5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
March, 31 2009, 10:31am EDT
Contact:
Luke Eshleman (202) 265-7337
Oil & Gas Drilling Labeled Major Threat to Eastern Forests
U.S. Forest Service Flying Blind on Drilling Impacts Yet Still Issues More Permits
WASHINGTON
Experts within the U.S. Forests Service call oil and gas development
"a major threat to our forest lands" due to an array of poorly
understood impacts on water and wildlife, according to agency workshop
papers released today by Public Employees for Environmental
Responsibility (PEER). The agency is reeling from court challenges,
embarrassing disclosures and even a stunning rebuke from the U.S.
Bureau of Land Management which recently withdrew leasing for tracts on
the Monongahela National Forest in West Virginia.
On November 12-13, 2008, the Forest Service convened a workshop for
officials from Eastern States to address "oil and gas exploration"
concerns. Workshop materials obtained by PEER under the Freedom of
Information Act show its specialists outlining large information gaps,
such as -
- Subsurface effects of drilling on groundwater, as well as on "hibernating bats";
- Surface effects ranging from spread of invasive species to habitat fragmentation; and
- Inability of the agency to prevent wildlife from drinking poisoned water in drilling "surface pits".
The regional biologist who briefed the gathering characterized
drilling as being "as dangerous [to forests] as our unregulated
motorized recreation" which the agency had classified as one of its
four biggest threats. He urged that his agency must "get a handle on
[drilling] to protect our resources".
"The Obama pledge to bring science-based resource management is
perhaps most desperately needed in the U.S. Forest Service," stated
PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch, noting that these oil and gas issues
will confront the President's yet-to-be-named appointees. "Despite
these gaping data holes, the Forest Service continues to issue permits
often under impossible findings that there are no significant impacts."
The Forest Service's uncertainty is not confined to science but
extends to the law. The agency had previously taken the position that
no environmental safeguards could be applied to privately-held
subsurface rights, even in the most sensitive forest tracts. Officials
ignored contrary legal advice from its sister agency, the Interior
Department. At the November workshop, it received similar legal advice
from its own lawyers at the U.S. Department of Agriculture Office of
General Counsel (OGC). In one e-mail obtained by PEER, OGC attorney
Michael Danaher wrote:
"As a general rule,...the exercise of outstanding or
reserved O&G [oil & gas] rights on NF lands in no way preempts
the laws or regulations dealing with NF...decision-making...such activities
are subject to the reasonable application of all such laws..."
Oddly, Danaher vehemently resisted providing this advice in writing
to workshop participants. PEER is submitting the workshop materials to
the USDA Office of Inspector General to supplement an earlier complaint
it had filed about malfeasance on the Monongahela NF.
"The
Forest Service operates under an unhealthy 'don't-ask-don't-tell'
regime when it comes to oil and gas drilling," Ruch added. "This
tortured stance forces the agency's own scientists to ignore obvious
problems, putting them in an intolerable conflict between their careers
and their consciences."
###
Read the list of drilling impact "Information Needs"
See the" key threats" briefing paper
Look at the e-mailed legal advice from OGC
View objections to including anything from OGC in workshop handouts
Review the PEER complaint to the IG about the Monongahela
Note effects on wilderness and experimental forests
PEER protects public employees who protect our environment. We are a service organization for environmental and public health professionals, land managers, scientists, enforcement officers, and other civil servants dedicated to upholding environmental laws and values. We work with current and former federal, state, local, and tribal employees.
LATEST NEWS
Rejecting Trump Plan, Iran Calls for War Reparations in Ceasefire Counterproposal
"The end of the war will occur when Iran decides it should end, not when Trump envisions its conclusion," said an Iranian official.
Mar 25, 2026
Iranian state media reported Wednesday that Iran has rejected the Trump administration's 15-point ceasefire plan, and a senior official outlined five conditions for ending the war, which the US and Israel launched late last month.
As President Donald Trump sent thousands more troops to the Middle East, the ceasefire plan "was submitted to Iran by intermediaries from Pakistan, who have offered to host renewed negotiations between Washington and Tehran," The Associated Press reported early Wednesday, citing an unnamed source briefed on the US proposal.
As experts warn that a global recession could occur if Iran continues to restrict the flow of fossil fuels through the Strait of Hormuz, Reuters highlighted that elevated "oil prices sank about 5% on Wednesday after reports the United States had sent Iran a 15-point proposal aimed at ending the war."
