Will Lack of a United Front Make Fracking Likely in the Finger Lakes?
Don’t look now, but I think hydraulic fracturing — known as fracking — is coming to New York.
For some background on fracking, I’d encourage you to read some of our previous coverage:
- DEC Defends Hydrofracking, but Opponents Worry About Impacts on Finger Lakes Wine Industry (December 2009)
- Op-Ed: “Fracking: The Most Urgent Issue in the Finger Lakes Wine Industry” Art Hunt, Owner, Hunt Country Vineyards (April 2011)
- Fracking: Big Questions Still Remain (July 2011)
- Opposition to Hydraulic Fracturing in the Finger Lakes (By John Ingle, Heron Hill Winery) (November 2011)
- Fracking Debate: Energy CEO Admits PR Mistakes, But Opponents Still Suspicious (August 2012)
The NYCR firmly opposes fracking. I mention this not because we are an important player in this battle, but because individuals and organizations that stand to be impacted — directly or indirectly — by fracking should not remain silent or waver in their position. As such, we join winery owners, winemakers and other winery folks across the state — but especially in the Finger Lakes — in our outspoken opposition.
Because everyone that I know in the industry is against fracking, it was with great surprise that I read in the December 1 issue “The Wine Press,” the New York Wine & Grape Foundation’s newsletter, that president Jim Trezise wrote at the end of a section on new wine trail signage and regulations ”As usual, New York Farm Bureau was a valuable partner in all this, and I encourage every New York grape grower and winery to join that great organization.”
There is little doubt that the New York Farm Bureau has made a positive impact on the state’s wine industry — but isn’t the New York Farm Bureau also in favor of fracking?
According to Steve Ammerman, the group’s public affairs manager, yes they are. “Yes, New York Farm Bureau supports natural gas drilling,” he told me in an email, adding that the group has called for stringent environmental regulations to be put in place in order to protect our important natural resources and that they have not reviewed the recently published regulations — but that barely matters. The New York Farm Bureau is pro-fracking — so Jim Trezise, the president of the NYWGF, is encouraging wineries to pay to become members of an organization that is pro-fracking.
That didn’t seem right to me, so I emailed Mr. Trezise, not only asking about his support for the Farm Bureau, but also asking what the NYWGF’s position is on fracking — assuming that it is opposed to fracking.
His response was “NYWGF doesn’t have a position on fracking. The support of Farm Bureau is based on their advocacy of issues pertaining to grapes and wine.”
Mr. Trezise didn’t reply to my follow-up email, so I do not know why the NYWGF doesn’t have a position on something that could have a devastating impact on the very grape and wine industry it is supposed to support and promote, but — ignoring the likely politics behind the inaction — I find it disturbing and disappointing. And it is even more troubling that Mr. Trezise is recommending that NYWGF members — a group made up at least primarily of those against fracking — to pay money to join an organization that is publicly in support of it.
No one in or around the wine industry should support fracking in the Finger Lakes. And I certainly don’t think that someone in a position of leadership in the industry should encourage wineries to support — through membership dollars — an organization that supports fracking. That just doesn’t sit right with me — and I’m assuming a great many people in the wine community.
Update 12/13/12 11:18 a.m.: I emailed Morgen McLaughlin, president of Finger Lakes Wine Country, to get that organization’s official stance on fracking and she let me know that “FLWC doesn’t have an official stance on fracking.” An email to Bob Madill, chair of the Finger Lakes Wine Alliance board hasn’t been returned yet.
Update 12/13/12 12:52 p.m.: Bob Madill replied a few moments ago, saying “When we formed the FLWA it was with the conviction that the organization would focus exclusively on the mission of raising the visibility of our region as a premier wine growing region and wines. We have been successful at working collegially (now with 37 supporting wineries) by sticking to this objective. Some Finger Lakes wineries support fracking and some do not. Some support wine in graocery stores and some do not. So on the matter of fracking, the FLWA has not taken a position. We remain open to being informed about these and related issues.”
Wine and drilling are living nicely together in Pa. and elsewhere.
