[CRNMC] Can someone subtantiate these claims?
Baile Oakes
baileoakes at gmail.com
Thu Jun 12 12:54:01 PDT 2014
Thank you, Tim, for helping all of us to move forward with more than just an ordinance.....with a dedicated path to a much more mindful and inclusive manner path.
On Jun 12, 2014, at 11:25 AM, Tim Rice wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jun 2014, Shannon Biggs wrote:
>
>> Indeed that is the focus and a good reminder for all.
>
> Also a reminder that *how* we go about getting this ordinance passed is
> at least (if not more) important than getting it passed.
>
> If we adopt the "just get it done" approach common in our society, and
> use half truths and exaggerations to "sell" the ordinance, we will
> have just modeled and legitimized the very system we are trying
> to change. To me, having the ordinance pass going down that route, would
> be a huge failure.
>
> It's important to make sure our message can stand the scrutiny of those
> that may not like what we are doing. And more importantly, we as a group
> need to model what we claim to be about. The "who decides?" thing has
> been interesting to watch in our group. A fair amount of modeling our
> default culture. To be fair, when we got into this, we didn't know
> what we didn't know and we naively thought we were different and could
> get this done in the incredibly short amount of time we had for this
> election cycle.
>
> I strongly suspect this ordinance will pass in spite of us. There is
> huge energy behind the changes we're attempting to accomplish. The question
> is, will having the ordinance pass represent a minor temporary success
> or a huge lasting success. That will largely depend on how willing we are
> at looking at our colonized thinking.
>
>>
>>
>> On 6/12/14 8:34 AM, "Paul Lambert" <paul52jazz at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for clarifications, Shannon. As someone who both supports CRNMC and is
>>> a member of the media, I have observed that focusing on the fracking issue
>>> (while a strong recruiting hook) is engendering some hysteria - there are 15
>>> permits in Mendocino - that would be better directed towards the real aim of
>>> the initiative - establishing local control over the purity of water.
>>
>> If you
>>> keep your focus entirely on fracking, the deeper message of local control of
>>> resources might get lost and weaken your campaign in November by bringing in
>>> outside money from Western States Petroleum Association to oppose you.
>>
>> So, I
>>> urge all of you as a friend and supporter to focus on the less sexy topic of
>>> local citizen control over air and water.
>>
>> My two cents,
>>
>> Paul Lambert
>>
>> On Jun
>>> 11, 2014 11:51 AM, Shannon Biggs <shannon at globalexchange.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Re:
>>> [CRNMC] Can someone subtantiate these claims?
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I think as a part
>>> of our online culture its important to be really aware of our language, and
>>> how others will interpret our ³tone.² Email is often terrible at delivering
>>> intent, and creates a defensive posture which I know we have been struggling
>>> with as a group.
>>>
>>> So having said that, let me share my thoughts on this
>>> item, and then lets try to get to a solution needed.
>>>
>>> Paul, my
>>> understanding is that this group list is for the volunteers who are part of
>>> CRNMC with the goal to exchange information and keep the ball rolling, so if
>>> you feel I was asking you something journalistic, not so. I agree, we should
>>> have a base of facts that you are all comfortable with. The ³15 permits² is a
>>> good fact to verify, but again It was mentioned by someone else at the event
>>> who lives in Mendocino. I am not the author of the stat, but I did hear it
>>> from members of the team. If whoever did say it, could send that information
>>> forward we¹d all be richer for knowing. I do trust what you all say from the
>>> podium is based on your local knowledge, so I¹m guessing that its true, but we
>>> should nail it down.
>>>
>>> My job is to guide you all in rights-based practices
>>> taking the issue that you are concerned with i.e. Fracking in your county.
>>> I do believe you should be knowledgeable on the threats locally and
>>> And it
>>> would be great if we all saw getting to the useful information as ³our² job.
>>> I brought a fracking expert David to speak to fracking generally and in
>>> CA, and hold a great deal of information about fracking - Please do remember I
>>> work with a dozen communities at a time, and cannot be an expert on the
>>> particulars of each place, though I will see what I can dig up (see below).
>>> My expertise is in applying what you all see as the issue to the
>>> rights-based framework. If you have a question on rights, ask me I¹m
>>> absolutely the right person for that job.
