 |
|
||
July 12, 2006
By STEVE KADEL
H&N Staff Writer
MERRILL - Mark Scrimsher's father and grandfather farmed in California, and he
grew up wanting to do the same.
But by the time Scrimsher was old
enough to take that step, the state's housing market had driven land costs so
high he had to look north.
Scrimsher came to Klamath County to pursue his dream. He and wife Susan own
250 acres near Merrill and lease another 250, primarily for alfalfa hay.
Scrimsher has farmed the land for 16 years.
Now he sees another type of development looming as a danger to his lifestyle.
A proposed 223-mile natural gas pipeline is routed through Scrimsher's
property.
If built, it would cut a 75-foot-wide easement through what is now fertile
agricultural land.
Mark Scrimsher is concerned that if a natural gas pipeline is allowed to cross
his land, he may lose out on some profits. Scrimsher has farmed alfalfa hay on
the land for 16 years. Scrimsher isn't alone in the dilemma. Lots of other
private land owners would be similarly affected by the pipeline between Coos
Bay and Malin.
Developers of the line say it's needed because natural gas fields in Canada
are in decline and another source near the Rocky Mountains will go to Eastern
states over the next couple of decades.
The proposed pipeline would transport enough natural gas each day to heat 1 million homes, according to estimates from the three companies vying to build the line as a joint project.
They are Williams, a long-time Pacific Northwest operator;
Fort Chicago Energy Partners of Calgary, Alberta; and PG&E Corp. which
serves about 15 million customers in northern and central California.
Developers tout the line's economic benefit, saying it would pump $2 million a
year in tax revenues into Klamath County and provide more than 1,000 jobs
during peak construction.
That's in addition to the benefits of more natural gas supplies to the West
Coast, they say.
Scrimsher, meanwhile, wonders what it
will do to farming and agriculture suppliers in the Basin. He sees the
easement as fragmenting his fields, lowering the land's value as well as
making farming more difficult.
Williams officials say land owners will be compensated at fair market value
for easements. However, they acknowledge other companies, such as local
utility firms, may also use the easement for their transmission lines.
If Scrimsher or other land owners along the route decide to
sell their land, the pipeline operator - known as Pacific Connector - would
retain its rights to the easement.
Scrimsher said it's unlikely he could sell a bisected acreage to anyone
interested in farming. Most likely, he said, the land will become a hodgepodge
of housing subdivisions. That would drive farmers out of business along with
local ag suppliers such as fertilizer or seed companies, he said.
Farmers have permission to plant crops
on the easement, but Scrimsher said that right holds little value. Pacific
Connector could dig in the easement for any reason it felt necessary, as could
other entities that might bury pipe or cable in the future.
Even if that doesn't happen, there's a problem from an agricultural
standpoint. Scrimsher said he's concerned about drainage problems and soil
quality on the easement.
“The soil is not going to be the
same,” he said. “It will act differently when watered. I may not be able
to get out in the field when I want to.”
Susan Scrimsher posed several other questions in a letter to the Herald and
News.
“What is the environmental impact of burying a pipeline under Lost River?”
she asked. “Why was the initial path of the pipeline changed without input
from landowners.”
Safety concerns
Pipeline project manager Steve Potts of Williams said the change was
recommended near Stukel Mountain by the company's geotechnical engineers. They
studied the land near Stukel's toe, he said, and found evidence of an old
landslide area.
In addition, Potts said engineers worried about the existence of a fault near
Stukel.
“It's a safety thing,” Potts said of the route change, which pushed the
pipeline onto farmland. “It would pose a future risk. We'd rather stay in
the powerline corridor because it's a shorter route.”
Potts said the detour around Stukel couldn't be avoided, and it returns to the
powerline corridor shortly past Scrimsher's land.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission will conduct an environmental impact
study and will decide whether to approve the project.
The state of Oregon has no say in the matter, thanks to the energy bill
approved last year by Congress and signed by President Bush. It takes
authority away from the state and gives it only to the federal government.
Scrimsher is almost resigned to the project going ahead, saying many people
feel powerless to stop such a big project.
He believes the pipeline's effects might be the tipping point that sends a lot
of farmers into economic ruin.
“It costs so much money now to farm,” he said. “Everything's right on
the edge. That's why this is so critical.
“It's one more nail in the coffin of farming.”