It’s unfortunate that the loudest voices on this issue happen to be the extremists who are factually incorrect on nearly everything they claim. On the other hand, it’s fortunate that decision-makers at DEC and in the Capitol can fact-check them.
If the antis had their wish, they would go back in time and take on this issue more honestly.
Can we all use real names here? This goes for DaddyReality, too. Let’s have a productive discussion, out in the open.
Agreed. I’ve often pondered changing how comments work here — requiring that people register as site users and use full names.
Maybe I need to look at that again.
I’m guessing you didn’t see this bit of news, Uncle:
http://www.dailycamera.com/news/boulder/ci_22177274/university-texas-probe-fracking-study-didnt-meet-standards
Is the clout of the Farm Bureau so great that wine growers and wineries feel that they have no choice but to be a member even though a large part of the FB’s platform is in direct contrast to their own self preservation? This is all fairly new to me and I actually look forward to hearing the challenges that growers/wineries face in making this decision…well, ones that actually leave their real names.
The fracking issue is huge here in the finger lakes. Today when I got home I asked my wife, “do you think it will happen?”… It’s on the minds of many people here for many reasons, and it’s of real concern to those considering investments in the area. There is no doubt that whatever the environmental impact would be (obviously a net negative even if the wells are safe) the economic impact to a primarily tourism-based industry as the FL wine industry is will be big. Do you think the Napa or Sonoma industies would be what they are if the vineyards were set amidst gas fields? There is a lot of tension on both sides and I’m sure plenty of misinformation, There are two points I would like to adress regarding the issue if I may. Regarding the misinformation… only one side has anything to gain here. Those opposed to fracking have nothing to gain by lying about the risks. Exaggerations abound no doubt, but honestly, what do the “antis” get if fracking doesn’t happen? The gains are written in black and white for those in favor of fracking. Tell me who has more of an incentive to spread propaganda? Beyond the debate of “should we or shouldn’t we”, I feel that many in both camps (in particular the anti-fracking camp) are missing the point with their arguments. Ok, so fracking may pose an environmental risk. Gas companies are bad. That’s where the rhetoric seems to end. Why not use this as an opportunity to promote alternatives? If you are anti fracking maybe instead of not joining this or that organization or not voting for so-and-so you should STOP BURNING PROPANE. Stop supporting the industries that you fear. If the demand weren’t there they wouldn’t be drilling! It’s really easy to stand up against drilling when it’s in your back yard… but all of the fuel you burn in your car or at the stove or in your heater came out of the ground somewhere! Sorry about that West Virginia, Louisianna, Texas, Wyoming, North Dakota (heaven forbid we mention the middle east). We don’t want to end up like you, but we’ll happily burn all of the fuel that you and your land are dying over. People, including many in the wine industry, will leave in droves when fracking comes.
Daniel – I get where your coming from but all of us could stop burning propane tomorrow and buy a Prius but it would not stop this debate. I believe a vast majority of us are open to alternatives, unfortunately those alternatives have been slow to come to market (a propane boiler runs $2500 vs. a pellet boiler which will run $8-10K), another discussion for sure, as to why. What you are saying about investment is absolutely correct and in terms of long term property values I don’t think we have a clue as to what the effect could be. I wish more discussions were taking place in how we can help those land owners realize some return that may give them a choice other than fracking.
If ‘fracking isn’t seen as an issue relevant to the advocacy of ‘grapes and wine’ by Trezise, then he is out of touch with what small-scale Finger Lakes farmers subside on- healthy soil, clean water, consumer confidence, quality (and regional) food culture, and autonomy from corporatism….all of which are threatened by the massive companies and chemical cocktails that will be entering our culture & ecosystem en masse if hydrofracking is in our future. But I don’t know where Jim’s heart truly lay.
Seneca lake (for one) will be grossly transformed if Cuomo lifts the moratorium – and every single winery and grape grower that sits along it’s circumference will face a harsh new social, cultural and ecological landscape. Just get educated and look at the proposed drilling sites, people.
Maybe Jim supports farmers getting rich off their land for once?
