Rep. Thompson: ANF Decision a `Dangerous Precedent’
Washington, D.C.—Frustrated over the Forest Service decision on the Allegheny National Forest (ANF), U.S. Representative Glenn `GT’ Thompson, R-Howard, today sent a letter to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, which was signed by 21 of his House colleagues from 14 different states. The letter recounted a settlement that was, “agreed to behind closed doors, with no industry representation at the table, and appears to have been agreed to in advance.”
Thompson refers to the lawsuit filed by the Allegheny Defense Project of Portland, Oregon, the Sierra Club of San Francisco, California, and the Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics of Eugene, Oregon, in November, 2008, against the Forest Service and the Pennsylvania Oil and Gas Association. The lawsuit demanded the 1970 NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) be applied to the permitting process for production of privately owned oil and natural gas in the ANF—even though it had not been used previously, and permitting is already regulated by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection.
In his letter Thompson wrote, “The settlement between the Forest Service and out-of-state environmental organizations allows some pending permits to move forward under existing conditions, but applies NEPA regulations to all subsequent permitting. This requirement will destroy the production of oil and natural gas in the ANF and devastate the regional economic engine that has been in place for 150 years.”
Thompson made this argument in the letter: “We are especially concerned over the precedent this unwarranted action has set with regard to private property rights. Pennsylvania law grants its citizens `reasonable access’ to private mineral rights and does not grant either the state or federal government superior surface or subsurface ownership rights to those of a private citizen. A recent Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision [J-52-2008; Belden & Blake Corporation v Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources] has clearly reinforced this point. However, the Forest Service’s settlement appears to convey the opposite: that federal ownership of surface rights somehow trumps those of privately held subsurface mineral rights.”
The letter concludes: “We believe the Department’s decision regarding the ANF has grave national implications and could very well set a dangerous precedent for public lands and private property rights countrywide. Therefore we respectfully request your close attention to this matter and look forward to working with the Administration to determine a swift and equitable resolution.”
In addition, Thompson joined the Congressional Western Caucus in speaking on the floor of the House of Representatives today on the loss of jobs related to Democratic and administration policies and proposals. He and the chairman of the Western Caucus, Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, discussed the manner in which the Forest Service made the ANF decision and how the policy will kill jobs at a time when we have spent more than a trillion dollars in the stimulus package to create them.
Thompson refers to the lawsuit filed by the Allegheny Defense Project of Portland, Oregon, the Sierra Club of San Francisco, California, and the Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics of Eugene, Oregon, in November, 2008, against the Forest Service and the Pennsylvania Oil and Gas Association. The lawsuit demanded the 1970 NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) be applied to the permitting process for production of privately owned oil and natural gas in the ANF—even though it had not been used previously, and permitting is already regulated by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection.
In his letter Thompson wrote, “The settlement between the Forest Service and out-of-state environmental organizations allows some pending permits to move forward under existing conditions, but applies NEPA regulations to all subsequent permitting. This requirement will destroy the production of oil and natural gas in the ANF and devastate the regional economic engine that has been in place for 150 years.”
Thompson made this argument in the letter: “We are especially concerned over the precedent this unwarranted action has set with regard to private property rights. Pennsylvania law grants its citizens `reasonable access’ to private mineral rights and does not grant either the state or federal government superior surface or subsurface ownership rights to those of a private citizen. A recent Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision [J-52-2008; Belden & Blake Corporation v Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources] has clearly reinforced this point. However, the Forest Service’s settlement appears to convey the opposite: that federal ownership of surface rights somehow trumps those of privately held subsurface mineral rights.”
The letter concludes: “We believe the Department’s decision regarding the ANF has grave national implications and could very well set a dangerous precedent for public lands and private property rights countrywide. Therefore we respectfully request your close attention to this matter and look forward to working with the Administration to determine a swift and equitable resolution.”
In addition, Thompson joined the Congressional Western Caucus in speaking on the floor of the House of Representatives today on the loss of jobs related to Democratic and administration policies and proposals. He and the chairman of the Western Caucus, Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, discussed the manner in which the Forest Service made the ANF decision and how the policy will kill jobs at a time when we have spent more than a trillion dollars in the stimulus package to create them.
.jpg)
Comments
It does not.
The Belden & Blake case does not even mention the federal government. It was a case between the company and the state DCNR. If the congressman was accurately quoted as saying this case somehow applies to the Forest Service's authority to regulate federal land, it just goes to show how far Rep. Thompson will go to deliberately mislead his constituents.