Moab Drilling & Exploration Land Sale
many of you are likely aware of this but, if not, this is worth checking out and writing a quick letter if interested.... this is posted on the front page, btw.
I saw that. Not good.
Originally Posted by happy_ending
I submitted the form letter from NSMB:
Deadline is DECEMBER 3rd for letters, so send one today!
Originally Posted by azdog
rockman's viewpoint ??????????????
I am curious what rockman's view is on this whole thing? He might be out there right now with a drilling rig doing some test drilling. I think he was up that way recently.
Just so you know I spend most of my time studying the impacts of dams on rivers so I trend more to the environmental side of things. However, I did do a week of fieldwork for a uranium company in Moab last spring. More out of curiousity than anything, although the money was pretty dang good. My take is that most of the uranium companies were trying to show that their claims had worth so they could sell them to bigger companies and make the investors some money. Anyway, I do think we should explore domestic drilling where it makes sense but not right next to a national park.
Originally Posted by traildoc
The IMBA letter is a bit misleading. I doubt that any of Moab's famous trails will turn into heavily used access roads. And I'm not sure the Moab aquifer is at risk either or that there is an aquifer at all. I thought Moab's water supply came from the Colorado River. Moab sits on top of a collapsed salt anticline.
Moab's water comes from extensive springs that drain the high country to the east of town. Moab gets no water from the Colorado.
I've reviewed the BLM map at length. The only trails currently threatened (now that the bulk of the parcels have been deferred) are Bartlett, Tusher, Hidden Canyon and the all the moto-ing trails to the far NW of Moab. The Porcupine Parcel, though now deferred, seems to cover the bulk of Matt Martin Point, which is several miles off of Porcupine Rim Trail proper. However, this would be a serious threat to the Porcupine Trail, as that trail constitutes the default access to that point; there is simply no other way.
Originally Posted by hfly
Can you be a little more clear about how the Procupne Rim Trail is being threatened.
Originally Posted by hfly
The BLM has since reneged because of the protesting (see Salt Lake trib articles below):
I was wrong about the water and where they get it; most comes from the sandstone aquifer--mostly Navajo designated by EPA as their sole source aquifer a few years back, but also a considerable amount also comes from the valley fill deposits.
The valley fill aquifer isn't very thick and the wells that use water from it don't penetrate the salt material below. Some of the locals use Ken's Lake as a secondary water source for outdoor watering. But the valley fill aquifer receives sufficient recharge from Mill Creek and Pack Creek plus extra storage in the Navajo that eventually makes it way to the alluvium to replenish ground water pumping, except with future growth, there is certain to be a problem in terms of quantity (related to drought and overuse). So, the long and the short of it would be that any development on Porcupine Rim would potentially effect Moab's water supply.
rockman- thanks for the input as well as the links...
from those articles it sounds as though the parcels in spanish valley proper have been deferred but i dont think those are the parcels that would threaten porcupine and clearly those arent they parcels threatening other trails mentioned such as amasa, bartlett, etc.
the nps is busy battling it out with the blm on the the parcels adjacent to various parks, but in the meantime, i wonder what is going on with the parcels that would threaten these various trails.
it seems to me that the blm has given up SO much land for exploration and extraction in the book cliffs & roan cliffs area (and many other areas in sw utah and the western slope of co) that is seems as if they could take some potential leases off the books that would jeopardize a recreation destination not seen anywhere else in north america.
Agreed. Don't forget it's not just the BLM. The elected officials of Grand County are typically pro-development as well.
Interesting thread. Do the La Sals not provide enough runoff from the snowmelt to maintain Moab's water supply or is that the source of the natural springs? It's interesting to here from both sides as well. I had a chance to meet one of the Moab locals who earns his living drilling in this area but I also feel if the possibility of finding more resources is minimal via exploration then why take the chance of risking the tourist industry. Tourism is what has kept this town alive since the early 80's.
Bender to AZDog: I'm not the best person to give advice on not riding!
From reading the Geological Survey report I linked above it appears there is ample water for Moab's current needs but that will change with further population and tourism growth and a cocommtant increase in use and also continued drought. Some of the storage in the Navajo is maybe "old" water (that is centuries or older) but judging how the quality changed for the worse at Matrimony Spring as the Slickrock Trail gained fame and campers were running rampant and pooping all over the place the recharge rate is pretty high. From both the Porcupine Rim and the LaSals. Obviously, there is a potential threat to the aquifer if they were to drill it.
Either way, the BLM didn't do their homework on the whole parcel sale deal which smacks of a crazy ploy by the bush admin to try to rape as much as possible before leaving.