Split estate and property rights cluster you know what

alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior MemberPosts: 8,845 Senior Member
http://www.eriewire.org/archives/11828/section/environment-science-health/

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2012/03/judges_ruling_limits_shale_dev.html

I'm sure many of you have been following the "fracking" story lately. It's all over the news and the explosive growth of domestic natural gas production has been quite the boon for our economy. Overall I think it's a great thing, but there are negative consequences. One of them that seems to be popping up more and more is major conflicts over property rights. There are two main ways that gas development infringes upon individuals property rights, forced pooling and split estates.

Forced pooling is a situation where a company leases land from enough landowners in an area (the amount depends on the state but anywhere from 25-60%) the law says they can legally extract resources from ALL land within the "block". Meaning they can take your mineral rights without your consent as long as enough of your neighbors agree. They do still have to pay you royalties, but you don't have a choice.

The other situation is split estates. This is a situation where for whatever reason an individual owns the surface property but does not own the mineral rights. In this case if an oil company leases the mineral rights they have the right to trespass on your property to drill a well and extract the gas. Furthermore the degree to which they have to get your permission and compensate you for the damage and disturbance are fairly limited in most states. The side effects of drilling are one thing when you have agreed to it and you are being well compensated for it, but it's completely another thing if you're being forced to accept it with limited compensation and without much say.

For a country that supposedly has such strong respect for property rights it sounds like a lot of states really need to improve their protections for individual property owners. It looks like some courts are starting to support landowners to some degree, but suing oil companies is not cheap or an economically efficient way to resolve such disputes.
"Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
-DoctorWho

Replies

  • sherwoodsherwood Senior Member Posts: 1,215 Senior Member
    Yes the states really do have to step up and get involved with this problem. If the people who have had their water poisened by these fools would sue them enough times we might get to the point where fracking is OK. If the frackers could get away from using deadly chemicals it would be OK. But as it stands now they frackers are poisening the water of many people.
    I may be old but I ain't dead!
    DPRMD
  • KSU FirefighterKSU Firefighter Senior Member Posts: 3,246 Senior Member
    http://www.eriewire.org/archives/11828/section/environment-science-health/

    http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2012/03/judges_ruling_limits_shale_dev.html

    The other situation is split estates. This is a situation where for whatever reason an individual owns the surface property but does not own the mineral rights. In this case if an oil company leases the mineral rights they have the right to trespass on your property to drill a well and extract the gas. Furthermore the degree to which they have to get your permission and compensate you for the damage and disturbance are fairly limited in most states. The side effects of drilling are one thing when you have agreed to it and you are being well compensated for it, but it's completely another thing if you're being forced to accept it with limited compensation and without much say.

    For a country that supposedly has such strong respect for property rights it sounds like a lot of states really need to improve their protections for individual property owners. It looks like some courts are starting to support landowners to some degree, but suing oil companies is not cheap or an economically efficient way to resolve such disputes.

    This is not a new situation. During the Great Depression, it was common for agents for Oil companies etc. to go around to farmers struggling to get buy and offer to buy the mineral rights to their property. Money being tight, cash in hand was worth a lot more than some minerals that might not even be there. Fast forward the present and you have a drill derrick on your property because Great Grandpa sold the mineral rights to the family farm to put food on the table. Does it suck? You bet! Is it completely legal? Absolutely!
    The fire service needs a "culture of extinguishment not safety" Ray McCormack FDNY
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,845 Senior Member
    Agreed, the question however is to what degree the holder of the mineral rights can trample upon the property rights of the landowner. WY actually passed a law to help protect the rights of landowners, so it depends on where you live. I'm still waiting for some crazy landowner in appalachia with a "no tresspassing" sign to take a shot at some oil company employee.
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • EliEli Senior Member Posts: 3,074 Senior Member
    I'm still waiting for some crazy landowner in appalachia with a "no tresspassing" sign to take a shot at some oil company employee.


    Absolutely nothing wrong with that.

