Conservation and Tribal Citizen Groups Sue Trump Administration for Gutting BLM Waste Prevention Rule
02 October 2018
Politics
A natural gas drill rig near homes and the Colorado Rocky Mountains. milehightraveler / iStock / Getty Images Plus
A coalition of 17 conservation and tribal citizen groups filed a lawsuit Friday challenging the Trump administration's decision to gut the Bureau of Land Management's Waste Prevention Rule, stating that the rule violates a number of existing federal policies. The states of New Mexico and California have already filed a lawsuit challenging BLM's action.
<p>"We are going to court on behalf of American taxpayers, public health and the planet," said Robin Cooley, an <a href="https://earthjustice.org/" target="_blank">Earthjustice</a> attorney representing the groups. "The Trump administration is not above the law—Interior Secretary <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/ryan-zinke">Zinke</a> cannot yank away a common-sense rule that was the product of years of careful deliberation simply to appease his friends in the oil and gas industry."</p><p>The common sense rule updated nearly 40-year-old standards by implementing cost-effective measures to reduce wasteful venting, flaring and leaking of publicly owned natural gas from federal and tribal lands. However, the administration's revised shell of a rule fails to take reasonable precautions to prevent waste and protect the public welfare, illegally relying almost entirely on inadequate or nonexistent state regulations in place of federal standards.</p><p>BLM adopted the Waste Prevention Rule to address rampant waste of <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/public-lands">public resources</a>. BLM's own estimates show that between 2009 and 2015 oil and gas companies wasted more than 462 billion cubic feet of natural gas, enough gas to supply more than 6.2 million households—or every household in Colorado, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming—for one year.</p><p>As a result of BLM's actions eliminating those protections, oil and gas companies will now be allowed to vent, leak or flare $824 million worth of publicly owned natural gas into the air over the next decade. State, local and tribal taxpayers will lose millions of dollars of royalty payments.</p><p>"Secretary Zinke is rolling back a rule that required greater capture of natural gas and that the industry pay a royalty on gas that is vented to the atmosphere or otherwise wasted," said Rodger Steen, chair of the <a href="http://www.worc.org" target="_blank">Western Organization of Resource Councils</a>' oil and gas campaign team. "Requiring royalty payment on wasted gas is one important reason why the 2016 rule is needed, but there are others. As the increasing scarcity of basic resources like clean water and old forests reminds us, we need to use our finite resources wisely and not waste them."</p><p>Moreover, according to BLM's own estimates, rescinding the Waste Prevention Rule will also result in the emissions of 180,000 tons of <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/methane">methane</a>—a greenhouse gas 87 times more powerful than carbon dioxide—every year. BLM's action also endangers communities' health by exposing them to dangerous smog-forming and carcinogenic <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/air-pollution">air pollutants</a>.</p><p>"The illogical and impulsive way in which the Interior Department conducted this completely unnecessary revision process once again showcases this administration's complete disregard for the American public and existing environmental protections," said Bruce Pendery, litigation and energy policy specialist at <a href="https://wilderness.org" target="_blank">The Wilderness Society</a>. "And while the administration will continue to proceed as if these policies don't exist, the fact remains that what they are doing is illegal and we will fight it." <br></p><p>The conservation and tribal citizen groups filed their lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District California, which has already struck down BLM's two prior attempts to roll back the Waste Prevention Rule. Earthjustice represents Fort Berthold Protectors of Water and Earth Rights, Sierra Club, The Wilderness Society, and Western Organization of Resource Councils in the lawsuit.</p><p>"The federal government is not living up to its trust responsibility to tribal members of the Fort Berthold Reservation in North Dakota who are living every day with toxic air pollution, constant noise and flares lighting up the skies of our homeland," said Lisa DeVille, president of the <a href="https://www.facebook.com/fortbertholdprotectors/" target="_blank">Fort Berthold Protectors of Water and Earth Rights</a>.</p><p>"The Trump administration has been relentless in its efforts to appease corporate polluters and roll back critical clean air standards," said Kelly Martin, director of the <a href="https://www.sierraclub.org" target="_blank">Sierra Club</a>'s Beyond Dirty Fuels campaign. "Today we continue the fight in court to hold them accountable and protect our health, climate and communities from dangerous methane pollution."</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="3b986" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="SXGL1W1576661976"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="967106015786405889" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Court Orders Trump Administration to Enforce Obama-Era Methane Rule https://t.co/F2Tdnnfi7k @NRDC @UCSUSA… https://t.co/5eyGWBRdKs</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/967106015786405889">1519411016.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Oil and gas companies flare natural gas that cannot be processed or sold. Varodrig / Wikimedia Commons
As expected, the U.S. Department of the Interior on Tuesday released a final rule that reverses Obama-era restrictions on methane emissions from oil and gas operations.
President Obama's 2016 methane waste rule, which never went into effect, required fossil fuel companies on tribal and public lands to reduce emissions of methane, a potent greenhouse gas that's about 86 times more powerful than carbon dioxide. It called on drilling operators to capture leaking and vented methane and to update their leak-detection equipment.
<p>
Had it been finalized, as <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/18/climate/trump-methane-rollback.html" target="_blank">The New York Times</a> noted, it would have cut methane from the oil and gas sector by as much as 35 percent and helped the U.S. reach emissions-reduction targets under the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/paris-agreement">Paris agreement</a>.
</p><p>
But the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/trump" target="_blank">Trump</a> administration <a href="https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/interior-department-finalizes-new-waste-prevention-rule" target="_blank">said</a> Tuesday that many parts of the 2016 rule were "unnecessarily burdensome" on the private sector, and found that it overlapped with existing state, tribal and federal regulations.
</p><p>
The fossil fuel industry cautioned that the Obama rule could cost as much as $279 million to implement and would hinder production, according to The New York Times.
</p><p>
<span></span>The Obama administration
<a href="https://www.doi.gov/ocl/gas-reduction-rule" target="_blank">estimated</a> their "common-sense" rule would avoid nearly 170,000 tons of methane emissions annually and save the U.S. between $115 to $188 million per year by allowing oil and gas operators to sell recovered natural gas, in addition to the environmental benefits of reducing methane emissions.
