FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact:  Cathy Pedler – (814) 454-7523

Bill Belitskus – (814) 778-5173

Ryan Talbott – (503) 887-7845

Department of Environmental Protection Unlawfully Permitting Water Withdrawals For Marcellus Shale Gas Drilling in Western Pennsylvania

Only riparian owners can make use of water in streams and rivers

Natural gas companies have descended on Pennsylvania’s forests and farmlands to drill into the Marcellus Shale.  Each Marcellus Shale gas well requires millions of gallons of water for the drilling process.  That water is taken from Pennsylvania’s streams and rivers under the alleged authority of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP).  The DEP, however, does not have the authority to permit water withdrawals in Pennsylvania.

In central and eastern Pennsylvania, water withdrawals are managed by the Susquehanna River Basin Commission and Delaware River Basin Commission.  Congress created the two commissions as federal-interstate compacts with the authority to permit water withdrawals within their respective basins.  The rest of Pennsylvania, most of which is in the Ohio River basin, is governed by riparian rights common law, which allows only the owner of property along a watercourse to withdraw water for use on their land.  There is no state law regulating water withdrawals other than for municipal drinking water supplies.

In a letter sent to DEP Secretary John Hanger, the Allegheny Defense Project (ADP) outlined the current state of Pennsylvania law regarding water withdrawals and charged the DEP with operating an unauthorized water withdrawal program that allows natural gas companies to take water that they have no legal right to for their Marcellus Shale gas drilling operations.

“The fact is, the DEP has absolutely no authority to permit water withdrawals in Pennsylvania,” said Cathy Pedler, ADP’s forest watch coordinator.  “Outside of the Delaware and Susquehanna River watersheds, water withdrawals are governed by riparian rights common law, which means only those who live adjacent to the water can make reasonable use of the water on their land.  A gas company cannot take water that flows through property it does not own.”

Nevertheless, documents obtained by ADP reveal that the DEP is unlawfully authorizing water withdrawals from western Pennsylvania streams and rivers.  On March 31, 2010 the DEP approved a Water Management Plan for Hanley & Bird, Inc.  The Water Management Plan allows Hanley & Bird to withdraw 1.44 million gallons of water a day from the Redbank Creek in Jefferson County for five years.

Under the Water Resources Planning Act of 2002, the DEP is required to develop Water Management Plans for the entire state.  That law, however, does not provide any authority to the DEP to authorize water withdrawals.

“The Water Resources Planning Act is just that, a planning act,” said Bill Belitskus, ADP’s board president.  “That law provided no substantive authority to the DEP to regulate or permit water withdrawals from Pennsylvania’s surface waters.  Each time the DEP approves a water management plan and tells a natural gas company that it can withdraw surface water for their drilling procedures, it is acting without authority and encouraging illegal conduct.”

Visit ADP’s website to see the documents we obtained from recent file reviews at the DEP’s Northwest Regional Office and to see the letter sent to DEP Secretary John Hanger: http://alleghenydefenseproject.wikispaces.com/Marcellus+Shale

We will be setting up camp on Friday September 18th in a group camp area at the Tracy Ridge Camping Facility in the ANF (see maps below).

This map shows Tracy Ridge / Chestnut Ridge proposed wilderness area will be destroyed by proposed oil and gas drilling and we want people to come and show support for protecting it. See map below for more detail.

What is the Fall Gathering? It is a family oriented event providing time for Allegheny Defense Project members, supporters and environmentally conscious individuals to come together in the fall to camp, hike, eat and learn about issues impacting the Allegheny National Forest, Pennsylvania’s only national forest.

The Allegheny Defense Project is an organization founded on principles of non-violence. We request that participants do not bring any illegal substances. Your well-behaved pets are always welcome.

Friday evening we will be setting up camp. We will get together to set up tents, the food area, prepare dinner, and spend time around the campfire renewing acquaintances and providing updates on Allegheny National Forest issues. Feel free to bring musical instruments.

Saturday and Sunday we will wake up to a nice healthy breakfast, and do a campfire update on Allegheny National Forest issues, before heading out to spend the day updating and educating supporters on ANF issues with on site hikes.

Evenings we will return to camp for dinner. Saturday night we will enjoy time around the campfire and do an after dark hike.

Sunday will be breakfast followed by a hike to an Allegheny National Forest area proposed for a massive oil and gas development. We will return for lunch and then the breaking down of camp.

The schedule is flexible and you can come out and spend whatever time you have whether its for one event, a meal, any day, the whole weekend, or just stop by for the campfire in the evening.

