|
|
|
Opening Remarks of U.S. Rep. Raul Grijalva
Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands
Joint hearing on "Land-Use Issues Associated with Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing and Development"
April 26, 2007
I'm pleased to join Chairman Costa in welcoming our witnesses and audience to this joint oversight hearing of the National Parks, Forests and Public Lands Subcommittee and the Energy and Mineral Resources Subcommittee.
Today's hearing will examine how the accelerated pace of oil and gas development on public lands in recent years is affecting other public uses and resources.
Today, we will hear from witnesses who have come a long way to tell us about what the oil and gas boom has meant to their ranches, their homes, their health and their livelihoods. Most have never testified before Congress. One is a lineal descendent of Chief Seattle and another has never before traveled east of the Mississippi.
At least two of our witnesses have had to sell their homes because oil and gas development drove them off the land they loved. Other witnesses will tell us of leasing operations that have been permitted to undermine federal and state investments in clean water, endangered species protection and invasive species control.
It's not surprising that regular citizens can't get satisfaction out of BLM when they complain about harm to their cattle, property and water. The BLM sometimes can't even be bothered to address concerns of the National Park Service, its sister agency in the Interior Department.
I have here copies of numerous letters sent to the BLM from park superintendents in Utah, Colorado and New Mexico who wrote to express worries about possibly unacceptable damage to park resources.
The letters talk about threats to the parks' pristine air and sparkling waters, to views of starlit night skies and majestic western panoramas, to the backcountry solitude and quiet that visitors treasure, to archeological jewels and to the wild creatures that call our parks home.
In most cases, the superintendents did not request that the parcels be withdrawn, merely that the leases be delayed until stipulations could be put in place to protect those park values. In some cases, BLM made changes reflecting the parks' concerns. In others, BLM ignored the superintendents' pleas, belittled their concerns, or simply did not respond. I would like to enter these letters in the record.
We will also hear today from a representative of the Western Governors Association, which has called for the repeal of a provision in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 that exempted more than a thousand new permits to drill annually from environmental review and public comment.
Industry supporters are always asking those who worry about the impact of oil and gas development if we drive gasoline-powered cars or heat our houses with natural gas. They imply that if we use oil and gas, we have no right to complain about how those products are produced.
But that is a false choice. Our irreplaceable natural resources and critical wildlife populations are paying the price not for our energy needs, but for lack of vigilance.
There are right places and right ways to develop our energy resources, and there are wrong places and wrong ways to undertake that development. Balancing energy production with the care of our parks, our wildlife and the livelihoods of our western citizens is possible. We simply need to resolve to meet that standard.
|
|
