brocksw
Well-known member
No thanks required. That’s what we’re here for. Now it goes to the Governor!
For those interested.
We present at 20:50
We testify at 2:34:00
Last edited:
Sublette Pronghorn Migration Corridor designation September 10 in Lander, WY
- Thread starter brocksw
- Start date
For those interested.
We present at 20:50
We testify at 2:34:00
Irrelevant
Well-known member
Mission kicked in the nuts.
Gordon pares back Wyoming’s first pronghorn migration, overriding Game and Fish commissioners - WyoFile
A long-delayed migration corridor designation advanced by Wyoming's governor is preferred by the livestock industry. It forgoes protections for animals that use the Red Desert and Golden Triangle.
wyofile.com
My hunting season has been filled with more meetings and calls on this issue than it has been filled with encounters with bucks or bulls. BLM/DOI is being directed by the Mike Lee contingent that wants a complete giveaway of resources on those lands and an exemption of any costs/liabilities that come from the give away.
From my meetings I have learned a few relevant things:
- Oil and gas leasing is now in the hands of the industry, with them getting to nominate whatever parcels they want and BLM/DOI rubber stamping such without any regard or consideration of wildlife.
- The Wyoming Congressional delegation is completely on board with these efforts. I've been told pressure is being exerted to extend this support down state government. This change by the Governor seems to validate what I've been told.
- No scientist argues what the consequences will be for mule deer, pronghorn, or sage grouse, not even scientists who are hired by the oil and gas industry. We have the data from the Jonah Field and the Pinedale Projects, both of which are now 20+ years old, and those results are pretty much in line with what was predicted and can be extrapolated very well with the additional data accumulated in the 20 years of studying the impacts of those two projects.
- Not all oil and gas companies are in favor of these leases, exemptions, and other actions they know will harm mule deer, pronghorn, and sage grouse. They also know this is likely to be a huge PR problem for the industry.
- Like all communities, there are members of the oil and gas community that doesn't GAF and are willing to do these things even though they know it will give a black eye to their industry.
- The difference in production that would result by moving some of these projects/leases less than 10 miles to less impactful landscapes is very small.
- The US domestic consumption of natural gas would not be impacted at all if all of Wyoming's natural gas were taken off the market. Since the change in 2015 that lifted the ban on exporting natural gas, the US has become a world leader in natural gas exports.
Summary of that - this additional production of natural gas by again hammering the mule deer and pronghorn herds of Wyoming provides only a small marginal benefit to the companies profiting from export of LNG to Asia and Europe. Not a single cubic foot of this natural gas is needed to maintain US supplies or keep us "energy independent."
Question becomes, are we willing to place the premier mule deer and pronghorn herds on the alter of profits when we know what the consequences will be and when we know the projects could be moved small distances to mitigate most of those impacts?
This is probably one of our biggest content focuses of the coming year. Very disappointing to see elected people willing to place another direct hit on a world class resource that depends on key parts of these landscapes for migration and wintering grounds.
From my meetings I have learned a few relevant things:
- Oil and gas leasing is now in the hands of the industry, with them getting to nominate whatever parcels they want and BLM/DOI rubber stamping such without any regard or consideration of wildlife.
- The Wyoming Congressional delegation is completely on board with these efforts. I've been told pressure is being exerted to extend this support down state government. This change by the Governor seems to validate what I've been told.
- No scientist argues what the consequences will be for mule deer, pronghorn, or sage grouse, not even scientists who are hired by the oil and gas industry. We have the data from the Jonah Field and the Pinedale Projects, both of which are now 20+ years old, and those results are pretty much in line with what was predicted and can be extrapolated very well with the additional data accumulated in the 20 years of studying the impacts of those two projects.
- Not all oil and gas companies are in favor of these leases, exemptions, and other actions they know will harm mule deer, pronghorn, and sage grouse. They also know this is likely to be a huge PR problem for the industry.
- Like all communities, there are members of the oil and gas community that doesn't GAF and are willing to do these things even though they know it will give a black eye to their industry.
- The difference in production that would result by moving some of these projects/leases less than 10 miles to less impactful landscapes is very small.
- The US domestic consumption of natural gas would not be impacted at all if all of Wyoming's natural gas were taken off the market. Since the change in 2015 that lifted the ban on exporting natural gas, the US has become a world leader in natural gas exports.
Summary of that - this additional production of natural gas by again hammering the mule deer and pronghorn herds of Wyoming provides only a small marginal benefit to the companies profiting from export of LNG to Asia and Europe. Not a single cubic foot of this natural gas is needed to maintain US supplies or keep us "energy independent."
Question becomes, are we willing to place the premier mule deer and pronghorn herds on the alter of profits when we know what the consequences will be and when we know the projects could be moved small distances to mitigate most of those impacts?
This is probably one of our biggest content focuses of the coming year. Very disappointing to see elected people willing to place another direct hit on a world class resource that depends on key parts of these landscapes for migration and wintering grounds.
