Trout Unlimited to Consider Southern Delivery System at March Meeting

The potential recreational and environmental effects of the planned Southern Delivery System pipeline from Pueblo Dam to Colorado Springs will be the topic under discussion at the March 13 meeting of Trout Unlimited in Pueblo. Drew Peternell, Colorado Trout Unlimited’s lawyer and the Director of the Colorado Water Project, will address concerns about the pipeline as it is currently presented in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. See Southern Delivery System EIS.  This is an important meeting to the future of recreation on the AK River through Pueblo! Please attend, if at all possible!

 THURSDAY, March 13, 7:00 p.m.

 Jones-Healy Realty, 119 W. 6th, Pueblo

 Everyone welcome - FREE to the public. Donate a raffle item to defray chapter expenses

Grand County locals among proponents of instream flow laws

http://www.skyhidailynews.com/article/20080207/NEWS/76165476

By Tonya Bina Sky-Hi Daily News February 7, 2008

   Efforts are being made on the state level to establish instream flows in rivers as a “beneficial use” under Colorado law, and a few locals are getting behind the legislation.    Kirk Klancke of Trout Unlimited and manager of a local water and sanitation district, endorses HB 1280, introduced last week, for making instream flows a “beneficial use to mankind.”

    Klancke, along with Mitch (Mo) Kirwan of Mo Henry’s Trout Shop, participated in a press conference introducing the legislation recently. They talked about the economic impacts of low flows.

    Not only are river flows necessary to the recreation and tourism industries helping to drive Colorado’s economy, they said, but are critical to sustaining fish, wildlife and healthy river corridors.

    In accordance with Colorado water law, Klancke said his district must prove beneficial use of water rights in order to protect those rights. The district’s water rights are secured for future growth, but at present, are not being fully utilized for the purposes of the district.

    Therefore, because of the “use it or lose it” component in Colorado water law, the remaining water to which the district has rights is pulled out of the river to irrigate a field that no longer gets hayed, he said.

    “It seems like a foolish use of water when leaving it in the stream has more beneficial use,” he said.

    And as more and more water gets diverted from the Fraser River, low flows are driving the cost of waste water and water treatment upward, he said.

    The concentration of pollutants is greater when flows are lower, resulting in higher expenses related to treatment operations, maintenance and construction, Klancke said.

    The Colorado Environmental Association has teamed up with other instream flow advocates, such as Trout Unlimited, the Environmental Defense Council and the Colorado Water Conservation Board, to create the Healthy Rivers Campaign in support of three legislative solutions proposed at the Statehouse.

    Groups such as the Rocky Mountain Farmers Union have also endorsed the bills, according to Water Caucus Coordinator Becky Long of the Colorado Environmental Coalition.

    “Colorado water law is many things, but logical and simple aren’t on the list,” Long said.

    The proposed bills are not in any way designed to reconstruct the existing water authority already worked out in statute, she said. Among the chief merits of current water law is that it has “an infrastructure built around it that people agree to,” she said.

    But what the proposed laws are designed to do is “provide protection for water right owners who want to do the right thing and keep water in the river.”

    Water right owners would do this by working with the state through the Colorado Water Conservation Board, an entity that since 1973 has been the only body allowed to acquire water rights for the sole purpose of letting water continue to flow downstream.

    The conservation board acquires these rights in a number of ways, by grants, purchases, donations or leases.

    HB 1280, dubbed the “Protect Lease Instream Flow Water Right Bill” among supporters, has been crafted to ensure protection of water rights if a rights owner chooses to donate or loan water to the Colorado Water Conservation Board.

    A Healthy Rivers Campaign fact sheet states that “by protecting the value of the owner’s water right for the future, this bill will allow individuals and cities to donate or lease water to the state without fears of future penalties.”

    The Colorado Legislature passed a similar bill, HB 1012, last year which allowed for a temporary loan or donation of water without penalty to the conservation board during drought times when the health of a river is in jeopardy.

    “This year’s legislation, in my opinion, is a natural progression of that,” Long said.

