Y'all seen this? Fed.Gov blowing up Red Snapper

[Moonpie]

http://www.local15tv.com/news/local/story/Explosive-Fed-Mandate-Killing-Thousands-of-Red/xj8T4zPamkOGc8fuT40W_Q.cspx

“They tell us not to fish [red snapper] but they’re blowing them up,” charter boat Captain Jason Domange told Local 15, “It’s a cryin’ shame.”

[Gulfcoast13]

Damn shame.

[Curmudgeon]

Amazing

[Root Canal]

POTUS to blame!!!

[Termo]

This video was heartbreaking to watch. Let's look at both sides tho.....The goverment is being blamed here but how would you feel if you were running along and hit a submerged platform, or a oil tanker is ripped apart by a jutting steel leg of an abandoned rig, releasing thousands or millions of gallons of oil into the Gulg...etc. etc. etc. Again, it's always the government's fault. Who put those rigs there? It wasn't the government. How about we demand the oil companies (that get BILLIONS of OUR tax dollars in subsidies) be required to post bonds for the removal of their rigs before being able to install them in the first place. And demand that they remove then without harm to the ecosystem before their bond is returned. Nahhh....let's just blame the government. Again.
I do agree that the government should have at least attempted to allow commercial or pleasure fishermen to collect the harvest of the dead snapper (if it could be done safely). This was a terrible waste of a valuable resourse.

[Jerkyourcroaker]

The crime isn't blowing up the rig and killing the snapper though that is certainly lamentable given the overbearing recreational harvest restrictions. The crime is that the rig could have been made safe and remained in place as habitat for the marine life that use the substructure as an ecosystem.

So, yes, it is absolutely the government's fault. With some planning and foresight (very short supply these days) the ecosystem could still be in place and the waterway navigable. You could say the same for the whack jobs that ruined the north shore of West with dredge spoils. All easily avoidable while still facilitating commerce - another area where our government is woefully lacking.

[Termo]

I agree with JYC that it could have been done differently (and should have been)......but we keep forgetting the root cause...poor resourse management when the rigs were put there in the first place, both the fault of the oil/gas companies and the federal managers at the time. We seem to always blame the effect and forget the cause in everything. Some comments were made in the video responses that the rigs must be removed at least 90' from the surface....why can't they (or do they?) just let the rig topple at 90' and remain on the bottom for future colonization? There HAD to be a better response than the one the government used in this instance.

[pieman]

This video was heartbreaking to watch. Let's look at both sides tho.....The goverment is being blamed here but how would you feel if you were running along and hit a submerged platform, or a oil tanker is ripped apart by a jutting steel leg of an abandoned rig, releasing thousands or millions of gallons of oil into the Gulg...etc. etc. etc. Again, it's always the government's fault. Who put those rigs there? It wasn't the government. How about we demand the oil companies (that get BILLIONS of OUR tax dollars in subsidies) be required to post bonds for the removal of their rigs before being able to install them in the first place. And demand that they remove then without harm to the ecosystem before their bond is returned. Nahhh....let's just blame the government. Again.
I do agree that the government should have at least attempted to allow commercial or pleasure fishermen to collect the harvest of the dead snapper (if it could be done safely). This was a terrible waste of a valuable resourse.

Exactly Termo. If theres anyhting I have learned in my 44 yrs its that theres always going to be criticism to every decision no matter what it is.

[Robalo]

This video was heartbreaking to watch. Let's look at both sides tho.....The goverment is being blamed here but how would you feel if you were running along and hit a submerged platform, or a oil tanker is ripped apart by a jutting steel leg of an abandoned rig, releasing thousands or millions of gallons of oil into the Gulg...etc. etc. etc. Again, it's always the government's fault. Who put those rigs there? It wasn't the government. How about we demand the oil companies (that get BILLIONS of OUR tax dollars in subsidies) be required to post bonds for the removal of their rigs before being able to install them in the first place. And demand that they remove then without harm to the ecosystem before their bond is returned. Nahhh....let's just blame the government. Again.
I do agree that the government should have at least attempted to allow commercial or pleasure fishermen to collect the harvest of the dead snapper (if it could be done safely). This was a terrible waste of a valuable resourse.

First off, Bonds are required by the Govt for most Operators in the OCS. Oil Companies are required to have turtle watchers and other enviros on location during removal operations to minimize impact. What are you going to do-spearfish or net each fish before blowing or cutting a leg off a platform? I am sure PETA and the other envirowhackos would have a **** fit. As far as "subsidies", that is a BS term for Oil & Gas-they get tax write-offs for manufacturing just like any company that creates goods-things like depreciation, capitalized and expensed items. Subsidies are what farmers get for NOT planting a certain crop or raising a certain livestock. Name me one subsidy that Oil gets. BTW, if those platforms did not exist, how would you be on your computer?

As far as rigs to reefs-that program exists; however, it is still required to pull the deck and cut the legs below 60' (i recall) and only can be done in Govt approved areas, so most are not "toppled" in place, but moved to an area for making a reef.

Under OCS Regs, platforms must maintain navigation horns and lights-they must be checked and helo flights are about $1500/hour-at least once a month a "flyby" must be made to check nav aids and ensure no issues for non-producing platforms, so leaving a platform in place is expensive (plus liability issues) and the OCS Regs require removal within 6-12 months from date of cessation of production.

