thegreekdog wrote:Okay, I clearly didn't get my point across.
(1) I have no problem with the private owner taking their resources and then putting the land back the way it was.
Impossible, not just difficult, but impossible.
thegreekdog wrote:(2) I have a problem with the private owner not being able to take their resources merely because there is a threat they wouldn't put things back the way they were.
How about because they are actively damaging other people's use.
Also we are not just talking about the "threat" we are talking about specific mitigations that will ensure the land can be restored to the extent possible... not full return is not possible.
. This is not just some esoteric idea, it is proven truth and reality.\
thegreekdog wrote:((3) I have a problem with the private owner being permitted to take their resources without putting things back the way they were.
Ecosystems have tipping points. They can take a LOT of damage, but exceed that tipping point and there is no restoration.
Beyond that, we have no way to remove most of the chemicals used in the fracking process from water once they enter. We are talking PERMANENT here. By saying this is OK, you are saying that its perfectly OK for a company to come in for a few years, do what they feel they can afford (they are specifically ignoring many USFS requirements, do't have to honor municipal demands at all.. and if 5, 10, 50 or 100 years down the road our water happens to be infiltrated and poisoned... tough luck on us.
thegreekdog wrote: ((So far, I don't see any evidence of #2 or #3 happening.
Read the articles again.
I will look at that separately.
thegreekdog wrote: Believe it or not Player, people that are like me (and BBS) have a super major problem with taking private property including taking private property and giving it to other, different private owners. Suffice it to say, private companies cannot get other peoples' lands without either paying for it or getting the government to give it to them. We see the latter happening more often here in Pennsylvania with the natural gas pipelines.
The problem is that you believe this to be true, and basically don’t understand why its not true because it involves natural resources.
Natural resources are not just replacable and reparable. The Allegheny is unique in that it began as an almost entirely second growth, denuded forest. What was here originally is already gone. Cut a stretch of timber, and it CAN be largely regrown, regenerated. Species here, for the most part, can withstand some major impacts because they have already done so. However, there is still a tipping point. Also, it has taken a LOT of unified effort and unified work by not just the federal government, but by state, local entities and private individuals to bring the forest back. These companies are not only not going to do that, they are arguing they are not required to pay any attention to any requirements or even requests made by any other entity.
They are arguing that their right to access these minerals supercedes everybody else’s rights.. including the public’s right to access water resources, which do not stay on a single site.
So, its not even just the surface rights and uses that they are ignoring, but also our rights to water, one of the most basic and fundamental.. and soon to be most limited resources in the country.