    Two pieces of companion legislation are set to follow HB 1012. One, sponsored by Rep. Kathleen Curry and Sen. Jim Isgar, would create a $1 million fund to assist the instream acquisition program. The other, sponsored by Rep. Jack Pommer and Sen. Dan Gibbs, is meant to create tax incentives for water-rights owners who choose to leave their water in local streams and rivers. The latter was written to offset costs that come along with each step of the process, such as the need to hire a professional hydrologist, for example, to provide documentation of rights.

    “This bill allows (water right owners) to take tax incentives up to 50 percent of the current use value of a water right capped at $100,000 per water right owner,” Long said.

    The tax incentive program would have a limit of $2 million per year starting out, she said, but it is hoped the program would have a chance to grow as participation grows.

    — Tonya Bina can be reached at 887-3334 ext. 19603 or e-mail tbina@grandcountynews.com.

Colorado looks at water leases, donations to increase river flows

By COLLEEN SLEVIN Associated Press Writer

Article Last Updated: 01/30/2008 05:54:30 PM MST

DENVER—Colorado lawmakers are looking at ways to encourage people to donate or lease water rights they're not using to increase the amount of water in the state's rivers. The aim is to make rivers and their fish healthier and support the state's recreation industry.The current law isn't clear on whether people would forfeit their water rights by leasing extra water to the state so it can flow downstream when they don't need it. To encourage leases, Rep. Randy Fischer introduced a bill Wednesday to clarify that they won't give up their rights.

Lawmakers are also working on bills that would give tax credits to people who let their unused water flow downstream and to give the state water conservation board $1 million to buy or lease rights to water that it can then allow to flow rather than be diverted.

The board is the only body allowed to hold such instream rights, as opposed to water rights in which water is taken out of the river to irrigate crops or support cities. Currently, it doesn't have any money to buy the rights or pay the legal fees for people who want to donate or lease their unused water.

All three bills are backed by Trout Unlimited and Environmental Defense, which released a study Wednesday saying that increasing instream flows would add another $4.4 million a year to the state's economy because of increased rafting and fishing. The study was paid for by Environmental Defense.

Mitch Kirwan, co-owner of Mo Henry's Trout Shop in Fraser, said it will become more difficult for fish to thrive in the Fraser River, especially in warm weather, if more water is diverted to the populous Front Range.

Kirk Klancke, who manages the water district for a nearby subdivision, said the development has rights to water it needs to provide for future development but doesn't need now. He said the district would like to let the water flow downstream to help fishermen and others who use the river but, fearing the district would lose its rights, each year he uses the extra water to irrigate part of an old ranch.

Kirwan said adding more water to mountain rivers like that would help his business besides helping the environment.

"It's a huge boon for the economy of the mountain areas," Kirwan said.

Sportsmen can voice concerns on Roan

"We would have liked Gov. Ritter's proposal to be more protective," said Chris Hunt of Trout Unlimited. "Why Northwater Creek isn't included is a mystery."

http://www.denverpost.com/extremes/ci_8112987

By Charlie Meyers The Denver Post

Article Last Updated: 01/29/2008 11:32:01 PM MST

Conciliation has its perils, particularly when the other side has no inclination to budge. When this occurs, the result borders on surrender — a condition that, pending a lawsuit and change of administration, seems to be the state of affairs for Colorado's imperiled Roan Plateau.

When Gov. Bill Ritter made a proposal late last year urging the Bureau of Land Management to expand protection of the Roan, it was with full understanding that he had no real authority to make it stick. Which makes one wonder why an avowed wildlife-friendly governor wouldn't ask for the broader safeguards the habitat really deserves, if for no other reason than good public relations.

After all, his counterparts to the north and south — Dave Freudenthal in Wyoming and Bill Richardson in New Mexico — had made what seemed like grandstand plays on resource protection involving federal oil and gas leasing and pulled it off.

The Roan issue involves 67,000 acres of public land sought for lease by various energy companies in concert with a massive leasing initiative in the fading months of the George W. Bush administration.

Ritter's request to increase the Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) excluded an important refuge for a remnant population of Colorado River cutthroat trout on Northwater Creek, a puzzling omission considering the Division of Wildlife is busily promoting restoration of this threatened species.

It should be noted that Roan public lands represent just 1.5 percent of the land base in the greater Piceance Basin. Further, half the BLM's Roan Plateau Planning Area already is owned or leased by the natural gas industry. Drilling already is occurring on many of these lands.

