Middle Field Land Use Analysis Final

LAND USE ANALYSIS: HEAVY INDUSTRY AND OIL, GAS OR
SOLUTION MINING AND DRILLING

PREPARED FOR:
TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF MIDDLEFIELD
PREPARED BY:
GREENPLAN INC.
MAY 10, 2011 (FINAL)
T O W N O F M I D D L E F I E L D
Otsego County, New York
3 0 2 Pe l l s Roa d, Rhi ne be c k, NY 1 2 5 7 2 t e l e phone : 8 4 5 . 8 7 6 . 5 7 7 5 www. gr e e npl a n. or g
Table of Contents
A) Introduction ..............................................................................................................................................................................2
B) Regional Land Use Trends......................................................................................................................................................5
C) Town Planning and Zoning ...................................................................................................................................................9
D) Land Resources.......................................................................................................................................................................27
E) Water Resources .....................................................................................................................................................................29
F) Plants, Animals and Ecosystem Services...........................................................................................................................35
G) Air Quality...............................................................................................................................................................................42
H) Agriculture ..............................................................................................................................................................................46
I) Visual Resources ....................................................................................................................................................................48
J) Cultural Resources.................................................................................................................................................................52
K) Tourism....................................................................................................................................................................................55
L) Transportation ........................................................................................................................................................................56
M) Energy Trends .........................................................................................................................................................................58
N) Noise.........................................................................................................................................................................................60
O) Public Health ..........................................................................................................................................................................62
P) Energy Boomtown Effects ....................................................................................................................................................65
Q) Community Character...........................................................................................................................................................69
R) Conclusions and Recommendations..................................................................................................................................70
Bibliography - Sources used in preparing the Town of Middleeld Land Use Analysis
Mi ddl ef i el d La nd Us e Ana l ys i s! GREENPLAN I nc .
1
Middleeld Land Use Analysis
A. Introduction
This Land Use Analysis has been prepared for the Town Board of the Town of Middlefield. It is
intended to provide background information on the potential effects of adopting a comprehensive
plan and zoning amendments in the unincorporated areas of the Town, which is located in Otsego
County, New York. Middlefields current comprehensive plan (Master Plan for the Township of
Middlefield) was adopted in 1989. Zoning regulations were adopted in 1975 and several amend-
ments have been adopted since that time as well. The comprehensive plan amendments proposed
in 2011 (Addendum to 1989 Master Plan) incorporate a broad analysis of environmental condi-
tions in the Town, prepared as part of the Towns accepted 2002 Final Generic Environmental Im-
pact Statement (FGEIS) on the Capacities of the Cooperstown Region. The Zoning Ordinance
amendments, if adopted, would prohibit, Heavy industry and all oil, gas or solution mining and
drilling, due to concerns for Middlefields health, safety, and general welfare from these potential
land uses if they were to become established in the Town.
This Land Use Analysis focuses on the effects to the community from a ban on Heavy industry
and all oil, gas or solution mining and drilling. Of greatest significance is the direct effect the
proposed amendments would have on current demands for tapping into the Marcellus Shale geo-
logic formation for extraction of natural gas. At the time this Land Use Analysis was prepared,
there were no operating heavy industries, oil, gas or solution mining and drilling operations in the
Town. It is the intent of the Town to prevent the establishment of such uses.
The planning, environmental, engineering, and legal literature is filled with documentation of the
effects of heavy industry including mining activities such as those involving oil, gas and similar op-
erations. Early large-scale atmospheric pollution has been documented from measurements taken
of Greenlands ice cores for lead. The lead was deposited in Greenland, when ancient Carthagin-
ian and Roman silver miners working in southern Spain, polluted the atmosphere more than 900
years ago. Today, there are more than 1,200 superfund
1
sites found throughout the country where
heavy industries have left countless acres of land unfit for human habitation.
New York State is currently home to almost 100 superfund sites with nearly half of them contami-
nating or threatening contamination of drinking water sources. Industrial operations affect the
full spectrum of environmental conditions including land, air, water, traffic, plants and animals,
scenic and cultural resources, open space, energy, noise and odors, public health and community
2
1
Superfund is the name for the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980. It was designed
to clean up sites contaminated with hazardous substances. The law authorized the EPA to identify parties responsible for contami-
nation and compel them to clean up the sites. Where responsible parties cannot be found, the Agency can clean up sites itself.
character. Oil and gas operations have likewise accounted for impacts to the same environmental
conditions from the processes of drilling, stimulation, produced water, separation and dehydra-
tion, gas compression, production, refinement, delivery and use. Some of the substances known to
be released directly by oil and gas operations include but are not limited to hydrogen sulfide, diesel
fuel, methane, benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylenes (BTEX), nitrogen oxides, toxic metals,
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, radionuclides, heavy metals, and sulfur dioxide. Otsego County
has been fortunate to have largely escaped the severe impacts of heavy industrial activities to date.
This will change as current demands for exploitation of finite fossil fuel resources in underground
formations becomes greater.
The Draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (dSGEIS), prepared by the
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) in 2009, characterized the
trend as follows: The Department of Environmental Conservation ("DEC" or "Department") has received
applications for permits to drill horizontal wells to evaluate and develop the Marcellus Shale for natural gas
production. Wells will undergo a stimulation process known as hydraulic fracturing, which functions to release
gas embedded in shale deep below the surface. While the horizontal well applications received to date are for
proposed locations in Chemung, Chenango, Delaware and Tioga Counties, the Department expects to receive
applications to drill in other areas, including counties where natural gas production has not previously oc-
curred. There is also potential for development of the Utica Shale using horizontal drilling and high-volume
hydraulic fracturing, and the Department is aware that this could bring use of those techniques to areas such
as Otsego and Schoharie Counties, which would also be new to natural gas development. Other shale and low-
permeability formations in New York may be targeted for future application of horizontal drilling and hydrau-
lic fracturing if Marcellus and Utica development using this method is successful and the requisite infrastruc-
ture is in place.
According to www.geology.com, Marcellus was the Opening Act. A rock layer below the Marcellus Shale
could prove to be another incredible source of natural gas. The Marcellus Shale captured public attention
when leasing and drilling activities began pumping billions of dollars into local economies and citizens began
debating the environmental, social and economic impacts. All of this began suddenly in 2004 when Range
Resources Corporation drilled the first Marcellus well using modern drilling technology. Now, just a few years
later, the Marcellus Shale is being developed into one of the world's largest natural gas fields. However, what
we are seeing today from the Marcellus is only the first step in a sequence of natural gas plays. The second
step is starting in the Utica Shale. The Utica Shale is a rock unit located a few thousand feet below the Mar-
cellus Shale. It also has the potential to become an enormous natural gas resource. The Utica Shale is thicker
than the Marcellus, it is more geographically extensive and it has already proven its ability to support commer-
cial production. It is impossible to say at this time how large the Utica Shale resource might be because it has
not been thoroughly evaluated and little public information is available about its organic content, the thickness
of organic-rich intervals and how it will respond to horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing. However, the
results of early testing indicate that the Utica Shale will be a very significant resource. To corroborate the
3
www.geology.com comment, staff at the New York State Museum have stated that The overlay of
Utica and Marcellus fairways create a potential two-for-one opportunity for drilling shale gas.
Interest in exploitation of the natural gas that underlies the Town and region has increased re-
cently due to changes in gas well development technology including new technologies for horizon-
tal drilling and hydraulic fracturing of bedrock at great depths. Construction of the Millennium
Pipeline, a 182 mile pipeline that delivers natural gas from Stuben County, NY through New
Yorks Southern Tier to Rockland County, NY has also contributed to the interest. The Marcellus
and Utica Shale areas are in relatively close proximity to high natural gas demand markets in the
Northeast. At the time this Land Use Analysis was completed, the State of New York has in place
a Moratorium on the use of hydraulic fracturing (i.e. see December 13, 2010 Executive Order sus-
pending permits for high-volume hydraulic fracturing combined with horizontal drilling). This
moratorium does not affect vertical gas or oil drilling nor does it affect other heavy industrial ac-
tivities.
The Town of Middlefield is a rural
2
community where the predominant land uses are agriculture,
forests and low density residential. The average lot size in Middlefield is about 25 acres with a
population density of approximately 36 persons per square mile. The principal industries, besides
agriculture and forestry, are health care and tourism. According to the Final Generic Environmen-
tal Impact Statement on Capacities of the Cooperstown Region (FGEIS), agricultural uses com-
prise 47 percent (18,616.79 acres) of Middlefields parcels (see the Build-out Analysis assumptions
below for a refinement of this acreage). The remainder contain a mix of residential, forested or
conservation land, vacant and limited commercial land uses. There are currently no uses within
the Town that include heavy industry, oil, gas or solution mining and drilling. In terms of surface
mining industries, there are currently three permitted sand and gravel mines in the Town that to-
gether, comprise a total of 46.5 acres. One of the mines is operated by the Town of Middlefield,
one is operated by the Town of Milton and the third is privately operated.
This Land Use Analysis includes a review of the Towns 1989 Master Plan as well as the proposed
2011 Addendum to the Master Plan. The goal of the Analysis is not to add another layer of plan-
ning to what has already been accomplished in the Town, but to bring the current state-of-the-art
planning and environmental studies, regarding Heavy industry and all oil, gas or solution mining
and drilling, into focus, so that the Town Board can be assured their decision-making is based
upon sound planning. In order to do this properly, it is first necessary to analyze the regional land
use changes that are expected from exploitation of the Marcellus and Utica Shale formations. The
analysis places the Towns location in the context of the larger region, where the Marcellus and
Utica Shale formations are located and that includes the States of New York southward to West
4
2
The New York State Legislative Commission on Rural Resources denes a rural community as one with a population density of
150 persons per square mile or less.
Virginia and westward to Ohio. The Marcellus Shale region covers six states with Otsego County
at the northernmost extent of the formation as shown on the maps below and the Utica Shale re-
gion is even larger in area.
This analysis has relied on other previous studies and on information available from Federal, State,
and Regional government agencies as well as municipal agencies, universities and other authorita-
tive sources. A complete Bibliography of sources used can be found at the end of the Report.
B. Regional Land Use Trends
According to the US Department of Energy, the Marcellus Shale covers an area of 95,000 square
miles at an average thickness of 50 feet to 200 feet. New Yorks portion of the Marcellus Shale is
approximately 18,750 square miles and is found very deep over 1 mile below ground in places.
To date, there are almost fifty companies that are already exploiting the Marcellus Shale for natural
gas production, or have expressed interest in conducting gas drilling in the Marcellus Shale region.
One company alone, Statoil ASA of Oslo, Norway partnering with Chesapeake Energy, says it
could drill as many as 17,000 natural gas wells in the Marcellus Shale field over the next 20 years.
According to the United States Geological Survey, In 2008, two professors at Pennsylvania State Uni-
versity and the State University of New York (SUNY) Fredonia estimated that about 50 TCF (trillion cubic
feet) of recoverable natural gas could be extracted from the Marcellus Shale (Engelder and Lash, 2008). In
November 2008, on the basis of production information from Chesapeake Energy Corporation, the estimate of
recoverable gas from the Marcellus Shale was raised to more than 363 TCF (Esch, 2008). The United States
uses about 23 TCF of natural gas per year (U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2009), so the Marcellus
gas resource may be large enough to supply the needs of the entire Nation for roughly 15 years at the current
rates of consumption. These estimates do not account for natural gas found in the even deeper
Utica Shales. As discussed above, the EIA has now estimated the United States possesses 2,552
trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of potential natural gas resources and shale resources accounts for 827 Tcf
of this estimate.
Interest in the Marcellus Shale formation has been likened historically to the gold rush in mid-19th
century California. Potential Marcellus gas production revenues of $16 billion to $22 billion have
been predicted in several publications. Of course, predictions are based on circumstances that can
change, sometimes rapidly, depending on markets, worldwide volatility from political unrest, the
assumptions that qualify the models, and most importantly the strengths and weaknesses of the
studies used to make the predictions. However, the reason there is great interest in the Marcellus
and Utica Shales is the current and projected demand for natural gas and the economic opportu-
nities it represents to landowners, gas companies and others that could benefit.
5
Natural gas is in demand in the United States, in part, because it has become widely available
(87% was produced domestically in 2009 and 97% in North America) through a network of
305,000 miles of interstate and intrastate transmission pipelines. Compared to wood, coal or oil,
natural gas is convenient to use and relatively clean to burn in comparison to these other fuels.
According to the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), the United States possesses 2,552
trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of potential natural gas resources. Natural gas from shale resources, consid-
ered uneconomical just a few years ago, accounts for 827 Tcf of this resource estimate, more than
double the estimate published in 2010. Shale gas in 2009 made up 14 percent of total U.S. natural
gas supply. Production of shale gas is expected to continue to increase, and constitute 45 percent
of U.S. total natural gas supply in 2035, as projected in the EIAs Annual Energy Outlook 2011.
While the nation is beginning to transition to renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, geo-
thermal and others, natural gas creates electricity, heats millions of homes, heats water, cooks food
and makes backyard barbecues possible year-round. As a fossil fuel, it is a finite resource yet de-
mand for it is rising. Like oil and coal, natural gas was formed from the fossilized remains of dead
plants and animals exposed to heat and pressure in the Earth's crust over millions of years (for dec-
ades, the coal industry has referred to coal as "buried sunshine"). Estimates are that society today
burns about 100,000 years of ancient plant growth each year. This has created an imbalance in
carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere.
A review of the literature describing the economic factors associated with exploitation of natural
gas has revealed a variety of outcomes. A study commissioned by the Broome County Legislature
in 2009 estimated a potential value per gas well by multiplying projected prices of natural gas times
the anticipated quantity of gas per well, resulting in ten-year gross revenues per well of $9.3 mil-
lion. However, this figure does not factor in the costs of well development, which have been esti-
mated to average $3.5 million per well. The Broome County study has been criticized by some
economists. A report entitled Unanswered Questions About The Economic Impact of Gas Drill-
ing In the Marcellus Shale: Dont Jump to Conclusions by Jannett Barth, PhD of J. M. Barth &
Associates, Inc. (March 22, 2010), analyzed several economic studies of natural gas drilling and
production including the Broome County study, the DECs 1992 GEIS and 2009 dSGEIS, eco-
nomic and employment indicators from gas and non-gas producing counties in New York State
and Pennsylvania,
3
and economic studies of the natural gas experiences in Texas and other West-
ern states. The conclusions of the report are as follows:
Decision makers may be on the verge of making bad choices for the health of the regional
economy. The oil & gas industry is not a reliable industry on which to base an economic de-
velopment plan. Alan B. Krueger, Chief Economist and Assistant Secretary for Economic
6
3
Data sources included the US Census Bureaus American Community Survey and County Business Patterns reports.
Policy at the US Department of Treasury, stated, The oil & gas industry is about ten times
more capital intensive than the US economy as a whole. Krueger continues, saying that
encouraging oil and gas production is not an effective strategy for creating jobs. (Remarks of
Alan B. Krueger to the American Tax Policy Institute Conference, October 15, 2009).
Headwater Economics...study...conclusions are that while energy-focused counties race for-
ward and then falter, the non-energy peer counties continue to grow steadilyCounties that
have focused on broader development choices are better off, with higher rates of growth, more
diverse economies, better-educated populations, a smaller gap between high and low income
households, and more retirement and investment income.
The entire Marcellus Shale region in New York may be at risk both economically and envi-
ronmentally. While the environmental risks have been a focus of concern, many stakeholders
have assumed that a positive economic impact may result. In reality, the economic impact
may very well be negative. And the likelihood is that gas drilling would adversely affect other
economic activities such as tourism and sport fishing and hunting. To some extent gas drill-
ing and these other industries are likely to be mutually exclusive. The net effect is what must
be considered.
One of the more recent analyses of the economic implications of Marcellus Shale development was
carried on at the Cornell University Department of City and Regional Planning. According to the
December 2010 Comprehensive Economic Impact Analysis Working Paper by David Kay:
Several studies have projected large positive economic impacts of shale gas development in the Mar-
cellus region. To make informed choices for their communities, policy makers need to understand the
strengths and limitations of these studies. Most importantly, they need to understand that there is a
tenuous relationship at best between positive economic impacts and long term economic development
based on an extractive, exhaustible natural resource. In addressing the relationship, proactive policy
can make a difference.
We conclude that existing evidence about the Marcellus shale gas operations is inadequate to make
predictions about the numbers of jobs that will be created, business expansion, or revenue generation
with high levels of confidence. Gas development will direct new money into the region, and the pros-
pects for substantial short-term economic gain for some local businesses and property owners are real.
Many economic development opportunities will also arise. On the other hand, mixed economic results
are likely even in the short run. The rising tide is not likely to lift all boats: there will be losing con-
stituencies among communities and individuals who are displaced or left behind. Moreover, the expe-
rience of many economies based on extractive industries is a warning that their short-term gains fre-
quently fail to translate into lasting, community-wide economic development. Most alarmingly, in re-
7
cent decades credible research evidence has grown showing that resource dependent communities can
and often do end up worse off than they would have been without exploiting their extractive sector
reserves. When the metaphorical economic waters recede, the flotsam left behind can in some circum-
stances be seen more as the aftermath of a flood than of a rising tide.
According to the DEC, more than
75,000 oil, gas and solution salt min-
ing wells have been drilled in New
York State since the late 1800s with
about 14,000 wells currently active.
The first natural gas well in the coun-
try was drilled in Fredonia, NY by
William Hart (1821). The first com-
mercially successful oil well in the
world was drilled just south of Jame-
stown, NY in Titusville, PA (1859).
Gas has been produced from the
Marcellus Shale since 1880 when the
first well was completed in the Naples
field in Ontario County. The Naples field produced 32 MMcf (million cubic feet) during its pro-
ductive life and nearly all shale gas discoveries in New York since then have been in the Marcellus
Shale.
In New York, all gas wells completed in the Marcellus Shale so far are vertical wells. To date, 49
wells have been developed, 18 of these wells are active while the remainder are either inactive,
plugged and abandoned, or shut-in. According to DEC records, two (2) gas wells have been drilled
in Otsego County in the Utica Shale Formation (one each is in the neighboring towns of Cherry
Valley and Springfield) while the other 17 are classified as Not Applicable or Confidential. In
addition to the local gas resources potentially available in Middlefield, other natural gas facilities
have recently been constructed in nearby locations. These include the Millennium Pipeline de-
scribed above.
According to the Millennium Pipeline Company, the Millennium Pipeline offers Unparalleled
Pathways to Northeast Marcellus Shale...Traditional natural gas markets are expected to grow in the
Northeast as efforts increase to improve air quality. Western New York storage development supports seasonal
use of natural gas and discoveries of local gas production including Marcellus Shale gas improve optionality
and reliability of natural gas. Millennium Pipeline is well positioned to deliver these benefits to gas consum-
ers.
Richburg, 1882 Richburg, 1882
8
Historic Gas Drilling in Richburg, NY - NY State Museum Collection
The Millennium Pipeline went into service in 2008. Millennium makes extensive use of existing
utility easements, extending from Independence in Steuben County NY to Buena Vista in Rock-
land County NY. Millennium, which is supplied by local production and storage fields and inter-
connecting upstream pipelines, serves customers along its route in the Southern Tier and Lower
Hudson Valley as well as serving several major utility customers in New England and the New York
City area. One of the Towns that the Millennium Pipeline crosses, the Town of Hancock in Dela-
ware County had recorded a total of 24,741 acres leased to gas drilling companies as of April 2009.
The graphics below illustrate the extent of the geologic formations discussed in this Analysis.
Marcellus Shale in the Region
Marcellus Shale in the State
Utica Shale Extent (in green)
C. Town Planning and Zoning
The Town of Middlefield Planning Board prepared and the Town Board adopted a Master Plan
for the Township of Middlefield in 1989. The Master Plan, which is a valid comprehensive plan
pursuant to 272-a.1(h) of New York State Town Law, establishes four general goals as follows:
1. That the senior citizens of the Township, who have stewarded these lands in such a way as to deliver
them to a younger generation in a beneficial condition, may continue to live here in a manner which
they find harmonious;
2. That men and women of the current generation who live and work on these lands may prosper in an
environment that is both flexible and secure;
3. That perhaps more importantly, future generations shall inherit these lands in a condition which al-
lows for a healthful, prosperous and independent way of life;
9
4. That improvement of land be encouraged and fostered in a manner which benefits the community as a
whole, but that development of land in a manner which threatens the health or well-being of the
community as a whole be prevented.
The Master Plan,
4
through a 1989 Addendum, adds specific additional goals To sustain the viability
of farm lands where possible and to encourage and foster improvement that does not diminish farm
lands...preservation of Otsego Lake, of wooded areas harboring game and of important aesthetic and historical
characteristics of the Middlefield Township.
This Land Use Analysis has found that there is a material discrepancy and conflict between the
Master Plan and Zoning Ordinance as it pertains to industrial uses such as heavy industry and all
oil, gas or solution mining and drilling. Sensing this conflict, the Town Board adopted two reso-
lutions in 2010 to encourage the County and State to place a moratorium on horizontal drilling
for natural gas using the hydrofracking process and and to encourage the federal government to
repeal federal laws that exempt gas company activities, including exploration, extraction, and proc-
essing, from the Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act.
The principal purposes of this Land Use Analysis are to document the material discrepancy and
conflict, to review the proposed amendments to the 1989 Master Plan and 1975 Zoning Ordi-
nance, and to review the regional land use trends in the context of the Towns current land use
controls and land use plan to aid the Town Board in its decision-making process. This Land Use
Analysis will:
Provide a build-out analysis of the potential for gas well development in the Town of Mid-
dlefield and the implications of such heavy industrialization of the Town, through accepted
measures of impact, in categories such as loss of farmland and forestland, truck impacts on
local roads, water, chemical use and wastewater disposal, employees needed by the industry,
and potential effects to community services;
Summarize the documented characteristics as well as the potential beneficial and adverse
impacts associated with heavy industry including oil, gas and solution mining and drilling;
Place particular emphasis on the most recent technologies being used to develop unconven-
tional gas reserves, such as the Marcellus Shale formation, because over the past few years,
there has been the greatest interest in exploitation of such reserves in the region and such
interest is expected to grow as all other sources of energy decline as shown on the US De-
partment of Energys chart below;
10
4
The Town Master Plan is a comprehensive plan as dened by 272-a of New York State Town Law. When it was adopted in
1989, New York Law referred to comprehensive plans as master plans.
Provide a basis for the Town Boards environmental review of the proposed Plan and
Zoning amendments under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR);
Articulate in a summary form the substantial and documented evidence that exists con-
cerning the potential for heavy industry, including oil, gas and solution mining, to
threaten the health and well-bring of the community as a whole and to otherwise prevent
the Town from achieving its well-established goals.
Heavy industry has been defined by the American Planning Association as A use engaged in the
basic processing and manufacturing of materials and products predominately from extracted or raw mate-
rials, or a use engaged in storage of, or manufacturing processes using flammable or explosive materials, or
storage or manufacturing processes that potentially involve hazardous or commonly recognized offensive
conditions. The U.S. Department of Labor, in the Standard Industrial Classification Manual,
includes Industry Group 131 (Crude Petroleum and Natural Gas) and Group 138 (Oil and Gas
Field Services) under Division B: Mining. Most other heavy industrial operations are classified
in Division D: Manufacturing. Examples include primary metals, chemicals, and petroleum.
These would fit the general category of heavy industry. While there are many characteristics of
these operations that differ significantly, they do share some common effects including the po-
tential for economic benefits to the community in which they reside through employment and
tax revenues. But, new industrial jobs not only create income for a community, they also create
11
costs as new families move in and public services must be provided. Furthermore, industrial
growth also carries with it inevitable and unavoidable adverse environmental impacts. These
include significant truck traffic, noise, odors, safety hazards, unsightly conditions, loss of habi-
tats, declines in water and air quality, to name a few topical areas. The costs of heavy industry
are not always felt while the industries are in operation. The superfund sites described above
have left a toxic legacy that has sometimes been paid for using tax revenues so the actual eco-
nomic costs of heavy industry are shared by all.
The following sections will analyze and discuss the build-out analysis results based upon the
potential for gas well development in Middlefield. Also included is an examination of the po-
tential adverse and beneficial impacts that can be expected to a variety of relevant areas of envi-
ronmental concern.
Heavy Industry (Photo: Sura Nualpradid)
NY Oil Well (Photo: investments-and-acquisitions.com)
Gas Well Drilling (Photo: NYC-DEP)
Heavy Industry Build-out Analysis
Geologists have long known about the natural gas resources of the Marcellus Shale formation. It is
buried deep beneath Middlefield. Until recently however, use of conventional vertical drilling
technologies failed to provide a significant supply of natural gas from the formation. Beginning in
the 1970s, the US Department of Energy funded the Eastern States Shale Project to develop new
technologies to advance development of shale gas. The Project resulted in a new application of an
already known technology referred to as directional drilling. This technology uses an initial vertical
drillhole at the surface and then slowly turns the drill 90 degrees to penetrate long horizontal dis-
tances, sometimes over a mile, through the Marcellus Shale bedrock. Hydraulic fractures are then
created into the rock at intervals from the horizontal section of the borehole, allowing a substantial
number of high-permeability pathways to contact a large volume of rock. This technology is com-
monly referred to as hydraulic fracturing, hydrofracking, hydrofrac, or simply fracking. Use of the
new technology (also referred to as unconventional drilling or unconventional gas), combined with
a substantial increase in the price of natural gas and the other factors described herein, has created
unprecedented demands for new gas wells in the Marcellus Shale formation.
12
Below the Marcellus Shale formation is the Utica Shale formation. As discussed in Section B
above, this formation is considered to have the potential to become an enormous natural gas resource.
Staff of the New York State Museum have stated that Gastem has had some recent success drilling ver-
tical Utica wells in Otsego County[and]...The overlay of Utica and Marcellus fairways create a potential
two-for-one opportunity for drilling shale gas. According to DECs well records, one vertical well has
been drilled into the Utica Formation in the adjoining Town of Cherry Valley and another in the
adjoining Town of Springfield. No further information was available at the time this Land Use
Analysis was prepared on these two wells, but it is possible that both Marcellus and Utica Shale
formations could be exploited either consecutively or concurrently. While additional gas well de-
velopment of the Utica Shales is likely in the future, potential build-out of the Utica Shale for-
mation was not included in this analysis. As a result, this build-out analysis likely understates
the overall impact from heavy industrial activities in the Town.
In order to estimate the number of new gas wells that could potentially be developed in the Town
of Middlefield, using high-volume hydraulic fracturing combined with horizontal drilling and/or
new vertical wells, a build-out analysis was performed of the potential rates and densities of natural
gas well development that the Town of Middlefield could see in the coming years in the Marcellus
Shale formation.
