Posted 1 year, 5 months ago in 
Loading ...
Real animals don’t thrive on gas pads
Maybe the deer and elk in Mesa County Commissioner Craig Meis’ mind like to hang out at natural-gas pads — like the fanciful creatures in “Alice in Wonderland” — but those in the wild, the real animals that live in the real world, do not.
The fact is that when gas pads (vast tracks of lifeless, sometimes contaminated, mini dustbowls) encroach upon and proliferate across traditional fawning/calving and foraging grounds, the deer and elk have no choice but to be in close proximity.
Once that happens, the herds have two choices: Learn to cope with the disruption and loss of habitat, or don’t go anywhere near the pads and wander off either adjusting to whatever habitat is left or simply dying off from attrition and aborted calves. Guess which option is selected most easily and therefore often? Number 2.
And as for reclamation, when it is done at all, it is typically years after production wanes and it is often unsuccessful — yielding invasive non-nutritive species. Ask the COGCC how many times they’ve been left holding the bag after big profits dry up and operators move on in the night? By the time successful reclamation finally takes place, assuming that it will, will there even be any herds left to consider?
Speaking of “Wonderland,” doesn’t Mr. Meis own Cordilleran Compliance Services, Inc.? And don’t they do a lot of the testing of polluted waterways for the oil and gas industry? It seems like Mr. Meis stands to make a lot of money from pollution, if pollution is allowed to continue. And not only is that a conflict of interest, but the kind of comments he’s making about wildlife draws into question not only his own credibility, but that of his employees and the industry folk who hire him to report findings to the COGCC.
Wildlife liking natural gas well pads? That’s rather like an unbirthday isn’t it? Oh, it’s a topsy-turvy world, Hatter … yes, yes it certainly is.
LISA BRACKEN
Silt
Atheist group should read entire First Amendment
I am amazed by the lack of constitutional acumen by the atheists. If they would read the entire first portion of the First Amendment to the Constitution, they would see that their position is in fact unconstitutional. It does not take a great legal mind to see this just common sense.
JIM VIDMAR
Grand Junction
Library provide stop-notch service
Thanks to Mesa County Library I am able to have my books to read.
I used to be able to go the library and go up and down and pick out my material for reading. Since I’ve gotten older and walk with a walker, I’m unable to do so.
The library has a van and every other Friday deliver me my wonderful books. I talk to Linda or Neil the day before and suggest what I would like.
It’s a wonderful plan and people should know the extra things they do. Again, a special thanks to the Mesa County Public Library and Linda and Neil (home-bound services 683-2420) for my armchair travels.
BARBARA PAGE
Grand Junction
Downtown will miss the Complete Traveler
The closing of the Complete Traveler is sad news for the downtown retail community and the many loyal customers Steve Jennings has provided exemplary service to for over 25 years.
Steve is closing his business to pursue other opportunities. He has been a very supportive business colleague, an advocate for the downtown shopping area and a strong supporter of a myriad of community events. His presence will, indeed, be missed by many, including myself.
I wish him the very best.
KAREN HILDEBRANDT
Grand Junction
24 Responses to “May 30 printed letters”
Posted June 3rd, 2008 at 9:09 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
I don’t know where Lisa Bracken (silt) got her information about the deer and elk having problems coexisting with the oilfield drilling and construction, but it is totally bogus info. I am out there every week and see these animals plus many other species, and they seem to me to be doing very well among all the ruckus.
For the past couple of years I have worked in the Battlement and Parachute Creek area, mainly for Williams and EnCana and I have never seen any company put as much effort into wildlife and reclamation as what these people have done, and are still doing.
I was born, and have lived in western Colorado nearly all my life and I have seen more wildlife in the past two and a half years working in the oilfield than I had seen in the previous 50 or so years, and nearly all of it in areas with high density drilling. I have hunted deer and elk most of my life and have the utmost respect for these , and all animals and very thrilled that they have a sanctuary to spend the winters where , in most areas, no guns or hunting is allowed where the oil companies have control over these issues.
