Letter conveyed inaccurate interpretation
A recent letter from Mr. Joe McLaughlin regarding a comment I made during a Peters Township Council meeting conveys an entirely inaccurate interpretation of what I said.
During a discussion of whether or not Peters Township should lease municipal land to EQT to be drilled from a well site in Nottingham Township, I objected to leasing Peters Township property for several reasons.
First, the well site is located in a residentially-zoned area in violation of the state constitution, zoning law and the commonwealth and Supreme Court decisions regarding Act 13 in which Peters Township was a litigant. For us to lease our property to be drilled from this site strikes me as a very hypocritical action.
Second, the proposed Lutes well pad will be the largest well pad in Pennsylvania with 24 wells. Drilling these wells will, in all likelihood, occur over a period of years during which residents of Peters Township will suffer the impacts of the drilling. A fellow councilman observed that 65 percent of the people living in the proposed drilling area had signed leases (a number given by EQT and not verified) and implied that that meant they “obviously” approved of drilling. I think that is anything but obvious or true and commented, I believe accurately, that signing a lease didn’t mean that they really approved of drilling or understood what drilling would mean to them.
Do those who signed leases know that drilling will mean thousands of heavy trucks travelling up and down Venetia Road and other area roads, 24/7 for possibly years? Do they know that drilling, in this case about 1,000 feet from the Peters Township border, will generate very high noise levels, vibration, dust and light? Do they know that there is the very real possibility that the air they breathe will be polluted with noxious chemicals, many carcinogenic and others toxic? Do they know that this exposure can reach out thousands of feet from the drilling site? Do they know that water impoundments can leak and pollute streams in the area? Do they know that ground water is frequently contaminated by drilling and fracking? Do they know that drilling cuttings are frequently radioactive and can result in radioactive materials stored on the site? Have they talked to people who have lived near drilling operations, many about the same distance as many of those who signed leases, and asked them if they approve of drilling? Are these people who signed leases aware of the many studies that document the health hazards of living near drilling sites? Do they know that a drill site frequently reduces property values in the area? Are they aware of well explosions and the damage that they can do? Are they aware of the pipelines that will follow drilling activity, destroying more property? Are they aware of the transient workforce attendant to a drill site?
I really doubt that they know or have thought about these issues. Therefore, I feel very confident in questioning whether the “65 percent of those who signed leases” really approve of gas drilling and whether they really knew what they were doing when they signed the leases. I think it is more likely that they probably bought the rosy story that the landmen presented and saw an opportunity for some money.
I have fought very hard to protect the people of Peters Township from the potential damage and destruction of our quality of life that gas drilling in the wrong places can cause. I will continue that fight. Contrary to Mr. McLaughlin’s assertion that I “show disdain” for the citizens of this township, I think I show very high regard for both our citizens and our township and I believe that my record fighting to protect our township speaks for itself.
David M. Ball
Councilman, Peters Township