Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Environment State chamber bashes 'Gasland'
Posted by Gerard Matthews on Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 2:09 PM
The Arkansas State Chamber of Commerce sent out a letter to local chambers in the Fayetteville Shale region asking for their support in criticizing the documentary "Gasland", which will show in Arkansas this week. There is also, as you might imagine, a heavy dose of cheerleading for the natural gas industry. The letter is addressed "Dear Editor" and, according to chamber president and CEO Randy Zook, was to be submitted to the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette for publication. Zook said the letter was a work in progress, but that it was his intention that it be published as is. (He was surprised and inquired how the Times had obtained a copy. We're not saying.)
"Gasland," a film that calls into question the practice of hydraulic fracturing - a process whereby millions of gallons of water and a host of unknown chemicals are shot into the ground to crack shale formations and release natural gas - will be showing in Clinton, Fayetteville and Little Rock on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday respectively. The letter is a typical industry response to criticism, calling into question the integrity of the filmmaker, Josh Fox, while ignoring any cost associated with gas drilling that isn’t strictly economic (road damage in Arkansas is already far in excess of the amount produced by a small increase in the gas severance tax). The Times has documented problems that can arise from gas exploration (Check here, here and here). The letter essentially says, let’s continue blindly into this foray for short-term economic gain while ignoring the health and well-being of our citizens and long-term economic and environmental impacts.
As representatives of thousands of businesses across our state, we find it ironic that during these challenging times, Arkansas has received a visit from a New York City filmmaker who is airing a “shockumentary” and has publicly stated that he wishes to shut down the natural gas industry in shale production regions across our country. While questioning his scientific and journalistic integrity might be in order, what is not in question is the great benefit to our state that the exploration of the Fayetteville Shale has been in sustaining our economy during this difficult time.
Two of those businesses the chamber represents are Chesapeake Energy and XTO, both considered "summit members" for their contributions of $25,000 in support of the chamber. Southwestern Energy is listed as a $10,000 contributor on the Chamber website. Read my story about the film and how early interviews in Arkansas set the tone for the documentary. For more information and viewing times, check out GreenAR by the Day. This isn't the first time Fox has suffered criticism. Upon the film's release he prepared this document to refute claims made by industry shills. The full letter is on the jump, plus a response from "Gasland" director Josh Fox.
August 20, 2010
Dear Editor:
As our nation is undergoing what has been described as the worst economy since the Great Depression, our state has weathered this storm with a budget that is still in the black and has endured only a modest increase in unemployment among our residents. While this is not the economy we hope for, it is far better than what others are experiencing in most states.
As representatives of thousands of businesses across our state, we find it ironic that during these challenging times, Arkansas has received a visit from a New York City filmmaker who is airing a “shockumentary” and has publicly stated that he wishes to shut down the natural gas industry in shale production regions across our country. While questioning his scientific and journalistic integrity might be in order, what is not in question is the great benefit to our state that the exploration of the Fayetteville Shale has been in sustaining our economy during this difficult time.
In 2004, Arkansas ranked 15th in the nation in natural gas production. Now, we are the 7th largest producer of marketed natural gas. With this growth has come enormous economic benefits including billions of dollars in investments, 30,000 jobs, average annual incomes of almost $60,000, immense growth in sales, income, severance & property taxes, and millions of dollars in royalty income to our residents. And, the biggest benefit — a cleaner burning, less expensive American energy source that is found right beneath our feet and does not have to be imported from overseas.
Is this development perfect? No, but tremendous progress has been made, and new, greener technologies are being pursued and developed every day. The filmmaker’s ideals of utilizing wholly renewable energy sources are admirable and may be attainable in the next 50 years, but to compromise the facts and impose a great cost to businesses and our citizens while stymieing the economic growth of our state at a time when we need it most does not make sense.
Please join us in ignoring the rhetoric, let the facts and common sense rule the day, and let’s continue building a business climate in Arkansas that has the best interests of all Arkansans in mind.
