And in broad daylight no less.
That’s right. West Slope Colorado Oil and Gas Association Executive Director David Ludlam actually wrote in a letter to the BLM and distributed it to reporters: “It is evident to WSCOGA members that the shifting Thompson Divide Area is a political concept created by wilderness advocates and not an area based on the Thompson Creek watershed or any other biological or geological considerations.”
Kinda makes you wonder. What is this guy on? Does he think the Thompson Divide is invisible? Maybe he never learned how to read a topo map. Who can say? I mean, first they attack Western Colorado Congress. Now this. It’s like a public meltdown of an entire organization with a whiny Captain Ahab at the helm.
Fear the whale, Mr. Ludlam. He’s coming for you. Fear the whale …
In July COGA dismissed the Lafayette class action lawsuit as “frivolous.” Well they should know. They are the king of frivolous lawsuits. In the past year COGA has sued Longmont, Fort Collins, and Lafayette. Now they are threatening a lawsuit if the leases are canceled.
As you may recall, WSCOGA and COGA members lately are fond of saying that citizens who are fighting for their rights to clean and air water are “extremists” and “not tethered to reality.”
Somebody please tell me what about Ludlam’s and WSCOGA’s positions and statements this article are not extremist or in any way tethered to reality?
An oil and gas industry group is challenging the very notion that the Thompson Divide area even exists as a geographical region, calling it a “political concept” created by wilderness advocates to prevent development of gas leases in the area west of Carbondale.
The West Slope Colorado Oil and Gas Association and its member companies whose federal land leases are now under review by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management also say they are preparing to file a “takings” lawsuit if any previously issued gas leases are canceled or modified.
WSCOGA Executive Director David Ludlam claims in a federal Freedom of Information Act request filed with state BLM officials that the “so-called Thompson Divide Area” evolved after numerous attempts dating back to 2006 to give federal wilderness protections to lower-elevation BLM lands in the region …
… Ludlam said his association members stand ready to sue the federal government if need be to protect leaseholder rights to develop the leases.
“We want to start painting a picture for ourselves as to how this agency prioritized these boundaries, which appear to be ever-shifting and basically drawn with a red Sharpie,” Ludlam said. “This whole thing seems to be an attempt to fold the political priorities of a lot of groups into one effort.
“We believe we know what the outcome of this will likely be,” he added, suggesting that some leases will either be canceled or modified, especially those lying within the area generally recognized as the Thompson Divide.
“Based on comments BLM has made privately to member companies with producing leases outside of the so-called Thompson Divide Area, WSCOGA believes BLM is considering different treatment for leases that fall in or outside of this area,” Ludlam wrote in his FOIA request to the BLM.
Comments from both Pitkin and Garfield counties also ask the BLM to make such a distinction in its lease analysis, he noted.
Doing so, “would violate the due process rights of our members holding those targeted leases and be subject to legal challenge,” Ludlam wrote.