Coal Bed Methane

[Tom]

I'll count the mule deer and elk later, unless somebody here counts it up in the mean time. I want to use that as an index for the issue on how good/bad the hunting is now compared to earlier.

I think a lot of CBM is on private land too, the CBM is up in the northeast part of the state.

I get that some habitat is changed, temporarily. Its not destroyed, not by a long shot. If somebody has info. on that, it would be interesting.

In the mean time, millions of people will be using the gas, Wyoming and others will get rich. An unknown number of mule deer, elk, and fish etc. will have a somewhat changed habitat.

Bambistew might have the numbers, what are they?

http://www.boone-crockett.org/bgRecords/trophySearch.asp?area=bgRecords

Gives in their description of the data base a total of 645 elk since 1830 with 337 in the last 20 years, >50%.

What did you get for mule deer? Did you subscribe to that database?

[ 06-23-2004, 16:38: Message edited by: Tom ]

 

[mtmiller]

I want to use that as an index for the issue on how good/bad the hunting is now compared to earlier.

Good point, the quality of animals killed and put in a book is a direct correlation to how good the hunting is or the quality of the habitat.

Tom, obviously you are an intelligent fella, so I am assuming you are just using this red herring to stir the pot.

If this is not the case,

I think a lot of CBM is on private land too, the CBM is up in the northeast part of the state.

Just because CBM may be below private land much of the time the landowner doesn't have much of a choice whether they punch a hole or not. Go ahead and investigate. I'll give you a hint, GOOGLE "split estate CBM".

 

[guppie9]

<SIGH> Gunner...I reallllly hope that entire post was sarcastic. I am pretty sure the end is, but one can never tell!!! I'm going to try to do this calmly. The reason that I feel that people in the lower 48 should not have a say is because of the blatant misinformation that is being put out about ANWR. All you see of ANWR are the pretty pictures of a caribou silhouetted against the Brooks Range...awwww....how majestic...how could any God fearing 'merican want to drill there and kill all the cute caribou????? Unfortunataly, that is a load of caribou crap (Alaskan version of bulls**t!!!)

The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is a huuuuge area. It is 19 million acres...larger than 10 other states. Of that 19 million acres, 17.5 million have been set aside as NOT OPEN TO DEVELOPMENT. The area we are talking about is the Coastal Plain, a barren and desolate area of the state. That area is 1.5 million acres along the Beaufort Sea, a little bigger than Delaware. Now...keep following...out of THAT 1.5 million acres, the oil companies would like to develop 2,000-5,000 acres for oil drilling and production, or less than one half of one percent of the total area of ANWR.

Want more numbers??? In 1997, the USFWS did a study and concluded that, only 1,000-1,500 people visit ANWR each year. When looking at the Coastal Plain alone, exactly 116 people visited in 1997, the year of the study. If the entire state of Deleware was loaded with oil, and only 116 people visited there, would you drill??

OK...how about those caribou then??? The major concern is that the caribou calving grounds for the Porcupine Herd are near where they want to drill. By way of comparison, the Central Arctic Herd calves near Prudhoe Bay (Where all the drilling takes place now and is the start of the pipeline.) Before drilling began in Prudhoe Bay in the 60's, the Central Arctic Herd numbered around 3,000 animals. By the early 80's, they had grown to over 23,000 and have now stabilized to around 18,000. All within earshot of a huge drilling operation.

These are the facts. The 220 residents of Kaktovik, the only village in the Coastal Plain, have come out in support of drilling in ANWR. The Arctic Slope Regional Corporation (we don't have reservations, they are corporations) the City of Kaktovik, the Kaktovik Inupiat Corporation, the North Slope Borough(kind of like a county), and the Alaskan Federation of Natives have all shown support for drilling in ANWR. 75% of Alaskans would support drilling in ANWR.

Now, perhaps, maybe you understand why I don't feel that everyone has all the facts. They are being swayed by misinformation. When the people who live, work, and play here all come out in support of this, why should some fat cat buearocrat(sp?) from Massachussetts tell me what we should and shouldn't do in Alaska? I do realize that this is federal land. Somehow, I imagine, if all 600,000 residents of Alaska got together and started making policy decisions about federal lands in Florida, there would be quite a stink.

Thanks for listening...although, I suppose you didn't have a choice!!

 

[BuzzH]

Tom,

When you do your search on Mule deer...be sure to look at the date the animals were harvested, not just when they were entered.

Also, note the B&C minimum scores for mule deer were lowered in the early 90's (or late 80's)...because so few were being entered.