Sincerely,
Randy Zook, Arkansas State Chamber
LR, NLR, and Fayetteville Shale Chambers of Commerce
"Gasland" director Josh Fox's response:
They called it a ‘schockumentary’ and I would say, yes, it is quite shocking what the natural gas industry is doing to Arkansas. The shock is entirely due to the fact that they’ve overrun the state and they’re causing huge problems. It’s shocking the government isn’t doing anything about it. It’s shocking that the chamber of commerce has decided to put Arkansas in the bind of getting a few short years of energy production for a future of contamination throughout the state.
The situation of drilling in Arkansas right now is unsafe and it will continue to be unsafe while the drilling companies are exempt from the four major environmental laws: the clean water act, the clean air act, the safe drinking water act and the superfund law. There are safeguards that should be put in place right now to protect against some of the horrific situations some Arkansans are going through. The only reason they’re not being put into place is because they lessen the profit margins for those companies. What we’re dealing with here is not a necessary evil, it’s greed and it’s their profit margin.
Speaking of...
-
Smear campaign mounted against ethics initiative
May 21, 2012A surreptitious effort has begun circulating in the Arkansas business community to encourage people not to sign petitions now circulating to improve Arkansas ethics law. /more/
-
Corporate puppetry continues on severance tax increase
April 23, 2012The chamber of commerce's full frontal attack on the severance tax increase — not yet qualified for the ballot — continues. /more/
-
The secret battle against the severance tax
April 16, 2012Stephens Media today reports that it can't find any prominent politicians in support of the proposal to raise the gas severance tax in Arkansas. /more/
-
Stands accused
March 21, 2012Is the Arkansas State Chamber of Commerce "un-American," as Sheffield Nelson suggests? It's a close call; reasonable men might disagree. That the Chamber is unconscionable, on the other hand, was verified long ago. /more/
- More »
Comments (46)
Showing 1-46 of 46
New York City!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Randy Zook sure took a hard turn to the dark side from when I knew him.
like
dislike
You can be CERTAIN that none of these bidness shills actually LIVE near any of these operations! Walk a mile in my shoes... When significant opposition to something occurs in Van Buren County, you KNOW people are starting to get restless, because the usual attitude is "NO problem, Bubba!"
Josh Fox will be on hand at each event to answer questions.
Times and locations for the three events are:
* Wednesday, August 18 – 6:30 p.m. – Clinton High School Auditorium, 489 Yellowjacket Lane, Clinton, AR (For more information, contact Donna Adolph, (501) 548-7787, dadolph56@yahoo.com)
* Thursday, August 19 – 7:00 p.m. – University of Arkansas Continuing Education Center’s Global Campus, 2 E. Center, Fayetteville, AR (For more information, contact Joyce Hale, (479) 527-2777, joyhale43@sbcglobal.net)
* Friday, Aug. 20 – 6:00 p.m. – Clinton School of Public Service (For more information, contact publicprograms@clintonschool.uasys.edu or (501) 683-5239.)
The fine folks who are saying that the frackin process is OK won't have a problem with drinking the water that comes from the ground around these wells...
Put them on tv showing all of Arkansas that they will drink the water straight out of the ground....
show me that and I'll stop bitching about it...
Have the State Chamber maids drink the water....
Bring in a few gallons from some of the wells and let them drink it...
And I thought that journalists were supposed to look at both sides of the story and report accordingly. Gerard obviously doesn't bother with such ethics. Because we all know that there ARE two sides to every story, and GasLand (and Gerard) only presents part of one side.
Oh for the day that journalists actually worked to present a whole picture. Gerard has as much of an agenda as Josh Fox does, and that has everything to do with money and very little to do with reality. Fox is only in Arkansas to raise money for his next movie. He's not here for the "good of nature" or Arkansas or Arkansans. He's here for Josh Fox and for Josh Fox's future alone. We should all keep that in mind.
