Denver police use force on Occupy protesters - rubber bullets, pepper balls and more

Associated Press
10/29/2011
via Yahoo

DENVER (AP) — A tense standoff between protesters and authorities near the steps of the Colorado Capitol erupted into a clash Saturday that resulted in a surge of demonstrators being met with police force that included reports of pepper spray and rubber bullets.

WTFrack.org

The situation downtown escalated when some supporters of the Occupy Wall Street movement marching in a group of about 2,000 tried to advance up the Capitol steps.

About eight officers scuffled with a group of protesters, according to The Denver Post (http://goo.gl/fkQkk), and police confirmed to the newspaper that they used pepper spray and either rubber bullets or pepper balls to break up the crowd.

Denver police spokesman Matt Murray said protesters knocked an officer off his motorcycle and other officers were kicked by demonstrators.

Murray said seven protesters were arrested, including two for assault and one for disobedience. He said some demonstrators had received medical treatment on the scene, but no one had been taken to a hospital.

Mike Korzen, 25, said he was among the protesters whom police dispersed with rubber bullets and pepper spray.

"I was standing there with my hands behind my back," Korzen said, using a water bottle to wash pepper spray from his eyes.

Continue readinf...

In Response To The Oakland Shooting Of Scott Olsen OccupyMARINES Request The Following

Source: anonops

Our Brother Marine Corps Veteran Scott Olsen Remains In The Hospital Under Critical Condition From Sustaining A Blow To The Head From An Oakland Police Department Riot Officer Projectile Early Wednesday Morning October 25, 2011.




OccupyMARINES Have Watched Closely The Response From The OPD, The Mayor, The Governor, And All Others Involved In The Oakland Attack On Peaceful Demonstrators; We Have Observed These Pathetic Cowards Refuse Responsibility For Their Actions That May Very Well Alter The Course Of Our Brother’s Life. Additionally, Many Other Police Departments Nationwide Deploy Similar Riot Tactics Against Demonstrators Honoring The OWS 8, A Peaceful Declaration Of Assembly; We Will Organize Peacefully Against These Departments.


In Response To The Oakland Shooting Of Scott Olsen OccupyMARINES Request The Following:

• The GOP Cowards Responsible For Influencing This Event Be Brought To Justice. Track Names And Photos Of Each And Email Them To Us

• Identify The 300 OPD Riot Officers By Name, Photo, And Badge Number With Boots On The Ground Engaging In Illegal Excessive Force Acts Against Peaceful Americans For Prosecution.

 

• Identify The Officer Responsible For Harming Scott Olsen By Name And Photo For Prosecution.

• The Honorable Resignation Of Oakland Mayor Jean Quan And Acting Police Chief Howard Jordan.

• A Public Apology From California Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. For The Unlawful Injury Of Our Brother Scott Olsen.

We Fully Intend To Make An Example, Legally And Peacefully, Of The Cowards Associated With Harming An American Veteran. We Will Not Stop Until Our Aforementioned Demands Are Met In Their Entirety.

God Be With Scott Olsen, We Pray A Speedy Recovery For Him And His Mother.

Semper Fidelis Scott Olsen

Keep Pushing Forward America We Support You.

anonops blog

anonops twitter

Environmental Groups Concerned About Senate Impact Fee

NPR State Impact
Scott Detrow
Oct. 28, 2011

The direc­tors of five envi­ron­men­tal advo­cacy groups — Clean Water Action, Delaware River­keeper Net­work, the Sierra Club’s Penn­syl­va­nia branch, Earth­works and Pen­nEn­vi­ron­ment — have sent a let­ter to state sen­a­tors, in advance of next week’s vote on a nat­ural gas impact fee.

They’re con­cerned about SB 1100’s “model ordi­nance” lan­guage, which would bar munic­i­pal­i­ties from receiv­ing fee money, if they past strict reg­u­la­tions on drilling. The groups also want to see stronger envi­ron­men­tal reg­u­la­tions and setbacks.

Octo­ber 28, 2011

Dear Mem­bers of the Penn­syl­va­nia State Senate:


We are writ­ing con­cern­ing Sen­a­tor Scarnati’s bill to address Mar­cel­lus Shale issues, SB 1100, which was recently amended and voted out of Appro­pri­a­tions Com­mit­tee. Our orga­ni­za­tions have two con­cerns we would like to draw to your attention.


First, the signed orga­ni­za­tions of the attached let­ter (sent to all mem­bers of the leg­is­la­ture on June 3, 2011) are writ­ing you to reaf­firm our posi­tion that we strongly OPPOSE any efforts to limit a municipality’s abil­ity to pro­tect itself, to weaken or stan­dard­ize munic­i­pal zon­ing author­ity, to pun­ish com­mu­ni­ties that choose to exer­cise their rights, or to give the Attor­ney Gen­eral the power to cir­cum­vent a tra­di­tional court process and deter­mine the fate of munic­i­pal zon­ing laws.