Build-out is a planning tool that estimates the impact of cumulative development upon a commu-
nitys land areas once all of the potentially developable land has been converted to the use or uses
under study. No attempt has been made to conduct a build-out for other heavy industrial activities
or for oil or solution well development since none of these uses are currently in as high demand as
natural gas using hydrofracking. This does not mean that they will not be developed in the Town
in the future, absent amendments to the Town Zoning Ordinance, just that any exercise aimed at
estimating the extent to which heavy industries like gas processing plants, chemical or other similar
operations or oil or solution well development would become established in the town is highly
speculative at this time. But, horizontal drilling combined with hydrofracking is the hottest devel-
opment to hit the Marcellus Shale region in decades. Like hydrofracking combined with horizon-
tal drilling, future technologies could eventually be developed to more efficiently extract oil that is
known to exist in the region. With Otsego County positioned well in relation to Interstate 88 and
even Interstate 86 (i.e. the former Route 17), industrial growth in the future is possible. In fact, the
presence of natural gas in the Marcellus and Utica Shale formations could induce new industrial
development in the region including Middlefield for support industries or other heavy industries
that rely on the use of fossil fuels as illustrated in the photo below.
13
However, the EIA expects production
of the Lower 48s onshore unconven-
tional resources to increase from 7.5 Tcf
in 2004 to 9.5 Tcf in 2030, when it will
represent about half of that total for the
same areas production. The largest
share of that unconventional production
will come from low-permeability sands.
Common Technology Needs
Gas from shale, low-permeability sands
and coal seams each offers a large,
onshore resource target to multiple
players. These tempting targets also
pose special challenges.
Unconventional gas reservoirs are
found in heterogeneous, complex and
often poorly understood geologic sys-
tems. Understanding those systems is
more difficult than understanding many
conventional reservoirs and arguably
more critical to economic success.
The defining characteristic of
unconventional gas reservoirs low
permeability makes effective stimula-
tion and a large number of precisely
placed wellbores keys to commercial
production and recovery.
Though there are technologies
more critical to one unconventional
resource than others, the common
characteristic of low permeability
means many technology needs are
common to all.
In a presentation at the Hart
Unconventional Gas Conference in
March, Kent Perry, director of explo-
ration and production research with
the Gas Technology Institute, listed
10 areas where improvement is needed
to fully develop the potential of
unconventional gas:
reservoir characterization and
imaging;
stimulation;
resource assessment;
data mining;
producibility models;
produced water handling;
extending well life;
drilling cost reduction;
horizontal well completion; and
expert systems.
If one of these is most important, it
is reservoir characterization, Perry
said. Determining how much gas is
available and at what depth as well as
accurately defining the reservoir
parameters are the foundation of a
sound development strategy.
There is still much that is not known
geologically, said Perry. There are still a
lot of unanswered questions about the
Overview
2 www.hartenergy.com January 2007
Devons Bridgeport natural gas processing plant is one of the largest in the country, serving hundreds of gas wells in the rapidly expanding Barnett Shale field in north Texas.
(Photo courtesy of Devon Energy)
Photo by Halliburton of a Gas Processing Plant in the Burnett Shale region of north Texas
The build-out provides a peek into the future by examining probable future gas development in-
tensities and patterns. It helps residents and Town officials to envision the extent of heavy indus-
trial growth from hydrofracking operations. The primary issue to consider, in light of the ex-
pected demand for gas drilling in Middlefield illustrated by this build-out analysis, is whether
the community priorities to sustain the viability of farmland, to preserve Otsego Lake, to pre-
serve wooded areas harboring game and to preserve important aesthetic and historical character-
istics can be realized if the scenarios presented come to fruition. New York State Town Law has
delegated to local government the authority and responsibility to undertake town comprehensive planning
and to regulate land use for the purpose of protecting the public health, safety and general welfare of its citi-
zens. [ 272-a.1(b)]. Currently, the Zoning regulations have been interpreted to allow for unre-
stricted development of heavy industrial activities like oil, gas or solution mining throughout the
community. If this were to occur, then farmland, forests, scenic areas and historical resources are
likely to disappear or otherwise be adversely affected and/or degraded. Water quality of Otsego
Lake (a public water supply), the Susquehanna River, Cherry Valley Creek and their tributaries will
likely become polluted based upon what is known about the unavoidable adverse impacts of high-
volume hydraulic fracturing combined with horizontal drilling as well as vertical drilling employing
hydrofracking, unless changes are made to the Towns land use controls.
14
If examined in isolation, the risks and impacts from one individual well, may not be significant,
but once examined cumulatively, the overall effect on the Town is significant and may be unac-
ceptable. The build-out analysis can assist residents and decision-makers in understanding, ahead
of time, the impacts heavy industrial activities can have on the community. It identifies the poten-
tial number of wells, the amount of water consumed, wastewater (flowback) generated, chemicals
used, the number of acres of farmland and forests which will be converted or impacted, the num-
ber of truck trips made on local roads, potential employees needed for each well by heavy industrial
uses like gas drilling and production in the future. This information can be used by Town officials
to estimate the infrastructure that may need to be built, expanded or improved to accommodate
the growth of industrial development. This includes the secondary growth needed by employees of
the companies that attempt to develop new wells, the need to construct or reconstruct Town roads
and bridges that are capable of accommodating the truck loads of 80,000 pounds or more (rigging
equipment can be as heavy as 100,000 pounds) and can help Town officials and others quantify
the services required by local government. The assessment also helps in the selection of policy al-
ternatives to determine whether or not to accommodate the anticipated new industrial develop-
ment.
The steps to undertaking the build-out analysis are relatively straightforward. First, lands that are
not suitable for gas well development, such as State parkland and the portion of the Town within
the Village of Cooperstown are deducted from the overall Town gross acreage. There is only one
State Park in Middlefield, Glimmerglass State Park and the acreage in the Town is 26.04 acres.
Roseboom State Forest, while comprising a total of 629.67 acres in the Town, may be available for
gas leases in the future since New York States Forest lands (and even Allegheny State Park) have
been subject to oil and gas leases in the past and it is currently unknown whether this practice will
continue. An additional 942 acres of land are owned by Otsego County, but these lands could
be subject to lease arrangements between the County and gas companies if approved by the
County Board of Representatives.
According to the New York State Museums Reservoir Characterization Group (for petroleum)
there is Great potential for natural gas production in Marcellus and Utica Shales. However, due to the
recent dramatic increase in use of the Marcellus Shale just the past few years (primarily in Pennsyl-
vania and other states without a moratorium on horizontal drilling combined with hydraulic frac-
turing like New York), there is little information that would allow for a characterization of the spe-
cific factors that can be used to estimate full build-out of gas production in Middlefield. According
to Otsego County records, while there have been at least 6,000 acres (at least 50 parcels) that have
already been leased to gas companies,
5
no wells have been drilled in Middlefield yet. Therefore,
build-out analysis conducted by others has been relied upon to develop the assumptions applied in
this analysis of the Town of Middlefield.
15
5
The number of acres and parcels identied may understate the lands already subject to gas leases since not all leases are led with
the County.
This includes the analysis conducted by the New York City Department of Environmental Protec-
tion (NYC-DEP), for its water supply watershed in the Final Impact Assessment Report prepared by
Hazen and Sawyer in December 22, 2009. This study was relied upon to develop reasonable as-
sumptions that could apply to Middlefield. The assumptions generated by the DEC in their 2009
dSGEIS document, to estimate the number of well pads per square mile and other relevant factors,
were used to estimate the potential for well development in the Town. The Nature Conservancy,
in cooperation with Audubon Pennsylvania conducted a study of the impacts on forests, based
upon before and after aerial photographic comparisons of gas well developments in Pennsylvania.
The Nature Conservancys report is entitled Pennsylvania Energy Impacts Assessment Report 1:
Marcellus Shale Natural Gas and Wind (November 15, 2010) and it was relied upon to assess the
potential impacts on forests in the Town both directly (i.e. acres of land disturbed) and indirectly
(i.e. acres subject to edge effect alteration).
The three studies used in developing the Middlefield build-out, including the NYC-DEP Report,
the DECs dSGEIS document, and TNC Report, reviewed shale gas formations around the coun-
try that have similar high potential for gas production as the Marcellus. Many of the locations
used in developing multipliers and the other factors used in calculating the build-out numbers
were for similar rural areas. Readers are encouraged to examine the information used by those
agencies in applying the baseline multipliers and other measurement standards used by these
sources and by this analysis.
The Marcellus formation is an extensive resource that occurs beneath much of the State and it has
been estimated by the DEC that it will require tens of thousands of wells to fully exploit. As such,
cumulative impacts from many wells constructed throughout the Town and the Region must be
evaluated in order to fully characterize the potential risk from both concurrent and consecutive
activities at multiple locations. This Land Use Analysis only attempts to answer the question of
how much of an impact the heavy industrial activity of gas development will have on the Town of
Middlefield. The well build-out density in the Town has been combined with quantitative esti-
mates for various activities associated with each well to develop cumulative values. The analysis is
designed to assess gas well development taking place at one point in time and space. It is not a
prediction, per se, of what will occur at any particular time. For policy-makers however, it
shows the consequences of taking no action to change the Towns land use controls.
The entire process of gas well development, from site development through completion, takes ap-
proximately four to ten months for one well. Multiple horizontal wells may be drilled from a
common well pad. One multi-well pad can accommodate six or more wells and can recover the
natural gas from a spacing unit covering a maximum of one square mile. New York State requires
that all wells from a pad must be drilled within three years of the first well, so sites will likely expe-
rience a relatively high and constant level of heavy industrial activity for at least one and up to
three years. The low and high estimate of 157 to 838 well pads that could be developed in Middle-
field could be drilled in a relatively intensive but short period of time or could be drilled over a
period of generations as all areas in the Town that are potentially available for drilling are pursued
16
by the gas industry. In addition, the fracturing process is usually repeated multiple times over the
life of a well (i.e. refracking) to restore declining gas production rates. According to Halliburton
(one of the worlds largest providers of products and services to the gas industry), It has been estab-
lished that only 10% of GIP [Gas In Place] is recovered with the initial completion. Refracturing the shale
can increase the recovery rate by an additional 8% to 10%. Simple reperforation of the original interval and
pumping a job volume at least 25% larger than the previous frac has produced positive results in vertical shale
wells. Schlumberger, an oilfield services company for the oil and gas industries, states that Shale
gas wells dont come on as strong as tight gas, but once the production stabilizes, they will produce consistently
for 30 years or more. Thus, the true impacts of each well that is drilled can be felt for decades as the
gas resource is fully exploited. Readers should also carefully note the exclusion of wells drilled into
the Utica Shale formation, which may create an additional heavy industrial demand in the Town
for generations.
Build-out Analysis Assumptions
The following assumptions were adapted from the research methodologies adopted by the City of
New York in its Final Impact Assessment Report prepared by Hazen and Sawyer in December 22,
2009, by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation in its Draft Supplemen-
tal Generic Environmental Impact Statement On The Oil, Gas and Solution Mining Regulatory
Program: Well Permit Issuance for Horizontal Drilling And High-Volume Hydraulic Fracturing to
Develop the Marcellus Shale and Other Low-Permeability Gas Reservoirs, by the Pennsylvania En-
ergy Impacts Assessment Report 1: Marcellus Shale Natural Gas and Wind by The Nature Conser-
vancy and Audubon Pennsylvania, and by the Manual of Build-Out Analysis by the Center for Ru-
ral Massachusetts at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
Infill wells. This analysis does not include the development of additional infill wells that can be
drilled. Infill wells, resulting in more than one well per 40 acres or other spacing requirement of
the Environmental Conservation Law, may be drilled upon justification to the DEC that they are
necessary to efficiently recover gas reserves. The gas industry refers to this as downspacing and it
is a technique that is widely used in other gas formations around the nation. According to Oil and
Gas Investor, As plays become further developed and the reservoir is better understood, downspacing begins.
Utica Shale and Other Gas-Bearing Formations. This analysis has not included future develop-
ment of the Utica Shale formation for natural gas since not enough information is known today
about the full extent of the resource available there. It is also important to note that the well spac-
ing assumptions discussed below are not applicable when wells are drilled into different gas-bearing
formations.
Potential Developable Land Area. The Town of Middlefield is the largest town in land area in
Otsego County. There are a total of 39,669.41 acres (or 61.98 square miles) in the Town. The Vil-
lage of Cooperstown consists of 192 acres (0.3 square miles) within the Town. Glimmerglass State
17
Park consists of 26 acres in the Town. Both areas were excluded from the analysis. As discussed
above, there are other State and County owned lands in the Town but currently, it is unknown
whether such lands could be leased to a gas company. Therefore, they have been included in the
analysis.
The NYC-DEP Report, in conducting their potential build-out of the New York City Watershed
lands in the Catskills, first established a reasonable land area that may be subject to gas leases by
gas companies. The NYC-DEP analysis, for comparison purposes, used Bradford County, Pennsyl-
vania with a population density of 54 persons per square mile, as roughly comparable to the Cat-
skill Watersheds population density. Bradford County, to date, has experienced mineral leasing of
about 85 percent of their total land area and so the NYC-DEP conducted their build-out of the
Catskill Watershed using the 85 percent factor to estimate the land area that could potentially be
leased in the Watershed. Even though Bradford Countys population density is substantially
greater than Middlefield's 36 persons per square mile, if this rate of leasing (i.e. 85%) were to occur
in Middlefield, a total of 33,533.69 acres (52.4 square miles) of land would potentially be available
for natural gas development. This build-out analysis has used the 85 percent rate to estimate the
total land area in Middlefield that could be available if landowners were willing to enter into lease
arrangements. The 85 percent rate is reasonable because Middlefield is a rural town, with a popu-
lation density of 36 persons per square mile and an average lot size of 25 acres, where the pre-
dominant features are farms, forests, with a small scattering of residences.
Well Density. New York State regula-
tions allow up to 16 wells per square
mile. This equates to 16 wells per 640
acres or 1 well per 40 acres. The US
Energy Department has stated that av-
erage well spacing in the Marcellus is 40 to
160 acres per well. The DECs dSGEIS
indicates a lower density, approximately
six to nine wells per square mile, is
more likely. According to the NYC-
DEP Report, this estimate is corrobo-
rated by recent permit applications in
Sullivan County, which are based on
five to six wells per square mile. Well densities to date in excess of three wells per square mile in
other areas have been documented from shale gas plays with significantly higher localized densities.
For example, Denton County, TX has a well density of 5.5 wells per square mile over approxi-
mately 400 square miles (40 percent) of the countys land area. It has not been established that
these areas have been completely developed so higher gas well densities are possible. Similarly, an-
nual well completion rates in excess of five wells per square mile have been documented, and
permit applications suggest that these rates could be higher also. The Google Earth aerial photo
18
above was prepared by Tony Ingraffea,
6
a Professor in the School of Civil and Environmental En-
gineering at Cornell University. It shows an overlay with the ideal well spacing (red dots) for a
location in southern Otsego County. According to Dr. Ingraffea, a minimum of eight wells per
square mile will be needed to maximize gas recovery. This would equate to development of a
minimum of 419 wells in Middlefield in the Marcellus Shale.
A visual build-out (shown in the following figures) was also conducted for the Town of Hancock in
Delaware County. While this level of gas well development may not occur in Middlefield, the two
images illustrate the results of visualization efforts in a similar community.
HANCOCK, NY
Hypothetical Scenerio based
on April 2009 Lease Map
15 ACRE WELL PADS
5-6 WELL HEADS PER PAD
16 WELLS PER SQ. MILE
HANCOCK, NY
Hypothetical Scenerio based
on April 2009 Lease Map
5 ACRE WELL PADS
40-ACRE WELL SPACING
16 WELLS PER SQ. MILE
High and Low Future Development Scenarios. This build-out analysis was conducted at two po-
tential levels of well development. One assumes that 50 percent of the lands that could be leased
are eventually developed (assuming 85% of the Towns land area minus protected lands and the
Village) and the other assumes that 100% of the lands could be leased (again assuming 85% of the
19
6
Professor Ingraffea has been a principal investigator on R&D projects from the National Science Foundation, NASA, FAA, Kodak,
IBM, Schlumberger, and the Gas Research Institute.
Towns land area minus protected lands and the Village). This range is based upon an assumption
that 50 to 100 percent of the currently uncontrolled land is ultimately developed using a threshold
of 16 wells per square mile for vertical wells, nine wells per square mile for horizontal wells each on
a single pad (for nine pads per square mile), and six to eight wells per square mile on a single pad
with multiple wells (one pad per square mile). This estimate is based on the best available data on
industry intent for developing the resource in conformance with New York State regulations at this
time, and presents a range of development within the Town that is consistent with that observed in
other natural gas regions (referred to as plays).
Farmland and Forestland Acreage. The National Land Cover Gap Analysis Project (GAP) was
used to calculate the number of acres of farmland and forest cover in the Town. Based upon the
GAP data, the number of acres of farmland in Middlefield is 11,240 or 28 percent of the Towns
land area while forestland is 25,331 acres or 63 percent of the Towns land area. The 11,240 acres
of farmland in cultivation is significantly less than the estimated 18,616.79 acres of agricultural
lands (46.93 percent of the Town) identified in the Town of Middlefield Master Plan Profile and
Inventory. The likely discrepancy between the two figures can be accounted for by the two differ-
ent methods of estimating the areas devoted to farming. GAP uses multi-season satellite imagery
(Landsat ETM+) from 1999-2001 in conjunction with digital elevation model (DEM) derived data-
sets (e.g. elevation, landform) to model natural and semi-natural vegetation. Vegetation classes are
drawn from NatureServe's Ecological System Classification. In some areas, manual techniques
were used in the GAP analysis to discriminate small patch vegetation systems and systems not dis-
tinguishable through topography.
The method used for calculating agricultural lands in the Town of Middlefield Master Plan Profile
and Inventory relied on information available from New York State tax and assessment records for
lands within Agricultural Districts. As stated in the Profile and Inventory, Most Ag districts have a
scattering of houses, idle lands, woodlands, and active farmlands mixed together. While the higher farm-
land figure of 18,616.79 acres may have once represented all of the lands devoted to agricultural
operations, due to the decline in the number of farms in Middlefield, some of the formerly active
agricultural fields may no longer be in production, as borne out by the GAP analysis. However, as
discussed below in Section H, Agriculture, the Town of Middlefield is committed to protection of
its farmland and there are many techniques available to encourage farmland retention and preser-
vation that are outside of the scope of this Land Use Analysis. Furthermore, there are encouraging
signs that farmlands that were once productive but may have been taken out of active production
may be subject once again to farming in the future if the trends that have emerged elsewhere are
reflected in Middlefield.
Forest Lost. As shown in the illustrations below, The Nature Conservancy used aerial photo-
graphs from before and after development of a Marcellus gas well pad site in Susquehanna County,
PA. to assess the impacts of this type of energy development. The Nature Conservancy digitized
the spatial footprint of 242 gas well pad sites and associated infrastructure. According to The Na-
ture Conservancy, well pads occupy 3.1 acres on average while the associated infrastructure (roads, water
20
impoundments, pipelines) takes up an additional 5.7 acres or a total of 8.8 acres per well pad. Adjacent
lands can also be impacted, even if they are not directly cleared. This is most notable in forest set-
tings where clearings fragment contiguous forest patches, create new edges, and change habitat
conditions for sensitive wildlife and plant species that depend on interior forest conditions. For-
est ecologists call this the edge effect. While the effect is somewhat different for each species, re-
search has shown measurable impacts often extend at least 330 feet (100 meters) from forest adja-
cent to an edge. To assess the potential interior forest habitat impact, the build-out analysis as-
sumes a 330 foot buffer into forest patches from new edges created by well pad and associated in-
frastructure development. For those well sites developed in forest areas or along forest edges (about
half of the assessed sites), an average of 21 acres of interior forest habitat was lost.
Farmland Lost. For estimating the number of acres of farmland lost as a result of site disturbance
activities, The Nature Conservancys aerial photographic analysis was relied upon as above for for-
estland. This showed that well pads occupy 3.1 acres on average while the associated infrastructure
(roads, water impoundments, pipelines) takes up an additional 5.7 acres, for a total of 8.8 acres per
well pad. Adjacent lands can also be impacted, even if they are not directly cleared, for instance,
when chemical spills occur. However, to remain conservative, the 8.8 acre figure per pad site was
used for the calculation of farmland lost. The forest edge impacts included in the forestland lost
calculations was not included in the analysis of farmland. It should be noted that the DECs
dSGEIS provided several ranges of estimates for well site impact. According to the dSGEIS, Most
wells will be drilled on multi-well pads, described in Chapter 5 as likely to be between 4 and 5 acres in size,
with pads larger than 5 acres possible, during the drilling and hydraulic fracturing stages of operations. Aver-
age production pad size, after reclamation, is likely to be between 1 and 3 acres. Access road acreage depends
!!
!
"#!!!
!
!
!
$%&&!'()*!+,,-'.!/0"!(,1%*!+2!(3%1(4%!
567&%!86%!(**+,7(8%)!7291(*81-,8-1%!
:1+()*;!5(8%1!7<'+-2)<%28*;!
'7'%&72%*=!8(>%*!-'!(2!())787+2(&!?0@!
(,1%*;!+1!(!8+8(&!+9!2%(1&.!A!(,1%*!'%1!
5%&&!'()0!!
B)C(,%28!&(2)*!,(2!(&*+!D%!7<'(,8%);!
%3%2!79!86%.!(1%!2+8!)71%,8&.!,&%(1%)0!!
E67*!7*!<+*8!2+8(D&%!72!9+1%*8!*%88724*!
56%1%!,&%(1724*!91(4<%28!,+2874-+-*!
9+1%*8!'(8,6%*;!,1%(8%!2%5!%)4%*;!(2)!
,6(24%!6(D78(8!,+2)787+2*!9+1!*%2*7873%!
57&)&79%!(2)!'&(28!*'%,7%*!86(8!)%'%2)!
on lnLerlor" foresL condlLlons.!!!
!
!"#$%&#'()%*+%,'-+.*/$0%12#'34$'5%$2#,,/.'(6%,#'
7#,,'8%9.'+1':4$#.*#9';41*#<*'=%2$#.>'
:4$#.*'2,#%$#9'34$'5%$2#,,/.'(6%,#'?#,,')%9' @AB'
CAC'
:4$#.*'2,#%$#9'34$'%..42+%*#9'+13$%.*$/2*/$#'
=$4%9.D')+)#,+1#.D'?%*#$'+E)4/19E#1*.D'#*2A>'
FAG'
H19+$#2*'34$#.*'+E)%2*'3$4E'1#?'#9&#.' IBAI'
JKJ!L'-HMN;J'!O-'HO-HMN;J'H58!;J(' @P'
B%17(&!'6+8+*!D%9+1%!(2)!(98%1!)%3%&+'<%28!+9!(!F(1,%&&-*!4(*!5%&&!'()!*78%!72!G-*H-%6(22(!I+-28.;!JB0!E+!
(**%**!86%!7<'(,8*!+9!867*!8.'%!+9!%2%14.!)%3%&+'<%28;!5%!)74787K%)!86%!*'(87(&'9++8'1728!+9!LML!4(*!5%&&!'()!
*78%*!(2)!(**+,7(8%)!7291(*81-,8-1%0!
!
21
on the location, the length of the road and other factors. In general, each 150 feet of access road adds 1/10th
of an acre to the total surface acreage disturbance. Centralized flowback water surface impoundments, when
included in the project scope, may be as large as five acres for the impoundment itself, plus the acreage neces-
sary for the access road, work areas, and to restrict access . . . the proposed disturbed access road acreage for
these sites ranges from 0.1 acres to 2.75 acres, with the access roads ranging from 130 feet to approximately
3,000 feet in length.
The NYC-DEP Report used a pad size disturbance area of seven acres per pad from experience with
the Fayetteville Shale formation reported by the US Department of the Interior. The 8.8 acres
associated with each gas well for the pad site, access road, pipeline infrastructure and water holding
facilities developed by The Nature Conservancy for lands in Pennsylvania is similar to what can be
expected to be found in Otsego County, is based upon aerial photographic analysis, and appears to
be the most reasonable data source and assumption for purposes of the Middlefield analysis. The
8.8 acre figure may actually be an understatement of the area of site disturbance that can be ex-
pected for each gas well, depending upon numerous other factors such as accidents. According to
the US Forest Services General Technical Report NRS-76 Probably the most severe, and certainly the
most dramatic, of the unexpected impacts are related to the drilling and hydrofracking fluids. Because there
was no brine indicated within the geology of the well site, the risk to vegetation was assumed to be minimal.
However, obvious and measurable damage to vegetation did occur from these fluids at three different locations
. . . These symptoms were attributed to a loss of control of the drill bore on May 29, 2008, resulting in an aer-
ial release of materials that drifted over areas immediately adjacent to the well pad and drill pit.
Water Consumption. The volume of water required to fracture a horizontal well depends on a
variety of factors, including characteristics of the target formation, the length of the lateral, and
fracture goal. Industry data cited in the DECs dSGEIS indicates that on the order of 3,000,000
to 8,000,000 gallons of water may be required to fracture a single horizontal well in the Marcellus
formation. Professor Tony Ingraffea of Cornell University has stated that Chesapeake Energy is
averaging 5.5 million gallons of water per well in Pennsylvanias Marcellus Shale play. Neverthe-
less, the NYC-DEP in their build-out of the Catskill Watershed assumed an average of 4,000,000
gallons of water would be consumed per well. Therefore, this analysis uses the assumption that
4,000,000 gallons of water will be needed to develop each new horizontal well. For vertical wells
subject to hydrofracking, a lower assumption has been used, relying on the NYC-DEP assumption
of 300,000 gallons per well.
Chemical Use. Water and sand use have been reported by the gas industry and the US Depart-
ment of Energy to comprise 98 to 99.5 percent of the fracturing fluid mixture, with the remaining
0.5 to 2.0 percent consisting of an array of chemical additives used to control fluid properties dur-
ing the various stages of the fracking process. Though the proportion of chemicals in fracturing
fluid is low relative to the large amounts of water required by the fracturing process, meaningful
assessment of potential water quality impacts requires that chemical additives be expressed on a
mass basis. This is especially important due to the toxicity of the chemicals used, as described be-
22
low in the section on Water Resources. The 167 tons (334,000 pounds) of chemicals used per well
figure cited by the NYC-DEP has been assumed in this analysis.
Flowback. After the hydraulic fracturing procedure is completed and pressure is released, the di-
rection of fluids pumped into the well reverses and a significant flow comes back to the surface.
The process and the returned chemical and water mixture are referred to as flowback. According
to the DECs dSGEIS, Flowback water recoveries reported from horizontal Marcellus wells in the northern
tier of Pennsylvania range between 9 and 35 percent of the fracturing fluid pumped. Flowback water volume,
then, could be 216,000 gallons to 2.7 million gallons per well. The NYC-DEP Report cites a flowback
volume of 400,000 to 2,800,000 gallons per well and for purposes of their build-out analysis, the
NYC-DEP Report uses (and this analysis will assume) an average of 2,000,000 gallons of flowback
to the surface. This flowback water and chemical mixture has been found to include not only the
chemicals pumped into the well but it also contains heavy metals and radionuclides found in the
bedrock that are released during the hydrofracking process. According to the U.S. Geological Sur-
vey, a typical 3 million gallon hydrofrac produces 15,000 gallons of chemical waste. In existing
Marcellus wells outside of New York this waste is stored on-site in large holding ponds to evapo-
rate, be land spread if legal, or until trucks haul it to other locations, for processing and disposal,
where suitable facilities exist. The flowback fluids must be contained and are subject to treatment
and sometimes reuse. There are no facilities in the Town of Middlefield that can accept such
flowback, so they must be transported to facilities outside the Town that can accommodate their
treatment.
Truck Trips. Development of natural gas resources are accompanied by a significant increase in
the level of heavy truck traffic compared to current conditions. The DECs dSGEIS estimates the
number of truck trips per well at roughly 900 to 1,300, approximately two-thirds of which are for
water and flowback hauling. The NYC-DEP Report cites a range of 800 to 2,000 truck trips per
well and for purposes of their build-out analysis, the NYC-DEP Report uses (and this analysis will
assume) an average of 1,200 truck trips per well.
23
Photo by Halliburton of a well pad in Burton, TX.
Employment. James Ladlee, Director of Penn State Cooperative Extension's Clinton County of-
fice and Larry Michael, Executive Director of Workforce and Economic Development at Pennsyl-
vania College of Technology, have estimated the creation of Marcellus Shale jobs involving the de-
velopment of the well pad itself. Several studies, including theirs, have found roughly the same
statistic: statewide in Pennsylvania, preparing, drilling and beginning the production of a Marcellus
Shale well will require the equivalent of 11 to 13 full-time jobs per well. This doesnt mean that
only a dozen or so people do all the work. Instead, their study found that, on average, it takes 410
individuals, across 150 different job types from roustabout and truck driver, to roughneck and
mud logger to get a well up and running. But nearly all of the workers are only there for a few days
or weeks at a time. Adding up the hours, it's equivalent to 11 to 13 people working on one well
site for an entire year. This analysis assumes an average of 12 employees per well. These employees
will require lodging and services in the community for the duration of the well drilling activity,
which has been estimated to last up to three years for one well pad with six to eight wells and from
four to eight months per well with one well per pad. Re-fracking of each well must also be ac-
counted for as described above.
Advances In Unconventional Gas
Solutions to meet growing gas demand worldwide.
A publication of Hart Energy Publishing
24
A Final Build-out Analysis Caution. As Neils Bohr, a Nobel Laureate in Physics once stated, Pre-
diction is very difficult, especially about the future. This analysis of the extent of heavy industrial
growth, principally in the development of natural gas wells, may understate the overall impact that
could be experienced in the Town of Middlefield. It should not be viewed as a prediction of what
will occur but as an exercise that can help residents and decision-makers understand the implica-
tions of taking no action to control the possible growth of heavy industrial development that is oc-
curring in other locations with the energy resources identified herein.
The results of the build-out calculations can be found in the following table summarizing several
impact categories. The impacts of the build-out will be discussed in detail in the sections that fol-
low the table.
25
Summary of the Build-out Analysis
MEASURES
UNI T OF
MEAS-
URE
VERTI CAL
DRI LLI NG
16 WELLS
PER SQ. MI .
WI TH
FRACKI NG
HORI ZONTAL
DRI LLI NG
1 WELL PER
PAD
9 WELLS PER
SQ. MI .
HORI ZONTAL
DRI LLI NG
6- 8 WELLS
PER PAD
6- 8 WELLS
PER SQ. MI
Potential Land Area Available for Wells
Town Land Area is 61.98 square miles
or 39,669.41 acres
