Casper Star-Tribune Online

Advanced Search

Judge tosses water lawsuit

Story Tools

Print this story

E-mail this story

Rate this story

Text Size

Share This Story:

trib.popular

By DUSTIN BLEIZEFFER
Star-Tribune energy reporter

Monday, June 23, 2008 2:07 AM MDT

A lawsuit against the state engineer and the Wyoming Board of Control regarding coal-bed methane water was dismissed recently.

Plaintiffs Bill and Marge West, and L.J. and Karen Turner, alleged that the state engineer failed to uphold constitutional and statutory obligations to protect the state's groundwater by not managing the volumes of water pumped to the surface in the production of coal-bed methane.

First Judicial District Judge Peter G. Arnold dismissed the lawsuit based on the view that the state was acting in accordance with the state constitution.

"It was a question of whether the review was something left to a court or the Legislature. We felt it should not be left to the court, and Judge Arnold agreed," said Pete Michael with the state attorney general's office.

The plaintiffs may file an appeal, but must do so by June 30.

"Obviously we're disappointed, because we want to get to the merits of the case," said the plaintiffs' attorney, Kate Fox, of the firm Davis & Cannon.

Fox said the judge's order seemed to agree with the plaintiffs' argument that the court has jurisdiction to review the complaint.

Arnold wrote in the order, "The court has authority to determine the constitutionality of statutes and laws. However, any decision by this court would not resolve the current case and controversy. Instead, any decision by this court most certainly will evoke political, administrative, philosophical, and/or academic debate or argument."

Campbell County rancher Marge West said she and her husband have not yet decided whether they will appeal the decision. In the meantime, West said the situation hasn't changed much in the Powder River Basin. Ranchers are still prone to losing water wells to the production of coal-bed methane.

"The state engineer is supposed to consider the interests of all the parties involved -- landowners and people who lease the land," West said. "But he was considering the methane companies and not considering any of the people who have use of the land."

Massive amounts of groundwater -- more than 600 million barrels per year -- are pumped from coal seams to relieve the hydrostatic pressure that holds the methane gas in place. Some of the produced water is used in irrigation and stock watering. However, the volume of water produced in the basin far exceeds practical uses, and sometimes floods low-lying pastures.

Energy reporter Dustin Bleizeffer can be reached at (307) 577-6069 or dustin.bleizeffer@trib.com.


Divert dollars from savings? Millions could be shifted to highways, state treasurer suggests		New Rawlins reservoir needed

Article Rating

Reader Comments

There are 8 comment(s)

Comments to this story.

Drue D wrote on Jun 23, 2008 9:59 AM:

" How many ranchers let the windmills run continuously. The water runs out of the tank and down the dry creek bottom never to be seen again.....Isn't this a waste of water without any benefits, like Natural gas....A lot of these wells were never permitted through the State Engineers Office......... "

Sally wrote on Jun 23, 2008 12:52 PM:

" This is not about the short term loss of ground water by letting the mills run, although that too is a waste.

The volume of water lost to the drilling will have a long term effect far after the fossil fuel is all long gone.

We have to make the producers responsible for returning the land and its resources to their pre-extraction state or we have to halt production until better procedures and/or technology can be found to see to that requirement.

I am not against fossil fuel exploration and extraction. But it must be done with the absolute least impact on the land, wildlife and other public and private users. This is all of our land and our home while their is fuel in the ground and long after that. "

Drue D wrote on Jun 23, 2008 2:43 PM:

" Sally.......Do you have an unpermitted water well? Did you know that the coal seems replenish themselves with water?
sorry too many questions, and I'm not here to argue with anyone....... waste is waste but in what degree ,for what good of the public. Do you think all of the Ranchers and irrigated Farmers in the U. S. amount to more or less of the total people that use water in the methane business. "

What the . . . wrote on Jun 23, 2008 4:37 PM:

" The attorney for the plaintiffs in this case, Kate Fox, is Nancy Freudenthal's law partner at the law firm of Davis & Cannon. I don't think that Nancy Freudenthal's lawfirm should profit from suing the State of Wyoming while her husband is Governor of the State.

There are many other lawyers in Wyoming who are qualified to take this case. Should the Freudenthal's be profiting financially from suing Wyoming state entities while Dave is still in office???

The simple answer is NO. "

WGT wrote on Jun 24, 2008 9:13 AM:

" This law suit was filed because the Gov would not sign the Mark Gordon EQC water rules. Interesting ... Gov would not sign the rules ... Gov's wife's partner files law suite ... goes to Supreme Court and is defeated. The law partner makes lots of money and the state spends lots of money. What the, really! "

Drue D wrote on Jun 24, 2008 10:08 AM:

" Can you name any Govenor of Wyoming that has NOT profitted? "

WGT wrote on Jun 24, 2008 4:08 PM:

" Common lib tactic, plant a question that discredits! Drue, back to you, name the Wyoming Governors that did illegally or immorally profit from their office. Yes I believe that this action of the Governor, his wife, and her partner is immoral. "

WOFT wrote on Jun 25, 2008 8:41 AM:

" Sally the CBM process requires less than 5% of the water to be removed from the coal zone. That leaves 95% of the water in the ground. Wyoming does take a conservative approach to the land. When the CBM play started the BLM required gravel roads with grade, pitch, and bar ditches. The Superintendent of the Oil and Gas Conservation Commission negotiated and argued with the feds until they would allow low impact two-tracks for the roads. It is the law that the operator return the land to as close to original state as possible. In many cases you cannot even find producing wells without a GPS. Wyoming does try to have the least impact on the land, wildlife and other public and private users. "

Submit a Comment

We encourage your feedback and dialog, all comments will be reviewed by our Web staff before appearing on the Web site.

Please note: We provide our story commenting feature in order to solicit feedback, debate and discussion on topics of local interest. Please keep in mind that civility is a necessary component of productive conversation. All blatantly inflammatory or otherwise inappropriate comments (i.e. vulgarity, marketing, etc.) are subject to rejection and/or removal. Comments will appear if and when they are approved. Thanks for reading, and thanks for participating.