</p><p>
However, the Obama administration's figures could be outdated, as the rate of methane leaks in the U.S. is likely much higher than previously thought. <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/oil-gas-methane-emissions-2580268075.html">A recent study</a> published in <a href="http://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2018/06/20/science.aar7204" target="_blank">Science</a> found that U.S. oil and natural gas operations release 60 percent more methane than currently estimated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Yearly methane emissions from the oil and gas industry total 13 million metric tons (approximately 14.3 million U.S. tons), mostly from leaks—an amount of natural gas that could heat 10 million homes.
</p><p>
The Obama rule was also widely supported by the public. A <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/senate-vote-methane-rule-2401565593.html" target="_blank">2017 poll</a> found 81 percent of Western voters surveyed said they supported leaving the methane waste rule in place.
</p><p>
Environmental organizations condemned the Trump administration's latest environmental rollback and criticized Interior Secretary
<a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/epa-methane-rules-2603997393.html">Ryan Zinke</a> for siding with oil and gas interests.
</p><p>
"Actions like these continue to show that this Interior Department and Secretary Zinke are not interested in managing and sustaining our public lands for generations to come but are instead focused on satisfying the wish-list of oil and gas developers,"
<a href="https://wilderness.org/" target="_blank">The Wilderness Society</a> president Jamie Williams said in a statement received by EcoWatch.
</p><p>
In a
<a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2018/09/trump-administration-continues-ongoing-assault-clean-air-and-public-health" target="_blank">press release</a>, the <a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/" target="_blank">Sierra Club</a> warned that methane is not only a potent climate pollutant, but the gas is also often accompanied by toxic air pollutants such as benzene that could threaten the health of residents who live nearby oil and gas operations.
</p><p>
Lena Moffitt, senior director of the Sierra Club's Our Wild America campaign, condemned the Trump administration's "ongoing assault on clean air, public lands, our health, and our climate."
</p><p>
"Millions of Americans and diverse stakeholders weighed in when this commonsense standard was developed, and the only people who want to see it weakened are fossil fuel industry executives who don't want to be held accountable for the threats their outdated and reckless practices pose to the public," Moffitt said in the press release. "We've already successfully defended these protections in court and in Congress, and the fight won't stop here."</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="5d7ba" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="SV6A691576662696"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="953387696466079750" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">New NASA Study Solves Climate Mystery, Confirms Methane Spike Tied to Oil and Gas https://t.co/dGVGRws5Ce @NASA… https://t.co/QSewyGaNNy</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/953387696466079750">1516140314.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
Zinke and Alexander: Pillaging National Parks for Fossil Fuels Is How We'll Protect Them
03 May 2018
Popular
Ryan Zinke and Lamar Alexander in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park on Aug. 25, 2017. Knoxville News Sentinel / YouTube
By Andrea Germanos
Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke joined with U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) to argue that the best way to fix the national parks is by pillaging public lands for fossil fuels.
Their CNN op-ed published Wednesday focuses on the $11.6 billion repair backlog the parks face—"our parks are being loved to death," they write. They say revenue to address the infrastructure repairs can come through their proposed legislation, the National Park Restoration Act (S.2509). Lamar is the sponsor of the bipartisan legislation, which he introduced at the behest of Zinke, and as the Interior Department noted in a press release, it "follows the blueprint laid out in Secretary Zinke and President Trump's budget proposal, the Public Lands Infrastructure Fund."
<p>
As Zinke and Lamar lay out:
</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">
These revenues will come from energy leases on all onshore and offshore sources of energy production on federal land: oil, gas, coal, renewables, and alternative energy. The fund would receive 50 percent of onshore and offshore revenues from energy production on federal lands over expected amounts that are not already allocated to other purposes.<br>
</p><p>
Environmental groups have long cautioned <a href="https://foe.org/news/2016-07-analysis-leased-fossil-fuels-on-public-lands-oceans/%20" target="_blank">against</a> fueling the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-change">climate</a> crisis with fossil fuel extraction on public lands—production Zinke is pushing to <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/public-lands-oil-drilling-2530822662.html" target="_self">make easier</a>.
</p><p>
Responding to the joint op-ed, some on social media gave the Zinke-Alexander plan a resounding thumbs-down and pointed to the need to get off fossil fuels:
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="24d0f" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="VB683V1576663076"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="991767188129251328" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">These two idiots plan to sell off the parks, pollute them from the inside while giving profits to their fossil fuel… https://t.co/BHerB0iGfN</div> — Jerry McNutt (@Jerry McNutt)<a href="https://twitter.com/Jerrymcnutt/statuses/991767188129251328">1525290698.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p><br></p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="2a7ad" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="I659521576663076"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="991739637721976832" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">READ my op-ed with @SecretaryZinke on our proposal to help rebuild our national parks. Every American should be abl… https://t.co/QNi5ZumJCe</div> — Sen. Lamar Alexander (@Sen. Lamar Alexander)<a href="https://twitter.com/SenAlexander/statuses/991739637721976832">1525284129.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p><a href="http://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/373019-new-trump-directive-puts-fossil-fuel-industries-in-charge-of%20" target="_blank">According to </a>Randi Spivak, the public lands program director for the <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/" target="_blank">Center for Biological Diversity</a>, "There appears to be no limit to the fossil fuel industry's appetite for extraction and the Trump administration's willingness to bend over backward for these polluting companies." She also noted an <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/public_lands/energy/dirty_energy_development/oil_and_gas/pdfs/DNAS-2017-2018-SHORT.pdf" target="_blank">analysis</a> (pdf) from her group that "shows there's been no meaningful environmental review, disclosure of harms, or public engagement regarding nearly 200,000 acres of public lands in six Western states scheduled to be auctioned off during the first half of 2018."</p><p>As for the $18 billion the Zinke-pushed plan supposedly would generate, that's "a fantasy number," Aaron Weiss, media director for the Center for Western Priorities, <a href="https://thinkprogress.org/zinke-public-lands-infrastructure-explainer-16d7502102fe/" target="_blank">told</a> ThinkProgress. "The idea that you could spark a giant stampede of new production while oil prices are where they are today, it's just fantasy land."