A s s u m e 2 6 . 2 t o 5 2 . 4 s q u a r e m i l e s o f t h e To w n s L a n d A r e a
a t 50 P e r c e n t u p t o 1 0 0 P e r c e n t B u i l d - o u t S c e n a r i o s
Number of Wells
50% to 100% Build-out Scenarios
1 well 419 to 838 wells 236 to 472 wells 157 to 419 wells
Townwide Site Disturbance
(acres/pad & infrastructure)
8.8 acres 3,687 to 7,374 acres 2,077 to 4,154 acres 1,382 to 3,687 acres
Active Farmland Lost (acres)
(11,240 acres 28% of town)
8.8 acres 1,032 to 2,065 acres 582 to 1,163 acres 65 to 129 acres
Forest Lost for Well Pad (acres)
(25,331 acres 64% of town)
8.8 acres 2,360 to 4,720 acres 1,329 to 2,659 acres 148 to 295 acres
Indirect Forest Impact (acres) 21.2 acres 5,685 to 11,370 acres 3,202 to 6,404 acres 355 to 711 acres
Water Consumption
(gallons per well)
300,000/vertical well
4,000,000/horizontal well
125,700,000 to
251,400,000 gallons
944,000,000 to
1,888,000,000 gallons
628,000,000 to
1,676,000,000 gallons
Chemical Use (tons per well)
0.5 to 2% of frack fluid
167 tons/well 69,973 to 139,946 tons 39,412 to 78,824 tons 26,219 to 69,973 tons
Flowback (gallons per well)
10 to 70% of frack fluid
2,000,000 gallons
62,900,000 to
125,700,000 gallons
476,000,000 to
954,000,000 gallons
314,000,000 to
838,000,000 gallons
Truck Trips Per Well 1,200 502,800 to 1,005,600 283,000 to 566,400 188,400 to 502,800
Employee Equivalent Per Well 12 5,028 to 10,056 2,832 to 5,664 1,884 to 5,028
26
D. Land Resources
In the past, land was viewed largely as a commodity and its only function was to enable the owner
to make money. Over the past few decades, that attitude has changed. Many now think that land
should only be viewed as a resource rather than a commodity. While this resource view correctly
indicates the direction of the changed attitudes, it ignores the constitutional right to own land and
to buy and sell it freely. Land must be treated as both a resource and a commodity. Those who
view land only as a resource ignore the social and economic impact that would come with any mas-
sive restrictions on the free alienability of land. Those who view land only as a commodity ignore
the decades of research that now helps us to understand the science of ecology and the benefits,
including economic, of protecting nature and natural resources. The commodity view also ignores
the considerable attention that has been afforded to environmental protection and legitimate land
use control regulations by our executive, legislative and judicial branches of government.
If local government wants to protect its natural resources, it must also weigh the costs and benefits
of doing so. Sometimes, protecting natural resources has obvious benefits. Tourism is driven by
those who visit a community because it has protected the unique qualities of its lands, waters, and
other important resources. In this context, it makes financial sense to protect land resources to
ensure that visitors have a positive experience with nature within their jurisdiction. Why would
tourists want to flock to a community that has invested heavily in industrial operations? Many
studies have now documented that preservation of natural resources and protection of open space
are essential factors in helping a community retain existing jobs and to attract new ones. For in-
stance, the Trust for Public Land in their study The Economic Benefits of Parks and Open Space
found that retention of natural amenities are critical to ensuring a higher quality of life and are
one of the most important components for attracting both employers and employees. Rural areas
with a high quality of life tend to see more growth in small businesses.
The effects of changes in the land use makeup of the Town, if heavy industry, oil, gas and solution
mining were to become established, could be dramatic and permanent. These changes were re-
searched and characterized by the DEC in their 1992 Generic Environmental Impact Statement
(GEIS) on the Oil, Gas and Solution Mining Regulatory Program. Much additional research has
been conducted since that time.
The following has been summarized from the assessments of impact on land conducted both by
the DEC and The Nature Conservancy for their study Pennsylvania Energy Impacts Assessment,
Report 1: Marcellus Shale Natural Gas and Wind (November 15, 2010). The Nature Conservancy
analyzed aerial photography before and after development of a Marcellus gas well pad site in Sus-
quehanna County, PA. To assess the impacts of this type of energy development, The Nature Con-
27
servancy also digitized the spatial footprint of 242 gas well pad sites and associated infrastructure to
arrive at conclusions about the average amount of site disturbance associated with each gas well.
The majority of the industry's (i.e. oil, gas and solution mining industry) activity centers on drilling
individual oil and gas wells for primary production. Oil and gas operations vary in the amount of
land used, their effect on local topography and the volume of soil disturbed during construction
operations. In 1992, DEC estimated that generally access road and site construction disturb less than
two acres of land. In the 2009 dSGEIS, the DEC increased their estimates and discussed well pads
averaging between four and five acres in size during the drilling and fracturing phase and they may be as
large as 500 feet by 500 feet, or 5.7 acres. The aerial photography research conducted in Pennsylva-
nia by The Nature Conservancy has found that well pads disturb, on average 3.1 acres of land with
an additional 5.7 acres devoted to associated infrastructure, such as roads, pipelines, and water im-
poundments for a total area of disturbance for each well pad of 8.8 acres. It is reasonable to con-
clude that the experience in Pennsylvania will be similar to what can be expected in New York.
Impacts associated with the siting of well operations are directly related to the location, size and
land contours of each well site. Middlefield has numerous areas of steep slopes as shown on Figure
4 of the Towns proposed Master Plan Profile and Inventory. Areas of steep slope, if proposed for
drilling operations or for heavy industry, will involve greater regrading operations than areas with
gentle slopes because a relatively flat site is required in order to accommodate the industrial opera-
tions. The direct impacts are virtually the same as those for all other earth moving and construc-
tion operations. Vegetation is removed, soil is regraded to accommodate the infrastructure, and
then stabilized with structures or by other means. The regrading of land and conversion of soils to
infrastructure uses unavoidably alters the natural soil profile. Some areas not needed permanently
will be reclaimed under State regulations. However, areas that will be permanently altered for ac-
cess, gas production, and gas transmission, including sufficient areas needed for refracking opera-
tions in the future, will also result in a permanent visual alteration in the Towns landscapes. This
would lead to an unavoidable impact on both land and aesthetic resources.
The build-out analysis estimated the total land area in the Town that will be directly impacted as a
result of gas well development ranges from 1,382 acres up to 7,374 acres depending upon the well
type and whether the well pad locates one or multiple wells. The direct impacts on land stem from
regrading for construction of the pad itself including accommodating drilling rigs and auxiliary
equipment such as tanks or ponds (for water, fuel, chemicals, and wastewater), generators, com-
pressors, solids control equipment (shale shaker, de-silter, de-sander), choke manifold, accumulator,
pipe racks, office space, equipment maneuvering areas and other associated facilities. Roads to ac-
cess well and other sites must be built, and accidents involving chemical spills (See Water Quality
below) as well as trucks transporting fluids and other materials increase the risk of soil contamina-
tion. In the case of heavy industry, typically raw materials must be transported away from the site
28
for processing elsewhere. In addition to the drilling and extraction operations, the gas, oil or salt
solution products must be transported. The transmission requires the construction of gathering
lines, transmission lines and compressor stations, all of which can adversely impact land and other
resources. The long-term adverse environmental impacts on a property from the drilling opera-
tions will remain well into the foreseeable future.
Erosion and sedimentation result largely from site preparation and include grading operations,
which often involve a failure to install erosion control measures properly. Regardless, erosion and
sedimentation is unavoidable when a site is constructed in steep slope areas. Vegetation losses are
unavoidable (see Plants and Animals below). Every site must be stripped of vegetation and long-
term vegetation losses are most severe when an operator fails to properly segregate topsoil from
other excavated material. Topsoil takes hundreds of years to form and its loss can have serious
long term impacts on the land's ability to support crops and other vegetation. (See Plants and
Animals and Agriculture below). Persistent erosion can also result in significant changes in the
landscape (See Aesthetics below). The potential for accelerated rates of erosion continues long af-
ter the construction activities are completed. When the topsoil is not set aside and redistributed
properly, the topsoil layer can become buried, effectively sterilizing surface soils.
Negative environmental impacts on soil also result from accidental spills of oil, brine or chemical
materials used by heavy industry or involved in drilling and production of oil and gas wells. De-
pending upon the type and amount of material spilled, the contaminated soil may be unable to
support vegetative growth. Brine and other waste fluids high in salt can kill vegetation and retard
growth for years. Similarly, oil and other petroleum products, such as diesel fuel used by machin-
ery and in the fracking process itself, when spilled on the ground surface, can kill plants and retard
new growth.
Middlefields proposed planning and zoning document adoption, that would result in prohibition
of heavy industry, oil, gas or solution mining operations would in turn lead to the elimination of
the impacts identified herein as a result of the build-out activities. With the exception of potential
soil contamination from heavy industrial activities, it should be noted that all land development
activities requiring vegetation removal, regrading and then stabilization with structures, like resi-
dential or commercial development, can have similar impacts on land.
E. Water Resources
While DEP is mindful of the potential economic opportunity that this represents for the State, hy-
draulic fracturing poses an unacceptable threat to the unfiltered water supply of nine million New
Yorkers and cannot safely be permitted with the New York City watershed.
29
NYC Department of Environmental Protection
The impacts of heavy industrial development, hydrofracking in particular, on water resources in-
clude watershed impacts, water supply, water quality, and accidents, described as follows.
1. Watershed impacts
Land clearing, loss of forested cover, soil compaction, erosion and stormwater runoff are all associ-
ated with well pad construction, road and pipeline construction, and well operation. Loss of for-
ested cover and soil compaction interfere with groundwater recharge and contribute to watershed
impairment. Erosion and subsequent runoff have the potential to significantly contribute to deg-
radation of surface water quality. Heavy industrial development including gas wells results in a de-
crease in overall watershed forest cover, and an increase in compacted impervious surfaces. The
disruption of local drainage patterns caused by heavy truck traffic and other equipment on small
rural roads and nonpaved cleared surfaces, including numerous wetland and small stream cross-
ings, has the potential to substantially interfere with the ability of watersheds to provide adequate
water supply and high quality water, especially when these activities occur over a large area. Sur-
face compaction may substantially reduce the flood control capability of natural systems, especially
in floodplains and wetlands. Nonpoint source pollution from stormwater runoff and erosion often
results from site clearing and grading. Especially where well pads are near small wetlands or
streams, the ensuing sedimentation effects may be significant. On a single gas well pad site in Fer-
now forest, WV, a US Forest Service study provides a conservative estimated loss of 2.3 tons of soil
per 2.47 acres, measured at this single site, due to improperly installed and maintained silt fences.
Any streams or wetlands in close proximity would likely be affected by this level of erosion and po-
tential sedimentation. The potentially large amount of land cleared for well pads, pits, roads and
pipelines increases the chances of widespread and cumulative sedimentation and subsequent water
quality issues.
The impact on wetlands is especially significant. Small wetlands are some of the most ecologically
and economically valuable habitats but they are also among the most threatened. Research docu-
ments a minimum 100 foot vegetated buffer is necessary for wetland water quality protection. The
DEC protects only wetlands that are 12.4 acres or more and only if they appear on DEC maps.
The federal government does not afford any buffer protection for smaller wetlands. However a sig-
nificant portion of wetlands are smaller in size, and cumulatively provide significant benefits in-
cluding flood control, water quality improvement, and moderation of stream flows during
drought. Since no protective buffer is required these wetlands are not protected from water quality
impacts.
30
2. Water supply
Hydraulic fracturing requires the use of large quantities of water and fracturing fluids, which are
injected underground at high volumes and pressure. Each well can be hydrofracked multiple times
over a period of years, using anywhere from 1.5 to 9 million gallons of water each time. With an
average well density of 6 to 9 horizontal wells per square mile, the cumulative effect of this level of
water use is significant. The build-out analysis estimated that between 62,900,000 gallons to
1,888,000,000 gallons of water supply will be required. Most of this water will come from surface
or groundwater resources, For example, 56% was sourced from groundwater and 43% from sur-
face water in the Barnet shale region of Texas; 55 % from surface water and 45 % from local water
utilities in portions of the Susquehanna basin (Pennsylvania). A hypothetical river or stream that is
10 feet wide and two feet deep would have to be about one and one-quarter miles long to hold a
million gallons of water at a single point in time. Water withdrawals from groundwater and aqui-
fers are equally problematic; groundwater is the source of baseflow for most rivers and streams and
supplies drinking water to a significant portion of the Towns residents.
Replenishment of groundwater occurs slowly over time, and depends on watershed condition (e.g.
forest cover, impervious surfaces) and is affected by local conditions including drought. During
times of low flow or drought, impacts of heavy industrial use of local water supplies would be even
more significant, affecting water quality, temperature, aquatic ecosystems, and recreation as well.
Sufficient ground and surface water resources will be needed to support drilling operations with-
out adversely impacting existing users and habitats. The availability of water resources to supply
drilling efforts in the Town have yet to be determined.
3. Water quality
During hydraulic fracturing, large volumes of water mixed with various chemicals, sand and other
constituents are injected deep underground. Chemicals include acids, biocides, corrosion inhibi-
tors, defoamers, emulsifiers, gellants, resins, surfactants and viscosifiers. The Marcellus shale natu-
rally contains high levels of salt and naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORM), some of
which will dissolve in the hydrofracking fluid. Estimates are quite variable and generally range
from 9 and 35 percent or more (some up to 70%) of this fluid comes back out of the well as flow-
back. The flowback contains high levels of total dissolved solids (mostly salt or sodium chloride)
and NORMS, as well as added chemicals. The remainder stays underground. Hydrofracking
wastewater is stored in tanks or pits at the well site, recycled for use in future fracturing jobs, in-
jected into underground storage wells, discharged to nearby surface water, applied to the land if
legal, or transported to wastewater treatment facilities. Although gas companies have not been re-
quired to disclose the chemical composition of wastewater, recent research has begun to fill this
information gap. A 2011 report issued by the US House of Representatives documents that be-
31
tween 2005 and 2009, oil and gas companies used more than 2,500 hydraulic fracturing products
containing 750 chemicals and other components. These included 652 different products that con-
tained one or more of 29 chemicals that are (1) known or possible human carcinogens, (2) regu-
lated under the Safe Drinking Water Act for their risks to human health, or (3) listed as hazardous
air pollutants under the Clean Air Act; and 95 products containing 13 different carcinogens.
Chemicals that appeared most often include methanol, isopropanol, crystalline silica, ethylene gly-
col, 2-butoxyethanol, hydrotreated light petroleum distillates, and sodium hydroxide. Their proper-
ties vary; for example, 2-butoxyethanol (2-BE) is a foaming agent or surfactant in 126 products. Ac-
cording to EPA scientists, 2-BE is easily absorbed and rapidly distributed in humans following in-
halation, ingestion, or dermal exposure. Studies have shown that exposure to 2-BE can cause
hemolysis (destruction of red blood cells) and damage to the spleen, liver, and bone marrow. In a
separate study, the Pennsylvania DEP has derived a list of 54 chemicals that may be used during
the process, including sixteen that affect 10 or more health effect categories (including skin, eye or
sensory organs, respiratory effects; gastrointestinal or liver effects, damage to the brain, or cardio-
vascular effects). These include benzene, acetone, arsenic, heavy metals, bromide, sulfate, toluene,
and cylenes. Hydrofracking fluids sometimes contain diesel fuel. The EPA has stated that the use
of diesel fuel in fracturing fluids poses a great threat to underground sources of drinking water.
With an average concentration of chemicals of 0.5-2.0 %, an average horizontal fracking operation
using four million gallons of water may contain 20,000 to 80,000 gallons of chemicals. When this
amount is multiplied by the number of wells and number of times any one well may be refracked,
the cumulative amount of chemicals both below and above ground is significant. In addition,
naturally occurring radioactive materials, as well as heavy brine from underground rock are present
in varying amounts in hydrofracking fluids retrieved from wells. In many instances, the wastewater
is transported to wastewater treatment plants that are not designed to treat salts and NORMS. Re-
cent studies indicate that rivers and streams may not be able to dilute the radioactive elements of
drilling waste that water treatment plants discharge.
The hydrofracking solution that remains underground (typically 30-70%) has the potential for mi-
gration into groundwater depending on rock composition and specific site characteristics. Research
has shown that hydrofracking fluids can make their way into local wells, as can methane from the
hydrofracking process. Well failures, such as inadequate or cracked well casings can allow fracking
water to leak out and potentially contaminate drinking water water supplies. New research indi-
cates that hydraulic fracturing fluids have entered local wells in gas development areas from Wyo-
ming to Dimock PA, to Colorado, contaminating water supplies. The presence of methane is one
indicator of such contamination; methane is also a health hazard and is highly flammable. Meth-
ane is also linked to explosions and may be leaked into nearby rivers and streams.
32
On the surface, wastewater is often stored in open pits at the well site where it may be allowed to
evaporate. This wastewater, which in addition to its chemical constituents may now also contain
sand, heavy brines (salt) and low level radionuclides derived from underground rock, may con-
taminate water resources via leaks in the plastic liner, pit overflow (e.g. during high precipitation
events), spills during handling or transport; it may be applied to nearby land areas or be discharged
into streams. Sometimes wastewater is stored in containers and trucked to wastewater treatment
plants. In some cases hydrofracking wastewater from the well pit was hand-applied to adjacent for-
est as per the well permit, with documented impacts on trees and other vegetation. Impacts from
hydrofracking wastewater include: impairment or loss of drinking water supply, degradation of
aquatic habitats and loss of wildlife, damage to livestock, vegetation loss, and changes in soil chem-
istry.
4. Accidents, spills and violations.
Documentation of a variety of accidents that have occurred during the process of hydraulic fractur-
ing are an essential element in overall hydrofracking impact review. Future similar accidents are
highly likely based on past experience from other states, due to the nature of the hydrofracking
processes, extent of proposed drilling, lack of comprehensive and consistent oversight, well siting
in or near sensitive areas, and the inevitability of mechanical failure or human error. The accidents
often involve water resources, thus increasing the likelihood that impacts will be transported
downstream. The potential for accidents involving hydrofracking wastewater raises special concerns
due to the unknown content of those wastewaters, especially since the release of the recent study
documenting over 700 possible wastewater constituents. It only takes one accident, at one site, as a
result of human error or mechanical failure, to create significant ecological damage-- particularly if
the well is sited in a sensitive area.
Riverkeepers report Fractured Communities documents over 100 cases of environmental con-
tamination where industrial gas drilling resulted in adverse impacts. These include more than 20
cases of drinking water contamination in Pennsylvania; over 30 cases of groundwater and drinking
water contamination in Colorado and Wyoming and more than 10 cases of surface water spills of
drilling fluid in the Marcellus Shale region. It also includes more than 30 investigations of stray gas
migration from new and abandoned wells in Pennsylvania, numerous illegal operations and permit
violations by gas drilling companies and explosions that occurred between 2006 and 2010 that con-
taminated groundwater and/or surface water.
As well drilling and hydraulic fracturing activities are increasing in some states like Pennsylvania,
there is a corresponding increase in the number of accidents being reported. Most recently (April
21, 2011) an apparent equipment malfunction caused a major blowout during a fracking procedure
at a natural gas well in Bradford County, PA and spilled thousands of gallons of chemically con-
33
taminated water into a stream that flows into Tonawanda Creek and ultimately the Susquehanna
River. Seven families were evacuated and farmers advised to not allow their livestock to drink the
creek water.
In addition, the Pennsylvania Land Trust Association has reviewed violations of state Oil and Gas
laws by Marcellus shale well drillers in Pennsylvania between January 2008 and August 20, 2010,
finding a total of 1614 violations of state laws due to gas drilling or other earth disturbance activi-
ties related to natural gas extraction in this 2.5-year period.
The Town of Middlefield contains numerous water resources. Major stream systems include the
Susquehanna, Cherry Valley Creek, and Red Creek. All three are associated with extensive wet-
land complexes. Additional large and small wetlands, and small streams are plentiful throughout
the town. Some of these streams drain areas with steep slopes. Drinking water comes from individ-
ual wells, with a segment of the towns population served by municipal water from Otsego Lake
(vicinity of Cooperstown). Two public wellhead areas are located along the Susquehanna River
south of Cooperstown. The numerous surface water bodies in the town are of significant impor-
tance for groundwater recharge, wildlife habitats, aesthetics, sustaining downstream water levels,
recreational fishing areas, and for irrigation and livestock support. These resources provide the
town with an array of benefits from drinking water to recreation. Water quality throughout the
town is generally good. The Susquehanna River (class B stream) is affected by only minor impacts,
from agricultural runoff to atmospheric deposition (i.e. mercury from midwest power plants), but
aquatic life fully supported. Otsego lake (class A) has minor impacts from nutrient loading and ag-
ricultural land runoff. It supports an outstanding quality lake trout fishery. Cherry Valley Creek is
class C (t), a trout fishery mostly non-impacted to slightly impacted from nonpoint pollution. The
water quality along this tributary is higher as it flows south, due to distance from the village of
Cherry Valley, and to increased forest cover and additional flow supplied by tributaries. The lower
portion also supports considerable wetlands within the floodplain. Groundwater is the source of
baseflow for most rivers and streams and supplies drinking water to a significant portion of the
towns residents.
The current threats to water quality in the Town are: atmospheric deposition (mercury), agricul-
tural runoff (nutrient loading, pesticides, fertilizers, etc.) and to a lesser extent individual septic
systems, habitat modification, and streambank erosion. Many portions of the Upper Susquehanna
Basin are particularly prone to flooding.
The benefits of prohibiting heavy industrial uses within the Town include the opportunity to pro-
tect the Towns water resources, both in quantity and in quality, by avoiding the impacts associated
with such development, including erosion and runoff, forest removal and soil compaction, and
contamination from spills, leaks and accidents. Agricultural operations would avoid losses due to
34
impacts on livestock or crops. The town would also avoid expensive clean up costs or drinking wa-
ter supply replacement in the event of spills and drinking water contamination. And the town
would continue to enjoy the benefits from tourism and recreation that are dependent on healthy
water resources. In this case, it is likely to be less costly to prohibit this land use than to repair
damages that are likely to result from it. The savings to the town in terms of economic expense and
increased quality of life (recreation, tourism, clean drinking water) are likely to be substantial.
The protection of watersheds and their unimpaired functions includes wetlands that provide water
quality improvement and flood control functions. Streams with stable, non-eroded banks and ade-
quate flow, wetlands and ponds with intact hydrology, thriving plant and animal communities as-
sociated with these water resources, and an adequate supply of high quality water for drinking
would all benefit from this prohibition of heavy industrial development.
While this prohibition is not a guarantee of water resource protection, it does provide an excellent
opportunity for a high level of protection- an opportunity that would be severely compromised
should heavy industrial development proceed within the Town.
F. Plants, Animals and Ecosystem Services
Heavy industrial development, particularly gas development and hydrofracking-- affects natural sys-
tems on several levels. Impacts may affect habitats and species and ultimately ecosystems, and the
benefits provided to human communities by ecosystem services. These impacts are complex due to
the interconnections among species and their habitats. Changes in habitat and condition affect
different species in different ways. For example, species that may be most susceptible to loss of
connectivity between habitats and increased roads and traffic are those that disperse across the
landscape like migrating birds and bats, and reptiles and amphibians traversing between upland
and wetlands. Certain species, such as stream salamanders and brook trout, are extremely sensitive
to changes in water quality or temperature. Other species are affected by loss or changes in food
supply resulting from land use impacts. Some species are only found in very few areas within NY
state, while others are found primarily within the Marcellus Shale region. Many of these species,
whether they depend upon upland forests or freshwater wetlands and streams may experience
changes in behavior, reproduction, distribution, or mortality from the array of impacts associated
with natural gas well construction and operation, associated road and pipeline construction, and
hydrofracking wastewater use and disposal. A brief summary of impacts associated with natural gas
development activities is provided as follows.
35
Site clearing, removal of vegetation, construction of well pad, pit, road, pipeline, stream and
wetland crossings.
Habitat fragmentation. These activities result in significant forest habitat fragmentation, i.e.
breaking up forest cover into smaller fragments, reducing forest cover, and loss of connectivity be-
tween fragments. Size of habitat fragments affects which species are able to thrive within them, as
different species have different habitat requirements. Tree frogs, flying squirrels and certain wood-
land flowers are sensitive to forest fragmentation because of changes in canopy cover, humidity and
light levels. Other species at risk are those that are of conservation concern such as tree bats and
woodland turtles and snakes. The clearing of forest for construction of well pad, roads and pipe-
lines causes impacts beyond the actual acres cleared. As noted in the buildout table, the amount of
forest cleared for a single well pad includes 8.8 acres of direct disturbance as well as an additional
21.2 acres of indirect impact resulting from the increase in forest habitat edge the area that ex-
tends at least 330 feet (100 meters) into adjacent forest. Impacts extend into this edge area. Inte-
rior forest species avoid edges for different reasons. Black-throated blue warblers and other interior
forest nesting birds, for example, avoid areas near edges because of the increased risk of predation.
Some species, especially common species such as whitetail deer and cowbirds, are attracted to forest
edges often resulting in increased competition and predation, and. Invasive plants often thrive
on forest edges and can displace native forest species. As large forest patches become progressively
cut into smaller patches, populations of forest interior species decline, while populations of edge
tolerant species increase. The increase of non native invasive species in areas where native vegeta-
tion is removed or disturbed changes habitat and food sources for wildlife; these species are often
difficult and costly to eradicate.
Wetlands and streams. Headwater forested streams provide the greatest filtration capacity for nu-
trient removal. Construction activities that impair water quality, especially erosion and stormwater
runoff into small streams and wetlands, also impair the functioning of these systems and their abil-
ity to support plants and animals. These impacts range from road crossings that interrupt water
flow to road construction that in one case filled in the entire streambed of a small stream. Small
wetlands are particularly at risk. As documented on the DEC website, these wetlands provide sig-
nificant ecosystem functions, but are typically not adequately protected. Degraded wetlands have
impaired function, with a resulting loss in the benefits they provide. This includes loss or degrada-
tion of vernal pools and impacts on the rare species they support.
Increased truck traffic
This results in direct mortality for wildlife species moving across roads, especially for species that
regularly move between habitat areas, such as reptiles and amphibians. This mortality can be sig-
nificant, especially for species of conservation concern, considering the extent of small rural roads-
36
and their crossing of multiple habitats- and the extent of truck traffic associated with hydrofracking
operations.
Noise and light
The operation of gas wells entails noise from engines, compressors, and operation of other heavy
equipment on a continual basis, as well as lighting at night. These have been known to affect the
behavior and distribution of species in the vicinity, and may affect behavior or reproductive success
of certain sensitive species. Bright lights, which stay on 24 hours per day, every day for the life of a
well, may confuse or attract migrating birds.
Water withdrawals
Water used for hydrofracking is generally taken from local surface or groundwater sources. Small
rivers, streams, ponds, lakes and wetlands are particularly vulnerable to the changes in hydrology
that result from these withdrawals. Small streams, especially headwaters, support a high diversity of
plants and animals, including rare species. Considering an average of four million gallons of water
used per fracking operation, this singular amount may not measurably affect a very large river like
the Susquehanna; however, it would be devastating to a small waterway and its biological diversity
and it also need to be viewed cumulatively given the potential for multiple well development occur-
ring simultaneously. Since water systems are interconnected, water withdrawn from a stream or
from groundwater will impact connected and downstream water resources as well. Aquatic habitats
are altered by seasonal fluctuations in water level, especially during drought. Lowered water levels
increase the effect of pollutant concentration and susceptibility to higher temperatures. These im-
pacted conditions are especially significant for sensitive stream species like trout that require cold,
clean water, and stream salamanders that are sensitive to changes in water quality.
Air pollution
Air pollutants associated with gas well sites include the volatile organic compounds that enter the
air from contaminated wastewater pits on well pad sites. These are described in the section on air
quality. Since information on human health effects is often derived from testing on animals, it is
likely that toxic air pollutants from emissions and from wastewater pits would affect wildlife, espe-
cially vertebrates. Effects on livestock have been recorded.
Wastewater
Wastewater from hydrofracking returns to the surface, and is stored onsite in plastic-lined pits. In
addition to the chemicals added to the water prior to hydrofracking, the fracturing process adds a
number of substances from the underground environment to the water that is withdrawn after
37
fracking. As result, withdrawn fracturing water has very high levels of total dissolved solids, or
TDS, which is the amount of material in dissolved formincluding minerals, salts or metals in a
given volume of water. The amount of various dissolved materials in fracturing water exceeds that
found in typical river water; these high total dissolved solids can be a serious impairment to water
quality in freshwater systems. The wastewater holding pits on well pad sites attract wildlife (often
due to the salt) and can be lethal to birds and other wildlife that drink from them or otherwise
