The industry is apparently taking the same tack with NYS “marks” as they did here [in Texas].

The need for pipelines and the total inability of municipalities to use police powers to control ROW selection for these ticking time bombs is an omission of material fact in mineral leases (producers 88) that makes this contract fraudulent in the inducement.

Drillers know that if they described their complete plans for production to potential lessors and municipal governments there would be nobody who would sign a lease.  Their con game involves appealing to greed to get the wells in the ground while saying as little as possible about any facts that would raise concerns. Then once they have spent millions of dollars on the well drilling (with the cooperation of the marks and the government) they will be in a position to threaten a lawsuit if there are any objections later to the infrastructure needs they unveil as it becomes necessary to do so. At that point they play blame-the-victim and ridicule any naysayers as being stupid for not realizing that pipelines, gas processing plants, and compression stations were going to be required. They will say “Buyer beware!”, and “You failed in your obligation to do due diligence before signing.”

But the fact is that the contracts are fraudulent by omission of material fact. I know of no case law where this issue has been tried, but I’m not a lawyer, either.

Jerry Lobdill
Fort Worth, TX

Tags: , ,



From the News-Herald, Northern Ohio:

“They come to your door with a deal hard to pass up, but it’s not all bells and whistles, says Peter Dautartas of Chester Township.

Dautartas, who recently signed a lease to have an oil well drilled in his yard, was one of several township residents who spoke out against oil and gas drilling in their neighborhoods Monday night at West Geauga High School.

. . . . .

“‘They promise you the world. They promised us so many things and when the well was in, all of a sudden they forgot their end of the deal, which I think is a breech of contract,’ Dautartas said to the table of representatives.”

______________________________

Dick. The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.

Cade. Nay, that I mean to do. Is not this a lamentable thing, that of the skin of an innocent lamb should be made parchment? that parchment being scribbled o’er, should undo a man? Some say the bee stings: but I say, ’tis the bee’s wax, for I did but seal once to a thing, and I was never mine own man since.

— Henry the Sixth, Part 2, Act IV, Scene II
.

D O N’ T   S I G N

Tags: ,



Illinois, if they paid you $6 THOUSAND  an acre,
it would be far too little for the price you will pay.

But SIX DOLLARS  an acre?

The gas industry has found another victim, it thinks.
Illinois farmers, show them they’re wrong.

P l e a s e.

http://www.courierpress.com/news/2010/mar/06/wanted-ill-farmland-with-natural-gas-reserves/

A Louisiana energy company has sent a team of workers to Edwards County, Ill., to lease hundreds of acres of farmland for a natural gas exploration project. The company is targeting a gas-bearing shale formation known as the New Albany Shale Group that lies about 5,000 feet beneath the surface.

“We first noticed the company doing research in the county assessor’s office about three weeks ago and decided to invite them to address our board,” said Rebecca Perry, director of the Edwards County Farm Bureau. “They actually wanted the board’s help getting these leases signed. But, it’s our position that we neither support nor oppose their plans.”

In an effort to understand Eagle Resources’ plans, the Farm Bureau asked the company’s chief executive, Earl Jenevein, to speak to landowners. In addition to Jenevein, a Farm Bureau attorney and a local lawyer with experience in oil and gas leasing were present to answer landowners’ questions.

During the first meeting, more than 70 landowners showed up.

Calls to Jenevein seeking his comments on the project were not returned.

Eagle has plans to drill down to the New Albany Shale Group, also known to local oil producers as the Devonian formation. After reaching the targeted shale formation, the company plans to drill four offset or horizontal wells to collect the natural gas.

Each horizontal well also would be 5,000 feet. Company officials say they must have 640 acres under lease for each of these collection wells.

Landowners who have been contacted by Eagle Resources have been offered $6 per acre for their land for each year of a five-year lease. In return for the lease, the landowner would also receive one-eighth royalty on any natural gas produced from the wells, which is considered a standard oil or gas royalty in the Tri-State oil basin.

“They’ve told us they first plan to drill three core sample wells around the first quarter of 2011,” Perry said. “The most promising of those test wells would then be drilled for production. If they’re successful, they tell us they plan to lease as much land as possible in Edwards County, and then expand outward from there.”

