| Muskingum Watershed meeting draws protesters
There are no immediate plans to reduce or eliminate the maintenance assessment enacted in 2009 by the Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District. The assessment, which raised $10. At least 30 protesters had gathered in front of the Tuscarawas County Courthouse on Saturday to voice their displeasure with the Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District"s dealings with oil and gas drillers, "frackers" as the assembled often called them. Jim Pringle, the district"s attorney, noted they have a statutory duty and precedents in policy that direct them to at least consider proposals for the "beneficial use" of reservoir water, which will include for industrial purposes. But many of those who had gathered in opposition said they weren"t persuaded by these arguments. Several who addressed the court in opposition to the fracking-related activities accused district leadership of greed. Inside at their annual meeting, leadership was recapping the state of the district, a public entity that owns and maintains 14 dams, their resulting reservoirs and the parks and campgrounds that surround them. Protesters hoped to highlight "the hypocrisy of the conservancy district not actually being about conservancy," said Josh Harris, a Mount Vernon resident and member of anti-fracking group the Stewards of the Land. Their beef comes from two activities the district has engaged in: " The leasing of mineral rights on or under district land to oil and gas drillers who plan to use the controversial horizontal hydraulic fracturing technique to unlock fossil fuels from a geological formation known as the Utica Shale, and " The sale of millions of gallons of water from the district"s man-made lakes to drillers for use in the fracking process. The Gulfport deal, the only one consummated in 2011 of the three Utica Shale leases signed, was worth more than $15 million and pushed revenue from overall mineral rights and royalties to $15. "The standard oil and gas lease is two pages long," he told the judges. However, the court only has supervisory authority, such as approving a per gallon cost, over long-term water deals, said Edward O"Farrell, of Tuscarawas County. "We don"t have any authority to involve ourselves as a division court in the short-term sales," the presiding judge said, referring to the statutory power that the district invoked in the Gulfport deal. On the horizon, Logan told the judges he expects Cadiz, which has an intake facilityat Tappan Lake that serves as the village"s primary water source, will ask for the volume of water in their contract to be expanded. During their presentation inside the courthouse, district administration summarized their defense. "If you take the water from the Licking River, you"re taking it from St. As for fracking on district lands, Executive Director John Hoopingarner said they"ve built protections into the leases that put in place hard-line rules agreed to by out-of-state megafirms like Chesapeake Energy or Gulfport Energy. Hoopingarner previously has given his blessing to such a deal, provided that Cadiz use the proceeds to revamp its sewer system, which fits in with the district"s mission of improving water quality and infrastructure. NEW PHILADELPHIA " The chanting was audible from a block away. 5 million that has been allocated to renovating district facilities, including upgrades to campgrounds. In all, Hoopingarner said a preliminary review of the district"s facilities and infrastructure has found $80 million worth of work needed. Representatives from several high-profile environmental advocates, including the Sierra Club of Ohio, the Buckeye Forest Council and the Ohio Environmental Council, urged the Conservancy Court to resist. |
Sunday, 3 June 2012
Muskingum Watershed meeting draws protesters