This area, as far as I am concerned is the premier winter wildlife watching area anywhere, but unfortunately most of it is not open to the public viewing, so People like Lisa have no idea what it is truly like out here and feel she would have a completely different outlook on the oil companies and wildlife concerns unless her interests are leading somewhere else.
It would be hard to guess how many millions of dollars the oil companies are spending on reclamation and storm water control, but I am sure it is a bundle, and what I have witnessed is within the time limit given them as per their contracts and agreements, to the best of my knowledge.
I have seen the deer and elk grazing in these reclaimed areas all winter long without having to waste very valuable energy traveling many miles everyday in search of food. As an example, a herd of about 30 elk spent the whole winter on the same terraced slopes that had been reclaimed, grazing, laying around chewing their cuds with not a concern about he hundreds of vehicles passing by not more than a hundred yards away. I know that in the past, during the late 70’s and 80’s gas drilling boom, there were many infractions pertaining to reclamation and hazardous materials and I am sure there will be errors made during this era but there is a lot of dedicated people in this field that care as much as anyone about what happens to our environment and want to keep it a great place to live and enjoy.
Leonard Lewis
22 Columbine Lane
Parachute. Co 81635
Posted June 3rd, 2008 at 10:16 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Leonard, thank you for your comments, but we clearly have a difference of opinion.
Since you inquired, I’ll tell you where I get my infomation. I live with these animals and I have for thirty years. I hunt with a camera, but I’ve also gutted a deer and eaten the sausage. I helped track a wounded buck and prayed for its soul when a dufus hunter missed his shot this past fall. I’ve stood feet from two huge bulls and watched them graze.
I’ve also seen elk tear into fences and run over one another in an effort to escape the chaos of pipeline construction. And this winter I saw cows standing in the cedars shut out from their calving and foraging grounds while EnCana dozed dirt around on the site.
You know what I didn’t see? I didn’t see the elk hanging out on any pads and mellowing out around any ruckus. And I didn’t see any calves as the splinter herd made its way out of the valley for the last time this spring.
I wouldn’t even bother to refute your opinion that my infomration is “bogus” except that something in your message made me think that maybe, just maybe there is something in you that does or could really connect with these animals.
If you really do love them and all animals, then for gosh sakes, Leonard keep your eyes open to realities. I lived in roughneck country for nearly half my life, and I’ve seen some tough guys reassess things once they cleared the lens through which they viewed life from the pad. They came out even tougher than before but with a different and a broader perspective. I don’t know what changed things for them, and maybe you will vehemently defend the position you are entitled and I would defend your right to.
But if you really truly care about Colorado’s wildlife, please pay attention to the big picture, because clearly, you aren’t seeing all there is to see.
Posted June 3rd, 2008 at 10:42 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
I spend a lot of time on public lands, hiking and fishing. My problem is that I see very few wild animals these days but I see an enormous number of cattle grazing on prime deer and elk land. I am sick to death of having to watch where I walk even on remote sites for fear of stepping in cow pies on our public lands. The ranchers in the area have vigorously supported local politicians so that the “multiple use” concept for public lands is engrained in Washington. “Multiple use” to many ranchers means an unbridled right to graze their cattle and despoil public lands which belong just as much to the New York City factory worker as they do the local rancher. Cattle eat the same grass which otherwise supports deer and elk. Oil companies tear up the grazing lands in even worse ways. Mr Lewis because of his oil company employment has a clear conflict of interest on this subject. I admire his honesty in giving us a full disclosure. Other writers on this subject have not been so open.
Posted June 4th, 2008 at 7:56 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
class, are you suggesting that we dissallow grazing on public lands for ranchers?…i’m quite curious
Posted June 4th, 2008 at 8:01 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
I couldn’t agree more with the statements above - in fact, in all of your comments, you make a lot of sense.
It takes someone living with wildlife to really uderstand the seasonal habits as well as to be able to discern trends over what can amount to decades.
