THE U.S. FOREST SERVICE HAS INDICATED IT INTENDS TO REVERSE COURSE on a previous decision to lease 44,000 acres in the Wyoming Range for oil and gas development.

The federal agency on Thursday released a draft of its long-awaited updated analysis of contested oil and gas leases on the eastern front of the Wyoming Range in the Bridger-Teton National Forest.

The draft states the agency’s preferred course of action now is to cancel all of the contested leases—a decision that would be in line with the wishes of a broad coalition that has worked for four years to protect the Wyoming Range from development. Those working to protect the range include Wyoming Gov. Dave Freudenthal, area ranchers, sportsmen’s groups, labor union members, outfitters, outdoors enthusiasts and conservation organizations.

LEASES CONTROVERSIAL FROM THE START

The Forest Service leased the acres in question for oil and gas development in four sales in 2005 and 2006. The leases faced numerous protests from conservation groups, labor unions, hunters and fishermen, concerned citizens, and the governor’s office, among others—who came together to stop the industrialization of the Wyoming Range, and conserve its recreational values.

The Wyoming Range Legacy Act—introduced by Wyoming Sen. John Barrasso in October 2007 in response to the development threats—was signed into law in March 2009. The act removed 1.2 million acres of the Wyoming Range from future oil and gas leasing, and had widespread public support.

The legislation left the fate of the 44,720 acres of contested leases to the agencies. The U.S. Bureau of Land Management decided in August to rescind about half of the contested leases, and refund the high bidders.

This latest draft analysis by the Forest Service addresses the entire 44,720 acres—not simply the remaining 21,000 acres—because industry is currently challenging the BLM’s decision to rescind the other half of the leases.

This updated analysis shows that the Forest Service’s preferred alternative is to cancel all of the leases from the first two sales.

Media Contact: Lisa McGee, Wyoming Outdoor Council, 307-332-7031 x20; lisa@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org.

Filed under: *All posts | No Comments »

By Lisa McGee

THE SHOSHONE NATIONAL FOREST could approve, in the coming months, a decade-old application to drill for oil near Dubois, Wyoming. If the project is given the green light, it would be the first well drilled on the Shoshone in more than 20 years.

Because the drilling would be part of a larger oil and gas unit—more development could follow. As is, the project would require the clear-cutting and leveling of several acres of Shoshone National Forest land to make way for new and upgraded roads and a large well pad.

The U.S. Forest Service has indicated it intends to bypass an in-depth environmental review of this proposed project.

The Outdoor Council believes the Shoshone National Forest deserves better. The proposed oil well was controversial ten years ago and is even more unsettling today. The Council’s members are requesting that the agency proceed more cautiously, and with a thorough review of potential impacts to nearby streams and to big game species, such as elk.

The area where the drilling would take place is important elk winter range and spring calving grounds and is right in the middle of an elk migration route that links the forest to Yellowstone National Park.

It is also an area referred to as “bear central” by a local wildlife manager, because it provides some of the most important springtime grizzly bear habitat in the Greater Yellowstone area, offering the bears a wide variety of lower-elevation food sources.

HOW TO PARTICIPATE

Although the Forest Service is not hosting any official public meetings regarding this project, Rick Metzger, the Wind River district ranger, has agreed to meet with interested citizens on Tuesday, February 2, at 6 p.m., at the Forest Service office in Dubois. The Wyoming Outdoor Council is encouraging people to attend.

The Shoshone National Forest is accepting public comments on the project until February 8.

Those interested can send comments to: Rick Metzger, Wind River Ranger District, P.O. Box 186, Dubois, WY 82513, or by email at comments-rocky-mountain-shoshone-wind-river@fs.fed.us or fax a comment to (307) 455-3866 ATTN: Rick Metzger. Include “Scott Well #2″ in subject line of emails and faxes.

OLD APPLICATION

This drilling proposal originally came before the U.S. Forest Service in 1999 and—due to public opposition and company inaction then and over the last decade—it was never approved and has remained under suspension.

