OK, here’s some good news and bad news.

First the bad news: the USDA - Forest Service will be conducting an Environmental Impact Statement on the South Branch of the Au Sable where Savoy Energy wants to drill an exploratory well.  This means the project was not necessarily kaput despite the ruling of a federal court last year against its plan.

Here’s the good news: the USDA – Forest Service will be conducting an Environmental Impact Statement on the South Branch of the Au Sable where Savoy Energy wants to drill an exploratory well.  This was one of the main components of our argument against the original Forest Service decision rendered in 2005 based on an Environmental Assessment (EA), a relatively cursory form of evaluation.  We strongly believed, and both the Magistrate and Judge concurred, that the sensitivity of the area in and around the project merited a much more thorough and detailed environmental review.

They have finally come around to our side of the table…six years later.

Few in Angler Nation want to see this well go in, but the core of our legal argument has always been that if certain conditions were met then we would acquiesce.  They could have their well if we could have our South Branch unaffected by it.

An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is the proper starting point.  It’s the fine tooth comb of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).  The EA in this case simply could not begin to identify or address the sundry concerns of an oil/gas well in this wild place.  A properly conducted EIS could possibly yield a set of guidelines that we can abide by.

The same talented and dedicated group of individuals who prevented the original plan from going forward will be holding meetings on how to proceed from here.  Yes, they thought their work was done.  No, they are not discouraged.  You shouldn’t be either.

Why would Savoy still be pursuing this project?

t’s possible that they are not the catalysts here.  Perhaps the Forest Service is only following Judge Lawson’s directive.  That begs the question, why take the time and spend the money on an EIS if only as an academic exercise?

They wouldn’t, so the project known as USA and State South Branch 1-8 Well still has a heartbeat.

Savoy Energy is in the oil and gas exploration business, delays and setbacks are commonplace.  A successful well, even after a decade of waiting, would be pretty close to business as usual. 

There is, however, another three letter word involved here and it’s not O-I-L or G-A-S, but E-G-O.  After a strong start in 2003 Savoy’s luck ran bone dry as the years moved on.  A well so near the Mason Chapel was a public relations disaster waiting to happen.  They added to it with inane comments (“We’re fishermen too”) and the 11^th hour attempt last fall to join the court case just as the appeals were being finalized.  It all looked ham-handed.

A friend of mine, a Limbaugh loving, Fox News watching investment banker said it best; “The federal courts do not rule so decisively against a business unless they really screw up.  That’s one company that has a lot of explaining ahead to its investors.”

Truth is, the case involved only the Forest Service, but it was Savoy’s plan and for their benefit.  They must shoulder the outcome. 

So Savoy likely has no choice but to carry on.  They need this well and probably know that the only way to drill, baby, is to do it by our rules.

Those who see this as a setback for us and the path to destruction for the Chapel region of the Mason Tract should take a deep breath.

In 2003, we knew a heck of a lot less about the law in these matters and did not yet have the necessary partnerships (Sierra Club) in place.  That all worked out and, if we stay the course, this will as well.