What does that tell you? Lowering a minimum score because of sagging record book entries?

 

[JoseCuervo]

Guppe,

By the same logic, why should 280 Million people in this country care what only 220 people in some Village think is best?? If you really care about those 220 people, you can give them a $50k divident NOT to drill, and we would all be better off.

Not all Public Lands need to be exploited for the benefit of some group of Locals. There is a ton of Value in having Wilderness, even if one doesn't visit the Wilderness every year.

And it appears that, based upon Congress'actions, most Americans don't want to drill ANWR. Welcome to the Club of states with a high amount of Federal Land. People in DC are going to make decisions on the land next door.

And we should all be suspicious of comments like "the oil companies would like to develop 2,000-5,000 acres for oil drilling and production, or less than one half of one percent of the total area of ANWR." as our Public Lands should not be managed to the benefit of Oil Companies, but rather to MY benefit.

 

[Bambistew]

Tom, I won't give B&C the $40 a year or what ever it is to be able to "look" at the shit on thier site. I really don't care all that much.

Buzz is right, the min scores for MD were lowered in the early 90's. The typ was dropped from 195 down to 190 and the nontyp was lowered from 140 to 130... If you have a B&C book handy check out how many bucks killed over 260 N/T have been taken in the last 20 years! Also check out how many 205+ Tpy bucks are killed each year for the last 20... then compare that to the previous 40...

I don't know the exact numbers and don't really care. Trophy M/D used to be my "job" I've handled more monster muledeer than most people will ever see. I've carressed each world record muledeer for all catagoies including P&Y, amongst other records, don't recall seeing any "monster" whitetails from TX how ever. We only dealt with BIG stuff not the TX stuff that barley sqeeked in the books...

I think B&C should raise the min for whitetails to 180... that would toss out about 90% of the deer from TX...

I've handeled pretty much every state record M/D, most non-typ but quite a few typs in there as well. Monster deer used to by what I did for a living!

Pretty much everyone on here could give a rats ass about some pen, raised corn feed "stock" animals in Texas. They grow big deer in the Zoo here and on game farms too... its pretty easy to grow big deer when you keep them in a barn and feed them the best nutrition you can afford!

How many of those B&C whitetails came off public lands in TX? Of course you don't care because you got an inside deal... A vast majority of the B&C muledeer came from public land! Do you think that only people with private leases should have the luxury to feed, shoot up with hormones, and then shoot while tied to a leash, animals so they can enter them in the book? I personally like chasing those deer and elk that can get away if they want to, to a diffrent state if if they want. Comparing the hunting in TX to the hunting in MT, ID, WY, etc. is like compring hunting earth and mars!

 

[Tom]

I like Guppie's post. He gave some decent data, I'd vote for his argument in a minute. Most of the rest is uninformed and non-informative emotional junk. Buzz is pointing out decline in mule deer, mtmiller is good at killing them and you know some biology. You're free to come up with data on habitat quality.

How many acres per mule deer in the basin there?

Bambistew correctly pointed out and agreed, I think, that elk and whitetail B&C numbers are great in the last 20 years, but states otherwise for mule deer. Without data supporting it, but probably true, so what are the explanations? It may not be true everywhere either, because, for example, we got a new state record mule deer out of Texas last year, 280 something B&C, from private free ranging land.

Are mule deer being out competed by elk and whitetail or overhunted or what?

I think Guppie's logic applies to the basin, major benefits, small losses. There's no documented numbers on any substantial loss, but the wells have major benefits. They've been drilling them for over 10 years too. Where's the losses? Nobody has documented them.

Maybe I'll get that database or a new B&C book sometime. I only have the 1981 one.

Bambistews ??: "How many of those B&C whitetails came off public lands in TX?" Our state record archery whitetail is off of public land, its like 246 for a score I think. I guess if I get the data base subscription I might be able to compute it. It doesn't have much to do with this discussion though either.

"Do you think that only people with private leases should have the luxury to feed, shoot up with hormones, and then shoot while tied to a leash, animals so they can enter them in the book?" No, and its not that way either. Shoot up with hormones? tied to a leash? You've got some kind of a problem with facts there Bambistew.