    When I worked for the census two years ago (I worked in the office, not out in the field), the supervisors told the enumerators over and over "that badge means that you're a federal employee.....that means you can go anywhere you want, no matter what the property owner says" . EVERY SINGLE DAY we had enumerators getting bit by dogs, and we actually had three that got ate up bad enough that it required a stay in the ER. Yet the bosses kept saying the same thing....."Y'all are ALLOWED to" .

    Just because the "rules" say you are allowed to infringe upon my rights doesn't make it so. If you are vandalizing my property without my consent, I don't give a damn what the "rules" say, that's not an action that I'm willing to tolerate.
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,428 Senior Member
    The big thing around Giles County Tennessee was phosphate, a chemical used in fertilizer. Several thousand acres just north of Pulaski were strip-mined and then abandoned, making the area totally unsuitable for any kind of use. One farmer whose land was in the path of an approaching strip mining operation sent the company's officials telephoto-lens pictures of themselves sitting in their cars, or some of them at home, with a set of crosshairs drawn on the pictures. He didn't have any problems after that. They decided not to mine his land, even though a previous owner had sold them the mineral rights back in the early 20th. Century.
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • VarmintmistVarmintmist Senior Member Posts: 6,586 Senior Member
    So its OK to not let property owners use their property... interesting.

    If grandaddy sold the land, you have no right to hunt it, no right to use it and no right to tell the landowner how to use it. What is the difference between surface and mineral?

    Buy the property (surface) you should know what you are buying. You have rights as a surface owner, you do not have the right to keep the drillers or miners off. You don't buy "fee simple", thats your problem, you don't have the right to infringe on THEIR rights. They are NOT trespassing, they have every right to be there.

    Please find the person whose well was ruined by fracking. So far, up here in the boom area, thear has been exactly zero wells that have gone bad by fracking. Quite a few folks have tried for cash but so far all the testing after the complaint shows the same amount of junk in it as the testing pre drilling. Some have gotten paid to go away. Fracking has been going on for 60+ years.

    http://www.pipelineattorney.com/blog/51-i-am-the-surface-owner-but-i-do-not-own-the-oil-and-gas-rights.html


    http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/minres/Districts/homepage/California/SSA/SurfaceOwnersRights.htm

    Methane in wells, its there because we live in coal country...
    http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/minres/Districts/homepage/California/SSA/5600-FS-DEP2690.pdf
    It's boring, and your lack of creativity knows no bounds.
  • jbp-ohiojbp-ohio Senior Member Posts: 9,612 Senior Member

    Please find the person whose well was ruined by fracking. So far, up here in the boom area, thear has been exactly zero wells that have gone bad by fracking. Quite a few folks have tried for cash but so far all the testing after the complaint shows the same amount of junk in it as the testing pre drilling. Some have gotten paid to go away. Fracking has been going on for 60+ years, some states use that evil fluid for the dangerous job of clearing ice. Yep, it is sprayed on your roads to treat for ice.

    http://www.pipelineattorney.com/blog/51-i-am-the-surface-owner-but-i-do-not-own-the-oil-and-gas-rights.html


    http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/minres/Districts/homepage/California/SSA/SurfaceOwnersRights.htm

    Methane in wells, its there because we live in coal country...
    http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/minres/Districts/homepage/California/SSA/5600-FS-DEP2690.pdf

    Fracking has ruined wells in other areas with different geology. They haven't found one ruined in the Marcellus or Utica areas.......