To RSVP and for more information contact:

Cathy Pedler
(814)454-7523
cpedler@alleghenydefense.org

Bill Belitskus
(814)778-5173
mbproact@penn.com

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Ryan Talbott: (814) 221-1408

Forest Service Cancels Willow Creek ATV Trail Expansion
Decision mirrors comments raised by Allegheny Defense Project

Warren, PA – The U.S. Forest Service has withdrawn its plan to expand the Willow Creek ATV Trail in McKean County. Proposed in 2004, the trail expansion would have added another 24-43 miles of new ATV trail near an area that has been recommended for Wilderness designation.

“The Forest Service made the right decision,” said Cathy Pedler, a board member of the Allegheny Defense Project. “This area is near the Chestnut Ridge Wilderness Study Area and contains habitat for timber rattlesnakes which is a sensitive species. This decision will protect habitat for this species and preserve the wilderness character of Chestnut Ridge.”

According to the Forest Service’s withdrawal notice, Bradford District Ranger Anthony Scardina stated:

“It is important to focus on the maintenance and improvement of the recreation facilities and trails that we currently have on the District and Forest. This is the message that we continue to hear from our visitors and that is made apparent from our recent Recreation Facilities Analysis and other data analyses. Some of our existing motorized and non-motorized trails and recreation facilities need significant amounts of work to be maintained to standard and provide quality recreational experiences for our visitors. I have determined that it is not a responsible use of public funds to add 24 to 43 miles of new trail, estimated to cost $40,000 per mile to build. Therefore, I recommend that this project be cancelled.”

“ADP noted in its previous public comments that because the Forest Service already had too many miles of ATV trails that were not properly maintained, it did not make sense to propose expanding the ATV trail system,” said Ryan Talbott, ADP’s forest watch coordinator. “Additionally, with the unprecedented level of road construction that has occurred over the past few years due to oil and gas development, it would be irresponsible to expand an ATV trail that would only cause further forest fragmentation.”

##

Contact: Ryan Talbott, Allegheny Defense Project: (814) 221-1408
David Sublette, Sierra Club Pennsylvania Chapter: (814) 397- 4121

Conservation Groups Intervene in Oil and Gas Drilling Lawsuit on Allegheny National Forest

ERIE, PA (7/2/09) – A federal judge has permitted two conservation groups to intervene in a lawsuit filed against the U.S. Forest Service by Catalyst Energy, a Cranberry Township based oil and gas company. Catalyst Energy sued the Forest Service in March claiming that it does not need the federal agency’s authorization to build roads and drill oil and gas wells on the Allegheny National Forest. The Sierra Club and Allegheny Defense Project intervened in the case to defend the Forest Service’s authority to regulate drilling and protect wildlife habitat and watersheds on Pennsylvania’s only national forest.

The conservation groups claim that Catalyst Energy’s attempt to limit the Forest Service’s authority to regulate drilling on the Allegheny demonstrates an unwillingness to work with the public on drilling projects on the Allegheny.

“Catalyst Energy seeks to erode federal regulation of drilling operations on the Allegheny,” said Ryan Talbott, forest watch coordinator for ADP. “The Forest Service, however, has broad authority to regulate access to private minerals that underlie the federal surface. Instead of suing the Forest Service, Catalyst Energy should be working with the Forest Service and the public to ensure that drilling on the Allegheny is done in a way that best protects Pennsylvania’s only national forest.”

Just days after Catalyst Energy filed its lawsuit the Forest Service settled another lawsuit with the Sierra Club, Allegheny Defense Project and Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics. In that case, the conservation groups challenged the Forest Service’s approval of 34 oil and gas projects without conducting environmental analysis with public review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The settlement agreement requires the Forest Service to conduct the “appropriate NEPA analysis” on future oil and gas drilling proposals to ensure that citizens have the opportunity to weigh in on drilling projects in the Allegheny National Forest.

“Oil and gas development threatens to destroy the sensitive wildlife habitat and spectacular wilderness that draw thousands of visitors to the Allegheny each year,” said Sierra Club representative David Sublette. “The public should at least have an opportunity to weigh in before oil and gas companies are allowed to build roads and drill wells in this pristine area.”

Currently, there are five lawsuits regarding oil and gas drilling on the Allegheny National Forest, all of which have been filed by the oil and gas industry.

##

June 9, 2009

Contact: Ryan Talbott (814) 221-1408

Allegheny Defense Project Praises New Legislation to Protect Drinking Water from Oil and Gas Contamination

The Allegheny Defense Project today applauded legislation recently introduced in Congress to regulate an oil and gas procedure called hydraulic fracturing under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act.