[ 06-24-2004, 09:52: Message edited by: Tom ]

 

[guppie9]

Interesting...I think I'm actually agreeing with both sides here. Tom gets my point about ANWR, and that is, if there is little to lose and much to gain, than what is the problem? Elkgunner, thanks for welcoming Alaska into the "people getting perpetually screwed by the government" club!!! However, you have failed to sway me with the exploitation arguement. I do not see how using 2-5k acres of federal land out of 19 million is exploitation. Plus, read the facts. Prudhoe Bay has been in operation for 30 years without any problems. Technology today would allow for even less invasion than in the 60's. I didn't want to start a big ANWR war, because that is not what this thread is about. I was just making a point that things aren't always as bad as they seem.

Conversely (wait...lemme get my "fill-in-any-politicians-name-here" Memorial Flip-Flops on!), I think that CBM might result in ecological harm. So far, Buzz and Nemont have given some good facts about what may happen if CBM is allowed to progress. I must say, by what is going on with CBM in Alaska, that I am not so sure it won't harm the environment. (ohhhh...nice double negative...but you get what I'm saying, right?)

I am a hard facts kind of guy...so...someone is going to have to convince me that this is the right thing to do. Elkgunner, if you want to continue this discussion about ANWR, perhaps we should start a new thread, although, I can't see you changing my mind on this one. BTW...its guppie, not guppe!!!

 

[Bambistew]

Come on Tom, just rib'n ya a little. I know those deer you hunt have 20,000 acres to get way from ya... The state record whitetails in MT came off public land as well, and they make your TX deer look like "minnows"

There are numberous reasons for the muledeer decline, but the biggest threat IMO is habitat loss.

I have to agree with Guppie too, a small impact for a possible big pay off is worth it.... but PRB CBM is not small impact. Its rape and pillage with a big pay off!

 

[Tom]

What's the state record MT whitetail and mule deer score?

You got any hard facts data to go with your opinion on why its habitat loss that is hurting mule deer most?
How can mule deer records decline, when elk and whitetail go up, if its mainly habitat loss?

I see the big payoff, its lots of gas for millions of people plus lots of money for Wyoming and others.
One road and well into 80 acres is about 2.5% loss of habitat, even if they do not use the road to improve the remaining habitat. With all the water from the well, they could do that.
2 1/2 % of a few animals lost during 20 years is not much to pay for 14 million people to have gas, for Wyoming and others to make millions of dollars, that will be spent on good things, including habitat improvement, if they so desire.
What is the rape and pillage?

You call this a minnow?

Here's the '98 state record desert mulie, we got one 60 points bigger here this year.
Decline?

Show me a fish.

What's the deal on that Al Gore quote too? Is it meaningful or funny or what?

 

[Bambistew]

Jeezz Tom... you Texans get your panties bunched up pretty easy don't ya. Can't ya take a little ribb'n? I guess I should have known everything is bigger in TX... it now makes sence. less room, more bunch'n

Muledeer utilize totaly diffrent habitat than whitetails, and also whities are a lot more aggressive. Elk are also more agressive, plus there is waaaay more elk than there was 40 years ago. Habitat loss due to elk is also a concern for the deer. Can't a whitetial live a full life in like 40 acres or something? Muledeer roam for miles...

MT Typ whitetail is 199 and change... and non-typ is somewhere up around 255 or so I don't remember exactly. Buy minnow, I'm talking a 170" TX dog deer that tips the scale at 120 pounds... not a 170" MT that tips in at 250-280... notice the before you fire away???

MT is not known for monster racks on m/d, I can't remember right off exactly what the state record typ M/D is but I think its around 206 or so, doesn't really get all that exciting untill you hit the 215 mark or so on typ's... and top two nontyps came from a father and son on public land they score in the 260+/- range... Again doesn't get all that exciting untill you hit that 270" mark... MT has trouble hitting the 210" mark on a yearly basis...

I couldn't find any pic of the mt record deer, but found this one of a decent WY buck... I belive the buck on the left is the WY state record... and either 3rd or 4th in the world if I remember right. I can't tell for certian, but I'm about 97% sure... I haven't had to rattle off these numbers for years, It's kind of dissapointing that I can't remember this stuff any more. The other punny one in the front center is a CO buck... he only scores in the high 2 teens...

here's another dink WY buck...

I really don't know why we're arguing about this anyway. The size of racks doesn't really dictate how good the habitat is, or the quality of the deer herd, its a function of numberous things the major factors being management and genetics! You should know that, TX has great management but can't put any BIG muleys in the book either!

I know in TX the size of rack dictates the amount of money generated... but not so on public land.

I understand what you are getting at with your money is good for the ammount of habitat disturbed... But look at this way, if they are going to put in 50,000 wells on 80 acres a peice they are essentialy disturbing over 6000 square miles of basically undisturbed area! The actualy foot print of the wells is relitivly small, but the over all impact is much bigger!