The area being targeted by Eagle Resources is in the southwestern part of Edwards County, near the Wayne County line. Specifically, the company is interested in land in Ellery and Dixon townships. Company officials said they chose the area because of its proximity to cross-country pipelines.

The natural gas potential of southeastern Illinois is well-known by researchers with the Illinois State Geological Survey.

Studies indicated that a 19-county section of southeastern Illinois is a favorable area to explore for gas in the Devonian shale formation. In a published study, Robert M. Cluff of the Illinois Geological Survey wrote, “Although gas shows in the shales have been encountered in several wells drilled in this area, no attempts were made to complete or evaluate a shale gas well until 1979.”

In 1979, core samples from two Wayne County wells were obtained, permitting the first quantitative assessment of gas content of the shales.

Cluff wrote that it will take unconventional drilling techniques to extract the natural gas.

“Commercial production of shale gas in Illinois probably will require novel drilling and completion techniques not commonly used by local operators,” Cluff wrote.

Local drilling contractors have been contacted by Eagle about their exploration plans.

Officials with the Farm Bureau are advising landowners to consult an attorney before signing any lease forms.

Tags: ,



.

From the Fort Worth Weekly blog, this was just too good to pass up:

Jim Beam And Frac Water Don’t Mix

Thursday, October 1st, 2009 by Jeff Prince

Jim Beam over ice with a splash of H20 is my favorite cocktail, and since all three ingredients require water I am concerned when somebody comes along and threatens the earth’s supply.

Fort Worth Weekly was among the first news organizations to explore the largely unregulated use of water by gas drillers and to explore how laws are stacked in the industry’s favor (“Til Your Wells Run Dry,” June 29, 2005, and “Water…Water…Where?” Oct. 4, 2006).

This paper has published numerous stories about people’s water wells being contaminated or dried up after a gas well began drilling nearby. Every time, the energy companies denied responsibility and said there’s no proof, you go get your expert and we’ll get our 12 experts, you go get your lawyer and we’ll get our team of lawyers and we’ll all meet in court…for many, many years until you’re bled dry, sucker.

Tarrant County and the Barnett Shale aren’t unique. The same fight is being waged across the country, wherever drilling is occurring.

Here’s the latest report, a good one from Reuters about polluted water wells in Wyoming. The EPA, which is taking baby steps toward growing a set of balls these days, says water wells tested positive for 14 contaminants and that nearby gas drilling might possibly maybe kinda be at fault.

As usual, the gas industry says “prove it, pal.”

Randy Teeuwen, a spokesman for EnCana Corp., which operates 248 wells in that part of Wyoming, was quoted by Reuters as saying, “The industry contends drilling chemicals are heavily diluted and injected safely into gas reservoirs thousands of feet beneath aquifers, so they will never seep into drinking water supplies. There has never been a documented case of fracking that’s contaminated wells or groundwater. We know they don’t have the science to prove what they say.”

The Reuters article ends with this: “Critics say their kids have gotten sick, their animals have died, and their water has in some cases become flammable because methane escaped into aquifers from gas wells. But they have been unable to prove their case because drilling companies are not required to disclose exactly what chemicals they use, thanks to an exemption to a federal clean water law granted to the oil and gas industry in 2005.”

Back in 2005, the Weekly was just perking up to the potential for water problems. The industry, of course, was way ahead of the game, already getting exemptions passed in their favor. Lobbyists and their wheelbarrows filled with cash have a way of encouraging exemptions.

See complete post at

http://www.fwweekly.com/index.php?option=com_wordpress&p=1632&Itemid=248

.

Tags: , , , , , ,



Guest post by Candace Mingins


In 1971, when my husband’s family bought its farm in Van Etten, there was an abandoned Oriskany formation well on the property. There were, indeed, abandoned wells all over the neighboring hills — some of which were providing neighbors with free gas. A small pipe and tank seemed innocuous enough. So when a neighbor came by in 1999 with his friend, an oil and gasman who owned a small company in Pennsylvania, we signed a ten-year lease. It was a community-held belief in Van Etten, based on past experience, that gas wells were “no big deal.” Nearly all our neighbors signed.

