2008 Divide Creek Seep
page  7 of  15

1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15

Seep Update

More update details are coming soon, but I am sad to report that of the few birds we have left on the mountain, we have found three dead in the past week. None showed any signs of trauma and two were found dead in the water fountain - a dove and a finch. It is possible they perished from Wet Nile virus. However, in 2004 we experienced the exact same thing when a dove keeled over at the fountain's edge - but not in the water. Two of the birds found recently were found in the water which could suggest fever and exhaustion - signs of West Nile. The third bird, however, was found near the woods - another occurrence of what we observed in 2004.

As noted in other posts, other anomalies we saw in 2004 and are seeing again are beak deformities and bulging eyes.

In the years prior to 2004 and between then and now we haven't had this type of occurrence, so seeing it again in concurrence with our other observations of the seep raises serious concerns. We collected two of the birds (both from the water), placed them in the freezer and will call the DOW today.

Update: 08-13-08

Agency frustration - no one answers the phone

Can't get hold of the Forest Service and Glenwood DOW doesn't answer either - this is chronic - they usually don't. Anyway - turns out the DOW doesn't test dead critters anyway - it's the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment.... just more hoops. It's really extraordinary how much time it takes to carry this load forward. The exhaustion, depression, insomnia - it all just sucks. And all this effort so you can have the privilege of being mocked and ignored. Any normal person would probably have given up by now just to avoid the friggin' hassle. I don't love conflict - in fact I'd like to have a life, but I like bullies even less, and how can you not fight to defend your home, your family and their health? There is no better cause, and this has therefore become our life.
 

Black Vegetation

Yesterday evening we found these big black spots on the ground that looked a lot like oil had come up through the ground and killed the vegetation. Our instinct was to only photograph the scene and not disturb the evidence, but the hydrologist said "dig it up - some of it anyway - and see how far down it goes." This was great advice because we otherwise would not have guessed that it wasn't oil at all - at least as far as what appeared as staining the ground. What it is - however - is crispy-fried vegetation. What is really weird is that the die-off is black - like it's been soaked in oil, and it's only affected some plants in one area. We've never before seen this type of die-off. Normally, the dead thatch is brown and eventually grey - never black. But I lifted the mat of plant matter and it was crispy and totally black - the ground beneath it appeared normal. Weird, but it may be indicative of oil-type components (maybe DRO's) moving into the plant from the roots. It remains to be seen. This find is not all that surprising given that so much other vegetation continues to struggle and die.

Here is a dark spot close up [08-12-08]

Here, the spots progress in a kind of zig-zag pattern through a contained area maybe 15 feet by 20 feet. Unfortunately, this weird die-off and whatever caused it is only ten feet or so from our water well. It definitely suggests a broader area of impact - but so does all the rest of the die-off. [08-12-08]

        
The two photos immediately above show the ground beneath the black thatch [08-13-08]

Dying pine in area where bog is now drying up [08-13-08]

One of our oldest and most stately cottonwoods struggles to hang on. The seep in 2004 took a toll, this one may finish it off. When I see our beautiful and truly scarce trees suffering and slowly dying I can hardly swallow. The bastards that have done this however - they clearly do not know the eternal loss of their own souls for the harm they knowingly cause. In this way they are very blind. Blinded by greed. This overt destruction of our gentle planet is not for me to judge. But they will be judged one day. In the meantime, it sickens my heart and soul in the most profound and enduring way.

This is the view of the seep area looking East. The two ponded areas (easterly is further away and closest is the westerly pond) are drying. The groundwater that erupted and had been expressing to the surface has subsided. The area behind the seep is now dry. The easterly pond is only damp, and the westerly pond is mostly stagnant and diminishing in volume. [08-12-08]

