House Bill 1950 Offers Substantial Funding for 350 Growing Greener Coalition: Pennsylvania, looking "green" and tasting deadly?

Recently, I received an email from Pennsylvania Representative Kate Harper defending her vote for Bill 1950, which is related to hydrofracking, or what is now commonly known as "fracking". Kate Harper's email was in response to a some local citizens' displeasure over her support for this bill, prompted in part by a Sierra Club email from Jeff Schmidt, of the PA chapter of the Sierra Club, asking recipients to "Tell your legislator you'll remember his/her vote!" and prompted in another part by the general dissatisfaction many are feeling with the disparity between our needs and our government's choices.

It is my assertion, that the greatest difficulty we face, in these corrupt and economically challenging times is not just getting to the truth of a matter but making the truth of a matter, matter to our government.  In the case of gas mining through shale, which is different land structure than mining for gas in many western states, an overwhelming concern is protecting water, and this means protecting people and animals. Once one understands the nature of water, one can see that like greed, it seeks its own level, and once contamination is allowed the freedom to move, each has the necessity to reach everyone. However, my role in presenting this is not to encourage or discourage readers to "Tell their legislators what they think of their vote on Bill 1950" nor to bash any particular politician. While I have distinct opinions about the manner in which our Pennsylvania government is proceeding concerning this "gold rush to gas", and a moral compass that demands that the burden of proof of the safety of the chemicals used in the fracking process be proven and addressed as a first thought, I want to be clear that am not writing this to attack politicians, or any party's viewpoint, or even a governor who seems mute concerning the chemical contamination of our water. What I would like to see come of this is that people learn about our water supply, learn about the process and chemicals used in "fracking" and based on the facts, make up their own minds about whether our government is representing us.

Below is a copy of Representative Harper's email and being that a number of friends encouraged me to publish my response, I have also included it.  Also included is a quote from a letter I received from the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, via. Senator John C. Rafferty, Jr. who also voted for Bill 1950. Local Representative Mike Gerber, in a speech on the floor called this "gut check time" and voted against Bill 1950 stating that it did not offer enough benefit to our region.

On Feb 11, 2012, at 12:37 PM, Kate Harper wrote:


Dear Friends,
Many in the environmental community LIKED the bill. Here is what some said :
350 Member Growing Greener Coalition Commends Funding In Marcellus Shale Bill
 
The Renew Growing Greener Coalition, the largest coalition of conservation, recreation and environmental organizations in the Commonwealth, Wednesday issued the following statement from Executive Director Andrew Heath, commending the Growing Greener funding contained within House Bill 1950, which passed Wednesday.

The Renew Growing Greener Coalition is pleased with the passage of House Bill 1950 due to the environmental funding and commends the leadership of the General Assembly, legislators, and the Governor for taking the first step toward renewing funding for the Environmental Stewardship Fund and Growing Greener programs and projects.

While this bill may not be perfect, it makes critical investments in storm water management and programs to protect our drinking water, preserve farmland and open space, enhance our recreational opportunities, support our heritage areas, and stimulate our local and regional economies.?

Growing Greener is a bipartisan program established in 1999 under Gov. Tom Ridge and later expanded by Governors Schweiker and Rendell. Since its establishment, Growing Greener has created a legacy of success, preserving more than 107,000 acres of Pennsylvania's family farmland, conserving more than 42,300 acres of threatened open space, adding 26,000 acres to state parks and forests, and restoring over 16,000 acres of abandoned mine lands.

Moreover, Growing Greener has contributed and leveraged billions of dollars to the Pennsylvania economy by helping to boost tourism, create jobs and generate revenue.

Yet despite the program's accomplishments, funding for Growing Greener projects and grants fell from an average of approximately $150 million per year for the last six years to $27.3 million in the current state budget, over an 80 percent reduction.

The Renew Growing Greener Coalition is the largest coalition of conservation, recreation and environmental organizations in the Commonwealth, representing nearly 350 organizations and government entities from across the state.

More than 140 government entities, including 32 counties, representing more than seven million Pennsylvanians, have passed resolutions calling for a dedicated source of funding for the Growing Greener Environmental Stewardship Fund.

For more information on the Coalition website.
 
