The answer - hydraulic fracturing (aka fracking).  But, that’s where the similarity ends.  While North Dakota has embraced this prolific drilling technique; New York has feigned distaste, citing environmental concerns.  In spite of record unemployment throughout the state (8.5% in March 2012) and a heavy consumption of energy downstate (4% of the US total), the Empire State has chosen to view fracking as controversial and has placed a moratorium on the technique within the state; leaving New York as a non-participant in the lucrative Marcellus Shale.

The Marcellus Shale, one of the largest shale regions in the United State is a rich resource for natural gas and it’s estimated to be the second largest natural gas find in the world. The geographic footprint of the Marcellus is significant; stretching across New York, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio and Maryland.  The USGS (United States Geological Survey) estimates the formation’s total area to be around 95,000 square miles, ranging in depth from 4,000 to 8,000 feet. This translates to a 400 year old a shale formation believed to contain more than 410 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, having the potential to supply U.S. consumer energy needs for hundreds of years.

Technological advances in horizontal drilling, coupled with hydraulic fracturing have allowed energy companies to unlock the energy resources from the Marcellus Shale, while protecting drinking water sources and the environment.  While some areas in the Marcellus Shale are currently in development, recent studies show increased access could create thousands of jobs and help stimulate the economy. A study by Timothy J. Considine, an economics professor at the University of Wyoming, shows increased access in the Marcellus Shale formation could create 280,000 jobs and produce over $6 billion in government revenue.  Pennsylvania has chosen to harness this opportunity in the Marcellus and estimates that each well drilled within its borders generates:

• 62 jobs
• $2.8 million in direct economic benefits from gas company purchases
• $1.5 million from industry workers spending wages, or land owners spending royalties from lease payments
• $2 million in local, state, and federal tax revenue

…..and yet New York is not participating in it’s own economic recovery due to its stance on hydraulic fracturing.

Source:  Manhattan Institute’s “The Economic Opportunities of Shale Energy Development”, June 2011

On the Flip Side:

The North Dakota Bakken Boom has had such a significant impact on the state, that the local Chamber of Commerce in the community of Williston, ND (population: who knows?…it grows daily) has had to automate its phone system because it can no longer respond to individual calls or emails.  Just dial 701-577-6000 and select option #1.

While in this techie age, the voice generated, how many buttons do I have to push to get a live body is the norm…it hasn’t been the norm in Williston (the heart of the Bakken Boom) until recently.  Continued economic woes through this country and a world class technology oil play in the western North Dakota has resulted in a mass flockin’ to the Bakken….in search of or the recapture of the American dream.

Your Chamber friendly voice informs, that “due to the influx of inquiries” the Williston Chamber can no longer respond individually or mail out information packets.  Instead you are referred to their website for a list of job search contacts, but are warned of the general lack of housing (temporary or permanent).

Despite Obama campaign rhetoric of 2008 of “Change we can believe in” and the lemmings over the cliff (aka faithful followers) chanting “Yes We Can”, our nation’s anemic economic recovery continues.  So having a place with too many jobs and too many full hotel rooms seems a bit unbelievable.

Could someone at the Williston Chamber of Commerce make an exception and mail relocation packets to some of the distressed citizens of upstate New York who have been on unemployment for 99 weeks?  For in North Dakota with an unemployment rate of 3%, and an economy that is literally going through the roof, the slogan is “oil can!”

Well, not being a scientist I have to base my opinions on information I get from trusted sources, as do most of fracking’s detractors. And based on that information my conclusion is that, just like the Keystone pipeline opposition isn’t about pipelines, coal dust alarmism isn’t about coal dust, and megaload obstructionism isn’t about megaloads; most of the fuss about fracking has little to do with the actual process and more to do with getting rid of fossil fuels.

Let’s start with a simple, verifiable fact: In its 60-plus-year history, there has been no generally accepted peer-reviewed scientific study demonstrating negative impacts of fracking on water supplies. That’s zero, zip, nada. EPA administrator Lisa Jackson — hardly a fossil fuel advocate — told Congress just last year that there have been “no proven cases where the fracking process itself has affected water.”

Self-serving studies

Sure, there are plenty of studies “proving” that fracking is either essential to mankind or, alternatively, its inevitable downfall. Most of these tend to be a tad self-serving. As the old proverb says, a lie will go ’round the world while the truth pulls its boots on.

But what have those who are actually responsible for public safety said about fracking? Dimock, Penn., and Pavillion, Wyo., have been under the fracking microscope for years and are good indicators.

