# Help keep big oil out of the Lochsa corridor



## gregular (Jul 15, 2005)

Please take a few minutes to read

Idaho Rivers United - Conservation and restoration of streams, riparian areas, salmon and steelhead

and consider lending your voice to the effort to keep mega-loads of oil equipment off of Idaho's Lochsa and Clearwater corridor.

Thanks!

Greg Stahl
Idaho Rivers United
Idaho Rivers United - Conservation and restoration of streams, riparian areas, salmon and steelhead


----------



## kellip (Mar 1, 2007)

From the ITD News Release.

*UPDATE: Hearing scheduled on transport of oversized Conoco/Phillips loads on U.S. 12​​*​

_MEDIA ADVISORY: The contested case hearing is scheduled for Dec. 8, 9 in Boise before hearing officer Merlyn Clark. The hearing location has not been determined yet. We will announce the location when a decision is made._

- - - - -

BOISE -- Idaho Transportation Department Director Brian W. Ness today accepted a hearing officer's ruling on the shipment of oversized loads on U.S. 12.

"I have reviewed and accept the decision of hearing officer Merlyn Clark that we should proceed with a contested case hearing on the issue. We intend to move forward with scheduling a hearing as quickly as possible," Ness said.

He said interested parties will meet to determine the hearing schedule. Details have not been finalized yet. He appointed Clark to preside over the matter as it moves forward.​


----------



## phlyingfish (Nov 15, 2006)

Keep in mind that this Conoco/Phillips shipment is just the first of many many more. Exxon has plans for dozens of these "mega-loads," so there is a real chance that your Lochsa paddling experience will be affected by these 10 mph rolling roadblocks if these permits go through. And, that's assuming none of these road-wide loads end up in the river. If that happened, there isn't enough room on the road for a crane big enough to lift the things. Instead they might have to cut it into pieces small enough to lift out with available equipment.


----------



## Outlaw (Mar 8, 2010)

So oil imports were running $34 billion last month... I'm not saying I love the idea either, but this country is in serious fiscal trouble. It's about time we quit the NIMBY attitude. By the way, that comes out to be $787,000 per second for imports last month!!


----------



## abron (Nov 19, 2004)

Signed the petition. Even without ever having been to Idaho, I'd say its a very worthy cause. Clean H2o should stay that way! I don't approve of manipulation and bullying by big oil, even though I am, like everyone, dependent on the product. Doesnt make it right for them to turn massive profit while degrading and destroying our country.
Good luck!


----------



## phlyingfish (Nov 15, 2006)

Most of loads are headed to Canada, specifically the Alberta tar sands. Oil from Canada is still imported. I believe a few loads are headed to a refinery in Montana. Neither of those things contribute to domestic crude production. So, your concerns about NIMBY getting in the way of increased domestic oil production is unfounded.


----------



## Outlaw (Mar 8, 2010)

Outlaw said:


> So oil imports were running $34 billion last month... I'm not saying I love the idea either, but this country is in serious fiscal trouble. It's about time we quit the NIMBY attitude. By the way, that comes out to be $787,000 per second for imports last month!!



I actually meant to say $787,000 per minute. Yes, most of the work is in Alberta, but many jobs will be in the US too. Furthermore, money in North America is likely to circulate back to the US. Unfortunately money sent overseas tends to never return to the US.


----------



## mttodd (Jan 29, 2009)

The conoco loads being discussed are two extremely large coker production drums that were mfg'd in Japan. These units are used to extract the very heaviest components out of the heavy crude that is the staple of western refineries. They allow the refineries to get every last dollar out of a barrel of oil without selling it as asphalt. Apparently the means to construct them in the U.S. no longer exists. These units are destined to replace the old one here in Billings. Last I heard conoco was negotiating a deal with canada to ship them on their highways because of the trouble with Idaho. Keep up the fight. My wife was telling me that her uncle in law owns the trucking company that dumped a tanker full of gasoline in the lochsa some months ago. I would support any efforts to close this road to commercial hauling.


----------



## mttodd (Jan 29, 2009)

how about this? Alternate Energy Holdings > Home
watch the video it's absurdly funny


----------



## dgosn (Sep 8, 2006)

I wonder if the outcry would be the same if it was a string of wind turbine components (150ft blade trailers, 220,000+ lb Nacelle trailers, 100ft steel tower sections, etc) being moved on Hwy 12? 