I supported it because of those features. Otherwise, there would be NO FEE charged to the drillers at all and Growing Greener would be broke. Kate

Kate Harper
State Representative
61st Legislative District
1515 Dekalb Pike
Blue Bell, PA 19422

Blue Bell: 610-277-3230
HBG: 717-787-2801
fax Blue Bell 610-270-1677
fax HBG 7171-787-2022
www.kateharper.net


Dear Kate,
From what you are saying it sounds like this is the only way that you thought Growing Greener could be funded.
I have friends who have personally travelled to, or live in Bradford and Tioga counties. My friends have spoken with residents and farmers who have been negatively impacted by hydrofracking. There are many issues surrounding this "gold rush" to gas, some of which include: labor being imported from outside Pennsylvania and the US, the amount of water being diverted for the process, the chemicals used are not required to be declared, and the gas industry does not have the burden to prove, prior to the use of chemicals, that they are safe, not singularly, or in combination.  Also, the people in upstate PA need legal help with the contracts and their enforcement.  And then, there is the issue of water quality, which I am sure, you know is not an issue that with this process and the nature of water, can contain itself to PA.  The Sierra Club and other international organizations notice this vote.
 
I do not support this vote even though Growing Greener has received funding.  Personally, I would have stood ground for regulations to support clean water and to fill the gaps described above.  In the long run, these funds received by Growing Greener seem inconsequential to many of us, when the very clouds that rain on Pennsylvania and water our municipal water supplies, and the streams that run through our parks and farms are permitted to be laced with toxic chemicals. You see it is the nature of water, to seek its own level.  Water cannot be contained and therefore, the chemicals used in the process of mining gas from shale cannot be contained. They spill, and enter the earth during hydro-fracking, and they will leach into Pennsylvania creeks, streams, rivers, lakes, and aquifers that feed Pennsylvania wells. They will evaporate and become part of the clouds that rain on us and fill municipal water reservoirs, water regional farms and our own backyard gardens. They will remain, and recirculate, because this is what water does, and the cost to identify them especially when we are not even being told which chemicals are being used, along with the litigation from pollution and the deaths of Pennsylvanians and their livestock will far exceed the funds received by this bill. I am not convinced that this vote which will help support the work of Growing Greener, will in the long run, make a difference when the water that runs through the very lands acquired by Growing Greener, and our private and municipal water supply contain multiple toxic chemicals, a cocktail of cancer, loss and death.

This is the thing that people need to understand: The life cycle of water. Anyone who farms, or has livestock, including horses and cattle (which have already died due to chemicals from hydro-fracking and caused litigation) should be aware of this. Anyone who plans to do pleasure riding, particularly in PA will want to bring their own bottled water for their horses.  Anyone who drinks water whether municipal or from a private well, is not protected.
 
I understand that it was a yes or no vote, and I am so sorry that you cast this vote.
Marie Crawford
 

February 6, 2012, From the Chesapeake Bay Foundation:

"This Bill also provides tremendous financial resources to the Growing Greener program and other environmental interests such as water infrastructure, sewer infrastructure, and watershed projects. CBF does, however, believe that a significantly higher impact feed is warranted. There are a few issues that were left out of this legislation... These include: a more inclusive definition of water and water bodies; required disclosure of fracking chemicals for all drilling operations, not only unconventional wells; and requiring complete public disclosure of waste water manifesting."
 
Was this vote for Bill 1950 to support Growing Greener a mistake? It appears so with the budget cuts Corbett had planned:

2/21/12 Growing Greener Headline:

Corbett Funding Cuts to Environmental Programs Undermine Shale Legislation

For Immediate Release:  February 21, 2012 

(HARRISBURG, PA) The Renew Growing Greener Coalition, the largest coalition of conservation, recreation and environmental organizations in the Commonwealth, today urged the Legislature to reject cuts to environmental, conservation and recreation programs in the Governor’s proposed 2012-2013 budget.

“With Pennsylvania’s land, water and air facing significant threats and impacts due to Marcellus Shale development, we should be increasing, not decreasing, funding for the programs that protect these vital resources,” said Andrew Heath, executive director of the Renew Growing Greener Coalition.  “The funding contained in the Marcellus Shale legislation was meant to help address the environmental impacts of natural gas drilling, but there would actually be less funding available for these purposes if the Legislature approves the cuts to environmental, conservation and recreation programs proposed in the Governor’s budget.

Click here to read the full article on the Growing Greener website