There were no informational forums back then, nor attorneys who knew what was coming. Five years later, after the lower rights to our lease were assigned to a multinational corporation, we realized something bigger was happening and finally sought an attorney’s help. The first attorney we saw was knowledgeable but was interested in helping us only if we exercised a sale clause we had put in the lease, and sell our land to a friend of his who invested in oil and gas. His fee would be 33% of the additional royalties gained from the transaction. We were not comfortable with this.

The second attorney willingly assisted us with the high-pressure, eleventh-hour negotiations with the gas company, which now wanted to drill a well on our farm. But it soon became clear he knew nothing about the industrial gas drilling coming.

Finding a reliable attorney was nearly an impossible task. We didn’t even know what questions to ask. We scrambled to come up with last-minute protections, mostly from bits and pieces of information we were now learning from neighbors. The gas company was willing to negotiate, as they had not yet gotten us to sign an amending agreement they needed. We forged an agreement to make sure our beautiful, gravelly loam field would be restored.

The well was drilled in the Trenton/Black River formation. It was a conventional well that went nearly two miles down and one mile horizontally under the village. It was a huge industrial operation — a far cry from the old Oriskany wells on our hill. From day one, the gas company began to cut corners. What was to be “just a couple of acres” was actually seven acres (we measured it.) We asked that the access road run along the edge of the field, and they cut it diagonally through the field. The landman who had been negotiating with us had actually helped us flag where the road was to be, and he argued for us to get them to re-do the road. It just went on and on. The holding ponds were supposed to have two layers of plastic. They had only one. The brine was supposed to be hauled out more often than it was. We felt we had to constantly be checking, taking pictures, and calling the gas company.

Of course, the operation was an industrial site we never could have imagined: 24-hour-a-day drilling, ramming noise, lit up all night. It went longer than they said it would, taking three months to prepare the site and drill. When the well was flared (for three days and nights) and the whole valley was lit up like a stadium, it began to feel like something terrible had been unleashed.

When it was time to restore the larger/outer area of the well site, the gas company cut corners once again, even though the procedure was spelled out clearly in the written agreement. They used a bulldozer to remove the plastic and large rocks, hauling much of our precious topsoil with it. My husband furiously tried to get them to stop, and subsequently to bring us more topsoil to fill in the depressions. Rude employees argued with him. They also never loosened the subsoil before filling in.

We had a retired Ag & Markets consultant come in and shoot some grades and write a recommendation. This appeared to really annoy the gas company. They sent us a “without prejudice” letter stating they had done all they had to do until final restoration (10 years or so hence). The “friendly” landman who had worked on our behalf was told to stop talking to us. We then knew that if we ever wanted to have that field restored as per the signed agreement, we would have to get an attorney. Attorneys tell us now that only rarely can you get industry to pay for your legal fees.

Having a multinational corporation in your life is extremely stressful. It’s a “contractual relationship,” but it is vastly unequal. Corporations are protected under the law, and are ultimately not liable, responsible or responsive. Their sole job is to make money for their shareholders, and they will do what they want. Oil and gas companies are essentially in the game of “gotcha!” Once you sign, it’s up to you to watch them, call them, sue them. It’s your problem now.

They are obliging only until they get what they want from you. Phone calls, e-mails, letters, lawyers all become routine. Signing a lease with a multinational corporation is like inviting a very rude, unscrupulous, uncaring (dare I say criminal?) person to live in your home. It is extremely stressful.

However, this well, we were assured, would have a lifetime of only about 10 years, and then they would be “out of there—all cleaned up, like [we] didn’t know [they] had been there.” We thought we could live with that. (Of course, at this point we had no choice.) At this time our daughter and her husband decided to go ahead and make plans to move their farm/ winery business to the family farm.

And we were “lucky” ones. The well was successful. In fact, it was the most prolific well in New York, and in 2006 produced 4 billion cubic feet of gas — enough to heat 57,000 homes for a year. Organizations and 133 families receive royalties from this well, including the town, school and church. Who couldn’t use more money? Folks could finally repaint their houses and replace roofs. They could start retirement savings and donate to charities. We were able to finish our house and install solar panels, buy a tractor and pay off some college loans. There is no denying that the people could use the money. But the question began to emerge: at what cost?