There are approximately 100,000 active oil and gas wells in Pennsylvania, yet the state does not have regulations specific to hydraulic fracturing. Hydraulic fracturing involves the injection of fluids, often containing toxic chemicals, into oil or gas wells at very high pressure. These pressurized fluids are used to crack open the underground formation to allow oil or gas to flow more freely and increase production. Studies show that, while some of the injected fluids are returned to the surface, some remain underground. In some cases, they are injected directly into underground sources of drinking water.

“There is nothing more precious to our community than safe drinking water,” said Cathy Pedler of the Allegheny Defense Project. “The oil and gas industry should have to comply with the same laws as any other industry when it comes to protecting our clean water. People should be able to find out what chemicals might be in their drinking water. We commend Senator Casey for his leadership on introducing the bill in the Senate.”

Communities in Pennsylvania and across the country have experienced environmental damage and health risks linked to these activities. In Pennsylvania, the Department of Environmental Protection has documented gas migrations caused by oil and gas companies’ well fracturing operations. According to notes from a September 2006 Oil and Gas Technical Advisory Board Meeting:

“After the operator fracks the well, they need to give the pressure time to bleed off. Some of the operators have not been doing this. There are various excuses why they don’t want to bring a rig back in again – i.e. money.”

The right balance needs to be established between oil and gas development and protection of our precious natural resources. Instead of that balance, however, some of our most critical federal environmental laws have exemptions for oil and gas production, including the Clean Air Act, Clean Water, Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and Safe Drinking Water Act.

“The DEP has already documented that at least some oil and gas companies operating in Pennsylvania are willing to take short cuts that save them money but threaten our water supplies,” said Ryan Talbott, ADP’s forest watch coordinator. “The industry is expanding by leaps and bounds, and regulations need to catch up with that growth. Congress should pass this bill before more water contamination or harm to human health occurs.”

Hydraulic fracturing, a highly variable and unpredictable process, was exempted from the Safe Drinking Water Act in the Energy Policy Act of 2005. This exemption benefits Halliburton and other companies.

##

You can read the Senate Bill here and the House Bill here.
You can read the September 14, 2006 Oil and Gas Technical Advisory Board Meeting Minutes here.

May 28, 2009

Contact: Ryan Talbott – (814) 221-1408

Forest Service Public Meetings not reaching a broad cross-section of people
ADP cites need to reach out beyond local area for input on oil, gas drilling issues

The Forest Service is currently preparing two separate Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) regarding oil and gas drilling regulation on the Allegheny National Forest. The first is a Supplemental EIS (SEIS) that will address the Forest Service Chief’s instructions to the Allegheny National Forest regarding the lack of public participation, the need to clarify the Forest Service’s authority to regulate oil and gas drilling and the cumulative impacts of oil and gas drilling on air quality. The second EIS will focus on the environmental impacts of oil and gas drilling on the Allegheny National Forest between 2010-2013. According to the Allegheny Defense Project, the Allegheny National Forest is not fulfilling its obligations to reach out to a broad cross-section of the public in a series of meetings being held on the two EIS’s.

The Forest Service has already hosted 9 public meetings to discuss the two EIS’s. All of the meetings to date have been held in Warren, Bradford and Clarion, PA, and Allegheny National Forest Supervisor Leanne Marten says the Forest Service plans to continue hosting meetings in these three locations. According to ADP, however, the Forest Service has an obligation to reach out beyond the local area so that more people can participate in the process.

“By holding all of these meetings in the same geographic area, the Forest Service is being exclusive, not inclusive,” said Bill Belitskus, ADP’s board president. “The Allegheny is a national forest and citizens that live outside the local area who have different views of our public lands must be afforded the same opportunity to participate in public meetings.”

In a letter sent to Forest Service Chief Abigail Kimbell, ADP cites previous research done by the Forest Service that found the “Allegheny National Forest draws most of its users” from “the metropolitan areas of Pittsburgh and western Pennsylvania, Cleveland and northeastern Ohio, and Buffalo and western New York.”

“We think it is important to let the Forest Service know now that it must reach out to a broader cross section of the public,” said Cathy Pedler, an ADP board member. “The Forest Service knows that many people who come to Pennsylvania’s only national forest for recreation live in the broader geographic region. It simply does not make sense to hold 24 public meetings in the same three locations.”

The next round of public meetings scheduled between June 2nd – 4th are again being held at the same locations as the previous 9 meetings on weekday/workday nights at 7 p.m. in Warren, Bradford and Clarion, PA. According to ADP’s letter to Forest Service Chief Kimbell, “only 9 members of the public attended the last meeting held on April 29, 2009 in Clarion, PA. This represents a waste of Forest Service resources and a total failure to reach a good cross-section of people.”