Our deer are smaller and fewer, and our small oasis of mostly wild habitat lies amid a sea of natural gas destruction. 40 wells on slate for the next year within a mile of our home. When the lands around us go to the wayside -making room for ever-increasing mega-pads, the value of the our land as wild habitat is also lost - despite it’s 60 acre size. That’s becuase most wildlife, elk and other big game like bear and lion rely on contiguous habitat for their survival. Their critical range goes well beyond the mere 60 acres of our property.
It’s pretty clear to me that a lot of folks in positions to make policy and a lot of folks in the west period, simply do not value our wildlife enough to even properly study it let alone protect it. When is the last time the BLM did an Environmental Impact Statement of the region hardest hit by gas development?
Posted June 4th, 2008 at 8:01 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
oh, and lisa, i’m also a “feild worker” that travels to most rigs, parachute creek, battlement mesa, picance creek (sp), grand mesa, even jonah feild up in wyoming…i’m not disputing your statement that drilling has a bad effect on wildlife….what i will tell you is that the wildlife does in fact adapt….just like yourself, i see this with my own eyes…i truly have seen elk on abandoned pads months after reclamation has occured…i’ve personally witnessed the reclamation efforts of exploration companies like encana and williams….while they can always do better, they’re a far cry from the villains people are making them out to be.
Posted June 4th, 2008 at 8:03 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
I guess I should clarify - I agree with classof52’s comments….
Posted June 4th, 2008 at 8:09 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Hitekredneck: “class, are you suggesting that we dissallow grazing on public lands for ranchers?…i’m quite curious”
That is exactly what I am suggesting (and have been for many years). Why do we permit a certain select group to make their living by exploiting public facilities which all of us own in common? Why should they be permitted to escape the capital investment that every other business owner must make (land, machines, buildings, tools etc.) in order to run a business? We do not permit farmers to plant orchards or corn fields on public lands.
Posted June 4th, 2008 at 8:10 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
a question, lisa…i know you’ve said you live with the wildlife and have witnessed the problems the wildlife are having, and i don’t dispute that….but where have you witnessed these occurences?…is it only on your property, or do you travel the gas fields?
Posted June 4th, 2008 at 8:13 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
class, i see where you’re coming from, but the ranchers have been allowed to graze those lands forever, it seems…it takes much land to run enough cattle to feed this country, and to dissallow it would negatively impact our food supply as well as the economy…beef is already at an average of around $4 a pound from the stores….what alternative would you suggest?
Posted June 4th, 2008 at 8:14 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Addendum: The answer is clear for those who have followed the history of this debacle. The ranchers through political contributions have a number of key congressmen in their pocket. This bribery results in great presure from the legislators on our public agencies and has resulted in the so called “multiple use” concept, which to my mind is just a license for economic exploitation of a public resource by the few. Ranches should be for ranching. Public lands should be for the public-not a money making scheme for the few.
Posted June 4th, 2008 at 8:17 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
you still haven’t answered the question, class….is it worth it to you to bankrupt the same people that feed the country just to avoid a few cow pies?…what is your alternative?….rather than making the general public pay for the prohibitively huge raise in beef prices, that is
Posted June 4th, 2008 at 8:19 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Hiteredneck: “class, i see where you’re coming from, but the ranchers have been allowed to graze those lands forever, it seems…it takes much land to run enough cattle to feed this country, and to dissallow it would negatively impact our food supply as well as the economy…beef is already at an average of around $4 a pound from the stores….what alternative would you suggest?”
Plenty of ranchers in other parts of the country (Kansas and Nebraska are two good examples) run economically viable cattle operations without resorting to public land grazing. Ranchers should pay their own way like every other business (and I am aware of their arguments about how much they pay for the rights to public grazing-but I notice they are lined up to continue that practice-so it must be a economically very attractive for them to use our land to raise their cattle).
Posted June 4th, 2008 at 8:25 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
you still haven’t answered the question, class….is it worth it to you to bankrupt the same people that feed the country just to avoid a few cow pies?…what is your alternative?….rather than making the general public pay for the prohibitively huge raise in beef prices, that is
Our messages are crossing one another (my addendum was posted before I read your message)
In this message you are making some assumptions that I do not think are necessarily true: among them that without grazing on public lands the price of beef would go way up and that ranchers would be bankrupted. My uncle does very well in this business without resorting to public land use (as do thousands of other ranchers across the country). Indeed he complains about the unfair competition from people who connive to utilize his and our public lands for their own gain.
