Oil well proposed in Glen Canyon

[phantom power]

The National Park Service has begun consideration of a proposed, controversial wildcat oil well in a remote corner of the Glen Canyon National Recreation Area. This area, known as Middle Moody Canyon, can only be accessed along a rough dirt road that first goes through one of the Bureau of Land Management's crown jewels, the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument.

The proposed well pad and access roads would be located in classic redrock country and along a unique geologic formation known as the Waterpocket Fold. In short, the proposed well would be located in one of the most scenic locations in the Glen Canyon NRA/Capitol Reef National Park/Grand Staircase-Escalante Natl. Monument area. The proposal would involve blading a drill pad (also putting in a sludge pit and holding tanks), as well as upgrading (reconstructing) and creating several miles of dirt road. The scars from this project would- as other failed attempts in the region attest to- last for many years.

Amazingly enough, this lease was issued in 1969 and thus predates Glen Canyon NRA and the GSENM. After a successful legal fight by the Sierra Club in the early 1970's to block a similar oil well, the lease was "suspended" by the BLM and sat idle for over 15 years. In 1990, the lessee submitted an application for a permit to drill with the Park Service who understandably was not in any hurry to consider approving development in such a sensitive location. After a few years of back and forth, the lessee went away- but now they're back. To make matters worse, the Park Service (meaning with our tax dollars) is footing the bill- $50,000 worth- for the environmental analysis.

WHAT YOU CAN DO:

The Park Service is asking for scoping comments on the proposed well- though it is not giving out much detail about the project or what resources it is most concerned about. The Park Service and BLM need to hear from you that they must: (1) prepare an environmental impact statement to analyze this destructive project and (2) hold public meetings in major metropolitan areas such as Salt Lake City.

Fill in, take the time to review and send your comment letter (see sample below) via the Park Service's website by following this link:
http://parkplanning.nps.gov/commentForm.cfm?projectID=12592&documentId=11645

You may also send written comments to:

Superintendent
Glen Canyon National Recreation Area
P.O. Box 1507
691 Scenic View Drive
Page, AZ 860400-1507

[IChing]

1. Glen Canyon is one of the most beautiful places I've seen

I wonder if the US will be forced to sell because of the new Supreme Court rulings
that would increase the economic growth of the area.

:sarcasm:

[phantom power]

2. Did you see it before they dammed it?

Glen Canyon was submerged before I was born. Or, at least well into the process of submerging.

I wonder how this new interpretation of eminent domain applies to land already owned by the government. Traditional eminent domain covers the appropriation of private land for public use. Does the new interpretation allow for the appropriate of public land for private use?

Oh well, even if it doesn't, there are already other ways that the government can sell public land to private interests.

[blindpig]

3. Pure malice or mental deficiency?

Flooding wasn't good enough? These people are beyond my comprehension. I can imagine this maladministration as diners at that perverse dinner club in "The Freshman", Cheney salivating in anticipation at the thought of Ivory-Billed Woodpecker under glass.

[phantom power]

4. I think it's a form of deficiency.

There are people who could look at the Grand Canyon, and have nothing to say except "Wow, that would make a great reservoir. Why haven't we dammed it yet?"

In fact, the same people who dammed Glen Canyon did intend to dam up the Grand, but it was saved.

They just aren't capable of caring, from an aesthetic or moral point of view. I think that may be one big reason that the environmental movement has failed with so many people. Environmentalists have trouble conceiving that there are people who really don't care, and won't ever care, no matter how many times we try to explain how beautiful it all is.

We all know, especially these days, that there are pragmatic reasons for environmentalism (like survival), but for a long time, we focused on ethical or aesthetic arguments. The pragmatic arguments are harder, because they are less immediate (or, used to be). Aesthetic arguments are immediate, but only if you can perceive them.

[blindpig]

5. why we fail with the masses

To be sure conditioning and reinforcement("education" as it is and electronic media) make it an up hill battle. But you would think that among the environmentally inert that there would be enough biophelia to make our position electorally stronger than it is. It might be that people understand too well. Perhaps in the gut they "know" that getting things straight means ending the party. But they're having fun, alot of them are drunk, so they're just not listening to that nagging little voice. It's overwhelmed by the expectation of immediate gratification, a nation of junkies. Until the booze runs out or the cops arrive they ain't leaving. I don't think Americans will give up "The American Dream", even as it slips from their grasp, but a billy club up side the head might bring some belated enlightenment.