But late in 2009 the Bureau of Land Management urged the Forest Service to deal with the long-suspended lease, and the Service responded by contacting the company, Hudson Group, LLC, which subsequently expressed a renewed interest in developing the lease.

This fall, the Forest Service indicated it would prefer to opt out of completing a detailed environmental review, claiming the project meets criteria such that it could be “categorically excluded” from review, which would essentially fast-track the approval. Traditionally used for minor administrative actions such as painting a building or mowing a lawn—actions that will have an insignificant effect on the environment—the use of categorical exclusions was expanded under the prior presidential administration. This type of exclusion was adopted toward the end of the last administration, and it would be its first application on any national forest in Wyoming.

The Wyoming Outdoor Council believes the authorization of this kind of industrial development should be made only with the most careful and detailed environmental analysis. The Shoshone is one of our most treasured national forests, and is one of this country’s last, best places for wildlife, biodiversity, and untouched backcountry landscapes.

WILD BACKCOUNTRY

Bordering Yellowstone National Park, the Shoshone National Forest is the United State’s first federally protected national forest, created by an act of Congress in 1891.

Some have mused that if Teddy Roosevelt were to explore the Shoshone today, it would look very much the same to him as it did when he visited in the late 19th century. This is a testament to an engaged public that has demanded routinely and passionately that the Shoshone be managed to retain the wild characteristics that set it apart from other forests in this country and around the globe. The Shoshone National Forest is what we at the Outdoor Council refer to as a “heritage landscape.” Heritage landscapes are places where the wildlife, scenic, historic, cultural, or recreational values are too important to the people of Wyoming—and to the nation as a whole—to sacrifice to industrial development.

The Council is working to ensure that the Shoshone National Forest remains a place where wildlife continues to thrive and people can go to experience world-class backcountry hiking, camping, hunting, and fishing—not unlike the experiences people had more than a century ago. There are perhaps few better examples of a heritage landscape than the Shoshone National Forest.

Contact: Lisa McGee, Wyoming Outdoor Council, 307-332-7031 x20; lisa@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org.

Filed under: *All posts, Activities | No Comments »

WYOMING’S NEXT ENERGY BOOM, in the form of industrial-scale wind farms, might already be here.

And the sheer volume of new applications for Wyoming wind projects has taken most observers by surprise. There have been about 100 applications for potential wind farms on federal land, alone, since 2002—and most of those have come in the past three years.

Although unlikely, if all of the applications were approved and developed, wind farms could cover an estimated 1 million acres of public land—and perhaps another 750,000 to 1 million acres of private land in Wyoming.

The Wyoming Outdoor Council has created a team of staff members whose goal it is to get out ahead of the next energy boom, and to offer meaningful leadership on the ground.

“We’ve worked hard to develop the expertise, and the means, to engage effectively with decision makers,” said Laurie Milford, executive director. “And we’re now in a position to help ensure that we make strides as a nation toward curbing climate change, without sacrificing Wyoming’s wildlife and most cherished landscapes.”

Download a PDF of our latest newsletter here, or click on the image of the newsletter above.

Filed under: *All posts | No Comments »

WITH THE AIM OF BRINGING HEALTH BENEFITS to millions of Americans, the Environmental Protection Agency proposed new smog standards on Thursday.

The new standards would replace Bush-era rules that experts agree are inadequate to protect people from potentially dangerous air pollution.

The standards would be the strictest to date, and would be in line with the unanimous recommendation put forth in 2008 by the agency’s Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee, which was composed of preeminent medical doctors, air quality experts, and public health professionals.

“EPA is stepping up to protect Americans from one of the most persistent and widespread pollutants we face,” said EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, in a prepared statement. “Smog in the air we breathe poses a very serious health threat, especially to children and individuals suffering from asthma and lung disease. It dirties our air, clouds our cities, and drives up our health care costs across the country.”

Using the best science to strengthen these standards is a long overdue action, Jackson said, and will help millions of Americans “breathe easier and live healthier.”

In 2008, the Bush administration rejected the unanimous recommendations of the EPA’s expert advisory panel, and chose instead to set a weaker standard that would allow for more pollution.