Residents in Dimock reported dirty water that was famously ignitable at times. But both state regulators and the EPA said claims relating those problems to fracking were unfounded, and the water posed “no immediate health concerns.”

My humble abode is also over an aquifer that gets cloudy as melted snow enters the sandstone structure. It looks awful but is perfectly drinkable. We deal with it. And I can remember stories as a kid in northeast Montana of burning stock ponds as naturally occurring methane bubbled to the surface. It should come as no shock that methane gets into water wells in areas where there are also gas wells. That’s where the gas is. Relating the two is a common but dangerous trick that tries to confuse coincidence and causation. It’s just like my being cranky on days that end in “Y” doesn’t necessarily mean the letter “Y” makes me cranky.

In the Wyoming case, the EPA came out with a 121-page draft report claiming that fracking contaminated ground water. But the report has not yet been peer reviewed and appears to leave some significant questions. It tested wells where hydrocarbons were already present, and that were far deeper than drinking water wells. Potential contamination could have come from “legacy pits,” or even the testing process itself. And it ignored the fact that organic chemicals were present in local water supplies long before fracking was employed. In short, the jury is still out on this one.

A final report on fracking’s impact on drinking water is due later this year. But it’s likely to be anticlimactic. Fracking solutions are typically over 99 percent water and sand. If you’re worried about the remaining 1 percent, you can look up individual well ingredients yourself at fracfocus.org.

Fossil fuels foes

So why all the fuss if the data is not all in, and what data there is proves no harm? It’s a fuss because for the zealots, this argument is about fossil fuels and not fracking. Just like the Keystone pipeline, coal dust, megaloads, and so many other battles, this is about shutting down the fossil fuel industry, and facts are the first casualty in what is essentially a highly coordinated, well-financed public relations campaign.

It’s also counterproductive. Cleaner, cheaper natural gas is rapidly replacing coal in the nation’s energy grid, already accounting for about 25 percent of power production. That would not be possible without fracking. If you care about global warming and affordable electricity, you should be a fracking fan.

And finally, fracking is good for Montana. It brings in jobs, prosperity, and tax revenues. The economic benefits are measurable and immediate. And the smiling faces of mothers and fathers in Eastern Montana watching their kids put on their boots and go to high paying jobs close to home are a welcome change.

*SOURCE:  Guest Opinion www.billingsgazette.com April 14,2012, Carl Graham is CEO of Montana Policy Institute, a nonprofit policy research center in Bozeman

‘The Need in a Word’

This past weekend I was on a brisk walk when suddenly I realized that I had come to a complete stop, but didn’t know why. Then, after an awkward moment I remembered that I had stopped to think and then simply forgot to start again. At least I knew where I was and where I was going or things might really have gotten embarrassing. As I resumed walking, I realized that as long as I remained focused on my destination; where I had been and how I had gotten there, it really didn’t matter much in light of my destination. Even if I couldn’t physically see where I headed, the vision of the objective is what mattered most. Knowing where I was headed was the very thing that was going to get me there, regardless of the time and distance between my present location and where I really wanted to be. So, even though I was tired and in some pain I began to focus not on the walk, but rather upon the destination. The vision of that destination is what the pain, the struggle and effort were all leading up to - the place I wanted to be.

After reaching my destination I paused again and began to reflect on the word vision and how it could impact not only my life, but the lives of those around me.  A couple of quotes came to mind:

“There is no more powerful engine driving an organization toward excellence and long-range success than an attractive, worthwhile, achievable vision for the future, widely shared”, were the words penned by leadership expert and best selling author Burt Nanus.

Helen Keller, the woman famous for overcoming seemingly insurmountable obstacles including a lack of physical sight was quoted as saying that “The most pathetic person in the world is someone who has sight, but has no vision.”  

The book of Proverbs reads, “where there is no vision the people perish” (Proverbs 29:18).

Wow, how does any of that apply to my life today? Other than getting me home from my walk of course.  As I continued to mull over the application of the word it occurred to me that the state of Montana is for all practical purposes, an organization. As such, “excellence and long-range success” for the state as a collective organization is tied directly to the concept of vision. Perhaps we don’t often speak of it in these terms but if you stop and think about it (please don’t forget to start again) the future of our state: politically, socially, financially and even environmentally has not been decided. The future is not a destiny, but a decision that we make today.

