Push to drill shouldn't hurt Wyo Range bill, senators say
By CHRIS MERRILL
Star-Tribune environment reporter
LANDER -- A movement to expand domestic oil and gas drilling shouldn't threaten the success of a popular Wyoming Range bill, representatives with the Cowboy State's two U.S. senators said last week.
High energy prices have reinvigorated calls from many members of Congress to ramp up domestic energy production. Still, the Wyoming Range Legacy Act of 2007, introduced by Republican Sen. John Barrasso, should garner widespread support, said Gregory Keeley, Barrasso's press secretary.
Keeley suggested that the primary push in Congress will be for more oil production off-shore and in Alaska, rather than in Wyoming.
"While Senator Barrasso understands that increased prices at the pump are a significant challenge, timing is perhaps the most critical hurdle at this point," Keeley said. "As Senator Barrasso has often stated, Wyoming contributes to the energy needs of the United States every day. We are first in coal production, first in uranium production, second in on-shore natural gas and seventh in oil production. In the Wyoming Range we have proven you can have both conservation and production."
The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that there's a maximum of 5 million barrels of recoverable oil in the Wyoming Range, about half of one day's oil import, Keeley said.
Senator Barrasso believes that the "real" potential for domestic oil is in America's deep seas, in Alaska and in Rocky Mountain oil shale, among other places, Keeley said.
Barrasso's bill is backed by a powerful and diverse coalition of conservation organizations, sporting groups, union and trade organizations, the state's Democratic Gov. Dave Freudenthal and its two Republican senators.
The Petroleum Association of Wyoming opposes the measure.
Under the act, no additional oil and gas leasing, mining patents or geothermal leasing would be allowed in a 100-mile-long section of the range in the Bridger-Teton National Forest.
Locales that are currently producing oil and gas within the boundaries would not be affected. And oil and gas leases already issued within the 100-mile-long stretch would remain valid, but the bill would establish a process by which groups or individuals interested in conservation could buy back leases and retire them permanently, if the lease-holders were willing to sell.
Barrasso introduced the bill in October, based on legislation planned by the late Wyoming Republican Sen. Craig Thomas.
"There are certain places that we want to protect, and one is this area of the Wyoming Range," Barrasso said in October. "It does allow for directional exploration. It doesn't stop anything that's going on there currently."
The bill has been bundled into a larger package of 90 bipartisan conservation measures -- called the Omnibus Public Land Management Act -- which was introduced to the full U.S. Senate in June.
It still awaits a hearing on the Senate floor.
Co-sponsor Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., said the people of Wyoming have told him they want the Wyoming Range protected, said his press secretary Elly Picket.
For Enzi, decisions about which areas to develop and which to protect should be made primarily by the affected states and their governors, Picket said.
"When there is broad consensus by state residents and their leaders on special protections for certain areas, then they should be recognized, just as the people in states who want the benefits of increased energy production should be," Picket said.
Enzi is continuing to work with Barrasso to move the bill forward, she said.
Bruce Hinchey, president of the Petroleum Association of Wyoming, said it is impossible for him to predict how a renewed debate over domestic energy production might affect the bill.
"I think a lot depends on what Congress eventually decides to do," Hinchey said. "Are they going to decide that they're really going to solve some problems for once, or are they going to continue with the lip service?"
The PAW supports the idea of protecting portions of the Wyoming Range from development, but stopping all new leases on 1.2 million acres of federal land with a single, blanket approach would be an excessive measure, Hinchey argues.
Tom Reed of Trout Unlimited argued when members of Congress look at the bill closely, there won't likely be many who take issue with it.
"I think if you didn't know what the act contained, if you just saw it as a straight withdrawal bill, you might have a problem with it," Reed said. "But in reality it takes nothing off the table. It allows for existing activity to continue and allows for directional drilling. It doesn't ban any drilling on existing leases that are undeveloped."
Reed said sportsmen, in general, welcome energy development in the West because it is a boon for the economy and creates good jobs. Many of TUs members work in the oil and gas patches, he said, but those same workers also want places to hunt and fish, and that's why they support the measure.