</p><p>Environmental groups including <a href="https://wilderness.org/press-release/far-better-infrastructure-plan" target="_blank">The Wilderness Society</a> and <a href="https://www.npca.org/" target="_blank">National Parks Conservation Association</a> (NPCA) say that the infrastructure <a href="https://www.democrats.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/senate-democrats-in-contrast-with-president-trump-unveil-major-infrastructure-investment-proposal_dem-plan-would-roll-back-tax-cuts-for-the-wealthy-to-fund-infrastructure-and-create-millions-of-jobs" target="_blank">proposal</a> put forth by Democrats is a far better option.</p><p>In the Democrat proposal, <a href="https://www.npca.org/articles/1777-fixing-america-s-infrastructure-doesn-t-have-to-mean-sacrificing-america-s%20" target="_blank">wrote</a> NPCA's Ani Kame'enui, "None of these construction and maintenance projects would be paid for at the expense of public lands and waters. Instead, this plan funds infrastructure work by rolling back some of the controversial corporate tax cuts passed in December 2017. We don't need to sacrifice public lands and environmental protections to improve America's infrastructure."</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="c229a" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="2BOQUX1576663076"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="940706629993095168" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Trump, Zinke to Auction Away 700,000 Acres of Western Public Lands for Fracking https://t.co/FE5d2IsXN6… https://t.co/FLLTKIOG5p</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/940706629993095168">1513116912.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p><em>Reposted with permission from our media associate <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/05/02/zinke-and-lamar-alexanders-big-plan-we-must-kill-planet-save-national-parks" target="_blank">Common Dreams</a>.</em></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Lands threatened by BLM's March 2018 sale include Hatch Point. Neal Clark / SUWA
The Interior Department on Tuesday is auctioning off 32 parcels of public lands in southeastern Utah for oil and gas development.
The Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) lease sale includes more than 51,000 acres of land near Bears Ears—the national monument significantly scaled back by the Trump administration last year—as well as the Hovenweep and Canyons of the Ancients monuments.
<p>
The Trump administration has aggressively pushed for
<a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/national-monuments-drilling-mining-2541783065.html">fossil fuels</a>. Even though Interior Secretary <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/ryan-zinke" target="_blank">Ryan Zinke</a> has previously insisted "this is not about energy," Interior Department documents made public by the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/02/climate/bears-ears-national-monument.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fclimate&action=click&contentCollection=climate&region=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront&referer=" target="_blank">New York Times</a> earlier this month showed that gaining access to the oil, gas and <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/uranium-mining-health-2538101514.html" target="_blank">uranium</a> deposits in Bears Ears and <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/coal" target="_blank">coal</a> reserves in <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/grand-staircase-escalante" target="_blank">Grand Staircase-Escalante</a> were key reasons behind the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/trump-utah-national-monuments-2514084239.html" target="_blank">drastic cuts</a> to the two Utah monuments.<span></span>
</p><p>
Conservation groups say the leases are <a href="https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2018/utah-national-monuments-03-19-2018.php" target="_blank">contrary</a> to federal laws and regulations, as oil and gas development will lead to the destruction of culturally and environmentally rich areas. Researchers <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/bears-ears-fossils-2538047979.html">recently discovered</a> what may be one of the world's richest caches of Triassic period fossils at an extensive site within Bears Ears' original boundaries.
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="3d787" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="1PHD291576683835"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="966709337342300161" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Rare Fossils Discovered on Lands Cut From Bears Ears National Monument https://t.co/bcZFaR5nEB #BearsEars @NWF… https://t.co/UGvpaWrdyB</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/966709337342300161">1519316441.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p>
"We won't sit idly by while President Trump and Interior Secretary Zinke auction off America's cultural and public lands heritage to the oil and gas industry," said Stephen Bloch, legal director with the
<a href="https://suwa.org/" target="_blank">Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance</a> (SUWA). "This lease sale flies in the face of historic preservation and environmental laws that Congress put in place to make sure that BLM thinks before it acts; not 'lease first, and think later.'"
</p><p>
"BLM's short-sighted decision threatens Utah's red rock wilderness as well as significant cultural and archaeological resources," added Landon Newell, staff attorney with SUWA. "BLM's 'lease everything, lease everywhere' approach to oil and gas development needlessly threatens iconic red rock landscapes and irreplaceable cultural history in the ill-conceived push for 'energy dominance.'"
</p><p>
<span></span>In addition to Bears Ears, Hovenweep and Canyons of the Ancients monuments, BLM also plans to offer leases in other culturally and ecologically significant public lands throughout southeastern Utah, as <a href="https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2018/utah-national-monuments-03-19-2018.php" target="_blank">conservation groups outlined</a>:
</p><ul class="ee-ul">
<li>Several tracts in a culturally rich part of southeastern Utah known as Alkali Ridge. BLM briefly considered leasing in this area in 2015, but acknowledged that it lacked sufficient information about the cultural resources in the area and backed away from the proposal. The agency is putting these cultural sites at risk without collecting and reviewing that information;</li></ul><ul class="ee-ul">
<li><span></span>Several tracts along segments of the Green River and San Juan River popular with families, recreational business and tourists for river running, as well as home to several endangered fish species; and</li></ul><ul class="ee-ul">
<li><span></span>Several tracts in proposed wilderness areas including in Goldbar Canyon and Labyrinth Canyon near Moab, Utah, and in Cross Canyon, immediately adjacent to Canyons of the Ancients National Monument.</li>
</ul><p>
Nada Culver, senior director of
<a href="https://wilderness.org/" target="_blank">The Wilderness Society</a>'s BLM Action Center pointed out, "Secretary Zinke and the BLM have acknowledged that some places should not be put at risk from oil and gas drilling, as we saw in his <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/zinke-national-monuments-2512981757.html">recent reprieves</a> for lands around Chaco Canyon and the town of Livingston, Montana.
</p><p>
"The extraordinary cultural resources and wilderness values of these Utah lands deserve the same protection," Culver noted.