##

Click here to read ADP’s letter to Forest Service Chief Gail Kimbell.

There’s been a lot of events that have transpired over the past year or so on the Allegheny National Forest regarding oil and gas drilling. For a primer on this issue, you can read my previous diaries here, here and here.

Long story short: 93% of the mineral rights underlying the Allegheny National Forest are privately owned and until very recently, the U.S. Forest Service has refused to conduct the appropriate environmental analysis pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) before authorizing access to and surface occupancy of the Allegheny for the exercise of private mineral rights.

On November 20, 2008 Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics, Allegheny Defense Project and the Sierra Club sued the Forest Service for its failure to comply with NEPA before approving private oil and gas drilling projects on the Allegheny National Forest. You can see a copy of our complaint here. Our lawsuit had a singular purpose: to compel the Forest Service to comply with NEPA and prepare the appropriate environmental analysis, subject to public comment, before allowing oil and gas companies to build roads and drill well sites on the Allegheny National Forest.

On April 9, 2009 we signed a settlement agreement with the Forest Service in which it:

agrees that it shall undertake appropriate NEPA analysis prior to issuing Notices to Proceed, or any other instrument for authorizing access to and surface occupancy of the Forest for oil and gas projects on split estates including both reserved and outstanding mineral rights. Appropriate NEPA analysis shall consist of the use of a categorical exclusion or the preparation of an Environmental Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement.

This is a major victory for the Allegheny National Forest. The settlement agreement ends the Forest Service’s unlawful authorization process it used for years in which it simply reviewed companies’ development plans internally and then gave the green light for the drilling. The Forest Service did not prepare an environmental analysis pursuant to NEPA and the public certainly was not part of the equation. All that has now changed.

The settlement agreement, however, sent our local, state and federal elected officials and the oil and gas industry into the upper stratosphere. Of course, had these elected officials and industry representatives actually read the settlement agreement, they would have realized that all it does is compel the Forest Service to follow the law like other national forests have done for years.

For instance, the Ottawa National Forest in Michigan is similar to the Allegheny National Forest in that it has privately owned minerals underlying the federal surface. However, unlike the Allegheny, the Ottawa National Forest did not have to be sued (at least not recently) for it to comply with its mandatory obligations under NEPA to prepare an environmental analysis and allow the public to comment on proposed private mineral development projects. Take, for instance, this private mineral exploration project in 2007. Here, the Ottawa National Forest emphatically stated at the bottom of page one of this Environmental Assessment that:

Federal actions such as permitting and/or authorizing access and surface occupancy for the exercise of private mineral rights must be analyzed to determine potential environmeconsequences pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA).

This is essentially what the Forest Service on the Allegheny National Forest finally admitted when it agreed to settle with FSEEE, ADP and the Sierra Club in April 2009. As stated above, the settlement agreement requires the Allegheny National Forest to prepare the “appropriate NEPA analysis” on proposed private oil and gas drilling projects. Furthermore, the Forest Service agreed that:

in the context of split estates the Forest Service has legal authority to establish reasonable conditions and mitigation measures to protect federal surface resources.

This is a really important statement that brings the Allegheny National Forest in line with other national forests that have similar issues involving private minerals. But none of this matters to some of our elected officials and certainly not to the oil and gas industry that views the Allegheny as their own private forest to be exploited indefinitely.

Take for instance these comments from U.S. Representative Glenn “GT” Thompson (R-5th), whose district covers most of the Allegheny National Forest, a couple months before the settlement was signed.

U.S. Rep. Glenn Thompson (R-Centre County) said the AFA needs to make “battle plans for the future” because there is what he calls “a war between rural America and urban America.” He said the “urban” side of the conflict has “a whole lot more soldiers than we do.”

For a U.S. Congressman to go out of his way to publicly declare that there is a “a war between rural America and urban America” is not only irresponsible, it is dangerous to his constituents who are looking beyond the boom and bust cycles of oil and gas drilling and instead are working to protect the major asset in the region – the Allegheny – Pennsylvania’s only national forest.

On April 19, 2009 U.S. Representative Glenn “GT” Thompson issued a statement condemning the settlement in which he said:

“I am mystified and seriously troubled as to why the USFS, through the U.S. Department of Justice, would so blatantly disregard the legal process and private property rights by agreeing to an out of court ‘settlement’ which has the potential to kill the regional economy, increase unemployment and further our dependence on foreign oil and natural gas.”
…

“This dangerous move will encourage future lawsuits and help fund the radical environmental movement – whose goal is to prevent energy and timber production in the ANF and at other forests around the country,” said Thompson.

