Archive for the ‘development’ Category

By Jordyn Dahl, The Durango Herald

For the first time, La Plata County could see horizontal shale drilling.

Swift Energy Co. has filed an exploratory drilling and spacing application for two units near Kline and Marvel – an area of the county that has not previously experienced heavy gas development.

One unit would encompass 643.4 acres, while the other would encompass 587.8 acres on privately owned land.

Thus far, the county has only seen coal-bed methane drilling, but shale drilling has gained momentum in recent years, fueling a gas boom that flooded the nation with inexpensive gas.

County commissioners debated whether to intervene with the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission on Swift’s application and enter into negotiations for a memorandum of understanding at its meeting Tuesday. The county typically takes this course when debating coal-bed methane wells, but shale drilling is new territory.

Memrandums of understanding cover land-use issues such as road maintenance and allow the county to negotiate what responsibility each entity has.

fight back - attack the frack!About 15 residents attended the meeting to hear the commissioners debate and to give their feedback. Most of the residents urged the commissioners to intervene, saying questions were left unanswered about the safety of the wells and increased truck traffic.

The board voted unanimously to intervene on the application.

“We want to make sure shale drilling happens in the most environmentally responsible way possible,” said Commissioner Gwen Lachelt, former director of Earthworks’ Oil & Gas Accountability Project.

The application is only for exploratory drilling to evaluate the contents of the ground, but the decisions the commissioners make for these wells could set a precedent for future companies that want to establish similar wells in the county.

Environmental group vows to take its fight to court

By Judy Fahys, The Salt Lake Tribune

The nation’s first fuel-producing tar sands mine, planned for the wild Book Cliffs in eastern Utah, has gotten a final go-ahead from state regulators.

The Utah Division of Oil Gas and Mining released its decision Friday to allow Alberta-based U.S. Oil Sands to move forward with the first stage of its mine on 213 acres in the arid high country between Vernal and Moab.

“This is not unexpected,” said Cameron Todd, company CEO. “We’ve been working long and hard on this and dotted all the i’s and crossed all the t’s.”

He added that the project will be a “strong example of environmental performance” and praised the “strong leadership” of Utah Gov. Gary Herbert and other decision-makers.

But John Weisheit, director of the environmental advocacy group Living Rivers, called the decision “arbitrary.” His Moab-based group, which has fought the project not only before the oil and gas board but also before the Utah Water Quality Board, contends the strip mine is a threat to the air and the water, especially the nearby White, Green and Colorado rivers.

“We have another avenue [to fight the mine] and that’s the appeals court,” he said, “and that’s where we’ll go.”

Todd said his company has been working on the project since 2005, doing tests and exploration on a 5,900-acre lease site that is thought to hold as much as 190 million barrels of oil. It will use a citrus-based chemical called d-limonene.

But recent approvals, in October by the Water Quality Board and on Friday by the oil and gas board, apply only to a smaller project site. When production gets under way next year, the initial 200-acre project area is expected to generate around 2,000 barrels a day for a total of 10 million barrels.

The main question for both state panels was whether the mine endangers the water — an important question in the nation’s second-driest state.

The oil and gas board earlier gave preliminary approval to the project pending a decision by water quality regulators on whether the project needed groundwater-pollution permit. In its October decision, the water board determined there is no groundwater to pollute.

That left the oil and gas board with a final decision that members deliberated following a December hearing.

John Andrews, associate director and counsel for the Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration, which owns the land, was pleased with the decision for its potential value to the state’s schoolchildren.

“You would be looking at between $1 million and $3 million a year to the trust,” he said of the project’s first phase.

Environmental activists have protested and held teach-ins for much of the past year to attract negative public attention to the project.

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Monday, December 24, 2012

Contact: Rudy Preston
Email: info@truesnow.org
Phone: 480-382-5288
www.TrueSnow.org

Arizona Snowbowl Starts Making Fake Snow from Treated Sewage… and it’s Yellow

FLAGSTAFF, AZ (San Francisco Peaks) — After a decade of legal battles and opposition from environmental groups, concerned citizens, and Indigenous Nations, Arizona Snowbowl ski area has started making fake snow from Flagstaff’s treated sewage effluent.

Surprise… it’s yellow!

“My parents always told me not to eat yellow snow, this is absolutely disgusting,” said Katie Nelson, longtime resident of Northern Arizona. “ Will parents tell their kids it’s OK to play in it? I used to be a skier and snowboarder, but I am boycotting Snowbowl because they obviously don’t care about my health or the environment.” stated Nelson.

Snowbowl is set to be the only ski area in the world to make snow from 100% treated sewage effluent. This action has raised serious concerns from community and environmental groups due to potential risks to human health and the sensitive mountain ecosystem.

“Snowbowl is clearly disregarding public health by not fulfilling their requirement to have signs posted that the fake snow is made from treated sewage and that it must not be consumed. I checked the entire area where kids ski and learn to ski and I could not find any warning signs.” stated Rudy Preston, former board member of the Flagstaff Activist Network. “There were none posted on the childrens ski lifts either,” he continued.