Around seven years ago, my husband Tom and I started Heart & Hands Wine Company with a dream of creating world-class Pinot Noir and Riesling in the Finger Lakes Region. For the better part of these seven years, we have worked seven days a week to make our dream a reality. We are passionately committed to the region,and to growing our wine business and our family here.
…. But the environmental and economic threat of fracking gives us grave concern about the future of our sustainable, growing, job creating industry.
We are not members of the Farm Bureau or the NY Wine and Grape Foundation. We will not join either of these organizations unless their stance on fracking changes.
The primary reason that we are not a member of the Farm Bureau, is because of their pro-fracking position. When they visit us to solicit membership (always unannounced), I explain that their pro-fracking position is a problem for our business, the wine industry, and our health and I will not knowingly give money to any organization that is pro-fracking. The Farm Bureau does have a broad constituency of different types of agribusinesses. Some would, no doubt, (temporarily) benefit economically from fracking, which is probably one of the reasons that the Farm Bureau takes a pro-fracking position. But, I don’t care about their rationale – if they are pro-fracking, then they will never see any donation of funds from my business.
With regards to the NYWGF, I will start by saying this: I think the NYWGF does many positive things for the NY wine industry. This said, it is beyond disappointing, but not surprising, that the NY Wine and Grape Foundation has not taken a position against fracking. While the NYWGF should advocate for the benefit of its member entities (Wineries, Growers, Retailers, other stakeholders), over half of the approved 2012 budget came from NY State:
http://www.newyorkwines.org/resources/55f3c9c5ee7040419607e48db0abb7e8.pdf
So – a call out to those of us who work in the industry…. These organizations, with their missions and mandates logically SHOULD be on our side….. but are we willing to wait for them to change their position? Perhaps we should take matters into our own hands, and collectively organize and advocate for ourselves; “New York Wineries Against Fracking”, Anyone?
It’s great to hear other farmers and wineries speak up about the NYSFB stance on fracking. After a decade of being a member, I wrote a letter explaining that I will no longer be part of the organization as long as they have a pro-fracking stance. I got a long winded message back from Lindsey Wickham chastising me for focusing on a single issue when the Farm Bureau works on many issues. However, this issue is the single defining issue for my business and my family. The Farm Bureau should focus on positive improvements for NYS farmers. Fracking is not positive, it is pitched (by the Farm Bureau themselves) as a last ditch effort to “save” struggling landowners who can’t afford to pay their property taxes. I’d love to join a farm or (winery) advocacy organization full of idealistic people who want to pay for their property taxes (and employe people and support the local economy) with hard work and the success of their wonderful agriculturally based products. Instead of serving them or supporting them, NYSFB is undermining those people with active advocacy to bring fracking to our communities.
Susan-Much like other hotly debated issues in our State, the Farm Bureau and NYWGF are on the wrong side or remain silent and their supporters in our industry fall faithfully in line with their corporate talking points.
It remains unclear to me who is opposed to fracking in the NY wine industry- and it has been long overdue that those of us opposed form a visible and vocal coalition.
In the wake of Gov. Cuomo’s Wine, Beer & Spirits Summit, and his stated support for the growth of our industry, it would seem the time is NOW to organize our vocal opposition and press for an independent Economic Impact Study to quantify the risks to our industry that fracking poses.
Count us in for the coalition of NY wineries opposed to fracking in NYS!
Susan, if you start your organization, be sure to include Associate Members like wine retailers and even restaurants who are against fracking. We all benefit from the rising quality of Finger Lakes wine and the food-wine-tourism connection. I’m sure there are dozens like myself who are concerned about this issue and would love to join voices with our winery partners.
@ Daniel: We at Hunt Country, just this summer installed geothermal heating and cooling in all four of our winery buildings. We are no longer burning propane or fuel oil on our farm.
This system is very efficient, and currently runs on electricity provided by NYSEG. We realize this is not a perfect system, but our long term goal is to install a photovoltaic system to provide power to our winery. I am the 6th generation on our farm, and our winery has been a major employer in our small town for over 30 years.