By CHRIS MERRILL
Star-Tribune environment reporter
LANDER -- A movement to expand domestic oil and gas drilling shouldn't threaten the success of a popular Wyoming Range bill, representatives with the Cowboy State's two U.S. senators said last week.
High energy prices have reinvigorated calls from many members of Congress to ramp up domestic energy production. Still, the Wyoming Range Legacy Act of 2007, introduced by Republican Sen. John Barrasso, should garner widespread support, said Gregory Keeley, Barrasso's press secretary.
Keeley suggested that the primary push in Congress will be for more oil production off-shore and in Alaska, rather than in Wyoming.
"While Senator Barrasso understands that increased prices at the pump are a significant challenge, timing is perhaps the most critical hurdle at this point," Keeley said. "As Senator Barrasso has often stated, Wyoming contributes to the energy needs of the United States every day. We are first in coal production, first in uranium production, second in on-shore natural gas and seventh in oil production. In the Wyoming Range we have proven you can have both conservation and production."
The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that there's a maximum of 5 million barrels of recoverable oil in the Wyoming Range, about half of one day's oil import, Keeley said.
Senator Barrasso believes that the "real" potential for domestic oil is in America's deep seas, in Alaska and in Rocky Mountain oil shale, among other places, Keeley said.
Barrasso's bill is backed by a powerful and diverse coalition of conservation organizations, sporting groups, union and trade organizations, the state's Democratic Gov. Dave Freudenthal and its two Republican senators.
The Petroleum Association of Wyoming opposes the measure.
Under the act, no additional oil and gas leasing, mining patents or geothermal leasing would be allowed in a 100-mile-long section of the range in the Bridger-Teton National Forest.
Locales that are currently producing oil and gas within the boundaries would not be affected. And oil and gas leases already issued within the 100-mile-long stretch would remain valid, but the bill would establish a process by which groups or individuals interested in conservation could buy back leases and retire them permanently, if the lease-holders were willing to sell.
Barrasso introduced the bill in October, based on legislation planned by the late Wyoming Republican Sen. Craig Thomas.
"There are certain places that we want to protect, and one is this area of the Wyoming Range," Barrasso said in October. "It does allow for directional exploration. It doesn't stop anything that's going on there currently."
The bill has been bundled into a larger package of 90 bipartisan conservation measures -- called the Omnibus Public Land Management Act -- which was introduced to the full U.S. Senate in June.
It still awaits a hearing on the Senate floor.
Co-sponsor Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., said the people of Wyoming have told him they want the Wyoming Range protected, said his press secretary Elly Picket.
For Enzi, decisions about which areas to develop and which to protect should be made primarily by the affected states and their governors, Picket said.
"When there is broad consensus by state residents and their leaders on special protections for certain areas, then they should be recognized, just as the people in states who want the benefits of increased energy production should be," Picket said.
Enzi is continuing to work with Barrasso to move the bill forward, she said.
Bruce Hinchey, president of the Petroleum Association of Wyoming, said it is impossible for him to predict how a renewed debate over domestic energy production might affect the bill.
"I think a lot depends on what Congress eventually decides to do," Hinchey said. "Are they going to decide that they're really going to solve some problems for once, or are they going to continue with the lip service?"
The PAW supports the idea of protecting portions of the Wyoming Range from development, but stopping all new leases on 1.2 million acres of federal land with a single, blanket approach would be an excessive measure, Hinchey argues.
Tom Reed of Trout Unlimited argued when members of Congress look at the bill closely, there won't likely be many who take issue with it.
"I think if you didn't know what the act contained, if you just saw it as a straight withdrawal bill, you might have a problem with it," Reed said. "But in reality it takes nothing off the table. It allows for existing activity to continue and allows for directional drilling. It doesn't ban any drilling on existing leases that are undeveloped."
Reed said sportsmen, in general, welcome energy development in the West because it is a boon for the economy and creates good jobs. Many of TUs members work in the oil and gas patches, he said, but those same workers also want places to hunt and fish, and that's why they support the measure.
