Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Showdown In Wyoming Over Gas (property rights)
CBS ^ | 02.09.05

Posted on 11/16/2005 9:47:32 PM PST by Coleus

Showdown In Wyoming Over Gas

Feb. 9, 2005


Energy has been big business in Gillette, Wyo., for years. But now, the new craze is methane gas.  (CBS)




Quote

"This is the largest open-pit mine in the world. The nation didn't have this coal, you know, turn your lights off and your computers."
John Kennedy,
independent energy producer


(CBS) Imagine this. All of a sudden you discover you're sitting on a fortune, with millions of dollars worth of natural gas under your house or property, just waiting to be drilled out of the ground.

But before you can ever dream about spending all that money, a gas company tells you it's their gas, not yours. And they're coming to get it, whether you like it or not, and they plan to keep the profits.

If that sounds like a far-fetched nightmare, it isn't. As Correspondent Dan Rather reports, it's perfectly legal out West.
Wyoming has called itself the cowboy state for years. The Old West may be changing, but you can still find plenty of cowboys in Gillette. Nowadays though, broncos aren't the only rough ride in that town.

The cowboys say their biggest fight these days is with energy producers. And they don’t like the way things are going.

"I feel helpless. I just don’t have a good feeling, you know," says cowboy George Smith. "I don’t trust these people. Their past dictates that."

Energy has been big business in Gillette for years. From open mines, more than a million tons of coal are dug up and shipped out of town every day. But the new craze that has Smith so upset is methane gas. It’s trapped in underground coal seams all over the area.

In just eight years, 17,000 methane wells have been sunk in the Powder River Basin. And 33,000 more wells are planned.

There are 18 of them on Smith’s ranch, even though he didn’t want them there.

"For people who own houses in the city, and anybody who owns a house, how would you feel if somebody comes in and knocks down your garage or tore half of your house off to get a drill rig in there, in your back yard, and drill for gas and oil," says Smith. "That’s basically what’s going on right here. I don’t think much of America would stand for that."

But Smith doesn’t have a choice. In Wyoming, the law is not on his side. Like many ranchers, he owns the surface land – the land you can see. But the gas and minerals underground are owned by another individual, or the government, which leases them to gas producers.

But when the gas companies tried to come on Smith’s property, he tried to stop them. They fought back just as hard. Smith says they tried to get a restraining order to keep him off his own property: "To keep me from going on and preventing them from going on and drilling."

Smith finally lost, and the gas companies drove their big trucks and rigs onto his property and started drilling for methane gas. "They were putting roads in and cutting well pads. And within that day’s time, they had that well rig up there, drilling," he says.

What went through his mind? "Pretty much just probably what the Indians thought 125 years ago. You know? There goes my home," says Smith.
John Kennedy, an independent energy producer, doesn’t have much sympathy for cowboys like Smith. From his plane, you can still see herds of buffalo, but he says it’s the coal and gas industries, not ranching, that now provide the high-paying jobs and pay the taxes in Wyoming.

"This is the largest open-pit mine in the world," says Kennedy. "If the nation didn't have this coal, you know, turn your lights off and your computers."

Today, Kennedy is focusing on methane gas, and says there’s enough gas to keep him busy for at least 20 years. He doesn't have any leases to drill on Smith’s land, but if he did, he says he’d have the right to drill there.

"That individual knew that when he bought his ranch or should have known that," says Kennedy. "I make every effort to come to a reasonable accommodation with any landowner."

He says he pays them for access: "I want to pay you damages and I'm gonna pay you on an annual basis and I'm gonna pay you a lot of money. But you have no right to the oil and gas that's going to be produced."

When a well is sunk, ranchers are paid a fee, sometimes as little as $500, and then an annual fee, which averages about $1,000 for every well on their property.

Does Kennedy believe, however, that the law is basically on his side? "I don't like to operate that way, but yes," he says.

Ranchers like Smith say the companies often act like bullies. And although just one good well can produce hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of gas, Smith says it's a constant battle to collect the small fees promised by the companies.

"In this part of the country 100 years ago, you wouldn't have been talking much," says Smith. "You'd have been dealing other ways."

60 Minutes talked to the gas company drilling on Smith's land, and the company said it paid Smith everything he's due under his contract, more than $23,000 in the past year and a half.

But ranchers say it's not just about money. They don't like what gas drillers are doing to their land and their way of life.

Don Spellman ranches 8,000 acres. "I really don't think anyone has the right to come in and ruin your way of making a living so they can profit," says Spellman. "And it does change your way of life. It changes it tremendously."

Spellman says he’s seen up to 50 trucks a day rumbling down new roads that have been cut into the open range. But what bothers Spellman more than the dust and the noise is what the gas drillers are doing to the water supply, especially since Wyoming is still in the middle of a long drought.

