To Lease or Not to Lease: Has Anyone NOT signed a lease? I'd like to hear why you didn't

My wife and I are part of a landowners group that is in the process of having their Range Resources contract reviewed by attorneys.  We only have 3.2 acres and have not decided whether we are actually going to sign a lease.  I am curious to hear from people who started to go through the process and then at some point decided against it.  I'd like to hear your reasons.  FYI - I'm not posting this so I can attack people's decisions.  I am genuinely interested in hearing from people who decided not to sign a lease.  

 

Thanks in advance!

Views: 11732

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Barbara on November 5, 2011 at 8:40pm

thanks for all of this, dan. i have been a sidelines observer, partly due to being a 'flatlander' here....someone who has moved here to the 'endless mountains' rather than someone who is a 'native'.  let's see if i can get up the energy/nerve to go for this...... thank you.

and to jim...so far, as far as i know...and i am just another person...the regs you speak of i would like to know of. thanks....and the impact fees are good to know about...for i, and other chesapeake leasors, will be paying them before i/we receive royalties.  no, i do not know the details of these and i would be glad to hear them from you.  i'm not trying to 'bs' anyone....so do welcome what info you have 'discovered'. 

Permalink Reply by Jim Litwinowicz on November 6, 2011 at 10:59am

The proposed regs and laws are all over the newspapers and internet.  If you haven't heard of them then you need to be reading more responsible sources than environmental extremist sites. Go to any major paper's website and search for them.

Impact fees are part of the permit application process and are not deducted from royalties unless you have a really terrible lease. Thats one reason that Corbett wanted impact fees instead of an extraction tax ....that the Philly area legislators are screaming for ....that would have been paid by landowners so thank the governor.The other reason is that he wanted the moneys raised to stay where it will mitigate the impact of drilling and not be stolen away by greedy legislators buying votes for their re-election.

 

 

 

 

Permalink Reply by Barbara on November 7, 2011 at 7:27am

jim, my lease with chesapeake clearly states that all royalties will be paid after all fees, taxes, production costs are taken out.  clearly. this was all cleared up front by a lawyer touted as being an 'expert' at that time on the gas leasing going on. everyone i know who has a chesapeake lease has the same terms. perhaps you have a really exceptional lease, or are with another company if you do not have the same conditions.

the actual implementation of a tax/fee is only recently becoming closer to a sure thing. local government is still talking that they WANT funds to come locally; not yet a done deal.  local politicians running for election are all claiming that they are for this. 

i'll try to capture sites for you......i tend to read and go on...i am admittedly not retaining them....but will be trying to 'gather' some for you as i travel along.  i have all this literally in my back..or rather 'side', i guess, yard............i do have an emotional overlay as i watch and wonder....................and know now how much i do not have in my leases/addenda that could be working for my protection, and the protection of my  little piece of the planet.

Permalink Reply by Jake Jackson on November 5, 2011 at 6:07pm
Or a town called Dish in TX.
Permalink Reply by Lana Boyer on November 2, 2011 at 6:18pm

Think about it!  What is your land worth?  What ever you sell it for you are selling it for life.  Once you sign you have no bargaining power.  They got what they wanted and you lost your rights.   They need you to add to their total acreage or they may not be able to complete their puzzle.   

 

Permalink Reply by wayne on November 4, 2011 at 1:03pm
I own about 100 acres in the souther tier. When the sgeis is finished & NY is open to drilling, members of my coalition will be looking at the best offers that take into account all the issues laid out in our lease agreement. We only get one chance to do it right.
Permalink Reply by Jake Jackson on November 5, 2011 at 6:40pm
The Marcellus Commission set up by the Corbett administration is made up of people who are all tied to the industry with the exception of a few.  And there is no one on that commission who is from the Public Health sector. That's for a reason, none of the professionals who head up public health initiatives can agree that this does not have major health impacts.  The PA government, both sides of the aisle are being bought by the industry.  There is very little they are able to do because it's so BIG.  The few that do try to protect the citizens they represent are being out voted in large numbers.  Although I was told that there are some serious issues that have both parties worried. Another well blowout this week, more toxic waste and no where to put it except to truck it to Ohio and inject it into the earth!   http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11072/1131681-454.stm
Permalink Reply by craig on November 5, 2011 at 10:35pm

Just a heads up that the article you referenced was published in March 2011. I won't try and piecemeal the articles' depiction of things. However you will notice if you read the whole article that one important item the author mentions is "One item clearly not on the panel's agenda will be reviewing the need for a severance tax or impact fee on drillers:..." Today, of course we all know that this statement is completely false.  Now we know the tilt of the story he wrote back then. The lesson learned should be that just because somebody writes something and has it published doesn't mean they know what they are talking about. Now, I don't mean to belittle the rest of his arguments, which may or may not be true, but it should make one think about the author and question his 'facts'.

 

 

Permalink Reply by Jake Jackson on November 7, 2011 at 1:24am
The idea that the DEP is watching them like "flys on s&*~^t is completely false. The well blowout last week burned for hours before anyone showed up and they still don't know how many gallons of toxic fluid got out. And the governor asked that water treatment facilities not accept the fluid but it is voluntary not mandatory and they are still taking it at some.  One reason why Scientific American reported high levels of bromides in the Monongohela River.  Some are treating the water unsuccessfully and it's eating up the plants.
Permalink Reply by craig on November 7, 2011 at 1:54pm

Please post a link to the blowout you are talking about. If it is the one in Washington County then you are completely wrong, in fact there wasn't even a fire, and not even at the well pad itself.  If you post a link to a different well problem, I will comment further at that time, because I don't seem able to find a link to any well fire last week. If I am wrong I will admit it. Will you do the same????

 

Post a link to a water treatment plant that is still treating frac water as well, because to my knowledge non are currently taking any, at least in W. Pa.  

 

Permalink Reply by Karen Bagdes-Canning on November 7, 2011 at 10:03pm

Here is a link you all may appreciate.  I know I did.

Below is a link to today’s NYT Op Ed piece by Paul Krugman.  Krugman  states that the cost of fracking, because the costs of the harm it inflicts, is  not cost effective, and if those costs were properly internalized and not in  effect subsidized, would be higher than the cost of solar.  He also states  that, contrary to the claims of the fossil fuel industry and its supporters,  solar costs are decreasing by about 7% annually, but because of the influence of  the fossil fuel industry on our politics and the industry’s ability to control  the public debate, this is large unknown.

Permalink Reply by Barbara on November 8, 2011 at 12:52am
very interesting viewpoint.....................wow

RSS

advertisements