Re Just the Facts:
Normally I let this kind of stuff pass. Life is short. But I can't help but note that it is virtually impossible to get both sides to the gas story in Arkansas because the major players, Chesapeake particularly, have sulled up and refused to answer questions. They prefer to use image advertising, shills in the Chamber and others who've been greased politically or otherwise to carry their baggage. Even the toothless ADEQ will concede it's short of manpower to inspect, much less regulate, much of the waste pits, drilling and other sensitive portions of the drilling industry.
Finally, we're doing this for money? It is to laugh. The money is in the gas companies' pockets.
JustTheFacts, I'd hazard a guess that it IS about money for you -- a paycheck from an interested party.
70% - ditto.
I first witnessed, with friends, the changed Randy some 13 years ago visiting The Rock. It was already shockingly evident even then, and comments were made.
Nice guy, not to say unctuous, who saw himself as Fuhrer and everybody around him as his troops or traitors.
The Chamber is already "defending" its position with ad hominem attacks on Fox, the "New York City filmmaker who is airing a 'shockumentary'" and questioning Fox's scientific and journalistic integrity based on unattributed criteria. Randy's a former journalist and knows how to write persuasively.
This is, as by now must be obvious, an "activist" Chamber of Commerce under Zook. Not necessarily a good thing.
At least Zook knows attention is being paid. ("How'd you get a copy of that letter?").
A good thing.
You can bet there are some Arkies who won’t be concerned about the content of “Gasland.” I hear tell of folks living in Faulkner County and points north and northeast of there who are raking in $80,000 to $90,000 a month (yes, per month) for land they’ve leased to the drillers. And I can’t forget the story a pal up in Van Buren County told a couple years ago. Perhaps Larry can confirm; perhaps not.
Anyway, the story goes that a scraggly old guy up there had spent his life trying to scrap out a living on his hilly, rocky, good-for-nothing land. Had never had a pot to piss in. Turns out his land (homesteaded by his ancestors) is in a prime Fayetteville Shale area. The old fella leases some of it and drilling commences.
Couple months later the old boy hobbles in to Clinton. Reminds folks around the square he ain’t never had nothin’ and just kindly, ya know, wants ‘em to know that he’s “came into a little bit o’ money.” Goes to Wal-Mart and buys himself a pair of pants and a couple of shirts. Also buys a beat-up old truck he’d been admiring on the used car lot.
That afternoon somebody on the square says to him, “My God, man, new clothes and a truck, how much money did you come into?! Old fella grins real wide and says, “Oh, ‘bout $19,000 a month.”
Oh yeah, the gas money has been big up here in Clinton. But any two lane within five miles of a platform is a mess, and every local, even the ones not making money, has a story about being run off the road by a energy company truck.
This is also airing on HBO and it still should be on comcasts ondemand service. It's a good film and scary. Funny how it's touted as clean energy. These poor fold in this documentary can light their well water on fire! But the energy companies say there is nothing wrong with the water. Capitalism is king.
Fixed!
"While questioning his scientific and journalistic integrity might be in order, what is not in question is the great benefit to our donors that the exploration of the Fayetteville Shale has been in sustaining their profits during this Obama administration."
I only ask because it seems the sort of thing an Arkansas journalist would do before taking the word of either party.
Matthew,
Gerard Matthews wrote this item (as the byline on the post clearly indicates). He's been to multiple drilling sites, including the one that was featured in last week's cover story. I've driven past a few, if that matters. I also have the long experience of growing up in the oil and gas fields of SW. La. I am, it happens, a part-owner of minerals on a now shut-in well that presented environmental problems in Cameron Parish. You can talk all you want about good practices and good intentions. Even people with good intentions make mistakes, often with damaging environmental consequences. The quarter of a billion (and counting) in road damage speaks for itself. So do the aerial photos we've run of leaking waste pits. So do the reports of ADEQ field inspectors. So do the many testimonies of neighbors and even some royalty owners. Big rigs, deep holes, lots of chemicals, the vagaries of water tables. All these things present the potential for problems, which inevitably happen. There are many more sides than two here. But if you're searching for my part it's this: Don't be lulled by the talk of money and don't sell our birthright cheaply. The profits have been enormous. The explorers can provide more protection for those who merely live here and reap little to nothing of the financial benefits.