This is the muddy bottom of the still-damp easterly pond area. I grubbed around in this mess to peer under the bank and see if I could find any orange gunk. Interestingly, this ponded area contains a top layer of very fine clays and a bottom layer of this black stuff. It was fed by the ground water upwelling. Nearby, in the area of the black seep, Diesel Range Organics - or oil-related hydrocarbons were found. I wonder if this is oil-based drilling mud? If it is, it may contain barium - a carcinogen that has been found to mutate and kill periwinkles in Africa where oil-based drilling mud is discarded into the environment. Apparently, shellfish are quite sensitive to such compounds, which truly makes me wonder about the dead crawfish that, for a while, littered this area. Of course, there are potentially hundreds more toxic compounds in drilling fluids - many of which the industry will not disclose. They don't care who or what they kill to keep their formulas secret. We would be grabbing samples left and right, but our rough methods are not in accordance with scientific protocol, and, ironically, because of contamination risk, would be discounted. That is why the COGCC should be out here investigating.  We certainly cannot afford to hire a battery of folks to do it, but our taxes certainly help pay their salaries and the money made from industry's pillaging of this land also puts money in the state and county coffers. Right now Garfield County should be getting involved, but they sit on 30 some-odd millions of dollars in a "rainy-day" fund as our land gets trashed and we get exposed to who knows what. So this type of thing gets ignored as the environment and everyone but industry and the "regulatory" folks who help them prosper suffers. [08-12-08]

Deep under the embankment of the easterly ponded area I found remnants of iron-reducing bacterial growth. This is still flourishing as the last of the groundwater diminishes and likely methane and other hydrocarbons along with it. What remains in the groundwater, however, remains to be discovered.  [08-12-08]

I was elated to find gobs of frogs - maybe 9 or so - just east of the seep site, and they all appeared normal looking. DOW only found one little frog on July 10th, during their whole sweep. [08-12-08]

Despite my joy at seeing the frogs -especially in a dawning era of mass amphibian extinctions - this one little frog right here gave me a message. It said loud and clear to me, 'looks can be deceiving....' How well I know that. I could not discount this message, and it just makes me sick. I'd so much rather delight in looking at a frog than listening to the difficult message it brings. But, I finally heard it. I took this picture as it spoke its heart to me. Maybe you can hear it too.

The black seep area continues to dry out. In this area of deep surface cracking, I smelled gas to a moderate degree. As I hung out here filming and taking pictures I only got a little "swimmy" for short moments. I didn't get full on sick or anything and the effect did not linger. Interestingly, the gas did not smell like rotten eggs. It smelled gassy though - like when you light a gas stove or maybe a grill. Kind of propane or fuel-like, very similar to the odors we noted in 2004 when the gas was bubbling up in the water and all over the place. [08-12-08]

Despite the area of groundwater upwelling that has dried up and which formerly fed this black seep area, some areas of the depression, where the vents holes were located, remains moist. [08-12-08]

The white stuff persists in areas that are still moist. Some of this is looking bacterial or fungal, and though similar looking to what we found decimating the sandstone, may be a different substance. [08-12-08]

The beaver family has built a new little dam up stream of the Turkey Point pond since the last update, but I didn't see the family down a Turkey Point on our Tuesday or Thursday visit. I did see a muskrat on Thursday though. This is not a good sign, since muskrats often move into abandoned beaver dwellings. It would just suck if the Beaver folk have gone. But, with the bubbling in their pond, the vegetation die-off, the weird stuff - the birds having left.... maybe they had to go too. I hope we see them again. I hate this.
 

Update: 08-13-08 - EPA Takes The Reins....

I got a call this morning from the EPA. They're getting involved. Finally. I don't know what their plans are or their timetable for achieving them, but this appears to at least be an exercise of their oversight authority.

Unfortunately, our county has been less inspired to action. They have not responded to my letter, so I will have to duplicate the contents of my letter in a formal presentation as an "agenda" item Monday the 18th. How sad to have to jump through such hoops - again probably only to be ignored, but when two of the three County Commissioners are pro-industry as evidenced by a private meeting with industry long ago and their voting records ever since these are the kinds of hoops you have to jump through when you have the audacity to ask for safe drinking water. Man, this county needs some leadership. I would have run myself in this election, but a pile of Democrats freaked out for fear I would dilute the vote and a 'dreaded' Republican would get in. And they had a point. We've seen how badly a Republican majority has trashed this county. Use by right man camps is just the latest landowner rights giveaway. You may recall I am a dyed in the wool Independent. I hope Democrat, Steve Bershenyi can turn things around, he at least called and has expressed some interest in what is going on - and he's only a candidate.
 

