Senator WALLOP. The offshore is presenting many of the same problems that the onshore is presenting right now in terms of either by policy or legal means being withdrawn. It seems to me if it is a balanced approach, I mean if you are just looking at recurrent trends, it would be one way of doing it. One of the recurring trends is the 500 dry holes in the areas that we didn't know, everybody thought could, but experience taught us could not hold oil, and yet it did.

Mr. OAKES. This is the Thrust Belt, western Wyoming. This is a very interesting story about the western Wyoming Belt. We hear so many times that people say we didn't think there was any potential there until we found something, and in 1975-that is not quite accurate, because the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, as far back as 1951, thought that area had tremendous potential. I think the estimate was, and I could be wrong, this is something like 3 billion barrels of recoverable oil.

The problem of course, is that the structure is so complex, you have got to go down so deep, at that time it just wasn't economical to do that kind of thing, but the potential was there. It was a favorable area.

Senator WALLOP. Then 3 billion barrels turns out to have been extraordinarily modest.

Mr. OAKES. No. USGS estimates 6 billion now, about 6.5 for the Thrust Belt in western Wyoming.

Senator WALLOP. People in the industry who have been there we heard testimony this morning are talking about 18 million barrels.

Mr. OAKES. I think you are talking about the entire Thrust Belt. We adopted USGS because this is a national debate. We are talking about public lands, and this data is available to the public, and we think that is a pretty solid way to go.

Senator_WALLOP. Much obliged; thank you. The next panel, Mr. Douglas Francisco, senior Government relations representative, IPAA; David Christiansen, manager, Governmental Affairs, Arco Exploration; Mr. Max Pitcher, vice president, North American Exploration for Conoco, Inc.; Mr. Bobby R. Hall, director of the Exploration Department, American Petroleum Institute-Mr. Pitcher, I understand that you have a plane to catch, so we will start with you.

STATEMENT OF MAX PITCHER, VICE PRESIDENT, DOMESTIC EXPLORATION, CONOCO, INC.

Mr. PITCHER. My name is Max Pitcher. I am vice president and Exploration Manager for Conoco, and as such I direct the exploration in the United States onshore and offshore for Conoco.

Conoco opposes enactment of S. 2801, and I would like to make six points. The six points I will talk about are, No. 1, use is not abuse.

No. 2, the seismic which has been raised; No. 3, the inventory is only accurate after drilling; No. 4, the time for production may be 5 to 6 years in remote areas; No. 5, slant drilling is not feasible; and No. 6, Conoco's position is that the wilderness per se, present wilderness, can be withdrawn. We don't want to see other lands withdrawn.

This bill very properly says public lands and especially wilderness lands must not be abused. Use, however, does not mean abuse. We can harvest our Nation's energy without harming surface resources. We can coexist with the sensitive environment. A case in point is the Arkansas Pass Oil Field in south Texas which lies in the middle of what is now a wildlife refuge. This oil field which Conoco operates has been active for 50 years. It is also the home of 10 endangered species. The magnificent but endangered whooping crane winters at Arkansas among our pumps and other oil field equipment. We are fortunate in having this striking example of coexistence because under today's restrictions we probably would not have access to those lands.

Recently we have leased some lands from the Audubon Society in Louisiana. We did this only after we convinced them that use would not be abuse.

Our seismic work is neither dangerous to wildlife nor does it leave a permanent scar. Our work is temporary and reparable, and after we have finished, nature carries on.

Conoco developed the vibra-sized equipment which is spoken of here. In remote areas we use nonexplosive devices for seismic activities all the time. In remote areas, this is not feasible.

As an exploration manager my job is to recommend investigations where potential for oil and gas appears high enough to justify the cost, and in areas where we have the opportunity to recover that cost by drilling and producing, and accurate inventory can only be accomplished through drilling.

Lacking meaningful inventory, the Congress has denied itself the opportunity to make sound, informed decisions. S. 2801 is hastily conceived legislation. To say that these lands would be made available in times of national emergency is just rhetoric. In remote areas it takes 5 to 6 years to do seismic work, exploration drilling, and finally produce oil. Slant drilling is not feasible. We could maybe drill slant wells half a mile from the border of wilderness areas, but that is almost never done in remote areas.

Thirty-seven million acres would be withdrawn with this bill. As a minimum, Conoco believes that the present wilderness areas could be withdrawn but the lands under study should not be, and some time-certain date should be established for their release.

Thank you.

[The prepared statements of Mr. Pitcher follow:]

Conoco Statement on S.2801

by

Max Pitcher

September 23, 1982

My name is Max Pitcher. I am Vice President of Domestic

Exploration for Conoco Inc.

Conoco opposes enactment of S.2801.

This bill very properly says public lands and especially wilderness lands must not be abused. Use, however, does not mean abuse. We can harvest our nation's critically important energy supplies without harming surface resources. The evidence demonstrates that we can coexist with a sensitive environment.

A case in point is the Aransas Pass oil field in South Texas, which lies in the middle of what is now a wildlife refuge. This oil field, which Conoco operates, has been active for 50 years. It is also home to 10 endangered species.* The magnificent but endangered whooping crane winters at Aransas among our pumps, pipelines and other oilfield equipment.

We're fortunate in having this striking example of coexistence because under today's restrictions we probably would not have had access to those lands.

Another example of this kind of compatibility is found in Alaska, where the caribou herds graze undisturbed in the very shadow of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline.

We have built, used and then obliterated roads which

are not now detectable.

*These include:

the peregrine falcon, southern bald eagle,
Attwater's greater prairie chicken, brown pelican,
five species of sea turtle, and the whooping crane

does it leave a permanent scar. Our work is temporary and reparable,

and after we've finished nature carries on.

As an exploration manager my job is to recommend investigations where the potential for oil and gas appears high enough to justify the cost and in areas where we have the opportunity to recover that cost by drilling and producing. By removing leasing and drilling rights, S.2801 removes all incentive for prospecting or inventorying, leaving this task, presumably, to federal agencies. Not only do the agencies lack the wherewithal to execute this function; but the bill also falls short of permitting the only means by which anyone could establish the presence of petroleum that is, by actual drilling and compounds the error by leaving open-ended the time in which these superficial surface studies can be made.

-

Petroleum is a legitimate value in making land use decisions. The public has every right to know what energy and what strategic security from that energy have been denied them by unnecessary foreclosure.

Lacking meaningful inventory, the Congress has denied itself the opportunity to make sound and informed decisions. S.2801 is hastily conceived legislation. Neither it nor the comparable House bill has been given adequate hearing or review. Important unanswered questions require further study and dialogue. For example, although the country's need for future energy supplies has been thoroughly documented, the need for wilderness, how much, and for whom have not been determined.

The effect of explosives on the