come into contact with contaminants in wastewater fluids. Pit liners may leak, pits may overflow,
or fluids may be spilled, contaminating soil, surface water, and ground water.
The combined effects of habitat fragmentation and potential release of fracturing water into
streams could have significant impacts on aquatic ecosystem services. Changes in TDS can be toxic
to aquatic organisms, reducing the size of biological communities and ultimately impacting fisher-
ies and water quality. For example, studies conducted by the Academy of Natural Sciences meas-
ured the conductivity of stream water, the abundance of certain sensitive insects and the abun-
dance of salamanders in steams located in areas with high density drilling, low density drilling and
no drilling. The results showed water conductivity almost twice as high in the high density sites as
it was in the low density and reference sites, while number of both salamanders and sensitive in-
sects were significantly reduced in high density sites. Amphibians are especially vulnerable to
changes in the environment and their absence is often an ecological "early warning" system.
Aquatic insects provide a critical food source for trout. Additional water quality impacts on wet-
lands, streams, and ponds and the species they support are described via ongoing research as well
as documentation of the consequences of spills, leaks and accidents that resulted in freshwater
contamination.
Wastewater disposal
Hydrofracking wastewater has the potential to affect plants and animals at every step of storage,
transport, or processing. U.S. Forest Service studies documented destruction of trees and other
vegetation when they came into contact with wastewater that was manually sprayed into adjacent
forest from a hydrofracking wastewater pit. The same study documented changes in soil chemistry-
and subsequently potential impacts on soil biota. Some wastewater is processed in wastewater
treatment plants that are not effective in removing salts, TDS, and some chemicals. Releases to sur-
face waters from treated, yet salt enriched, waste water can significantly affect freshwater ecosystems
and the species they support.
Accidents and violations
The potential for contamination of streams, ponds, lakes and wetlands from hydrofracking waste-
water as a result of various accidents, mechanical and human error, spills, leaks, and direct release
38
into surface waters is significant. Refer to the water quality section for additional information.
Damage to plants and animals, habitats and ecosystems depends on the specific chemicals and
other harmful constituents (e.g. salts) present in the wastewater as well as the specific characteristics
of the surface waters and the types of species (including those of particular conservation concern)
and their sensitivity to water quality changes.
Cumulative impacts on ecosystem benefits and services
The cumulative effect of forest fragmentation and degradation of small wetlands and streams, in-
crease in invasive species, and subsequent decrease in diversity of native plant and animal species is
likely to be significant across the larger landscape as numerous well pads are constructed. Impacts
on stream headwaters and wetlands, which in many cases support a high diversity of plants and
animals of conservation concern may result from the loss of or encroachment on, adequate pro-
tective vegetated buffers (necessary for water quality protection and species needs including nest-
ing), soil compaction and disruption of water flow and connectivity at stream and wetland cross-
ings, and sediment loading from stormwater runoff. These effects on wetland and stream habitats
are exacerbated by additional water quality degradation from hydrofracking wastewater via spills,
leaks, or accidents. These may be cumulatively significant within individual watersheds. The mag-
nitude of gas well and similar heavy industrial development may impair recovery of ecosystems and
populations over time.
Ecosystems provide a variety of services that benefit human communities, and many of these have
economic value as well. New York State provides information about these benefits, but does not
legally protect them. A diversity of plants and animals play important roles in ecosystem function-
ing and thus are important to these benefits and services.
Summary of Hydrofracking Activities and Effects on Ecosystem Services
GAS WELL AND
HYDROFRACKI NG
ACTI VI TI ES
GENERAL
HABI TAT
I MPACTS OR THREATS
TO SPECI ES
ECOSYSTEM SERVI CES
AFFECTED
Clearing and grading,
removal of trees, con-
struction of drilling
pads, roads, pipelines;
increased traffic; air
pollution; noise; light;
wastewater spills and
accidents
Forest Loss of habitat connectivity,
habitat fragmentation, toxic
contamination (soil or
vegetation), loss of trees,
nesting disturbance, in-
creased edge habitat and
changes in species; loss of
interior forest species; in-
creased invasive species
Watershed protection,
stabilization of stream/
river banks, water tem-
perature moderation, air
quality, biological diversity
39
GAS WELL AND
HYDROFRACKI NG
ACTI VI TI ES
GENERAL
HABI TAT
I MPACTS OR THREATS
TO SPECI ES
ECOSYSTEM SERVI CES
AFFECTED
Construction of well
pad, roads, pipelines;
unprotected wetland
crossings; increased
truck and equipment
traffic; wastewater
spills and accidents;
withdrawal of local wa-
ter supply; wastewater
pits and leakage
Wetlands
(freshwater
wetlands,
marsh, vernal
pool) and
ponds
Degradation of water qual-
ity from contaminants,
toxics, stormwater runoff;
increased nutrient loading;
altered hydrology (including
decreased water supply),
loss of forested buffer and
adjacent critical terrestrial
habitat, nutrient and sedi-
ment loading, loss of con-
nectivity between habitats,
invasive species
Flood control, water qual-
ity improvement, ground-
water recharge, recrea-
tion, education, habitat
for species of
conservation concern,
maintenance of
streamflow during drought
Road crossings;
erosion and stormwa-
ter runoff from con-
struction, spills and
accidents; wastewater
spills, discharges;
withdrawal of local wa-
ter supply; wastewater
pits and leakage
Rivers,
streams, lakes
Degradation of water qual-
ity from contaminants,
toxics, stormwater runoff;
increased nutrient loading;
increased water tempera-
ture; water loss from with-
drawal; altered streamflow
esp. during drought; ripar-
ian corridor degradation
and buffer loss; increase in
invasive non-native spe-
cies, loss of insect life as
food source for fish
Watershed connections,
water supply, recreation,
fisheries
The Town of Middlefield contains a high diversity of habitats and species of plants and animals.
The New York Flora Atlas documents 1111 plant species in Otsego County (many are likely to be
found in the Town); 23 of these are state listed threatened or endangered. The importance of plant
species in the Town is difficult to quantify without site-specific information. Many rare plants are
associated with freshwater wetlands, while others prefer disturbed sites such as old fields. The im-
portance of a variety of native plants is more readily seen in the composition of habitats and the
role of plants in ecosystems.
Wildlife has been more readily identified; but here too its value lies in its diversity including spe-
cies of conservation concern, and in the role of species in ecosystems. The Towns habitats support
a variety of wildlife species as well. Some of these are listed in the New York State Comprehensive
Wildlife Strategy Plan as SGCN or species of greatest conservation need. These are generally the
species that are most sensitive to impacts-including those from heavy industrial development. The
NYS DEC lists ninety wildlife species of greatest conservation need in the Susquehanna River Ba-
40
sin. The Town of Middlefield is likely to support many of these due to the variety of its habitats.
The following table provides some examples.
Selected Habitats and Associated Species of Greatest Conservation Need
Likely to be Found in the Town of Middlefield, Otsego County
HABI TAT EXAMPLES OF SPECI ES OF GREATEST CONSERVATI ON NEED*
Forests: deciduous forest,
shrubland, woodland
black-throated blue warbler, Cerulean warbler, red-headed woodpecker,
wood thrush, Louisiana waterthrush, scarlet tanager; eastern red bat,
hoary bat, silver-haired bat; American woodcock, golden-winger warbler,
ruffed grouse, whip-poor-will, Canada warbler, brown thrasher, prairie
warbler; long-eared owl, red-shouldered hawk, northern goshawk, Coo-
pers hawk, sharp-shinned hawk
Freshwater wetlands and
ponds
American bittern, pied-billed grebe, king rail; four-toed salamander, wood
duck, American black duck, spotted turtle; Jeffersons salamander, blue-
spotted salamander
Rivers and streams, ri-
parian corridors
brook trout, dragonflies, mayflies and stoneflies; hellbender, longtail
salamander, northern red salamander; mink; river otter; wood turtle;
blackchin shiner, comely shiner, swallowtail shiner
Grasslands and open
fields
northern harrier, upland sandpiper, horned lark, vesper sparrow, grass-
hopper sparrow, Henslows sparrow
*Including but not limited to species listed as threatened, endangered or special concern by the State of New York
Heavy industrial development affects habitats and the individual species that live in those habitats.
Due to its affect at the landscape level, it also impacts species diversity, and the ability of ecosys-
tems to provide the services that benefit human communities. The benefits of maintaining high
biological diversity and intact ecosystems are far reaching; they include water quality and supply;
sediment control; nutrient cycling; flood control; groundwater recharge; pollination of crops, habi-
tats and gardens; rural character; air and water quality improvement; control of invasive species;
recreation including fishing, hunting and birdwatching; natural areas like Glimmerglass State Park
and Roseboom State Forest; and human health.
A landscape that is biologically diverse is more resilient to changes, and this stability helps to en-
sure that ecological services and benefits will continue into the future. Many of these benefits also
have economic value to the town, especially within the watershed context. As stated in Economic
Benefits of Open Space Preservation by the New York State Office of the State Comptroller, 2010,
41
Decision-making that explicitly considers and values the positive economic effects of open space, as well as
environmental and quality-of-life implications, will best serve a communitys long-term interests. Some of
these economic benefits, noted in the report, include the control of stormwater runoff, flood con-
trol and storage, erosion control, preservation of surface water quality and stream flows, and
groundwater recharge.
By prohibiting heavy industrial development the town retains the benefits of ecosystem services
and the option of providing them for future generations, and avoids the costs associated with the
loss of those benefits.
G. Air Quality
Air quality impacts from heavy industrial uses include emissions from a variety of stationary and
mobile sources. One of the largest sources of air pollution is engines used by trucks and heavy
equipment. Air emissions from the exploration and production of shale gas include a variety of
potential air pollution sources that change during different phases of operation. These include ex-
haust from drilling rigs; venting and flaring of natural gas; exhaust from multiple diesel-powered
pumps (to achieve necessary pressure in the well); vehicular traffic; volatile chemicals that escape
into the air from wastewater pits; compressors and pumps, often operating 24 hours a day; fugitive
emissions from leaks in pipe connections and other equipment; dehydrators that remove water
from natural gas and separators that may vent large volumes of methane and volatile organic com-
pounds (VOCs); sulfur removal systems; and diesel powered compressor engines operating 24
hours a day, compressing gas and moving it along pipelines.
A significant amount of methane, a potent greenhouse gas with a global warming potential greater
than that of carbon dioxide, escapes into the atmosphere every year from gas fields and facilities. A
recent study from Cornell University documents that the amount of methane released during
natural gas hydrofracking produces greenhouse gas emissions at least as significant as those pro-
duced by burning coal, and that overall this method has a global warming potential greater than
that of conventional gas or oil.
The report recently released by the US House of Representatives states that more than 2,500 hy-
draulic fracturing products containing 750 chemicals and other components were used between
2005 and 2009. These included 25 toxic chemicals that are hazardous air pollutants and that are
used in various hydraulic fracturing products. 595 products contained 24 different hazardous air
pollutants (pollutants that cause or may cause cancer or other serious health effects e.g. reproduc-
tive effects or birth defects, or adverse environmental and ecological effects) including hydrogen
fluoride, lead, and methanol. In another study, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
42
Protection identified 21 chemicals, used in hydrofracking fluid, that are readily airborne. All of
them cause human health effects that affect gastrointestinal and liver systems, respiratory system,
skin and eyes, cardiovascular and blood condition, brain and nervous system, kidneys, immune
system, reproductive system and endocrine system. Six of the 21 are known cancer-causing agents.
43
Summary of Selected Air Pollutants Generated
During Hydrofracking and other Heavy Industrial Activities
AI R POLLUTANT SOURCE I MPACTS
Methane Venting of natural gas, dehydration Tendency to explode
Diesel Fuel Stimulation fluids, oil-based drilling
muds, engines and heavy equip-
ment
Mixture of hydrocarbons including
carcinogens
Heavy metals (arsenic, barium,
cadmum, chromium, lead, mercury,
selenuum, zinc)
Diesel fuel exhaust Lead is harmful to childrens neuro-
logical development and can also
cause health problems in adults,
including reproductive problems,
high blood pressure, and nerve dis-
orders
Volatile organic compounds (ben-
zene, toluene, ethylbenzene,
xylenes, formaldehyde, etc.)
Venting and flaring of natural gas,
wastewater pits, engine exhaust,
compressors, wastewater dehydra-
tion and storage, compressor op-
eration
React with nitrogen oxides to form
ozone and smog; health effects
include: cancer, reproductive and
nervous system, respiratory and
neurological effects
Sulphur dioxide Engine exhaust (gasoline or diesel
fuel containing sulphur), natural gas
flaring
Reacts with other chemicals for
form particulate pollution, with
health effects including lung dam-
age, respiratory illness, heart condi-
tions
Nitrogen oxides Compressor engines, flaring, ex-
haust from diesel and natural gas
engines
React with VOCs to form ozone and
smog; health effects include lung
damage, respiratory illness, heart
conditions, premature death.
Particulates diesel fuel exhaust, dust from pits,
venting and flaring
Health effects include respiratory
illness, may combine with other air
pollutants for additional health ef-
fects; particulates from diesel ex-
haust are carcinogenic.
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Diesel exhaust, flaring, pits Possible carcinogens, reproductive
effects in animals
Hydrogen fluoride Wastewater pits Highly corrosive and systemic poi-
son, causes severe health effects
due to deep tissue penetration, ab-
sorption of substantial amounts may
be fatal.
The cumulative effect of all of these contaminants is degraded air quality and subsequent affects
on human health. This is illustrated by following the impacts of just one of these, ozone, which is a
commonly measured air quality indicator. Ozone is a major component of smog and a potentially
harmful pollutant. It is created by sunlight reacting with chemicals found in gasoline vapors and
emissions from cars and industrial smoke stacks. Besides generating an array of human health ef-
44
fects, ozone also has detrimental effects on plants and ecosystems, reducing forest growth and crop
yields.
Air pollution impacts from hydrofracking have been examined in areas where gas drilling has been
in practice for some time. The following cases illustrate some of these impacts.
Dallas-Fort Worth, Denton and Dallas Counties, TX. The Dallas-Fort Worth area has seen a dra-
matic impact on its air quality from natural gas drilling in the Barnett Shale. A report from South-
ern Methodist University found that the pollutant emissions from natural gas drilling activities per
day surpassed those produced by all of the vehicle traffic in the Dallas-Fort Worth region.
Town of DISH, Denton County, TX. Reports of human illness and animal illness (including neu-
rological effects and blindness in horses) and deaths led to an air quality study of the effects of gas
wells and compressor stations. The study found the presence in high concentrations of carcinogenic and
neurotoxin compounds in ambient air near and/or on residential properties. The compounds found were
in excess of what would normally be anticipated in ambient air and included benzene, xylene, carbon
disulfide, napthathalene, dimethyl disulphide, methyl ethyl disulphide, and pyridine metabolites.
This area supports 11 natural gas compression stations. Extremely high levels of benzene have been
recorded in the area.
Sublette County, Wyoming. This is one of the most sparsely populated counties in the continen-
tal United States and home to massive natural gas fields. The state of Wyoming recently recom-
mended non-attainment status be given by the EPA for ozone that has reached exceptionally un-
healthy levels due to pollution from oil and gas development.
Within the town of Middlefield, air emissions generated from heavy industrial development, and
especially from hydrofracking activities and equipment would be significant, along with subsequent
effects on health, ecosystems and agriculture. Increased emissions and ozone due to truck traffic
alone would be significant. At an average of 1200 truck trips, (as per the Build-out Table) gener-
ated by each well, and further multiplied by the number of wells at build-out, the result points to a
significant increase in emissions and ozone levels.
In 2006 Otsego had zero ozone days, i.e. days when air was unhealthy for sensitive populations due
to ozone levels. Based on best available information from NYS DEC overall air quality is good.
There is some atmospheric deposition of mercury (from midwest power plants) which has resulted
in the designation of portions of the Susquehanna River as impaired due to health advisories re-
garding fish consumption.
By prohibiting heavy industrial development within the Town, Middlefield would not experience
elevated levels of air pollution that commonly result from such development, and would subse-
45
quently avoid the human health impacts- and costs- associated with high levels of air pollution.
While other air pollution sources, for example increased automobile traffic due to residential de-
velopment, will continue to be a concern in the future, the air pollutant load from these sources
will be significantly less than what could reasonably be expected to occur as a result of heavy indus-
trial development- especially from the intensive development and truck traffic associated with hy-
drofracking. Avoidance of health impacts would also involve a savings in health care costs, espe-
cially those associated with some of the more toxic contaminants described in this section.
H. Agriculture
It is a goal of Middlefield to sustain the viability of farmlands and to encourage and foster improvement
that does not diminish farmlands. The build-out analysis calculated a direct loss of active farmland in
the Town ranging from 65 acres, if all well development were to be horizontal drilling with six wells
per pad, and up to 2065 acres if all well development uses vertical drilling. It is impossible to pre-
dict which drilling techniques will be employed in Middlefield. However, any direct loss of farm-
land from heavy industrial development is contrary to the Town comprehensive plan goal to en-
courage and foster improvement that does not diminish farmland. Every well pad or access road that cuts
across a farm field fragments productive farmland. As farm parcels become smaller, there are fewer
contiguous areas of active farming available to operating farms. Eventually farms may become too
small to operate profitably. As farms go out of business, the critical mass to economically support
related businesses is reduced. Loss of those businesses leaves remaining farms without nearby sup-
ply or service providers. As a result other farms will inevitably fail simply from being caught up in
the spiral. Pennsylvania agricultural agencies report that 25 percent of farmers receiving royalty
payments from gas companies discontinued farming, while another 25 percent converted from
dairy farms to grazing operations.
Explosions, spills, flares and leaks from gas pipes associated with natural gas drilling, production
and transmission (see Section O, Public Health below) have all been shown to have negative effects
on agricultural soils. One study shows that gas flaring adversely affects soil fertility, causing the soil
to become more acidic and reducing total organic carbon, nitrate, and phosphate content. An-
other study reports that methane from pipeline leaks changed the oxygen and bacterial composi-
tion of the soil, and altered a plants ability to fix nitrogen, to successfully complete cellulose con-
version, and to maintain an adequate hydration level. Gas drilling emissions have led to increased
ground level ozone. Many long-term studies also document impacts to agricultural productivity
due to ground level ozone.
Livestock near gas operations drink surface water from ponds and streams, which can be contami-
nated from the use of fracking fluids at the surface as a result of injecting, withdrawing, collecting,
46
storing and disposing of flowback. Small spills can have very big effects on livestock by contami-
nating their drinking water or the grasses that they eat. Both livestock and game are attracted to
the sodium in these fluids. There are documented reports of livestock illness and death from ex-
posure to spills. The US Forest Service has documented a significant increase in the use of pad
sites by deer and bear. While not an agricultural impact, a specific goal of the Towns existing Mas-
ter Plan is preservation of wooded areas harboring game.
As discussed above under Water Resources, naturally occurring radioactive materials have contrib-
uted to contamination of oil and gas production areas. Uranium, radon and other radioactive de-
cay products have been measured in the air, soils and water at or near natural gas sites. Taken up
by plants, these radioactive elements can bioaccumulate in the food chain, eventually appearing in
milk and dairy products if dairy farms are located nearby. Similarly, heavy metals including arse-
nic, barium, cadmium, chromium, lead, and mercury have be found in drilling waste and can be
absorbed by plants and incorporated into the food chain as well. While it is possible to decon-
taminate soil, it takes a minimum of four years of specific successive plantings to get these metals
out.
Recent trends in agriculture have included a movement to strengthen local and regional food mar-
kets, to establish local and regional green markets throughout New York State, and there has been
considerable interest in organic and natural farming methods. State residents have become more
aware that most of the food found in grocery stores travels an average of 1500 miles from farm to
table. The movement away from transportation of foods from distant continents and toward lo-
cally grown food is now regarded as a long term strategy for ensuring food security.
The number of certified organic farms in New York State increased from 218 in 2002 to 590 in
2008 with a concentration of organic farms in the Marcellus Shale region. The number of actual
certified organic farms represents a fraction of the farms practicing natural farming methods and
many of these farms are working towards organic certification. The local organic food market is a
rapidly growing sector of New York agriculture and is highly valued by farmers market patrons in
New York City, its suburbs and elsewhere around the State.
In what could become a significant issue for agriculture in Middlefield as well as the remainder of
the farms found in the Marcellus Shale region is the effect that hydrofracking will have on the per-
ceptions of buyers of New Yorks farm products. In an open letter to Members of the New York
State Senate, the New York State Assembly, Governor Patterson and Governor-Elect Cuomo dated
December 8, 2010, the Park Slope Food Coop, a 15,800 member wholesale buyer of New York
State agricultural products stated that it will start researching alternatives to New York State prod-
ucts if hydrofracking occurs on farms in the areas where they buy their agricultural products from.
The Co-op, just in the last year, purchased over $1,500,000 of fruits and vegetables grown in New
47
York State, $500,000 of chickens and over $400,000 of beef, lamb, and pork from New York State
farms.
Agriculture is one of the largest sectors of the Towns economy. Royalties to farmers may offer
short-term relief and added cash to continue to farm for those who sign gas leases. But, there is
also the likelihood that once a lease is signed, the farmer will decide to close the farm, move else-
where and simply live off the royalties from the well(s) as has occurred in Pennsylvania. But there
is a great deal of evidence to suggest that unconventional shale gas extraction could ultimately
damage the Towns agricultural base, as well as every other major sector of the Towns economy.
Many farmers have chosen not to sign gas leases just for this reason.
The quality and marketability of locally produced agricultural products depends upon clean air and
water that, as described above, could be degraded by hydrofracking and shale gas extraction. In-
stances of drilling-related groundwater contamination have been reported in many states including
New Mexico, Wyoming, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. Surface waters have also
been contaminated. Sixteen cattle were reported to have died in a northwestern Louisiana field in
2009 after apparently drinking fluids near a natural gas drilling rig, according to Louisiana's De-
partment of Environmental Quality and a report in the Shreveport Times. High levels of airborne
toxic emissions have been detected in Dish, Texas, and Rifle, Colorado. Similar instances of con-
tamination could render nearby farmland, that is not subject to leasing and drilling, unsuitable for
agriculture and put those additional farmers out of business. Based upon the foregoing, it can be
expected that the impacts of heavy industrial activities, associated with gas drilling and production
activities, could have far reaching consequences and impacts on Middlefields farms.
the impacts identified herein as a result of the build-out activities.
I. Visual Resources
The Town of Middlefields landscape is made up of a series of ridges and valleys running generally
northeast to southwest. Small hamlets like Middlefield Center, Phoenix Mills, and Middlefield
dot the valleys surrounded by agricultural and forested lands. The ridges are generally more for-
ested than the valley areas. The scenic Village of Cooperstown is in the heart of the Town on the
southern shore of Otsego Lake. There is one state park, a state forest and most of the eastern
shore of Otsego Lake is important to the community as evidenced from the proposed Town Master
Plan Addendum. A majority of the lakeshore rises abruptly to higher elevations and remains
largely undeveloped or is farmed and County Route 31 runs along the scenic shoreline linking
48
Cooperstown with Glimmerglass State Park. About one-third to one-half of the Town is or was
recently in agriculture. In short, Middlefield is the picture of a bucolic rural community. Tourism
to facilities in the Town and County is in part driven by the scenic rivers, valleys and hills that
comprise the sense of place
The natural beauty and rural character of the Town creates a unique quality of life for its residents
and many visitors. It is what drives the tourism industry, one of Middlefields most important
economic activities. New York State estimates that every $1.00 generated directly by tourism indi-
rectly generates $7.00 for the States economy and this includes the local residents who are em-
ployed by tourism or are benefited by the dollars tourists bring into the community. Total Visitor
Spending in Otsego County was estimated to be $137,244,070 in 2000.
The DEC published in 2000 a Program Policy document entitled Assessing and Mitigating Visual
Impacts. It is a guide to defining and assessing visual impacts. According to the document, An
ever expanding body of research has demonstrated that environmental aesthetic values are shared among the
general population. This research finds that such values are not idiosyncratic, random, or arbitrary. For exam-
ple, millions of people visit Niagara Falls for our shared appreciation of its beauty. Many places have been
recognized for their beauty and designated through Federal or State democratic political processes, reinforcing
the notion that environmental aesthetic values are shared. Recognition of aesthetic resources also occurs at lo-
cal levels through zoning, planning or other public means. That these special places are formally recognized is
a matter of public record.
The policy document relies heavily on site specific visual impact assessment methodologies in offer-
ing guidance to DEC staff who must conduct such assessments. For purposes of this analysis, the
document is not entirely pertinent because no specific heavy industrial developments are proposed
in Middlefield to enable an assessment based upon a specific location. However, it does offer some
clues as to how to assess the significance of an impact based upon certain principles including but
not limited to the area affected, the size of the structure in relation to its surroundings, its location
in relation to aesthetic resources, ability to screen the structure, use of lighting, and the perma-
nence of the impact.
This analysis of the visual impacts of heavy industry is presented in a generic format using the fac-
tors outlined above as a guide. Heavy industrial activities are widely perceived as unsightly.
None currently exist within Middlefield. As illustrated in the build-out analysis, up to 85 percent
of the Town could potentially be available for development of heavy industrial activities like gas
wells. Therefore, virtually the entire Town could be affected based upon the build-out. Visual im-
pacts of new development was assessed through a survey, for the 2011 Addendum to the Town
Master Plan, at the time the Cooperstown Region 2002 FGEIS was prepared and accepted by the
Town.
49
The survey established that the rural character most preferred by residents are landscapes having a
mixture of active farm fields, wooded, and other undeveloped natural areas. Acceptable rural
character also includes landscapes having the above, along with barns, silos and other obvious farm
buildings. Small settlements having distinct boundaries surrounded by woods and fields were pre-
ferred over those landscapes having low-density residential sprawl. People perceive a diminution of
rural character when landscapes became dotted with scattered non-farm residential development.
The build-out analysis assumed that each
well site and the access road to the well
site would be 8.8 acres in size and that
from 157 to 838 wells could be poten-
tially developed in the Town. This would
account for clearing of vegetation and
regrading of soils and rock on 1,382 to
7,374 acres of land or up to 18.6 percent
of the Towns land area. Once vegeta-
tion is removed and the pad site and ac-
cess road is regraded, then the soils are
generally stabilized using crushed rock
which is brought in and compacted to
stabilize the pad and access road to accommodate the equipment and truck traffic, and the drill rig
and equipment used during the drilling phase is brought to the site along with any production
equipment once it is determined that the well is viable. The degree of visual impact of grading ac-
tivities will vary depending upon whether there are gentle or steep slopes. The photograph above
by Certus Strategies shows what can happen as a result of grading in steep slope areas, such as exist
throughout the Town of Middlefield.
Drill rigs vary in height from 30 feet for a small cable tool rig to 100 feet or greater for a large ro-
tary rig for a vertical well. The rigs used for horizontal drilling will be like the one illustrated to the
left, 140 feet or greater, and will have more supporting
equipment than for vertical wells. A taller rig with a
larger footprint and substructure and 170 feet in total
height, can be used for drilling consecutive wells on a
pad. On well pads with multiple wells, the equipment
noted above is on the site for up to three years for one
well pad with six to eight wells and from four to eight
months per well with one well per pad. Drill rigs are pro-
vided with lighting during the night due to the 24 hour
nature of the operation.
Pennsylvania Natural Gas Summit 2009!
Varcelluc 6Hale Cac lccuec
Public Issues
! "Lack of knowledge
! "Drinking water/Protection of water
! "Environment
! "Trac
! "Water disposal
! "Risks of directional drilling
! "Spills and leaks
The goal is not to persuade people that they are
wrong and we are right but rather to seek to
understand their issues and concerns, engage them
in the consultation design, and through meaningful
dialogue and resolution processes, mitigate impacts
that aect them and the local community.
1he Marcellus Shale lay
lmpocts to stteom ecosystems ooJ poteotlol teqolotloo of loteoslty of mloloq
!erry v. Mead, lrank Anderson, uavld vellnsky, and 8lchard PorwlLz
aLrlck CenLer for LnvlronmenLal 8esearch
1he Academy of naLural Sclences
50
Long term visual impacts of a pad, after the drilling phase, are determined by whether the well is a
viable well or is considered a dry hole. In either case, reclamation work is supposed to begin
within 45 days of cessation of drilling and stimulation. If the well is a dry hole, the entire site is
supposed to be reclaimed. If the site was heavily forested, there will be a permanent visual impact.
If the site was agricultural land, then the reclamation process depends upon whether it can be
suitably reclaimed for active agricultural use again. As discussed above under Agriculture, the suc-
cess of reclamation for farming depends upon many factors that must be evaluated on a site by site
basis. Was there any contamination of soils? Was the topsoil properly stockpiled, protected from
erosion and then properly regraded so that its productivity can be restored? These and other ques-
tions are all relevant to the success of reclamation.
Photo: Chesapeake Energy photograph of equipment needed for a frack job in the Marcellus Shale, WV
If the well pad is productive, then the access road must be maintained in effect permanently. Re-
fracking of each well is likely, as discussed above, so much of the equipment required for this proc-
ess must be brought back to the site each time it is refracked. The NYC-DEP in their build-out
analysis of the Catskill Watershed lands estimated re-fracking at intervals of five to ten years over a
forty year life of each well.
!"#$%&''("#)*+,&'&)%-.+/&%0(-&+ 12+
+
++
!"#$%&'()*'+,-%.$/"0'!%.01$%&'234'
!"#$%&&'()*+"&%),%&&-),%(.)/0#1020")