Still Very Little Wildlife

Still no sign of the beaver - or the muskrat, but rats are a bit more elusive. Our wildlife population is still thin. For two or three weeks, all we saw were a handful of hummingbirds, lots and lots of hornets and wasps, crickets mosquitoes - water skippers, a couple of butterflies and a bird or two winging through - that was about it. Over the past ten days or so, we've found three dead birds.  Still, though - even with these few, this is more wildlife than we had in 2004: then, we only had vultures and hornets for a while, then only hornets - even the ants left. There was only  a period of maybe a week, this time that we didn't see any ants, and what we see now are the tiny variety - I've only seen one area of larger species any activity, and they are up high running around on a clothes line. Also, there are now a lot of frogs and still fish in the creek. So, the mountain is not devoid, but the life that remains here is a thin minority of what this habitat normally sustains (the one exception being frogs at the seep site - their numbers appear strong at least in that one area). Critters know when an area is sick. Comprehensively, multiple species take notice - almost simultaneously - and either make a mass exodus or simply remain and die. Our human tendencies make an interesting study in contrast and similarity to nature's ways.

Update 08-15-08

I left the photos below in a larger format as I wanted to show more detail of what we found today. The ponded areas seem to be continuing to evaporate, but they are wetter than before. Intrigued by the black stuff revealed a few days ago, I mucked deeper in the mud to see what was beneath and was shocked by what we found.

Remember, these two ponds caught the upwelling expression of groundwater - and whatever was in it at the time. They also, periodically mingle with surface waters from the creek when it is higher. Predominantly, however, their contents were fed by the upwelling for a period of nearly two months.

So, two things stand out  : 1) the nature of this black stuff.... it is foul smelling and also very black - nearly blue. As you can see by the tip of the rock (left top) it clings to the rock almost like latex paint.  I wonder what level of diesel range organics the COGCC would find now if they bothered to test.

[08-15-08]

The other thing that stood out was the nature of the mud. It is extremely fine and viscous.  It also has a kind of plastic feel - with firm, yet malleable tensile characteristics. Both of these visual phenomenon are like none we've ever seen in the twenty years we've lived here. As a potter, I have dug clay myself, and I've not only never seen it so near the surface, it is usually striated with minerals and other organics. Nor have I ever worked with even slip (very wet clay used as a glue) with these kids of properties. This stuff appeared almost homogenized and emulsified. I've worked with natural oils and water before, and in order to keep them from separating, you have to add an emulsifying agent. And although this black stuff appears to be layered separately from the clay mud - it seems willing to mix with water and other materials in the mix, suggesting the presence of an emulsifier. What we think we may be seeing is drilling mud that has communicated with the surface through a fissure. More disturbing still is that if drilling mud communicated - and who knows what might be in that which companies are not required to disclose, then fracing fluids also could be present - of which there are hosts of other micron-sized natural and synthetic chemicals that again don't have to be disclosed. Such as occurrence could also explain the corrosive which well might be acid-related residue. Of some of the many things used in these fluids are: solvents, bactericides, surfactants, anti-corrosive agents, polymers, the list goes on. Radioactive isotopes are even used to check well integrity. CO2 is often used to frac which can move arsenic and other toxic metals. into the picture.

I can tell you one thing. This is big-time, folks. And the COGCC's adamant stance against  proper investigation suggests strongly they are actively working to conceal the truth - but what, why and to who's benefit can only be guessed. That EnCana hasn't acted to express any concern, though it could well be their own operations which have caused this.... sadly typical. Have we received that promised list of fracing fluids? No.

God only knows what my family and anyone else walking around in this area has been exposed to.

[08-15-08]
 

What a frigging ordeal. I was grateful to have the opportunity to address the Commissioners - although Tresi recused herself given her position and communication with COGCC staff. But, you know, to have to jump through another hoop when I've already spelled out as many details as I can in both the letter I already sent and through the website is a little much. Still though, I had not heard from anyone at the county since the letter was sent, so I just ' figured' an agenda presentation would be the next logical step. 

At one point, near my time to speak, an EnCana representative came in and took a seat.

So, here's the thing. I put together a quick ten - fifteen minute presentation. I mean, what more was there to say than what I'd already put in the letter and on the website (referenced in the letter)?