Although Snowbowl manager JR Murray has stated that treated sewage would be “…cleaner than the snow falling out of the sky” the yellow colored snow clearly indicates that something is wrong.

State law mandates that it is illegal for anyone to consume snow made from treated sewage effluent. Ingestion pathways include the eyes, ears, nose, mouth, and skin. Additionally, any “direct reuse” cannot even have the “potential for ingestion.” While Snowmaking is considered legal, the “direct reuse” of this treated sewage effluent is in fact “skiing” and ADEQ is ignoring their own laws when it allowed Snowbowl to make snow (Arizona Administrative Code: R-18-9-704).

“Despite the obvious health risks, you would have thought that respect for our Indigenous brothers and sisters would have been enough to stop this project years ago, treated sewage for snowmaking is an absolute affront to Indigenous Nations that revere the Peaks as holy and I for one choose to respect their wishes and will no longer ski at Arizona Snowbowl.” stated Rudy Preston.

Multiple protests and prayer gatherings have been held since Snowbowl opened last Thursday.

On November, 14, 2012 the Hopi Tribe filed a new lawsuit and for injunctive relief due to threats reclaimed water poses to an endangered plant that is found nowhere else in the world but on the Peaks. The Hopi Tribe requested an injunction to be placed on snowmaking activities until consultation was completed with both the US Fish and Wildlife and Department of Agriculture. The court has yet to issue a response.

The wastewater, which is treated to Flagstaff’s highest standard, has been proven to contain endocrine disrupting chemicals and now even anti-biotic resistant genes. Since the Environmental Protection Agency has no regulations addressing these contaminants in treated sewage, the Forest Service, City of Flagstaff, AZ Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ), and Snowbowl continue to call it “clean enough to drink” although it would be illegal to do so.

ADEQ regulations allow A+ treated sewer water to contain fecal matter in three out of seven daily samples (R18-11-303 2a). In addition, according to Northern Arizona University biologist Dr. Paul Torrence, the treated sewage effluent may also contain antibiotics such as triclosan and triclocarban, which break down into bio-accumulating cancerous dioxins when exposed to sunlight.

For nearly a decade every environmental concern brought to the courts by Sierra Club, the Center for Biological Diversity, and Flagstaff Activist Network have been swept under the rug on filing technicalities and no court has ruled on the issues raised about direct reuse and ingestion. In another lawsuit by the Hopi challenging the legality of the City’s contract with

Snowbowl, Judge Joe Lodge ruled that the tribe waited too long for the court to make a ruling on clear ADEQ environmental law violations.

Download high resolution pictures here.

Opponents say “the last thing we need is to destroy our public lands.”

From The Salt Lake Tribune:

Environmental groups filed a protest this week of a Bureau of Land Management plan to allocate more than 800,000 acres in Utah, Colorado and Wyoming for oil shale and tar sands development.

The Center for Biological Diversity, the Grand Canyon Trust, Living Rivers and the Sierra Club sent the protest Monday to BLM protest coordinator Brenda Hudgens-Williams.

The proposal would make available nearly 700,000 acres in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming for research and development of oil shale, and about 130,000 acres in Utah for activities related to tar sands.

A news release about the protest said such development would release “intensive greenhouse gas emissions, hasten Colorado River drying, threaten wildlife and increase local and regional air pollution.”

“The climate crisis is worsening every day. The last thing we need is to destroy our public lands for carbon-intensive oil shale and tar-sands mining,” said Taylor McKinnon, public lands campaigns director with the Center for Biological Diversity.

Last month, the BLM made public a plan that dramatically scaled back a Bush administration plan to allow leasing on rangelands in the three states.

The 806,000-acre recommendation — about 1,250 square miles — was one-third of what the Bush administration had proposed to lease.

BLM Colorado State Director Helen Hankins said the compromise proposal takes a responsible cautious approach to resource development.

“Today’s leases demonstrate our continued commitment to encouraging research and development that will help fill in some of the existing knowledge gaps when it comes to technology, water use and potential impacts of commercial-scale oil shale development,” Hankins said in a prepared statement issued Nov. 9 with its recommendation and a 6,245-page environmental impact statement. “To date, technological and economic conditions have not combined to support a sustained commercial oil shale industry, and this plan lays a strong foundation to explore oil shale’s potential.”

A 30-day protest period ended Monday, after the environmental groups filed their 94-page protest.

For more information on the BLM plan, click here.