In our personal lives we all have dreams, desires, and a hope for the future; but how often do we stop to think on a broader scale of what we want for the future of our neighborhoods, our communities, and our state? What is your dream for Montana five years, or five generations from now? Is it attractive and worthwhile? Does it include a sustainable prosperity that benefits each and every citizen of the state? Or is it simply more of the same? Are you a parent or do you plan to be one? What is the Montana that you want for your children, their children and yes even their grandchildren?  Have you shared that vision with others or can you even put it into words? After all the definition of a dream that cannot be shared with others is a fantasy not a vision.

Only when a dream is spread can it becomes infectious, but when it does it also becomes an unstoppable driving force propelling all that share it; toward a common destination. Perhaps this is why without vision a person with physical sight is most pathetic. For without vision there is no hope because it is hope that overcomes. In this regard, vision is not just an objective; vision empowers that which is seen. The vision itself becomes the motivation to continue, the courage to endure, the strength to overcome, and the burning desire to succeed.

OK I thought, so I get that, but without vision people perish? Then I remembered the words of Henry David Thoreau, who said, “in the long run men hit only what they aim at”.  If we do not have a vision for our lives how can we ever be, more than what we are now? We will never reach, never achieve, and never move beyond where we are because we cannot hit what we cannot see. Therefore, without vision, there is no future only the present and all we will ever have, ever will be, or ever become is that which we already are today. The future of this state is no different.  It is a choice and the choice is yours. So I ask again, what do you see?

I was driving in eastern Montana last week when suddenly my lungs were satiated with an overpowering sensation best described as a harsh and bitter bite combined with an unmistakable aroma otherwise known as the recent spray of skunk. In parts of the country where skunks are common place this might normally be a good thing this time of year. For those unfamiliar with this annual occurrence, the smell of skunks in late winter is one of the first signs of the coming of spring. However, this year has not been a typical winter. The past four months have produced very little snow and mostly mild temperatures. This abnormal weather almost seems to beg the question, what of the now impending spring? So with lungs now recovering, I was left to ponder not just the skunk but the other signs of spring as well.

Soon I was as deep into contemplation as a driver dare get, when yet another sign confronted my senses, albeit more visual than aromatic. It was then that I realized (in case I hadn’t before) that this was in fact an election year. But this is not just any election cycle, this is gubernatorial primary season as conspicuously confirmed by a prominently placed placard soliciting my attention and requesting my vote. As I thought about the significance of this latest sign an uneasy trepidation stampeded my brain, which had only recently repelled the odiferous effects of an unseen assailant.  But no time for that now as I was coming in to town and I could already tell that the traffic was about to get crazy.

Since that day, however, I have continued to contemplate the significance of the crucial 2012 primary and general election seasons. This season, like the waning months of winter is truly shaping up to be anything but normal. In just a matter of weeks and again in only eight short months, Montana’s will be faced with the most crucial gubernatorial election in recent memory. For as we the people of this state gather to cast our ballots, history will record the day as either a missed opportunity or a great beginning. Moreover, the choice on the ballot is not just about a man but about the unwritten history that will be made long after the last ballot has been counted. Though the stakes are higher than they have been in many years and the issues at hand are as complex as they are varied the choice is really quite simple. On one hand we will have the opportunity to elect a man who will forever be remembered by the writers of history. While on the other hand, the people of Montana can place into office a man who himself will be the writer of history. The only question is which candidate will fill which bill?

On a regular basis now, I travel the roads of eastern Montana complete with their obstacles of ice and odors yet brimming with opportunity for prosperity and true sustainable growth. While I face the obstacles in order to engage the opportunity, I cannot help but wonder if this state is prepared to do the same. There are many challenges before us both as a nation and as a state. Yet with each challenge comes the potential for opportunity. The question here is will we let the former keep us from the latter. In my own life I have chosen again and again to leave the comforts of home and hearth to brave the conditions and overcome the obstacles for nothing more than a chance at an opportunity. Like the people of this state I am not guaranteed success in any of my endeavors only the opportunity for it. Yet, I know that if you don’t start somewhere you will never get anywhere and if you don’t try something you will never achieve anything.

Thus, over the past 18 months my wife and I have journeyed countless times into the land of opportunity better known perhaps by the moniker of eastern Montana and western North Dakota. As most people know by now this a land capable of putting the ‘treasure’ back into the ‘treasure state’. The question is not should we develop these resources but rather how? With over seven billion people now living on the planet and with an increasing percentage of those rightfully demanding the better things in life the need for petroleum is greater than at any other time in human history. If you don’t believe me take this one simple test.

