SLIDES: The Monumental Legacy of the Antiquities Act of 1906: The Rainbow Bridge National Monument in Context

Presenter: Professor Mark Squillace, Director, Natural Resources Law Center, University of Colorado School of Law 35 slide

Mining Regulation and Takings

10 pages. Contains footnotes

Managing Unconventional Oil and Gas Development as if Communities Mattered

The advent of horizontal oil and gas drilling into relatively impermeable shale rock, and the companion technological breakthrough of high-pressure, multi-stage fracking that frees hydrocarbons along the substantial length of these horizontal wells, has fundamentally altered the oil and gas industry. The Energy Information Administration has gone so far as to predict that North America could become a net energy exporter as early as 2019, largely as a result of the explosive growth of this “unconventional” oil and gas development. Despite its promise, managing unconventional oil and gas development has proved challenging, and many of the communities that find themselves hosting this development have begun to push back in the face of serious public health and community impact concerns. Some communities have gone so far as to enact complete bans on “fracking,” the shorthand way that unconventional development is often described. Yet notwithstanding many legitimate concerns, the flexibility made possible by drilling wells horizontally two, three, and even five miles in length provides an opportunity to manage unconventional oil and gas development in a manner that greatly reduces health and environmental impacts. Efforts to impose proactive management regimes that would effectively address these adverse impacts have thus far proved elusive. Effective management was especially challenging when the prices for oil and gas were high and developers rushed to cash in. But as the price of these commodities collapsed, and as development has waned, an opportunity has emerged to forge a new dialogue over a smarter approach to unconventional oil and gas development that might be deployed when the inevitable boom mentality returns. A smarter approach recognizes that the flexibility afforded by horizontal drilling can minimize the adverse impacts of development even while making development more efficient. Many in the industry will likely resist a system that requires a far more substantial role for regulatory agencies, especially during the planning phase of development. But once the affected parties understand that oil and gas development can be carried out in a manner that is both efficient and compatible with community health and values, then the prospects for a productive relationship should brighten. Let the hard work of building that relationship begin

Day 1: Wednesday, 17 August 2005: Reauthorizing the ESA

1 page. Contains one reference

Grazing in Wilderness Areas

Domestic livestock grazing is naturally in tension with wilderness. Wilderness areas are not truly untrammeled by man when they host managed livestock grazing. Yet the compromise that allowed livestock grazing in wilderness areas was surely one of the greatest in the history of the conservation movement. Without it, Congress might never have passed a wilderness bill or designated countless wilderness areas throughout the country. The grazing exception--and the Congressional Grazing Guidelines that afford specific protections for grazers--made it possible to secure bipartisan support for wilderness bills in even the most conservative western states. Notwithstanding this success, the ecology of some wilderness areas would plainly benefit from reducing or removing livestock, and modest changes to current law could accommodate such reductions without undermining the essential compromise that has allowed wilderness to flourish. In particular, as livestock grazing has declined in importance to the economy and the culture of the western public lands states, opportunities abound for the voluntary retirement of grazing rights. Unfortunately, the law has not yet evolved in a manner that can assure that the voluntary retirement of grazing rights can be made permanent. Without such assurances parties interested in purchasing grazing rights to protect wilderness areas are unlikely to step forward. This article reviews the history and legal status of livestock grazing on the wilderness lands. It includes a brief review of the beneficial and adverse impacts of livestock grazing on the ecological health of land systems and how those impacts might compromise wilderness values before discussing federal grazing policy, especially as applied to wilderness areas. It concludes with a modest plea to clarify the authority of the BLM and the Forest Service--the principal federal land management agencies--to reduce or remove livestock from wilderness lands where necessary to protect public lands resources, and to retire wilderness grazing rights permanently, where the existing permittee willingly accepts an offer to purchase such rights