Munic­i­pal­i­ties all across Penn­syl­va­nia are work­ing to enact or have enacted mea­sures designed to pro­tect the envi­ron­ment and health, safety, and wel­fare of their com­mu­ni­ties and its res­i­dents in light of the rush to drill for nat­ural gas in the Mar­cel­lus Shale. In addi­tion, Penn­syl­va­nia Supreme Court rul­ings have made it clear that the state Oil and Gas Act does not pre­vent munic­i­pal­i­ties from apply­ing zon­ing codes to gas wells.


Our pre­vi­ous let­ter referred specif­i­cally to a pro­vi­sion in the orig­i­nal ver­sion where the receipt of rev­enue from an impact fee was tied to adop­tion of a model zon­ing ordi­nance. Recently, efforts have begun to amend this leg­is­la­tion. Whether nego­ti­a­tions result in the preser­va­tion of this “one size fits all” pro­vi­sion or pro­duces new lan­guage that would attempt to weaken a municipality’s abil­ity to pro­tect its res­i­dents, the result is still the under­min­ing of the cen­tral pur­pose of local ordi­nances: to address the par­tic­u­lar needs and con­cerns of munic­i­pal­i­ties, which vary greatly with regard to nat­ural resources, pop­u­la­tion loca­tion and den­sity, com­mer­cial sec­tors, and other aspects.


We request that you stand with us and your munic­i­pal­ity in this cause and encour­age your lead­er­ship to do the same. It is essen­tial that we pre­serve a municipality’s abil­ity to deter­mine what is best for their com­mu­nity and its’ res­i­dents and we hope you will call for the strongest decision-making pow­ers pos­si­ble for local communities.


Sec­ond, we are con­cerned that the cur­rent lan­guage in the amended ver­sion of SB 1100 does not pro­vide enough pro­tec­tion for Pennsylvania’s drink­ing water sup­plies. Both the recently released Cen­ter for Rural Penn­syl­va­nia study and the pre­vi­ously pub­lished Duke Uni­ver­sity study found that drink­ing water wells had increased con­t­a­m­i­na­tion when Mar­cel­lus Shale gas wells were drilled within 3,000 feet of the water sup­ply. Unfor­tu­nately, the cur­rent lan­guage only increases pri­vate well set­backs to 500 feet and pub­lic water sup­ply set­backs to 1,000 feet.


While SB 1100 does increase the zone of pre­sumed con­t­a­m­i­na­tion to 3,000 feet, a set­back of at least that dis­tance, and ide­ally 5,000 feet, would pro­vide real pro­tec­tion to res­i­dents. Increas­ing the zone of pre­sumed con­t­a­m­i­na­tion pro­vides landown­ers with greater legal rights; how­ever, in prac­tice many res­i­dents are unaware of their rights and as a result can­not ben­e­fit from this change. While it is pos­i­tive that more res­i­dents would receive replace­ment water sup­plies under this change, it would be far more ben­e­fi­cial to sim­ply pre­vent the con­t­a­m­i­na­tion from tak­ing place through a set­back pro­vi­sion. Replace­ment water sup­plies are a bur­den on res­i­dents and often result in a loss of prop­erty value.


We would urge you to sup­port a greater set­back for pri­vate and pub­lic drink­ing water sup­plies, with 3,000 feet being a min­i­mum dis­tance that is sci­en­tif­i­cally backed and 5,000 feet as an even more pro­tec­tive setback.


Thank you for your atten­tion to this issue.

Senate panel approves Marcellus environmental amendment

Scranton Times-Tribune
Robert Swift
Oct. 27, 2011


HARRISBURG - A key Senate committee approved environmental protections for Marcellus Shale drilling Wednesday while negotiations continue in the chamber over an impact fee on drilling and restrictions on local zoning ordinances for drilling activities.

The Appropriations Committee voted unanimously for what senators labeled a comprehensive amendment addressing such varied issues as natural gas well setbacks from water sources and response procedures in case of emergencies.

Several of the amendment's provisions mirror or even exceed recommendations offered by Gov. Tom Corbett's Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission, while others would put into law regulations that were adopted last year by the Rendell administration, said Senate President Pro Tempore Joseph Scarnati, R-25, Jefferson County.

The Senate plans to consider more amendments to the measure next week and then vote on an entire bill that includes an impact fee before a break for an Election Day recess, said Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi, R-9, Chester.

The approved environmental amendment would...

Continue reading...

Boulder County, Colorado oil and gas well count - Are there more than you thought?

Below is a complete list of all wells in Boulder County, Colorado with their respective status, field name, API number (well ID), and operator name.


Boulder County, Colorado

AL - Abandoned location (169 wells)
DA - Dead & Abandoned (107 wells)
PA - Plugged & Abandoned (141 wells)
DM - Domestic Well (1 well)
PR - Producing (active well) (301 active O&G wells in Boulder County)
SI - Shut in (5 wells)
TA-Temporarily Abandoned (1 well)
UN - Unknown (5 wells)
XX - Well status not reported (34 wells)

764 oil and gas wells exist in Boulder County, Colorado and 301 of those are active and producing oil and gas wells according to the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC) website http://cogcc.state.co.us/ (28 OCT 2011)

Now you have accurate data...