Declaration of Opposition

No one knows the connection between environment, economy and quality of life than farmers. Here is a Declaration of Opposition that farmers can sign, or people who purchase directly from a farm, can sign to speak on behalf of that piece of land. Feel free to print out and circulate. Send signed declarations to Pat Stewart, 18 Kraetzer Road, Ashburnham, MA 01430

There is also a MoveOn.org petition, but this is much more detailed and makes our point more completely.  You can see that at http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/declaration-of-opposition?source=c.fwd&r_by=2226308

DECLARATION OF OPPOSITION TO PIPELINE EXPANSION
We, the undersigned, declare our opposition to the expansion of energy infrastructure that transports non-renewable fossil fuels through the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. We object to this expansion on behalf of the land, food, water and livestock that are endangered by this short-sighted practice. Our objections are based upon the following:
a) Blasts will shatter rock that forms barriers that hold and our aquifers. These aquifers feed our wells, natural ponds and municipal water supplies, which provide water for our animals, crops, families and communities.
b) Local food is a critical part of growing a health Massachusetts and local economy. Pipelines crossing our farms, neighboring farms and bounding wetlands endanger our ability to provide food for the citizenry of the Commonwealth.
c) The construction of these pipelines will remove significant land from production, not only the pipeline proper, but also the access roads that will allow heavy equipment onto the pipeline the heavy equipment entering on the rights-of-way will compact our soil, making it more subject to erosion, and more difficult to grow crops and use for pasture. We will still be responsible for payment of taxes on this land, whether or not we can use it.
1.) The inability to use this land for food or timber production takes it out of production, removing it from Chapter 61 protection.
2.) For those of us with Agriculture Preservation Restriction (APR) land, this violates our contract with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, violating M.G.L. Chapter 184, Section 32.The movement of the heavy equipment will damage the air quality and leave residue on plants and could disqualify any organic farms from certification. In addition, the application of herbicide that may be applied, directly or aerially, would certainly endanger any certification, due to wind drift and water runoff.
d) This same heavy equipment emits substantial noise in its activity. These sounds will frighten livestock and wildlife, causing loss of production and increased predation. Animals that are stressed, including by being exposed to constant loud noises, shaking of the earth and looming machinery, do not conceive, do not eat, drop milk production and produce lower quality products, from milk to meat, due to stress hormones. Increased predation will lower the ability of farms to maximize their food and products, and lose valuable livestock to death, as predators are pushed out of their native habitat where they would normally find abundant small wildlife to meet their dietary needs.
e) The herbicides, deforestation and lack of productive land will further deteriorate the region's honeybee population. The toxins will poison, while the lack of pollen from wild and cultivated plants will put added stress on these endangered insect. The financial as well as environmental costs of this disruption would be devastating to the apiculture industry. A threat to the honeybees is a threat to our food production.
f) Locally raised food, whether raised conventionally, sustainably or organically, provides fresher, superior food to that which is trucked in from anywhere else in the world. Our growing small farm population will be impacted severely by this project, as well as our long standing and centennial farms.
g) Keeping local food available makes it more affordable, which benefits all of our population. Fresher food has more vitamins and minerals, stronger flavor, and diminishes the need for preservatives and other chemical additives in a family’s diet. We must keep local farms nearby and productive, and not lose them to a product that does nothing to improve our regional or national environment.
h) The loss of trees cut in timber cuts, or the loss of cropland, will increase erosion, degrading our regional infrastructure, and further degrade natural water ways.
i) Farms not only provide food, but they provide an integral part of our culture, teaching vital traits such as patience, hard-work and empathy. The loss of any of these teaching facilities can have long lasting effects on our regional culture.
Massachusetts is a Right-to-Farm state, recognizing the Constitutional right for individuals to raise their own food and to provide food/fiber to the greater market. Once these farms are lost, they will not be able to be re-established, and the damage to the air, water and soil cannot be repaired.
As there are alternative means to provide the needed energy for the growth of the Commonwealth through such as means as conservation, solar, wind and as yet undeveloped water and other alternative energy sources, there is no need to take the risk of permanently damaging the food supply and lifestyle of the farmers and farm communities in Massachusetts.
We therefore respectfully demand that all governmental entities deny any permission to proceed with fossil fuel expansion, and begin to plan for the future with the farms, land and the people in mind, rather than short term gains for others.

