Killdeer Mountains threatened by process

February 05, 2013 2:00 am  •  By TOM ISERN Fargo

It is time for more light and less heat on the issue of petroleum development in northern Dunn County. The leasing by the state of certain school trust lands in the Killdeer Mountains locality for petroleum development has sounded alarms among historians, archaeologists and all friends of antiquities.

Those questioning the development make three points:

First, the Killdeer Mountains area is a site of religious and cultural importance to several native peoples of the region. Second, it was the site, in 1864, of one of the most significant military engagements in the history of Indian-white conflict on the northern plains. Third, the Killdeer Mountains environs are known to be rich in archeological material. Heedless development, thus, may imperil irreplaceable heritage resources.

Is this, then, heedless development? It is not, but neither is it well considered. Public scrutiny prompted by the proximity of development to such a noteworthy site as the Killdeer Mountains has exposed problems with the processes for conserving our heritage.

The state trust lands at issue are school lands, a legacy of federal frontier land policy, granted to the state for the support of public schools. The Department of Trust Lands, under direction of the Board of University and School Lands, manages them for revenue that the Legislature then appropriates for education. We are fortunate to have these lands. We have been wise to retain them.

The process with reference to heritage resources on the state lands works this way: Before the land board lists tracts for potential leasing, it calls for the Historic Preservation Office of the State Historical Society to provide records of historic and archeological resources known to be present. Land Commissioner Lance Gaebe takes these records into account as leases are bid and negotiated, and again, especially, when the Land Board negotiates with an oil company the surface damage agreement that will govern how development proceeds and collateral damage is compensated. The Land Board has considerable leverage at this point in the process.

Agreements with the Land Board in hand, the oil company still has to go through the well-permitting process with the state. The Department of Mineral Resources’ Oil and Gas Division has a hearing (done last October for the Killdeer Mountains land) and makes a recommendation to the state Industrial Commission. On Jan. 24, the commission adopted the recommendation by Mineral Resources Director Lynn Helms to proceed with permitting on the state trust lands in the Killdeer Mountains.

In addressing the issue of heritage resources on state trust lands, there is a need for reasonable good will by state officials and by the public. We, the public, need to want to solve these problems, not exploit them for some perceived advantage.

There are two obvious issues illustrated by how the Killdeer Mountains situation has unfolded.

First, Helms, in public statements and personal communications, does not take cognizance of state law (55-10-09 of the state Century Code), which requires all state agencies to cooperate with the state Historical Society in the preservation of historic and archeological sites. The law is imperative, and it is crystalline. It is qualified somewhat by a 1988 opinion of Attorney General Nick Spaeth, but that opinion by no means absolves any agency of its obligations under the law

Second, and in the long run more important, there is a hole in the process at the leasing stage. The information that the Land Board gets from the State Historical Society is incomplete to nonexistent. This is not the fault of either the Land Board or the Historical Society. Information exists only if some previous, likely federal, development has generated earlier cultural resource survey work. There is no provision in the process, as there should be, for physically going over the ground to determine what heritage resources are there. Consequently, leases and agreements can be concluded that directly threaten significant heritage resources. This happened, despite technical adherence to law by all parties involved, in the matter of the Killdeer Mountains.

With respect to a heritage site as profoundly significant as the Killdeer Mountains, we should move deliberately, reset if necessary, and address public concerns. As for the general process _ that wants reform, which requires legislative attention.

(Tom Isern is professor of history, university distinguished professor, and director of the Center for Heritage Renewal at North Dakota State University. Opinions here expressed are not necessarily those of NDSU.)

http://bismarcktribune.com/news/columnists/killdeer-mountains-threatened-by-process/article_1797841e-6ed9-11e2-ab42-0019bb2963f4.html

A ‘mountain’ of a debate

A ‘mountain’ of a debate

Posted on 18 January 2013 by Bryce Martin

A two-mile stretch of North Dakota land will mean the difference between oil drilling and disrupting the slopes of the Killdeer Mountains for one global oil company.

Hess Corp., a Texas-based oil corporation, is making plans to drill on top of Killdeer Mountains. They have proposed drilling four additional wells on the Killdeer Mountains. They already have received permits and are in the process of now applying for four more to drill a total of eight wells.

By BRYCE MARTIN

Herald Editor

Posted Jan. 18, 2013

A two-mile stretch of North Dakota land will mean the difference between oil drilling and disrupting the slopes of the Killdeer Mountains for one global oil company.