What is really irrational about Rep. Thompson’s statements is that the settlement agreement that we signed with the Forest Service actually allows 54 “packages” covering 588 oil and gas wells, one pipeline and one seismic line to move forward without NEPA analysis. As the Warren Times Observer dutifully noted in this April 22, 2009 article:

The 54 packages represent a sizable body of work – 588 wells, two pipelines, and a seismic line.

The total number of wells is a drop from the last few years when the price of oil reached record highs, but double the number of new wells built each year early this decade.

Mohney said there were 5,168 new wells approved from 2000 to 2008.

Most of those came in the last four years. From 2005 to 2008, 3,726 of those wells were approved – about 930 a year. “It increases as the market prices of oil and gas climb,” Mohney said.

From 2000 to 2004, the average was 288 new well approvals.

It is slightly ridiculous for Rep. Thompson to claim that this settlement “has the potential to kill the regional economy, increase unemployment and further our dependence on foreign oil and natural gas” when the settlement actually allows the drilling of 588 wells immediately. Furthermore, this notion that our NEPA litigation is somehow responsible for decreased oil and gas drilling on the Allegheny or that drilling on the Allegheny somehow reduces our dependence on foreign oil and gas is erroneous, at best.

Taking the foreign dependency issue first, all of the oil wells in Pennsylvania (~ 19,000…give or take a thousand or two since so many new wells have been drilled in recent years) produced a paltry 3.6 million barrels of oil in all of 2007. Considering that the U.S. consumes approximately 20 million barrels of oil every single day, the notion that drilling in Pennsylvania will somehow reduce our dependence on foreign oil is foolish. Since the majority of wells drilled in the Allegheny are oil wells, I’m not going to focus on natural gas except to say that, like oil, the gas production in Pennsylvania is a drop in the bucket compared to our national consumption…certainly not enough to justify further extensive fragmentation such as this. I should say, however, that gas drilling is likely to increase in this area due to the Marcellus shale.

As for our litigation and settlement allegedly having something to do with a decrease in oil and gas drilling on the Allegheny, an understanding in basic economics refutes that. Perhaps this story on drilling in the Allegheny National Forest region will shed some light on why oil and gas drilling has decreased there. As this CNNMoney article clearly demonstrates:

The collapse in oil prices from over $147 a barrel has caused many oil producers to pack up their rigs and stow their jacks.

The CNNMoney reporter even interviewed local oil and gas operators to ask them why they were not drilling. Did they blame the litigation filed by environmental groups? Nope:

“We’re not drilling right now,” said Willard Cline, who has run the small Cline Oil Company since 1946. “The low price of oil is slowing it up.”
…

Just outside Bradford, Pa., Keane and Sons Drilling Corp. recently laid off 20 employees – about a third of its workforce.

Half the company’s drill rigs sit at the shop. A row of brand new fracing trucks, used to inject fluids into oil wells to get production flowing, line the back of the parking lot.

“Once oil dropped below $75 a barrel, the economics just don’t make sense for the wells we have around here,” said Shawn Keane, who now runs the company along with his brother. “Just about everyone we’ve talked to is in the same situation we are.”

Worldwide reach
The pullback isn’t limited to Pennsylvania. From Texas to Wyoming to California, places once considered boomtowns are now going bust as energy prices drop and access to credit dries up.

Nationwide, the number of drill rigs fell almost 50% since October, the steepest decline since the energy bust of the mid-1980s. Worldwide production numbers have been continuously revised down nearly every month since late last year.

“It’s like things fell off a cliff,” said Richard Mason, publisher of the Land Rig Newsletter, an industry paper that tracks oil and gas rigs in the U.S. If it continues, Mason said production could be hurt permanently.

Perhaps a few graphs will help drive home the fact that the price of oil and gas is the determining factor of whether oil and gas companies are drilling on or off the Allegheny National Forest. The first four graphs document oil and gas drilling in the four counties with Allegheny National Forest land within their boundaries (McKean, Warren, Forest and Elk Counties). The next four graphs document oil and gas drilling in four other counties (Clarion, Jefferson, Armstrong and Indiana Counties) that are outside of the Allegheny National Forest. These graphs demonstrate that oil and gas drilling dropped significantly after the collapse of oil and gas prices from last fall and the decline occurred across the boards, whether it was the four counties in the Allegheny National Forest or the four other Pennsylvania counties outside the Allegheny National Forest. Is Rep. Thompson going to blame litigation on the Allegheny for the drop in drilling in counties outside the Allegheny National Forest?