"We would have liked Gov. Ritter's proposal to be more protective," said Chris Hunt of Trout Unlimited. "Why Northwater Creek isn't included is a mystery."

The overall thrust by the omnibus group Sportsmen for the Roan Plateau is for balance. The notion is that preserving this relatively small part of Colorado's Western Slope would help bring at least some measure of environmental equilibrium to an area already torn apart by energy development.

"They can get to 80 percent of the gas without disturbing the ridges or key watersheds," Hunt said.

It might be argued that the Roan — and other energy-rich areas around the nation — was toast when the nation pulled the lever for George W. Bush more than three years ago. Politicians almost always choose their fading term to repay the most contentious campaign debts without fear of retribution from an electorate denied the use of tar and feathers.

One potential avenue for Trout Unlimited and other wildlife groups is to file a lawsuit that might stall Roan leasing pending a change in administration in Washington.

While the state of Colorado has no official leverage in the granting of BLM leases, it isn't without clout when it comes to enforcing certain regulations concerning the impact of energy development on public health, safety and welfare.

Last year, the Colorado General Assembly passed legislation requiring the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission to revise its rules by July 1, 2008, to reflect these concerns, as well as set standards to minimize impacts on wildlife resources.

Through this process, sportsmen have the opportunity to comment or endorse the guidelines established by the Colorado Wildlife Federation and Colorado Mule Deer Association and endorsed by Trout Unlimited.

Submit these to: COGCC Rulemaking, c/o Department of Natural Resources, 1313 Sherman St. Room 718, Denver, CO 80203.

Let’s reform the 1872 Mining Law — finally

Lew Carpenter January 19, 2008

Like many Westerners, I grew up with the luxury of unlimited adventure outdoors. I could wander around, fishing rod in hand, looking for the next hidden pond near my family’s cabin in northern Colorado. That was before I began working in the San Juan Mountains of southwest Colorado as a mountain guide for a kids’ camp. I’ll never forget the first time I ran across a copper-colored creek in the Animas River watershed. I stopped and stared because it was strangely beautiful at first. I failed to grasp that the water had turned that brilliant color because acid waste was draining into it from a mine abandoned at the turn of the century. Certainly, no trout could survive in those waters, and I could only guess how far down the mountain the stream carried its poison.

But I’ve never been opposed to mining, and I understand how the gold rush of the late 1800s helped define the state I was born in. Mining for metals brought people, towns and railroads, leading President Ulysses Grant to declare Colorado a state in 1876.

But while Colorado is undeniably still tied to mining, times have changed, and the General Mining Law of 1872 that gives mining priority over all other land uses is way past due for revision. Fully recognizing that this outdated law is to blame for much of the damage to our public lands, many of America’s sportsmen have set their sights on reforming the 1872 law.

The issue is no less critical for hunters than it is for anglers. More than 80 percent of the most critical habitat for elk, for example, is found on lands managed by the U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management. Pronghorn, sage grouse, mule deer, salmon, steelhead and countless other fish and wildlife species are similarly dependent on public lands. Our public lands in the West also contain more than 50 percent of the nation’s blue-ribbon trout streams and are strongholds for imperiled trout and salmon.

Though congressional reform never seems to go the distance, last November marked a milestone: The Hardrock Mining and Reclamation Act of 2007 passed the House of Representatives 244-166, and was a huge victory for hunters and anglers. The bill was strongly supported by a coalition called Sportsmen United for Sensible Mining, made up of organizations and individual grassroots partners and spearheaded by the National Wildlife Federation, the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership and Trout Unlimited.

Now, it’s the Senate’s turn, and as the issue gains momentum, sportsmen in the West want to make sure the bill retains four principles that will make all the difference in the world to fish and other wildlife:

• Allow reclamation incentives and common-sense liability relief to those “good Samaritans” who buy or own land damaged by mining. Companies and nonprofit organizations that didn’t create the problems created by abandoned mines or their waste need to be encouraged to return the land to other uses while being protected against unreasonable liabilities.

• Prohibit the patenting or sale of public lands under this law. Since 1872, public lands have been practically given away to mining companies for as little as $2.50 to $5 per acre. Our wildlife needs public land to survive, and reform should prohibit the sale of that land.

