Pine Mountain Creek (Van Buren County) development

[KimL]

I received a water sample today taken from Pine Mountain Creek on February 1. The sample looks like a very dark brown, thick paint. If anyone is in the area and can go by and check it out in person, please do. Apparently this is another case of frac material making it into the water supply. I hesitate to say too much here because I have not been able to confirm anything myself, but if this water sample is typical, Pine Mountain Creek is in great danger, as are the farms and several hundred head of cattle that rely on the creek for water.

[Tmuse]

I live in the mnt. pine area just outside of Hot Springs,Ar which creek are you talking about. Tim muse

[Trismegistus]

Several Pine Mountain Creeks -- this most likely is the one that flows into Hogan Creek and subsequently in Cove Creek subsequently into North Fork of the Cadron. It's watershed is west of Bee Branch/Damascus in the heart of the Fayetteville Shale exploits.

[Fish]

To further complicate things, there is also the "Pine Mountain" Dam issue at Lee Cr., which was what I thought this was about when I saw the subject line. Have to be specific about which "Pine Mountain" you're talking about! :)

- Fish

[Roger]

Several Pine Mountain Creeks -- this most likely is the one that flows into Hogan Creek and subsequently in Cove Creek subsequently into North Fork of the Cadron. It's watershed is west of Bee Branch/Damascus in the heart of the Fayetteville Shale exploits.

Would bet that is the one.

[KimL]

Tris and Roger are correct. Sorry for the confusion.

[Trismegistus]

Nice day for a little walk in the woods -- I'll check it out. Post later.

[Roger]

Sample looks like drillling fluid that has been diluted.

Not sure what they are using for the make-up of the fluid. It appears , according to Halliburton's website, that in other areas where similar operations are going on that they use a clay-free invert drilling fluids. This means that their fluids are oil/water based with some petroleum-based additives to create a viscosity so that the fluids can be weighted with barite.

Can be nasty stuff. At least the true oil-based muds are.

[Tmuse]

How can they get away with the drilling lube run off going into the creeks, is no one from the state or fed agencys monitoring these actions. This is not acceptable. Tim muse

[prophet]

figured you would be on top of that Roger. Can the stuff be traced upstream/uphill to a source?

[Roger]

How can they get away with the drilling lube run off going into the creeks, is no one from the state or fed agencys monitoring these actions. This is not acceptable. Tim muse

Tim, often it is cheaper for a company to "spill" the liquid, pay the fine and "mitigate" the damages and move on than to dispose of properly (which by the way most of the land farms have been the subject of scrutiny). I think that is was reported to the appropriate agencies. If there is any kind of fish kill, then AG&FC will get involved.

Grant, I think the source has been determined to be a drilling site. The liquid is question is too thin to be unadulterated drilling fluid as its viscosity is too low to carry much in the way of cuttings. Wish I had my old mud testing equipment!

If you want a site for further info on some of the things going on in this drilling boom, try this (yes, it will be slanted but if Chesapeake can put on the Shale Channel Network, well):

http://www.arktimes.com/blogs/shale/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Being a user of petroleum products and having worked in the oilfield as drilling fluid technician and sales rep for almost 20 years, I understand the need to find and manage these resources. But having grown up in South Arkansas, I can remember seeing the effects of un-regulated drilling activities on our land 30-50 years after the drilling took place. It takes a long time to recover from some of these mistakes.

Given a free rein, companies will do what is cheapest (true in any business, not just oilfield) regardless of the impact on the environment. This is not saying these companies need to be regulated to where recovery of the resource is not viable. But we don't want to them to have carte blanche to do as they wish.

And we know that ADEQ is not all about environmental quality.

[Trismegistus]

Look Around Report:

It is a changing landscape through the upper Cove Creek Basin and its tributaries -- Hogan, Pine Mountain and Cedar Creek. Pipeline right-of-ways crisscross the countryside across streams, pastures and mountainsides -- the the steep cut down the north face of Robert Mountain is a particular impressive display of manpower. From Republican to Holly Springs to Martindale to Formosa are innumerable dust storms of truck convoys supplying the workers and rigs with gravel, water and equipment. Plastic-lined catchment basins are now more common than livestock ponds, homes, and barns and stand ready to hold their toxic mix of runoff, slurries and lubricants -- many are the last barrier protecting the nearby streams.

I examined several of the well operations -- SEECO's Payne Basin, McGee, C. Hall, J. Nabors and a couple of other operations where the "Authorized Personel Only" signs failed to serve notice. In none could I discovery any release of pollutants outside their perimeter. I also could detect no visually observable sediments, film or gases in samples along Pine Mountain Creek at three different sites -- 285 Bridge, Rabbit Ridge Bridge and Black Hill Road. And although perhaps not very useful -- Phosphate, Nitrogen, temperature and pH were all within normal limits at all three sites. Tangent: Where last year's tornado obilterated the forests along Pine Mountain many landowners have cleared out more pasture land -- anticipate more sediment run off this spring; however, Pine Mountain's bluff-lined beauty is now easier to observe from the roadside.

Not to say something isn't going on -- the pollutants could have been more transient or more localized. Moreover with this much activity, this much development, this much intrusion by humanity -- the impact is significant regardless of our ability to identify any one violation at any one given location at any one given moment of time -- there are hundreds of these wells and thousands more planned.

Everyone should take the time to drive through the heart of the Fayetteville shale development -- it is a real eye-opener!

If you are opposed to unrestricted expoloitation you'll find ample evidence to support your position.

And if you enjoy Arkansas' untouched and pastoral countryside you best hurry and go see it while there is still a little left. For soon every hillside and valley will be covered in drill platforms, wells, compression stations, pump houses, and pipeline right-of-ways. Nothing -- including the ADEQ and AGF&C -- seem to be standing in the way.

[KimL]

Tris, I'm glad you found nothing where there were no signs stopping you. The recovery of the creek water took place on February 1, so it is possible that even had you been on site you might not have observed the material. Did you have a stream team kit handy? Sounds like it from your assessment!

I've still got a full Gatorade bottle of what is clearly not creek water from Pine Mountain Creek and information from two unique sources now that it is material dumped at a drilling site, so we'll be digging deeper.

[prophet]

what company's wellsite?

[Clif]

3 or more companies will do work drilling at each site. Some of these are owned by the company controlling the operation. All different parts of the process.