Protest Filed Over 800,000-acre Oil Shale Plan in Colorado, Utah, Wyoming

Oil Shale and Tar Sands Development Would Worsen Global Warming and
Harm Public Lands, Colorado River, Wildlife

From the Center for Biological Diversity:

For Immediate Release, December 11, 2012

Contact: Taylor McKinnon, (928) 310-6713

DENVER— The Center for Biological Diversity on Monday filed a protest challenging a Bureau of Land Management plan allocating 806,000 acres of public lands in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming for oil shale and tar-sands development. If it’s carried out, the development would unleash intensive greenhouse gas emissions, hasten Colorado River drying, threaten wildlife and increase local and regional air pollution.

“The climate crisis is worsening every day. The last thing we need is to destroy our public lands for carbon-intensive oil shale and tar-sands mining,” said Taylor McKinnon, public lands campaigns director with the Center. “This plan’s water use and greenhouse gas emissions would be ruinous for public land, the already-drying Colorado River, endangered species and efforts to curb global warming.”

The BLM plan stems from a settlement of litigation brought by environmental groups in 2009 that challenged a 2008 Bush administration plan to open 2 million acres of public land to oil shale and tar sands development. Today’s protest challenges an environmental impact statement and proposed amendments to 10 land-management plans for violating the National Environmental Policy Act, Endangered Species Act and other laws.

The protested plan allocates more than 676,000 acres of land to oil shale development and more than 129,000 acres to tar sands. It subjects oil-mining projects to additional review not included in the Bush administration’s plan. While it reduces developable acres from the Bush administration’s 2008 plan, it increases allocations from what was proposed in a 2012 draft environmental impact statement. Acres allocated for oil shale development increased by 46 percent since the draft plan; acres for tar sands increased by 42 percent.

Producing oil from shale or tar sands can be dirtier than coal given the energy required to extract the oil. The production of every barrel of shale oil sends 50 percent more CO2 into the atmosphere than the production of one barrel of crude oil. Because mining would deplete and pollute water and destroy large areas of land being mined, development would likely affect numerous endangered species like Mexican spotted owl, Canada lynx and four endangered fish species in the Colorado River — Colorado pikeminnow, razorback sucker, humpback chub and bonytail chub.

The Center is dedicated to ensuring that atmospheric CO2 pollutant levels are reduced to below 350 parts per million, which leading climate scientists warn is necessary to prevent devastating climate change. Further development of greenhouse gas-intensive energy sources, including oil shale, tar-sands and coal-fired power plants is incompatible with achieving this goal. If greenhouse gas emissions are not immediately reduced, the atmospheric carbon dioxide level will rise to approximately 500 ppm by mid-century, escalating wildlife extinctions, catastrophic weather and ecosystem changes and tragic human suffering.

The Center for Biological Diversity is a national, nonprofit conservation organization with more than 450,000 members and online activists dedicated to the protection of endangered species and wild places.

Southwest Colorado gas, oil leases clear review by BLM

Posted: November 23, 2012 by earthfirstdurango in development, fracking, oil & gas

See the previous article: BLM proposes leasing private & public lands for gas and/or oil development

Environmentalists say study fails to address water, air, road impacts

By Emery Cowan, The Durango Herald

The Bureau of Land Management released a final environmental assessment for the leasing of 12 parcels covering more than 12,000 acres in Southwest Colorado. But local environmental groups involved in the issue said the agency’s decision and its assessment process failed to fully analyze potential impacts of drilling.

“Unless the final environmental assessment is three times the size and much more intensive than the draft, many issues are not even close to being dealt with,” said Dan Randolph, executive director of the San Juan Citizens Alliance.

After receiving more than 70 pages of comments on its draft assessment, BLM found that leasing the parcels for natural-gas and oil development would have no significant impact on the surrounding environment.

Eight of the 12 parcels, encompassing 10,761 acres, are in La Plata County near Hesperus. In its decision, BLM deferred leasing of 60 acres near U.S. Highway 160 to preserve the viewshed near the highway, which is designated as a scenic byway.

The leases will be approved for sale in February after a 30-day protest period that began when the analysis was released Friday.

Environmental groups involved in the public comment process said the BLM failed to take a “hard look” at how drilling will specifically effect various parts of the environment such as county roads, water resources and air quality. Several residents were concerned with the potential for hydraulic-fracturing technology to affect the area’s already-scarce water resources.

In many cases, the BLM responded that it could not analyze specific impacts until it receives individual drilling permit applications that would specify issues such as traffic routes, proposed drilling techniques and technologies and development locations.

According to its current leasing policy, the federal agency first analyzes the potential effects of leasing and potential development on a parcel, then conducts another environmental analysis when it receives a drilling permit application.

The environmental assessment for a lease sale evaluates if the area is “OK for development to be there” while the assessment required for a drilling permit “assesses the exact type of development,” said Vanessa Lacayo, a spokeswoman with the agency. Both assessments include public-comment processes.

The Bureau of Land Management started the two-staged analysis process in 2010 to engage and involve the public before the parcels are leased, Lacayo said.

But that process fails to evaluate the cumulative and larger-scale impacts of drilling, said Lesli Allison with the Chama Peak Landowner Alliance.