Many medical professionals and public health officials protested that decision, and in 2009, in Pinedale, Wyoming, a grassroots organization called Citizens United for Responsible Energy Development—along with other local individuals—petitioned the Cowboy State to set its own smog standard that would be in line with what the scientists and medical professionals had recommended to the EPA.

That request was ultimately dropped by Wyoming’s Environmental Quality Council, but the EPA’s newly proposed standard for smog would be roughly the same level of pollution control that the Wyoming petitioners had asked for.

Mary Lynn Worl, a retired teacher who was one of the Pinedale-area petitioners, said she was pleased with Thursday’s announcement.

“This is good news,” Worl said. “I’m personally very pleased that the EPA has taken this action. It certainly recognizes the scientific evidence that a stricter standard is needed to protect human health.”

Bruce Pendery, program director for the Wyoming Outdoor Council, agreed.

“The science is overwhelming on this point, and it’s great that we’ll finally have a national standard that reflects the science” Pendery said. “We need to keep in mind that this standard is all about protecting our health, especially that of elderly people, our children, and those with respiratory problems.”

THE PROBLEM WITH OZONE

Smog, also known as ground-level ozone, is especially dangerous to children and the elderly, and can cause a number of serious health problems, including aggravation of asthma and increased risk of premature death in people with heart or lung disease, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the EPA.

Ozone can also harm healthy people who work and play outdoors. The damage caused to people’s lungs by ozone is thought to be immediate and irreversible.

The EPA on Thursday proposed to set the “primary” standard, which protects public health, at a level between 0.060 and 0.070 parts per million measured over eight hours. The current national primary standard is 0.075 ppm. Children are at the greatest risk from ozone because their lungs are still developing and they are most likely to be active outdoors, and they are more likely than adults to have asthma, according to the agency.

The EPA is also proposing to set a separate “secondary” standard to protect the environment, especially plants and trees. Secondary standards are set with the intention of protecting the “public welfare.” The seasonal standard the EPA is recommending is designed to protect plants and trees from damage caused by repeated ozone exposure, which can reduce tree growth, damage leaves, and increase susceptibility to disease, the agency explained in a media release.

OLD STANDARD WAS INADEQUATE

Administrator Jackson announced in September of 2009 that the Obama administration would reconsider the existing ozone standards, which the Bush administration set at 0.075 ppm. Since September, the EPA conducted a review of the science that guided the 2008 decision, including more than 1,700 scientific studies and public comments from the 2008 rulemaking process, according to the agency.

The EPA also reviewed the findings of the independent Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee, which unanimously recommended that standards be set in the ranges ultimately proposed on Thursday by the agency.

Depending on the level of the final standard, the proposal will yield health benefits between $13 billion and $100 billion, according to the EPA.

“This proposal would help reduce premature deaths, aggravated asthma, bronchitis cases, hospital and emergency room visits and days when people miss work or school because of ozone-related symptoms,” the agency wrote in is release. “Estimated costs of implementing this proposal range from $19 billion to $90 billion.”

This rulemaking is important for Wyoming, especially western Wyoming in the Pinedale area where ozone levels in excess of even the current, weaker, national standard have been recorded in recent years.

Ozone levels have gotten so high in the Pinedale area in recent winters that they have rivaled the worst bad-ozone days in major metropolitan areas, such as Los Angeles. As a result, the state, with the support of Gov. Dave Freudenthal, has recommended that the EPA designate the Pinedale area in nonattainment with the national ambient air quality standard for ozone.

Ground-level ozone forms when emissions from industrial facilities, power plants, landfills, and motor vehicles react with sunlight.

The EPA will take public comment for 60 days after the proposed rule is published in the Federal Register.

The photo above of natural gas flaring was taken by Linda Baker in the Upper Green River Valley, a rural area in western Wyoming that has experienced big-city like ozone pollution spikes in recent years as a result of a natural gas drilling boom.

Filed under: *All posts | 1 Comment »

Photo by Linda Baker

U.S. SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR KEN SALAZAR on Wednesday announced major reforms to the way the federal government manages oil and gas drilling on federal lands.