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="b0de9" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="NQNABI1576683835"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="935309798299590656" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Zinke Proposes New National Monument in His Home State But Wants to Shrink Them Elsewhere https://t.co/LfQW41cPtT… https://t.co/NHNYLd9bC9</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/935309798299590656">1511830207.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p>
<a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-utah-energy/u-s-interior-department-offers-oil-leases-near-utahs-wilderness-monuments-idUSKBN1GW1AL" target="_blank">Reuters</a> reported that local officials are eager to extract resources from the areas in order to provide economic benefits in some of Utah's poorest areas.
</p><p>
"Oil and gas operations are an important contributor to a diversified county economy and the county supports leasing as a necessary step toward realizing economic benefits," county planner Nick Sanberg said in comments to the BLM.
</p><p>
However, as Reuters detailed, "recent lease sales have yielded relatively low bids, a reflection of soft demand for federal property as the oil and gas industry taps vast reserves on private lands."
</p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Flare from gas well. Ken Doerr / Flickr
A federal judge reinstated a widely supported methane waste rule that President Trump's administration has repeatedly tried to stop.
Judge William Orrick of the U.S. District Court for Northern California ruled Thursday that Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) decision to suspend core provisions of the 2016 Methane and Waste Prevention Rule was "untethered to evidence."
<p style="">
Orrick ruled that the plaintiffs—California, New Mexico <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/trump-methane-regulations-2456838827.html">and environmental groups</a>—have shown "irreparable injury caused by the waste of publicly owned <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/gas">natural gas</a>, increased <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/air-pollution">air pollution</a> and associated health impacts, and exacerbated <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change">climate</a> impacts."
</p><p style="">
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra celebrated the news in a tweet:
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="29e3b" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="W0IH2E1576662809"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="967062510976356352" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">#DonaldTrump threatened the health of our families & our environment with his attempt to suspend a rule that protec… https://t.co/R2gRvGZiap</div> — Xavier Becerra (@Xavier Becerra)<a href="https://twitter.com/AGBecerra/statuses/967062510976356352">1519400644.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p style="">
Judge Orrick, an Obama-appointee, also blasted the BLM's decision to postpone the methane waste rule in that it failed to point to any factual support underlying its concerns, and also rebuked Interior Sec. Ryan Zinke's refusal to consider public comments related to the rule.
</p><p style="">
The Obama-era regulation was finalized in November 2016 and went into effect in January 2017. The rule limits methane pollution from <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/fracking" target="_blank">oil and gas operations</a> on <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/public-lands" target="_blank">public lands</a>. Not only is methane is a potent <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/greenhouse-gases">greenhouse gas</a> that's 86 times more powerful than carbon dioxide, accidental leaks and intentional venting and flaring costs more than $330 million each year.
</p><p style="">
The <a href="https://wilderness.org/" target="_blank">Wilderness Society</a> noted that the Trump administration has now tried and failed its four attempts to stop implementation of the "commonsense" rule. The group <a href="https://wilderness.org/press-release/district-court-reverses-interiors-suspension-blm-methane-rule" target="_blank">listed</a> the three other times as follows:
</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">1. Jan. 16: Wyoming District Court denies industry trade groups and several states request for preliminary injunction, to prevent the rule from going into effect.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">2. May 10: <a href="https://wilderness.org/press-release/us-senate-votes-protect-public-lands-not-special-interests" target="_blank">The effort to kill the methane rule </a>via Congressional Review Act fails with bipartisan support, 51 to 49.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;"><span></span>3. Oct. 4: <a href="https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060062725" target="_blank">California court overturns</a> the Interior Department's decision to unilaterally suspend many of the most important protections of the methane waste rule without providing any opportunity for public comment.</p><p style="">
"The continued attempts to repeal the rule are baseless, and we should instead be focused on implementing the rule we've got as this decision makes clear," said Chase Huntley, the organization's energy and climate program director.
</p><p style="">
According to <a href="https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060074579" target="_blank">E&E News</a>, "Orrick issued a preliminary injunction requiring BLM to fully enforce the regulation. The agency just released a broader proposal for a permanent rollback of most of the rule's provisions, but that plan won't be finalized until April, at the earliest."
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="5d7ba" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="LJ17OI1576662809"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="953387696466079750" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">New NASA Study Solves Climate Mystery, Confirms Methane Spike Tied to Oil and Gas https://t.co/dGVGRws5Ce @NASA… https://t.co/QSewyGaNNy</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/953387696466079750">1516140314.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
Read More
Show Less
Groups Slam Zinke's 'Backroom Deals' to Build Road Through Alaskan Wildlife Refuge
16 October 2017
Animals
Brant at Izembek Lagoon. Kristine Sowl / USFWS
Ryan Zinke's Interior Department is working behind the scenes to build a controversial and long-contested road through the heart of Alaska's Izembek National Wildlife Refuge, documents show.
The refuge was established more than 30 years ago to conserve wetlands and habitats for migrating birds, brown bears and salmon and other wildlife. 300,000 of its 315,000 acres has been designated as Wilderness in 1980 under the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act.
<p>
The proposed 11-mile road would essentially bisect Izembek to connect the towns of King Cove, population 989, and Cold Bay. Proponents, including Alaska Gov. Bill Walker, say the road is needed for medical emergency evacuations, as King Cove's airport is inaccessible during inclement weather, forcing residents to use boats or helicopters.
</p><p>
<span></span>But refuge advocates fear the road would disrupt critical wildlife habitat and <a href="https://www.backcountryhunters.org/izembek_national_wildlife_refuge_the_crown_jewel_of_north_american_waterfowling" target="_blank">set a precedent</a> to open wildlife refuges, national monuments, wilderness areas and other public lands to economic development.
</p><p>The <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/" target="_blank">Center for Biological Diversity</a>, the <a href="http://refugeassociation.org/" target="_blank">National Wildlife Refuge Association</a>, and other environmental organizations have also <a href="http://refugeassociation.org/advocacy/refuge-issues/izembek/" target="_blank">warned</a> that the project is about "<a href="http://refugeassociation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/The-Red-Herring-Highway_March-2017.pdf" target="_blank">privatizing public lands for profit from a seafood venture</a>."
