Buffalo

Environmentalists call for 'do-over' on management plan near Buffalo

2014-07-05T08:00:00Z Environmentalists call for 'do-over' on management plan near BuffaloBy BENJAMIN STORROW Star-Tribune staff writer Casper Star-Tribune Online

A coalition of environmentalists and landowners is calling on the U.S. Bureau of Land Management to rewrite its proposed management plan for federal lands around Buffalo, arguing that the current draft would roll back protections aimed at preventing oil and gas development on areas unsuitable for drilling. 

BLM officials defended their proposal. The draft Buffalo Resource Management Plan, which will govern 780,000 acres of BLM surface land and 4.8 million acres of federal minerals, clarifies past ambiguities about where companies are allowed to drill and will mean more consistent management in the region, they said.

Industry officials, meanwhile, welcomed the move, saying it provided companies flexibility while also ensuring conservation goals are met.

The debate highlighted the rising stakes in the Powder River Basin, where oil development is now increasing.

The BLM projects that 1,773 wells will be drilled in coming decades throughout the western reaches of the basin covered under the Buffalo plan. An additional 2,721 coal-bed methane wells are expected to be drilled in the area.

Under the 1984 plan governing the Buffalo region, development was prohibited on slopes greater than 25 percent. It was restricted in areas susceptible to erosion and locations where reclamation efforts were deemed unlikely to succeed.

The draft plan would allow companies to drill in those areas provided they produce site-specific plans saying how they intend to mitigate environmental concerns.

"It can really hurt private landowners who have federal minerals beneath them," said Jill Morrison, an organizer at the Powder River Basin Resource Council, a Sheridan-based landowner's group. "The reason those stipulations were put in place originally was to protect those fragile landscapes and those areas that really can’t be reclaimed."

The Powder River Basin Resource Council, the Natural Resource Defense Council, the Sierra Club Law Program and the Western Environmental Law Center wrote a June 19 letter to Interior Secretary Sally Jewell and BLM Director Neil Kornze calling for a "do-over" of the Buffalo plan.

In addition to rolling back restrictions on oil and gas, the plan allows additional acreage to be allowed for coal leasing and will lead to an increase in the greenhouse gases responsible for global climate change, they said.

But BLM officials said their proposal actually increases environmental protections, adding stipulations to conserve reptiles, bats, fish and sage grouse, while providing more consistency in their oil and gas leasing rules.

Under the old plan, a company could receive a waiver from the Buffalo office supervisor to drill on a slope greater than 25 percent, despite the nominal prohibition on drilling in those areas. However, there were no rules on when the office supervisor was allowed to grant that waiver, they said.

"The exception really isn’t an exception anymore when it was the common thing to do," said Buffalo field office supervisor Duane Spencer.

The draft plan will ask operators to submit plans to stabilize and reclaim the area.

"The whole idea what we are doing with this new plan is tell a project proponent what they have to do up front," said Thomas Bills, the Buffalo field office's environmental coordinator. "We thought the old plan was pretty vague, so we are trying to be clear about what is required and how to go about it."

The draft plan was released for public comment last year. It is expected to be finalized late this year or early next year.

In written comments submitted to the BLM, the Petroleum Association of Wyoming, an industry group, supported the stipulation changes called for in Alternative D, the federal agency's preferred option among the four alternatives it laid out.

The association said it supports flexible approaches to soil management in high-erosion areas, on steep slopes and in areas where reclamation is difficult.

The oil and gas industry has worked with a wide range of consultants and academics in an effort to improve reclamation efforts, the association wrote in its comments.

"With constant improvements and innovations taking place, a (Resource Management Plan) needs to recognize the value of such efforts and, as in Alternative D, support flexibility to achieve the desired results," the association said in a release.

Reach energy reporter Benjamin Storrow at 307-335-5344 or benjamin.storrow@trib.com. Follow him on Twitter @bstorrow

Copyright 2015 Casper Star-Tribune Online. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

(3) Comments

  1. Todd
    Report Abuse
    Todd - July 06, 2014 6:06 am
    While the working taxpayers struggle to survive, we have these multimillion dollar non taxed so called "non profits" demanding more and more all of the time. They seem to feel they are entitled to exclusive use and control of recreational land and the rest of us have to pay them to enjoy it.
  2. thehousemouse
    Report Abuse
    thehousemouse - July 05, 2014 7:15 pm
    " can tax payers have a do over too, refund the money"
  3. logger
    Report Abuse
    logger - July 05, 2014 11:01 am
    The powder river basin council...doesn't represent squat for landowners. Just another cheap propaganda ploy. Maybe...if the CST would really like to do some investigative reporting like the big boys...maybe they should get to the bottom of how many "landowners" it really represents....of course, I'm sure that's top secret...and we wouldn't want to put our allies in a bind.
Untitled Document

Civil Dialogue

We provide this community forum for readers to exchange ideas and opinions on the news of the day. Passionate views, pointed criticism and critical thinking are welcome. Name-calling, crude language and personal abuse are not welcome. Moderators will monitor comments with an eye toward maintaining a high level of civility in this forum. Our comment policy explains the rules of the road for registered commenters.

If your comment was not approved, perhaps...

  1. You called someone an idiot, a racist, a dope, a moron, etc. Please, no name-calling or profanity (or veiled profanity -- #$%^&*).

  2. You rambled, failed to stay on topic or exhibited troll-like behavior intended to hijack the discussion at hand.

  3. YOU SHOUTED YOUR COMMENT IN ALL CAPS. This is hard to read and annoys readers.

  4. You have issues with a business. Have a bad meal? Feel you were overcharged at the store? New car is a lemon? Contact the business directly with your customer service concerns.

  5. You believe the newspaper's coverage is unfair. It would be better to write the editor at editors@trib.com, or call Editor Jason Adrians at 266-0545 or Content Director David Mayberry at 266-0633. This is a forum for community discussion, not for media criticism. We'd rather address your concerns directly.

  6. You included an e-mail address or phone number, pretended to be someone you aren't or offered a comment that makes no sense.

  7. You accused someone of a crime or assigned guilt or punishment to someone suspected of a crime.

  8. Your comment is in really poor taste.

Add Comment
You must Login to comment.

Click here to get an account it's free and quick