Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Finnbear on January 22, 2012 at 9:01am

I think the way the ruling came down, CHK only can access what is under the JSC land from the JSC land. The 500ft setback requirements are in place to ensure that a company can't drill up to a property line and take gas from under the adjacent property. A rookie attorney could make the argument that the 500ft setback applies here, especially in light of the ruling about only harvesting O&G under JSC from JSC. Because of the ruling, adjacent parcels would have to be treated the same as if they were unleased or leased by a different company in this case.

Permalink Reply by 1s7k1qp9wk1t7 on January 21, 2012 at 8:20am

Fine...no problem....they can put their well in, harvest all the gas and oil that is under tbe club, pay the club $15,000 for surface damage and then LEAVE That 15 grand wont pay the attorneys fees. Then Chesapeake just puts in another pad somewhere else and STILL gets the rest that they couldn't get from the surrounding land....so what did the club accomplish?.....BOY YOU SURE SHOWED THEM.....should've got those tree stands and fishin poles when you had the chance :)

Permalink Reply by Finnbear on January 22, 2012 at 8:53am

The economics of that idea won't fly. They want to be able to drill 6-8 wells from one pad to profitably develop the shale. They might settle for 3 or 4 but I don't think the JSC acreage is that large, especially when combined with the 500ft setback requirement.

Permalink Reply by Finnbear on January 22, 2012 at 8:55am

And that is what the JSC really wants. Drill under the JSC land from somewhere else where CHK has a lease with the surface owner and has full surface access.

Permalink Reply by Dan on January 22, 2012 at 4:41pm

It will be interesting to see how this judgement stands up.  I'm also wondering how broadly this can be applied to similar situations, in terms of case precedent.  I don't know how unique the wording was in that lease that allowed it to be interpreted in that way.  At a mininum I would guess that all the thousands of acres of surface rights that North American Coal sold off during the same time period that JSC acquired theirs might have similar wording, and that all those surface owners may be able to claim the same restrictions on horizontal drilling that the JSC is asserting, if they choose to.

Permalink Reply by 1s7k1qp9wk1t7 on January 31, 2012 at 4:04am

So what's going on at the JSC?......any movement, any activity.....whadya hear, whadya say?

Permalink Reply by Jim Thompson on January 31, 2012 at 1:40pm

Hello, I am an officer at J.S.C. and have just lately discovered this site.  There are some interesting posts about our situation, some seem informed and some uninformed. First let me let Katherine know that the Club has and does accept women as members.  Membership is currently frozen at this time due to our current legal action with Chesapeake, but when it opens back up you can become a member by having a member submit your name at our monthly meeting, you must get 75% approval of the members present to be accepted.

If anyone has been by the site recently, they would see that it seems ready for a drilling rig to be placed there.  The pad seems fully constructed with a 6 foot high chain link fence around the berm.  All construction equipment has been moved off the site with only a "hoe sitting along the county road.  This is not the original site that Chesapeake first started negotiating with us back in April 2011. Originally they were planning on placing the pad below the Clubhouse out past the Trap Range.

The current site is within 500 feet of the State Property line and also Dennis Elias's property line.  I would be glad to answer questions as best able to.

Permalink Reply by AT on January 31, 2012 at 2:04pm

Jim,  Welcome to GMS.com. I believe you knew my father "Satch" and know my uncle "Bub"?

Permalink Reply by Jim Thompson on January 31, 2012 at 2:34pm

Yes indeed. There is alot less Hay field for Bub to mow and they tore up his dog track too.

Permalink Reply by AT on January 31, 2012 at 2:43pm

Yes. I was scouting around out there about a month ago and saw that.

Permalink Reply by Jim Thompson on January 31, 2012 at 3:08pm

If they drill vertical at that location, I believe, when they Frac, the fracturing will extend beyond the J.S.C. property line and be in violation of the current ruling.If they drill horizontal they would have to go in the direction of the State shooting range to be able to cover the most property inside the Club boundries. I believe that they had planned on drilling towards Jewett at this site.

Permalink Reply by Dan on January 31, 2012 at 4:27pm

Hi Jim,

Do you really think they are going to drill there now, after Judge Nunner's ruling?

It doesn't seem cost effective at all for them to drill there for such a short lateral, especially when they could just capture the gas under the Club by drilling down on a different property and catch the gas under the Club as part of a more typical mile-or-so horizontal lateral.

Have you heard what they intend to do at this point?

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• Next ›
• Page