</p><p>
The Obama administration shelved the King Cove road project years ago after then-Interior Secretary Sally Jewell decided after a 2013 visit to the refuge that building a road would "cause irreversible damage not only to the Refuge itself, but to the wildlife that depend on it."
</p><p>
In June, however, Zinke's Interior department issued the state permission to survey a route for the road. Then in July, the House of Representatives voted along party lines to authorize a land swap between Alaska and the federal government to build the one-lane road. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R- Alaska), who has long fought for the road, introduced a Senate <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/101" target="_blank">version</a> of the bill that is still pending.
</p><p>
Now, a new report from the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/interior-looks-at-behind-the-scenes-land-swap-to-allow-road-through-wilderness-refuge/2017/10/15/c6458380-aeb7-11e7-9e58-e6288544af98_story.html?tid=ss_mail&utm_term=.2a4fd4c4004c" target="_blank">Washington Post</a> suggests that the Trump administration is making the issue a top priority and has taken steps to hide discussions from the public.
</p><p>
According to the Post's report:
</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">
Those documents, primarily internal agency emails, reveal how much discussion is intentionally taking place out of public view as federal, state, local and tribal officials work to approve a land exchange. Were the targeted terrain owned by the King Cove Corporation, that would clear the way for construction through the refuge to join up roads on either side.
</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">
<span></span>[...]
</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">
The documents from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service make clear that Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke has elevated the issue to one of the agency's top priorities, and his appointees have taken deliberate steps to conceal the plan from the public.<br>
</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">
At one point, a refuge official relayed his conversation with a department attorney about questions Zinke raised over public review of agency action related to Alaska's survey of a possible road through Izembek.
</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">
"He indicated the Secretary would like to see folks on the ground doing the survey in the next couple of days," the official emailed colleagues. "He did not seem to [sic] excited about the direction that it was going out for public comment."
</p><p>
The documents were obtained by <a href="http://www.defenders.org/" target="_blank">Defenders of Wildlife</a> under the Freedom of Information Act. <br>
</p><p style="">
"These records expose yet another of Secretary Zinke's secretive, backroom deals to sell off and sell out our public lands and wildlife," said Jamie Rappaport Clark, president and CEO of Defenders of Wildlife. "We will not stand by and watch while some of the most important wildlife habitat on the planet is sacrificed for surreptitious commercial interests. If this proposal, which reflects a terrible abuse of power, is successful in Izembek, then none of our public lands, waters and wildlife will be safe."
</p><p style="">
<a href="http://wilderness.org/" target="_blank">The Wilderness Society</a> also issued the following <a href="http://wilderness.org/press-release/feds-are-trying-destroy-izembek-wilderness-backroom-deal" target="_blank">statement</a> from Alaska Regional Director Nicole Whittington-Evans.<br>
</p><p>
“This is an appalling move by the Trump administration to bypass the public process and cut a sneaky, backroom deal that not only would harm Izembek Refuge, but will threaten all of our nation's refuges, public lands, and many of our bedrock environmental laws," Whittington-Evans said. "This proposed road is an economic-development project for the community of King Cove, and taxpayers should be outraged at this secretive attempt to gut a globally important wildlife refuge—which belongs to all Americans—by transferring public lands to private ownership."
</p><p>
“The Izembek land exchange and road proposal have been considered many times—most recently through an exhaustive, scientific study by the U.S. Interior Department, which determined that the road should not be built and that it would harm the very species the refuge was established to protect," Whittington-Evans added.
</p><p>
“The Army Corps of Engineers in 2015 issued a report emphasizing that several alternatives to a road would effectively meet the emergency needs of King Cove residents. If this were about medical evacuations, as road proponents claim, the government should be talking about other options that would result in faster and more reliable transportation, instead of conspiring to strip protections from the Izembek refuge."
</p>
Read More
Show Less
White Sands National Monument. Howard Ignatius / Flickr / CC BY-NC-ND 2.0
Rep. Rob Bishop is moving legislation that would radically cut down the scope of the Antiquities Act, effectively blocking new protections of national monument lands.
Bishop's bill—in an Orwellian flourish, titled the "National Monument Creation and Protection Act"—would bar the Antiquities Act from being used to protect landmarks, prehistoric structures and objects of "scientific interest," switching the law's scope to the vague term "object or objects of antiquity."