Thank you! 

Comment on the proposed gas Kinder Morgan Pipeline

By Walt Cudnohufsky 8.13.14

Gas is neither a bridge fuel nor a cleaner fuel! It contributes at least equally, with other dirty

fuels, to our accelerating climate problem. Substantial methane, freed by gas drilling and

transport, has recently been calculated as sixty eight times more impactful and longer lasting

than co2. Clean and green is thus a myth!

By allowing the proposed Tennessee (Kinder Morgan) gas pipeline, even if against our will,

we are enabling destructive fracking and more pollution that any life time of conscious living

could ever mitigate. By voting no, this proposed pipeline gives us an opportunity, possibly the

single largest in our lives, to make a discernable difference on climate change and reducing

environmental impact.

It is my widely shared opinion that FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) is little more

than a rubber stamp for the oil and gas industry and our all too corrupt government. FERC will

almost assuredly find a “public need/necessity” where none exists.

It is critical to notice, even if you are now just learning of this pipeline proposal, that it is not

early in the planning process! On the contrary it is very late and near the end of that process.

As a land planner with some experience with transmission routing and road alignment, I have

come to know the four major stages of planning and design for such networks.

(1) Corridors several corridors would normally be reviewed--each multiple miles wide. Then

(2) Routes which can be up to one or two miles wide and within a selected corridor.

(3)Alignment the more specific path within the route and finally

(4) Design the technical specification for construction.

Kinder Morgan are assuredly in the fourth and final design stage for this pipeline, no matter

what they pontificate.

Sophisticated environmental data for the first three stages is readily accessible to the

corporations without going on the land. The important thing to note is there is only minimal

flexibility in their plans at this late fourth stage and with a favorably inclined FERC (they

know already of their favored odds of achieving approval) what we say and think is severely

discounted if ever it had value.

I submit that the cumulative effect of impacts of the pipeline, must be assessed for the entire

pipeline even if in multiple states and tabulated and reviewed cumulatively by state and at the

federal level.

The impact studies must also include any lateral distribution pipes (mentioned in their

presentations) which could rival the proposed direct pipe line in aggregated length and

impact. The laterals are likely to be equally impactful and damaging because of certainty to

be in populated areas. If Kinder Morgan claims there are no laterals planned or designed,

it is assured that the huge proposed volume of gas is destined to be shipped off shore. The

container ships and LNG stations are on order, being planned and constructed as we ponder

this pipeline.

The environmental impacts of fracking in addition to the pipeline itself (PA, NY, elsewhere)

must also be a simultaneous part of an environmental and cultural impact assessments.

Incremental review of any part of this fracking-pipeline system is severely deficient. There

are ample town, state and federal regulations that support and require this cumulative and

aggregated environmental review.

There is currently encouraging momentum in the mounting resistance across the affected

Towns in Massachusetts. By use and electricity rate increases, everyone in the State is involved

not just the directly affected communities.

My conclusion: If ever you were to speak up and take action, now is that time! Support your

neighbors and fellow citizens and all the Massachusetts and New York communities certain to

be harshly impacted. See http://www.nofrackedgasinmass.org/

Funds over Facts

It’s amazing how the thought of money seems to cloud a person’s hearing. In fact, it seems to ave effected the hearing of the entire New England States Committee on Energy (NESCOE.) Despite information sent to them by the Conservation Law Foundation, recent information from several studies linking fracking and pipelines with illnesses, seismic disruption and animal deaths. It also seems to be ignoring a recent study done by the energy industry stating the need for natural gas is not rising, and that many fracking sites and drilling operations have been shut down because they aren’t cost effective. But NESCOE recently responded to CLF’s attorneys, ignoring their comments and re-asserting the need for additional natural gas.

Why? Because for two weeks in the past winter there has been a shortage of natural gas to heat homes. This amount of energy could be created through several different mechanisms without burying hundreds of miles of pipeline. A simple request to conserve, as is frequently done during heat waves, water shortages and other temporary lulls, is the easiest way. In addition, increasing the amount of energy created by solar power, wind power, or a long term look at the myriads of micro-hydropower sources that dot New England’s countryside, are much more feasible, renewable and sustainable methods of creating that power.
The story of the pipeline has started to get more publicity, through a recent article in the Boston Globe, and one on the Associated Press wire, but we need people to understand the underlying issue. This is not about providing energy to poor, deprived residents. This is about bringing money into the pockets of people like Kinder Morgan. These corporations are destroying farm land, and families, by their hydro-fracking, and want to bring that produce through the pristine lands of Northern Massachusetts. They say it will bring jobs, but only short term jobs, which will most likely be filled by their own, already employed, workers. They say it will lower our electric rates, but since we’ll be paying for the pipeline’s construction out of a tariff on our power, our rates will actually rise.