The announcement immediately won guarded praise from conservation groups, including the Wyoming Outdoor Council.

Citing a need to improve “certainty and order” in oil and gas leasing on U.S. public lands, Salazar said the Bureau of Land Management will undertake to improve protections for land, water, and wildlife and reduce potential conflicts that can lead to costly and time-consuming protests and litigation of leases.

The Department of the Interior will also establish a new “energy reform team” to identify and implement important energy management reforms, Salazar said.

“The new initiatives should go a long way to establishing greater oversight of oil and gas lease offerings,” said Bruce Pendery, program director with the Wyoming Outdoor Council.

But Pendery said a thorough analysis of the reforms will be impossible until more details are provided by the Interior Department.

“These reforms seem to represent a major step in the right direction for onshore oil and gas management,” Pendery said. “They will help restore balance, accountability, and common sense to a system that had essentially become single use rather than multiple use.”

The new initiatives should create better oversight of the federal oil and gas program by requiring “interdisciplinary” review of nominated lease parcels, he said. Such a review would include input not only from the oil and gas experts — as had been the practice in the past — but from experts such as wildlife biologists, archaeologists, soil scientists, and others, he said.

Additionally, Salazar announced the development of a new approach to managing major oil and gas plays. The approach will include developing “master leasing and development plans,” which Pendery believes could create a more cohesive, bigger-picture approach to managing areas that are anticipated to see intensive new oil and gas development.

“The previous Administration’s ‘anywhere, anyhow’ policy on oil and gas development ran afoul of communities, carved up the landscape, and fueled costly conflicts that created uncertainty for investors and industry,” Salazar said in his announcement. “We need a fresh look – from inside the federal government and from outside – at how we can better manage Americans’ energy resources.”

The federal Bureau of Land Management is issuing new guidance for local field managers that will help bring clarity, consistency, and public engagement to the onshore oil and gas leasing process while balancing the many resource values that the BLM is entrusted with protecting on behalf of the American people, Salazar said.

“In addition, with the help of our new energy reform team, we will improve the Department’s internal operations to better manage publicly owned energy resources and the revenues they produce,” Salazar said.

Pendery agreed these changes are both necessary and overdue.

“We should see greater oversight of where leasing will occur, and greater public involvement at all levels, which is an important step forward,” Pendery said. “The plan to emphasize leasing in already-developed areas and allowing leasing in new areas only after careful planning is commendable.”

SCALING BACK SO-CALLED ‘CATEGORICAL EXCLUSIONS’

The Interior Department is also moving toward greater oversight of so-called categorical exclusions, a tool for fast-tracking development by bypassing detailed environmental review. The use of categorical exclusions proliferated during the previous presidential administration, and conservationists, sportsmen’s groups and others have long-argued that the tool was being abused in places such as Wyoming’s Pinedale Anticline Field, at the expense of the environment.

A 2009 report from the Government Accountability Office — the investigative arm of congress — found that local Bureau of Land Management field offices in Wyoming and Utah, among other places, had misused or misapplied the categorical exclusions tool, and the GAO recommended reforms to the process.

“These reforms to the way categorical exclusions will be implemented are in line with the National Environmental Policy Act, and this, also, is overdue,” Pendery said.

And Pendery noted that President Barack Obama issued a proclamation on Tuesday, the day before Salazar’s announcements, recognizing the 40th anniversary of NEPA, celebrating our nation’s “basic national charter for the protection of the environment.”

Media Contact: Bruce Pendery, Wyoming Outdoor Council, 435-752-2111, bruce@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org

LINKS:

* Click here for the Department of the Interior media release about the reforms.

* Click here for Interior Secretary Ken Salazar’s official order.

* Click here for an energy reform fact sheet.

*Photo immediately above is Western Wyoming’s Jonah natural gas field. The photo at the top of this post was taken on Western Wyoming’s Pinedale Anticline field.

Filed under: *All posts | No Comments »

THE STATE OF WYOMING has been informed by the federal government—once again—that some of its policies related to the pumping and dumping of coal-bed methane water violate the Clean Water Act.