Of course, the truth is very inconvenient for Rep. Thompson. So rather than engage in rational debate about the issue, Rep. Thompson has instead opted for the “conspiracy theory” argument. On May 1, 2009 the Pennsylvania House Republican Policy Committee held a “hearing” in Warren, PA to discuss the settlement agreement and other oil and gas drilling issues on the Allegheny National Forest. You can read about this dog-and-pony show here. Rep. Thompson went on to say:

Thompson insinuated that a conspiracy took place between the U.S. Justice Department, the Forest Service and “radical environmentalists” to attempt to shut down oil and gas development in the National Forest. He told the committee he planned to investigate.

That’s right…a “conspiracy” to “shut down oil and gas development” by immediately allowing 588 oil and gas wells to be drilled without further environmental analysis! Like I said, the truth does not matter.

Warren County Commissioner John Bortz recently stated:

I think it’s time the U.S. Forest Service leaves Warren County.

But Rep. Thompson and Commissioner Bortz were clearly outdone by Craig Mayer, an attorney and member of the Pennsylvania Oil and Gas Association (who attempted to block the settlement agreement in court). Here’s how Mr. Mayer described the Forest Service agreeing to obey the law:

He went on to liken the Forest Service to a “nationalistic military group in a Third World country.” According to Mayer, he spent time while serving in the U.S. Marine Corps studying such military groups.

“Predictably these Third World military groups rely on special armed groups to threaten and intimidate,” Mayer said. He claimed the Forest Service used its law enforcement arm in similar style to intimidate oil and gas industry workers and their families, including showing up at public meetings being held on drilling in the ANF with sidearms.

What’s next? Black helicopters? Seriously, the atmosphere developing on the Allegheny National Forest right now is one of outright hostility toward individuals that are members of environmental and recreation groups. Mr. Mayer’s assertion that the Forest Service had its law enforcement at these meetings to intimidate those in the oil and gas industry is patently absurd. The Forest Service’s law enforcement was there as a precaution, most likely to protect those affiliated with environmental and recreation groups who have pushed for environmental analysis of oil and gas drilling on the Allegheny.

Keep in mind that Mr. Mayer’s and Rep. Thompson’s statements were made in front of a committee of Pennsylvania House Republicans that have all been very critical of the settlement agreement. After reading the above articles and statements about “conspiracies” and referring to the Forest Service as a “nationalistic military group in a Third World country,” is it any wonder why Sen. Arlen Specter left the Republican party of Pennsylvania?

What is truly unfortunate in all this is that the truth about this settlement agreement has been completely lost. The truth is, the settlement agreement will not stop oil and gas drilling on the Allegheny National Forest. As stated above, 588 oil and gas wells will immediately move forward without further analysis. After that, the Forest Service is simply agreeing to do on the Allegheny what it already does on other national forest with private minerals – prepare the “appropriate NEPA analysis” and allow the public to comment on proposed oil and gas developments.

Just days before we reached a settlement, the judge allowed the oil and gas industry to intervene in the case. The industry filed an emergency motion to stay the settlement after it was announced but the judge categorically rejected their arguments.

On June 1, 2009 the Forest Service intends to publish a Notice of Intent in the Federal Register to prepare a Forest-Wide Oil and Gas Development Transition EIS. The Forest Service will be analyzing all proposed oil and gas developments between now and 2013 as part of this EIS process. This is a paradigm shift on the Allegheny — no longer will the public be completely excluded from commenting on proposed oil and gas developments and prevented from offering alternatives that better protect Pennsylvania’s only national forest.

Finally, largely as a result of what has occurred on the Allegheny National Forest, the USDA has announced its intent to undergo a federal rulemaking to “clarify and expand” the Forest Service’s authority to regulate private mineral developments on all National Forests that have private minerals underlying the federal surface.

Stay tuned for more information in the months to come so that you can take action to better protect the Allegheny and other national forests from private mineral developments that impact wildlife habitat, water and air quality and recreation opportunities.

Contact: Andy Stahl, Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics: (541) 484-2692
Ryan Talbott, Allegheny Defense Project: (814) 221-1408
David Sublette, Sierra Club Pennsylvania Chapter: (814) 397- 4121

Public Will Be Allowed to Weigh in on Drilling in Allegheny National Forest
Federal Judge Upholds Agreement Between Forest Service, Environmental Groups

ERIE, PA (5/12/09) – A federal judge today decided in favor of environmental groups who argue that the public should have a chance to weigh in on oil and gas drilling in the Allegheny National Forest. In his decision, U.S. District Judge Sean J. McLaughlin upheld a settlement agreement between the U.S. Forest Service and three environmental groups – Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics, Allegheny Defense Project, and the Sierra Club.