53$%0&6'3+%("4%"5%)62%#17)38#48#".082-)9::;<)
731&86)=+%)7%&&8>)?#"$)."25()02).+%)?8#%1#8'2@)"2@)"&821).+%).#%%)&02%)+8&@)>".%#-).+%)#%@)."25%#)+8&@()4#844"2.A)
+7@#"'&0$)4'B4()"#%)02).+%)$%2.%#<)
!"#$%&"'()*!+&',-*
Fracturing fluid functions in two ways: opening the fracture and transporting the propping agent (or
proppant) the length of the fracture.
22
As the term propping implies, the agent functions to prop or hold
the fracture open. The fluids properties must exhibit the proper viscosity and low friction pressure when
pumped, breakdown and cleanup rapidly when treatment is over, and provide good fluid-loss control (not
dissipate). The fluid chemistry may be water-based, oil-based or acid-based depending on the properties
of the formation. Water-based fluids (sometimes referred to as slickwater) are the most widely used
(especially in shale formations) because of their low cost, high performance, and ease of handling. Some
fluids may also include nitrogen and carbon dioxide to help foaming. Oil-based fluids find use in
hydrocarbon bearing formations susceptible to water damage, but are they expensive and difficult to use.
Acid-based fluids use hydrochloric acid to dissolve the mineral matrix of carbonate formations (limestone
and dolomite) and thus improve porosity; the reaction produces inert calcium chloride salt and carbon
dioxide gas.