However, "Iran has responded negatively to an American proposal aimed at ending the ongoing imposed war," according to the Iranian state-run Press TV, which spoke with a senior political-security official.
Characterizing previous negotiations with the US—including nuclear talks in the lead-up to the current war—as deceptive, the official said that "Iran will end the war when it decides to do so and when its own conditions are met."
In addition to the Iranian government's demands from the recent negotiations in Geneva, the official said, the five conditions under which Iran would now agree to end the war are:
- A complete halt to "aggression and assassinations" by the enemy;
- The establishment of concrete mechanisms to ensure that the war is not reimposed;
- Guaranteed and clearly defined payment of war damages and reparations;
- The conclusion of the war across all fronts and for all resistance groups involved throughout the region; and
- Iran's exercise of sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz is and will remain Iran's natural and legal right, and it constitutes a guarantee for the implementation of the other party's commitments, and must be recognized.
A ceasefire is contingent upon acceptance of those conditions, and "no negotiations will be held prior to that," the official told Press TV. "The end of the war will occur when Iran decides it should end, not when Trump envisions its conclusion."
The Iranian government this week put the death toll from the US-Israeli assault at over 1,500. According to Reuters, the news agency of the US-based Human Rights Activists in Iran said at least 3,291 people, including 1,455 civilians, are dead. US and Israeli bombings have also damaged tens of thousands of civilian locations, including homes, schools, medical facilities, energy installations, courthouses, and United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization World Heritage sites.
There have also been civilian and military casualties across the region, including more than 1,000 people slaughtered in Israel's bombing of Lebanon, 16 killed in Israel, and 13 confirmed deaths of US service members, according to the AP.
Speaking at UN headquarters in New York on Wednesday, Secretary-General António Guterres renewed his call for the US and Israel to end their war on Iran, which he said is "out of control" and "has broken past the limits even leaders thought unimaginable."
"The world is staring down the barrel of a wider war, a rising tide of human suffering, and a deeper global economic shock. This has gone too far," Guterres said. "It is time to stop climbing the escalation ladder—and start climbing the diplomatic ladder, and return to full respect of international law."
"I have remained in close contact with many from the region and around the world. A number of initiatives for dialogue and peace are underway. They must succeed," he continued. "My message to the United States and Israel is that it is high time to end the war—as human suffering deepens, civilian casualties mount, and the global economic impact is increasingly devastating. My message to Iran is to stop attacking their neighbors that are not parties to the conflict."
The UN chief then turned to Lebanon, which he recently visited: "There, too, the war must stop. Hezbollah must stop launching attacks into Israel. And Israel must stop its military operations and strikes in Lebanon, which are hitting civilians the hardest. The Gaza model must not be replicated in Lebanon."
Keep Reading
Show Less
As Trump Threatens to Escalate Further, Majority of Americans Say Iran War Has Already 'Gone Too Far': Poll
Trump is considering putting US troops on the ground in Iran. Only 12% of Americans want that to happen, according to a new Associated Press-NORC poll.
Mar 25, 2026
Nearly six in ten Americans say President Donald Trump's war in Iran has gone too far, according to a poll out Wednesday from the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.
The war launched late last month by the US and Israel has led to the deaths of more than 1,400 Iranian civilians, according to the Human Rights Activist News Agency (HRANA), and the displacement of more than 3 million. It has spiraled out across the region while creating a global economic crisis that has caused gas prices to spike to nearly $4 per gallon in the US.
Now, 59% of American adults say it's "gone too far," compared to just 26% who say it's "been about right" and 13% who say it's "not gone far enough," according to the survey of 1,150 people.
Those opposed to continuing the president's war of choice include 90% of Democrats and 63% of independents. Most Republicans, 52%, say the amount of force used by Trump has been “about right.” Just 20% want him to go further, while 26% say he’s gone too far.
In recent days, as Iran's closure of the Strait of Hormuz has wreaked havoc on global oil prices, Trump has sent thousands more servicemembers to the region and reportedly mulled deploying American ground troops in hopes of reopening the crucial waterway.
Experts have warned that a ground deployment could turn the war into an even greater quagmire. Already, 13 US soldiers have been killed since February 28.
An even larger share of Americans, 62%, said they oppose the idea of deploying US troops on the ground in Iran, while just 12% say they support it and 26% say they have no opinion.