Once BLM has granted a lease, it guarantees a right to develop on a certain parcel, said Kyle Tisdel, an attorney with the Western Environmental Law Center. By deferring site-specific analysis until after that lease has been granted, BLM fails to take a hard look at environmental impacts on parcels before they are opened to development, he said.

From Peaceful Uprising

On Wednesday, October 24th the Utah Water Quality Board approved in a 9-to-2 vote the first tar sands mine in the United States. The bogus and revolting conclusion of the Board was that there is no ground water near the mine, so there is no need for a water pollution plan by U.S. Oil Sands, a Canadian corporation. The attorney for Living Rivers (Peaceful Uprising’s fiscal sponsor) said they are likely to appeal the ruling in court.  U.S. Oil Sands hopes to be mining the site at PR Springs in the gorgeous Book Cliffs within a year, but they must first receive approval by the Utah Division of Oil, Gas and Mining. Learn more about the ruling here and here.

This is a destructive and dangerous proposal especially for the people of Utah who live close to the proposed mine, but also for all the millions of downstream people who drink Colorado River water — including the people of many Native American Nations (Navajo, Northern & Southern Ute Tribes, Cocopah Indian Community, and the Chemehuevi Indian Tribe to name a few), Las Vegas, Phoenix, Los Angeles and San Diego — more than 20 million people. The beautiful and remote Book Cliffs would be permanently scarred, destroying some of the best animal habitat in Utah, if not the entire country. Lastly, every living thing is impacted by the climate change this mine would provoke. We had little hope the state government wouldn’t green light this path to destruction, so we’re gearing up for a campaign we think we can win, a campaign to resist an attack by the machine.

Will you rise up with Peaceful Uprising and our allies on the ground (Before It Starts, Living Rivers, Utah Tar Sands Resistance) against this violent attack? We need you now; life needs you now — climate justice can not be delayed.

As our co-founder Tim DeChristopher has said before:

“It’s Time To Rush The Field!”

This is truer now than ever before.

Will you join us?

Some of the Latest Media Coverage:

UPDATE! Action camp postponed! Stay tuned for new dates!

UPDATE! Gas and oil comment period gets extension!

From The Durango Herald:

The Bureau of Land Management has extended the public comment deadline for an environmental assessment of more than 12,000 acres in Southwest Colorado that are proposed for natural-gas and oil-lease sales.

The new deadline to comment is Oct. 2.

The parcels are in Archuleta, Dolores, La Plata, Montezuma and San Miguel counties and about 64 percent of the federally owned minerals are under privately owned land.

Eight parcels, or 10,761 acres, are in La Plata County near Hesperus.

The Bureau of Land Management will incorporate public comments into a final environmental assessment. The final assessment will provide the basis for the BLM’s decision whether to lease the parcels and under what stipulations.

The parcels will potentially be offered for lease in February.

“We are extending the comment period to ensure that we receive applicable information regarding resources on these parcels,” Connie Clementson, BLM Tres Rios field manager, said in a news release.

The nonprofit San Juan Citizens Alliance submitted comments criticizing the BLM’s environmental assessment because that analysis is based on a 1985 Resource Management Plan. The BLM has spent years working on a new management plan that is scheduled to be complete next year.

“We believe that any significant project such as this leasing decision, should not progress until the completion of (the BLM’s) Resource Management Plan,” the San Juan Citizens Alliance said in a statement released Tuesday. “The public provided thousands of comments in the shaping of the (management plan) and rightfully should be afforded the respect of the completion and use of the plan and as a guiding document for approval and design of all BLM-related projects.”

The San Juan Citizens Alliance and several Durango-area residents said the BLM deferred gas and oil lease sales for certain parcels in Southwest Colorado in 2008 because an updated Resource Management Plan. The BLM should continue to follow its previous reasoning, they said.

Borders confirmed that Southwest Colorado parcels were deferred in 2008, but said she did not know the reason.

Anne Marie Greenberg, resident of Durango West 2 and another opponent of BLM’s approach to the lease sale, started a Facebook page and a petition on the social change website Change.org to spread public awareness about the lease sale. The petition cites concerns about a lack of “proper public comment” and the BLM’s decision not to complete an Environmental Impact Statement. Greenberg’s petition, titled “Stop Fracking in SW Colorado,” had 272 supporters as of Wednesday.

The BLM did not complete an Environmental Impact Statement – a more thorough analysis of the potential environmental effects and risks of a certain action – for the 12,000 acres set to be leased. The BLM’s current draft environmental assessment resulted in a finding of no significant impact, which does not trigger an environmental impact statement.

Hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling technologies are increasingly being used to break into shale beds such as the Mancos, which the BLM environmental assessment cited as a “potential drilling target” for the Hesperus-area parcels.

