American Oil and Gas Reporter - January 2015 - 185

The Presidential Papers
Remember, no one else is going to do it
for us.
Combined Efforts
Another challenge our organization
faces as we enter 2015 is a thoroughly
changed political landscape. We have a
new governor, four new state constitutional
officers, a new U.S. senator, two new
members of the U.S. House of Representatives and a host of new members in
the Arkansas General Assembly.

AIPRO certainly has plenty of work
to do as it gets to know all the new
players and shares our industry's story. I
look forward to working with these new
officeholders and am thankful this organization is the voice of Arkansas' oil
and gas industry.
I am proud of our efforts and of the
partnerships we have formed in Arkansas'
communities. I also am gratified we have
managed to forge important relationships
with local representatives of other or-

California Independent
Petroleum Association
KEN HUNTER
President And
Chief Executive Officer
Vaquero Energy
Bakersfield, Ca.

FROM THE CHAIRMAN
For decades, in-state oil and gas production was a sleepy public policy issue
that drew little attention in California.
That all changed a few years ago when
the hysteria concerning hydraulic fracturing finally reached California's borders
from 3,000 miles away. A very minor aspect of California oil and gas production
suddenly consumed legislative debate.
Although the slow, deliberative legislative process often may be a source of
frustration, it also helps defuse such hysteria. CIPA advocates were able to educate
legislators that were genuinely interested
in facts and science. Thankfully, that describes the vast majority of them. Although
it is a reliably "blue" state, California
has benefitted from electing a growing
crop of pro-job Democrats. This allowed
CIPA to defeat a batch of anti-production
measures, including a ban on hydraulic
fracturing that failed to garner even a
majority of Democratic support.
Once those anti-oil measures were
dispatched, CIPA began work on legislation that created a regulatory process
that-while arguably the nation's toughest-nonetheless allows California producers to continue to apply the stimulation

techniques they have used successfully
for decades.
Strategy Shift
Because anti-industry nongovernmental organizations lost the debate in Washington and Sacramento, they turned their
focus to California's 58 counties and
more than 400 cities. As of late 2014,
NGOs had sought to ban production or
well stimulation in 22 California jurisdictions. Their pattern is to approach
cities and counties that produce little or
no oil and gas in hopes of running up
the score and giving their cause an appearance of momentum.
This effort has had a minimal effect
on actual production. Bans on new drilling
have been pursued in the California localities of Santa Cruz and Mendocino
counties, as well as Berkeley and other
areas with no oil and gas operations for
hundreds of miles. In a few other California
communities that do have production, including Beverly Hills and Los Angeles,
NGOs have worked to ban hydraulic fracturing even though no such operations
are occurring.
In order to maximize the hysteria,

ganizations that share our goals. When
under attack, we have pulled together
our coalition to advance Arkansas business.
We live in a state that recognizes
strength in numbers is far more valuable
than individual accomplishments. It makes
facing constant changes and challenges
much more tolerable and successful. As
AIPRO President, I intend to encourage
further collaboration and collegiality when
necessary, and I certainly look forward
to our group efforts and victories.
Ì
NGOs are attempting to define all oil
and gas operations as "fracking," even
in the absence of fracturing or any other
well stimulation techniques. For instance,
a voter initiative in Santa Barbara County
proposed to ban all "high intensity operations," which included conventional
methods such as steam and water injection.
CIPA joined forces with some major
companies to push back against the initiative. The long election calendar gave
our industry ample time to educate local
voters-who have lived in close proximity
to both on- and offshore oil and gas production for more than 100 years-about
the initiative's actual consequences. Despite Santa Barbara County being heavily
Democratic and widely credited as the
birthplace of the modern environmental
movement, the initiative went down in a
24-point defeat.
CIPA must continue to deploy this
model as NGOs shift to new fronts,
which experience shows they do whenever
they lose the public policy debate on
issue after trumped-up issue. NGOs do
not explicitly advocate for their true goal,
which is getting the world off fossil
fuels. Since U.S.-based NGOs cannot
control foreign countries' oil and gas
production, they instead strive to eliminate
all domestic oil and gas production in
hopes of raising fossil fuels' price to the
point that American consumers are forced
to use alternatives. Since this goal is
very unpopular with most Americans
and their elected officials, NGOs must
convince citizens that oil production is
scary and dangerous. That is why they
depict "fracking" as a boogeyman.
Upcoming Boogeymen
What is next? We probably will see
NGOs attack acidization and injection
JANUARY 2015 185

American Oil and Gas Reporter - January 2015

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of American Oil and Gas Reporter - January 2015