I know this topic has been discussed many times. However, I still find it fascinating that so many public officials want to expand the use of hydro fracking. An Ohio Treasurer is religiously proposing just this. In response to a U.S. Forest Service decision that natural resource rights and oil rights in south east Ohio would not be auctioned off before adverse impacts could be studied, Treasurer Josh Mandel is pushing for immediate exploitation of the area’s natural gas. As expected, he cites job creation and economic revitalization; a position proponents of drilling have typically used to sell the the Fracking process to the public.
Although this question is oftentimes political, it does raise issues we have discussed recently. What kinds of activities are proper for a given publicly owned land? Should short term economic gain outweigh what could be long term adverse health effects? As someone who has spent time in Western Pennsylvania,an are abundant with Marcellus Shale, I fear that economic concerns, may win over many amongst the general populace. Quite frankly, many who live in the area actually do know the potential health effects. Hence, when you tell them about it, you are met with a look “Oh and what are you going to do about” or “We need jobs”. In this respect, I think the message needs articulated that employment may not be what people think it is.I dont know. Maybe this will change the way we think about land use. Or maybe not
Here is a report from the Food and Water Group explaining why