While I am no fan of big oil I do realize that our nation's infrastructure and supply chain relies on highways. I have worked in alt energy and the planning that goes into moving ANY series of oversize and overweight loads is amazing. Before this proposal would be implemented the transportation company would have traveled this corridor many times calculating turn radius's, timing traffic, measuring overhead hazards, etc. While this will make runs on a kick ass river a royal pain the oil industry is not going out of their way to make a bunch of boaters pissed. This road is NOT ideal from a transportation standpoint, so it tells me that there is a reason this road was chosen over others.

I'd rather see the road along the Lochsa choked with Tecate Trucks and burrito wagons but also realize that highways are to be used for commerce as well as transportation.

Maybe if everyone rode their bikes to the Lochsa instead of the multiple hours or DRIVING it takes most to get to the Lochsa from almost anywhere we wouldn't need to build oil refining equipment


----------



## mttodd (Jan 29, 2009)

On point and well spoken. The road in question is just much less expensive to traverse for conoco than their alternatives. It would alright with me if they spent a little more $ and used a different route. It would be cool if I could haul my stuff with pedal power though!


----------



## abron (Nov 19, 2004)

I agree. well spoken.
It is a difficult subject no matter which way one's bias lays... In general kayaking is a high consumption, first world luxury sport, So there is glass houses all around. We're all consumers. Everyone has to get to the river somehow. ( good sales pitch for South main...wouldn't it be nice to walk to the Rio..) 

What pisses me off is that there are so many disproportionate tax breaks and credits and cheap land auctions, and all manner of breaks for these big companies, more often then not on taxpayers' dime, and then they jack up prices on any little whim or whisper of trouble in the gulf of somewhere.... I find it ironic that prices go up overnight, and yet somehow take weeks to go back down again. it just seems arbitrary. Huge profit with minimal reciprocation isn't right.send it back to help get this country back out of debt, or at least treading instead of sinking....but anyway.... with out petroleum there'd be no tupperware and then we would all be canoeing in dugouts. :shock: 
as usual there's no easy answer. of course doing whats necessary to promote conservation of resources seems like a pretty damn good idea all around.


----------



## colomega (Mar 15, 2008)

I love the Loccha River. That river corridor is amazing. I have been there when the highway is shut down because of personal vehicles (pick-up trucks and motorcycles) have gone into the river. Also been around for a couple of the regular sized tractor / trailers going in for a swim. 
But if these over-sized drums are destined for Alberta and were built in Japan. I wonder why the ship that is transporting them isn't using a Canadian sea port? Surely, that would be cheaper than sea freight into the US and then using land transportation.


----------



## abron (Nov 19, 2004)

good question...!!?!


----------



## The Mogur (Mar 1, 2010)

abron said:


> What pisses me off is that there are so many disproportionate tax breaks and credits and cheap land auctions, and all manner of breaks for these big companies.


I have just one quick question for all who complain about "tax breaks for the big corporations." Where do businesses get the money to pay these taxes that you want them to pay? I'll give you a clue: It's all built into the prices YOU pay for their products.


----------



## The Mogur (Mar 1, 2010)

colomega said:


> I wonder why the ship that is transporting them isn't using a Canadian sea port?


I'll take a stab at this. I think there are two reasons. Number One: Canada does not have good east-west highways. Because the mountain ridges run north-south, so do the highways. Number Two: They can use the Columbia-Snake to transport the things by barge all the way to Lewiston.

Actually, I believe that part two has already been done. The things are in Lewiston now.


----------



## kellip (Mar 1, 2007)

A couple things:
These shipments were actually manufactored in South Korea, not Japan. 
There are 38 loads already in Lewiston awaiting permit approval to continue along Hwy 12.
Shipments will go to Alberta and Billings, MT.
Hwy 12 is designated as a Northwest Passage Scenic Byway.
Runs for 70+ miles beside 2 nationally designated Wild and Scenic Rivers, the Middle Fork of the Clearwater and the Lochsa, and provides access to a 3rd, the Selway River.
Some numbers I've found on the size of the shipments: The loads will be between 110-225 feet long, 27-29 feet wide, 27-29 feet high, and weigh over 600,000 pounds.


----------



## abron (Nov 19, 2004)

The Mogur said:


> I have just one quick question for all who complain about "tax breaks for the big corporations." Where do businesses get the money to pay these taxes that you want them to pay? I'll give you a clue: It's all built into the prices YOU pay for their products.


