Is energy independence hiding beneath
our public lands?

By Robin Hubbard

Your favorite backcountry trail probably seems miles away from concerns about national security and dependence on foreign oil. However, Congress is considering energy proposals that would put those two worlds on a collision course.

Since September 11, 2001, national attention has focused on the security risks inherent in depending on foreign oil from unstable regions. Public lands were thrust into the picture when the Bush administration asserted that we could drill our way to energy independence by tapping fossil fuel deposits beneath roadless areas, proposed wilderness, and other lands.

In an article titled “Working the Land,” the National Journal reported that, “Bush is now using his administrative powers to permit hundreds of new oil wells, natural gas wells, methane wells, and coal mines throughout the West, including on federal lands that some government officials continue to deem too ecologically sensitive to exploit.”

Thumper trucks in Canyons of Ancients National Monument. These machines are multi-ton trucks that shake the earth looking for oil. Photo by Mark Pearson of the San Juan Citizens Alliance.

What resources could be tapped

The U.S. Geological Survey predicts that unrestricted drilling on all federal lands would meet U.S. demand for oil for only 222 days and gas demand for 1.7 years. At present, about ninety percent of public lands in the west are already open to oil and gas leasing. The remaining ten percent are a mix of national monuments, roadless areas, and current and proposed wilderness areas. Pushing energy development into these areas would not decrease our dependence on foreign oil for more than a few weeks at best (see sidebar: “What Lies Beneath”). The numbers show that tapping the Rockies for oil and gas is not our long-term solution.

The cost to Colorado’s public lands

The economic arguments don’t reflect the other trade-offs of dramatically increasing energy development. The Bush administration’s decision to focus on the Interior West threatens to undermine exhaustive efforts by local citizens to expand protections for important watersheds, wilderness study areas, cultural heritage sites, and wildlife habitat. Hunting, recreation, and tourism could all be impacted.

Some of the areas in Colorado that will be affected if the energy plan is implemented include:

The HD Mountains Roadless Area located in southwestern Colorado. This parcel holds some of the highest-quality old-growth ponderosa pines in the state—the most underrepresented ecosystem in the Rocky Mountain region’s wilderness system. Industry submitted plans to the Forest Service to drill up to two hundred new coal bed methane wells in the San Juan National Forest, including over a hundred inside the HD Mountains Roadless area. Potentially, four wells could be drilled per square mile with associated roads, pipelines, and power lines scarring the landscape.

The Vermillion Basin in the northwest corner of the state, near Dinosaur National Monument. This wild and rugged landscape has vividly colored badlands, rich archaeological history, and a large number of rare plant species. The BLM sought bids on two parcels in the Vermillion Basin desert canyon area for oil and gas development even though the basin is included in a wilderness bill before Congress. Actual development—construction of roads or drill pads—would disqualify the land for wilderness protection.

The Roan Plateau is a recreation hotspot for Colorado hunters, anglers and backcountry wildlife watchers. Deer, elk, black bear, mountain lion, and native Colorado River cutthroat trout populations call it home. The BLM is currently reviewing management plan options that include increased gas development. (See Saving the Roan Plateau.)

Above: This photograph of a waterfall in a pristine area of the Roan Plateau is in marked contrast to the area scarred by thumper trucks seen in the photograph above.

Congress will set the pace

Any energy legislation passed by Congress will set the pace for drilling in Colorado and determine whether more remote lands are developed. If last year’s proposals are any indication, conservationists will need to be vigilant when the debate continues in 2003. Last year’s House version of the National Energy Security Act—also known as H.R. 4—called for unprecedented industrial development in pristine western landscapes and removed basic protections from some of the nation’s most sensitive wild lands. Provisions included: eliminating lease stipulations that protect sensitive areas and critical habitat; elevating energy development on public lands to a dominant use over fish and wildlife, water, recreation, and other multiple-use values; giving Interior Secretary Norton authority to repeal current protections for wildlife habitat, unstable slopes, and wetland areas; and allowing unrestricted energy exploration in roadless areas.

The impact these policies would have on wild places moved many people to speak up. The National Rifle Association teamed up with the American Fly Fishing Association and other recreation groups to voice their concerns. They told Congress that “The energy bill presently in conference between the Senate and the House of Representatives contains numerous oil and gas leasing provisions that could diminish conservation measures on public lands for water re­sources, wildlife and fish habitats, and scenic landscapes. As you know, informed energy development does not have to significantly im­pact fish and wildlife and their habitats on public land.”

Countless conservation groups at the local and national level made calls, wrote letters, and generated media attention about the bill. Ul­ti­mately, the Senate re­jected these kinds of provisions and passed a much different looking energy bill. However, Congress reached no resolution before  ad­journing for the holidays, and energy legislation is expected to be a top priority in 2003.

A brighter path

The good news is that a responsible energy policy can meet our energy needs without negatively impacting public lands. This is the brighter path of efficiency and renewable energy. According to a spring Department of Energy report sixty percent of future electricity demand could be met by increasing efficiency and production of clean renewable energy. In order to achieve those goals, Congress should set strong standards for auto fuel efficiency, require a greater percentage of our electricity to come from renewables, and increase funding for energy efficiency research, development, and implementation.

This Spring, many organizations within the Colorado conservation community will be vocal advocates for a responsible energy plan that focuses on long-term solutions such as these, instead of reversing protections for public lands.

As you explore the backcountry this winter, consider the impact that energy development could have on Colorado and consider adding your voice to the debate.

Call your member of Congress at (202) 224-3121; sign up to receive energy e-mail alerts by visiting www.copirg.org. P

Robin Hubbard is a field director with the Colorado Public Interest Research Group. CoPIRG is a non-partisan advocacy group that works to protect the environment, stop consumer fraud, and strengthen our democracy. CMC collaborates with CoPIRG on public lands issues including energy development on public lands.