• Create a royalty from any minerals taken from public lands to fund fish and wildlife conservation programs and reclamation of mined land. Sportsmen for over a century have been paying to play on public land; it’s time mining companies paid their share.

• Strengthen protections for fish, wildlife and water resources from the impacts of mining. This can be done by entrusting federal land managers with the authority to ensure reclamation of mining sites and to approve or deny mining permits based on environmental impacts.

Will these changes help fish and wildlife habitat in the years to come? Absolutely. That’s why so many people who love the outdoors and wildlife want this ancient mining law finally brought into the 21st century.

Lew Carpenter is a contributor to Writers on the Range, a service of High Country News (hcn.org). He lives in Boulder, Colo., where he is outreach coordinator for the National Wildlife Federation.

State to Consider Water Measures

Conservationists say water bills are vital to rivers and streams http://www.durangoherald.com/asp-bin/article_generation.asp?article_type=out&article_path=/outdoors/out071228_2.htm

This Durango Herald legislative preview features Drew Peternell, director of National TU's Colorado Water Project

Bill Aimed At Keeping Off-Road Vehicles On Track

"It completely ruined my hunting trip, and that just happens all the time," said Petersen, who works on off-road issues for the conservation group Trout Unlimited. http://cbs4denver.com/local/snowmobiles.atvs.hunters.2.631336.html

DENVER (AP) ― Hunters and the state's leading off-road vehicle group are teaming up to support a crackdown on people who ride snowmobiles and ATVs where they shouldn't.A bill in the Legislature would penalize people who ride all-terrain vehicles and snowmobiles in prohibited areas on public land.

"We know a very small portion of the recreating and hunting population causes problems, and we're going to get them reined in," said Dennis Larratt, chairman of the Colorado Off Highway Vehicle Coalition.

Dave Petersen, a bow hunter who lives near Durango, said he saw plenty of elk on a scouting trip in August. When he returned with his bow a few days later, Petersen didn't find any elk but he saw tracks from the ATV he figures scared them away.

"It completely ruined my hunting trip, and that just happens all the time," said Petersen, who works on off-road issues for the conservation group Trout Unlimited.

A bill by Rep. Kathleen Curry, D-Gunnison, and Sen. Lois Tochtrop, D-Thornton, would set a $100 fine for people who ride ATVs or snowmobiles on prohibited areas of state and federal lands. Fines would double in a wilderness area, and violators' hunting and fishing licenses could be docked 10 to 15 points and eventually revoked.

House Bill 1069 would allow any law-enforcement officer, including state wildlife officers, to enforce the law on federal lands. Federal agencies don't have enough rangers to police their lands, Petersen said.

The U.S. Forest Service will be happy for the help, said Janelle Smith, spokeswoman for the agency's regional office in Denver.

National forests are changing their rules on motorized vehicles and will designate areas where ATVs are allowed, Smith said. "You need to be on a designated trail, route or area," she said.

The Bureau of Land Management was consulted on the bill's wording, BLM spokesman James Sample said.

A 1976 federal law governing how public land is managed gives states the authority to impose fines on people who violate regulations Sample said. But each state "may have to authorize it with its own legislation," he said.

Salazars offer compromise on Roan Plateau drilling

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/jan/09/salazars-offer-compromise-on-roan-plateau/

U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar and his brother, U.S. Rep. John Salazar, both Colorado Democrats, said Tuesday they will drop their opposition to natural gas drilling atop the state's majestic Roan Plateau, while they work to minimize environmental impacts.

The Salazars said their new stance is in the spirit of compromise, after they previously sought a one-year moratorium or even an outright ban on drilling on the Western Slope landmark.

Those efforts were killed in the Senate version of the energy bill.

"We may not get everything we want, but this is a pretty good compromise," Rep. Salazar said Tuesday in a news conference at the state Capitol.

The Salazars' approach aligns them with Gov. Bill Ritter, who last month said he would work with the U.S. Bureau of Land Management to minimize the impact of gas drilling atop the plateau.

In recent years, the Roan - which includes 74,000 acres of federally owned land about 180 miles west of Denver - has become a battleground between the energy industry and conservationists.

The plateau contains an estimated 8.9 trillion cubic feet of recoverable gas, according to the Interior Department, enough to heat 4 million homes for 20 years. It also is touted by hunters, outdoors enthusiasts and environmental activists for its wildlife, trout streams and topography.