Fair is fair. I pay my dues. I pay whatever full price is for my gasoline. I pay my my taxes. Why should they get a discount if we pay full price? So they can turn record profits while the price of oil spikes over 'speculation'?
And, as an example, taxpayers get stuck with the bill for the 'superfund' cleanups after the mining corporations are done getting their profit. BP i guess being one of the exceptions. they have been held accountable for a meager % of their damages. 
Look I am not going to convince anyone and you're not going to win me over or 'Give me a clue'... I just think its wrong. There is no easy answer. I stated that already...


----------



## The Mogur (Mar 1, 2010)

abron said:


> Fair is fair. I pay my dues. I pay whatever full price is for my gasoline. I pay my my taxes. Why should they get a discount if we pay full price?


 
You completely missed my point. That full price you and I pay INCLUDES all of the taxes that the corporation pays. Increasing taxes on the corporation just increases the amount we pay for their products. Consumers are ALWAYS the ones who pay the bill. It shouldn't be hard to understand that.

Politicians love to tax corporations, because doing so largely conceals the tax from consumers. We dumbly blame the big, bad "corporations" for high prices, oblivious to the fact that big chunks of what we pay go straight to the government. Think: HIDDEN TAXES.


----------



## The Mogur (Mar 1, 2010)

gregular said:


> *Help keep big oil out of the Lochsa corridor*


This heading is deceptive. "Big oil" is not the issue here. The issue is big load. If you want to argue, argue whether a load as big as this should be transported on a public highway. Argue that the traffic blockage will be unreasonably inconvenient to the public. Argue that the weight of the load will damage the highway. Argue that the hauler hasn't proved to your satisfaction that he can safely transport something this big.

But don't argue that it is bad simply on the basis of your dislike for "big oil." That is shallow and destructive.

And before you demonize "big oil," consider exactly who "big oil" is. It is everyone who owns mutual funds investments--that is, everyone with money invested in a pension fund, a 401K, a retirement trust, or passbook savings account. In other words, it is just about ALL OF US.


----------



## dgosn (Sep 8, 2006)

The sensationalist title is what raised my hackles. Had it of been "giant truckloads of puppies and sunshine" the response would likely be different. I live 1000 miles from the Lochsa, how can I decry 'big oil'?


----------



## brandob9 (Jun 13, 2010)

mttodd said:


> On point and well spoken. The road in question is just much less expensive to traverse for conoco than their alternatives. It would alright with me if they spent a little more $ and used a different route. It would be cool if I could haul my stuff with pedal power though!


This isn't about the cost - it is a slow and winding road that takes time to move over. It just happens to be the only crossing of the mountains without clearance restrictions. I-90 and the Canadian highways have many structures above the roadway. 

Don't confuse me with being on the side of saying ok to these shipments. I'm just pointing out why they're centering on Hwy 12. Even once they get to Missoula, they have a further 700-800 miles to travel.


----------



## lhowemt (Apr 5, 2007)

dgosn said:


> The sensationalist title is what raised my hackles. Had it of been "giant truckloads of puppies and sunshine" the response would likely be different. I live 1000 miles from the Lochsa, how can I decry 'big oil'?


Just because you use a resource doesn't mean you should bend over and let them have their way with you. Or have their way with your tween daughter. Haven't we progressed past letting ourselves be 3rd world countries for resource extractors? Maybe the rest of the country (except a few states and native nations) doesn't have this experience, but Montana is well steeped in being raped and pillaged and ultimately fighting back to make everyone play fair. If we're going to use something or do it, let's do it wisely. What's good for you is good for me, what's good for me is good for you. Screwing your neighbor just gets you screwed by your neighbor. We have backbones and can choose to use them. Good for those who are putting their money and efforts where their mouths are.

No, there would not be such a fight if this were wind turbines or puppies and sunshine, the people against tar sands would not be involved (or the ASPCA/HSA). That's pretty straightforward. The core issue of inappropriate corridor would still be there, but there would be fewer fighting against it. The tar sands issue is not an issue for most of the locals fighting this, with the exception of some in Missoula and most of those are concerned about both issues. It's about the corridor. It's the wrong place and this entire thing was done behind everyone's back.

The hundreds of modules going to Alberta can be manufactured there (actually most are, like 75%), and now there are actually facilities idle. They claim that they did it (have some made in Korea) to "diversify" their supply chain which usually means low-balling the local. Who knows, maybe it's just a big stunt to get the local facilities to drop prices comparable to Korea, and the few that they lose/have lost if this transport corridor goes awry are a pittance when they bust the local unions. Even if they have to go around to Texas, they'll still probably win big, financially.