To comment and view assessment:
The Bureau of Land Management’s Tres Rios Field Office is accepting public comment on the preliminary environmental assessment of 12 parcels nominated for a competitive natural-gas and oil lease sale. Comments must be submitted by Oct. 2. Comments can be mailed to the Tres Rios Field Office, Attn: Oil and Gas Lease Sale, 29211 Colorado Highway 184, Dolores, CO 81323. They also can be faxed to (970) 882-6841 or emailed to tres_rios_lease_sale@blm.gov.To view the preliminary environmental assessment, click here.

BLM proposes leasing private & public lands for gas and/or oil development

From the San Juan Citizens Alliance:

Comments needed to ensure analysis of all impacts.

The BLM is moving forward with the leasing of lands in western La Plata County and eastern Montezuma County, primarily south of Highway 160 in the area from Hesperus to Mancos Hill. The proposed lease areas also include parcels adjacent to Canyons of the Ancients National Monument, next to the McKenna Peak Wilderness Study Area in Dolores and San Miguel counties and near Chromo in Archuleta County.

We don’t know the geologic formations that are of interest to the companies that nominated the leases (they rarely publicly disclose such information), but there is a high likelihood that shale oil or shale gas are the primary targets.

The need for a thorough scientific analysis, along with a vigorous public process, is not only legally required, but is extremely warranted. Unfortunately, the Tres Rios Field Office of the BLM is doing neither.

If the leases go forward there could be significant increases in heavy truck traffic on the Hesperus/Red Mesa Highway (Route 140), Hay Gulch, and other roads in the area. There are many water quality and use issues, air quality, wildlife and other issues of concern, and project development could bring major changes to the character of the upper west side of La Plata County.

  • There are 12,175 acres in the potential lease areas, of which 7,766 acres are private surface ownership, 3,369 acres are federal surface ownership, and 1040 acres are State of Colorado surface ownership. All parcels are entirely federally owned minerals. NOTE that almost 2/3 of the proposed mineral leases would underlay PRIVATE LANDS.
  • In 2009, these same parcels were put on hold from leasing pending the completion of an updated Resource Management Plan (RMP) and Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS). Those documents have not yet been completed, yet the BLM is now proceeding with leasing based on the clearly outdated 1985 RMP and 1991 EIS.
  • Although this is a huge issue for the communities that would be impacted by development, the BLM has made minimal efforts to get those communities’ input as well as to inform the public in general.

PLEASE CONTACT BLM IMMEDIATELY

  • BLM cannot proceed with the proposed development based upon 27-year-old analyses, especially when the updated planning documents will be completed later in 2012.
  • There is inadequate air quality, wildlife, threatened and endangered species, soil and water, cultural, transportation, socio-economic and environmental justice, and recreation and visual resource impact analysis. The reality that the BLM has proposed not leasing only 60 acres (.5 %!!!) of the industry-proposed 12,175 acres is sufficient information to note that their analyses of the nominated lease parcels in nothing less than inadequate.
  • The opportunity for public comment has been compromised by BLM’s lack of general noticing of the release of the EA, the proposed actions, and an associated “public” meeting.

The BLM is accepting written comments through September 17, 2012 regarding the Preliminary Environmental Assessment and Draft Finding of No Significant Impact. Please submit comments by mail to: Tres Rios Field Office, Attn: Lease Sale, 28211 Highway 184, Dolores, CO 81323, or by email to:  tres_rios_lease_sale@blm.gov 

Sending a copy of your comments to the local offices of your Colorado Senators can be done to:
Wanda_Cason@MarkUdall.Senate.Gov
John_Whitney@bennet.senate.gov 

The EA and associated maps are available here.

For additional information, please contact Josh Joswick at
970 259-3583 or josh@sanjuancitizens.org

San Juan Citizens Alliance is a grass roots organization dedicated to social, economic and environmental justice in the San Juan Basin. We organize San Juan Basin residents to protect our water and air, our public lands, our rural character, and our unique quality of life while embracing the diversity of our region’s people, economy and ecology.

The Bureau of Land Management’s Tres Rios Field Office is accepting public comment on the preliminary environmental assessment of 12 parcels nominated for a competitive natural-gas and oil lease sale. Comments must be submitted by Sept. 17. Comments can be mailed to the Tres Rios Field Office, Attn: Oil and Gas Lease Sale, 29211 Colorado Highway 184, Dolores, CO 81323. They also can be faxed to (970) 882-6841 or emailed to tres_rios_lease_sale@blm.gov. To view the preliminary environmental assessment, click here.

Hesperus could see thousands of acres leased for gas

Thousands of acres could be leased for gas, oil projects

By Emery Cowan, The Durango Herald

The Bureau of Land Management has released a preliminary environmental assessment of more than 12,000 acres in Southwest Colorado that are potentially set to be leased for natural-gas and oil development. Eight of the 12 parcels, encompassing 10,761 acres, are located in La Plata County near Hesperus.

The BLM is accepting public comment on the 117-page environmental assessment until Sept. 17. The agency will incorporate those comments into a final environmental assessment, which will provide the basis for the BLM’s decision whether to lease the parcels and under what stipulations.

