Reader comments
BLM releases list of deferrals on oil, gas lease

Leonardo | 7:43 a.m. Dec. 13, 2008

This BLM proposal was unusually controversial because it was so transparently a "wish list" of leases that stood their best chance of passing during the last days of the Bush Administration. Let the BLM bring forth a proposal that doesn't impinge on parks and wild areas, and they won't generate such a storm of controversy. If the BLM has a black eye over all of this, it is self-inflicted; they punched themselves in the face.

No Clue | 8:41 a.m. Dec. 13, 2008

This protestor is ridiculous. The simulated crude substance looks nothing like sweet Utah crude. I wish I would have been there standing next to him covered in money to represent all of the money and potential tax dollars generated by the oil extraction industry. I would also have a picture of oil country showing no damage to our enviroment.

Earth First | 8:48 a.m. Dec. 13, 2008

We can drill other planets later.

Comments continue below

Infromed | 9:45 a.m. Dec. 13, 2008

Man we are dumb. We need oil independence. We need to provide our own oil, etc. At the same time we should look at alternative or more efficient ways of running our county in regards to energy. We need to quit letting the hippy minority run our country and stop progress. All the $ that is tied up in litigation of things like Legacy Parkway could easily be invested in research of alternatives or helping our people. Wake up people!

calbrode | 10:10 a.m. Dec. 13, 2008

The oil and gas industry is the only one here in the Rockies that is keeping people putting food on their tables!!!!!!

Protester | 10:51 a.m. Dec. 13, 2008

I just love how the media portrays the idiot protestor as very thoughtful and all oil companies are evil and reckless. The fact is most oil companies put a lot more care and effort into maintaining the environment than this ridiculous protestor will ever commit to. For everyone freaking out about a drilling rig being visible from Moab's arch why don't you quit hiking all over it? That's more harm than the oil companies will ever cause.

fletch | 11:33 a.m. Dec. 13, 2008

we are watching our country crumble with political corruption, greed and stupidity...and then we see more crazy political moves that seal the verdict of a government that continues to 'fiddle while Rome burns'. Is there no sanity left in those who make the important decisions?

Last one out turn out the lights - if any are still burning.

xscribe | 12:32 p.m. Dec. 13, 2008

Alternative forms of energy could have been in use today if it were a priority years ago. Now we want to drill everywhere while we "explore" alternative energy. We don't need oil independence; we need to live independent of oil. Had Gore been president instead of Bush, we'll probably already be well on our way. The only ones who are dumb are those that can't see the forest for the trees. It reminds me of my 9-year-old who wants instant gratification.

Leonardo | 1:14 p.m. Dec. 13, 2008

"Infromed" (sic); we will never have "oil independence". It's a finite, nonrenewable resource that we will run out of in the future, more or less distant. In the meantime, there are many things that should be weighed when deciding where we explore and exploit. Those people who think, "there's oil/gas there, end of discussion, let's drill" are the ones with simple-minded thinking. It has nothing to do with the virtue or evil of fossil fuel companies, who are just trying to make a buck. It is a matter of the American public weighing the pros and cons of individual leases.

Paul | 3:35 p.m. Dec. 13, 2008

I was unaware there was a shortage of oil from Eastern Utah. I thought the Salt Lake refineries were taking all of the Basin oil that they can handle (if I remember, 15% of their capacity, due to high wax content in Basin oil). What is the point in drilling more oil wells, if no one will take the oil? As for the natural gas wells, that's all being targeted to be shipped out of State in the new pipeline that's going in.

Sure, drill more, if needed, but do it rationally. Don't cut off the tourism nose just so we can ship some extra natural gas back East.

Robert | 4:46 p.m. Dec. 13, 2008

I, for one, cannot understand why a news article about BLM lease deferrals should include -- as its only accompanying photographs -- pictures of a protester with simulated crude oil pouring over his head. I suppose it's a result of clever protesters doing what they know will catch the attention of journalists who are always rushed for deadlines and hungry for eye-catching pictures. But it does little to educate the public about the real issues.

Further, the protesters show their back lack of understanding when they use a black substance to "simulate" crude oil. Very few crude oils are actually black; most are shades of brown. Some are even as clear as fresh water.

Communists by another name | 5:36 p.m. Dec. 13, 2008

These protesters care nothing for the environment. Their only aim is to bring down western civilization, America first. They are anarchists, nihilists, and evil to the core.

Karl | 6:35 p.m. Dec. 13, 2008

I don't even know what to say to "communists by another name." I am at a loss for words that someone could be so ignorant to a group of people.
I have seen more wonders in the natural world than I ever will in the world created by man. I have read accounts of petrified forests in our mountains being ground up for the silver that the ancient trees contained. This is what I fear will continue to happen if things progress as they have in the past. We don't need more roads polluting our forests, paving the way to more possible accidental spills that hurt both us and our environment. We need something other than more oil being pumped through the veins of our country. We use more than our fair share of oil, and that needs to stop. There are other ways.

Hey Des News | 8:50 p.m. Dec. 13, 2008

How about not falling for the picture of a guy with black mud on his face? You can get that at a mud wrestling contest anywhere. These handful of guys have little clue as to what is going on.

Karl is a little parochial in his views as well, though a historical perspective on any issue is good. But I'll bet he owns and drives a car and uses electricity at his house.

The BLM and energy companies are not trying to destroy public land. There is oil and gas to be found. There are jobs related to energy development that provide for families in our rural counties. It is not like the BLM wants to lease all the acreage. Millions of acres that make a park a special place are being held back. Alternative forms of energy should also be explored.

We are watching a national recession take hold in the US, yet some think it is better to buy oil from unfriendly and unstable counties, and let them have the well-paying jobs that go with it.

I say we keep the energy jobs here and let them help us climb out of this economic slowdown.

to Karl: | 8:51 p.m. Dec. 13, 2008

If there are other ways, tell us what they are.

Boblog to Paul | 10:31 p.m. Dec. 13, 2008

You speak of the relationship between tourism and energy development. They hardly cross in today's world, as BLM and federal land management agencies don't allow development in national parks. And lest we forget, it is the car and the plane that bring in tourists. They need fuel.

Both tourism and enery development can take place and do just fine. The extreme environmentalists would have us believe you have to choose one or the other, but Utah is an example of having both.

We need both. We would like to have MORE of both. It would increase jobs and tax revenues.

Aldo | 1:00 p.m. Dec. 14, 2008

Boblog; if you destroy the beauty of a national park or monument, you destroy the reason to visit it. The beauty does not stop at the park boundary. In the case of Arches, the cliffs directly across the Colorado River from the park are part of the experience. That doesn't mean you need a 50 mile unscathed landscape; it just means that you need to careful not to degrade the foreground.
In the case of Dinosaur, there were parcels offered that were supposed to be "closed to leasing" in the BLM's own management plan. There were parcels contiguous to the monument, opposite scenic viewpoints, that were "standard stipulations"; in other words, no actions would be taken to preserve the beauty. This massive outcry is a proportionate response to a very bad set of parcels. Keep leasing, keep drilling - but not everywhere.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.