When the road collapses boating will be a bit different when they build a 4 lane road suitable for such hauls without stopping traffic. It's what will happen. Maybe not with these 200 loads, but with the next 200, or the next. Everyone will say the road is up to it, because they must not because that is what they will believe. Then we will see the difference of calculations and drawings in an office and what actual conditions on the ground are.

No one is talking about the fact that these are going to occur in the winter. Have any of you tried to drive Hwy 12 in the winter? Get real, it's a disaster waiting to happen. Winter transport is required by Canada because they want their roads frozen so they don't get destroyed. Maybe we should take their hint.


----------



## dgosn (Sep 8, 2006)

I'll agree, we have progressed past being 'third world' in our extraction of resources. The US is smart enough to play the NIMBY card, so we USE resources but we outsource the production and extraction of these resourses to other poor countries. While you and I are enjoying our alloy bikes, cat frames, ipods, we can pat ourselves on the back because we stopped that copper mine, or smelting facility in our backyard. Meanwhile we still have our exotic gadgets and there is some family in China, India, Africa, etc that gets paid squat to mine metal for OUR toys (consumerism at its finest), their water is tainted, air pollutued, no OSHA, no work comp, no workplace safety practices, etc. So whenever you or I put our foot down on domestic mining and oil production yet still drive our vehicle with ou rtrailer load of expensive toys we have done NOTHING to help the environment, we just rape and pillage at someone else's expense in a place that we don't ever have to visit.

We can fight "BIG OIL" all we want, but it is a hypocritical fight unless we as individuals and a society actually curtail our use. I hate BP, EXXON, etc, but the fact is that they dont cram oil down my throat. I decide to take a boating trip, and i voluntarily drive to their station and fill my truck with dead dinosaurs. If I was so green I would ride my horse to the river, sustainably harvest logs for a craft, build my vessel, and launch. Instead I belch exhaust fumes, drink beer from aluminum cans, pump my cat up (made of nasty chemicals), and float down the river on my boat that costs more than many in the world make in several years. So for me to hate something because it is tied to the oil industry is asinine......


As far as the modules being manufactured in Canuckistan; i have no info on this. I will say that Korean and European manufacturing is insanely more efficient and cheaper than that in the US, even with the shipping costs across the channel. Having worked on large construction projects and inspecting components both foreign and domestic, I can say that other than China that US manufacturing is quite embarrassing. No idea about Canada's but it cant be much better or we wouldn't import things from overseas at the rate we do. What is better shoddy domestic made modules that will spew oil and leak cancer everywhere, or better made modules that have to travel through a scenic corridor? If these loads were to be transported though my Colorado backyard would you be so passionate about stopping them? 

I love the Lochsa, even with the highway right there it is a beautiful river corridor. I hope to have the opportunity to boat/flip/swim the Lochsa every year. I also don't like the idea of big giant loads on the highway there or anywhere, but I understand that our nation's infrastructure and manufacturing capacity relies entirely on out transportation infrastructure.

I am not familar with ID laws, but when I was in WV and PA whenever heavy or hazardous louds needed permits they also needed to be insured/bonded so that should they tumble down into a river the cleanup and extraction would be covered and executed in a responsible fashion. I assume that ID is no more lax than PA and WV(strip mines everywhere).

No disresepct meant, I am partially palying devil's advocate and trying to understand why people fight big oil, but still suck on the oil teat.....

scott


----------



## lhowemt (Apr 5, 2007)

Here's a little video regarding the issue of a long term High And Wide Corridor.


Also the hearing in Boise this past week. If you go through the numerous blogs there is a lot of blow by blow reporting of the testimony.

Eye On Boise - Spokesman.com

Another article with an interesting link to GVW and roadways.

Conoco Permits Highlight Question of U.S. Highway 12 Damage | Steve Bunk | Politics | NewWest.Net


----------



## basil (Nov 20, 2005)

Yes, bad choice of title of this thread. Anything "Big Oil" does is bad? Why don't we just outlaw oil companies? 

Although, I've got to admit oversize trucks are a pain. You've got to pay attention and slow down more than normal on a winding road. How many oversize trucks will there be on that Lochsa road?


----------



## lhowemt (Apr 5, 2007)

The Rural People of Highway 12 ? Fighting Goliath

The current count is approaching 300. Then there's also the return trips. A pull-out will be blocked every 2 miles, at a minimum. If you've been to the Lochsa, imagine us boaters, tourists, bicyclists, etc enjoying the place without any pull offs.

