The Save West Mamm Creek Coalition is calling for community members to submit comments on the environmental assessment for a proposed project for new natural gas and water pipelines near West Mamm Creek south of Rifle.

West Mamm Creek runs south of the Garfield County Airport and provides recreation opportunities on public land such as hunting, hiking and more. It also provides access to Mamm Peak and other prominent high points in the region.

The West Mamm Creek Pipeline Project, proposed by TEP Rocky Mountain LLC and Grand River Gathering LLC, would construct around seven miles of pipelines near West Mamm Creek to transport natural gas and produced water. The pipelines would cross 2.9 miles of National Forest System lands, 2.1 miles of land managed by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management and 2.1 miles of private property, expanding TEP’s water transfer system and delivery to water management systems and collecting and delivering low pressure natural gas. 

---

---

Although officials say the project would reduce truck traffic in the area and improve transportation efficiency, local advocacy organization Save West Mamm Creek Coalition is concerned about its cumulative environmental impact and future implications.

“It’s just going to be providing further fragmentation of the wildlife habitat up here,” LuLu Colby, organizer of the Save West Mamm Creek Coalition, said. 

---

---

“They’re not going to install that pipeline for the few number of wells that are in the valley,” she added. 

While new oil and gas developments are not included in the project proposal, the pipeline could support future development near West Mamm Creek, “which is broadly analyzed in the draft environmental assessment,” according to a December news release from David Boyd, White River National Forest public affairs officer. 

TEP’s existing development in the Mamm Creek area includes three well pads, each with three producing wells, on private land. 

“We’re surrounded by what we call high density oil and gas development and we need to keep a few wild safe places,” Colby said. “We just can’t have it leach out all over our beautiful habitat.”

The West Mamm Creek area already suffers from cumulative environmental impacts of oil and gas development, climate change, livestock overgrazing, recreation, hunting, roads and invasive species, Colby said. Drying springs, poor range conditions, species loss and displacement of local elk herds are a few area changes locals have noted, according to Colby.

Earlier this year, the Colorado Energy and Carbon Management Commission (ECMC) adopted new Cumulative Impacts and Enhanced Systems and Practices Rules. The rules address the impacts of a proposed oil and gas operation, as well as past, present and future effects of oil and gas developments, on public health and the environment.

The new rules will not impact the pipeline project — ECMC does not regulate pipelines, but “If an oil and gas development plan (OGDP) is required for this proposed new location, TEP will need to follow our new CI/ESP rules,” Kristin Kemp, ECMC public information officer, said. “To date, ECMC does not have a TEP WMC 24-29 pad application in our permitting application system.”

The Save West Mamm Creek Coalition is concerned that the estimated construction period for the pipeline — around four months — would significantly impact local wildlife, air and water quality, especially if the work is spread over a longer period of time due to weather and timing limitations. 

“It’s like taking a frog in a hot pot of water, or a piece of cake and you just take one little bite. That’s not going to hurt. You heat up the water a little bit and the frog doesn’t even notice,” Colby said. “As you keep taking bites or keep turning up the heat on the water, pretty soon, you don’t just have one location. You have 15 locations in the section and 100 wells in that area. That’s when the cumulative effect of all those locations and all that construction can just decimate an area.”

In May, the Colorado Natural Heritage Project will conduct a BioBlitz, finding, identifying and recording all the living species within the project area for a comprehensive biological survey. “It’s a much more complete assessment of what we have here. I wish they would wait until that is done,” Colby added.

Although the White River National Forest and BLM Colorado River Valley Field Office originally extended the public comment period until Jan. 17, community members now have until Feb. 7 to submit comments regarding the project’s draft environmental assessment.

The assessment doesn’t indicate that the project will have significant environmental impacts, but Colby is still urging community members to review and comment on the report. 

“We’re looking at those studies and trying to show them where they’re not complete and that we have to go further,” Colby, who’s calling for the Forest Service to conduct an in-depth environmental impact statement, said.

Public comments can make a difference, according to Boyd. “What concerns do you have? What are there things we missed? Is there additional information?” he said, explaining what comments should address. “One comment that finds a flaw in the analysis can have a big impact.”

TEP Rocky Mountain LLC did not reply to the Post Independent’s request for comment by the deadline for this article. 

Submit public comments at http://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/2025023/510. Find more information on Save West Mamm Creek at westerncoloradoalliance.org