22
Chapter 7 - Fracturing Fluid Chemistry and Proppants, in Reservoir Stimulation, ed. Michael J. Economides and Kenneth G.
Nolte, 3rd ed. (John Wiley & Sons, LTD, 2000).
51
During the production period of a well, there will be an assembly of wellhead valves and auxiliary
equipment such as meters, a dehydrator, a gas-water separator, a brine tank and a small fire-
suppression tank. Multi-well pads will have larger equipment to handle the increased production.
For purposes of the build-out analysis, it was assumed that each pad would average 3.1 acres in size
over the life of the well.
An infrastructure of pipelines
7
must also be constructed townwide to transport gas to markets.
While most of these pipes are installed underground, a number of above ground facilities will be
permanently installed with an accompanying visual impact of industrialization. Even with under-
ground pipelines, the visual impacts are unavoidable since the above ground vegetation over the
pipeline must be maintained in a trimmed condition for the life of the pipeline.
the impacts identified herein as a result of the build-out activities. However, if drilling and produc-
tion of gas wells occurs in towns adjacent and in close proximity to Middlefield, in particular Ot-
sego and Springfield due to their proximity to the scenic resources of Lake Otsego, some degrada-
tion of aesthetic resources, as viewed from Middlefield, can be expected.
J. Cultural Resources
There is one National Register of Historic Places site found within the Town and two National reg-
ister Districts. The Middlefield Hamlet Historic District encompasses the hamlet of Middlefield
and the one site is known as the Benjamin D. North House. The other National Register District
is shared with adjoining towns and is described in the Cooperstown FGEIS as follows:
According to the United States Department of the Interior, National Park Services narrative
description of the Glimmerglass NR HD, this district encompasses 15,000 acres and includes
portions of the Towns of Otsego, Springfield, and Middlefield along with the entire Village of
Cooperstown. The Cooperstown Historic District was first listed on the National Register in
1980. Other features were added to this listing in 1988, 1992, and 1997. It is now included
in the Glimmerglass NR HD. The Glimmerglass NR HD also encompasses the physical and
social sphere of Otsego Lake. The districts landscape is dominated by Otsego Lake, the ridges
rising along the Lakes east and west shores, and lower, rolling hillsides along the flatter land
52
7
According to the US Department of Energy, Transporting natural gas from the wellhead to the nal customer involves several physical
transfers of custody and multiple processing steps. A natural gas pipeline system begins at the natural gas producing well or eld. Once the gas
leaves the producing well, a pipeline gathering system directs the ow either to a natural gas processing plant or directly to the mainline trans-
mission grid, depending upon the initial quality of the wellhead product. The processing plant produces pipeline-quality natural gas. This gas is
then transported by pipeline to consumers or is put into underground storage for future use.
at the head and foot of the Lake. Visual points of reference include the Susquehanna River,
Mount Vision, Mount Wellington, and the 600-foot hill near the north end of the lake.
Along the west side of the lake, the lower and more gradual slopes show evidence of agricul-
tural use; the steeper ridge along the east shore is forested. The flat foot of the lake is the site
of the Village. The district includes a variety of built features that illustrate human activity
in the area since 1785.
The Village is one of the districts prominent built features. Cooperstown is noted for its his-
tory as a market town, the county seat and a resort area. Recreational resources such as
boathouses, monuments, designed gardens; scenic viewpoints and museums are found
throughout the district and are among the 1,475 contributing features. Some of the other sig-
nificant resources here include the Cooperstown Post Office, Hyde Hall and the Hyde Hall
Covered Bridge.
Historian Jessie Ravage documented, in the Glimmerglass Historic District nomination to the Na-
tional Register of Historic Places, Otsego Lakes landscape as nationally and internationally impor-
tant in part because this was one of the first landscapes of American environmental consciousness.
The writings of James Fenimore Cooper were influenced by the European lament in the early 19th
century for the loss of their native forests. Coopers placement of his heroic novels in the Garden
of Eden-like setting based on the Otsego Lake area he knew as a boy, venerated the landscape itself
as the stage for the telling of American epic stories.
Susan Fenimore Cooper, the daughter of James Fenimore Cooper, is noted by historians as a pio-
neering conservationist, whose writings mourned the wholesale destruction of the forests to change
the landscape to suit changing agricultural practices. In her book Rural Hours, Miss Cooper wrote
about the importance of maintaining balance between using the bounty of the land and preserving
the landscape. This abstract and literary concept of land preservation inspired the literal conserva-
tion of this landscape by the Edward Clark family beginning in the mid 19th Century. Middlefield
therefore, appears to be part of a shared history with regional landscapes, persons, and landscape
conservation.
As discussed in the Cooperstown Region FGEIS, most concerns related to potential negative im-
pacts on historic resources is directed at those sites, properties, structures or objects that are listed
or that are eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. During preparation of the
FGEIS, contact was made with the New York State Office of Parks Recreation and Historic Preser-
vation (OPRHP). According to the OPRHP, the entire area is considered historically sensitive and
any development should consider the impact on historic resources, including archaeological re-
sources. Direct adverse impacts to historic resources may include destruction of all or part of a his-
53
toric property, isolation from or alteration of its surrounding environment, introduction of visual,
audible or atmospheric elements out of character with the property (or that alter its setting), and
neglect that results in its deterioration or destruction. Primary impacts on archaeological resources
may occur whenever the ground surface is disturbed by construction activities. Construction im-
pacts consist of potential disturbances of sites with the consequent loss of scientific or historic in-
formation.
Development of or alteration to the open spaces that surround known historic or archaeological
resources may diminish the historic integrity of such properties. Similarly, alteration of the charac-
ter of potential historic districts by the introduction of structures, objects or land uses incompati-
ble with the historic setting or buildings in the district would be considered an adverse impact on
the cultural quality of the district.
The specific location of archeological sites is kept confidential by the OPRHP because these re-
sources are vulnerable to looting and vandalism. However, there are many found throughout the
Town. General locations of sensitive areas can be identified online through the OPRHPs publicly
accessible tools found on the State agencys web site. The DEC had this to say about archeology in
their 1992 GEIS: The impacts of construction activities on archaeologic resources are more serious. Since
archaeologic sites are generally difficult to detect by their surface appearance, they are more likely to be dam-
aged during construction. Even if artifacts are salvaged before excavation begins, removal from their original
location and disturbance of the site will destroy much of their value. Even with safeguards, it is possible for an
archaeologic site to escape detection until construction actually begins.
The build-out analysis has illustrated the extent to which heavy industrial activities would be spread
out throughout the Town. Therefore, it is highly likely that heavy industrial activities would cause
adverse impacts on cultural resources that exist in the Town. The adverse effects include the direct
adverse effects to historic resources and primary effects to archaeological resources if the well pads
or access roads were in areas of archaeological sensitivity. Secondary impacts could include impacts
from vibrations caused by heavily laden trucks on local roads that may pass in close proximity to
historic structures.
the impacts identified herein as a result of the build-out activities.
54
K. Tourism
The Cooperstown Chamber of Commerce issued a statement regarding the heavy industrial activi-
ties associated with horizontal drilling combined with hydrofracking for natural gas on February 9,
2011. The Statement concludes with the following passage:
The plans for drilling pose a direct and material threat to the interests of the Chamber
membership. Industrial-scale hydrofracking in the upstate region will irreparably damage the
essential qualities that make the Cooperstown area an excellent place to live, raise families,
farm and work. It puts at risk much of the local economy, ranging from hotel and tourism to
restaurant and retail businesses, most of which are driven by the hundreds of thousands of
tourists who choose to visit the region every year.
While health care is a major industry in the Town and Otsego County, tourism is the fourth larg-
est employment sector in the County, generating 1 in 10 jobs and bringing in $20 million in tax
revenues annually. Important tourist attractions include the Baseball Hall of Fame, the New York
State Historical Associations Fenimore Art Museum and Farmers Museum, the annual Glimmer-
glass Opera festivals, Glimmerglass State Park, and Lake Otsego. These attractions draw between
335,000 and 500,000 visitors to the Cooperstown area annually. Tourism has other positive im-
pacts on the Town that include conservation of important natural areas, conservation of historic
sites, preservation of community character, and improvement of infrastructure. These are, after all,
the setting for the features that attract tourists to the Town and region in the first place.
Tourism creates more jobs than heavy industries like gas drilling. Tourism is a labor intensive in-
dustry, compared with heavy industries like gas drilling, which is about 10 times more capital in-
tensive than the average American industry. Moreover, tourism creates local jobs, while heavy in-
dustries like oil and gas, rely on a small, transitory workforce from out-of-state areas.
As discussed in other sections of this Land Use Analysis, heavy industrialization of Middlefield
from the effects of gas well and other similar developments run a significant risk of contaminated
surface water, groundwater, air and soils, will create the visual impacts of an industrialized land-
scape in a bucolic rural community that depends on clean water, clean air, and scenic and aesthetic
resources to fuel a large sector of its economy. An industrialized landscape will unavoidably trans-
form the natural beauty of the Town, upon which the tourism industry depends. If the Town were
to become industrialized, it may take time for the full effects to be felt by the tourism industry, but
once tourists visit the area facilities and potentially have a bad experience due to heavy truck traffic
and visually compromised landscapes, they may never come back.
Industrialization also has the potential to adversely affect infrastructure by the large trucks that
must ply the Towns roads, and even the potential for increasing health related concerns. The ef-
55
fects on Middlefield of heavy industrialization will likely mean the end of the tourism industry.
Why would tourists want to visit an area where they had to contend with heavy truck traffic,
blighted landscapes, and polluted resources? These questions raise substantive issues with far-
reaching policy implications for the Town and region.
tion of gas wells occurs in towns adjacent and in close proximity to Middlefield, in particular Ot-
sego and Springfield due to their proximity to the scenic resources of Lake Otsego, some degrada-
tion of aesthetic resources, as viewed from Middlefield, can be expected.
L. Transportation
Development of heavy industrial activities like natural gas facilities will be accompanied by a sig-
nificant increase in the level of heavy truck traffic compared to current conditions. The build-out
analysis conservatively estimates the number of truck trips per well at 1,200, approximately two-
thirds of which are for water and wastewater (flowback) hauling. On an annual basis, the number
of additional truck trips per year depends on the number of wells drilled in a given year. For full
build-out of all wells in Middlefield, the total number of heavy truck trips is estimated to be be-
tween 188,400 and 1,005,600 depending on whether the wells are vertical drilled or horizontal
drilled with one well per pad or multiple wells per pad. The increased number of travel cycles in
the Town will increase the risk of accidents. The risk of any accident increases substantially if it
occurs with a truck carrying hazardous materials and the accident occurs in close proximity to a
water feature such as Lake Otsego, the Susquehanna River, Red Creek, or Cherry Valley Creek and
their tributaries.
There is only one State Highway in the Town, which is Route 166. Otsego County maintains
County Routes 31, 33, 52, and 35. The remainder of the roads in the Town are maintained by the
Town Highway Department. Large volumes of truck traffic will stress all roads but the lack of a
State and Federal highway system in the Town will mean that local roads and bridges will be espe-
cially affected by trucks weighing 80,000 pounds and sometimes up to 100,000 pounds. This will
increase maintenance and capital costs and will also increase the risk of accidents that result in
leakage or spillage of hazardous materials. The risks associated with such spills are discussed below
under Public Health.
The interstate and state highways were constructed to handle heavy traffic, but the road network in
Middlefield is maintained as county and municipal roads. Most of these small local roads were
56
constructed well before the invention of large tanker trucks and gas drilling rigs. The Towns
bridges, culverts and road beds were not designed to handle the numbers of trips nor the 40 ton
loads that trucks carry.
Trucking for the hydraulic fracture equipment, water, sand and flow back removal represents over
80 percent of the total truck traffic. This trucking takes place in weeks-long periods before and
after the hydraulic fracture. It occurs during the initial hydraulic fracture and then again every
time a well is refracked. Truck traffic associated with intensive industrial activity, on a relatively
constant basis and over a period of decades will impact local quality of life. Trucking activity will
be accompanied by provision of equipment and material supply systems (warehouses, garages, sup-
port services), gas gathering and pipeline systems, compressor stations, and waste disposal systems
to name a few of the associated facilities. The potential rate and density of heavy industrial devel-
opment will likely cause a significant and relatively rapid industrialization of the Town.
Trucks used by heavy industrial activities like
hydrofracking often involve convoys of 100
or more trucks to a site when it is being mo-
bilized and demobilized. The photo to the
right by James Chip Northrup shows truck
traffic associated with well drilling in Tow-
anda, Pennsylvania. Water and wastewater
tankers can also arrive in convoys. The ef-
fects of diesel exhaust have been described
above under Air. If the trucks drive on un-
paved or gravel roads, which exist in the
Town and which will be constructed for well pad access, dust can also be a source of emissions.
According to the U.S. Bureau of Mines, some primary concerns associated with heavy truck traffic
are that large and heavy trucks start slowly, drive slowly, and stop slowly, and can interfere with
other traffic; they are noisy, especially when Jake brakes are used in hilly areas like Middlefield;
heavy trucks can create dusty conditions and materials can fall off the truck, possibly damaging or
breaking windshields and injuring persons, and heavy trucks can damage local, roads especially in
the springtime when the ground thaws.
Generally, heavy trucks will work out of service yards and truck traffic will be heaviest near the
yards, traveling in convoys to and from well sites. Trucking operations for drill sites is generally
through the use of contract truckers that are paid by the load. Observations are that these drivers
drive faster than conditions or speed limits dictate because more loads hauled means more income
for the owner/driver. Well operations go on 24 hours of the day seven days a week so the truck
traffic is non-stop.
57
Traffic can also be affected when roads must be crossed by pipelines. While the initial trucking
activity is related to drilling, producing wells will require additional local disturbance associated
with the opening up of roads and drainage ways to allow the construction of underground pipe-
lines which will be necessary to connect the well heads to markets.
The design and construction of transmission pipelines is subject to regulation by the State Public
Service Commission, this is not the case with gather and distribution (local service) lines. Typi-
cally all of these lines are installed underground for weather and safety related reasons. When a
pipeline crosses a local road it would normally require the approval of the Town Highway Superin-
tendent. During the time a road is cut open to install a pipeline, it is not available for public and
emergency use. An additional concern with Town roads is seismic testing. One of the practices
that drillers are reported to follow involves the use of trucks with special equipment to explore the
geological structure of an area through vibration or underground sound waves. The principal con-
cern regarding this type of use relates to any restriction to traffic flow while this type of exploration
is occurring and the potential for damaging town roads
some of the impacts identified herein as a result of the build-out activities. However, heavy indus-
trial activities like gas drilling and production in other towns in the region, may still affect Middle-
towns roads due to the truck traffic that inevitable must pass through the Town. See below for
recommendations to address this issue.
M. Energy Trends
According to the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution and the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) of the United Nations, global CO2 levels have risen 35 percent since the
industrial revolution began in the mid-18th century and are likely at their highest levels in the past
20 million years. According to these research findings, the main source is the burning of fossil fu-
els, such as oil, natural gas, and coal. The Earths average temperature has been increasing over the
past century, with warming accelerating over the past 50 years, according to observations of tem-
peratures globally. Of the hottest 12 years since temperatures began to be measured in the 1850s,
11 have occurred in the past 12 years. No known natural forces can account for the recent severe
warming. The effects of this warming trend, and the debates it has fueled, have been widely pub-
lished and need not be repeated here. What is important to consider, however, is that use of fossil
fuels is increasing, the pace of climate change is increasing, and governments worldwide are plan-
ning ways to both mitigate and adapt to these challenges.
58
The Planning profession has recognized the urgency of creating sustainable communities through-
out the nation to address this issue. The American Planning Association (APA) in 2004 adopted
an official Policy Guide on Energy. The goal of the Guide is to help planners, and the communi-
ties and individuals they serve, to increase energy conservation and renewable energy production
while significantly reducing use of non-renewable energy sources such as oil and gas. Most Ameri-
cans are unaware of the large role energy plays in their everyday lives, and particularly how today's
energy production and consumption are directly connected to the condition of the environment,
the health of the economy, and the quality of life that will be experienced by future generations.
The Planning profession also understands the connections between use of fossil fuels and climate
change. On April 11, 2011, the APA adopted an official Policy Guide on Planning and Climate
Change. As stated in this Policy Guide, The earth is getting warmer and it will continue to do so well
into the future, creating a wide range of impacts that include sea-level rise, droughts, and heat waves. The key
question is how fast and how severe the impacts will be and whether we can adopt policies for mitigating and
adapting to these impacts. The General Energy Policy of the American Planning Association, its
Chapters and Divisions, its 16,000 certified planners (AICP) and its 40,000 members are to sup-
port efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions related to the production and use of energy in the built environ-
ment. The policy also supports establishment of strategies to minimize the conversion of farmland
and woodland for other uses because this strategy will enhance carbon sequestration, supports the
local economy, and retains rural character.
While many in the fossil fuels industry talk of an increasing demand for these products necessitat-
ing an expansion of their operations, the Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) has taken a different
approach in its efforts to reduce use of fossil fuels. Their Executive Director, Amory Lovins is the
principal author of Ending the Oil Endgame, an independent, peer-reviewed synthesis for Ameri-
can business and military leaders that charts a roadmap for getting the United States completely,
attractively, and profitably off oil. As stated in the report: Winning the Oil Endgame offers a coherent
strategy for ending oil dependence, starting with the United States but applicable worldwide. There are many
analyses of the oil problem. This synthesis is the first roadmap of the oil solutionone led by business for profit,
not dictated by government for reasons of ideology. This roadmap is independent, peer-reviewed, written for
business and military leaders, and co-funded by the Pentagon. It combines innovative technologies and new
business models with uncommon public policies: market-oriented without taxes, innovation-driven without
mandates, not dependent on major (if any) national legislation, and designed to support, not distort, business
logic. The RMI strategy integrates four technological ways to displace oil: using oil twice as effi-
ciently, then substituting biofuels, saved natural gas, and, optionally, hydrogen. According to the
RMIs calculations, The quickest and cheapest way to save large amounts of natural gas is to save electric-
ity: improving total U.S. electric efficiency by 5% would lower total U.S. gas demand by 9%enough to return
gas prices to $34/MBTU for years to come...Reducing natural gas demand will tame the volatile gas mar-
59
kets, lower gas prices, and potentially cut gas bills by $40 billion per year and electric bills by an additional
$15 billion per year. Alternatives do exist to increasing use of finite natural gas reserves.
Rather than increasing the supplies of natural gas, the RMI advocates for saving it for future use as
an alternative to the dwindling supplies of oil. Forestalling access to the natural gas found in the
Marcellus Shale within the Town can have the effect of preserving it in place for the Towns future
generations when oil and other natural gas formations have been fully exploited. Future technolo-
gies may also make it more environmentally benign to extract than the current hydrofracking proc-
esses, along with their accompanying adverse impacts, that have been described at length herein.
Natural gas is being widely advertised and promoted as a clean burning fuel that produces less
greenhouse gas emissions than coal when burned. While less carbon dioxide is emitted from
burning natural gas than from burning coal per unit of energy generated, the combustion emis-
sions do not tell the whole story. A recent study by Robert W. Howarth and David R. Atkinson of
Cornell University entitled Preliminary Assessment of the Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Natu-
ral Gas obtained by Hydraulic Fracturing found that when there was a complete consideration of
all emissions from natural gas, including the full range of emissions of greenhouse gases from using
natural gas obtained by hydrofracking, suggests that they are 2.4-fold greater than are the emissions
just from the combustion of the natural gas. This estimate is considered highly uncertain, but is
likely conservative, with true emissions being even greater. When the total emissions of green-
house gases are considered, greenhouse gas emissions from hydrofracking obtained natural gas are
estimated to be 60 percent more than for diesel fuel and gasoline. Hydrofracking obtained natural
gas and coal from mountain-top removal probably have similar releases. The authors warn that:
Until better estimates are generated and rigorously reviewed, society should be wary of claims
that natural gas is a desirable fuel in terms of the consequences on global warming...The large
GHG footprint of shale gas undercuts the logic of its use as a bridging fuel over coming dec-
ades, if the goal is to reduce global warming. We do not intend that our study be used to jus-
tify the continued use of either oil or coal, but rather to demonstrate that substituting shale
gas for these other fossil fuels may not have the desired effect of mitigating climate warming.
N. Noise
Noise is essentially any unwanted sound. One of the most frequently cited concerns identified in
the Cooperstown Region GEIS, adopted by the Town in 2002, was the threat of an increase in
noise levels in the area. Middlefield is a rural community with few sources of high noise levels.
The principal sources currently include road noise from local transportation sources, use of farm
equipment, forestry equipment, and residential activities such as leaf blowing and lawn mowing.
60
There are no Interstate highways close enough to Middlefield to cause a noise impact and only one
small airfield (Cooperstown-Westville) can be found in the Town along State Route 166. Middle-
field is a quiet rural community and its residents have an expectation of quiet as part of their qual-
ity of life.
According to the US Census, Ameri-
cans number one neighborhood com-
plaint, above crime, traffic and poor
public services, is noise. Noise can raise
your blood pressure and change your
blood chemistry. Adrenaline levels can
rise from noise sources, indicating an
imposition of stress. Noise is the lead-
ing cause of hearing loss in the nation.
Exposure to excessive noise has been
estimated to have made at least 10 mil-
lion Americans a little deaf. Noise af-
fects humans and animals in adverse
ways. Noise is generally measured in
decibels (dBA). To put decibel readings
into perspective, a quiet rural area at
nighttime can be expected to be in the
range of 20 decibels as shown in the Ta-
ble above. Some other common noise levels can be found on the Table.
The medical literature has identified the human health impacts of noise pollution on the commu-
nities surrounding oil and gas development. Specifically in relation to oil and gas exploration ac-
tivities: drilling, well pumps, compressors, and vehicle traffic. Low frequency noise, produced from
oil and gas compressors, may be of concern in the surrounding communities. A small number of
studies reported the following symptoms related to low frequency noise: annoyance, stress, irrita-
tion, unease, fatigue, headache, adverse visual functions and disturbed sleep.
Traffic related noise produced from oil and gas activity, also of concern to surrounding communi-
ties, has not been studied. Although many papers have been published in the last five years sug-
gesting an association of cardiac health effects and noise related to traffic, these studies are re-
stricted to urban settings. The majority of these studies reported annoyance and disturbance due
to road traffic noise and associations with a higher incidence of myocardial infarctions, hyperten-
sion, ischemic heart disease, and sleep problems.
Common Noise Levels