These aren't just your every day oversize trucks (they can't even really be called "trucks" except that it takes two to move them), take a look at the video.


----------



## BroKing (Feb 19, 2009)

*Irony*

Its ironic to see boaters complain about anything oil. Boaters need oil for all their gear and to get to where they are going. I signed the petition, because I like to help the fight against big oil. I am guilty as the rest of you and think that the potential for an accident is enough for them to find a new route.


----------



## Rich (Sep 14, 2006)

The more I read about this, the worse it sounds.
This is not a one time shipment of 300 loads (600 with return trips) and then we all get our Wild and Scenic River back. This is big oil making a large investment in a LONG TERM industrial corridor for the advantage of Korean manufacturing and Canadian tar sands projects, no upside for Idaho or Montana.

Once this investment is in place, this will become the preferred route for all oversize loads. 

What people need to understand is that this "investment" in route improvements is ONLY for the benefit of foreign corporations. There is NO benefit to Idaho or Montana. The few jobs that will be created will be temporary and will be offset by loss of jobs in tourism.


----------



## rwhyman (May 23, 2005)

Rich said:


> The more I read about this, the worse it sounds.
> This is not a one time shipment of 300 loads (600 with return trips) and then we all get our Wild and Scenic River back. This is big oil making a large investment in a LONG TERM industrial corridor for the advantage of Korean manufacturing and Canadian tar sands projects, no upside for Idaho or Montana.
> 
> Once this investment is in place, this will become the preferred route for all oversize loads.
> ...



Rich, I think that pretty much sums it up.

But, the rich get richer, the poor get poorer and we are being told that is what is best for the country. What a frickin' joke.


----------



## lhowemt (Apr 5, 2007)

Right Rich, the fees that are charged by states for oversized roads are based exactly on premature failure and damage. There's a good paper on this, also the effect as the loads get larger. I'll post some links in a few days when I'm not so busy.

In other news, there have been 2 mega load accidents in the past 6 months, both caused damage off the road, one slid off.

Imperial Oil told a public hearing in Lewiston, Id last fall that there would be no locals hired for their portion of the work. It's sad to see such a disconnect about jobs, as this project completely facilitates the servicification of the US's jobs. Production (and pay) jobs go elsewhere, we staff the help desks and empty the garbage cans.


----------



## Outlaw (Mar 8, 2010)

It sounds like you guys are right on this issue.


----------



## glenn (May 13, 2009)

Great discussion.


----------



## yetigonecrazy (May 23, 2005)

I can't believe no one has thought of this yet. Why don't we just move the rivers? That way, Highway 12, which exists because it's a vital link in the intra-state commerce network in the Middle Rockies, could still serve it's number one purpose, and we, the boaters, who are much lower on the necessity totem pole than that, wont have to get in their way! Surely there's room in Nebraska or North Dakota we could do this, nobody cares about that area do they? Nobody lives there so thats not anybodys backyard there, so lets put them there! And then we drive 10 or 100 or 1000 miles to get to it's new location (thank you, car-that-runs-on-hopes & dreams-and-not-petroleum, for getting us there) we can remark about how we won against big industry. Then everybody wins!


----------



## studytime (Oct 4, 2010)

I didn't track with you on that one. Please explain in clear, concise rational thought. 

kthnxbai.


----------



## tealzephyr (Jun 10, 2010)

Better still, let's all just forget about questioning big business, medium business, small business, and, [gasp] the government. To this point, I think most Americans are exceedingly satisfied with the notion that these 'people' always have, and always will act in our best interests. In Montana, we start right off with the Anaconda Copper Company story to warm our hearts and spirits, especially during the holidays.
More recently, we have the Montana Power Company saga which transformed the lowest electricity rates in the PNW to some of the highest. All with the help of then Governor Racicot and his cronies in the legislature. They were all over the TV/Radio/Newspapers telling us what a great deal this would be for utility users in the State. Yep, I can say that I'm perfectly comfortable with big business and government making all the decisions sans the input of the vacuous buffoonery that is the ordinary citizen.


----------



## studytime (Oct 4, 2010)

lol.


----------



## yetigonecrazy (May 23, 2005)

studytime said:


> I didn't track with you on that one. Please explain in clear, concise rational thought.
> 
> kthnxbai.


