I have no idea whether the Black Diamond Coal Co. should be allowed to operate in the Glendale State Fish and Wildlife Area. I've never seen the place, so I might like to know what kind of operation there would be and how that would affect what's there. I might also like to know what percent of Indiana is public land and how that might compare with other states, both in total acreage and on a per-capita basis. Lots of information is still needed. I do know the question is not as simple as the Journal Gazette insists:
Allowing a private coal company to drill in an Indiana wildlife preserve is unconscionable. It has become clear that Gov. Mitch Daniel's appointment to lead the Indiana Department of Natural Resources does not understand his duty to protect the public lands that belong to Hoosiers.
[' ' ' ]
And it was only after residents, horrified by the sight of drilling rigs in Glendale, rang alarm bells that Hupfer decided to inform the public
Comments
Looks like a pretty transparent land grab to me, Leo, not to mention a catty swipe at the Journal-Gazette, which is doing a responsible job of reporting where your rag's falling down on the job per its usual.
Why aren't you presenting this same argument on your hard copy editorial page where it'll get the public skewering it deserves?
1. This is a "land grab" but it wasn't when the government took it over? I think that was my point.
2. I do make a catty swipe once in a while, as you apparently also do. There are stories the JG originates and ones we originate. This was neither. I think it was first reported by the Evansville paper then distributed statewide by the Associated Press. The JG expressed an opinion on the situation, as did I.
3. I have presented similar arguments on the editorial page many times over the years, having been both praised and skewered for them.
4. I did not say coal operations there would be a good thing, merely that the state's willingness to entertain the idea is not, ipso facto, a valid argument against it.
The people in Daviess County obviously would rather have a park in their backyard than a coal mine. The trouble with this idea is that it was being entertained without the public's knowledge at the behest of a man who's paying to play. Kind of like the Toll Road deal, which was a done deal even before the public had any chance to evaluate its merits. Knowing what this administration is capable of ramming through, it's no wonder the people in Daviess County are terrified.
So I respectfully disagree with you that entertaining such an idea is not a valid argument against it. The circumstances under which it's being entertained make the best argument against it. And good for the J-G for bringing it to the public's attention.
not everyone in the area of glendale are opposed to the idea of mining the state ground. as a miner i know that the land can be put back however the state or public would like. i wish people that dont know anything about modern reclamation would quit making it sound like it will be totally useless after we get done mining.we have several happy private landowners that are well pleased with the job we have done. one of these landowners just happens to be mark dillion the guy who keeps showing up in news reports against mining glendale. he has made alot of money from our company and to my knowledge has never had any complaints about the way we have reclaimed his land or the land surronding his huge house.
After reading the above linked Journal Gazette "editorial", I have to tell you, the writer certainly does make some enormous assumptions.
First off, I'd kind of appreciate a quote from one of those "terrified" residents. Not that I don't believe the writer, but based on the first few sentences I sensed an underlying theme.(that being "I really really really hate the Governor)
The writer acknowledges it was exploratory drilling, and I think maybe the findings are sort of necessary to even start the pissing match, don't you? Rather a moot point if there is no coal to be mined.
I'd appreciate an example of the "flagrant harm" being done by exploratory drilling too.
All in all a pretty factless essay, but a wonderful way to shove the proverbial sharp stick in Mitch's eye though.
Alex, I think what's got your shorts in a knot is Leo pointing out the obvious:
You guys (The Journal Gazette Types) always want it both ways....
I'm not taking the bait, Tim. Now or ever again. Good knowing you.
And you also Alex.
I know a little something about unpopulated wilderness and coal, too, because I was born and raised in Eastern Kentucky, where there was an abundance of both. My father was a deep-coal miner and had black lung. My uncle had his back broken in the mines but is still alive in his 80s, and has a nice, contured pasture on his property as a result of the work done by a coal company after it stripped out the coal. (If you buy a piece of property there, make sure you also have the mineral rights -- you likely don't.) I would challenge anybody with a visceral reaction against coal to drive through Kentucky or Tennessee or even southern Indiana and look for evidence. You'd have to drive a long time to find the closed-up entrance of a deep mine. An old strip-mining operation tends to look like, well, most of the land around it. Maybe there used to be a hill there that was nice to look at, but now you can grow things on it. If you live around a coal operation, you have to put up with the noisy, obtrusive transportation of it, but that's true of any commercial enterprise. Check out the local truck traffic.
Certainly I agree that anything done by government should be fair and transparent --that was something I did not address in my post. And, while some (maybe most) in Daviess County might rather see a park instead of a coal mine in their back yard, I presume they also enjoy the amenities of a modern, technological society, which requires power, of which coal is a necessary provider. Forgive me if I do not feel too much sympathy for people who would rather keep their government-protected fishing and hunting area while the coal is quietly slipped in from somewhere else where the people must make the hard choices.
Coal is neither good nor evil, merely a commodity we need that will be provided to us by other people, some of whom are good and some of whom are evil. As long as we do need it, we must accept the good and the bad that comes with its acquistion. We must make choices based on the best evidence available and then live with the consequences.