In a letter dated Nov. 13, 2009, the Environmental Protection Agency instructed the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality that it cannot modify drainage-wide water discharge permits in the Pumpkin Creek and Willow Creek watersheds, as the DEQ has proposed.

The proposed changes for these two particular drainages would contravene federal law because they would fail to protect native grasses in the area, according to the EPA.

These are the only so-called general watershed permits to have been issued by the DEQ. As opposed to traditional permits for individual sources of pollution, the DEQ has attempted to streamline the permitting process by creating a general permit for one type of pollution throughout an entire drainage.

“The two drainages in question flow into the Powder River, and the Wyoming Outdoor Council has argued from the start that these drainage-wide coal-bed methane permits violate the law,” said Steve Jones, watershed protection program attorney with the Council.

The Council believes the traditional approach of issuing individual permits ensures greater public participation and more careful scrutiny, Jones said.

OUTDOOR COUNCIL APPEALED THE PERMITS

The two permits in question were issued in September of 2006, but were appealed by the Wyoming Outdoor Council. After a hearing on these permits in April of 2008, the state’s Environmental Quality Council substantially modified them to better protect for the growth and production of natives grasses.

Native grasses are important to ranchers in that their cattle or other livestock utilize such grasses as a primary food source and thus the ability of ranchers’ cattle to grow and thrive is directly connected to the health of native grasses in riparian areas along the streams and creeks of the Powder River Basin.

In August of 2009, one year after the EQC imposed substantially stricter requirements on the watershed general permits, the DEQ moved to eliminate the restrictions through proposed major modifications to them. These permit revisions would have eliminated protections for native grasses because they would have allowed higher levels of salty water to be dumped into each drainage.

The DEQ attempted to make the drainage-wide water dumping acceptable by employing the dubious approach of using “irrigation waivers,” where landowners in each drainage had signed statements indicating that they waived any concerns they might have had for protecting native grasses within their respective property.

The EPA said the DEQ cannot accept such waivers, because it plainly violates the federal Clean Water Act.

“Basically, the EPA told the DEQ that individual landowners cannot waive the requirements of the Clean Water Act,” Jones said. “No individual has the power to waive such statutory requirements.”

The Wyoming Outdoor Council made a similar argument against the waivers in September.

LINKS:

* For a copy of the EPA’s November 13 letter to the Wyoming DEQ, click here.
* For a copy of the Wyoming Outdoor Council’s comments on the proposed 2009 irrigation waiver in the Pumpkin Creek area, click here.
* And for the comments on the proposed waiver in the Willow Creek area click here.

Media Contact: Steve Jones, Wyoming Outdoor Council, 307-332-7031 x12; steve@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org.

Filed under: *All posts | No Comments »

Photo by Scott Copeland

THE FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY has significant concerns about Wyoming’s proposed plan to reduce haze generated by polluters such as coal-fired power plants and trona mining operations.

The EPA sent a letter to Wyoming’s Department of Environmental Quality at the end of October, which indicates that Wyoming’s latest revision of a federally mandated air pollution plan has failed to honor specific requests previously made by the EPA.

Click here to read a copy of the letter.

Callie A. Videtich, the EPA’s regional director for its air program, was the signatory of the EPA’s most recent letter to the Cowboy State.

“It appears that the state did not address many of the concerns we detailed in [previous] letters,” Videtich wrote in the October correspondence.

And Wyoming’s current approach to air quality modeling is also likely deficient, according to Videtich, and could require a do-over.

Wyoming’s latest proposed plan represents an attempt to fulfill the requirements of a decade-old EPA rule intended to reduce haze over Class I areas, which are special landscapes throughout the United States.

“We believe the EPA’s most recent correspondence indicates that unless the DEQ makes substantive changes to its plan, it’s possible the EPA will reject it,” said Bruce Pendery, program director for the Wyoming Outdoor Council.

If the EPA were to reject Wyoming’s plan, the federal government could impose its own haze control plan—a possibility the DEQ likely wants to avoid because it would mean a loss of control over the decision-making process related to how the reductions would be accomplished.