RE: Max
"Finally, we're doing this for money? It is to laugh."
So, I guess that I'm wrong that sensationalism doesn't sell papers (Yes, I'm aware the ads pay for the Arkansas Times and not readers), and increased readership doesn't raise ad rates (even true for the Times), and increased ad rates means pay raises and/or you simply get to keep your job - i.e. paycheck. Nope. The facts are often boring. Sensationalism vs. responsible journalism. Sensationalism wins out way too often.
I've read every post of the Arkansas Blog for about two years. Max, attacking one of your readers is new, is it not? Not classy.
To Mr. Carroll and similar ilk above,
One did not have to step into a death camp to accept what went on there [or are you a Holocaust denier also?]
One did not have to live in Ms. Silkwood's neighborhood to realize what went on at Kerr McGee was not healthy for human beings. Worked great for the corporation though! I guess that is just collatoral damange in your book, Right?
One did not have to visit Love Canal to accept the damage it did to the environment and people.
I guess what you guys are saying is that it's OK to destroy human life, the balance of nature/enviornment, as long as you and folks like you make a profit. Those are real Values. And those are the Values that are destroying this country.
Just the facts,
No attack. I just suspect -- and you've avoided, I notice -- my feeling that you likely have more monetary motivation on gas exploration than we do. Since you've leveled that charge at us, I'm just curious if any financial benefits flow to you on account of gas exploration. If there's been any financial impact on us from our writing on this particular issue, I'd guess it would be negative. The political class and the corporate interests, as evidenced by the Chamber's letter, are all about the state getting out of the way of gas exploration. They don't tend to lend support to those with contrary views. Nor have newspapers ever been a way to much in the way of financial riches. Even if there were somehow a pecuniary motive in this, I can think of worse ways to make money than advocating a clean environment and writing about the occasional downsides of development. Now if only we could.
Durango, you get lease money once for a period of time-5 years in my case. THe only way you can get lease money monthly would be to have more and more sections to lease out monthly.
It is the royalty checks that come monthly. Of course, I haven't seen any of those and don't expect to. Why lease? If you are a small landowner in a section with larger owners who lease theirs, you get all the negatives and they can use your property because of our pro-business state laws but none of the money unless you sign a lease. In my case, I am surrounded by owners with over 500 acres each.
I asked a question that's fairly pertinent to he discussion. Not sure if that really elevates me to Nazi like status, but.... OK!
Max-- saw Gerard's byline. I was just responding to your earlier thread comment.
Matthew,
I hope I've adequately responded. But, sure, I've formed some opinions based on the reporting of others, both in Arkansas and in Texas, New York and Pennsylvania. Pro Publica has been a useful source, to name one independent organization researching gas issues. I don't guess I'll be joining a gas company PR staff as some in this market have. Nor are we likely to be paid to play Chesapeake's mockumentary on the industry on our video player. So it goes.
Matthew....Max's bonafides look good. What about yours since you think such is pertinent to the discussion?
“Durango, you get lease money once for a period of time-5 years in my case. THe only way you can get lease money monthly would be to have more and more sections to lease out monthly.” ~ couldn’t be better
cbb, what you describe is similar to the arrangement my mother had, except I think her leases renewed every seven years. This was years ago and in an area north of the Gumlog/Moreland fields, long before anybody had ever heard of "Fayetteville Shale." Anyway, they explored, capped, never drilled on her property, and after many years decided against offering to renew.
After her death, we sold, but retained the mineral rights, since we believe “something” is down there. I mean, why would they have continued to lease all those years after capping if they thought nothing was there?
As for the figures I noted earlier today, I can only pass along what I was told. The $80,000-$90,000 monthly numbers came from a member of the banking community in the Conway area. He’s in a position to know what he’s talking about, I’d think. The Van Buren County story was told to me two years ago by a person who used to spend lots of time around the courthouse up there.