 

[JoseCuervo]

Guiseppe,

Nahhh, I don't think we need a thread on ANWAR. Why bring up threads on dead Egyptian presidents?

And besides, my arguement doesn't need facts. Just acknowldegment that Federal Lands are for ALL Americans, not just 220 villagers who want a quick payday. I personally feel that ALL Public Lands should be managed to maximize my recreational benefit.

 

[BuzzH]

"will be used for less than all of the resources; and harmonious and coordinated management of the resources, each with the other, without impairment of the productivity of the land, with consideration being given to the relative values of the various resources, and not necessarily the combination of uses that will give the greatest dollar return or the greatest unit output."

---Multiple use Act

 

[MarvB]

Buzz- though I agree, in principal, with what you are saying the problem lies a lot in something you didn't highlight in the above quote harmonious and coordinated management I put in enough time around the USFS and BLM to know that nut isn't gonna be cracked anytime soon- IMHO too much empire building and one-upmanship between those entites for much good to happen

 

[Tom]

What is the relative value of the mule deer habitat possibly lost? Coordinated management could be treating the water, planting things along the road for mule deer, etc. Couldn't it? Any documentation for that, what's coordinated management, its got to coordinate with roads to the wells, to be coordinated? You people imagine some destroyed habitat, I'm asking to further define the relative value of it. People just say its destroyed and forget about it. That Multiple Use Act, requires consideration to the relative value. So, what measure of habitat destruction is there, how many mule deer are being displaced? Maybe gas profits and use can go down a little to coordinate some food and water for the mule deer. It certainly seems to enhance the productivity of the land all around to do it that way, if possible.

Is that right, more elk then less mule deer, or more mule deer then less elk? I don't know much about manageing them, being down here where they are few and far between. What's the best reference book on that, say, for a degree in wildlife management like several of you people have? The Wildlife Management Institute book looks pretty good, but there might be a good one you people know about.

Here's a possible way to go. Nut wanted some alternative energy, as well as, everyone else, probably.

http://www.biogasworks.com/Reports/9th-yt&t.htm

This might be the answer, biogas. We can generate gas from septic tanks, maybe. Anybody studies this?

Wow, I guess Texas mule deer got on the map last year, our state record is now 280 something. One of those fat assed northern deer wouldn't survive down here long, not with the heat we have. I'll get a good picture of the 280 one from here eventually. The Texas Big Game Awards are here in San Antonio pretty soon, I think. I hope they have a good display for it.

I finally got a picture of the snow goose I got mounted.

If you want to slaughter them with no plug in the shotgun and electronic calls, you come here right after the regular goose season ends and its just extended season on snows. That's when the electronic calls and no plugs go into effect. But, if you want speckle bellies too, one/day, come before that. The trouble with getting snows, there are so many of them, one of them, in a big group, figures out its decoys, sounds the alarm and they all take off. If you get a few in a group, those can be called in to the decoys easier.

On the whitetail and 40 acres. If its good habitat and there's does to hang out with, they'll stay on 40 acres. If they need to roam to find some does or food, etc., they go for miles, Dr.James Kroll, even said 60 miles in his book on whitetail, but didn't give a reference. Its burried in the literature somewhere. I hunted a place in west Texas where they shot a buck that had an id from a ranch 15 miles away. I've watched whitetails run over a mile away, just at the site of me standing there. So, they can live their whole life in a square mile, people have said that, but in low density areas, they move more. Also, bucks disperse a few miles away, even annually, during rut.

[ 06-25-2004, 11:02: Message edited by: Tom ]

 

[Bambistew]

Tom, I read someplace that their was some controversy behind the new TX state record m/d, as there always is with everything. Do you know anything about that?

 

[guppie9]

Ilklover,

I agree that there is no reason to start a thread about
A rgentenian
N ational
W elfare
A id
R eduction
and there is certainly no need to talk about Cleopatra and her clan. I mean, who wants to be mummified anyway?
As for your arguement not requiring facts...if you can show me one fact that supports your argument of not needing facts, then perhaps I will consider it. I also agree that ALL public lands should be maximized for public recreation. Therefore, I have scheduled my next vacation in Idaho during hunting season, so that I may drive my ATV and hoot 'n' holler on the public lands down there while you're trying to hunt!!!