The Pennsylvania Oil and Gas Association (POGAM) and the Allegheny Forest Alliance (AFA) had attempted to put the brakes on the settlement agreement. However, Judge McLaughlin stated that POGAM and AFA “have failed to demonstrate that they will suffer legal prejudice by the dismissal of this action.” Judge McLaughlin also denied Warren County’s motion to intervene in the litigation since the case is now dismissed.

The settlement requires the Forest Service to conduct an environmental analysis pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) on proposed oil and gas drilling projects on the Allegheny National Forest. The settlement creates an orderly transition by allowing 588 oil and gas wells, one pipeline and one seismic line to move forward without further environmental analysis since these projects were already submitted to the Forest Service for approval at the time the lawsuit was filed. The Forest Service will postpone approval of approximately 440 other oil and gas wells that were submitted to the Forest Service before the lawsuit was filed, but were considered “incomplete applications” by the Forest Service. Those proposed oil and gas wells, in addition to all future oil and gas drilling projects, will be subject to “appropriate NEPA analysis” and public comment.

“This is a great day for the Allegheny National Forest,” said Ryan Talbott, forest watch coordinator for the Allegheny Defense Project. “The judge categorically rejected the arguments raised by POGAM and AFA in their attempt to unravel the settlement we reached with the Forest Service.”

“The Forest Service certainly has a responsibility to set conditions that prevents damage to the surface land it owns and protects wildlife on that land,” said Andy Stahl, executive director of Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics. “With this settlement the Forest Service has made a commitment to disclose to people living near the Allegheny National Forest what impact oil and gas drilling will have on water quality, recreational opportunities, and the other benefits they expect from the national forest in their backyard.”

Days after the settlement was reached, the Forest Service announced that it would publish a notice of intent to prepare a forest-wide environmental impact statement (EIS) on June 1, 2009 for all oil and gas drilling projects between now and 2013. The Forest Service expects to complete the EIS by April 2010.

“This agreement is a significant policy shift for the Allegheny National Forest and will shed daylight on a process that has been hidden from public view for far too long,” said Sierra Club representative David Sublette. “Oil and gas development threatens to destroy the sensitive wildlife habitat and spectacular wilderness that draw thousands of visitors to the Allegheny each year. The public should at least have an opportunity to weigh in before oil and gas companies are allowed to build roads and drill wells in this pristine area.”

You can read the judge’s opinion and order here.

Allegheny Defense Project notifies House Committee on Agriculture, other officials
about escalating rhetoric on Allegheny National Forest
Government data shows drop in drilling related to oil, gas prices

The Allegheny Defense Project has contacted the U.S. House Committee on Agriculture to explain a recent settlement agreement signed between it and two other environmental groups and the U.S. Forest Service. In a letter addressed to U.S. Representative Collin Peterson, chairman of the House Committee on Agriculture, ADP also notified the committee of what it calls, “a real threat of violence developing on the Allegheny National Forest” toward conservationists as a result of recent public statements from state and federal elected officials and representatives of the oil and gas industry. ADP also sent the letter to Sen. Arlen Specter, Sen. Robert Casey, PA Attorney General Tom Corbett and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder.

On April 9, 2009 ADP, Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics and the Sierra Club signed a settlement agreement with the U.S. Forest Service that requires the Forest Service to conduct “appropriate NEPA analysis” on future oil and gas development projects on the Allegheny National Forest. Since then, elected officials and the oil and gas industry have launched an aggressive campaign to criticize the settlement. The Pennsylvania Oil and Gas Association (POGAM) and Allegheny Forest Alliance (AFA) were permitted to intervene in the litigation the day before the settlement was signed and Warren County recently filed a motion to intervene in the case. According to ADP’s letter, “this is a coordinated effort to undermine the Settlement, prevent the Forest Service from complying with its mandatory obligations pursuant to NEPA and deny the public’s right to weigh in on decisions that have significant impacts to public resources.”

“Our local, state and federal elected officials have an obligation to represent all of their constituents in a mature, respectable manner,” said Cathy Pedler, an ADP board member. “Talking about conspiracy theories and secret police forces is not how we should be discussing important issues on the Allegheny National Forest.”

Ms. Pedler refers to testimony provided by U.S. Representative Glenn “GT” Thompson and POGAM director Craig Mayer at a recent Pennsylvania House Republican Policy Committee hearing held on May 1 at the Warren Holiday Inn. According to the Warren Times Observer, “Thompson insinuated that a conspiracy took place between the U.S. Department of Justice, the Forest Service and ‘radical environmentalists’ to attempt to shut down oil and gas development in the National Forest,” while Mr. Mayer “went on to liken the Forest Service to a ‘nationalistic military group in a Third World country.’”