The BLM last summer issued its first "record of decision," or a plan covering 53,000 acres of the Roan's top and sides, that Ritter reviewed over 120 days, ending in December. In the spring, the federal agency will finalize its second plan to cover the remaining 21,000 acres, categorized as environmentally critical areas.

Ritter has proposed increasing the environmentally critical areas to 36,000 acres, which he said would allow for greater protection of wildlife habitats and still allow narrow corridors of accessibility to drillers.

The Salazars said they would work that proposal into new legislation, with the support of Rep. Mark Udall, D-Eldorado Springs.

Sen. Salazar said he'd propose a phased leasing of the plateau, beginning with the gas-rich zones in the initial years and graduating to marginal zones. He also proposed a minimum lease bonus payment of $28,000 per acre by energy companies.

The Salazars' shift in position was hailed in some industry quarters but greeted with disappointment elsewhere.

"In the end, the winners will be Colorado taxpayers and local governments who will benefit from a huge potential revenue windfall, which our state badly needs," said Greg Schnacke, president and CEO of Americans For American Energy - a Golden-based interest group that has pushed for drilling atop the Roan.

Trout Unlimited, an environmental group that opposes drilling atop the Roan, said sportsmen in Colorado still think natural gas can be attained from beneath the Roan without drilling on public lands on the plateau's top.

"The gas isn't going anywhere, and with some patience, we can wait for technology to move along and allow us to get at the gas without sacrificing habitat and hunting and fishing opportunity," said Corey Fisher, a TU field coordinator on oil and gas issues.

Meanwhile, it's not clear how Ritter's proposal or new legislation by the Salazars and Udall would impact the BLM's first record of decision.

"As with any legislation, we follow any new rule that Congress approves and the president signs," BLM spokeswoman Jamie Gardner said.

chakrabartyg@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-2976

Change in direction

Sen. Ken Salazar and Rep. John Salazar say they will, along with Rep. Mark Udall, all Colorado Democrats, propose legislation to:

* Allow oil and gas drilling atop the Roan Plateau, as per a federal decision last year, but lease those acres in a phased manner.

* Require a minimum lease bonus payment of $28,000 per acre. The federal government owns about 74,000 acres on the Roan, with the first decision covering more than 53,000 acres. A second decision expected this spring will cover the remaining "environmentally critical" areas.

* Increase the environmentally critical areas from 21,000 acres to more than 36,000 acres, with narrow corridors through those lands being accessible to drillers.

* Increase and restore the state's share of mineral-leasing revenues to 50 percent from 48 percent in the Omnibus Appropriations bill that was approved by Congress and signed into law by President Bush.

* Transfer excess funds from the Anvil Points oil shale trust fund back to the Western Slope communities to invest in land and water protection and on roads affected by oil and gas development.

Salazars offer compromise on Roan Plateau drilling

http://www.postindependent.com/article/20080108/VALLEYNEWS/922694956

By Phillip Yates Glenwood Springs CO Colorado January 8, 2008

GLENWOOD SPRINGS — U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., and Rep. John Salazar, D-Manassa, are backing away from attempts to prevent gas leasing on the top of the Roan Plateau, and instead plan to introduce legislation partly based on recommendations by Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter.The Salazars’ proposed legislation, which was crafted with the help of U.S. Rep. Mark Udall, D-Eldorado Springs, would direct the federal government to implement two of Ritter’s proposals for boosting environmental protections during energy development on the Roan. Ritter announced the proposals in late December.

“The Roan Plateau is a very special place for us here in Colorado. It is one of the most diverse wildlife habitats we have in our state. It is one of those places we absolutely have to protect,” Ken Salazar said Tuesday during a conference call with reporters. “I will not allow the Western Slope or any part of our state to become the sacrificial zone for oil and gas development.”

The Salazars, who are brothers, plan to submit their legislation in both the House of Representatives and the Senate when they return to Washington on Jan. 15.

The proposed legislation also would transfer an estimated $80 million in the Anvil Points oil shale trust fund back to Colorado and the Western Slope. About $20 million is needed to clean up the Anvil Points Superfund site north of Rulison. The proposed legislation would direct $40 million in “spillover funds” to water and land conservation efforts and roads impacted by oil and gas development in Garfield and Rio Blanco counties, according to the Salazars.