The assessment outlines potential effects of leasing and development that include impacts on wildlife, soil, water and air quality.

The document indicates that “potential drilling targets for (Hesperus) parcels are Mancos Shale and deeper.” In recent years energy companies have been increasingly eyeing the Mancos Shale, a formation that hasn’t been developed previously but could potentially yield both oil and natural gas.

Jimbo Buickerood, public lands coordinator with the San Juan Citizens Alliance, outlined several concerns the nonprofit has with the BLM’s environmental assessment.

The most glaring is the fact that the assessment is based on a 1985 Resource Management Plan which is now outdated, Buickerood said. A resource-management plan acts as a guiding document for BLM projects and decisions.

The BLM has spent years working on a new management plan that is scheduled to be complete next year. The agency should wait until it has a more current document with up-to-date data to guide its environmental assessments, Buickerood said.

Waiting for the completion of the management plan would hold up the BLM’s work on the ground, said Shannon Borders, a spokeswoman for the BLM’s Tres Rios Field Office, which covers Southwest Colorado.

With about 70 percent of the leases located on private property, potential drilling also would affect many local landowners, Buickerood said.

All leaseholders who purchase natural-gas and oil leases must apply for drilling permits before they can develop on the land. The BLM would then be required to go through another environmental review process in line with the National Environmental Policy Act.

That process would mean it would be two to three years for development to occur after a lease sale, Borders said. The leases are scheduled to be offered in a competitive sale in February 2013.

From Fires Never Extinguished:

A campaign of political repression is under way against anarchist and indigenous projects in Arizona, spearheaded by the Arizona Counter Terrorism Information Center and the Tempe Police Department Homeland Defense Unit. The Tempe police department’s anti-terror division preemptively shut down the Protect the Peaks solidarity benefit show that was planned for Friday night, using the threat of a fire code violation to ensure that the venue would have to cancel the event.  The Homeland Defense Unit acted on an alert they received from Arizona’s main counter terrorism information gathering hub, also known as a fusion center, that a benefit show to raise money for the struggle to save the San Francisco Peaks was scheduled to take place in Tempe on Friday night.

The benefit show organizers had contacted a DIY venue/space run out of a warehouse in west Tempe, a well regarded space that has hosted a number of shows over the last year, often receiving coverage in the Phoenix New Times and other media.  It is a labor of love for the person who runs it, who has a full time job in addition to hosting the occasional show at the venue.  The Protect the Peaks benefit show would have been the first political show to have been hosted at the space, it also put the venue on the radar of Arizona’s counter terrorism fusion center.

On Thursday, September 6th the venue operator received an unannounced visit at his workplace from an officer assigned to the city’s Homeland Defense Unit.  The officer, Detective Derek Pittam, threatened to have the venue shut down for fire code violations if the Protect the Peaks show wasn’t canceled immediately.  Detective Pittam informed the person that he was aware that the venue regularly held shows and made it clear that under no circumstances would this benefit show be held at the venue.  The venue’s future is now up in the air due to the threats of the Homeland Defense Unit, even though Detective Pittam admitted to the venue operator that he was aware that there had never been one call to police or reports of any illegal activity at that location.

Detective Derek Pittam of the Tempe Police Homeland Defense Unit

At least one officer working in the Homeland Defense Unit spent last week locating the DIY venue, identifying the operator of the venue, finding his cell phone number, and where he works his full time job so that he could be harassed by Detective Pittam. They had also decided that their anti-terror unit was going to manufacture a fire code violation as pretext to shut down the show, unless the Homeland Defense unit is regularly enforcing code violations in Tempe.

I’ve learned that during the workplace visit, Pittam specifically identified support for the “Save the Peaks” as a concern for the authorities.  Throughout his visit Detective Pittam made it clear, the issue is with the benefit show not the venue, however the venue would face the consequences for allowing a radical, anarchist, and indigenous themed event.

I’ve also learned that the venue operator was again contacted on his cell phone Friday night by a Tempe police commander who wanted the venue’s permission as the primary property manager to arrest individuals (who may not even know the show was canceled) for trespass on site.  The venue operator declined, and was then asked by the commander for the landlord’s phone number, which he also declined to provide to the Tempe Police.   A friend who drove by the venue Friday evening observed one marked police vehicle on the property where the venue was located, and another vehicle parked near by.

In the short time since word got around about the show being canceled, many people involved with various projects are shocked and outraged over this show of state repression.  I was able to chat with Alex Soto, a Tohono O’odham MC from the hip hop group Shining Soul, one of the acts that was scheduled to perform on Friday.  In addition to his music, Alex has organized against border militarization on his traditional land,  the Tohono O’odham nation, a land divided by the US/Mexico border wall and militarized by the border patrol.