In the spring of 2008, we began hearing talk of the next big gas “play” — the Marcellus shale — and, at first, thought nothing of it. But the more we learned, the more alarmed we became, and then it hit us: we were “held by production” with a producing well, and that meant that lease expiration was irrelevant. And while we are held by production, more wells may be drilled on our property in different formations, which in turn could hold us by production longer.

In essence, we had “sold” our land forever. The night I realized this, I had a dream that our house had been robbed, and it was from the inside.

Now, our daughter seriously doubted they could move to the farm. How could they move here when there could be a lifetime of drilling, drastic change in our rural landscape, and potential contamination and pollution? We had “sold” the land out from under our children and their children. No amount of money is worth that.

Unconventional shale gas drilling is a nasty business. And I venture to guess there are hundreds, maybe thousands of leased-landowners out there who, as they learn what this new gas drilling really entails, wish they had never signed a lease.

A contract between an individual and a multinational corporation is never on an even playing field. The power imbalance is staggering. Attorney Jane Welsh, of Hamilton, believes gas leases should actually be commercial lease transactions, which include the legal concepts and protections found in any commercial lease, and “the only reason they are not is that the parties to a gas lease are woefully mismatched in terms of negotiating power, experience, sophistication and financial clout.” New York, she concludes, is sorely remiss in not regulating these leases.

But this is not merely a leasing issue (though the Attorney General’s Office, Cooperative Extension and many landowner coalitions seem to believe it is). For one, it’s a community issue. As Herb Engman, Ithaca town supervisor, said recently (and I’m paraphrasing): Towns go through all the time, trouble and expense to generate comprehensive plans and protect community resources, and then gas companies can destroy all planning.

The scale of proposed shale gas drilling in the area will affect our entire landscape and rural way of life. Leases cannot protect us from plummeting real estate values or the inability to obtain mortgages or sell our property; leases cannot protect us from a decline in tourism or other negative economic effects; leases cannot protect us from the increased difficulty in obtaining insurance or the increased cost of doing so. And unless gas companies are willing to post billions of dollars in bonds, leases cannot ultimately protect us from personal liability.

But above all, this is a public health issue. Emerging studies on air pollution and reports of water contamination make it very clear that the negative affects of unconventional gas drilling cannot be contained by property boundaries.

Whether you are leased, leased in a coalition or compulsorily integrated; whether you are un-leased living down the road, downwind or downstream of gas wells or deep injection disposal wells; or whether you simply use roads traveled by frack-water trucks — we are all at increased risk. Our communities need full disclosure of the risks we will be exposed to before we can decide if we, as a community, want to take those risks. We do not want to be unwilling participants in a grand experiment, because that’s what this is.

And the truth is, no one even knows what all the risks are. There have been no comprehensive, long-term, systematic studies of hydrofracking. Nor have there been comprehensive, long-term, systematic studies on deep injection disposal of toxic wastewater. But the high-pressure injection of contaminants into the ground appears to be linked to unpredictable migration of fluids, aquifer contamination and possibly earthquakes.

Have we mapped our entire area for natural faults? How do we know that the fracking fluid left behind won’t eventually migrate upward and contaminate our water? Maybe not this year, but what about in five years or 50 years? While the gas companies and the DEC assure us that these activities are perfectly safe, they will not guarantee it, because there is no science backing those claims. And in fact, more and more evidence is mounting to the contrary —at the expense of people’s health and safety.

I am haunted by the specter of some day turning on my tap for a glass of our clear, cold, sweet water and wondering if chemicals left underneath us have migrated into it.

Do I test my drinking water once a year? Once a month? Every week?

How can I live (how can we live) with the unending uncertainty that this glassful might be poisoned?

Do I drink it?

Do I offer it to my granddaughter?