>>>
>>> Best, Shannon
>>>
>>> Some
>>> resources:
>>> http://theava.com/archives/29538
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2014/03/14/18752559.php
>>> And while it can
>>> be shown that there is no active production of conventional resources in
>>> Mendocino County, any recent exploratory well locations are confidential. Thus
>>> the potential for both horizontal or slant deviant drilling and multiple wells
>>> per pad combined with hydraulic fracturing in Mendocino County at some point
>>> in the future cannot be entirely ruled out. Technically feasible and
>>> economically viable approaches may be discovered by the oil and gas industry
>>> to tap the tight-gas and shale oil potential in the Franciscan formations, and
>>> interest in production could shift from the mature oil-rich resource areas in
>>> southern California to the un-associated gas-yielding formations in the
>>> northern parts of the State.
>>>
>>> It also cannot be ignored, that the wells
>>> in Mendocino and Humboldt Counties are owned by the same Big Oil Corporate
>>> Petroleum Companies that own the lease-held agreements to production on tracts
>>> of lands in the States of Texas, Oklahoma, New York, Colorado and Kern.
>>> Bakersfield is more like a Corporate Park in the State of Kern and most of
>>> the north coast county wells are owned by Corporations with 2 addresses, one
>>> in Houston, and one in Bakersfield. Holdings in Bakersfield and throughout the
>>> Kern Oil Fields may change hands for flexible market viability and company
>>> survivability, but those same companies selling leased acres even in other
>>> Shale plays in other States, (to reduce debt load from expansion), have held
>>> onto ownerships in Northern California, and are expanding the lease-acres.
>>> Chevron, Vintage (OXY) and INNEX hold leases or own acreage in Humboldt,
>>> Mendocino, and Sonoma Counties.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6/11/14 11:12 AM, "Paul Lambert"
>>> <paul52jazz at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Actually, Shannon it would behoove you and
>>> crn members if you nailed it down.
>>>>
>>>> Leaving it to me or other journalists
>>> opens you to charges of misrepresentation and trying to build up hysteria.
>>> Since you said it, you need to confirm it or deny it.
>>>>
>>>> Not my job.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Paul
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Shannon Biggs
>>> <shannon at globalexchange.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> HI there,
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes David is a
>>> founder of Americans Against fracking and is currently working with the
>>> coalition Californians Against Fracking, of which Global Exchange and 50 other
>>> organizations are members.
>>>>>
>>>>> I did not claim there were 15 permits, but
>>> I did hear that at one of the meetings by someone from CRNMC. Not sure who.
>>> There are some articles out there if you google search, and some folks
>>> mentioned some specific articles. Be good for you all to nail down the facts
>>> and your talking points on that, as we get our information from you all on
>>> local matters.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you have questions for David, let me know and I can
>>> ask him.
>>>>>
>>>>> Shannon
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 6/11/14 9:57 AM, "Paul Lambert"
>>> <paul52jazz at gmail.com <http://paul52jazz@gmail.com> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I
>>> believe that David Braun also stated that....btw he claimed to me to be a
>>> founder or associated with Californians against fracking but a search of their
>>> site shows no reference to him anywhere.....
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> Paul
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 9:53 AM, edward Oberweiser
>>> <edoberweiser at gmail.com <http://edoberweiser@gmail.com> > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I
>>> agree,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is sounding pretty flaky to me. We shouldn't claim
>>> this unless we have substantial proof. Who else besides Shannon is claiming
>>> this. If there are approved permits, shouldn't we be able to get that
>>> information from the county?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ed Oberweiser
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On
>>> Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 9:45 AM, Paul Lambert <paul52jazz at gmail.com
>>> <http://paul52jazz@gmail.com> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Several time I have heard
>>> Shannon Biggs and others claiming that there are 15 (?) already approved
>>> permits for fracking in Mendocino County but when I have asked her and others,
>>> the only reference I could get is to a small colored state or fed map that
>>> shows approved fracking sites, mainly in the mid-state area but whose tip
>>> seems to end in Mendocino. There is no attribution for the map, nor are there
>>> any details as to who issued the permits, where they are located, who holds
>>> them and what their plans are.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Can someone help because this is
>>> a potentially damaging assertion which could undermine your credibility if it
>>> is not substantiated.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Paul
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> crn mailing list
>>>>>
>>> crn at lists.mcn.org
>>>>> http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/options/crn
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> crn mailing list
>> crn at lists.mcn.org
>> http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/options/crn
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Tim Rice Multitalents (707) 456-1146
> tim at multitalents.net
> _______________________________________________
> crn mailing list
> crn at lists.mcn.org
> http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/options/crn
More information about the crn
mailing list