<p>Court rulings and more than a century of presidential practice have established that the Antiquities Act is broad and can protect large natural landscapes. Reducing its scope to the narrow yet vague and infinitely litigable terms Bishop proposes would fulfill a longstanding goal of the anti-public lands fringe and severely undermine the law.</p><p>Among other things, Bishop is infamous for remarking about Native American rock art at Nevada's Basin and Range National Monument, "<a href="http://www.hcn.org/issues/48.2/rep-rob-bishop-is-seeking-massive-change-and-destroying-a-conservative-legacy" target="_blank">Ah, bullcrap. That's not an antiquity</a>." It's not hard to see the potential damage done by reshaping a bedrock conservation law in this man's image. If thousand-year-old art—not to mention the Grand Canyon itself, whose onetime monument status led to a legal ruling that the Antiquities Act could be applied to large natural landscapes—isn't an "antiquity," then what would he deem worth saving?</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image"><img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xMTY3Nzc5Ni9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0MzY1ODMwNH0.S3EmFUlZxRrKa1T4WcBu6R8A9P6yoImor4pojmTeTFs/img.jpg?width=980" id="df0b3" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="9f5f7f5edcfd994ee4e69fbba2d4646e" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image"><small placeholder="add caption..." class="image-media media-caption">Based on past remarks, Rep. Rob Bishop might not consider the rock art at Basin and Range National Monument (Nevada) a worthy criterion for Antiquities Act protection.</small><small placeholder="add photo credit..." class="image-media media-photo-credit">Bob Wick / Bureau of Land Management </small></p><p>Bishop's bill would also outlaw monuments beyond a certain acreage, allow future presidents to slash existing monuments down to a fraction of their size, and completely end the practice of setting aside marine habitat under monument status.<br></p><p>"On the heels of [Interior] Secretary [Ryan] Zinke's <a href="http://wilderness.org/blog/list-out-trump-administration-wants-gut-protections-these-public-lands" target="_blank">secret report</a> to illegally roll back national monument protections across the country, [House Natural Resources Committee] Chairman Bishop has one-upped him by trying once again to gut the law that protected these treasures in the first place," said Dan Hartinger, deputy director for parks & public lands defense at <a href="http://wilderness.org/" target="_blank">The Wilderness Society</a>. "It seems as though they're in some perverse contest to see who can author the most radical proposal to sell out our public lands to development." </p><p><strong>Antiquities Act Has Been a Long-Running, Bipartisan Success </strong></p><p>Signed into law by Theodore Roosevelt in 1906, the Antiquities Act authorizes presidents to protect important archaeological, historic and scientific resources on <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/public-lands">public lands</a> under the designation "national monument." It has been used on a bipartisan basis by almost every president, a method <a href="https://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Public-Opinion-on-US-Energy-and-Environmental-Policy_slides.pdf" target="_blank">supported by some 90 percent of voters</a> that forms the backbone of our National Park System. </p><p>Despite its popularity and proven track record, in the spring of 2017, President Trump <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/trump-antiquities-act-bears-ears-2379688298.html">signed an executive order</a> launching a "review" of every large national monument established under the Antiquities Act since the beginning of 1996. It was a move transparently spurred by extreme members of Congress trying to shrink boundaries and reduce protections in their respective states. </p><p>In September, media outlets <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/shrink-at-least-4-national-monuments-and-modify-a-half-dozen-others-zinke-tells-trump/2017/09/17/a0df45cc-9b48-11e7-82e4-f1076f6d6152_story.html?utm_term=.06bbc240d8fe" target="_blank">reported</a> that Interior Sec. Ryan Zinke's recommendations based on that review featured changes to 10 national monument lands, including shrinking Utah's Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante, Nevada's Gold Butte and Oregon's Cascade-Siskiyou. </p><p>Bishop's law is the natural next step, a killing blow aimed at the very foundation of the American public lands tradition. The goal is to not only roll back what has been protected in the past, but to prevent any and all protections in the future. </p><p>We don't know precisely what path this bill will take, but should it come to a full House vote, we will call on Wilderness Society supporters to mobilize and let their members of Congress know Bishop's proposal is totally unacceptable.</p>
Read More
Show Less
Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is one of 15 threatened wild places profiled in "Too Wild To Drill." Florian Schulz
A new report released Tuesday by The Wilderness Society raises the alarm about wild lands threatened by extractive industries eager to exploit the resources on or underneath them, including oil, gas and coal.
Too Wild To Drill identifies 15 unique places found on public lands that are at high risk of drilling, mining and other development—and the damage and destruction that inevitably follow. These lands provide Americans with important benefits such as clean air and water, wildlife habitat, recreational opportunities and jobs and other socioeconomic benefits.
<p style="">"Some places are simply too wild to drill," said Jamie Williams, president of The Wilderness Society. "The federal government must resist pressure from energy companies and other special interests to open up our last remaining wild places for development."</p><p style="">Energy development damages landscapes, often permanently. Impacts resulting from infrastructure like well pads, oil rigs, roads, fences and pipelines include air and water pollution from haze, spills, chemicals and dust, as well as phenomena like industrial traffic, gas flares and other light pollution, and loud noise that can disrupt communities and <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wildlife">wildlife</a>.</p><p style="">The Wilderness Society issues a new version of <em>Too Wild To Drill </em>every few years to call attention to vulnerable places on public lands. The release of this edition falls in the midst of numerous reviews of public lands policies, ordered by <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/trump-watch/">President Donald Trump</a> and Interior Secretary, taking place behind closed doors with little or no public oversight or accountability.</p><p style="">In fact, earlier this week news broke of the Trump administration's secret efforts to roll back protections for several wild places featured in the report, including the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/bears-ears">Bears Ears</a> and Grand Staircase Escalante national monuments, presumably to make them available for energy development.</p><p style="">"The Interior Department is required by Congress to manage, on behalf of the American people, almost 450 million acres of public lands for many different purposes, not just energy extraction," Williams said. "Yet oil, gas and coal have long had an outsized influence—and footprint—on public lands. It is long past time that we take some of these lands off the table."</p><p style="">Energy companies already have more leases than they can apparently use. Of the <a href="https://wilderness.org/sites/default/files/TWS%20Energy%20Fact%20Sheet_September_5_2017.pdf" target="_blank">27 million acres currently under lease</a> to oil and gas companies—an area about the size of Tennessee—more than half are sitting idle. And the coal industry already has 20 years of reserves under lease on public lands. </p><p style="">While oil, gas and coal companies and their activities have an indisputably disproportionate influence on public lands, other imminent threats to treasured public lands identified by <em>Too Wild To Drill </em>include uranium and sulfide-ore copper mining and groundwater extraction.</p><p style="">This month also marks the end of the 180-day review period established by President Trump's "Energy Independence and Economic Growth" Executive Order. The directive requires federal agencies to review any regulations that could "potentially burden" fossil fuel development. The Trump administration is known for its close ties to the extractive industries.</p><p style="">"We must set aside our wildest, most pristine places for future generations to enjoy," Williams said. "Selling out our public lands for short-term profit should not be an option for these special places. Once they're gone, we can never get them back."<br></p>
Read More
Show Less
Trending
Tom Reichner | Shutterstock.com
Three days before oral arguments are scheduled in the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals on Bureau of Land Management safety measures to regulate fracking operations on public lands, the U.S. Department of Interior is moving ahead with its plan to rescind the 2015 rule.
The rule, which was the product of nearly five years of agency work, expert input, public comments and hearings, never went into effect after it was challenged immediately by oil and gas industry trade associations. After a district court judge set aside the rule in 2016, BLM and citizen groups appealed to the 10th Circuit in late 2016.
