Bloch and Miller also said they have a problem with the way the BLM is interpreting the 2005 Energy Policy Act and that 25 wells recently approved were without the BLM's analysis of the impacts the added wells will have on the Nine Mile area's art and cultural sites. Zavadil said those wells are being drilled on existing pads and that the BLM imposed a "very stringent" dust standard with its approval of the wells.

Plaintiffs SUWA, Miller's group and The Wilderness Society also say the National Environmental Policy Act and the National Historic Preservation Act require that the BLM consider a full range of impacts before giving a "green light" to more drilling.

The Wilderness Society's regional director, Suzanne Jones, said in a statement that the West Tavaputs project is an "egregious" example of a relentless push for oil and gas projects into "iconic" Western landscapes. Like Miller, each of the groups takes care to say they are not opposed to drilling on public lands.

As the BLM considers Barrett's West Tavaputs project, groups like the National Trust For Historic Preservation have written the BLM to say the project would "perpetuate and immensely exaggerate the adverse effects of natural gas development on Nine Mile Canyon."

The federal Environmental Protection Agency also recently weighed in on the proposed project, which the EPA noted "will occupy unique and sensitive canyonlands including Nine Mile Canyon, a potential archaeological area of national significance." Protecting those areas, the EPA added, will require a "high level of commitment form the BLM to preserve the special character of this wild and remote plateau country."

---

E-mail: sspeckman@desnews.com