It's quite simple: move it to someone else's backyard so it's not our problem. That way when we drive our gas guzzling vehicles to the river for maybe 100 days of boating out of a 365 day year we can get exclusive and expedited access to the river, because our personal recreation matters WAAAAY more than any of the industry that keeps our gear-intensive and dollar-intensive sport afloat.......

its the same load of bullshit that people here in Crested Butte keep whining about the mine they want to build. Sure, we want the lightest weight titanium for our mountain bikes and prius's and skate skis and carbon fiber alloy backpack frames and lightweight capilene clothing but as long as it's in someone else's backyard so we don't have to look at it.

Yeah, it sucks. But are you the first people ever to have a river corridor threatened by industry? No. So shut up and be happy this isn't the 50's and they aren't damming it completely. We have a road here locally that trucks are BANNED from driving on [SH 114/Cochetopa Canyon], and they still do it, and every five or six years one or them carrying fertilizer or acid or something ends up in the creek and kills like ten miles life in the creek. Yeah, it sucks, and yeah, its tragic. But short of physically going out there and stopping the trucks, it's gonna continue to happen. Industry is impossible to fight, so you better get used to it.


----------



## glenn (May 13, 2009)

Yeti, why should Idaho and Montana provide a resource at such great risk to their infrastructure and local economies for industry that is going elsewhere? It's a protected river corridor for a reason. Yes send it to a flat area where there is not such a rare and valuable resource directly next to the road. 

You have a real knack for rolling over and taking it.


----------



## studytime (Oct 4, 2010)

yetigonecrazy said:


> . Industry is impossible to fight, so you better get used to it.


Words to Live By with Yetigonecrazy.

You should write a book.


----------



## jpbay (Jun 10, 2010)

WE stayed in Lewiston on are way to the main Salmon in August, the crews from Emmert international were staying at the same motel. They said at that time there permit had been issued the denyed pending further studys. The interesting thing is the minning equipment is sitting in a yard across the river from the motel! Terry Emmert does't care about any river or inviromental concerns,just how much he can put in his bank.He had water buffalo on a side steam of the Clackamas river in Oregon.The bacteria destroid the fish population and made it unsafe to swim in. The state finally field suit. The fine was so low he paid it out of his front pocket!He finally moved the heard of water buffalo someplace ,Probably by some other creek with less people around to complain.I hope the oil company and Emmert International are forced to move the minnng equipment to another route.


----------



## mttodd (Jan 29, 2009)

Conoco actually sent a bus load of people, employees of private contractors who work at the refinery, (not directly employed by conoco) to attend the town hall meeting in Lewiston. Three days wages, bus fare, lodging, and meals, for each individual. Expressly so they would have the illusion of public support at said meeting. These people have all the money on the planet at their disposal. It seems they will do anything to have their will imposed.


----------



## yetigonecrazy (May 23, 2005)

studytime said:


> Words to Live By with Yetigonecrazy.
> 
> You should write a book.


You all just reek of hypocrisy. Every last one of you who think you can win against industry is just a LAUGHABLE matter.

And heres how its true: Unless you walk everywhere, and fasion yourself clothing out of animal hides you've hunted down yourself, with a weapon like a spear or something you made yourself [no knives, just a sharp rock to pound with], and you ski on huge pieces of tree that youve cut and sanded and sharpened yourself [again, without using tools except rocks and such] and live in a hut made out of mud and twigs and logs that you built yourself [again, NO tools] and tend a vegetable garden next to your shanty so you can grow your own food, then YOU USE INDUSTRY. The very fact you're on a COMPUTER alone states how big of a technological user you all are. Get rid of the computer, get rid of the car, get rid of anything mechanical or anything made by industry and then I will accept your arguments as legitimate.

It's biting the hand that feeds you. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

It's a terrible thing but you all use industry one or way another, so its completely hypocritical of you guys to bash it and pretend like you wont benefit from it! Sure we love all the technological advances [AHEM, RAFTING AND SKIING AND CLIMBING AND SO ON] but you sure don't want the deal with the side effects of what those advances require. Well, you do, just as long as it bothers someone else, and not us.


----------



## yetigonecrazy (May 23, 2005)

"
*"hy·poc·ri·sy"-*

[hi-pok-ruh-see]
–noun, plural -sies.

1. a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.

ie- being high and mighty and thinking your that your backyard shouldn't be the place for this, it should be somewhere else, a lesser place, even though you're still going to use petroleum on a daily basis!



2. a pretense of having some desirable or publicly approved attitude.

ie- see, "BANDWAGON".

