BOISE – The new owners of natural gas wells in western Idaho plan to spend more and drill more to find more gas in the state.

“This is exciting news for Idaho,” Snake River Oil and Gas President Richard Brown told the Idaho Statesman in a story published Saturday.  “This acquisition of the productive wells and the thousands of associated leased acres means we can expand our oil and gas exploration program, drill more wells, and bring major investments to the region and the state.”

The company is partnering with AM Idaho LLC, a subsidiary of Texas-based Alta Mesa Holdings.

The companies recently purchased the Idaho gas wells from Bridge Resources Corporation and its partner, Paramax Resources Ltd.  Those companies in 2010 produced what appear to be commercially viable natural gas wells after drilling 11 wells in Payette County.

The new owners plan to use advanced technology that allows geologic mapping of the region to find more natural gas. Continue reading →

Here’s a news item from the Associated Press: BOISE, Idaho ― Governor C.L. “Butch” Otter signed the bill restricting local control over the natural gas industry, putting the finishing touches to a measure that launched the Senate’s ethics investigation into Senator Monty Pearce.  The law, HB 464, went into effect Friday, forbidding local governments from enacting ordinances to prohibit gas drilling.  From now on, Idaho cities and counties can’t require exploration companies to secure conditional use permits for their projects.  Though the bill cleared the House and Senate on wide margins, it created a sensation in the 2012 Legislature when Democrats accused Pearce of not disclosing a conflict of interest.  Pearce has leased land to Snake River Oil and Gas, the company behind the bill.  He didn’t disclose his leases publicly until the final vote.  Wednesday, the Senate Ethics Committee dismissed the complaint.

(By Betsy Russell, Eye on Boise, The Spokesman Review)

On Monday, March 19, in Weiser, and on Tuesday, March 20, in Fruitland, the Idaho Organizing Project of the Western Organization of Resource Councils and Oregon Rural Action hosted guest speaker John Fenton of Pavillion, Wyoming, the rancher and chair of the Pavillion Area Concerned Citizens featured in the Gasland documentary.  Throughout two informative evenings of free, public presentations, John talked about his and his neighbors’ personal experiences and their direct struggles against the negative aspects of living in the middle of oil and gas fracking development on their ranches and in their community.  See a brief video of John explaining how his peers organized themselves and recruited the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for a seminal study of their ground water.

(Link provided by Liz Amason)

The Senate ethics investigation into Senator Monty Pearce is over – as a bipartisan committee voted unanimously to drop a conflict-of-interest complaint.

But the hard feelings linger.

In a news release this morning, Senate Democrats complain that they were saddled with an unreasonable burden of proof. They say they were told to prove that Pearce, R-New Plymouth, would derive direct and unusual financial benefit from oil and gas leases from the process.

Committee Republicans and Democrats closed the process with an agreement that potential conflicts should be disclosed sooner in the legislative process – not on the Senate floor, before a final vote on legislation, as Pearce did last week.

Read more: Idaho Senate Democrats Decry ‘Unpleasant Ordeal’ of Pearce Ethics Process

(By Kevin Richert, The Idaho Statesman)

Controversial legislation fast-tracked by the Idaho Petroleum Council through the Idaho Legislature, House Bill 464 faced a gridlock 17 to 17 vote on the Senate floor last Friday, March 9, about whether it should be sent to the Amending order for language changes.  This industry-sponsored law would allow state agencies and commissions to pre-empt city and county control of natural gas development and would exempt associated wells from state regulations governing Class II injection wells, thus permitting disposal of hazardous drilling waste such as hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) fluids.  In an unexpected turn of events, Lieutenant Governor Brad Little cast the deciding vote in favor of revisions (see the Boise Weekly article also on the WIRT website, Senate Deadlocks on Amending Gas Drilling Measure, Lieutenent Governor Casts Tie-Breaker. Continue reading →

The debate over local control when it comes to Idaho’s burgeoning gas exploration made its way to the floor of the Idaho Senate Friday morning.

What started as a series of speeches promoting the benefits of oil and gas exploration evolved into a robust debate of how much input Idaho cities and counties should have in determining where, or even if, oil and gas wells should be allowed.