Posted June 4th, 2008 at 8:30 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
class, after a bit of research, i’ld like to put forth something i just found from 2006:
http://www.free-press.biz/6-2006/Public-Grazing.html
The Public Grazing Conundrum
By Daryl Hunter
The face of the west is changing, what was once a frontier populated with hard scrabble farmers, loggers, miners, cowboys and ranchers has been infiltrated and is getting gentrified by interlopers from the cities that have a new plan for their adopted home, part of this plan is to end the grazing of our public multipurpose lands.
Cattle grazing on our public lands has not always been an issue. Until recently cattle grazing was a natural part of the culture of the West. Cowboys, Indians, tumbleweeds and cows were the first thing to come to mind when thinking of the west. For the last couple of decades this perception has been muddied, a battle has been raging between cattle ranchers and environmentalists. The battle is rife with mistrust and misunderstanding by all.
Jon MarvelÕs Western Watersheds Project (WWP) is the driving force to form the National Public Lands Grazing Campaign (NPLGC). The NPLGC is pushing Congress to authorize the voluntary buy-out and permanent retirement of federal grazing permits. The WWP and the NPLGC believe a payment of $175 per animal unit month (AUM); will reduce the contentious and adversarial conflicts concerning grazing interests and environmentalists on federal land.
The buy-outs are voluntary, but the buy-out amount being almost triple the average value per AUM of federal grazing permits in today’s market provides a powerful bribe for ranchers to succumb to the temptation. A rancher with 300 cows that graze on public lands for five months of the year, will net the rancher a $262,500 settlement. Some say that this expenditure is sound because WWPÕs asserts $500 million annually is spent to administer public grazing will have a payback period of about six years after retirement of all grazing permits. The land area involved in 11 western states is about 270 million acres.
The General Accounting Office of the US government report concludes that federal agencies spent at least $144.3 million in direct and indirect expenditures to support grazing activities on federal lands in fiscal year 2004. A far cry from the WWP and NPLGCÕs asserted figure. According the GAO grazing fees generated about $21 million in fiscal year 2004 less than one-sixth of the expenditures to manage grazing.
The WWP and NPLGC theorize permanent elimination of federal administrative costs of public grazing land will produce savings after the initial six-year payback. While the financial benefits of such a program are easily asserted, the environmental value of the plan seems to them even greater. By ending the negative impacts of livestock grazing will result in a rapid recovery of degraded riparian areas and all wildlife species dependent on them.
The WWP and NPLGC plan will change the face of public lands in the West. It will also greatly change the face of the private lands as well. Where there is great change there is also great opportunities for the law of unforeseen consequences
One unforeseen opportunity/ consequences that will result is millions of acres of previously useful hay production land of our western valleys that produced hay for the cattle that were grazed in the nearby public lands will have to find another use. These farms and ranches freshly freed from the bovine production industry will naturally evolve into something else, it isnÕt to hard to guess that the highest and most profitable use of land is to subdivide it for profit creating millions of buying possibilities for AmericaÕs new insatiable appetite for rural living, and technologyÕs facilitation for them to be able to do so. Public land ranching maintains open space. 107 million acres of private ranchland are tied into public land grazing. Without access to public land forage, these ranches would be forced to sell out.
According to Rangelands Journal, 11,300 acres of farm and ranchland are lost to development each day. The greatest threat to biodiversity of plants and wildlife is fragmentation of habitat and public land ranching protects millions of acres of open habitat for rangeland species.