Common Outdoor
Noise Levels
Noise Level
(dBA)

Common Indoor
Noise Levels

110
Jet flyover at 1,000 feet
! !

110 Rock band

100
Gas lawnmower at 3 feet
! !
100
Inside subway train

90
Diesel truck at 50 feet
! !
90 Food blender at 3 feet
Garbage disposal at 3 feet

Noisy urban area (daytime) 80

! !
80 Shouting at 3 feet

Gas lawnmower at 100 feet 70

! !
70 Vacuum at 3 feet
Normal speech at 3 feet

Heavy traffic at 300 feet 60

! !
60
Large business office

Quiet urban area (daytime) 50

! !
50 Dishwasher next room

Quiet urban area (nighttime) 40

! !
40
Small theater (background)
Quiet suburban area (nighttime)
30

! ! Library
30
Bedroom at night

Quiet rural area (nighttime) 20
! ! Concert hall (background)
20
Broadcast & recording studio

10
! !
10
Threshold of hearing

0
! !
0

61
During drilling of wells, drills are operated 24 hours of the day and this can go on for days and
sometimes weeks. Other on-site equipment can also run 24 hours of the day seven days a week.
Expected noise levels, from equipment used in oil and gas activities, was measured and studied in
La Plata County, Colorado. The following were reported:
EQUI PMENT DECI BEL LEVEL COMPARABLE NOI SE
Crane for Hoisting Rigs 68 dBA (500 feet from source) Highway or Train at 50 feet
Fuel and Water Trucks 68 dBA (375 feet. from property boundary) Highway or Train at 50 feet
Average well construction site 65 dBA (500 feet from source) Predominantly Industrial Area
Concrete pump for drilling 62 dBA (500 feet from source) Predominantly Industrial Area
Typical compressor station 50 dBA (375 feet from property boundary) Background noise in Office
Pumping units 50 dBA (325 feet from property boundary) Background noise in Office
The expected noise from heavy industrial activities will transform Middlefield from a quite rural
community to one that shares many characteristics with urban and industrial communities. Mid-
dlefields proposed planning and zoning document adoption, that would result in prohibition of
heavy industry, oil, gas or solution mining operations would in turn lead to the elimination of
tion of gas wells occurs in towns adjacent and in close proximity to Middlefield, some increases in
the ambient noise levels in the entire region can be expected.
O. Public Health
Accidental spills, leaks, and releases associated with natural gas well drilling and fracturing activi-
ties have resulted in hundreds of documented groundwater and surface water contamination inci-
dents across the country. Surface spills can be a relatively common occurrence at well sites because
the drilling and fracturing process involves transfer of large volumes of fluids between trucks,
tanks, wells, pits, and so on, often at high flow rates and pressures, substantially increasing the like-
lihood of a spill due to human error, equipment failure, or accident. Surface spills can be catego-
rized as resulting in either acute or chronic impacts based on proximity to streams and lakes.
Acute spills include accidental or intentional chemical releases that occur adjacent to or in a
stream or lake. Chronic spills are considered to occur at the well site or beyond the immediate vi-
cinity of a stream or lake.
62
Approximately 167 tons of chemicals are used for each well. The build-out estimated the number
of tons of chemicals that would be used in the Town as ranging from 26,219 tons to 139,946 tons
(52,438,000 to 279,892,000 pounds). Wastewater contaminated with chemicals, heavy metals and
radionuclides would range from 62,900,000 gallons to 954,000,000 gallons. Given the enormous
volume of chemicals and wastewater that could be transported into and out of the Town and gen-
erated within the Town over a multi-decade development period, acute spill scenarios are realistic
and should be expected to occur in the Town. This is a natural outcome of a complex and inten-
sive heavy industrial activity that would occur dozens of times per year across the Town. This is
particularly important in light of the proximity of roads adjacent to numerous streams and Lake
Otsego and the heavy volume of truck traffic required to haul wastewater and chemicals.
In addition to acute spills, it is reasonable to expect that development of natural gas resources in
the Town will be accompanied by an increased frequency of chemical, wastewater and fuel spills at
or near well pads. This is a natural outcome of a complex and intensive heavy industrial activity
occurring dozens of times per year across the Town. Site spills can be reduced through implemen-
tation of best management practices (BMPs) for pollution prevention, waste minimization, chemi-
cal handling and storage, etc. However, even with appropriate BMPs and regulations, mechanical
failures, human errors, and accidents are inevitable. Impacts will be minor when on-site personnel
respond quickly and limit the impacts of the incident. But significant contamination will occur
when spills go undetected, plans are not followed, equipment is not maintained, and/or BMPs are
not implemented. Even if most site spills are mitigated with minimal impact, the chronic occur-
rence of multiple spills per year over a period of several decades can be expected to compromise
public confidence in the quality of Lake Otsego as a source of public water supplies.
Some examples of accidents include the following reports. A June 3, 2010 gas well blowout in
Clearfield County, Pennsylvania, about 100 miles outside Pittsburgh, sent at least 35,000 gallons of
wastewater and natural gas spewing into the air for 16 hours. While there were no casualties, State
personnel and an independent investigator concluded that the cause of the incident was untrained
personnel and the failure to use proper well control procedures. The 35,000 gallons of wastewater,
collected after two nearby creeks were polluted, lead investigators to conclude that nearly 1 million
gallons of wastewater had been released. This figure includes the uncontrolled discharge of flow-
back fluids and saltwater flowing on the ground and into a tributary of Little Laurel Run, a high
quality cold water fishery.
In June 2010, an explosion at a gas well in West Virginia sent seven injured workers to the hospital.
Chief Oil & Gas owns the well, which is operated by AB Resources PA, LLC. The crew had fin-
ished drilling the well and was starting the hydraulic fracturing process when they hit a pocket of
methane that caused the explosion. The explosion occurred in Marshall County, West Virginia,
55 miles southwest of Pittsburgh.
63
On April 1, 2010 both a tank and open pit used to store hydraulic fracturing fluid caught fire at an
Atlas well pad in Hopewell Township Pennsylvania. Washington Countys hazardous materials
team responded to the fire and a state police fire marshal ruled the blaze an accident and estimated
it cost Atlas Energy $375,000 in damages. Flames were at least 100 feet high and 50 feet wide, with
the plume of black smoke visible for miles.
On December 15, 2007 an explosion occurred inside a home in Bainbridge, Ohio. Two residents
in the home were not injured but the structure was damaged significantly. After investigating, the
Ohio Department of Natural Resources determined that nearby high-volume hydraulic fracturing
operations, conducted by Ohio Valley Energy Systems Corp. in the Clinton sandstone formation
caused the explosion.
Most recently on April 20, 2011, as reported by WNEP, Officials said thousands of gallons of fluid
leaked over farm land and into a creek from a natural gas well in Bradford County [PA]. Chesapeake Energy
officials said Wednesday night the leak had been contained and the situation was stable. The rupture near
Canton happened late Tuesday night, contaminating nearby land and creeks. The blowout happened on the
Morse family farm in LeRoy Township outside Canton, a farming community. Chesapeake Energy officials
said a piece of equipment on the well failed. A major response was launched to stop the leak of frack fluid
and get control of the well. Water gushed from the earth at the Chesapeake well pad for hours Wednesday. It
was all hands on deck to put a stop to the leak of fracking fluid that, according to company officials, spilled
thousands and thousands of gallons into nearby land and waterways. Company officials stressed no gas leaked.
We've been able to limit the flow. We're still doing additional work to regain full control, said Brian Grove of
Chesapeake Energy. He added there is no telling yet how much of that extremely salty water mixed with
chemicals and sand has impacted the nearby Towanda Creek, but no gas has escaped into the air.
Heavy industry involves use of hazardous machinery and hazardous materials. Accidents can and
will happen. They are likely to always be associated with heavy industrial activities and can be ex-
pected to occur in Middlefield if heavy industry becomes established in the Town. According to
Ronald D. Bishop, PhD, Professor in the Chemistry and Biochemistry Department at the State
University of New York, College at Oneonta, If future impacts may be inferred from recent historical
performance, then:
Between two and four percent of shale gas well projects in New York will pollute local ground-
water over the short term. Serious regulatory violation rates will exceed twelve percent.
More than one of every six shale gas wells will leak fluids to surrounding rocks and to the surface
over the next century.
Each gas well pad, with its associated access road and pipeline, will generate a sediment discharge
of approximately eight tons per year into local waterways, further threatening federally endangered
mollusks and other aquatic organisms.
64
Construction of access roads and pipelines will fragment field and forest habitats, further threat-
ening plants and animals which are already species of concern. 2
Some chemicals in ubiquitous use for shale gas exploration and production, or consistently present
in flowback fluids, constitute human health and environmental hazards when present at ex-
tremely low concentrations. Potential exposure effects for humans will include poisoning of suscep-
tible tissues, endocrine disruption syndromes, and elevated risks for certain cancers.
Exposures of gas field workers and neighbors to toxic chemicals and noxious bacteria are exacer-
bated by certain common practices, such as air/foam-lubricated drilling and the use of impound-
ments for flowback fluids. These methods, along with the intensive use of diesel-fueled equipment,
will degrade air quality and may cause a recently described down-winders syndrome in humans,
livestock and crops.
State officials have not effectively managed oil and gas exploration and production in New York,
evidenced by thousands of undocumented or improperly abandoned wells and numerous incidents
of soil and water contamination. Human health impacts from these incidents appear to include
abnormally high death rates from glandular and reproductive system cancers in men and women.
Improved regulations and enhanced enforcement may reasonably be anticipated to produce more
industry penalties, but not necessarily better industry practices, than were seen in the past.
the impacts identified herein as a result of the build-out activities. However, it should be noted
that any drilling activities in other surrounding towns that affect the upstream watersheds in the
Town, could also adversely impact waters in Middlefield.
P. Energy Boomtown Effects
According to the Congressional Research Service, In 1999, signing bonuses for leases on private lands
were around $5 per acre, with royalties of 12%. During that same time, the state received between $15 and
$600 per acre in bonus payments. In todays climate, bonus payments are as much as $3,000 per acre on pri-
vately held lands with royalty rates between 15% and 20%. Lease terms are typically 3 to 5 years with re-
newal clauses for continued production and shut-in wells. Fewer than 10 years ago, there were only about five
or six companies involved in securing leases to develop gas shale projects. By 2008 there number rose to about
four dozen companies (including Exxon/Mobil, BP, and Conoco Phillips).
According to Penn States College of Agricultural Sciences Cooperative Extension, many commu-
nities in the Marcellus Shale region are experiencing rapid population growth and changes to daily
life as natural gas development accelerates. Communities experiencing growth associated with en-
65
ergy development have been called boomtowns. Previous research on these boomtowns, usually
in the western United States, has documented both positive and negative impacts to economies,
communities, families, and individuals.
One of the most recent efforts to investigate the boomtown effect is the Energy Boomtowns &
Natural Gas: Implications for Marcellus Shale Local Governments & Rural Communities by Jef-
frey Jacquet of the Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development at The Pennsylvania State
University. In his 2009 report, he discusses this issue as follows:
The impacts of energy extraction on small towns were extensively studied during the 1970s
and 1980s, when rural areas of the western United States underwent a period of significant
energy development. While more than 25 years old, these studies represent the most recent
wide- scale analysis on the effects of energy development in the United States. A number of
social and economic trends emerged from this work and a so-called Boomtown Impact
Model took shape among researchers studying the development in these rural communities.
The model posits that rural communities are often overwhelmed by rapid population influxes
associated with the energy development and that energy development often provides a number
of unique opportunities and challenges to communities and local governments.
Local governments are often caught unprepared by the waves of new growth and are at a dis-
advantage to mitigate potential growth problems. Some of these disadvantages include a lack
of information, growth volatility, lack of jurisdiction, conflict between long-term residents and
new residents, resistance to new government policy or planning strategies, shortage of staff or
expertise, and a lack of or lag in sufficient revenue. Boomtown research has shown that eco-
nomic impacts can be mixed, as some sectors or communities will benefit much more than
others. Businesses or residents not directly tied to the energy industry may have to deal with
inflationary or employment pressures while not seeing gains in revenue. Job growth can be
stratified, as while new jobs will be created, not all workers will be suited for or interested in
these jobs. Expectations for economic benefits are often unrealistically high, and while eco-
nomic and job growth does occur, these expectations are not met. A significant body of litera-
ture shows that boomtowns can harbor disproportionate increases in social problems such as
crime, mental health problems, community dissatisfaction, education shortfalls, and other
indicators. Research shows that certain groups of people will have different social reactions to
rapid growth, depending on their stature in the community and whether they were residents
before the growth occurred.
An even more recent effort has been undertaken by Susan Christopherson, a Professor of City and
Regional Planning at Cornell University. Her investigation of the issue raises a number of points
66
that merit consideration. Results of her findings to date, relating to the costs to local government,
include:
Accelerated road maintenance needs
Traffic congestion from trucks
Higher public safety costs
Increased demand for health and education services
Increased demand on public administrative services (e.g. planning and zoning, permitting,
assessments, housing assistance)
New service requirements, such as emergency response capacity and environmental moni-
toring and remediation.
She raises the question of how the costs will be paid for and concludes that local residents may
have to absorb whatever costs are not covered through state tax policy, local taxes and fees, or local
agreements, if they can be negotiated with the gas companies. Depending on the pace and scale of
drilling, the Town of Middlefield may not have the capacity to respond to these new demands.
Rural regions like Middlefield, dependent on natural resource extraction, frequently have poor de-
velopment outcomes for several reasons including:
Volatile revenue leads to poor government planning and lack of accountability. Yet, de-
mands on government rise.
Crowding out -- the expectation of wealth from the resource works against economic di-
versification, and increases the cost of doing business for other industries.
Housing and labor costs rise.
After the initial ramp-up construction phase, there are few jobs and income inequality
increases.
According to studies conducted in New York, when compared to adjacent counties or all of non-
metropolitan New York, counties with significant natural gas drilling are characterized by popula-
tion loss and smaller increases in real personal income. In Pennsylvania, counties with conven-
tional gas production (1991-2005) show similar trends. Graphs, prepared by the Cornell Depart-
ment of City and Regional Planning, and that illustrate this effect can be seen below:
67
Population Decline
New York
Gas-producing
counties have been
losing population
faster than adjacent
counties and much
faster than upstate
NY as a whole.
Source: Census Annual Population Estimates
Population Decline
Pennsylvania
Gas Counties in
Pennsylvania began
losing population in
the mid-90s,
whereas population
in adjacent
comparison counties
leveled off but did
not decline.
The top 3 gas
producing counties
lost an even higher
proportion of their
population.
Source: Census Annual Population Estimates
Other Cornell findings include personal income growing more slowly in New York gas-producing
counties between 1990 and 2008. There was a 108% average growth in real personal income be-
tween 1990 and 2008 for Non- Metropolitan New York State. That growth was an average of 101%
for counties adjacent to gas counties, a 99% average growth for the 10 top gas counties, and a 97%
average growth for the top three gas-producing counties (Chautauqua, Chemung, Steuben). In
Pennsylvania, incomes grew more slowly in gas-producing counties. Compared to all non-
metropolitan counties, gas counties in Pennsylvania grew more slowly in real personal income, and
slightly faster in per capita income. But compared to adjacent counties, gas counties grew much
more slowly in both total and per capita income in Pennsylvania.
Some or all of these effects can be expected to occur in Middlefield, like much of the remainder of
the Marcellus region, were the area become a new energy boomtown. If Middlefields proposed
planning and zoning documents are adopted to prohibit heavy industry, oil, gas or solution min-
ing operations this may eliminate some of the impacts identified herein as a result of the build-out
activities. However, demands for housing by temporary workers are regional impacts and gas de-
velopment in other location is likely to affect Middlefield. Emergency services workers, because
mutual aid agreements are in place, may be called upon to assist with accidents, explosions, and
other emergency needs in adjoining towns. Trucking is also a regional impact so Middlefields
roads and maintenance costs, as well as traffic levels and the potential for trucking accidents re-
main if other area towns permit these heavy industrial activities.
68
Q. Community Character
The Cooperstown Region FGEIS, accepted by the Town Board of the Town of Middlefield in
2002, contains the following excerpt from its vision statement:
The Cooperstown area will be culturally vibrant, have excellent schools, and a diverse popu-
lation of all ages and cultures. Its environment will include a preserved lake, clean water and
air, and preserved forested hillsides and open valleys. Our landscape is visually unspoiled, has
preserved historic buildings and locations, and has an agricultural character. It will have
affordable houses, and new homes built so as to preserve open lands. The future Cooper-
stown area will have a robust and a year-round economy. The economy fosters a diversity of
small businesses that meet the needs of both residents and visitors.
This vision will not be realized if heavy industry, oil, gas or solution mining operations become
established in the Town. The Cooperstown Region FGEIS includes a statement of the most seri-
ous threats to the quality of life enjoyed by area residents. These include: 1) Changes to the rural
landscape and character of the area; 2) Increased costs to providing services; 3) Loss of identity,
sense of place, and sense of community; 4) Loss of open space and scenic views; 5) Increases to air,
light, water, and noise pollution; 6) Increasing levels of crime; 7) Displacement of people; 8) De-
creases in amount and quality of wildlife habitats; 9) Further decreases in parking supplies; and 10)
Increased sprawl. With the exception of item number 9 (i.e. parking supply), each of the threats
considered most serious to residents when they were surveyed, will result from heavy industrializa-
tion of Middlefield.
The Cooperstown area is known worldwide for its clean air, clean water, farms, forests, hills, trout
streams, scenic viewsheds, historic sites, quaint village and hamlets, rural lifestyle, recreational ac-
tivities, sense of history, and history of landscape conservation. These features give Middlefield its
sense of place and its community character. Heavy industrialization of the Town, however, will
eliminate many of these features as outlined in this analysis of land use in the Town. It is the natu-
ral and cultural assets that Middlefield possesses, which allows the economy to survive, guarantee-
ing its residents continued employment, health, safety, and welfare. Altering this unique mix of
quality of life and economic conditions, by allowing industrialization to occur, may benefit the few
landowners who enter into successful lease agreements and it will also benefit the gas companies
and other parties that will receive revenues from gas drilling and production. It will also irreversi-
bly overwhelm the rural character of the Town, including needed municipal services, its architec-
ture and archaeological resources, natural resources, tourism, waterways and other special envi-
ronmental assets.
69
R. Conclusions and Recommendations
New York State Town Law at 272-a.11(B) requires that All plans for capital projects of another gov-
ernmental agency on land included in the town comprehensive plan adopted pursuant to this section shall take
such plan into consideration. The SGEIS preparation underway by the DEC can be considered a
resource management plan that determines the direction hydrofracking will take in New York State
and may form the basis for a new regulatory and institutional arrangement. It is the opinion of the
authors of this Land Use Analysis that the DEC has an obligation to consider the vision and goals
established by Middlefields residents, as expressed in their existing Master Plan and their proposed
2011 Addendum to the Master Plan, and should acknowledge that allowance for heavy industries
including oil, gas and solution mining are incompatible with the Towns comprehensive plan.
There are a number of actions that the Town can take to address the issues raised in this Land Use
Analysis. They are as follows:
The Town should give serious consideration to adoption of the proposed amendments to
its comprehensive plan and Zoning Ordinance.
The Town should initiate a dialogue with the DEC to ensure that the States actions can be
properly considered in the context of Middlefields natural and cultural resources as well as
its community character.
The Town should initiate a dialogue with other towns in the region that will be affected by
natural gas development impacts. The Pace University Land Use Law Center has success-
fully brokered the establishment of Intermunicipal Agreements for numerous towns facing
regional land use issues with common problems through its Land Use Leadership Alliance
Training Program with the Glynwood Center. Appropriate regional issues to be addressed
include traffic, housing, water quality, visual impacts, noise, air quality and others. The
Town should consider contacting John Nolon, Esq., Director of the Universitys Land Use
Law Center.
The Town should conduct a comprehensive review of its Zoning Ordinance to determine
whether there are other amendments that would be appropriate. There are good sugges-
tions in the proposed 2011 Addendum to the Town Master Plan and many others as well.
New York State planning and zoning enabling acts were substantially overhauled in the
1990s and there now exist a multitude of new and innovative approaches for local gov-
ernments to protect natural and cultural resources as well as community character. Some
techniques to consider include but are not limited to the following:
Weight and other limitations for town roads and bridges