Name one commercially viable product that in the life cycle of the product from development to consumption does not require petroleum at some point in the process.

The harsh reality is that regardless of how desperately we want a greener planet free of fossil fuels the idea is and will remain, impossible for the foreseeable future. That said, we must diligently pursue the means to extract and utilize petroleum with more environmentally friendly processes so that we truly are good stewards of the treasures beneath our feet.

Today the future is unwritten yet by year’s end the story line will be set. Will we be stewards that through diligence of effort shepherd in sustainable prosperity for future generations despite the obstacles? Or will we continue to ignore the warning signs and be forever remembered as those that could have but did not? Wake up Montana the future is now!

“Cultural Resource Management” – wow , that’s a big governmental sounding term!  So, let’s just call it CRM for short.  CRM is the process we use to determine if archaeological or historical properties (that’s sites more than 50 years old) are within a project’s “Area of Potential Effect”.  (Yes, I know, another big governmental sounding term – but APE works for short).  Bear with me, I’ll get through the dry stuff quickly !

The CRM process is required by the regulations set forth under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. This process is required when public lands or funds are involved in a project that will have potential ground disturbing consequences.  Through the process, prehistoric and historic sites are:  identified, documented, and evaluated for eligibility into the National Register of Historic Places.

Reports are issued to the federal or state agencies involved as well as the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO).  Recommendations are given by the CRM specialist (that would be me) concerning whether or not there are potential negative effects to significant archaeological sites, and what actions can be taken to avoid those effects.  The agencies involved then determine whether they agree with this assessment.

So why is the CRM process relevant to the Bakken?

Given the checkerboard nature of the state and federal lands sprinkled across eastern Montana and western North Dakota; public lands in the path of the Bakken exploration and production progression is going to happen.  In order to access roads, power transmission lines, well pads, or pipelines to receive clearance for placement on public lands, the CRM process must completely run its course.

A modified process known as a Visual Impact Assessment (VIA) is also required for projects, such as cell towers, whose signals are under the purview of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).  As the Bakken business grows, so shall the need for communications.

The Bakken is under the international spotlight, and now, more than ever, the need for professionalism and cooperation is needed to insure that the industry grows in a manner that complies with federal and state regulations.  To accomplish this goal, the CRM professionals are vital now, and in the future of the Bakken oil play.

To learn more about CRM, Hope Archaeology, Inc., and Shane be sure to click the link to Shane’s Listing in the Synergy Station Directory.

The following is a test. Please proceed with care…Sharpen your wits & your pencils…PROCEED:

1. What is the source of the following quote and who was/is the intended audience?

“Pipelines enable the safe movement of extraordinary quantities of energy products to industry and consumers, literally fueling our economy and way of life. The arteries of the Nation’s energy infrastructure, as well as the safest and least costly ways to transport energy products, our oil and gas pipelines provide the resources needed for national defense, heat and cool our homes, generate power for business and fuel an unparalleled transportation system.”

 2.  What or who is PHMSA?

3.  What is 36 inches in diameter and 1,661 miles in length? (This one is easy)

4. What will increase by 50-60% by the year 2035 and what are the two primary reasons why that will be the case?

5. What is 2 inches to 48 inches in diameter and 2,307,981 miles long?

6. Was President Obama’s January 18, 2012 decision regarding the Keystone XL Pipeline a wise choice or an extra-large mistake? 

Answers:

1.  After reading these words the logical answer might be a representative of the National Petroleum Council. However, that answer would in fact be wrong.  The correct answer is: the statement is a partial answer to the question- What can you tell me about our nation’s pipelines as represented on the FAQ page of the PHMSA website. The audience is the general public – all of US.

2. If you answered Partially Hydrogenated Meat Substitute Army rations, chances are you might just actually be technically correct. From experience, it certainly sounds like something that would be found in and army meal ready to eat (MRE). But the answer  we were looking for is PHMSA is a federal agency that falls under the authority of the US Department of Transportation. The acronym is short for Pipeline Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.  This is the agency that has operational control over the pipeline network that delivers liquid products like natural gas or oil all throughout the country.

3. The answer to this one is easy, it is the underground storage system designed to handle original copies of government documents like the tax code and the health plan. On second thought something that big would be nowhere near large enough to contain all of those immense documents.  Actually you probably got it right if you read the title of this blog. It is the size in diameter and length of the proposed Keystone XL Pipeline.