But, as soon as I sat down, the County Attorney stood up and whispered something to someone and then McCown stood up and whispered something to Martin. Martin and McCown looked out toward the EnCana rep, McCown nodded. Then Martin says he wants to get the COGCC Environmental manager on the phone to sit in on the presentation. I said, "I didn't realize this was going to be a debate forum..." Martin assured me it wouldn't be, but he said the County might have some questions, and they'd like COGCC to be present. Uh huh. O..kay. So, the Environmental Manager gets on the phone - they go to conference and she mentions she wants a member of her team and some PhD. guy present. Amazingly - they are all present and on the phone in a flash, though there is some feigning of thirty second delay. Garfield County's Oil and Gas Liaison held the flank along with County Environmental Health. Man. Ambushed. No big deal. I came with the truth.

And the truth was about to be told right in front of God and everybody.

The first thing Martin said was that he "sensed some animosity". Animosity? No. I corrected him. "Disappointment, John, disappointment." I voted for Martin when he first ran, but by his second term I wrote a letter to the editor warning of exactly the type of things now happening to our valley and expressing frustration and disappointment then at his lack of true leadership in times of turbulence. He was the chair at the time and the mot experienced. I left McCown out of the picture, cutting him some slack since he was new. But I made it clear then that if the county did not act to implement some form of land-use regulation around an industry poised to dominate the valley, we would see exactly the kinds of things we are now seeing.  Animosity was the wrong word. But continued disappointment and frustration, to the point of washing my hands of the ridiculous and relentless politicking. - that's right on the money.

So, I gave an overview of what I was about to demonstrate and we rolled with the presentation. The only thing I added to the presentation that isn't on the website (I could only suppose they never bothered to look at the website - hence the public meeting), was a review of the 2004 seep event, a few geologic references and a quote from the COGCC.... here's that stuff:

Hearing Testimony of Anthony Gorody – EnCana’s consulting geologist
August 18, 2004
Mr. Gorody concurred with the general consensus that the extent of the seep hasn't been fully determined.
 

So, now we move through the slides and I show perspective with the maps and graphics so everyone can get a feel for where all this stuff is located.

I note we first started noting anomalies in the beaver pond back a year ago when EnCana first re-entered the Schwartz. I also noted the COGCC tested the pond and found the methane to be biogenic (let's forget for a moment that the pond acts like a giant conversion tank allowing microbes to scarf up any hydrocarbons and poop out their own brand of biogenic methane.)

Signs of trouble again?
I point out notices that I found reviewing COGCC documents on-line relative to the Schwartz well 11-2A (on the O2E pad site).

Document 1) [with photo] Loss of Well Control - Report 10-10-07
Document 2) [with photo] Notice to Remediate - Sundry Notice 01-15-08

What do these mean? I have no idea. In asking EnCana if any problems occurred with the drilling of any wells - we heard again and again... "No, no problems...."

More perspective photos, and we launch into all the visual observations categories by they characteristics: corrosive / black seep / orange seep / vegetation / so forth....

I point out the iron-reducing bacterial gunk, it's relevance as an important hydrocarbon indicator, and COGCC refusal to sample the bank or the area where the groundwater was flowing into the area. Then I provide quoted matter from EnCana on a similar subject from back in 2004. Now, the following is absolutely key in our argument for groundwater testing. It provides a lot of perspective right in a nutshell, and I'll explain that at the end....

Then, I wrap it up with a reminder of the water cycle - something most of us learned in third grade, but I felt it a worthy reminder of the importance of our ground water/surface water quality - since we drink it and all.

And that was it....

And that's when I asked, "I sent you a letter, which you received August 1st. You've had 18 days to deliberate this situation and decide what to do. I've put everything up on a website. I've jumped through your hoop and made a personal presentation. What more do I need to do, and what, if anything are you going to do?"

I don't know. I could be wrong, here, but I think everyone was a little surprised by the slides. Martin asks the COGCC Environmental Manager (E.M.) about the mud. I think he was rightly alarmed. We certainly are. The E.M. hims and haws.... hummana hummana....

Martin brings up the corroded boulders (he really did, to his credit, appear to be listening - thank you for that John....), the E.M. hims and haws.... hummana hummana....