Durango and all,
I don't have any doubt some owners of formerly hardscrabble land are making big money. My bottom line remains that all should be cautious about being bedazzled by that easy money. I'm telling you: I've lived in the oil patch, including the famous Tuscaloosa Trend find that made instant zillionaires in SW La. (Not me.) When the play is over -- and after years of inadequate regulation -- the remnants can be awful to see. Water quality issues are persistent. That's what so bogus about what I take to be Matthew's implication that you can adequately judge a drilling operation by how clean the site is or how quiet it may become after initial drilling is done. What you can't see or hear is what might be leaching through the underground or into the air in the form of gas. Chesapeake can build a Potemkin gas village with manicured grounds and silently purring generators, but it tells us nothing, nothing at all, about the unseen and potentially eternal side effects that may be silently bubbling below ground and into the air. To do anything other than demand rigorous oversight is -- to me -- a default on our obligation to future generations.
I’m riding shotgun with you, Boss. Gerald’s cover story last week (Shale shock: Drillers’ rights top landowners] was an eye-opener to me and I suspect to thousands more. There's no doubt in my mind that rigorous oversight is needed, and that it should be required by law.
The argument here is that if you can't present a story with hummingbirds flying around the oil rigs, bunny rabbits playing in the roads between the trucks, and overall-wearing good old boys exclaiming that their well water is the best it's ever been, then you can't cover the story.
It's news, and it's important for the public to know that these gas companies are doing far more damage then we're gaining in economic benefit, and that they are leaving us with an environmental disaster than our great-great-grandchildren will still be dealing with.
That's not an agenda. That's fact. This story is an example of the very reason for existence of the press. To bring facts to light. Facts that the powers-that-be would like to keep from seeing the light of day.
The only reason anyone would have to want thus story to go away is that they're one of the few people making money from it.
The problem with Josh Fox is Josh Fox. He is out for himself and Hollywood fame and $$$. From the first scene of the movie Fox tells a tall tale, Hes not from Milanville, Pa and he doesn't own land there either, he was born and raised in NYC, Manhattan to be exact. He then goes on to say that he was offered $5000/acre another fable, no one in this area has even come close to receiveing an offer for this amount.
This is a rebuttle of Gasland the fiction by energy indepth
http://www.energyindepth.org/2010/06/debunking-gasland/
And the problem with the gas industry is that they are trying to pull a BP on you and run fast and loose with the rules. Just like BP, however, they've already made mistakes that are damaging the environment and they're unable to own up to their shenanigans.
For the REAL information, based on a 6-month study and DEPA information, read:
http://thedailyreview.com/news/six-month-i…
BTW: Matthew Carroll works for KTHV which helped Chesapeake do their little porpaganda piece for the public. Can you say shill??
Matthew, you've got to admit it's more than a bit curious that you have 3 total posts in your lifetime on this blog with all 3 incredibly on this single thread and you just registered for the ArkTimes blog today. Wow. Coincidence? I think not.
Jake has you pegged. Better stick to your day job if you can keep it.
CBB and Durango,
The monthly amounts you two are talking about are probably royalties paid to lessors of a producing well, 13-20% of the net or gross sales of gas production depending on how the lease is written. This will usually reduce over time as the gas is extracted.
The amounts received for leasing the land are actually called "bonuses" so much per acre on a one-time payment which may be paid again at a higher rate if the lessee has the option to renew and renews.
Like many stories, when the publics’ interest conflicts with business’ profit, FUD (Fear, uncertainty and doubt) becomes the rule of the day.
“The goal of life is living in agreement with nature.” Zeno
dott, I think you’re right about the royalties being paid for producing wells. And according to an ole UofA pal who inherited what he calls “a piddlin’ little western Oklahoma farm” that has "a few" wells on it, the monthly check varies depending on how much oil is sucked from the ground that month. Says he never knows what to expect: A big check one month and a much smaller one the next. Must not be much of a problem, though; the peckerwood retired at 45 and has lived quite nicely ever since.