4. Your Taxes

Actually, According to the National Petroleum Council, the organization that represents the interests of the commercial side of the energy industry, it is the global demand for energy. The two primary reasons are the same as those I stated in my earlier blog entitled “Slow Train”. The world population is growing (fast) and at the same time there is a deliberate and intense pursuit to improve the living standards for all people across the planet.

5.  This is really a trick question because although it is a real question, once you know the answer and realize that this large number continues to increase on a regular basis you have to ask why is an additional 1,661 miles a problem?  The answer to the stated question is the number of miles of pipeline currently in operation in the US. 2.3 million miles and growing.

6. You tell me – what do you think?

Your opinion, viewpoint, and input are important….can we hear from you?

Pavillion Wyoming

On December 8, 2011 a report was released by Region 8 of the Environmental Protection Agency, under the direction of EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson.  This report is a 121 page document that according to media sources around the world (literally) link local water contamination in Pavillion Wyoming with oil and natural gas operations in the area. At first blush the science behind the report appears to support the belief that that the process of ‘Hydraulic Fracturing’ is a risky proposition that may be detrimental to the environment. After all the EPA is a Government Agency in charge of reducing environmental threats to public safety and imposing justice on those who violate this public trust. I do not say this with any sort of disdain because the history of the agency has been one of legitimate concern for public well being. Much of what the EPA has accomplished since their inception during the Nixon Administration of the early seventies has truly benefited mankind. Thanks to their diligence great strides have been made to limit the degradation of the environment in this nation and indirectly around the world. But recently the methods and practices of this organization have been tainted by the sway of political opinion. As a result, the findings of this agency must be legitimately questioned as they pertain to issues that have at their core the semblance of political significance.

It is our policy at the station to present material from the perspective of seeking truth in the form of verifiable information, and it is in that light that this blog is researched and written. I am not an expert in the field of environmental protection or geology however; I am a doctoral student who is well accustomed to presenting material for verification, authentication, and peer review analysis. When I read reports of any type of study these days it is with a mind that asks where did the information come from, can it be verified, how was it gathered, what research methods were used if any and is the presentation in agreement with the findings. When I first heard of this EPA report my inclination was, in the words of President Ronald Reagan, “to trust but verify”. I so I began to research not only the report its self but the process of drilling as it related to contaminated ground water and even the types of chemicals discovered in the EPA report. In other words I researched this topic from many different angles in order to better understand what it was that was really going on in Pavillion Wyoming. I was not content with the report but wanted to understand both the science and methodology used in the study from which the report was prepared. I quickly realized that this report had become news even in places like Europe. After several hours of research one interesting fact presented itself again and again; the EPA links hydraulic fracturing to contaminated aquifer that supplies the town of Pavillion Wyoming. After several hours of research one could conclude that this statement and the report and study behind it were gospel truth.

In the back of my mind however I could not dismiss one lingering question. Where was all this information I was uncovering coming from? As I went back through what by this time was a copious list of sources I found a single commonality. Every single source was somehow connected to an environmental group, cause and or funding source. For some sources it had been obvious all along but with other accounts that was not the case. In all fairness, not every site that had a pro-environment agenda presented one sided discussions. In fact many of the sites toned down the report a bit by recognizing that the EPA had requested and was waiting on a peer-review evaluation. One site admirably took an approach that was so balanced in presentation that the conclusion even for a reasonable and questioning individual seemed to be that the EPA report was sound in it methods and its findings. Despite this approach I was determined to look at as many angles as I could in order to understand from a 360 perspective what was really going not only in the Draft Report, December 8, 2011, but also on the ground so to speak.

What I found over the next couple days was interesting and clearly needs to become a major element of the public discourse on the topic. According to Matt Mead the current Governor of Wyoming,  “The Environmental Protection Agency’s draft study on Pavillion wells is scientifically questionable and more testing is needed. We believe that the draft study could have a critical impact on the energy industry and on the country so it is imperative that we not make conclusions based on only four data points,” Governor Mead said. “Those familiar with the scientific method recognize that it would not be appropriate to make a judgment without verifying all of the testing that has been done.”

Thus, over the next several blogs I will present additional information about this subject that is not making national news. I am not talking about some conspiracy theory or political subterfuge but rather scientifically verifiable evidence that the EPA report on Pavillion Wyoming drill site is not all that it is ‘fracked’ up to be. Until then you may want to withhold judgment on the situation. Remember we welcome your comments.