Mail Call

Thanks everyone for all the letters in this week's mailbag! Word about this blog really got around the past couple of weeks. Appreciate your comments and advice, some of you offered some great insider info, very perceptive writings, thank you. Haven't had a chance to reply to each one yet, wanted to get this post up, but rest assured I understand what you're saying and why so many of you feel the way you do about this topic, believe me, I understand. Very nice hearing from a number of you who've been working behind the scenes in various forms of activism for so many years, as I have, and who, like myself, can pretty quickly gauge the issues and understand the concept of realism/practicality and deciding if efforts are feasible, or not.

And yes, I definitely know what you mean about those who stir the pot against their own assumed allies. It always happens, no matter the topic, and there's no sense in it because it essentially degrades the cause and pushes back any forward efforts made by others - not to mention letting the real opposition know that the activists are divided among themselves. So be it, they've known it for some time. It's sadly been done, and continues, here in the Barnett Shale. There's even opposition among "celebrity" activists around the country and that inevitably becomes more newsworthy than the cause itself. One of the worst examples of negative "activism" is that appalling woman in the northeast whose obscenity-filled, vitriolic verbal attack of a fracking advocate was enough to make an intelligent and sensible fractivist walk away from the effort. Yoko and party should have taken away her bus pass. So whether it's an activist hatefully attacking the opposition or one of their own, it's uncalled for, and will negatively impact the cause just as much as anything the industry or governmental legislation will do; too bad some people don't understand that. I found it interesting that a couple of you commented in your emails that you've many times found that one individual seems to try and "control" other activists and thus, further muddies the waters because the others submit like some kind of dutiful soldiers. Interesting, very interesting, thanks for that take. I could not agree more, and I've encountered that in pretty much every activist endeavor, and the problem is that those who align themselves with the controller lose a degree of credibility, not just because they align with that individual, but because they will almost always be misled while believing they are getting good advice and direction, and thus, their efforts in the cause will ultimately be moot or ignored. Every adult activist or concerned citizen can - and should - make their own decisions. No one person is "in charge" - it's about individual choice, individual approaches, and sensible activism, so there's no room for pettiness or critical sniping at those on the same side just doing what they can to help. And on that note, sorry there's no public commenting, but as you each already know, comments on these kinds of blogs are absolutely unnecessary as most of us are on the same page - and this is not a debate blog. And there is no reason for any of you kind commenters to be subjected to snide remarks made by aforementioned pot stirrer types with bad attitudes. Actually, and I know some of you will fully agree, we can all thank those types for making us realize, (what we pretty much knew going in even as we were trying to be idealistic), that (unpaid) blogging & tweeting for something you have little to no chance of changing for the better, is a waste of good time that you can never get back. That realization is priceless.

At any rate, please know I'll reply as soon as possible to each of your notes to let you know the latest.

The Beast versus Beauty - Chesapeake's Enviro Melding Fail

Back in the 1960's, Lady Bird Johnson was instrumental in the passage of legislation called the Highway Beautification Act which called for the control of outdoor advertising, primarily the size, number, and placement of billboards, along America's interstate highway system. In an effort to encourage scenic enhancement of the landscape and roadside development, included in the HBA was the requirement that junkyards and other unsightly messes along those highways be removed or at least screened from public view.

"Getting on the subject of beautification is like picking up a tangled skein of wool," she wrote in her diary on January 27, 1965. "All the threads are interwoven -- recreation and pollution and mental health, and the crime rate, and rapid transit, and highway beautification, and the war on poverty, and parks -- national, state and local. It is hard to hitch the conversation into one straight line, because everything leads to something else."

Lady Bird first began her beautification efforts in Washington, D.C. but as she and her husband had driven many times from their home in the Texas Hill Country to D.C., she had become frustrated by the numbers of junkyards and billboards along the way.

She wanted the highways filled with green landscaping and wildflowers, and so began promoting legislation that would accomplish her goals. Supporters contributed millions of dollars in support . . . urban activists and environmentalists were thrilled . . . corporations, polluters, and advertisers were not.

The bill was fully supported and signed by her husband, then President Lyndon B. Johnson, and although lobbyists and Republican sympathizers watered it down and the provisions for enforcement were somewhat weak, the legislation passed and was nonetheless significant because it made a loud and clear statement across America that our land, in every way, is fragile and worthy of protection and preservation.

Unfortunately, that particular Act became convoluted over time and has not been effective in curbing and eliminating the problems it was designed to address. It is, in my opinion, just one more item on the very extensive "America's Shame" list. I was not a fan or supporter of the Johnsons, but I've longed admired Lady Bird's intent and efforts, and in my opinion, the HBA should be revived and restructured, not only in memory of Lady Bird, but also in an effort to beautify a land that deserves respect. 