Tags: , , ,



From
http://www.timesleader.com/news/Gas-lease_offer__lsquo_excites_rsquo__area_group_09-16-2009.html

Gas-lease offer ‘excites’ area group

After ’08 deal dies, Wyoming County Landowners expect Chesapeake Energy deal

“We knew that we wanted a company that could afford to buy 37,000 acres … that could not only buy us, but drill us,” Lines-Burgess [landowners' coalition secretary] said. “In order to do that, we knew we had to go for the cream of the crop.”

Cattle dead next to hydraulic fracturing job on Chesapeake natural gas well:

__________________________________

From The Shreveport Times:

The ’stuff’ killed the cows, sheriff says
Prator questions whether drilling company has reported incident.

By Vickie Welborn •  June 25, 2009

That’s Caddo Sheriff Steve Prator’s assessment of what contributed to the deaths of 17 cows in late April near a natural gas drilling location south of Spring Ridge.

Until now, none of the state agencies involved in the ongoing inquiry into the incident has stated what caused the cattle to drop dead in Skipper Williams Jr.’s pasture on state Highway 169.

The deaths were reported at some point after a liquid leaked from the well, which was in the completion process, and pooled into a low area accessible to the cows. The substance later was determined to contain elevated chlorides, oil, grease and some organic compounds.

But no state agency took responsibility for testing the animals. Results from a necropsy performed by Williams’ private veterinarian are unavailable.

On Wednesday, Prator gathered representatives of his and Caddo District Attorney Charles Scott’s offices, the Caddo Commission, state police and the state Environmental Quality, Natural Resources and Agriculture and Forestry departments in one room to review all the reports connected to the incident.

“We went over for an hour exactly what everybody’s response was, and everybody’s response and cooperation was really good,” the sheriff said. “We responded to the scene well. When everyone found out about it we all worked together very well.

“We have determined — although no one agency except me will say this — by piecing everything together, there was a spill from the site that ran off of the site and that was ingested by the cows and that’s what caused the cows to die.”

State veterinarian Michael Barrington confirmed the cows’ deaths were neither natural nor caused by disease, a release from Prator’s office states.
. . . . .
Still undetermined is whether the spill was reported and, if so, whether it was reported in a timely manner. “We contend it should have been reported. And the timeliness of it we’re investigating,” Prator said.
. . . . .
State police, the sheriff’s office and Environmental Quality still are looking into the timeliness of the reporting. Findings of the sheriff’s office and state police will be turned over to Scott for review. Environmental Quality will move its report through its channels.

Environmental Quality was notified via its hotline when Chesapeake Energy learned of the dead cattle. And over the next 72 hours, the company worked with Schlumberger, the sheriff’s office and other agencies involved to investigate the incident, McCotter said.
. . . . .
“While Chesapeake, Schlumberger and others have conducted water and soil analysis, Chesapeake and Schlumberger have not had access to the cattle owners’ necropsy and toxicology reports and have, therefore, been unable to draw any conclusions as to the cause of the cattle deaths,” McCotter said.
. . . . .
“If at the time it happened proper notification had been made, there are chances cows would still be alive right now,” the sheriff said. “In this case, this was cows. How unfortunate. But what if it was children?”

.

For complete story, see: http://www.shreveporttimes.com/article/20090625/NEWS01/906250326/0/L/The–stuff–killed-the-cows–sheriff-says

.
For an important post on gas drilling’s effects on livestock and farmers, see also:
http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/amall/oil_and_gas_impacts_on_livesto.html

.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,



.

From
http://www.timesleader.com/news/Gas-lease_offer__lsquo_excites_rsquo__area_group_09-16-2009.html

Gas-lease offer ‘excites’ area group

After ’08 deal dies, Wyoming County Landowners expect Chesapeake Energy deal.

“We knew that we wanted a company that could afford to buy 37,000 acres … that could not only buy us, but drill us.” – landowners’ group secretary

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/masochism

Noun:
masochism

1. the enjoyment of receiving pain

.

Tags: , , ,



How long can you live with a problem while you struggle to enforce the terms of your “good” lease? Yup, that one, the one with all the protections – protections that are only as good as your ability (read money) to enforce them.


The company gets to deduct its “production” (imagine what that term could encompass) and transportation costs from your royalty payments. You don’t get to recoup your legal costs on top of your royalties.

What will you have left when the fight’s over?

Tags: , , , ,