I never heard that particular story AND am only marginally connected in VBC. One of the WORST things about this exploration & production in addition to the unknowns about the water and the virtual overnight destruction of roads - the Noise Pollution of both the active drilling/fracking and especially the "compression stations." There is one over a mile from our place, and when we're outside at night, at the end of our driveway, we can BARELY carry on a conversation!!! It is awful; many people (including my wife) are driven nearly nuts by this - especially because we moved to the boonies in part to get away from noise. Now we've moved away and are faced with the very real possibility of not being able to SELL because of the noise!
The nutsack(s) defending them are simply uninformed, OR knowingly wrong - and pathetic.
Kilgour -- not much of a nice try. You say:
"The problem with Josh Fox is Josh Fox. He is out for himself and Hollywood fame and $$$. "
Honey, when you're talking facts you don't start with meaningless ad hominem attacks unless you're a shill and don't HAVE any contravening facts.
The preening stupidity of your opener smacks of Chamber of Commerce (and others) PR.
For starters, unless you're a mental telepathist you can't possibly know what Josh Fox is "out for."
THAT'S an idiot statement you presume plays to your presumed idiots. But wait: you've MORE!
"Hollywood fame and $$$. " Are you kidding? The presumably envious hicks, to whom your transcendently stupid opener presumably appeals and simultaneously insults, presumably salivate with positively Pavlovian petulance at presumably liberal Big City buzzwords like "Hollywood" and "$$$". (Watch a lot of "Mad Men" do you?)
Only the most ignorant will bite at your assertion that documentary exposés are the path to "Hollywood fame and $$$." For every Michael Moore there are a hundred Josh Foxes.
Even your rubes know better, kilgour. In it's ENTIRE HISTORY, "Hollywood fame and $$$"has NEVER been about documentaries. Tits and ass and gash in the sense of sex, violence and gore? Certainly! Biblical epics involving tits, ass and gash? Unbeatable! Horror movies and comedies featuring TAG? BOO! Ha-ha!
Documentaries on Big Business pollution and eco-rape? Not so much.
What we CAN conclude, from decades of studies, is that ALL factless rebuttals based on ad hominem attacks are projections of the attacker.
You're a paid shill, sweetheart. SO like pursuing "Hollywood fame and $$$" only without the Hollywood or the $$$, hence stupid.
A wannabe Fame Whore hopelessly lost and landlocked in The Rock, far far away from a galaxy where they take meetings, issue gate passes and (presumably) drive Maseratis.
Next time, peapie, bring facts.
Plus, kilgour, and it pains me to point this out, no, seriously: it helps shills' cred if they correctly spell the words they try to use -- like "rebuttal."
You're welcome. Seriously.
So now big lib environmental whackos don't want natural gas either "cause it harms da enviwonment?"
What exactly can we do that would please you? Can we take a dump or a wee wee? Will that harm the environment too? I realize that when we breath we emit CO2, so I am expecting EPA mandated gas masks that everyone is required to wear under the pain of committing a felony if you do not comply. Expecting this any day now.
Why won't environmental whacko big libs just say all humans need to commit suicide, because our very existence is harmful to the natural environment.
Big Lib environmental whackos, all talk, no action, wants everyone to do ABC, then when they do, its still not good enough and require XYZ which is also never good enough. All while continuing to run their air conditioners at break neck speed, expecting everyone else (BUT NOT THEM) to have to comply with all their little rules.
And I ponder how did we ever survive 200 years plus of our nation without big lib environmental whackos telling us we can't do anything 'cause it harms de enviwonment? Emmmmmm?
Quit being stupid ActLax. The argument is about not abiding by the environmental rules set up in the first place to protect the environment. Apparently you've been letting your brain go unprotected for many years because it shows in the asinine arguments you present.
We don't have to wonder about the side effects of toxic waste when you're here to give us an example.
Actually, ActMax is proving that he supports toxic waste and thus is himself the one who is anti-human race. The very definition of toxic waste should explain that but he doesn't want to waste his time on such trivial matters.