He had this to say about the cancelling of the show:

“The show itself is an example of the solidarity between indigenous people, the Diné and O’odham, and anarchist people who are supportive, it also means that the authorities are afraid of us acting in collaboration, collectively.  They’re afraid of all of us coming together, it’s not new, it’s happened before at past demonstrations where we’re targeted, we’re marked for oppression, mainly just by being ourselves and being there.

It doesn’t matter to them whether it’s an action or protest, or in this case with our talents and our musical gifts to bring people together, the state doesn’t respect that.  This act of repression by the police further motivates myself and everyone else involved to push forward and to have another benefit or show, because we know this will be effective, and all we’re doing now is picking up mics and guitars.

In addition, I’d like to express that as a Tohono O’odham person, I have solidarity with other indigenous people in this area, in this case it’s Diné people and the other 12 tribes that hold the San Francisco Peaks as a sacred site.   This act by Tempe police, and all the entities involved is an attack on who I am and who we are as indigenous people, it verifies to me that we’re doing our role, in this case by standing in solidarity with the peaks, or when we oppose the loop 202 freeway or oppose the border and militarization because this is what solidarity and healthy communities look like.   When we stand together, fight alongside each other, or in this case sing together to defend who we are and what we hold sacred, then fuck the Tempe PD, fuck Phoenix PD, fuck DPS, and any entity that tries to stop this energy that’s building here in Arizona.”

When the authorities act to intimidate or threaten dissident voices and movements, it causes a chilling effect, in this case the Tempe police were willing to let a fire inspector poke around in the venue until any little violation could be found that would shut the show down.  We also know that they wanted to arrest anyone who came to the property expecting to see a show. This is a direct attack on the ability of people to freely gather, communicate, and organize without the potential of arrest or physical injury by police, in addition to the potential for serious financial problems for the venue operator.

More information will be coming this week.

Activists in Utah crafted this sign with bitumen found in pools on the ground at an abandoned tar sands mine. Photo courtesy Before It Starts, via Flickr.

By , Waging Nonviolence

Last week, a new front opened in the struggle against tar sands mining in the U.S. If you didn’t know that tar sands mining is in the works on this side of the border in the first place, you’re not alone. Most people don’t realize that tar sands extraction, which has caused tremendous pollution and environmental degradation in Canada, has crossed the border to U.S. soil, where it has taken root in Utah.

Activists on both sides of the border have been working fervently to halt the spread of tar sands in Canada and the piping of tar sands oil from Alberta to Texas. Beginning with Tar Sands Action’s mass arrests outside the White House in August 2011, followed by the Indigenous Environmental Network’s protests at the climate talks in Durban that December, activists have made Canadian tar sands mining and the Keystone XL pipeline to the Gulf of Mexico a high-profile issue this past year.

Now, direct action campaigns like the Tar Sands Blockade in Texas are continuing the effort to stop construction of the southern leg of the pipeline by disrupting business as usual for the oil industry. The threat of tar sands mining in the U.S., however, complicates the struggle. It forces geographically divergent groups to either divide their efforts or find ways to unite across vast distances. That’s why groups like Utah Tar Sands Resistance and Before It Starts are forming a strategy that can join, as well as compliment, the tornado of opposition that has formed against the tar sands industry.

Before It Starts — co-founded by Ashley Anderson, who began Peaceful Uprising with Tim DeChrisopher in 2009 — is focusing primarily on national outreach, while Utah Tar Sands Resistance is focusing on forging local and regional coalitions. In both groups, activists who have experience in nonviolent direct action are prepared to ramp up efforts when the time is right. Thus far, however, the struggle has mainly been waged in the courtroom.

This two-acre mine is just the beginning of U.S. Oil Sands’ plans for the region. Photo courtesy Before It Starts, via Flickr.

The environmental group Living Rivers initiated a legal challenge in 2010 to halt the progress of what’s set to become the first commercial tar sands mine in the U.S. — a forested area in Eastern Utah called PR Spring, which the state has leased a portion of to the Canadian mining company U.S. Oil Sands. Living Rivers has contested the company’s permit to dump wastewater at the mine, but last week, the judge — an employee of the Utah Department of Environmental Quality — sided with U.S. Oil Sands, granting it the right to pour toxic wastewater into the remote wilderness of eastern Utah.

The case hinged on whether or not PR Spring contains groundwater. In the hearing back in May, U.S. Oil Sands argued that the land holds no groundwater, which means that polluting the land wouldn’t contaminate water systems. But according to engineering geologist Elliott Lips, who spoke as a witness for Living Rivers, the land holds numerous seeps and springs, which the toxic tailings would pollute before either continuing to flow into rivers or percolating downward into the Mesa Verde aquifer. Ultimately, the judge was satisfied knowing that the company had conducted its own tests and would have reported water if it had found any.