Most of the statements made by these elected officials and industry representatives accuse the litigation and settlement agreement for the loss of jobs related to oil and gas drilling. However, ADP provided the House Committee on Agriculture with a series of graphs documenting that oil and gas drilling has decreased across Pennsylvania, both on and off the Allegheny National Forest.

“What you see when you look at the data is that oil and gas drilling has decreased just as much in counties outside the Allegheny National Forest as it has in counties within the Allegheny,” said Ryan Talbott, forest watch coordinator for ADP. “The reason for these decreases is the price of oil and gas, not our NEPA litigation or settlement agreement.”

–

To see ADP’s letter to the House Committee on Agriculture, click here.
To see the graphs documenting the decrease in drilling following the decrease in oil and gas prices both on and off the Allegheny National Forest, click here.

Contact: Andy Stahl, Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics: (541) 484-2692
Ryan Talbott, Allegheny Defense Project: (814) 221-1408
David Sublette, Sierra Club Pennsylvania Chapter: (814) 397- 4121

Forest Service Agrees to Conduct Environmental Review of Oil and Gas Drilling in Allegheny
Conservation Groups Hail Agreement

ERIE, PA (4/9/09) – The U.S. Forest Service has agreed to conduct environmental review and allow the public to weigh in on all oil and gas development in the Allegheny National Forest, following pressure from conservation groups concerned that drilling will pollute water and destroy habitat for wildlife like the northern flying squirrel, eastern box turtle, northern goshawk, and timber rattlesnake.

The Forest Service reached a settlement today with Allegheny Defense Project, Sierra Club, and Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics, who filed suit in November after the agency failed to subject 34 proposed oil and gas projects to adequate review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Today’s agreement ensures the public’s right to weigh in on all future drilling in the forest before the Forest Service gives it a green light.

The settlement will ensure that citizens have the opportunity to weigh in on drilling projects in the Allegheny National Forest. Over the past 10 years, thousands of oil and gas wells have been drilled in the Allegheny without environmental analysis and public comments. As a result of drilling, more than 2,000 miles of roads have been built, damaging important wildlife habitat.

“With this settlement the Forest Service is making a commitment to disclose to people living near the Allegheny National Forest what impact oil and gas drilling will have on water quality, recreational opportunities, and the other benefits they expect from the national forest in their backyard.” said Andy Stahl, executive director of Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics. “The Forest Service certainly has the duty to set conditions to prevent damage to the surface land it owns and protect wildlife on that land.”

The settlement agreement stipulates that no oil and gas drilling can occur within Wilderness Study Areas, National Recreation Areas, Inventoried Roadless Areas, the Tionesta Scenic and Research Natural Areas, and the Morrison Run Area west to the Rimrock Overlook without environmental analysis and public comment and appeal opportunities.

“These areas contain some of the most remote wildlife habitat and recreation opportunities on the Allegheny National Forest,” said Ryan Talbott, forest watch coordinator for the Allegheny Defense Project. “Because of this settlement, places like Minister Valley, Tracy Ridge, and Rimrock are now protected from unregulated oil and gas drilling. Additionally, the settlement agreement unequivocally states that ‘the Forest Service has legal authority to establish reasonable conditions and mitigation measures to protect federal surface resources’ from oil and gas drilling. This important acknowledgment signals a new direction for regulating oil and gas drilling on the Allegheny that will better protect water and air quality, wildlife habitat and recreation opportunities.”

The settlement agreement creates an orderly transition allowing the drilling of approximately 585 oil and gas wells since these projects were already submitted to the Forest Service for approval at the time the lawsuit was filed. The Forest Service will postpone approval of approximately 440 other oil and gas wells that were submitted to the Forest Service before the lawsuit was filed, but were considered “incomplete applications” by the Forest Service. Those proposed oil and gas wells, in addition to all future oil and gas drilling proposals, will be subject to NEPA analysis and public comment.

“This is a victory for everyone who enjoys the natural beauty of the Allegheny National Forest. This agreement will shed daylight on a process that has been hidden from public view for far too long.” said Sierra Club representative David Sublette. “Oil and gas development threatens to destroy the sensitive wildlife habitat and spectacular wilderness that draw thousands of visitors to the Allegheny each year. The public should at least have an opportunity to weigh in before oil and gas companies are allowed to build roads and drill wells in this pristine area. This agreement represents a significant policy shift for the Allegheny National Forest.”

You can read the settlement agreement here.

##