20,000 acres

20,000 acres in the heart of the Utica shale fairway unleased? Guernsey County,Ohio. Salt Fork state Park.. Someone needs to get to the bottom of this. Why isn't it leased? If it is ,Why doesn't the public know? If it isn't,why not?  Politics?  Legal problems?  Everyone cant be in the dark.  Someone knows the answers,  maybe a Gag order?  Big Secret?

Views: 1574

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

015334grltd9mPermalink Reply by 015334grltd9m on August 31, 2014 at 1:07am
Ask Mikey of the Elwood News, he made repeated statements that all land in the Utica is leased. Amateur Mike Murphy for breaking news or breaking win . You Decide.
Permalink Reply by Philip Brutz on August 31, 2014 at 3:13pm

Huh?

Permalink Reply by bo boboski on August 31, 2014 at 1:44am

It may be leased, but by whom? where did the $$$go?  Like I've read on here; "follow the money".

Permalink Reply by Barry D on August 31, 2014 at 2:03am

bo,

The last I had heard is that the Governor had asked for a hold on the leasing of state land. If I remember correctly he was going to or has appointed a committee to review lease options. I'm not saying this out of certainty so don't attack me.

Anyone else know anything?

The point was to assure that the state received the best offer for state owned minerals.

Not sure where that all stands, but I wouldn't be surprised if the decision is being put off until after the election in November. Can you imagine the storm of protest the leasing of state land (like a park) would stir up.

Permalink Reply by bo boboski on August 31, 2014 at 2:59am

They could lease it for at least $90 million. and.  20 % royalties. Never have to have a truck or a rig,or a pipeline  on the park grounds. Who could be against that? They need the $$$. Not leasing it would have a more negative effect, Maybe even hurt his re-election bid. IMHO.

Permalink Reply by Barry D on August 31, 2014 at 3:32am

bo,

One thing is for sure, electing the Governor's opponent would definitely mean no leasing of government land, he is raising money from the anti-shale crowd. I'll roll the dice with our current Governor.

Permalink Reply by Hunter 1 on August 31, 2014 at 2:11pm
Bet it gets force pooled ...
Permalink Reply by Philip Brutz on August 31, 2014 at 3:12pm

It is probably to large to be force pooled in its entirety but probably many acres around the edges will forced to join units.

Permalink Reply by Jimmy Wilson on September 1, 2014 at 12:35am

It may be too far west...I've heard the line is somewhere right around Winterset and heads NE...

Permalink Reply by bo boboski on September 1, 2014 at 10:16am

That "line" , may be there ,BECAUSE of the state park.

Permalink Reply by Kathi Albertson on September 1, 2014 at 9:04am
As the owner of land adjacent to the park I have tried to keep as close to this issue as possible and here is what I know:

From the very beginning, ODNR has said that if and when leasing of the state parks would occur, Salt Fork would be the last to be leased. They want to give the industry a chance to improve the technology through experience.

Some of the previous owners of land that is now the park retained their mineral rights so the state is not free to lease the entire park. Since the land was only sold in the 60s, many of the heirs of the previous land owners are easy to find and in fact live on the edges of the park.

Although at least some of the members of the commission to develop the policies regarding drilling on state lands were named, as of about 3 months ago, the commission has not met according to one of the members named to the commission.

As for the owners of land adjacent to the park, we have different opinions. Personally, I am concerned about the effect of ORC 1509.022 that would allow a pad on my land for directional drilling under the park and keep my parcels out of the drilling unit. This could happen due to an old lease that allows for another well without a new spud fee. After checking old leases in the recorders office, I know that there are others in the same situation. Hopefully the laterals would go both SE and NW.

On the other side of the equation, I am afraid that the current ban on drilling under the park might keep Enervest from going back to a very productive Clinton well on my land with new laterals. Others have the same situation.

So from my perspective, the lack of activity in the park has advantages and disadvantages for the locals. As a land owner and Farm Bureau trustee, I work hard to let our elected officials know how their laws and rules affect us and encourage others to do the same. In the mean time, the park remains a great back yard and perhaps time is on our side as the technology continues to improve.
Permalink Reply by bo boboski on September 1, 2014 at 10:28am

Thx for your input,Kathi.  Looks like you have lots to gain, or lose, when and if the park gets leased for its oil & gas. Sounds like you are staying on top of things.  I presently have come to side with Barry, that  our Gubner may be waiting till after the election. For many reasons. Anti fracs & technology & maybe better lease terms once the nearby wells are put into production with hopefully, better than expected results!

RSS

© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service