REGIONAL HAZE RULE

Wyoming, like all states, is required by the EPA’s 1999 regional haze rule to create a plan to manage industrial air pollutants—such as sulfur dioxide and oxides of nitrogen—that cause haze and can potentially ruin views over some of the nation’s most prized landscapes.

The pollutants that this rule is meant to address can also be dangerous to people exposed to them.

In Wyoming, much of the haze-producing air pollution comes from the state’s five coal-fired power plants and its three major trona mines. One of the most effective ways for the state to make the required reductions will be to oblige the power plants and mines to use what’s called the best available retrofit technology, or BART, to clean up their emissions.

“The state has a big job to do implementing BART and managing these pollutants,” Pendery said. “But it is critical that we achieve significant, maximum pollution control to protect these Class I areas, because they are some of our premier, treasured landscapes that people flock to Wyoming to see.”

REDUCING HAZE IN WYOMING, SOME BACKGROUND

To meet the requirements of the regional haze rule, the Wyoming DEQ has been working toward compliance for several years.

In 2003 the State adopted provisions related to the control of sulfur dioxide from large industrial sources. Sulfur dioxide is a key component of haze. More recently the state has been moving toward putting in place “best available retrofit technology,” or BART, requirements to control oxides of nitrogen and particulate matter emissions. Eight sources of air pollution in Wyoming have been determined to be “subject to BART,” because they cause or contribute to visibility impairment in at least one Class I area.

These eight sources are the Naughton, Jim Bridger, Laramie River, Dave Johnston and Wyodak coal-fired power plants, and the Granger, Westvaco, and Green River Works trona operations.

The EPA has offered many comments on the state’s attempts to comply with the regional haze rule so far, and these comments have generally been critical of Wyoming’s efforts.

Among other things, the EPA has said the proposed BART permitting conditions for coal-fired power plant have been deficient because Wyoming did not provide for sufficient controls of nitrogen oxides and particulate matter.

In its comments on the state’s draft implementation plan, the EPA expressed concerns about Wyoming’s long-term strategy to reach natural visibility conditions, saying several of the state’s plans to postpone pollution control measures—or not to ensure their federal enforceability—were unacceptable.

“Since the EPA will ultimately have to approve the state’s plan, it may well get the last word on these issues,” Pendery said.

THE OUTDOOR COUNCIL’S ENGAGEMENT

In addition to the EPA’s comments on the state’s compliance efforts toward the regional haze rule, the Outdoor Council has also participated in the process, submitting comments on the BART proposals, and on the state’s draft implementation plan.

The Council’s principle concern with the BART proposals has been that the DEQ has not proposed requiring selective catalytic reduction for control of nitrogen oxides (NOX).

Selective catalytic reduction would achieve much greater levels of pollution control, and the EPA supported this view in its comments.

“The consequence of the state not putting in place more stringent requirements now is that more stringent requirements will have to be put in place in the future,” Pendery said. “And we doubt that postponing needed decisions is going to make achieving the Clean Air Act’s air quality goals for Class I areas any easier.”

The Air Quality Division seems to be taking a minimalist approach to reducing regional haze, he said, which is inadequate because Wyoming residents value such things as being able to see the Wind River Range from Rock Springs.

“Clean, clear air and expansive views, are qualities of Wyoming that are universally cherished by its residents,” Pendery said.

LINKS:

* You can read the Wyoming Outdoor Council’s and coalition partner’s comments on the BART permit proposals by clicking here and the Council’s comments on the proposed state implementation plan by clicking here.

* The Council’s comments on the trona plant BART permit proposals can be found at the regional haze section of our website here.

* You can get information on Wyoming’s regional haze rule compliance efforts at http:// deq.state.wy.us/aqd/regionalhaze.asp.

Media Contact: Bruce Pendery, Wyoming Outdoor Council, 435-752-2111, bruce@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org

Filed under: *All posts | No Comments »

Photo by Jeff Vanuga

THE LOOMING THREAT that the greater sage-grouse might be listed as an endangered species spurred Wyoming to adopt a new approach to protect the celebrated bird.