I grew up with Jim Trezise and went to school with both of his kids. I feel he is in the wrong supporting farm bureau due to their stance on hydrofracking, but farm bureau has supported the NYWGF over the years when the state has tried to cut their funding. I for one will not join NYFB for reasons such as climate change, hydrofracking, and many others. We at Hunt Country Vineyards ARE working towards energy independance as fast as we can financially, there is no perfect system, but we ALL need to reduce our footprint. Hydrofracking is worse for the environment and people’s health even than coal and it will ruin our fragile local economy.
Hi Lenn,
I must say this is clearly commentary and not a “story” as you called it in your message looking for information. You made no mention of your intent or your focus. You asked where we stand on the issue of “fracking” and why. No where do you include the why, nor do you make reference to the long response to DEC I sent you addressing our environmental concerns and what NYFB would like to see the state do to protect our land and water that are vital to the success of all farms. They are in line with what many environmental groups have called if it is approved. It isn’t an either/or issue. Here is a link to the comments on the SGEIS draft: http://www.nyfb.org/img/topic_pdfs/file_nfzaud2ccp.pdf
More importantly, you apologized in the email for “not knowing your organization better.” Then how can you jump to the immediate conclusion that no winery should be a part of NYFB? Let me help you know NYFB better. We have more than 25,000 members who are as diverse as the wonderful agricultural landscape in this state. No organization with that large of a membership can expect full agreement on 100% of the issues. Just last week, more than 100 state delegates representing their respective counties gathered for our State Annual Meeting to discuss and vote on grassroots policy resolutions that originated at the local level. That included resolutions for and against natural gas drilling which was ultimately supported in a delegate vote. While everyone may not agree, everyone in NYFB has a voice. That is the best part of NYFB. (On a side note, every wine bottle on our banquet tables at SAM was from a NY winery.)
Also, you asked me in your email about the work done on behalf of NY wineries in this state, which is vast. I appreciate you recognizing that we have made a positive impact on the industry. NYFB was a major partner in helping change recent state regulations that were burdensome and costly for every NY winery. We are also working on reducing trade restrictions as well in hopes of encouraging more Canadians to purchase NY wine. There are dozens of issues every day that we are tackling to help wineries and all farm based businesses in New York have the ability to grow and prosper. Encouraging people to not to support NYFB based on one issue is like throwing the baby out with the bath water. Jim Trezise understands the importance of that, and it is unfair to target him because he simply wants the best business climate for his members.
Finally, in your email to me you said, “Hopefully we can catch up sometime in the spring as I’d like to understand your goals and efforts better.” I hope you mean that and it isn’t a disingenuous statement. Certainly, some people have real concerns and if we don’t talk about them in a reasonable and respectful manner, we get nowhere.
Steve,
Thank you for commenting on the piece, which is part story and part commentary. The intent here is to inform New York wineries on the NYWGF’s lack of position on fracking and NYFB’s pro-fracking stance.
I absolutely agree with you that NYFB has been instrumental in many of the positive regulatory changes made to make doing business easier for New York wineries. NYFB should be commended for that.
That said, I don’t think wineries will care as much about being able to more easily sell wine to Canadians if their groundwater is undrinkable and the tourism in the region is reduced to a trickle because of fracking.
The NYFB supports fracking. If NYFB really wants to push DEC over environmental concerns, why not take your support for fracking off of the table until it is proven safe or the technology is improved?
To your last point — I’m a lot of things but disingenuous is not one of them. My in-laws live in the Capital District and I’d love to meet with you sometime when I’m up visiting them.
I think that it is easy (or at least easier) for those of us on Long Island or in Albany or anywhere NOT the Finger Lakes to talk about this or make decisions without understanding the very real impacts this could have on that region. This isn’t just about land and money. It’s about people — lives and livelihoods.
I understand that the NYW&GF wants to be an umbrella ( and gate keeper) organization including everyone from Concord growers to old time “pioneer” wineries to “newcomers” to the local wine industry. As such, there will be many issues on which they cannot take a clear position; such as wine in grocery stores.
