Angry Residents of State’s Northern Coast Jeer Plans for Offshore Drilling

Politicians, environmentalists and residents converged on a small hall Wednesday and, during a raucous meeting, harshly criticized a federal plan that would allow extensive oil drilling off the scenic Northern California coast.

Throughout the day the parade of witnesses assailed the proposal at the Interior Department hearing, waving “no oil” signs and booing a handful of pro-development speakers.

More than 500 people packed Eagles Hall, which was festooned with anti-oil posters and sea life pictures. Another 1,000 people, who could not get into the hall, jammed the streets outside and followed the proceedings by loudspeaker. More than 200 others gathered in a nearby church and monitored the video hookup.

Unified Community Told

“This has galvanized the entire community,” said Nancy Puder, a coordinator for California Ocean Sanctuary Assn., formed to oppose offshore drilling. “People have come out of the woodwork to fight this thing.”

The conflict is over the Interior Department’s proposal to lease to oil companies 1.1 million acres off the coast in Mendocino and Humboldt counties. The proposal, which includes a 1,214-page environmental impact statement, is being examined this week before a hearing board composed of several federal Minerals Management Service officials, a U.S. Fish and Wildlife representative and a U.S. Coast Guard officer.

The plan calls for up to 22 oil platforms, more than eight times the Interior Department’s earlier top estimates of oil and gas exploration in Northern California waters.

More than 750 people signed up to testify against oil drilling at the meeting, which was scheduled to last 13 hours Wednesday and seven hours today. Those who denounced the oil proposal included Lt. Gov. Leo T. McCarthy, state Controller Gray Davis, state Atty. Gen. John Van de Kamp, former San Francisco Mayor Dianne Feinstein and U.S. Senate candidate Bill Press.

Van de Kamp said that if the Interior Department begins selling tracts to oil companies he will “bring suit to block it on behalf of the people of California.”

“Massive oil drilling along the Mendocino coast is bad public policy and absolutely unacceptable to the overwhelming majority of the people of this state,” he said. “This document (the environmental impact statement) is nothing more than a silk scarf to hide the ugly face of a drill-at-any-cost philosophy. It is part and parcel of a national energy policy of, by and for oil company profits.”

But Greg Hill, an engineer for the Shell Oil Co. in Bakersfield, said at the hearing that because of increased demand for imported oil, the country’s “energy deficit and trade deficit both will continue to skyrocket” if new sources of domestic oil are not found.

Environmental Price Tag

Opponents of drilling, however, say the cost to the environment is too great, including increased pollution, the risk of massive oil spills, the damage to the fishing industry and loss of tourism.

The rugged Mendocino and Humboldt coastline is considered one of the most spectacular areas in the country. Towering redwoods run to the edge of the sea, which is rich in bird and fish habitats. Millions of tourists a year are drawn to the area.

If the Reagan Administration’s plan is approved, platforms would be clearly visible from such oceanfront tourist havens as Mendocino, Albion and Point Arena. A platform averages one acre in size and can reach a height of 300 feet

Federal officials will assess information gathered at the hearing, and one held Monday in Eureka, to draft a final environmental impact statement. In January, 1989, the new Administration will make the final decision on whether to proceed with the plan, which would culminate in Lease Sale 91, in February, 1989.

Residents in the small towns along the Mendocino County coast organized an effective grass-roots campaign to oppose the drilling and generate public interest in the hearing. Bed-and-breakfast inns offered discount prices to anyone who made the trip to testify against oil development. Merchants displayed large anti-oil signs, sold anti-oil T-shirts and offered anti-oil decals and bumper stickers and posters.

Foes of the drilling plan said at the hearing that while the Reagan Administration has pushed for oil development off California’s coast, it has ignored other energy alternatives.

Feinstein and others said the Administration’s decision to roll back 1987 automobile industry gasoline mileage standards from 27.5 to 26 miles per gallon will increase the use of oil during the life of these cars by 100 million barrels--the same amount of oil projected to be pumped off Northern California over a 20-year period.

Called an Outrage

“The hypocrisy of allowing our fisheries and environmental resources to be sacrificed only to be blown out the tailpipe of a born-again, Reagan-approved gas guzzler is an outrage and insult to those who care about the future and those who depend on the sea for their living,” said Humboldt County Supervisor Wesley Chesbro.

But Lorraine Lawrence, a public affairs officer for the Interior Department’s Minerals Management Service, characterized the current oil proposal as a “good program and a safe program.”

“We’re all impressed with this beautiful coastline and we believe we can protect the coastline and still develop the resource,” Lawrence said in an interview at the hearing. “We’re importing 40% of our oil and what if that is cut off? There is great potential for oil in this area and we feel it’s in the best interest of the nation’s economy and security to explore it.” Lawrence’s words were reinforced Wednesday by Interior Secretary Donald P. Hodel, who insisted that future exploration for new oil reserves off California’s coast is virtually inevitable.

Major Drilling Advocate

“The offshore plan will go forward no matter which party is elected (President this year) because the nation is going to need an energy supply,” said Hodel, who has been the Reagan Administration’s main offshore drilling advocate .

“My successor, regardless of party, is going to be faced with that problem and he’s going to be very hard-pressed to ignore the nation’s energy requirements,” he said.

Hodel made his remarks to reporters in Sacramento after a speech to the Free Market Political Action Committee. He made no specific reference to the drilling sites proposed for Northern California.