As a result, the Cowboy State has emerged as the regional leader in re-thinking sage-grouse policies, focusing its conservation efforts on sage-grouse “core” habitat areas.

Following Wyoming’s lead, Montana’s state game agency recently announced its own “core area” strategy.

There is some disagreement amongst Wyoming’s conservation community about the value of this core area approach, said Sophie Osborn, wildlife biologist with the Wyoming Outdoor Council.

But Osborn said while the approach has some limitations, she believes Wyoming’s attempt to conserve core sage-grouse habitat might be the West’s best bet for maintaining viable sage-grouse populations, and for keeping the bird off the endangered species list.

Click here for a map of Wyoming’s core sage-grouse habitat areas.

If properly implemented, Wyoming’s approach could offer other states a model for finding a balance between energy development and the protection of this vulnerable species, Osborn said.

A MAJORITY OF THE NATION’S GREATER SAGE-GROUSE NOW LIVE IN WYOMING

Sage-grouse numbers have been in decline throughout the West for decades, and today 54 percent of the remaining greater sage-grouse in the United States live in Wyoming.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s decision whether to list the sage-grouse as an endangered species will be swayed, at least in part, by the strength and efficacy of Wyoming’s policies toward the bird.

One criterion for the federal government’s ultimate listing decision, Osborn said, is the answer to the following question. Are there regulatory mechanisms in place that will adequately protect the species?

“That’s why Wyoming has worked so hard to develop this core sage-grouse concept,” Osborn said. “To make sure there is an existing, adequate regulatory mechanism in place.”

Wyoming’s actions will likely play a key role in determining whether overall sage-grouse populations begin to stabilize or continue to decline.

“State and federal agencies, conservation groups, the energy industry—they all understand that what we do in Wyoming really matters,” Osborn said. “It might seem as if we’re obsessing over this bird, but Wyoming has to get this right, and we all know it.”

In addition to the ecological motivations for preserving sage-grouse “core” areas, there are also economic incentives for keeping these grouse populations healthy.

If the sage-grouse were listed as an endangered species, energy extraction and other types of development could be subjected to more stringent regulations and possibly curtailed throughout the bird’s range, and not only in core habitat areas. In a state that relies heavily on revenues from mineral extraction operations, such a possibility gets lawmakers’ attention.

Sometimes just the threat of an endangered species listing can be the impetus for better wildlife management and development policies, Osborn said.

WIND DEVELOPERS LEFT OUT IN THE COLD?

The burgeoning wind energy industry has had a particularly difficult time adapting to Wyoming’s sage-grouse core area conservation strategy.

As part of this strategy, Wyoming will not permit the development of wind farms in core areas until wind developers can show that their activities will not have a negative impact on sage-grouse populations.

In a letter sent to Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar in July 2009, wind industry representatives warned that such a requirement would abruptly halt wind energy development in Wyoming’s core areas and have “deleterious effects on renewable energy development across the Western United States.”

The Wyoming governor’s office maintains, however, that 86 percent of the state’s “economically viable wind areas” are outside of sage-grouse core areas, and so the state still has ample opportunity to develop wind, without placing its, and the West’s, sage-grouse populations at risk.

Some developers—frustrated by their inability to build wind farms in core areas until the effect of turbines on grouse is studied—feel that the wind industry was left out of the process when sage-grouse core areas were developed.

But Bob Budd, head of the Governor’s sage-grouse task force, said wind energy development had not yet emerged as a prominent issue when the team developed the core area strategy. The push for widespread wind development is a relatively recent phenomenon in Wyoming.

A representative of the wind energy industry has since joined the Governor’s sage-grouse team.

Horizon Wind Energy’s Simpson Ridge Project near Medicine Bow was an early casualty of the state’s rigorous stance on protecting core areas, even after the company committed to doing research to document the impacts of turbines on grouse.

However, bird advocates and energy watchdog groups, including the Wyoming Outdoor Council, argue that Horizon knew from the start about the important sage-grouse breeding areas near the company’s proposed wind farm, and the company’s promise to spearhead a research study was simply an attempt to justify sacrificing these areas.