The influx of millions of gentleman farmers/ranchers will decimate wildlife much more than the evil cattleman did, every farmette will have a dog to see to it that no pesky grouse or other varmint is trespassing on the property. What the dog misses will be picked off by a 14 year-old with a 22. The exponential population growth will be matched with equal increased visitation to all the beautiful public places. And the NPLGC and the WWP thought that a cow was destructive force of nature.
please note that this is for informative purposes….me, i like beef, and don’t mind skirting around piles….btw, are you originally from colorado?….the question does have pertinence, i assure you
Posted June 4th, 2008 at 8:45 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
I think that article is a reasonably balanced view of the issues. There is no question but that some ranchers prefer to sell their land for housing development to cash in on their property. I have no doubt but that contributes to the price of beef, but that is a separate issue from the public lands question. I don’t mind skirting around piles when I am on a private ranch where I occasionally fish. But I am sick to death of doing that on public lands. I was not born in Colorado but the same problem exists in other states such as Wyoming, Montana, and Utah.
Posted June 4th, 2008 at 8:51 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
did you by chance catch the bit about hay/feed fields?…it raises the spectre of higher beef prices all by itself….the more it costs to raise beef, the more we, the end consumers will pay…it is simply commen sense
Posted June 4th, 2008 at 8:58 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
I have very mixed feelings about grazing on public lands.
I do believe it wold devastate an entire industry to forbid or even severely limit the practice, resulting in reduced open space as many ranchers sell out their privately held lands to developers.
On the other hand I have witnessed the damage done by cattle in our area and it is more than just having copies lying around. It is loss of native grasses so hillsides erode and the snakes and other small prey go away so the eagles stop hunting there, etc. etc. etc.
Now, I only have observed and studied about these effects in the high desert; I have read that prairie grasslands are better able to sustain grazing.
The solution will be tough but it should involve experts in ecology, not just politicians. Perhaps identifying some areas that should not be grazed at all, and a system of seasonal rotations and limitations where it does occur.
Oh, full disclosure: I am not originally from Colorado but my grandparents moved to Estes Park the year I was born. I lived on a working cattle ranch for 2 years and helped with feeding, herding, tagging, and birthing, and it gave me an intense respect for all of the families who ranch for a living. And I love a good steak once in awhile.
Posted June 4th, 2008 at 8:59 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
ooops … cow pies, not copies :]
Posted June 4th, 2008 at 9:05 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
I think that stepping in dog poo on public land is much more disturbing! It would seem that people dont understand that God or Allah or whoever isnt going to make anymore land. When there is a house on every acre of farmland, who is going to feed the masses? There is nothing to compare to the beauty of our state, cows dont seem to be the ones destroying it.
Posted June 4th, 2008 at 9:09 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
jen, the dog poo bothers me much more too, just speaking from an excrement standpoint. I always pick up my own dog’s and bring extra bags to pick up after those other dog owners who can’t be bothered.
Posted June 4th, 2008 at 9:13 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Here’s an idea. We could demand the formation of a federal government bureaucracy, name it something that could easily be converted into an acronym such as BLM and any decisions made by this bureaucracy in regards to grazing, mining, gas and oil production, timber production etc, we could attack, not only on face value, but additionally because we felt that our side of the issue was not properly represented. We could challenge their expert opinions and demand and protest against their every decision. Kind of makes you wonder why somebody hasn’t thought of this before, Huh?
Posted June 4th, 2008 at 9:16 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
ashhugger, THANK YOU! Oh and full disclosure, my great, great grand-parents homesteaded a couple miles outside of Eagle in 1881. I am the third generation born in the state, but technically, we are on the 7th generation to be here.
Posted June 4th, 2008 at 9:36 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
It seems that lisa and gene are suffering from myopic tunnel vision.
They see what they want to see, they can’t(or don’t want to) see past the end of their noses, and the ‘big picture’ is a 4X6 photo held up real close.
gene obviously never heard the phrase ‘watch your step’ prior to walking across the cow patch.
He never would have made in in the ‘good old days’ when people gathered ‘chips’ to burn for heat in the winter.
lisa is apparently watching evolution in progress if the deer and elk are getting smaller.
Pretty soon we can each have one for a house pet?
gene would really enjoy it if most people were forced back into a horse and buggy.
That way, anytime somebody went somewhere, they would see him leading the way.
In the interest of full disclosure.
I have posted full disclosure in an earlier post.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.