The Anvil Points issue was a point of contention between Ken Salazar and Sen. Wayne Allard, R-Colo., in late December, as Congress was rushing to approve several bills. Allard accused Salazar of refusing to co-sponsor his Anvil Points provision to return revenues to Colorado unless Allard supported moratoriums on gas leasing on the Roan Plateau and on the process leading to commercial oil shale leasing in the region. The moratorium effort regarding gas leasing on the Roan Plateau failed.

Attempts to contact Sen. Wayne Allard’s office were not successful late Tuesday.

Following the governor’s lead Included in the Salazars’ proposed legislation is a requirement to increase the designated areas of critical environmental concern in the current Bureau of Land Management plan for drilling on the Roan from its current 21,034 acres to about 36,000 acres. Ritter had requested the increase in December.Ritter also called for phased leasing rather than leasing all the federal lands at once. The Salazars’ legislation would require phased leasing.

Jon Bargas, manager of communications for the Independent Petroleum Association of Mountain States, said he applauded the Salazars’ goal of striking a balance between energy development and preserving public lands in the Roan.

“At a time when the country is suffering from rising energy costs, unemployment, and fears of a recession, we are glad to see the Salazar brothers and Rep. Udall are beginning to recognize the importance of this important domestic energy resource,” Bargas said.

Ken Neubecker, vice president of Colorado Trout Unlimited, said any legislation to increase the size of the ACECs is a positive step.

But he added, “It is still not as good, in my mind, as not allowing drilling at all (on top of the plateau). That is the only way to guarantee protection of the wildlife and aquatic resources.”

The Salazars’ legislation would also target language slipped into a $555 billion spending bill that would reduce the states’ 50 percent share from federal mineral leasing — derived from energy and mineral extraction on federal lands — by 2 percent. The reduction means states would get 48 percent of the proceeds, and the federal government 52 percent.

“The legislation would repeal the provisions and restore Colorado’s federal mineral leasing share to 50 percent,” said Salazar, adding that the legislation would apply only to Colorado.

Allard staff members have indicated the 52-48 split would apply only to the 2008 fiscal year. Allard also opposes changing the 50-50 split, even for a year.

Salazar Brothers, Udall Offer Hope for Roan

But sportsmen continue to call for full protection of plateau’s public lands

Jan. 8, 2008 / Contact:  Corey Fisher, Trout Unlimited (970) 589-9196

DENVER—Trout Unlimited applauded U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar and U.S. Reps. Mark Udall and John Salazar on Tuesday, after the lawmakers announced their intent to increase protections for critical fish and game habitat atop the Roan Plateau. However, the organization said, sportsmen in Colorado still believe natural gas can be attained from beneath the Roan without drilling on public lands on the plateau’s top. “Expanding the number of protected acres on the Roan is certainly good for fish and wildlife,” said Corey Fisher, a TU field coordinator who works on oil and gas issues in Colorado and around the West. “But sportsmen have sacrificed so much already—the Piceance Basin is a huge natural gas field that is being aggressively developed to the detriment of fish and game and hunting and fishing. The top the Roan is a last, best refuge for wildlife and for hunters and anglers, in the region.” Reps. Salazar and Udall and Sen. Salazar said they will introduce a bill in Congress later this month that will increase the size of the protected acreage on the Roan by 16,000 acres, all of which would be included in the Roan’s Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC). In a press conference on Tuesday, however, the three said they wouldn’t stand in the way of leasing the top the Roan, albeit via a phased-in and orderly process. “That’s encouraging, but I don’t understand the rush to go after this last, unspoiled place,” said Fisher.  “The gas isn’t going anywhere, and with some patience, we can wait for technology to move along and allow us to get at the gas without sacrificing habitat and hunting and fishing opportunity.” TU and other sportsmen’s organizations in Colorado have long advocated for directional drilling to access the natural gas beneath the Roan.  “It’s possible to get at the bulk of the gas today with existing technology,” Fisher said. “With the energy boom in full swing across the West, technology will only improve, and more of the gas will be accessible if we only show some restraint in places like the Roan, that are simply too valuable to drill.”