However, if there ever was one issue that could ( and should) all grape growers and wineries it would be hydrofracking. It affects the livelihood of all of us; as well as our neighbors and friends.
Not taking a position on such an important and potentially unifying issue simply shows that Jim Trezise no longer is in touch with the people he represents: grape growers and winemakers. instead, he puts political alliances and his own relations first; surely with the thinly disguised agenda of maintaining the status quo at a time when it is becoming increasingly clear that the organization he represents no longer adequately reflects the industry. How is it possible to ask special recognition for “pioneer” wineries, thereby clearly fracturing our industry but not possible to take a stand on an issue where we all stand united?
I find it very hard to believe Mr. Trezise was unaware of the farm bureau’s pro fracking position. Almost impossible, in fact, which leads me to question his integrity. If he truly did not know, he isnt doing a bery good job. The farm bureau is not only pro-fracking, but highly vocal in its position. Vote with your money, withdraw support for the farm bureau and Mr. Trezise’s organization. The only way to get their attention is to stop paying dues and leave their organization.
As a Keuka Lake resident this issue is very clear, the proposed regulations cannot and will not protect the area. If fracking is allowed and the inevitable spill occurs, the public perception will be the death of our beloved and growing wine region…..let Mr. Trezise try to sell that! Swapping a proven growing wine industry for a boom and bust industrialization of gas drilling does not make sense…And by the way Unclefracker, where are drilling and vineyards co-existing?
http://eidmarcellus.org/marcellus-shale/finger-lakes-region-has-been-developing-oil-gas-for-decades/15652/
The above article will show you how gas & oil development has been co-existing for decades. Whats interesting is the amount of wells around Seneca lake on the North end and the fact that you didn’t even know they were there.
Here in Pennsylvania we have wineries with pipelines running through the vineyards. The grapes are fine and they continue to produce great wine.
Be advised that Energy in Depth is an industry funded and driven site and comments should be evaluated with that tilt. Comparing the new technology with grandpa’s vertical well is a reach at best. I wonder how many vineyards would like a containment pond with ingredients that are not completely disclosed next to the Pinot Noir or Riesling ?
Agreed Stan. It is a common argument that is rolled out that usually causes me to slap my head when I have to ask “again, really?”. This apples and oranges and they have nothing to do with each other…thanks for pointing that out.
Farm Bureau is a MONSTER organization that tries to weigh in on every issue without good process for dealing with less broad issues like fracking (less broad because it does not affect the entire state). We dropped out of FB when we realized that the majority rules on every issue, even when it doesn’t directly apply to all of their membership. They also don’t allow discussion, favoring instead a 2 minute time limited comment from a designated member (delegate) at their annual meeting. If you are selected as a delegate you can get a 2 minute slot or 2 to speak your mind on an issue. That’s no way to form a member driven opinion on anything! It’s also how you get a lobbyist organization like FB in favor of things like fracking – even though most of the NY members are outside of frackable land. While I don’t want to debate wine in grocery, FB’s position on that is determined by the dairy and produce farms, not the wineries. The dairy and produce farms feel they have to support the grocery stores, even though the issue has nothing to do with them. FB has 25,000 members as stated above and there are only 300 wineries in NY. Only the winery members should be able to guide winery policy, just as only the farms on frackable land should be able to guide the position on fracking. Give the decision to those who are the most invested in the issue. It is sad that FB would allow the organization to function as a tyranny of the majority, rather than effective representation on member issues. It could be so much more effective and credible.
I’ll join FB again when they change their processes to allow votes and real discussion/debate among the affected and interested parties, rather than a 2 minute statement at the annual meeting and everyone gets a vote. I’t not an election, its taking a lobbying position, and while it is true that “everyone in FB has a voice”, it is not true that every issue is weighed carefully by those most affected. Until FB changes their process to address these inherent weaknesses, I won’t put much weight in farm bureau’s opinion on any issue, unless it is a very broad issue like labor. I find it curious that FB appears to be taking credit for many of the recent changes when there were a number of groups involved in addition to FB. When given the opportunity, FB took no effort to apply regulatory changes to commercial winery licensees when they lobbied for farm winery license changes. Many commercial wineries are small, and are commercial only to source grapes out of state (in our case, we source some grapes 15 miles west, in Ontario).
