Ollin Magnetic Digiscoping System

Department of Interior approves ANWR O&G leasing plan

What you suggest is the usual path that happens when society requests changes in our natural resource policies. It is painful, but few options are made available to those without political connection.

I've seen the dwindling of a small rural community, first-hand; lived it and left it. I was young, single, and without obligation, so it was easy for me to relocate, as is often suggested that others should do.

To your point of "Why," my personal experiences and interactions with others show a lot of answers to that, a few of which I'll list below.

I had family members who were/are the primary caregivers to other family members. Picking up and moving to a new job was/is not easy for them, sometimes impossible. Most of them stay in these depressed areas out of responsibility and obligation to those they provide care. In many rural areas, this caregiver situation is far more common than many might think. There just isn't the caregiver infrastructure in many places where these type of resource-based economic spirals happen and that responsibility falls to family members.

Many of these folks bought homes and tried to make a go of it in these mostly rural areas. In my case, when the mill shut down, the logging economy hit the skids and property values crashed. When these crashes happen, folks who are expected to move to follow the jobs have homes/mortgages that are way underwater; they are not the beneficiaries of a crazy real estate market we have here in Bozeman today.

When they are expected to relocate to where the jobs exist the options come with some tough decisions; either default on their mortgage by walking away or taking all the savings they might have to pay the difference in how much their mortgage is upside down. Pretty hard to pack up a family and move to a much higher cost location when you are defaulting on a mortgage and/or bringing no home equity with you to restart a new life somewhere else.

Many are small business owners. They have business loans, employees, and other obligations. They are lucky to liquidate their equipment and facilities for what debt balance exists. They end up with no equity, often defaulting on their business loans if they leave. Not that easy for them to pack up and move, leaving behind an entire life's investment in their version of the American Dream.

I've witnessed that in most instances, moving to the jobs and doing as you say is the eventual outcome for most, though it might take decades for the migration to complete. Most these folks know that eventual reality, but a life of dreams is hard to give up on, so they search and fight to find a way to change that eventuality.

For these folks, whether they stay or migrate, it is very difficult. The concerns tend to be discounted by politicians and economic theory promoters. Those theories assume everyone has skill mobility and low-hurdle migration options. That's just not the case.

These changes come with a ton of turmoil and consequence that is hard to measure, as it shows up in divorce rates, suicides, broken families, and other social fractures. These folks know that reality and they resist change in hopes that they can avoid this turmoil, though they seldom do avoid it.

When they voice their concerns that come with policy changes that impact resource industries, it is a social protest against the changes to their reality that bring forth a decision between multiple bad options. It is why they often vote the way they do, knowing many urban folks have bought into the mobility theories, of which these folks are the lab rats. I think we would do a lot better by listening and addressing those concerns, maybe even finding ways to soften the financial impacts imposed on these folks.

If AIG, Wall Street, and the automakers were "too big to fail" in 2008/09, I think the same could be said of Libby, MT and its timber industry, or Rangely, CO and its natural gas industry, or Gillette, WY and its coal industry, or Colstrip, MT and its electrical generating economy, or Koochiching Country, MN and its logging/paper/timber economy, or (insert here). I'd way rather see tax money or more US Treasury debt used for those folks than the well-connected dudes who usually get bailed out.

Yet, as a society, we've decided that the folks on the blunt end of the resource policy hammer are "just the right size to fail." Neither party has cornered the market on bludgeoning these folks with policy changes, as it seems to happen in many different situations under many different administrations. And both sides seem to share the same lack of concern for the folks who are doing the bleeding, crying and dying when the policy pendulums swing. I guess that is why politics is the science of picking winners and losers and political donations are the insurance premiums paid to insure being a policy winner.

Wish it was different, but what you mention is the expectation in our society. When faced with no other options, migrating becomes the eventual reality for most these folks. And with that migration comes the turmoil and disruptions that don't get recorded in the simplicity of most our economic measurements.

I am thankful for the good fortune that was my tailwind when that reality was part of my life. I came out the other end better than I could have ever asked for. Many family and friends were not so lucky.
I appreciate the thoughtful response and agree with it all. I too left my home young and single for what I thought was better future, and it worked out. I somewhat get why people don’t. What I don’t get completely, and why I bring up WV as an example, is that in 2016 Clinton campaigned on the idea of retraining people in coal country for other jobs. THe plan was $90B in cost. I thought it had merit, but she easily lost WV, only got about 25% of the vote. She wasn’t asking them to leave, just to embrace change and work toward reaching new goals. I just don’t get it. The reason seemed to be mostly that they blamed Obama for the industry decline. we know this isn’t the reason, the reason is Nat gas and the decline continued under Trump (who still got 70% of vote in 2020). To your point, these people take a beating from both sides but some of it is their own fault. I don’t have solutions, but doing the same thing and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity. Nothing in the world remains static and change is accelerating.
 
I appreciate the thoughtful response and agree with it all. I too left my home young and single for what I thought was better future, and it worked out. I somewhat get why people don’t. What I don’t get completely, and why I bring up WV as an example, is that in 2016 Clinton campaigned on the idea of retraining people in coal country for other jobs. THe plan was $90B in cost. I thought it had merit, but she easily lost WV, only got about 25% of the vote. She wasn’t asking them to leave, just to embrace change and work toward reaching new goals. I just don’t get it. The reason seemed to be mostly that they blamed Obama for the industry decline. we know this isn’t the reason, the reason is Nat gas and the decline continued under Trump (who still got 70% of vote in 2020). To your point, these people take a beating from both sides but some of it is their own fault. I don’t have solutions, but doing the same thing and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity. Nothing in the world remains static and change is accelerating.
What jobs was she wanting them to be retrained for? I know in oklahoma there aren't good paying jobs to be retrained for in alot of areas they just don't exist. And obama brought more regulations against coal so he definitely had an impact.
 