And why are the energy companies pulling back on exploration and drilling in some parts of the country? Because the gas leaks are so substantial the fields are “playing out,” sooner than they expected. The Marcellus Shale, the reservoir that Kinder Morgan will be piping through New England, is expected to be past profitability status by 2020. The pipeline won’t even be completed until 2018, if it goes through on schedule. After that time, what will come through? Probably oil, or the pipelines could just sit there, venting the Marcellus gas throughout New England, and they have no obligation to clean it up.
How does it come to happen that a government agency can so ignore the facts, and the wishes of its constituents in favor of the Texan voices? Because they don’t hear the voices of the people loud enough. Ms. Berwick’s husband is running for Massachusetts Governor, and his platform states that he is for” renewable energy and environment goals,” (from his campaign’s website.) He says he wants Massachusetts to be the first Carbon Neutral state, yet his wife is still a proponent of this pipeline that is not renewable, nor environmentally sound.

We need people to voice their opinions about the importance of the environment, alongside the need for required energy sources. The two are not at odds with each other, IF we think of the environment as we assess our needs. Air, water, food and security are not any less required than heat or power. We can change the way our country grows, but not if we keep looking to the same set of tools to build with.
If our country and our planet are going to be sustainable, we need to use our personal energy, and voices to add to the power sources that push us to more sustainable energy and choices. We can’t let the rustle of money and the comfiness of safety override the true need for sustainable energy, responsiveness to the voters and continuation of our planet and our lives .

Who Are the Blasted Towns?

Along the Northern Tier of Massachusetts there is a part of the Commonwealth that has been relegated to "summer places," "small towns," and now, potentially, pipelines. Kinder Morgan, through its subsidiary, Tennessee Gas Pipeline, wants to bring a buried pipeline for natural gas through these towns, forests, and fields, to connect with the Eastern Massachusetts, more urbanized area. It is more than likely that this gas will be exported, so that Kinder Morgan and any other contracted energy company, could make money while they destroy the soil, towns, water and air of these areas.

When Kinder Morgan came through decades ago to drop the Constitution line, or other pipelines were put into New England, there was no established Internet, as there is now. Each town felt that they had to deal with this independently, and as news between these isolated towns did not travel as quickly, the companies could advance steadily to their goal. That's not true anymore. We have an Internet to connect our towns and cities. We have literate, intelligent residents who know how to use networking tools, and many of us have chosen to leave cities and 9-5 jobs in favor of a more self-reliant life where our individuality is a positive force, not a drawback. We are the residents of "Those Blasted Towns," and we are facing the energy corporations with facts, questions, and steadfastness.

Where are the "Blasted Towns?" They start in Upstate New York, where open farmland is proposed to be opened up to bury gas pipelines to take gas to urban areas in the East and "across the Pond." In Massachusetts we start at the NY/MA border and travel along the route through the Berkshires, Pioneer Valley, and to the Vermont and New Hampshire border towns. Once it reaches Dracut, the pipeline will connect south to the North Shore towns of Lynn, Salem, and potentially south to Boston and onto Rhode Island.

We'll be posting updates on town meetings, TPG presentations, and welcome photos, videos and other information from people affected in "Those Blasted Towns," by blasting, burying, or what has happened in the areas where pipelines are already existing. We will also be explaining how natural gas will serve, or not serve, our communities, the planet, our neighbors, and our lives.

This is not a place for name calling, or illogic. It's a place to educate people about what's happening, what we can do, and why we should do something? AGree, or disagree, as long as its civil, I'll post it here.
For more information about the pipeline visit www.MASSplan.org or the other sites listed there. There are lots of organizations working on this issue, each with their own take. I represent North Country Sustainability Center, Inc. and my job is to disseminate information. It's your job to make a decision for yourself what to do about it. Ok?

Pat Stewart,
Pres/Ex.Dir
NCSC,
Farmer/Abutter of Proposed Pipeline in Ashburnham