Toxic waste is waste material that can cause death or injury to living creatures. It spreads quite easily and can contaminate lakes and rivers. The term is often used interchangeably with “hazardous waste”, or discarded material that can pose a long-term risk to health or environment.
So, if you have any toxic waste you want to get rid of, just take it over to ActMax's home and drop it off in his backyard. He won't mind if it kills anyone or poisons his family or cripples his family. He thinks it's okay to harm the "enviwonment." It matches his mood so well when that happens.
Actually I already have Toxic Waste, I particularly like their 4th album, its pretty heavy.
How about Jumping Without a Parachute?? That seems particularly in your style. Or, why not go with the alternative, Hazardous Waste? They're really eclectic - hardcore rock, punk & show tunes.
Oh, I know....how about Lead Coffin??
ActMax,
I consider myself a moderate, not a strict liberal, although I'm sure you would disagree. I feel like everyone has turned and moved so far to the right that many of us moderates appear to you to be the left or "horrors to betsy," liberals.
However, I digress. My family and I have placed much of our land under lease recently for gas exploration. I'm sure you will cringe, but we wrote the lease to try to protect our land, surface and subsurface water and timber. Maybe the restrictions that the exploration firm agreed to will work.
Having lived in an oil boom area, we are very familiar with the abuses of the 1920's. We have just seen natural ecological succession eradicate the scars of salt water run-off, salt flats and petroleum leaks, gushers, blowouts and well head explosions from the Smackover and El Dorado fields.
But one thing about our land, leased and otherwise, we can not ensure that our neighbors placed equal protections or restrictions on theirs. The energy exploration companies are going after every parcel they can. A spill or pollution on our neighbors may affect our land and timber production, but that is always the problem.
By the way, the exploration company accepted out restriction on the lease without blinking. So, our effort to environmentally protect our land and get our neighbors to do the same did not stop or deter the exploration one whit. Although, it did take us 3-4 months to write the restrictions into the lease.
So you go ahead and lobby for no environmental laws or restrictions on your own and cavil about us moderate/liberals "environmental whackos" all you desire. In the meantime, as Bill Engvall would say, 'Here's your sign." See the "Speak Now" thread.
Josh Fox is a really nice man and is dedicated to helping arkansans save their water, what is left of it. Does it not strike you as strange that those in the know are investing in water supplies? Those same folks that are destroying ours? Water will be the next oil.
More by Author
-
Health care reform kicks in, feels good
The partisan political battle over the passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or whatever pejorative term the bill's opponents want to call it, is over.
- Mar 21, 2012
-
Last night: Hayes Carll, John Paul Keith
Hayes Carll gave the crowd a good show in Little Rock last night.
- Mar 18, 2012
- More »
Event Calendar
-
Re: Surgeon general strikes deal on disturbance charges
Jegley is right. Even if the cops are wrong, you have to submit, and then…
- on May 24, 2012
-
Re: New attention to Tom Cotton, no press champion
Most transplanted Arkies in Washington, D.C., are still Arkansas residents. You can do that in…
- on May 24, 2012
-
Re: Hurst fined again by bar committee for late filing
I can understand that. After all, he looks like a child molester.
- on May 24, 2012
Top Commenters
Blogroll
Slideshows
-
Police close the Occupy Little Rock camp, perhaps the last Occupy encampment on public land.
Site Index
News
Cover Story / Arkansas Reporter / The Week That Was / Smart Talk / The Insider / The Observer / Editorial / Max Brantley / Ernest Dumas / Gene Lyons / Bob Lancaster / Words / Guest Writer / Letters
Entertainment
A&E Feature / To-Do List / In Brief / Movie Reviews / Music Reviews / Theater Reviews / A&E News / Art Notes / Graham Gordy / Books / Media / Dining Reviews / Dining Guide / What's Cookin' / Calendar / The Televisionist / Movie Listings / Gallery Listings
This Week's Cover
Quick Links
Special Publications
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