“If, as we suspect, turbines cause grouse declines and displacement, we risk losing our healthiest grouse populations by conducting these studies in core areas,” Osborn said. “Studies should be conducted in non-core areas, where we have fewer grouse to lose; otherwise, we increase the risk of an endangered species listing for the grouse.”

Osborn’s comments echo those of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which stated in July 2009 that building wind farms in core areas, even for research purposes, “would negate the usefulness of the core area concept,” and undermine a key regulatory mechanism designed by Wyoming to protect its grouse populations.

Soon after the Fish and Wildlife Service issued its statement in support of making core areas off-limits to wind development, Horizon withdrew its construction and research proposal, because the project would have enveloped, and threatened, 15 active sage-grouse breeding grounds, or leks—where these chicken-like birds perform their distinctive courtship displays and choose mates.

Although the impacts of oil and gas development on sage-grouse are fairly well understood, scientists have yet to examine the effect of wind turbines on grouse. Until these impacts are known, agencies must rely on indirect, but relevant, scientific information that suggests that grouse will be displaced by wind turbines.

INTRODUCING TALL STRUCTURES INTO A SHORT ECOSYSTEM

Having evolved in open, treeless habitat—in what some refer to as the “sagebrush sea”—sage-grouse show a strong aversion to vertical structures. Tall objects do not occur in the bird’s natural surroundings, and they can be used as perches by raptors that prey on grouse.

Sage-grouse populations have declined where trees, transmission lines, and oil and gas development have encroached on their habitat, Osborn said. In addition, grouse have been eliminated from habitats fragmented by roads and other forms of development.

Given these facts—coupled with the threat that sage-grouse could be listed as an endangered species without a robust state-level regulatory mechanism—the wind industry will have to focus for now on developing wind farms in areas with few or no sage-grouse, such as in the eastern portion of the state, Osborn said.

Many people in Wyoming and beyond view sage-grouse core area protection as the best hope for safeguarding a declining species, and the best chance to avoid an endangered species listing that would complicate not just wind energy, but all types of energy development in the West.

Filed under: *All posts, Wildlife | No Comments »

ON THE HEELS OF a recent independent report that called a proposed Wyoming water policy “scientifically indefensible,” the federal government on Tuesday voiced its own opposition to the policy—suggesting that if the rules were officially adopted by the state, Wyoming would not be in compliance with the federal Clean Water Act.

The proposed rules in question have to do with how the Cowboy State regulates groundwater that is pumped up from coal seams and dumped on the surface during coal-bed methane production. Most of Wyoming’s coal-bed methane operations are in the state’s Powder River Basin, east of the Big Horn Mountains.

Although Wyoming’s Department of Environmental Quality scrapped the proposed rules last week—following a damning independent scientific report that was commissioned by the state—the provisions outlined in the proposal still constitute the DEQ’s de facto policy for regulating the water that is produced during coal-bed methane operations.

Water pumped up from coal seams is often salty and otherwise impure, and can damage native grasses that support Wyoming wildlife and can ruin a variety of habitats such as seasonal wetlands and streams.

In comments submitted on September 29 to Wyoming’s Environmental Quality Council—which is the state’s environmental rulemaking body—the EPA stated:

“… several of the provisions do not appear to be consistent with the (Clean Water Act)… and the [EPA] would recommend the (Assistant Regional Administrator) disapprove those (Water Quality Standards). Accordingly, our recommendation is that (the rules) should not be adopted as proposed. Even if retained as a policy, EPA has significant concerns regarding whether its implementation is consistent with Wyoming’s approved (Water Quality Standards).”

To read the full document submitted by the EPA on September 29, click here.

The Wyoming Outdoor Council has long argued these proposed rules are inadequate, and that the DEQ should do more to regulate not only the quality of the water produced in coal-bed methane operations, but the quantity, as well.

Wyoming Gov. Dave Freudenthal has also long had concerns about the proposed rules.

Media Contact: Steve Jones, Wyoming Outdoor Council, 307-332-7031 x12; steve@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org.

Filed under: *All posts | 1 Comment »