70
Setbacks to streams, wetlands and other water bodies
Lighting standards
Noise limitations
Tree cutting and ground disturbance limitations (excluding agriculture and forestry)
Ridgeline and scenic area protection
Agricultural protection zoning including allowances for farmers to engage in non-farm

businesses that do not adversely impact the community
Conservation subdivision through a four step process designed to protect conservation

areas without changing permitted density
Energy efficiency standards for new development and allowances for at home and
neighborhood solar and wind power production
Community preservation program funded through a transfer tax on real estate transac-
tions
Protection of wetlands
The Town should consider designation of its many natural and cultural resources as Criti-
cal Environmental Areas (CEA) under the New York State Environmental Quality Review
Act. The Town Board, Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals all have the authority
to designate CEAs in accordance with the SEQR regulations [see 6 NYCRR 617.14(g)].
71
Bibliography
Advances In Unconventional Gas: Solutions to Meet Growing Gas Demand Worldwide. Hart En-
ergy Publishing, Houston, TX. January 2007.
A Legal and Practical Guide to Protecting Your Citizens and the Environment in the Face of Mar-
cellus Shale Natural Gas Drilling. Kimberley Shaw Rea, Esq. Bosworth Gray & Fuller, Bronxville,
NY. March 30, 2009.
Annual Energy Outlook 2011 with Projections to 2035. United States Energy Information Admin-
istration. 2011.
Assessing the Environmental Effects of Marcellus Shale Gas Development: The State of Science.
V. Alaric Sample Will Price. William Penn Foundation, USDA Forest Service Northern Research
Station In partnership with the Academy of Natural Sciences. April 2011.
A Survey of Zoning Definitions. Tracy Burrows. American Planning Association, Planning Advi-
sory Service Report Number 421. 1989.
Community and Economic Impacts Of Marcellus Shale Natural Gas Development. Jeffrey Jac-
quet, Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University: Cornell Cooperative Extension We-
binar. May 12th, 2010.
Community Impacts of Marcellus Shale Development: Preliminary Research Findings. Kathy
Brasier and Matt Filteau, Penn State College of Agricultural Sciences Cooperative Extension. June
27, 2010.
Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy for New York. NYS Department of Environmental
Conservation Albany, NY. 2005.
Contaminant Characterization of Effluent from Pennsylvania Brine Treatment Inc. Josephine Fa-
cility: Implications for Disposal of Oil and Gas Flowback Fluids from Brine Treatment Plants.
EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study Technical Workshop 3, Fate and Transport, University of Pitts-
burgh Graduate School of Public Health. March 28-29, 2011.
Draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement On The Oil, Gas and Solution
Mining Regulatory Program: Well Permit Issuance for Horizontal Drilling And High-Volume Hy-
draulic Fracturing to Develop the Marcellus Shale and Other Low-Permeability Gas Reservoirs.
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Division of Mineral Resources. Sep-
tember 2009.
72
Economic Benefits of Open Space. New York State Comptroller. 2010.
Effects of Development of a Natural Gas Well and Associated Pipeline on the Natural and Scien-
tific Resources of the Fernow Experimental Forest. Mary Beth Adams, Pamela J. Edwards, W.
Mark Ford, Joshua B. Johnson, Thomas M. Schuler, Melissa Thomas-Van Gundy, and Frederica
Wood. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station,
General Technical Report NRS-76. January 2011.
Emerging Trends in the Marcellus Shale: Research & Policy Brief Series. Jeffrey Jacquet and Rich-
ard Stedman, Cornell University Human Dimensions Research Unit. Issue Number 30/July 2009.
Energy Boomtowns & Natural Gas: Implications for Marcellus Shale Local Governments & Rural
Communities. The Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development, The Pennsylvania State
University, NERCRD Rural Development Paper No. 43. January 2009.
Fracking: Chemical and Biological Risk Assessment for Natural Gas Extraction. Ronald E.
Bishop, Ph.D., CHO, Chemistry and Biochemistry Department at the State University of New
York, College at Oneonta. Draft, January 21, 2011.
Fractured Communities: Case Studies of the Environmental Impacts of Industrial Gas Drilling.
Craig Michaels, Watershed Program Director, James L. Simpson, Senior Attorney, William Weg-
ner, Staff Scientist, Riverkeeper. September 2010.
Gas Drilling Emergency in Bradford County. Jim Hamill and Sarah Buynovsky, WNEP.com.
April 20, 2011.
Generic Environmental Impact Statement on Capacities of the Cooperstown Region (Final).
Town of Middlefield, Town of Otsego, Village of Cooperstown and Community Planning & Envi-
ronmental Associates in collaboration with Sterling Environmental Engineers and AlphaGeosci-
ence. 2002
Generic Environmental Impact Statement on the Oil, Gas and Solution Mining Regulatory Pro-
gram. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Division of Mineral Re-
sources. 1992.
Hancock & The Marcellus Shale: Visioning the Impacts of Natural Gas Extraction Along the Up-
per Delaware. Columbia University Urban Design Research Seminar. Spring 2009.
Hydraulic Fracturing Considerations for Natural Gas Wells of the Marcellus Shale. J. Daniel Ar-
thur, P.E., ALL Consulting; Brian Bohm, P.G., ALL Consulting; Mark Layne, Ph.D., P.E., ALL
73
Consulting. The Ground Water Protection Council 2008 Annual Forum, Cincinnati, Ohio, Sep-
tember 21-24, 2008.
Hydraulic Fracturing Research Study. Science in Action, US EPA, Office of Research and Devel-
opment, Jill Dean. No date.
Impact Assessment of Natural Gas Production in the New York City Water Supply Watershed:
Final Impact Assessment Report. NYCDEP, Hazen and Sawyer. December 22, 2009.
Impact Assessment of Natural Gas Production in the New York City Water Supply Watershed:
Rapid Impact Assessment Report. NYCDEP, Hazen and Sawyer. September 2009.
Impacts on Community Character of Horizontal Drilling and High Volume Hydraulic Fracturing
in Marcellus Shale and Other Low-Permeability Gas Reservoirs. Final Report. Prepared for the
New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, Albany, NY. Prepared by: NTC
Consultants, 18 Division Street Suite 304 Saratoga Springs, NY 12866. Lisa C. Nagle, AICP Pro-
ject Manager, NYSERDA Contract #: 11170. September 16, 2009.
Marcellus Gas Development and Habitat Impacts. Nels Johnson, Pinchot Institute Marcellus Sci-
ence Workshop. Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, PA. April 1, 2011.
Marcellus Shale Communities: Report, Recommendations and Resources for a Collaborative Ap-
proach to Planning and Local Land Use Tools. Central New York Regional Planning & Develop-
ment Board. October 2010.
Marcellus Shale Drillers in Pennsylvania Amass 1614 Violations since 2008: 1056 Identified as
Most Likely to Harm the Environment. Pennsylvania Land Trust Association. October 2, 1010.
Marcellus Shale Gas Drilling: What Does it Mean for Economic Development? Preliminary Find-
ings on the Economic Consequences of Natural Gas Extraction in the Marcellus Shale. Susan
Christopherson Cornell University Department of City and Regional Planning. December 13,
2010 Update.
Methane and the Greenhouse-gas Footprint of Natural Gas from Shale Formations. Robert W.
Howarth, Renee Santoro, and Anthony Ingraffea. Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biol-
ogy, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Cornell University. 12 November 2010 /
Accepted: 13 March 2011.
New York State Flora Atlas. Available on the web at: http://newyork.plantatlas.usf.edu/
74
New York State Oil, Gas and Mineral Resources 2009. New York State Department of Environ-
mental Conservation, Division of Mineral Resources 625 Broadway Albany, New York 12233-
6500.
Not so Fast, Natural Gas: Why Accelerating Risky Drilling Threatens Americas Water. Food and
Water Watch, Washington, D.C. 2010.
Observations Concerning the Role of Local Government in Relation to Natural Gas Exploration
and Production in the Marcellus Shale in the Southern Tier East Region of New York State. Rob-
ert Augenstern. DRAFT Southern Tier East Technical Paper # 08-07.
Oil and Gas Accountability Project. Available online at:
http://www.earthworksaction.org/oil_and_gas.cfm
Pennsylvania Energy Impacts Assessment, Report 1: Marcellus Shale Natural Gas and Wind. Nels
Johnson, Assessment Team: Tamara Gagnolet, Rachel Ralls, Ephraim Zimmerman, Brad Eichel-
berger, Chris Tracey, Ginny Kreitler, Stephanie Orndorff, Jim Tomlinson, Scott Bearer, and Sarah
Sargent. The Nature Conservancy and Audubon Pennsylvania. November 15, 2010.
Planning for Agriculture in New York: A Toolkit for Towns And Counties. American Farmland
Trust. David Haight and Diane Held, 2009.
Poisoned Wells: Dangers of Natural Gas Drilling. William S. Friedlander, Esq. American Associa-
tion for Justice. Professional Resources: Environmental Harms and Hazards, Volume 47, No.3.
March 2011.
Policy Guide On Planning and Climate Change. American Planning Association. Adopted April
27, 2008 Updated April 11, 2011.
Report on Implications of Marcellus Shale Gas Drilling on Conserved Land. Maryland Depart-
ment of Natural Resources. December 2010.
Resource and Environmental Studies on the Marcellus Shale. Daniel J. Soeder, National Energy
Technology Laboratory, US Department of Energy, Geology and Environmental Science Morgan-
town, WV. 2008.
Shale Development Best Management Practices Natural Resources Information and Assessments
Natural Gas Exploration and Development Regulations. Aaron M. Lien and William J. Manner.
Pinchot Institute for Conservation. December 15, 2010.
75
Shale Gas White Paper. Joseph H. Frantz, Jr. and Valerie Jochen, Schlumberger (oil services com-
pany). October 2005.
Technical Assistance for the Draft Supplemental Generic EIS: Oil, Gas and Solution Mining Regu-
latory Program: Well Permit Issuance for Horizontal Drilling and High-Volume Hydraulic Fractur-
ing to Develop the Marcellus Shale and Other Low Permeability Gas Reservoirs. Agreement No.
9679 7, NYSERDA. August 2009.
Testimony of David Warne Assistant Commissioner, Bureau of Water Supply New York City De-
partment of Environmental Protection on Hydrofracking. Committee on Environmental Protec-
tion, Council of the City of New York. March 1, 2011.
The Dirty Truth Behind Clean Natural Gas. Paul Tolme. National Wildlife 48(4). 2010.
The Energy Equation: Marcellus Shale Gas. The Nature Conservancy, nature.org/paenergy. No
date.
The Future of Natural Gas, An InterdIscIplInary MIT study. Massachusetts Institute of Technol-
ogy, MIT Energy Initiative. 2010.
The Marcellus Gas Play: Ground Water Impacts. James B. Campbell, Director, Pennsylvania Wa-
ter Science Center New Cumberland, PA US Geological Survey. 2010.
The Oil and Gas Industrys Exclusions and Exemptions to Major Environmental Statutes. Renee
Lewis Kosnik, MSEL, JD Research Director, Oil and Gas Accountability Project. October 2007.
Unanswered Questions About The Economic Impact of Gas Drilling In the Marcellus Shale:
Dont Jump to Conclusions. Jannett Barth, PhD, J. M. Barth & Associates, Inc. March 22, 2010.
Unconventional Oil and Gas Plays of New York State. Brian Slater, Langhorne Smith, Richard
Nyahay. Reservoir Characterization Group at the New York State Museum. No date.
Unifying Framework for Understanding Impacts of Human Developments on Wildlife in Energy
Development and Wildlife Conservation in Western North America. D.E. Naugle, ed., Johnson,
C.J. & M-H. St-Laurent, Island Press, Washington, DC. 2011
US Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2 Comments to the New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation (on the DECs dSGEIS). December 30, 2009.
US Environmental Protection Agency website, Hydraulic Fracturing Quick Finder.
76
Water Resources and Natural Gas Production from the Marcellus Shale. Daniel J. Soeder and
William M. Kappel, US Geological Survey, Fact Sheet 2009-3032. May 2009.
Whats in that fracking fluid? The River Reporter 34 (49). S. Long. 2008.
Working Paper Series, A Comprehensive Economic Impact Analysis of Natural Gas Extraction in
the Marcellus Shale: The Economic Impact of Marcellus Shale Gas Drilling, What Have We
Learned? What are the Limitations? David Kay, Cornell University Department of Development
Sociology, Community and Regional Development Institute. December, 2010.
77

Middle Field Land Use Analysis Final

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Middle Field Land Use Analysis Final

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Middle Field Land Use Analysis Final

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

LAND USE ANALYSIS: HEAVY INDUSTRY AND OIL, GAS OR

SOLUTION MINING AND DRILLING

Weight and other limitations for town roads and bridges

Setbacks to streams, wetlands and other water bodies

Ridgeline and scenic area protection

Agricultural protection zoning including allowances for farmers to engage in non-farm

Conservation subdivision through a four step process designed to protect conservation

You might also like