I brought up a thing that came to mind last night when I was down checking things out. Sandbar. We have a sandbar in the area of this seep, and we've never had sand like this before in the creek. We've had crap loads of silt - yes. Lots of that. Mud, rocks, regular creek stuff. But what we have now is friggin' Pensacola Beach. And I had earlier attributed it to some anomalous run-off event. And I went - "Neato! We have this really cool sand now!" Well..... it's the kind of "neato" reaction you might illicit from a kid playing with a ball of mercury - remember how fifty years ago kids did that? Well, I hadn't thought of anything really in line with a bad thing until the ponded areas dried a bit and the viscous clay mud revealed itself and then I went - huh.... If this is drilling mud - which might explain the diesel hydrocarbons - then, fracing fluid could also come up - which might explain the corrosive (acid?) and sure could explain the superfine beautiful sand we now have - and God knows what all else that's in it.

So Martin asked the E.M. about sampling the sand. And the E.M. said, 'Well, sand is just silica' - BINGO! Got one right!

However, as far as I know, and thanks to a helpful short course in fracing from EnCana's Expo a few years ago, I learned that the fracing sand that is preferred is mined only in like, one place. It's beautiful very fine stuff. So, as I'm over noticing a couple of new areas where ground water expressed to the surface and still wets one area, I noticed the sand again - but differently. I picked it up and let it run through my fingers. Super fine. Now, it wasn't so neato.

And then we got to the gas.... And Martin asked why COGCC hadn't sampled the gas. I'd already noted that earlier on, when the black seep was wet, it smelled like rotten eggs, but now that it's drier, it just smells like propane - like lighting a stove or a grill. So, the E.M. says: 'The diesel organics are only bugs and the gas is normal with these bugs.' She didn't note the other possibility - of formation gas and well completions sources.

I asked why COGCC failed to sample for BTEX in the soil where diesel hydrocarbons were found - more him and haw from the E.M.... a lot of talking around the issue, confusing the issue - classic evasive stuff.

That's when McCown appeared to think could get in a good virtual shank and honed in for position. He says - apparently harkening to my reference about lighting a stove - he says to the E.M. with the tone of someone really relishing the pounce - 'I didn't think you could smell methane - which is why they put additives in it.' It looked like he wanted to grin evilly but was trying to appear Commissioner-like. I guess he thought he had me. I almost felt sorry for him, because I could have told him the same thing the E.M. did: 'Pure methane doesn't have an odor, but formation gas has propane and butane and bunch of other stuff that comes up with it - and, naturally, it does stink.' Did he really think I was going to try and B.S. anyone? Please.

So, all of that was kind of swept away with a little more him-haw-hummana-hummana, and Martin said: 'Well, if we asked the state to sample the mud and the sand, would that be okay?' I reminded him that in any investigation time is of the essence. Once certain things express into the environment - sunlight, air, surface water, etc, they can be converted or even washed away with the rain. Because it's nearly been two months of delay, I stressed that the groundwater is likely the only medium that has preserved what has truly occurred - and of course, because our well is located between the two seeps (2204 and this one) it was the most important medium to test. McCown obviously thought he had me again and tried to remove the validity of our water well's position. That fizzled. Then, he said, 'Well, if the mud is tested, didn't you just say that it caught the groundwater coming to the surface?' He had circled around for a another  shank attempt. I reminded him again that the ponded areas are adjacent to the creek and can become dilute from surface flow - though it is not as frequent.

So, then the E.M. gave it a try: 'We sampled the ground water! That's what came to the surface. We don't need to sample the groundwater!'   'No'.... says I. 'You sampled the surface water present in the ponded area and only after it had been diluted by a volume (though reduced) of constantly flowing creek water.' The COGCC, you may recall, refused to sample where the ground water was actually expressing at the surface and feeding into the ponded area.

So then, I asked very simply. 'If there is no need to sample the groundwater, based on the fact that BTEX were not detected at the surface, then why are you sampling the groundwater at the main seep area from 2004, when there are no BTEX in the surface waters there, but there is a crap load of benzene in the groundwater?' No answer. Dead, friggin' silence all the way around the room. I wasn't being a smart ass. I really, really want to know. Why is it suddenly okay to risk my family's health in this case - but somehow the other area is different?

Remember the slide from the presentation where EnCana talks about the hydrocarbons found in the "bank"? The bank they are talking about is about ten or fifteen feet from the monitor well where benzene is underground but not detected in the surface. Guess what else? It's covered - covered in iron-reducing bacteria. That's the argument in a nutshell. So, why the hell are they not testing the groundwater?