Hess Corp., a Texas-based oil corporation, already maintains several oil well sites within Dunn County and has proposed drilling four additional wells on the Killdeer Mountains. They already have received permits and are in the process of now applying for four more to drill a total of eight wells.

A citizen action group known as the Killdeer Mountain Alliance (KMA), formed to protect the mountains from industrial development, urged both Hess and the state of North Dakota to relocate the drill site to two miles south of the mountain.

The decision now rests in the hands of the North Dakota Industrial Commission (NDIC).

Rob and Mary Sand are two local landowners and members of the KMA, expressing their strong concern over possible placement of Hess’s wells.

“This isn’t near (the mountains), this is on the mountains,” Rob Sand said.

Hess’s plans call for the wells to be placed along the south side of the Killdeer Mountains, within a public section of the slope that is designated as a school section. Two sections of every township in North Dakota are considered state school land and earmarked for funding public education. Monies from minerals discovered would be awarded to the state for education.

If permitted to begin drilling, Hess’s construction would span nearly three acres of land, with all topsoil being removed, the area leveled and an infrastructure consisting of access roads to be constructed.

Continental Resources Inc., an Oklahoma-based company, has leases directly east of where Hess maintains several leases. They proposed drilling on the mountains in the past, but moved farther away off the mountains when urged by residents.

“If (Hess) were to drill where they propose, it puts them right on top of archeology,” Rob said. “It’s a hunting area, it’s a very scenic area and it’s public land.”

Archeologists claimed there are findings of historical and cultural significance around the proposed dig site that they want to further explore and evaluate. The area is also one part of the mountain that has public access.

“Almost anywhere in the Killdeer Mountains, if you come to a gopher hole and you kick the soil, you’re going to come across some sort of artifact,” Mary Sand said. “It is one of the richest archeological sites. Once they start messing with the surface, that is lost.”

As landowners and others come forward to voice opposition to Hess’s proposed dig, the matter heads to the NDIC for approval.

“This is one place where the public can speak up,” Rob said. “When it’s on private land, there’s not a whole lot we can say.”

On state lands in North Dakota, oil companies need only the approval of the Oil and Gas Division of the NDIC for site location. Unlike decisions related to federal lands, the NDIC is not obligated to protect archaeological and historical artifacts if such protection impedes financial gain for the state.

“In some cases, however, state officials have worked with industry to relocate wells on lands where there are concerns about wildlife habitat or archaeological artifacts,” Rob said. “We hope that will be the case here.”

The NDIC is scheduled to meet Jan. 24 at the North Dakota State Capital building to make a decision regarding Hess’s permits to drill at that location. The final decision ultimately is up to the state.

“They really need to be more considerate of what the public interest is,” Rob said.

Consensus among landowners in the area remains clear – drilling on the mountains is unacceptable. A location the KMA suggested for Hess to relocate is two miles south, combining the unit they’re presently applying for and the unit directly below them, which is also under their ownership.

“It’s not going to change the financial gain – they’re still able to access those minerals,” he said. “We’re just trying to change the location. Apparently it’s easier to drill two miles than it is four miles.”

A spokesperson for Hess acknowledged the situation in the Killdeer Mountains and offered a written statement to the Herald.

“We seek to minimize our impact on the environment in all aspects of our operations in North Dakota,” a company spokesperson said. “We are aware of the concerns and have made every attempt to address the issues raised with regard to our drilling program. We design every well taking into the specific environmental considerations for that location. In this case, we have also worked closely with the North Dakota Department of Trust Lands, who is the surface owner and a major mineral owner under the well in question.

“Hess Corp. is committed to meeting the highest standards of corporate citizenship by … safeguarding the environment and making a positive impact on the communities in which we do business.”

Regardless of the situation, Rob said their intention is not to make the oil companies the “bad guy.”

“They’re just trying to follow their standard practices, and since we know it’s possible to drill from a farther distance, we’re asking that the state change the permit and the location,” he said.

“It’s both the state and Hess that we’re appealing to.”

The Sands plan to attend the upcoming open meeting in Bismarck and eagerly await a decision over their beloved mountains.

“It is an area that we think is a treasure – the whole mountain is, but that particular area is public land and that’s why we’re feeling like we should be able to say something.”
http://www.dunncountyextra.com/661/