Raphael Cordray, co-founder of the Utah Tar Sands Resistance, explains that tar sands mining would be incredibly destructive in a number of ways, such as polluting water, lowering river levels and destroying diverse ecosystems. “There’s so much wild land in our state, and that’s something I’m proud of,” she said. “That’s our legacy. And it’s a treasure for the whole world. Some of these places they’re trying to mine are so unique that if more people realized they existed, they’d certainly be considered national parks.”

To catalyze mass resistance, the group plans to lead trips to the site. “Helping people experience the majesty of this land firsthand will show people how much is at stake, and move them to take a stronger stand,” said Utah Tar Sands Resistance co-founder Lionel Trepanier.

Together with activists from Peaceful Uprising and Living Rivers, Utah Tar Sands Resistance visited the PR Spring site two weeks ago, and members returned home ready to ramp up efforts to halt the mining. As a member of both groups, I went along on the trip, because I wanted to see firsthand what the land looked like and whether the mining company’s claims about the absence of groundwater were accurate.

As it turns out, they couldn’t be more false. Water has etched its presence into this land, leaving creek beds that may run low at times but never go away. And clearly, the area holds plenty of water to support the large herds of deer and elk, as well as the aspen, Douglas firs and pinyon pines that make up the dense forest covering much of the land.

The surrounding forest is threatened by U.S. Oil Sands expansion. Photo courtesy Before It Starts, via Flickr.

This vibrant green scenery was juxtaposed by the two-acre strip mine just feet away from the forest’s edge. The difference between life and death could not have been more stark. Looking into the face of such destruction, I realized it’s no longer about saving the ecosystem, or saving our water — it’s about saving life on Earth. But that kind of effort isn’t possible without a broad movement behind it.

According to Lionel Trepanier, the groups working on this issue are looking to Texas’ Tar Sands Blockade as a model for building a broad coalition that includes “diverse groups of people like ranchers, hunters, the Indigenous community and climate justice activists.”

“I think we so often assume that someone won’t agree with us just because they seem different from us, when they could be our biggest ally,” said Cordray. “We’re committed to breaking down those barriers formed by fear of reaching out, and approaching people as human beings who need clean water and a healthy environment just as much as we do.”

While still in the first leg of its campaign to stop tar sands and oil shale mining, the group is reaching out with its teach-in and slideshow presentation to a wide range of outdoors retailers, religious communities and groups concerned about environmental quality in the city. When they handed out flyers and spoke with attendees at a recent Nature Conservancy film screening, they were surprised at how many people in the seemingly politically moderate, middle-class crowd were outraged at the prospect of tar sands mining coming to Utah.

An elk herd grazes along the ridgeline near the U.S. Oil Sands mine. Photo courtesy Before It Starts, via Flickr.

“People are genuinely shocked this is happening,” said Trepanier. “They just want some direction, some guidance.”

After the Utah Tar Sands Resistance secures a vehicle to use for the trips, they’ll invite people at the teach-ins to attend, and will bring as many as possible to the site. They feel that being in nature together will break down barriers, helping them to see each other not as the labels society assigns them, but as human beings who are mutually dependent on the ecosystem, and on each other.

To raise awareness and empower people to join a coalition that ultimately aims to halt the destruction of tar sands and equally-destructive oil shale mining, Utah Tar Sands Resistance and Peaceful Uprising have been working together on creative methods of outreach. In April, they staged a flash mob dubbed Citizens’ Public Hearing in the office of the state agency leasing out public land for tar sands mining. Dozens of people flooded the office, where a woman playing an elementary school student announced that she had called a public hearing to expose the agency’s misguided decision to let state lands be destroyed. They also performed a similar street play, called Bringing Science Lessons to the Governor, outside the governor’s mansion when he held a luncheon to talk energy policy with four other Western governors.

Members are now building a “tar sands monster,” a Frankenstein-inspired creature who never wanted to be pulled from the earth to pollute the waters, which they believe will make an attention-getting mascot for their efforts. The activists also plan to use online videos of their theatrical endeavors as an outreach tool to get activists across the country thinking about joining them in their struggle when the time is right.

Uniting a diverse range of people such as activists, farmers, landowners and outdoor enthusiasts, many of whom may have not previously thought of themselves as activists, will be important, as this is only the beginning of proposed tar sands operations in the U.S. The state agency (School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration, or SITLA) that leased the PR Spring site to U.S. Oil Sands holds pockets of land scattered around the state, which it may lease for tar sands and oil shale mining.

The Bureau of Land Management is also considering leasing nearly 2.5 million acres of public land throughout Utah, Wyoming and Colorado for tar sands and oil shale mining. Much of this would overlap with indigenous land or is in close proximity to national parks and other protected areas.

In the meantime, Living Rivers will likely appeal the decision to let U.S. Oil Sands dump wastewater into the land. Its success, however, will be determined by the extent to which groups like Utah Tar Sands Resistance can educate and empower the general public. Such a base of support, like the one that has formed in Texas, will not only pose a challenge to fossil fuel interests, but also help to usher in a new era of environmental justice.