Another thing. I added that arsenic could be present but has never been tested for - even though the 2004 event is still going on and bringing up with it any mobilized toxic metals. The E.M. refuted EnCana's use of CO2 and said it was never used to frac. She actually said this. Was adamant about it.  I said: 'I have the completions report.' And I do.... so do others. Dead silence again. Some people are afraid of silence - especially in a room of strangers. Not me. Everyone needed to process what was just said. Martin finally said: Well, it looks like both of you need to do more research. Correction Martin: I said I had the completions report and tons of CO2 was pumped into the ground. I've done my research. It reasonably came up everywhere natural gas came up and that included in the soil at a level of 6 at our house and 4 at the creek. and that means arsenic may well be present. Remember the new "clarifications" that the COGCC staff put forth allowing EnCana an exemption from better toxic metal clean up standards on the 2004 event? How inappropriate and heedless of public safety - establishing such a threshold when they've never even - and more inappropriately tested for arsenic in the water?

I said I was finished. That I'd said enough. I asked Martin again, what - if anything - they intended to do. I reminded him I had come to ask for groundwater monitoring. He said he'd get back and let me know. Fine, but I'm not holding my breath. Thank God the EPA is involved.

Ground Water Nutshell Argument
 

Here is a spring from May, 16 2004 flowing with iron-reducing bacteria and biofilm

This is the 2004 "main seep" bank from July, 03 2008.


1) The seep is still active
2) The bank is still covered with iron-reducing bacteria
2) Hydrocarbons were found in the bank
3) BTEX were not found here in the surface water
4) BTEX were found in the ground water about ten to fifteen feet upstream in concentrations some 49 times the safety threshold.

Here is the new seep [07-03-08]

1) The bank was covered with iron-reducing bacteria and biofilm
2) BTEX were not found in the surface water
3) COGCC is refusing to test for BTEX in either the soils or in the ground water

 

Now you tell me how this is different.

I left the county presentation like a giant turd followed by forty flies as media swarmed. I guess, despite comments that I bored some to tears, I was the biggest hit of the show. How pathetic is that for all of us? But I was happy to share the truth with reporters as this is sadly the only means we have of trying to persuade our elected officials to do what is right and timely. It's election season folks and the politicians (Tresi Houpt excluded) have their antennae tuned to any catalyst for outster. I guess the timing of all of this is good for something. Good GOD maybe someone will actually listen.

So, here are all these stories and each one is done very well - but then the journalists go and interview the Environmental Manager (EM). It's good reporting, but it mucks up the truth. The EM is still trying to characterize this thing as if it were 2004. Maybe she's also got brain damage from sniffing around all the toxins. Maybe that's the whole problem - two brain damaged chicks just trying to find their way out a bag. But I digress.

What she continues to say - like a parrot with a pull string is: 'We've already taken 60 samples! RRWWWAACK! EnCana continues to monitor the situation! RRWWACCK!'

What she doesn't say is this:

A.  The seep to which she refers is the 2004 seep which continues to vent some 2000 feet upstream (see 2nd graphic map). The project scope has been scaled back because the contracted environmental firm, Cordilleran, has found that the BTEX (benzene toluene, etc) plume seems to be contained and only slowly migrating in the ground water toward our water well. They anticipate that, at the current flow rate, it will take around seven years to get into our well. Then we're seriously screwed. Think the COGCC put our water well in the continued monitoring program? Nope. EnCana is not only in no way monitoring this event, but they have denied anything to do with it - just like in 2004.

B.  The area where the 2004 seep was first discovered - lit on fire - thousands of bubbles all over the place - is just maybe thirty to sixty feet upstream of our well and was COMPLETELY IGNORED by the COGCC. It was never tested nor remediated. We have no idea what is going on in that area. Despite repeated requests as to what criteria the COGCC used to delineate the seep - we've never had a response to this question. This is what they do... hedge hedge hedge, humman humman humman, silence. Their three big methods of communication. Our illustrious leaders at work.

