Site search
sponsored by
Home
News
Many local landowners affected by the proposed natural gas pipeline from Coos Bay to Malin have expressed frustration about their lack of input on whether the pipeline is approved.
Their concerns are not without merit, considering a federal energy law passed in 2005 essentially took the power to approve such projects out of state and local hands and entrusted it with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. It’s hard for any property owner to get excited about the idea of a federal agency determining the course of a pipeline that may run right through their back yard.
Public comments on the pipeline have been taken by the FERC, and judging by documents posted on the agency’s Web site, many landowners have taken this opportunity to express their concerns.
Also piping up about the pipeline’s potential environmental effects are the Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Forest Service, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and other public bodies.
The BLM and Forest Service are two agencies which opted to cooperate with the FERC and pipeline officials in helping to plot a course for the proposed pipeline, meaning their concerns about its impact to public lands are taken into account during the drafting of environmental impact statements.
Given the sensitivity of the environment through which the pipeline would pass, the public should expect agencies like the BLM and Forest Service to be as thorough as possible in the questions they raise during this process.
This land is home to a rich array of wildlife. Some of these species are listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act, and great care must be taken that the proposed pipeline does not put them in further jeopardy.
Judging by the smattering of documents posted to the FERC’s Web site so far, officials at both agencies have raised a litany of concerns.
Questions about the pipeline’s effect on spotted owl habitat have been raised alongside concerns about its impact on the streams and rivers it will cross, the hiking trails it may pass through and even the beautiful views the 230-mile pipeline is likely to mar with its 50-foot treeless easement snaking through the scenic wilds of Oregon.
It is gratifying to see such vigilance on the part of our public officials. We’ll know how seriously pipeline officials are taking them when the draft environmental impact statement comes out next year.
Their concerns are not without merit, considering a federal energy law passed in 2005 essentially took the power to approve such projects out of state and local hands and entrusted it with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. It’s hard for any property owner to get excited about the idea of a federal agency determining the course of a pipeline that may run right through their back yard.
Public comments on the pipeline have been taken by the FERC, and judging by documents posted on the agency’s Web site, many landowners have taken this opportunity to express their concerns.
Also piping up about the pipeline’s potential environmental effects are the Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Forest Service, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and other public bodies.
The BLM and Forest Service are two agencies which opted to cooperate with the FERC and pipeline officials in helping to plot a course for the proposed pipeline, meaning their concerns about its impact to public lands are taken into account during the drafting of environmental impact statements.
Given the sensitivity of the environment through which the pipeline would pass, the public should expect agencies like the BLM and Forest Service to be as thorough as possible in the questions they raise during this process.
This land is home to a rich array of wildlife. Some of these species are listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act, and great care must be taken that the proposed pipeline does not put them in further jeopardy.
Judging by the smattering of documents posted to the FERC’s Web site so far, officials at both agencies have raised a litany of concerns.
Questions about the pipeline’s effect on spotted owl habitat have been raised alongside concerns about its impact on the streams and rivers it will cross, the hiking trails it may pass through and even the beautiful views the 230-mile pipeline is likely to mar with its 50-foot treeless easement snaking through the scenic wilds of Oregon.
It is gratifying to see such vigilance on the part of our public officials. We’ll know how seriously pipeline officials are taking them when the draft environmental impact statement comes out next year.