    6a00d83476d35153ef015438e107b2970c-800wi

    Only real danger is surface runoff
    "The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." Thomas Jefferson
  • VarmintmistVarmintmist Senior Member Posts: 6,586 Senior Member
    But the Marcellas guys are taking the heat, not the driller in 1964 going 100 ft below the water table.
    It's boring, and your lack of creativity knows no bounds.
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,845 Senior Member
    There actually have been quite a few instances of methane migration, but all of those cases have been tied to either shallow gas or poorly cemented well bores, not fracking. That being said, methane is nontoxic and fairly easy to deal with.
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • CHIRO1989CHIRO1989 Senior Member Posts: 11,099 Senior Member
    Provide a detailed description of the situation on your land, of the folks mining operation, to Tenmike and I am sure a solution that would properly test the limits of the miners insurance policy would be available shortly.:wink:
    I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn away from their ways and live. Eze 33:11
  • jbp-ohiojbp-ohio Senior Member Posts: 9,612 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    Not so sure about that, mi amigo. You have not smelled the methane my dog produces.

    Beano! Cut our bulldogs production by 75% or better

    Sent from my R800x using Tapatalk
    "The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." Thomas Jefferson
  • kansashunterkansashunter Senior Member Posts: 1,505 Senior Member
    Forced pooling depends on what state you live in. Here they can not do this. I own some property that I do not own the mineral rights on and they are getting ready to drill here. It does kind of suck to get the mess but no money but I am the one that bought it that way. I will recieve damages for the mess. They paid for not stole the right to drill here.
  • FisheadgibFisheadgib Senior Member Posts: 5,733 Senior Member
    Agreed, the question however is to what degree the holder of the mineral rights can trample upon the property rights of the landowner. WY actually passed a law to help protect the rights of landowners, so it depends on where you live. I'm still waiting for some crazy landowner in appalachia with a "no tresspassing" sign to take a shot at some oil company employee.


    Chris, you're a little out of touch on this topic. When I lived in Texas, I looked around for land to buy on several occasions and I learned that land was substantially cheaper if you were willing to relenquish the mineral rights. Depending on the location, sometime the land would be half to a third as much if you gave up the mineral rights. When someone buys land, they are cognicent of weather they retain the mineral rights and they know beforehand what rights the owners of the mineral rights have. If anyone tells you different, they are lying to you. When someone buys something cheap and then and then wants more than what they paid for what does that make them?
    snake284 wrote: »
    For my point of view, cpj is a lot like me
    .
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,845 Senior Member
    Fisheadgib wrote: »
    Chris, you're a little out of touch on this topic. When I lived in Texas, I looked around for land to buy on several occasions and I learned that land was substantially cheaper if you were willing to relenquish the mineral rights. Depending on the location, sometime the land would be half to a third as much if you gave up the mineral rights. When someone buys land, they are cognicent of weather they retain the mineral rights and they know beforehand what rights the owners of the mineral rights have. If anyone tells you different, they are lying to you. When someone buys something cheap and then and then wants more than what they paid for what does that make them?

    Maybe. I do appreciate the perspectives of those who have more experience with the issue. I know if I had purchased a home somewhere in east of the Mississippi before the shale boom I wouldn't have given 2 seconds worth of thought into if I owned the mineral rights. If I was buying a larger patch of land out west or in an area that has a long history of oil and gas production then I probably would. Then again the impact of drilling on someone's hunting/ranching/farming property vs. drilling literally in their back yard is a lot different.
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • VarmintmistVarmintmist Senior Member Posts: 6,586 Senior Member
    PENNzoil and Quaker state, Hmmmm where did those names come from?? The first oil rig was in PA, near where that guy in the article lives. Texas came around well after the fact.

    I either own, or am next to the gas well that caught fire and at the time, was burning enough gas to heat Philly for a year. It was said that there were flowers in febuary and it became a picnic spot in the winter because you didnt need a coat. There are 2 oil wells (private) within a mile in each direction of my house. There are 2 closed gas wells on my property, and 2 wooden storage tanks.

    If you do not buy "fee simple" you aren't buying the mineral rights. If you don't know what that means, well, I am not responsible for your training before you inherit property from your father.

    Now, that guy might be getting taken with the timber. He needs to call a consulting forester if he can be bothered to travel up to his property. 1K is not enough IF there actually was saleable hardwood there even with the price down.
    It's boring, and your lack of creativity knows no bounds.
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.