C. She fails to note that our water well and the two ground water monitoring stations on our property were culled from sampling so long ago there is rust and cobwebs where the padlocks were left to hang from the last ground water effort months and months ago (I'd rustle up the date, but my brain is fried). Anyway, EnCana petitioned to scale back monitoring. Fine - for THAT event. This is a NEW event. I am yelling now... not at you. At the brain-damaged one. And this seep? It continues to change - to the total dismay of the COGCC. I want to know where they get their environmental degrees. I bet I could get one pretty easy. I bet all I'd have to do is show up, mutter, hedge and fall asleep.

D. Our water well is not part of any sampling effort associated with the state's monitoring/remediation program. We had to try and wrangle some kind of deal with EnCana. So, we finally got them to agree to sample quarterly for a year - then annually. Our water well had not been sampled since last December. Supposedly, the first sample taken since that time was taken this June or July, but we don't have those results. Huh. Go figure. I wonder what's up with that. EnCana took the samples. Why would a company we are at odds with not want to share data that could be incriminating. But does the COGCC maintain any oversight in this situation? No.

E. Any of the few COGCC samples taken since we first started noticing weird bubbling in the creek in 2007 were last done in the middle of frigging winter at the edge of a beaver pond where the bubbles weren't even occurring. Good God. Increase the glucose. Then the beaver pond is ripped away by run off - we find a butt load of visual evidence suggesting a new seep is happening and the EM says 'Hey, I know! Let's verify that the orange stuff is microbial!' Okay - no brainer there. It is microbial, which sprung up out of nowhere and flourished for a few weeks (and is still present under the banks) on what is most likely hydrocarbon-laced ground water. So what did the EM say then? How about: 'Let's not check for BTEX when we know there are diesel range organics detected - even though this is common scientific protocol!' Because why, class? Everyone together now.... "BECAUSE NO ONE WANTS TO FIND OUT WHAT IS REALLY THERE!"  Good, good. Now get in line for your diploma.

I'm sorry. I know that was way sarcastic, but these people who keep trying to BS other's in a position to find out the truth - and then THEY buy into it is about to make me nuts. This kind of an event is broad and dynamic - as weeks of new photos will show you. The 2004 blow-out was also that way, but again, the same genius lead that investigation, and a lot of what we could have learned went down the drain. They still haven't tested for arsenic and denied CO2 was ever used (CO2 acts to liberate arsenic from the soil and let's it migrate into water). Deny the CO2 all you want - here's the proof (click the link for the larger document and "Exhibit A" cover of the "Drilling and Completions History" given by EnCana to the COGCC and given to me by the COGCC in August, 2004).

Deny that. 164.7 tons is a lot of evidence to try and hide - but then again, it was already underground. I guess I wasn't supposed to have such documentation. Easier to hide the truth if a dumbass public has no information. Oh - did I mention, "staff"  - that'd be her - recommended in the new rule language, which is supposed to help protect the public's health, that the 2004 ongoing seep event - and EnCana who is responsible for it - be exempted from higher arsenic clean-up standards. Even though they've never tested for it. I think that's very interesting and a disgustingly egregious attempt to undermine the intent of the new rules which are supposed to help protect the public's health.  The 2004 event was the very catalyst that moved us to this long-awaited point in time and to exempt a polluter now... it makes me sick. Even more ironically, it just might make me sicker over time.

At the presentation, the E.M. actually said she never thought I was complaining about a seep in June of this year, and that I only wanted the COGCC to test for a specific substance. What a load of horse feathers. I think anyone with a normal brain can see that I've been jumping around like a spider monkey on steroids raising all kinds of questions about a comprehensive impact - of which we know next to nothing. But this seems to be one of her favorite tactics - hedge. Blame someone else. Ask a non-expert to define a specific aspect of cause and effect. Why would the Environmental Manager do this? I can only guess it is to hide something. I've been calling this a seep from the very beginning - because that's what I believe it is. I believe natural gas, drilling fluids, fracing fluids and whatever the hell else they don't disclose that I'm supposed to guess at and point out has communicated with the surface through a fault structure either created or made worse by drilling operations. Man. What more do I have to do or say to get these evident nitwits out here to investigate this thing?

One friend from the meeting said the whole thing was just boring and complicated and scientific. Well, good grief, it was a meeting where the hottest and most sexy topic discussed was turn lanes in Rifle. I'm glad I didn't run for Commissioner. I would keel over in those meetings... anyway - no it's not sexy, it is complicated, it is scientific - it is environmental devastation. If I could figure out how to strap a garter belt on a dead crawdad and make it dance on a string for these people, we probably would have had ground water testing from the get go. But I digress.