NYWGF is in a similar position, though they are not really a lobbying organization. Their board is not an elected board as most industry associations are. I will say, though, that NYWGF’s focus is strictly marketing and administration of state funds to wine trails. Taking positions on things like regulatory reform or other policy based positions would actually require that they have a representative board that is guided by the wine industry, rather than an appointed board that is not accountable to the wine industry through an election/reporting process. They could be a powerful voice for the wine industry with this type of accountability to the industry.
When we look ahead, my husband and I see a small, premium winery on the shores of Seneca Lake as our future. And our family’s future. Fracking could remove this as a viable option if it pollutes the water, the land and the landscape. But I don’t like the “us” and “them” tone of the conversation. I understand why many NYS farmers are desperate for options — they face children who don’t want to continue farming, consolidation, loans, and diminishing options for future success. Fracking is one option when your land is your livelihood, and that land is no longer able to provide a living. So I get it. But it saddens me.
I was in Geneva yesterday for a Cornell-hosted shrub willow growing and heating conference, and the comments about alternatives for land use came up time and again. Like Rick said, the issues go beyond individuals making more sustainable energy choices. To make a dent in our use of fossil fuels, consumers need an operational market for sustainable fuel — growers, suppliers, infrastructure, buyers. So yeah, the easier and faster way is fracking; the market is established, we just need more supply. And we are sitting on vast quantities of it. Growing shrub willow or grasses on marginal or underutilized farm land for biomass heating or biofuel? Developing a new, sustainable and local NYS cash crop for farmers who are feeling the squeeze? That takes time, money and a huge appetite for risk. Something, frankly, that most farmers and governments — and let’s be honest, consumers — don’t tend to have.
So instead of bashing the NYWGF, I’d rather send a message. They can support and work with the NY Farm Bureau in as much as the alliance is aimed at working together to find sustainable, economically viable uses for NYS farm land. Put more energy into making it easier, and less risky, for farmers to switch to growing perennial grasses or shrubs for heating — municipal use, or for colleges and schools. Colgate University has been supplying nearly 80% of their heat with a wood chip boiler since 1981. A school district in Lycoming PA is doing it. It can be done. Where are the lobbyists and bureaucrats and communities supporting this?
Bottom line: NYS farmers need more options, and I’m concerned that there won’t be enough time to develop those options before opposing forces approve the easier, dirtier one…
Agreed – the route cause has to be addressed. BTW – I’m not sure if it was a case of bashing, at least in my instance, as more of a case of being dismayed that anyone in the wine industry (NYWGF, Wine Alliance etc.) could be ok with not have a stance (hell, pick one!) about fracking but instead choosing to stand on the sideline while we try and work through this contentious issue…That is what really blows me away.
You’re right, Rick. Bashing was probably not the word I should have used. And I agree with you; standing on the sidelines is worse than taking a stance once way or the other…
Sorry I missed this discussion, but the comments section is good reading on the issue.
Being a resident in Pulteney, at Keuka Lake, a particular hot spot for the energy industry, I have been involved in opposition to fracking. I grow tired of the lies that come from the energy industry and their paid cheerleaders.
Aside form the dangers involved in vertical drilling hydrofracking, and there are many, the issue is strictly about making quick money at the expense of making real progress in alternative energy sources.
One thing I know: you fight back with what hurts most. Make it expensive for the energy industry to try to get in and they will think twice. In the case of the governor of NY State, make it expensive for him to realize his political ambitions and he will think twice–I’m talking about a certain national election in 2016. If state residents make it plain that he will not have the state’s support for that bid because he is allowing the energy industry to rape the land and the people on it, he will have to rethink the idea of issuing drilling permits.
As to the subject of organizations unwilling to take a stand: what can you expect? This is what money does, which takes you right back to why farmers would lease their land.