While a minority says it is very important for the US to stop Iran from threatening Israel or to replace its government with one more favorable to the US, Americans are prioritizing issues at home.
Ninety-three percent said it was very or somewhat important for the US to keep oil and gas prices low, which has so far not happened—in less than a month, they have spiked by about a dollar and have not shown signs of coming down, even as Trump has deployed emergency fuel reserves and lifted sanctions on some Iranian oil to juice supply.
A majority of Americans, 65%, also said they felt that preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon—one of Trump's stated objectives for the war—was a very important foreign policy goal.
However, as journalist and commentator Adam Johnson pointed out in a piece for The Real News on Tuesday, the US public is "grossly misinformed" about the subject—25% wrongly believe Iran already possesses a nuke while 45% believe they are working towards developing one, which has been refuted by US intelligence assessments and reporting based on the testimony of US officials.
The unpopularity of the war with Iran is in line with previous polls showing that the majority of Americans believe the war benefits Israel more than the US and want the war to end quickly.
With Trump having returned to office on the explicit pledge to avoid war with Iran and the cost of living already at the center of the president's near-historic unpopularity, Republicans' outlook for this year's midterm elections looks as grim as ever.
Polling aggregators predict Democrats will easily flip the House, and the Senate is now a toss-up, though Republicans still hold a slight edge.
According to polls, Republicans’ midterm chances truly began to tank in January amid outrage over federal immigration agents' killings of two US citizens in Minneapolis. Though surveys haven't shown GOP numbers getting markedly worse since the war began, recent opinion polling suggests it is not a non-factor.
A poll last week from the Institute of Middle East Understanding found that 43% of voters said they're less likely to support Republicans in the midterms as a result of the war, compared to 31% who said they're more likely.
Keep Reading
Show Less
With No End in Sight, Cost of Trump's Illegal Iran War Balloons to at Least $25 Billion
The new estimate comes amid warnings that the war, now in its fourth week, could "cost the US trillions of dollars in the decades to come."
Mar 25, 2026
The price tag of US President Donald Trump's illegal war on Iran is on track to surpass $25 billion by the end of this week as more American troops head to the Middle East, signaling a protracted conflict and possible ground invasion that would explode the war's already massive financial and human costs.
The latest estimate of the dollar cost of the Iran assault to US taxpayers, who are also facing significantly higher prices at the pump because of the war, comes from the Center for American Progress (CAP). The liberal think tank noted Tuesday that, based on a combination of official figures from the Pentagon and outside estimates, "the Iran war’s cost has likely surpassed $20 billion already and will likely surpass $25 billion by the end of this week."
CAP found that $25 billion would be enough to provide Medicaid coverage to around 3.1 million people for a year, or fund free school lunches for more than 29 million children for a full school year.
"While the cost of the war is funded through the Pentagon’s budget, and that money could not have been legally spent on domestic social programs, the spending nonetheless reflects a choice both Congress and the president made in allocating the country’s limited resources," wrote Bobby Kogan, CAP's senior director for federal budget policy. "This trade-off is particularly salient as Congress considers the president’s upcoming request."
"Before Congress chooses to provide $200 billion in new funding for the US Department of Defense," Kogan added, "it should seriously consider other ways that funding could be used, including improving people’s lives."
"One of the officials lamented that Americans would be paying off the war for generations."
The updated price tag came amid reports that the Pentagon approved a deployment of around 2,000 elite Army soldiers to the Middle East, heightening concerns that the Trump administration is preparing for a deeply unpopular ground invasion of Iran even as the president publicly declares victory.
Experts believe the true financial cost of the Iran war is likely much higher than what publicly available estimates indicate so far.
The Intercept's Nick Turse reported last week that the Trump administration is "drastically undercounting the price tag of the US war with Iran, peddling fragmentary estimates that offer Americans a skewed understanding of the costs."
Citing analysts, lawmakers, and unnamed US officials briefed on Iran operations, Turse reported that "the war is burning through between $1 billion and $2 billion per day—or roughly $11,500 to $23,000 per second."
"The cost, the officials told The Intercept, could rise to a quarter trillion dollars or more over the coming months," Turse added. "Even that is a drop in the bucket compared to the long-term expenses, which could cost the US trillions of dollars in the decades to come. One of the officials lamented that Americans would be paying off the war for generations."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Most Popular