Here are the articles:

Commissioners agree to ask for soil sampling near alleged seep south of Silt: Silt woman has seen 'gunk,' was hoping for groundwater tests
By Phillip Yates, Post Independent
Citizen Telegram reporter Mike McKibben contributed to this report
August 19, 2008
http://www.postindependent.com/article/20080819/VALLEYNEWS/23014/1083&ParentProfile=1074

Silt resident fears EnCana well leaking again

By Dennis Webb, The Daily Sentinel
Monday, August 18, 2008

http://www.gjsentinel.com/search/content/news/stories/2008/08/18/081908_3a_divide_creek_seep.html

"Resident fears drilling is contaminating creek — again"
by David Frey, Aspen Daily News Correspondent
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
http://www.aspendailynews.com/section/home/128818

2008 Divide Creek Seep
page 7 of 11

1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11

Other Relevant Links

Compare the 2004 Seep with the 2008 Seep with video  (scroll down to Video section)

Divide Creek Then - 2004 [Seep photos and information]

Divide Creek 'Now' - 2007 [Prior to the seep event of June 28, 2008]

Timeline of events [From January 2004 to present]

COGCC 2004 Divide Creek Seep Order (judgment) and Vital Exhibit showing faulting.  (in particular, you may find paragraphs 10, 20, 30 and 73 of interest).

Map of Drilling Area (showing well locations, other fault lines, drilling schedules, etc)

Dr. Geoffrey Thyne's (of Science Based Solutions) presentation to Garfield County Re: "Sumary of PI and PII Hydrogeologic Characterization Studies - Mamm Creek Area, Garfield County, CO"  This key PowerPoint presentation and its companion conclusive report provide an outstanding perspective of the dynamics at play between the hydrology and the geology of this area in particular as it specifically relates to drilling operations and risks to water supplies. Please look for these links at the following addresses:

    Presentation - http://garfield-county.com/Index.aspx?page=1150

    Conclusions - http://garfield-county.com/Index.aspx?page=1149

Garfield County Incomplete List of Hydraulic Fracturing Constituents (with MSDS sheets)
http://garfield-county.com/Index.aspx?page=1279
    Glutaraldehyde Solution, 24%
    Glutaraldehyde
    Chloroxylenol
    Polyacrylamide
    BE-7™
    LiquiBlock™ 44-OC
    Poloxamer 181, Surfactant
    Acrylamide
    BioGuard Scale Inhibitor

Garfield County Gas Wells and Pipelines
(click "gas wells in Garfield County)
http://garfield-county.com/Index.aspx?page=594

COGCC Quarterly Complaint Reports
House Bill 07-1341, Section 34-60-104 Paragraph III requires the "COGCC to submit each quarter a report concerning the number of complaints received in the previous quarter."
    July 1, 2007 - September 30, 2007
    October 1, 2007 - December 31, 2007
    January 1, 2008 - March 31, 2008
    April 1, 2008 - June 30, 2008
    July 1, 2008 - September 30, 2008
    October 1, 2008- December 31, 2008
    January 1, 2009 - March 31, 2009
    April 1, 2009 - June 30, 2009
    July 1, 2009 - September 30, 2009
    October 1, 2009 - December 31, 2009

Analysis of the West Divide Creek Seep
prepared for Garfield County by Science based Solutions LLC
Author: Geoffrey Thyne PhD., P.G.
This is Dr. Thyne's cursory analysis of 2008 Divide Creek Seep conditions. And in part, the substance for which he was dog-piled by the COGCC and industry operators at the Glenwood Springs hearing in 2009.
http://garfield-county.com/Index.aspx?page=1401

Updates      Canary Watch       Stand Tall       Image Gallery

Divide Creek Seep 2008      Timeline of Events     Hydraulic Fracturing (Fracing) Primer

    Consortium of the Frac'd     Mean Energy     Site Map  (recommended)

All contents of this site, unless otherwise noted are copyrighted by Lisa Bracken, 2007-2012 (or present). All rights are reserved.
Visit links outside the scope of this website at your own risk.  All information is subject to change without notice.