Ya can't lift a platform out-they gotta be dismantled and unless you can remove w/o explosives (and those are minimal charges used), aint gonna cvhange-plus those snappers would not be there if not for the platform to begin with, so it causes gains with some minor losses at the end.

BTW, platforms maximum depth is about 300' of water. Most are in about 60-120' of water-so how ya gonna get 60-90' of hull clearance w/o making a large mess on the floor and causing major snags for shrimpers (which has a compensation fund set up by the Govt for snags caused by oil companies' debris/platforms/pipeline valves, etc.?

[Termo]

Well said Robolo. Thanks for the enlightenment. I am all for drilling in the Gulf to meet our energy needs, but it seems to me the oil companies should be responsible for their removal if they placed them there in the first place (they MAY be doing the removal, I don't know) and it should be done with as little impact on the environment as possible. People who beatch about killing fish and then drive a SUV to work every day need some soul searching. You can't be an environmentalist in one breath and gripe at the government when they clean up a mess like this in the next.......Our oil companies provide a service like none other to our population and our gas prices are the lowest in the world. That said, there is still room for improvement in this industry ( the Deepwater Horizon spill comes to mind). Just saying........

[H.Maier]

It's all Obama's fault.

[H.Maier]

Every time I see those BP commercials about the gulf coming back and the seafood in La. and the beachesin Fla. Ala. and Ms. all clean and shining I wonder why Bp spent all those billions of dollars cleaning up thier chit when all they had to do was change out a million dollar valve. LMFAO.

[Battle Reds]

I think part of the argument here is the gov being OK with killing all these fish (10k lbs in one blast), but limiting the recreational fisherman with shorter seasons and smaller bag limits.... its the double standard that bothers me.

And Termo... there is a difference between supporting fish conservation and being an environmentalist.

[H.Maier]

Termo is a pretty fair angler and releases fish regularly. I would say knowing him personally he is a true conservationalist. Not a conservative. On the other hand I fill the box and feed the under priviledged.

[Swells]

From what I can tell, Congress passed laws a long time ago that said offshore oil & gas operators could mine the property, and once the exploration and production was over, remove the rig. This was put into regulations in the Department of Interior, back then the Minerals Mining Service (MMS). Companies were allowed some flexibility to keep their "idle iron" on site if the well could be reworked, which inflated offshore asset prices.

In April, 2010 the Deepwater Horizon had a massive blow-out on the Macando site. Americans were outraged at the pollution. The MMS was subsequently reformed and restructured, and a temporary ban was placed on all new offshore drilling. IN Setpember, 2010 the Department of Interior issued "guidance" to explain that approximately 3,500 submerged wellls were not properly shut-in and cemented, along with about 650 abandoned oil & gas platforms that hasn't been producing in the last 5 years. The "Notice to Leasees" told the owner/operators to submit a plan to (1) keep the rig, (2) reef it, or (3) remove it. Another option was (4) to cut it down below 80 feet from the surface of the water.

The oil and gas companies went hog wild removing their old rusty rigs, especially the inshore ones in shallow "pocket" hydrocarbon deposits that were played out a long time ago. Huge "rig killer" cranes were constructed so as to remove the entire topsides of the platform in one pull. The rig was left standing about 30 feet above the water. At this time, the owner usually instructed the demolition crew to cut the legs such as with a diamond wire saw, or blow them up with a material similar to C-4, about 15 feet below the mud line. About 60 percent of the offshore rigs use explosives because it is so fast and cheap. To repeat, not all rigs are blown up - although there still is a loss of what the scientists now call "essential fish habitat" when the rig is removed and not recycled into a reef. Since the steel if worth about $100 a ton, it is usually sold to smelters in Monterrey, India, or Asia.

So far, Congress has refused to amend the old laws and call for a revision to the old, antiquated Department of interior rules. Some bills have been fled, but languished because of the huge budget fights that get the national attention - and get politicians reelected. Nobody, it seems, wants to fight for the reef fish. Except a few of us.

It wouldn't be too hard to form a conservation kind of deal where the rig owners would be protected from legal liability, and leave the rigs standing. It does take some money such as to clean the black pipe (hazardous chemicals), maintain navigation gear, hire somebody to do cathodic protection, and do an annual Coast Guard / BOEM inspection. This can be done by creating a trust fund of how much the rig owners saved by leaving the rig there, instead of chopping it down - which can cost millions of dollars. the Texas Rigs-to-Reefs program is an example, although few companies do this for some reason. But my point is, it can be done.

You can blame Obama I guess - after the BP disaster, he felt something had to be done and that summer a few more oil rigs started leaking, catching on fire, or having some kind of oil spill. But did he "create" new law? I don't think so. Unlike some other objectionable uses of executive power, all these laws were on the books ... for example an oil well couldn't be left on the bottom with just a safety valve, but had to be cemented hundreds of feet down, and permanently plugged. This regulation will probably still stand. It's the some-650 platforms that we're arguing about. the number could be higher because there are so many shallow-water inshore rigs that are way beyond their useful life, and tend to get toppled over in hurricanes like Katrina, Rita, and Ike. It's kind of a shame how this turned out, and I blame the Congress for not lifting a finger to do the right thing.