<p>The <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/trump-watch/">Trump administration</a>, however, reversed course in March 2017 and announced that it would propose repealing the rule. Today, the administration formalized that reversal with a <a href="https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2017-15696.pdf" target="_blank">proposal</a> to be published Tuesday for public notice and comment. </p><p>"This is another cynical move by the Trump administration that sacrifices our public lands and public safety as a favor to the oil and gas industry," said Michael Freeman, the attorney for Earthjustice who is representing environmental groups who support the safety rules in the legal action.</p><p>Despite a request by the administration to stay the appeal, the 10th Circuit scheduled oral argument for July 27.</p><p>"The timing of this proposal is obviously linked to this week's oral argument. It is part of the administration's effort to circumvent the law by asking to stay this appeal while leaving the lower court ruling in effect. We oppose that request, and we'll see the agency in court Thursday morning," Freeman said.</p><p>The rule calls for drillers to disclose what chemicals are used in fracking fluids and to perform tests on the integrity of the wells before drilling can begin. It was the first time the rules had been updated since the 1980s.</p><p>In its proposal to rescind the rule, the Interior Department said, "BLM believes that the 2015 final rule unnecessarily burdens industry with compliance costs and information requirements that are duplicative of regulatory programs of many states and some tribes."</p><p>BLM staff members in New Mexico have reported, however, that they do not perform onsite inspections of hydraulic fracturing operations because "the work is too dangerous" under existing rules.</p><p><a href="http://earthjustice.org/" target="_blank">Earthjustice</a> is representing <a href="http://www.sierraclub.org/">Sierra Club</a>, <a href="http://wilderness.org/" target="_blank">The Wilderness Society</a>, <a href="https://suwa.org/">Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance</a>, <a href="https://westernresourceadvocates.org/" target="_blank">Western Resource Advocates</a>, <a href="https://www.earthworksaction.org/" target="_blank">Earthworks</a> and <a href="https://conservationco.org/CoCoEF/about/" target="_blank">Conservation Colorado Education Fund</a>.</p>
Read More
Show Less
Colorado Lands Outdoor Retailer After Utah Actively Undermines Its Public Lands
07 July 2017
Business
By Scott Miller
Outdoor Retailer has a new home for its three annual trade shows: Colorado, a state that really gets the value of our wild lands.
The Outdoor Industry Association announced in February that it was pulling its trade shows out of Utah, where they'd been located for 20 years, because the state's elected officials were undermining the future of America's public lands. The hosts decided they would not reward Utah with thousands of visitors and an economic impact of up to $110 million a year after the state actively undermined Utah's public lands and recreation economy that the outdoor industry relies on.
<p>Major businesses that take part in the shows, including Patagonia and Black Diamond, did not want to continue to pour money into a state that did not see the value of protecting its stunning conservation and recreation areas. It's not surprising that Outdoor Retailer had become disillusioned with the efforts of Utah officials. Both state and national level politicians, including Gov. Gary Herbert, Sen. Orrin Hatch and Rep. Rob Bishop have aggressively attacked public lands in the state—especially the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/bears-ears">Bears Ears National Monument</a> in southeast Utah.</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed"></p><div id="67141" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="AN69Z41499454331"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="819273494575935488" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">The Outdoor Industry Loves Utah ... But Does Utah Love the Outdoor Industry?
https://t.co/JLpDXkleeW</div> — Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@Robert F. Kennedy Jr)<a href="https://twitter.com/RobertKennedyJr/statuses/819273494575935488">1484164997.0</a></blockquote></div><p></p>
<p>Utah's leadership has pressed <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/trump-watch/">President Trump</a> to reverse the national monument designation, favoring opening lands for industrialization like mining instead. They have also been leading the charge for the reversal of the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in Utah and others across the country. </p><p>In response, the Trump administration has included Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monuments in its review of <a href="https://medium.com/our-wild/monumental-mistake-trump-wants-to-undo-our-national-monuments-27-at-risk-29e2445eb117" target="_blank">27 national monuments</a> designated by the Obama, Bush and Clinton administrations. The monument that may be facing the biggest threat is Utah's Bears Ears. In an unprecedented move, <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/ryan-zinke">Interior Sec. Ryan Zinke</a> already has announced he intends to <a href="https://wilderness.org/interior-secretary-recommends-revoking-parts-bears-ears-national-monument-fight%C2%A0back" target="_blank">recommend revoking protections</a> for large portions of the monument. </p><p>After setting out to find a new location in a state that supports protecting public lands, Outdoor Retailer didn't have to look far. In clear contrast to Utah, leaders in neighboring Colorado value and stand up for their public lands. </p><p>The Colorado delegation, including Sens. Michael Bennet and Cory Gardner, has defended Canyons of the Ancients National Monument, which is now under review by Trump. So has Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper. Colorado also has <a href="https://www.bennet.senate.gov/?p=release&id=3931" target="_blank">advocated for keeping</a> the 1.35 million-acre Bears Ears intact, too, recognizing that the national public lands there contain fragile and irreplaceable resources that are important to all Americans. </p><p>Utah could learn a thing or two from Colorado. </p><p>For one, Colorado recognizes the economic value of conservation. The state has a massive outdoor recreation economy, with <a href="https://outdoorindustry.org/resource/colorado-outdoor-recreation-economy-report/" target="_blank">$28 billion in consumer spending</a> in the industry annually. Outdoor Retailer will bring the money and attention it draws to Colorado instead, starting with its winter show in January 2018. </p><p>But more than that, leadership here recognizes the intrinsic value of public lands for the identity of the state. </p><p>"If you look at what this means, that's a huge benefit, but that's not what deserves to be mentioned," <a href="http://www.denverpost.com/2017/07/06/outdoor-retailer-shows-denver-2018/" target="_blank">said Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper</a> when the deal was announced Thursday. "State parks, wildlife areas. All this stuff comes as an accumulative attraction. It is part of the defining characteristic of Colorado." </p><p>"What we're saying today is that we're in this for the long term. We're going to continue to try and talk about the importance of outdoor recreation in Colorado. Henry David Thoreau once said all good things are wild and free. We believe that in Colorado," Hickenlooper said.</p><p><a href="https://outdoorindustry.org/article/outdoor-retailer-largest-u-s-tradeshow-for-outdoor-community-chooses-denver-for-all-shows-beginning-january-2018/" target="_blank">Outdoor Industry Association Executive Director Amy Roberts</a> was spot on when she said that "Colorado's elected officials have shown significant leadership in promoting policies that ensure the outdoor recreation economy continues to thrive." </p><p>Colorado is home to more than 23 million acres of public lands. These lands are highly valued, especially by the 71 percent of Coloradans who participate in outdoor recreation each year, according to the Outdoor Industry Association. </p><p>These public lands, which include four national parks, eight national monuments and millions of acres of high quality Forest Service and BLM lands, also bring in millions of tourists every year. People from around the world spend money throughout Colorado in order to travel to, stay in and experience our incredible scenery. Whether that includes a snow-capped 14er, a meandering mountain trout stream, or an ancient cliff dwelling in our high desert lands, the quality of these outstanding outdoor experiences is not accidental. Preserving our best wild places takes forethought and determination--as well as resistance to the urge to sell our lands out to a quick buck. </p><p>This major move by businesses shows that despite the Trump administration's threat to our wild, if we stand together, we can send a strong message like the one these outdoor retailers have sent to politicians in Utah. </p><p>It's reassuring to see the outdoor industry stand its ground by moving its multi-million dollar shows to Colorado. You, too, can take a stand to protect our public lands. Until July 10, you can <a href="https://medium.com/our-wild/monumental-mistake-trump-wants-to-undo-our-national-monuments-27-at-risk-29e2445eb117" target="_blank">speak out in support of the national monuments</a> that are under attack.</p>
Read More
Show Less
Pipeline Route Lands This Virginia Town on List of State's 'Most Endangered' Historic Places
18 May 2017
Popular
Appalachian Mountain Advocate
Opponents of the Mountain Valley Pipeline were dealt a blow after the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP) denied a hearing request to appeal the state's water quality certification for the controversial project.