“I want the oil and gas industry to succeed and move forward, but I also have grave reservations about this bill,” said Rupert Republican Sen. Dean Cameron, referring to House Bill 464, which would give ultimate authority on permits for oil and gas drilling to the state, trumping local oversight. “I have received a good deal of correspondence from our counties that are expressing their concerns.”

Read more: Senate Deadlocks on Amending Gas Drilling Measure, Lieutenant Governor Casts Tie-Breaker

(By George Prentice, Boise Weekly)

House Bill 464 passed the Senate Resources and Environment Committee on Friday, March 2, with a 6 to 3 vote after three and a half hours of discussion and testimony extended from a similar Wednesday, February 29, hearing.  Deviously crafted and promoted by the Idaho Petroleum Council, the proposed bill bypasses state rulemaking processes and limits city, county, and local jurisdictional control of natural gas drilling operations, including hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” practices.  It also would exempt all natural gas wells from state regulations for injection wells, thus allowing disposal of hazardous fracking fluids underground, where they could endanger community and private drinking water.  Five other oil and natural gas laws were also recommended as “do pass” measures by the seven Republican and two Democrat committee members.  Listen to between 13:11 and 6:21 of the Monday, March 5, Evening Report, Two Megaload Blockers Arrested, on KRFP Radio Free Moscow for a description of this legislation and its testimony and deliberations, Senate Resources Committee Approves Drilling Ordinance Pre-emption Law.

* Industry is attempting to push through too many major changes in one piece of legislation.  This bill should really be three different bills. Instead, it’s one large and very bad bill. There are so many problems that need to be addressed:  local control issues, water grabs, and injection well issues; that frankly, the Senate Resource and Environment Committee should kill it.

* The gas industry and the State have essentially coerced counties into supporting bad legislation.

* House Bill 464 is a direct attack on local control and citizen involvement in land use regulation.

* How can the gas industry call this a “compromise bill” when the only county in Idaho with a gas and oil ordinance wasn’t invited to the negotiations?

* The impacts of the gas industry will be felt most acutely at the local level.  Local governments must absolutely retain authority over siting, setbacks, noise, odor, road use, etc., and the ability to use the special permitting process to create site-specific conditions that may, at times, require stronger regulations than the state’s. Continue reading →

For 35 years, statute has required local governments to develop a comprehensive plan and then adopt ordinances which conform to the plan and state law.  In this way, development is orderly and follows a road map (comp plan) which is tailored to each community.  As you probably know, all land use is divided into difference use zones.  Then administrative permitting or guidelines are written for what is allowed in each of those zones.  In this way for example, if you want to build a 2000-square-foot home, you can do it simply by applying for a permit to do so in any zone which allows for that use.

Most every community also identifies certain other activities which by their very nature, can be allowed in one or more zones but because of potential conflict or other concerns, need special review.  For example, a day care center may be allowed in a commercial zone, but requires a special use permit to be allowed in a residential district because the hours of operations, traffic, and other safety or quality of life issues could be impacted.  In a rural setting such as the county, things like cell towers, gravel pits, CAFO’s, etc., are usually allowed in most zones, but only by special use permit.  In this way, adjacent property owners can have some input to address issues that may impact the enjoyment of their own property or other safety and quality of life concerns.  It allows local authorities to grant the use if certain conditions are met to mitigate these concerns.  In reality, the special use permit cuts two ways.  Rather than completely excluding a potentially compatible use from any given area because there might be instances where such a use is problematic, special use permits are really about expanding opportunity.  So too it is with gas & oil. Continue reading →

Urgent action is needed on House Bill 464!

If House Bill 464 passes the Idaho Senate as it has already passed the House, it would shift all meaningful control over oil and gas production from the county/city level up to the state level.

Under the Local Land Use Planning Act (LLUPA) and current state statutes, anytime someone wants to develop a property in a manner and location other than how that area is currently zoned, they must follow a special permitting process. For example, if Snake River Oil and Gas wanted to drill a well on the Payette Elementary School grounds, they would have to apply for and be granted a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) or Special Use Permit (SUP), in this case, through the City of Payette. They would file an application with the city and be required to go through a public hearing process in order to be granted the permit. That process mandates a public notice, written notification to surrounding property owners, and a public meeting where residents can testify for or against the siting of the facility. It also affords affected property owners the ability to appeal a permit if they feel they have been aggrieved in any way or if the process was not handled correctly (no public notice, no notification to surrounding landowners, etc.). Continue reading →