[definition courtesy of Dictionary.com]


----------



## glenn (May 13, 2009)

Yeti, there is a big difference between using advances of industry and letting it walk all over you, your community, and your communities resources. You might see it is hypocritical, but I don't. I think most of us in here who do not want the corridor damaged are not against this industry making money, producing refined oil and prospering. We just don't want it at the expense of our wonderful resources. Yes, send them to the flat lands where a farmer can sue them if they dump into his fields and he looses a couple hundred bucks worth of crop. I'd rather see that than no recourse if they dump in the river and cost hundreds of thousands in lost tourist dollars to the commercial operations on the Lochsa.


----------



## yetigonecrazy (May 23, 2005)

im done talking about this. its the same attitude as every other topic similar. NIMBY. elsewhere, we dont give a shit. just not here.

the guy who said what if these were wind turbines was spot on.....


----------



## lhowemt (Apr 5, 2007)

This and so many other environmental and social justice issues are complicated, as you say. We use the resources, so we essentially employ the companies that provide it. I like to look at this process as my effort at being a customer of those companies, the little bit I can do or influence them. All I can do it try, put my foot forward, and do what I think is right and what is worth my personal time and energy. We may lose, but so be it. We may win too, like a friend and I did Monday night in front of the city council on an annexation issue. We couldn't believe that we were successful (at least for now). You never know how things will go, and if we don't try things will never change. You're wrong when you think we can "win" against corporations. Look at the environmental laws (NEPA, RCRA, CAA, CWA, RTK, CERCLA, etc, etc and , even OSHA (no, it's not OK to kill people at work for profit)). Those were enacted in opposition to corporations wishes. I can relate to being overwhelmed sometimes, and feeling it is not worth it. I try to keep my focus on what I can do (get the word out, fund lawyers, be active) and not look at the potential resulting failure.


----------



## glenn (May 13, 2009)

yetigonecrazy said:


> im done talking about this. its the same attitude as every other topic similar. NIMBY. elsewhere, we dont give a shit. just not here.
> 
> the guy who said what if these were wind turbines was spot on.....


Yeti, I've had a lot of backyards over the years. I've moved well over 15 times and lived in almost as many states. The bottom line is, some areas are more precious and delicate than others. I'd like to keep them precious and undamaged if at all possible. 

As stated above fighting cooperations is not a lost cause. Look to AW and see their success stories. They have a small, talented and very lightly funded legal staff. They go up against teams of lawyers with heavy funding, and still manage to gain access and release schedules because there are laws in place to protect what we do and where we go.


----------



## jpbay (Jun 10, 2010)

Have you ever been on the locsha? or taken a drive over lolo pass? The issue is not the moving of the equipment to Canada. The Buzz is about Route selection! They have freeway routes they can use, it will cost them more. That is it. I love the freedom that we injoy from things made from oil. My raft is pvc and towing it with a ox would limit the rivers we raft on.


----------



## lhowemt (Apr 5, 2007)

glenn said:


> As stated above fighting cooperations is not a lost cause. Look to AW and see their success stories. They have a small, talented and very lightly funded legal staff. They go up against teams of lawyers with heavy funding, and still manage to gain access and release schedules because there are laws in place to protect what we do and where we go.


Recently Montana's won against Gold mines, who wanted to do cyanide heap leaching in the headwaters of the Blackfoot river. It's not impossible.


----------



## studytime (Oct 4, 2010)

jpbay said:


> The issue is not the moving of the equipment to Canada. The Buzz is about Route selection! They have freeway routes they can use, it will cost them more. .


Read this Yeti. Sink it in to your brain.


----------



## lhowemt (Apr 5, 2007)

Here's a petition to sign in opposition to the Mega Haul. It was started specifically to counter the claim that the opposition is just a few well funded environmental organizations. 

All Against The Haul | All Against The Haul


----------



## Rich (Sep 14, 2006)

*The big beneficiaries of this hijacking will be a Korean steel company hired at the expense of Canadian steel workers, and Exxon—the richest corporation in the world: the losers will be the American people, starting with us. - David James Duncan, Author*


----------



## lhowemt (Apr 5, 2007)

*Cost not prohibitive*

Highway 12 megaloads: Union questions why oilfield modules were built in South Korea

Clearly the cost is not prohibitive, unreasonable, unaffordable, etc to have the modules made in Canada, let alone on this continent. As the majority of them (400 of 600) were made in Canada.


----------



## Rich (Sep 14, 2006)

The below info on US 12 thru Idaho is from www.FightingGoliath.org. 