The Charleston Gazette-Mail reports that WVDEP secretary Austin Caperton signed a letter addressed to the environmental law firm Appalachian Mountain Advocates denying its request for the hearing. The brief letter did not state a reason for denial.
<p>
Appalachian Mountain Advocates senior attorney Derek Teaney said individuals and groups he represents will likely appeal Caperton's decision in the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
</p><p>
The proposed Mountain Valley Pipeline will carry
<a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/fracking/">fracked</a> gas 300 miles from northwest West Virginia to southern Virginia, crossing streams and wetlands in the 195-mile project area in West Virginia.</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed"></p><div id="f1b59" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="MAOEWM1495137925"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="810268358511906816" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">This Pipeline Would Cut Through America's Most Celebrated Hiking Trail https://t.co/glEu9fkfWq @BoldNebraska @NoTarSands</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/810268358511906816">1482018005.0</a></blockquote></div><p></p>
<p>
In March, the WVDEP <a href="http://www.dep.wv.gov/news/Pages/WVDEP-Issues-401-Permit-For-Mountain-Valley-Pipeline-Project.aspx" target="_blank">announced</a> it issued the State 401 Water Quality Certification for the project, which stipulates that pipeline activity will not violate the state's water quality standards. The department also praised the project as it would help "meet the growing need for power generation in the Mid-Atlantic and Southeast regions."
</p><p>
However, Appalachian Mountain Advocates contends that the WVDEP acted prematurely in issuing the permit. As the
<a href="http://www.roanoke.com/business/news/law-firm-disputes-w-va-water-quality-permit-for-pipeline/article_53b8f7c6-6680-5e7a-8e4a-4e2af0a1a98d.html" target="_blank">Roanoke Times</a> detailed, the Lewisburg, West Virginia-based nonprofit has a slew of concerns over the department's approval of the natural gas pipeline, including:</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">• The department had not established current water quality baseline data for streams that the pipeline would cross.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;"><span></span>• The department had failed to adequately consider impacts to water quality from land disturbance and subsequent erosion and sediment unrelated to stream crossings.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;"><span></span>• Because the pipeline's route is not yet final and property surveys are incomplete, the "locations and effects of discharges associated with the construction and operation of the Mountain Valley Pipeline [are] ill-defined and impossible to fully evaluate."</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;"><span></span>• The department had not adequately evaluated the effects on public drinking water supplies of the pipeline's construction and operation.</p><p>
"It's really disappointing that the secretary of the DEP so cursorily rejected our request for a hearing," Teaney said earlier this week. "But it's not surprising given how little attention the agency gave the application in the first instance, accepting such limited information from the applicant."
</p><p>
The project has sparked further outcry in Virginia. For instance,
<a href="https://preservationvirginia.org/" target="_blank">Preservation Virginia</a> has put the village of Newport in Giles County on its 2017 list of the state's <a href="https://preservationvirginia.org/press-room/release/preservation-virginia-announces-2017-most-endangered-historic-places-listin" target="_blank">most endangered historic places</a>:<span></span>
</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">
<span></span>"One specific example is in Giles County, where two existing historic districts are threatened by the [Mountain Valley Pipeline] ... The covered bridges and historic structures that lend the district integrity and the continued agricultural pattern of land use in this area would be permanently and irrevocably impacted by the pipeline." <span></span>
</p><p>
<span></span>Conservation groups also warn that the line would cut through one of the most celebrated <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/10-great-american-hikes-that-should-be-on-your-bucket-list-1882011635.html" target="_blank">hiking trails in America</a>—the Appalachian Trail.
</p><p>
Caroline Mosley, of
<a href="http://wilderness.org/" target="_blank">The Wilderness Society</a>, wrote in an online <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/mountain-valley-pipeline-appalachian-trail-2149221350.html" target="_blank">post</a> that the pipeline could threaten <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wildlife" target="_blank">wildlife</a> habitat, recreational lands and the health of local Appalachia communities—all "while setting a terrible precedent of building energy infrastructure through our national forests."
</p><p>
<span></span>The proposed pipeline is a joint $3.5 billion project of EQT Midstream Partners LP, NextEra US Gas Assets LLC, WGL Midstream and Vega Midstream MVP LLC.
</p><p>
The interstate project will be regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The agency will issue a final environmental impact statement for the pipeline on June 23.
</p>
Read More
Show Less