I would like to comment on the ongoing debate between our local anti-fracking gas activists and Cabot Oil Co.

I am an activist as well. I protest and put action in the areas that I feel are relevant, and folks should be aware of.

Some of the things I write about, most folks can hardly believe would be an issue. Until it happens. Look at what a small group of activists did to the stone mining industry. The group so enraged the DEP that the department felt it was easier to cripple the industry with unreasonable, I would say crowding illegal, measures to mine in Pa., that it is now a dying industry. This age old, time honored way of making a living is about decimated, unless you have the big bucks and don't mind the jerk around.

These anti mining activists have money now. They sold out to the gas companies, for a very large profit. One can see where the wells and pipe lines go, and who the property owners are.

Gas is a naturally occurring "mineral" in Susquehanna Co., just as Pa Bluestone is. I believe the trouble starts when one party has the stone, or gas, and another does not. Then you see activism. Gas companies have the big bucks. They send in attorneys who are more sophisticated than the ones here, and barter the money for gas, oil, coal. This does create a climate of distrust.

The one thing about being active in your protests, is that one must be reasonable enough to see the other side. There is science that should be considered and not just a "dig in the heels" sentimentality. In the beginning, I don't believe anyone knew just how close to the surface the gas is. That did set up a few unfortunate events, which would make a soul nervous about the potential for disaster. The beauty of mistakes, is they are corrected. The rest of the gas companies took a cue from Cabot, and set up knowing gas pressure. I think the real problem now, is how arrogant Cabot came across in the beginning, that set up this gas company versus local land owners mentality. Even our local lawyers got involved and have prospered exponentially depending on if they belonged to Alta Resources. Cabot redeemed themselves by helping to build a hospital on the hill.

Being an activist requires a sense of responsibility to the cause. One just can't go trespassing and potentially cause harm to another and not expect to be called out on your actions. I think the Judge has ruled wisely in this matter, and I found it amusing that it was taken to mean, you can't get to your favorite grocery store. That type of response is similar to the anti-miners. They didn't like the answer they were given, so they made themselves a mockery, and in this mockery they inadvertently beat the miners.

I am sorry to say, I can't get behind your cause. The science isn't really there. The water jug that is travelling around isn't tested. In my old job, I had water tested, and I can't think of what could possibly hold that "mud" look, without some settling of contents.

The folks you are protesting on behalf of do not come across as solid in the belief now. Did they sell the mineral rights? I will say getting a few D-list celebrities was a neat trick. It is unfortunate they now are off to protest something else. I do wish you well in your protesting. I admire that you are willing to keep awareness of the potential for disaster and would hope you can get a better group of scientists who will have facts, not just speculation. And most of all, I hope you do not end up being right.

Quality of life will never be the same without clean water.

Sincerely,

Cynthia Allen

Summersville, PA

Sixty years ago Hinkley was just another small town in southern California. Of course it had its problems. The usual not-enoughs: jobs, growth, and prosperity. So when PG&E began construction of a natural-gas pipeline and compressor station they were greeted like monetary missionaries. Construction promised to be the answer to all three problems. Instead, what Hinkley got turned it into a ghost town.

Hinkley didn't change overnight into a desolate way-station haunted by bitter memories. It was death by a thousand cuts. Slowly, ever so slowly, health problems began to appear, then with disturbing frequency.

Residents began complaining about an array of physical and mental concerns with no common denominator: liver function, heart irregularities, difficulty breathing, poor digestion, lack of energy, anxiety and depression.

Then serious ailments turned into life-threatening illnesses. Incidences of cancers of the brain, kidney, breast, and uterus began to take a noticeable toll. Even the animals and trees suffered, wilted, and died. Something was radically wrong in Hinkley but no one knew what.

There was another peculiarity. In the mid '80s, PG&E began buying homes, bulldozing them, and carting away the rubble. This caught the attention of Erin Brockovich. She investigated and found that 75 percent of the residents of the leveled houses had been treated for medical conditions.

PG&E claimed it destroyed the houses because of vandalism. Brockovich suspected it was to destroy evidence. She was right. PG&E knew the cause of the problem as early as 1964 but covered it up until 1983---20 years.

Waste water containing chromium-6, a highly toxic chemical, was pumped into an unlined evaporating pond. The air downwind from the pond was polluted with waste water evaporates while pond water percolated into the groundwater creating a toxic plume two miles by one mile. The air and water wells of Hinkley were being poisoned by PG&E from 1953 to 1964.

Finally, in 1983 the company informed the State of California that it had detected levels of chromium-6 in the groundwater surrounding the compressor station. The levels were ten times greater than the maximum amount allowed by law.

Brockovich was instrumental in taking the company to court. The case was settled in 1996 for $333 million, the largest settlement ever paid in a class-action lawsuit.

Hollywood's eponymous film had the necessary happy ending but this time the movie matched reality. Residents were convinced that the carcinogenic plume could be contained. They were wrong. To this day the plume is spreading.

Hinkley's population has shriveled to half of what it was 60 years ago.

“I walked away assuming that everything was okay,” said Brockovich, “and it wasn't. I feel duped, ashamed, and really sad for the people of Hinkley. This will be another town in America lost to pollution.”

The parallels between Hinkley and a number of towns in Susquehanna County are many---too many.

In both Hinkley and in this county, the shale gas companies were given a warm welcome that cooled when environmental degradation, health issues, and divisions began to surface.

Dozens of water wells have been contaminated by fracking in Susquehanna County, 15 in Dimock alone, say residents. Cabot bought several houses in that town and converted one into a vacant lot. And since 2010 the DEP designated nine square miles in Dimock “off limits” to drilling because of a plume of contaminated groundwater.

In many towns across the county, residents claimed they were sickened by the fumes, sand dust, traffic, and noise created by fracking. Others are upset about the dappled industrialization in Susquehanna County.

But there are those who say that shale drilling has brought jobs, growth, and prosperity to Susquehanna County. For some, this is true.

A courtroom clash was inevitable.

On March 24 the county courthouse was packed for a hearing between Cabot Oil and Gas vs Vera Scroggins, the shalers' Erin Brockovich. “It's the most I've ever seen for a hearing,” said Sheriff Lance Benedict.

The hearing and post hearing press conference with Scroggins were covered by newspapers in seven states, three countries, national news media, two wire services, and many TV programs (view YouTube: Vera Scroggins vs Cabot Oil & Gas).

So who's right? Is hydraulic fracking good or bad? That is not the question. And no one claims there are any Hinkleys in Susquehanna County. The question is this: Will there be?

Sincerely,

Bob Scroggins

New Milford, PA