Recently, a Twitter twit tweeted to me that I have not given any reasons for opposing gas drilling and fracking other than that "the equipment is ugly" . . . his comment, silly and obtuse as it was, partially prompted my writing this post.  

Given the nature of this blog (and the fact that there are at least 225 active gas wells within a very few miles of my home), I don't believe there's any doubt about my stance on this issue. And right here in the DFW metroplex, one can find several online sources offered by enlightened people who can provide, for anyone who wants to know, in-depth explanations, statistics, analysis, and studies about the gas industry and its operations and health & environmental impacts. I encourage anyone who does not fully understand this business or may be on the fence about it, to seek out those sources, most of which you'll find on this blog's sidebar, and you can read and learn about what really goes on in this big business industry, its government connections, and field operations. Therefore, there's no particular reason for me to to offer the exact same content in my individual posts, especially at the risk of a "cut & paste" appearance.

That all said, let's be real - the wells are here, they'll probably keep right on a-drillin', and so the best activists can do is push, push, and continue to push for stringent oversight and constant monitoring, stronger legislation, well-defined regulations and enforcement by city government and state agencies.

But in my opinion, it doesn't stop there . . . part of the effort includes the preservation of our land, from keeping it healthy to the simple issue of aesthetics. 

Now . . . to an update on the Chesapeake Day site on Ragland Road. 

You may click HERE and HERE to read about Chesapeake's alleged commitment to be "good neighbors" and how its Landscape Designer is "powering progress in the Barnett". 

In a direct - or indirect - response to this blog bringing attention to the lack of walls and designer landscaping at the Ragland Road site, the following photos show the brand new fencing . . .

Brought to you by your GOOD NEIGHBORS, CHESAPEAKE ENERGY. 

Above you see workers installing the fencing .  . .

And below are new photos of the finished product . . . a basic, tall chain link fence.

Chesapeake Energy:
May we assume this is the completion of your fencing project and that it is your idea of melding a drill site into the surrounding environment?

Although you are evidently not legally required to adhere to the wall/landscaping requirements of the city ordinance, since these wells were drilled pre-amendment, if you truly mean what you say in your promotional videos, you should have already taken the initiative to construct masonry walls and install landscaping because it would be the "good neighbor" thing to do. It would have made a positive statement in your favor. 

Some years ago up in Wichita Falls, a former council member had an innovative idea and started a contest asking local artists to submit their ideas for building murals to be painted throughout the downtown area. His goal was to have 100 different murals created.

Several initial entries were submitted and an artist was commissioned to create the first mural, with funding from a local industry. But that wasn't what the gentleman had in mind - he wanted artists and volunteers to come forward for the simple reason that they wanted to see their city improved.

The program was then implemented through the Downtown Development/Public Art Program as the 100 Mural Project. And in addition to local artists and volunteers he hoped would come forward, he wanted to use the talents of those who were already painting downtown buildings - the graffiti artists. When asked why he would reward a graffiti artist who vandalized, he said because they're good - the only difference between graffiti and a mural is permission.

So to Chesapeake (and all other gas operators in urban areas of the Barnett), the Ragland Road Chronicle offers the following:

Implement a pilot program, starting with the Ragland site and targeting other urban sites located in open, obvious, and well-traveled areas . . . build a masonry wall and employ the talents of local artists to create fantastic works of art along the walls. The artwork could depict scenes that will pay tribute to the specific area's history (i.e. the Chisholm Trail mural in Sundance Square) or of landscapes, trees, plants, and flowers indigenous to Texas. Some sites could include "toned down" abstract graffiti art that would blend in, make a statement. 

The concept of building murals is not new to the metroplex as there are many throughout the cities, and there are artists - amateur and graffiti - who would no doubt be eager to lend their talents for either minimal remuneration or simply the public credit for their work.

It's evident the industry wants to portray itself as "community involved" and caring, while promoting the idea that gas drilling is safe and not harmful to people or the environment - and it's evident, too, that there are growing numbers of those who oppose you and will contradict what you say and promote. The aesthetically unpleasing qualities of sites like Ragland Day serve as blatant reminders to the public just how intrusive these well sites are in neighborhoods, around private residences, schools, parks, and businesses.

So even though the public will know what "lurks behind", you can at least tastefully and artistically "hide" these monstrosity drill sites.

Seems to me that while the giant elephant will forever be in the room, Chesapeake and other industry operators could take a progressive step forward by adopting ideas like the one suggested here.