Nationally designated the Northwest Passage Scenic Byway.
Nationally designated 1 of the nation's 27 All-American Roads.
Crosses and parallels for 80+ miles the Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail.
Crosses and parallels for 80+ miles the Nez Perce National Historic Trail.
Runs for 70+ miles beside 2 nationally designated Wild and Scenic Rivers, the Middle Fork of the Clearwater and the Lochsa, and provides access to a 3rd, the Selway River.
The Scenic Byways and All-American Road designations are US DOT programs to "preserve and maintain" significant scenic road ways.

I would think that the US DOT would be leading the fight to stop turning a Scenic Byway into an "industrial corridor".

The number of additional turnouts and the size of the turn outs would seem to violate the designation of the Loachsa and Clearwater as "Wild and Scenic Rivers."

Do any of these designations actually mean anything???


----------



## Outlaw (Mar 8, 2010)

Although I am generally very supportive of "Big Oil", particularly domestic natural gas production, I am disturbed that the equipment production is being done overseas. Moreover, these foreign entities are asking the US to place a national treasure at environmental risk so that they can benefit from the most cost effective transport means. I say, find another route that doesn't put a treasure at risk. Like someone else has mentioned in this thread, just refer to the Poudre river to see that accidents do happen. Just my two cents.


----------



## lhowemt (Apr 5, 2007)

Turnouts for oilfield megaloads yet to be built in Montana

So a bunch of imperial oil modules are in Lewiston, ready to move if only they could get those gosh darn permits. Oh, except all of that super-expensive infrastructure Montana stands to gain hasn't been built. Wow, we need a LOT of pull outs by Augusta MT, have you seen the traffic there? What's the deal? Supposedly Canada is requiring these to be transported only in the winter (to protect their roads), but now they're raring to go and they don't have the necessary pull outs built, let alone evaluated in Montana? How are they going to get those built during the winter, and then get a hundred or so shipped before the spring thaw? Sounds kind of fishy, even a super smart engineer should be able to see the gap in the "critical path" here. Perhaps we've been led a bit astray?


----------



## lhowemt (Apr 5, 2007)

Here's a pretty decent article from today's paper. Interesting are the comments near the end, from the retired FS administrator regarding the intended limitations when the road was first built. 

_"When Highway 12 was first built through the Clearwater National Forest in the 1960s, Worf said, easements restricted such things as the size of roadside turnouts. He doesn't recall the length limit, but he's sure the 300-foot-long turnouts needed to park the big rigs far surpass it._
_"One of our concerns early on was we knew those wheat trucks were going to go through, but we wanted restrictions on the highway that were going to hold them to a reasonable size and speed," he said."_


Big rigs' proposed route follows federally designated scenic byway and river


----------



## lhowemt (Apr 5, 2007)

*Update*

Conoco/ITD won the hearing and it seems they'll be getting approval to move their 4 loads to Billings. There may be an appeal, but some think people will just let this one go and focus on the main problem, 200-300 more loads, and probably more after that. It looks like we'll know the status of this one by Tuesday, their deadline to appeal the hearing results. I don't know if they have to appeal to have standing in court, as it could also just go back to the courts.

Final decision on megaloads permits awaits appeals process - Seeking Alpha

In one of the various threads, I think someone stated the great safety record of Emmert, the hauler for Conoco. It seems they are having some safety issues:

Megaload mover appeals Oregon OSHA citation | KLEW CBS 3 - News, Weather and Sports - Lewiston, ID - Lewiston, Idaho | News

A national bicycling organization has come out in opposition to the hauls. This section of Hwy 12 is used heavily by bicyclists (as crazy as that seems, if you know the road!)

http://missoulian.com/news/local/article_e9ff419c-1889-11e0-a021-001cc4c002e0.html

Lastly, if you want to educate yourself, and put some money towards funding the opposition, check out this book. Phenomenal authors.

http://www.nwbooklovers.org/2010/12/22/by-rick-bass-and-david-james-duncan/


----------



## lhowemt (Apr 5, 2007)

The 4 Conoco loads are scheduled to roll on Feb 1, officially. It is likely the Idaho group will take their case back to the courts, now that they have exhausted the administrative process.

There was a great meeting in Bonner last week, and it outlined many of the negative aspects of the project, especially the lack of planning, lack critical review, and likely avoidance of federal environmental regulations. Here's the latest local article, quite lengthy:


Crossroads | Features | Missoula Independent

If you live in Montana, Idaho, Oregon or Washington, and oppose this project, it is imperative you make your voice heard. Call the Governors, the heads of MDT and ITD, and your local representatives. 

Some assistance in making those contacts:
All Against The Haul


----------