I deal with this every day. I have "mobile skills". I also have a granddaughter whom my wife will not leave. I am close enough to retirement that I'll just stick it out. I LEFT the city to come here 30 years ago, WTH would I ever want to go back? By the time I get the work done on our old ranch house to make it sellable, the equity will be gone.

I do tech work and business analytics from home. There is a time coming when I will be pressured to move or be resourced. Executives with gigabit ethernet are not tolerant of waiting for my rural bandwidth to keep up in Webex and Zoom sessions. HughesNet ain't the answer and Elon Musk's new toy will suck too when it has 1M+ users on it.

If Ol' Hillary thought it was any different in the hollows of WV, she was listening to economists who have gigabit internet, too.
 
Decent article. Fantastic article for who printed it. Sort of on topic about moving and industry decline.

 
What jobs was she wanting them to be retrained for? I know in oklahoma there aren't good paying jobs to be retrained for in alot of areas they just don't exist. And obama brought more regulations against coal so he definitely had an impact.
I don’t think it was specific. There is always to political promise of more manufacturing, but it was more of a $ credit toward retraining. That would allow the worker to choose what they were interested in pursuing. Does it matter? At least the job wouldn’t require them to work in a hole in the ground. I will conceded Obama didn’t help the industry, but neither did Trump. It can’t be saved. Saving the workers should be the focus.

Expect any infrastructure bill to include broad band internet and maybe 5G nationwide. I think both side can agree on that. The government (us) will have to pay for it like we did when they made laws that required wired telephone service and electricity to the areas. Agree on HugesNet. Don’t get me started.

This discussion will continue to come up around automation and whether it takes jobs. Some say the economy always creates new jobs and new areas so they don’t worry about it. I am not sure. Unspecialized jobs that can be replaced through automation puts those people in a position needing government assistance. Spending money early to retrain might save money later. But that battle is the same capital vs labor this country has fought for its entire existence.
 
Decent article. Fantastic article for who printed it. Sort of on topic about moving and industry decline.

Lessons learned from the whaling industry.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/253355/
 
Expect any infrastructure bill to include broad band internet and maybe 5G nationwide

I sure hope so. From someone involved in an industry that would be helping to make it happen, it is going to be quite a process, and should create a good many jobs along the way for sure. It will be far more likely that it is fiber optic broadband rather than 5G, at least in the rural areas.

The best option I have where I live now is the AT&T fixed wireless. I know folks that have it and it works great for them, but I have it and unless they can find a way to make it better I won't have it long. Too many trees blocking line of sight to the tower. My air card, cellular hotspot, and cell phone data in general smoke it on both download and upload speeds and there isn't any 5G within 100 miles.
 
Decent article. Fantastic article for who printed it. Sort of on topic about moving and industry decline.

Yea, I read it through. He makes some valid points on the topic at hand.

It does leave me with a couple of questions pertinent to this thread though:

1. Does anyone truly believe that this country is going to be anywhere near "net zero" carbon emissions by 2035?

2. Will wind generated power or solar power ever be a major contributor to the nations power grid as compared to what fossil fuels contribute now? I personally can't see it but I am no expert by any means.
 
Last edited:
I don’t think it was specific. There is always to political promise of more manufacturing, but it was more of a $ credit toward retraining. That would allow the worker to choose what they were interested in pursuing. Does it matter? At least the job wouldn’t require them to work in a hole in the ground. I will conceded Obama didn’t help the industry, but neither did Trump. It can’t be saved. Saving the workers should be the focus.

Expect any infrastructure bill to include broad band internet and maybe 5G nationwide. I think both side can agree on that. The government (us) will have to pay for it like we did when they made laws that required wired telephone service and electricity to the areas. Agree on HugesNet. Don’t get me started.

This discussion will continue to come up around automation and whether it takes jobs. Some say the economy always creates new jobs and new areas so they don’t worry about it. I am not sure. Unspecialized jobs that can be replaced through automation puts those people in a position needing government assistance. Spending money early to retrain might save money later. But that battle is the same capital vs labor this country has fought for its entire existence.
Obama had a plan, he executed the plan and the coal industry took it in the shorts. The power companies rolled in the cash as a result and the rate payers footed the bill.
 
I work in oil and gas too and am aware of all that.
Your point of view is looking about an inch I'm front of your nose.
The big oil companies think long term and long term ANWR may be needed.
I've been to ANWR. Pretty damn ugly country and very easy to explore and drill responsibly in the winter months.
And again the economics are known by the lease holder. If it wasn't and never will be economical they wouldn't be interested.

The coastal plain of the North Slope isn't all that exciting but the mountainous part of ANWR is one of the most incredible places on earth. The coastal plain might not be pretty, but it is vital calving habitat for the Porcupine and Central Arctic caribou herds. In fact the Porcupine herd primarily calves right in the middle of where the oil leases are located. I can't imagine that oil development would do anything but harm both of these herds.

Porcupine Herd Calving Grounds
Caribou_calving_map.jpg

The Oil Lease Tracks
Screenshot-2021-01-05-154125.png

This is a video of capturing caribou for ADF&G filmed primarily within those lease sites.

 
Back
Top