 

[MarvB]

Just some info (in regards to the PRB) that came off of our newswire a few minutes ago:

Wyoming Pipe Authority May Help Finance Cheyenne Plains, Lower Valley Project

The Wyoming Natural Gas Pipeline Authority is closing in on deals to utilize some of its $1 billion bonding authority for three projects that will either directly or indirectly promote the sale and transportation of more Wyoming natural gas.

According to a source at the Pipeline Authority, there are plans to help El Paso finance the 380-mile Cheyenne Plains pipeline. The Authority also is in talks to provide financial assistance to Lower Valley Energy for a proposed gas pipeline to serve Jackson, WY. And the Authority is looking at plans to help a developer build a business complex in Rock Springs that will be leased by oilfield services giant Halliburton.

The Pipeline Authority is still in the negotiating stage on the $425 million Cheyenne Plains project. El Paso currently is in financial distress currently. Although the company already has obtained construction financing, apparently final contract signatures are being held up by delayed quarterly financial statements. While that may be only a short-term concern, the real issue involves a permanent financing package.

"The Cheyenne Plains pipe is literally laying on the ground right now," the source said. "The contracts are completed and about to be signed. They have their construction financing in order. Everything is a go on that project, but they have not addressed their permanent financing and that's where we may come in with some sort of assistance."

The Pipeline Authority sees Cheyenne Plains as an essential addition to the Rocky Mountain gas grid. "It is the one project we feel Wyoming cannot do without," the source said.

The project, which will extend from the Cheyenne Hub in northeastern Colorado to Greensburg, KS, will be a significant new addition to the entire region, but particularly for Wyoming. It will provide a new direct route to Midcontinent and Midwest gas markets for rapidly growing Powder River Basin coalbed methane production, as well as for gas supply from the Jonah Field in the Green River Basin in western Wyoming and other production from the Piceance Basin in western Colorado.

The 36-inch diameter pipeline will include several laterals, 23,063 horsepower of new compression, a gas treatment plant at the Cheyenne Hub in Weld County, CO, and nine new pipeline interconnects. The project has been targeted for service in January 2005 with an expansion the following year. Initial deliveries will total 560 MMcf/d with another 170 MMcf/d in phase II and the possibility of an additional 1 Bcf/d expansion.

The second project the Authority is examining is Lower Valley Energy's 52 mile, eight-inch diameter pipeline from Williams' Merna gas production field to Jackson, WY. It would be a $12-15 million pipeline.

Gas conversions and customer demand growth in Jackson has made it extremely impractical and inefficient for Lower Valley to expand its LNG transportation program beyond the current 500 trucks per year.

"If you saw the roads, these little skinny mountain roads, and considered all the snow slides, you would understand that it has come to a point where the logistics are too difficult and just don't make sense anymore," the source said.

"They are still in the process of doing their environmental impact statement and so until that is done, they can't really commit to saying this is how they want to do the financing. They have their NEPA work done but are still working on other environmental work so when that is done I think we can sit down and do some negotiating. It's probably going to happen in the next 60 to 90 days. They have some existing debt that we may be able to roll into this new project and do some financing."

The third project being discussed is already being built in the southwestern part of Wyoming under previously obtained construction financing but the builder has requested additional financing assistance from the Pipeline Authority because the project, a $25 million business complex, will be leased to Halliburton, one of the world's largest gas and oil field services companies. Its a 40 acre facility with 120,000 square feet of office and shop space and railroad spurs.

"We have a draft opinion from our bond counsel saying that this fits under our legislation -- we can help with financing this because all of these services are needed to have gas production."

The Rock Springs project is likely to go through Pipeline Authority financing first and may happen by the end of the year, the source said. Lower Valley's project may not happen by the end of the year because it is still going the environmental work. And El Paso's permanent Cheyenne Plains financing most likely will not be completed until next year, the source said.

The Wyoming Natural Gas Pipeline Authority was reconstituted in 2003 after the state's natural gas industry suffered from a year of depressed gas pricing due to poor pricing differentials and tight export pipeline capacity. Pipeline Authority staff spent the last year gathering information on gas transportation problems in the state and region and identifying several means of addressing those problems. By the end of this year staff hopes to have begun taking action on solutions. The Authority currently has funding for two years.

 

[Tom]

http://207.235.25.248/photos/dev/display.asp?path=E:\INETFILES-8-00\hosted%20websites\texasbiggameawards.com\photos\albums\Region_1\Compton%20Resize.jpg

is a picture of the 288+ buck, but its not such a good picture. What's the controversy you heard?

 

[JoseCuervo]

Can you say "Road Hunter"????