For years, it’s been said in Wyoming: "Whiskey’s for drinking, but water’s for fighting."

"Water is really, and a lot of people don't understand this, but water is a commodity to us," says Spellman. "It really is. Our land is pretty worthless without it."

And the ranchers say the gas drillers are using an awful lot of their precious water. The drillers are pumping water out of the ground into reservoirs so they can get at the gas. It’s a cheap way to reduce the underground water pressure so the gas can bubble to the surface.

But rancher Eric Barlow says most of the water is being wasted. "They said, 'Well, you can use this water for the livestock and your wildlife,'" says Barlow. "I did the calculations. Eighteen minutes per day would put out enough water for all our livestock and my calculated wildlife numbers. So for 23 hours, 42 minutes, their water is a waste product. … They run all the time."

Is Kennedy concerned that what he's doing is taking away from water resources? "Not really," he says. "That amount of water is a miniscule amount of water when you look at the total water resources of the basin."

But a 2003 federal environmental impact study says the water table is depleted by gas drilling and may take 100 years to return to normal.
Some homeowners showed Rather how their wells have gone muddy or dry. They say it's because of gas drilling on or near their property. When that happens, gas companies often agree to truck in water for free, or drill a new well for the homeowners.

But Bill and Marjorie West, who have been fighting the gas companies for six years, say negotiating with them isn't easy. The Wests say it will cost millions of dollars to take them to court, and the companies have unlimited funds, and very deep pockets.

But Kennedy says lawsuits by the ranchers and environmental groups are slowing down his gas production, costing him, and ultimately the consumer, a lot of money.

"Because of the lawsuits, I mean, we’re made to do things that are worse than silly," says Kennedy. "It's ridiculous."

If he had his way, what would he do with them? "We need some common sense; that's completely lacking right now," he says.

Ruth Riele, who works for Kennedy, showed Rather what her boss was talking about.

"This is an archaeological study that we had done to permit 14 federal wells. This cost us a little in excess of $75,000," says Riele. "In addition to the archaeological study, we have to do wildlife studies, vegetation studies, soil studies. And you can see this is one of the historical artifacts that we had to pay to have surveyed. This is an old tin can."

"To those who say, wait a minute, 'Dan Rather, you’ve gone out in Wyoming, you’ve found some sort of whacko environmentalist,'" Rather asks Smith.

"Well, I’d say you were way off track there, because I’m not a tree hugging environmentalist," says Smith.

"We like to take care of the ground out here. We've been taking care of the ground for a lot of years," adds Smith. "If that's a conservationist, I just call it respect. Respect for the old boy, what he made to provide for us, right here."


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; US: Wyoming
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

1 posted on 11/16/2005 9:47:33 PM PST by Coleus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Comment #2 Removed by Moderator

To: Coleus


Refreshing to see such an unbiased post from the MSM.


3 posted on 11/16/2005 9:52:13 PM PST by Tzimisce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

Since when did CBS and Blather care about people's property rights?


4 posted on 11/16/2005 9:54:05 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus; Dog Gone; Ernest_at_the_Beach; Robert357; dalereed; sergeantdave; BOBTHENAILER

Old joke from the 1974 Energy Crisis... "Fart in a jar! America needs the gas!"


5 posted on 11/16/2005 9:54:47 PM PST by SierraWasp (The only thing that can save CA is making eastern CA the 51st state called Sierra Republic!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

Doesn't the federal goverment own most of the mineral rights in Wyoming?


6 posted on 11/16/2005 9:55:15 PM PST by Paleo Conservative (Hey hey ho ho Andy Heyward's got to go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
What a stupid article!!!

They lead you on, in their RatherBiased way to think this poor rancher was defrauded or worse, but ... But Smith doesn’t have a choice. In Wyoming, the law is not on his side. Like many ranchers, he owns the surface land – the land you can see. But the gas and minerals underground are owned by another individual, or the government, which leases them to gas producers.

Wow, someone actually came and CLAIMED WHAT THEY OWNED?!?!

The horror!

7 posted on 11/16/2005 9:57:10 PM PST by WOSG (http://freedomstruth.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

But what about "Eminent Domain"? Think of all the tax dollars generated by the sales and eventual windfall profit tax collected


8 posted on 11/16/2005 10:00:08 PM PST by digger48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

As usual these MSM RatherBiased types are opposed to real property rights. Apparently Rather wants the mineral rights owners to go pound sand, else he wouldnt have made them out to be the meanies in the article.


9 posted on 11/16/2005 10:00:51 PM PST by WOSG (http://freedomstruth.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

When you buy land, read your contracts. In the title report it will say who has easements to your property and whether or not you have the rights to the land under your feet or just the dirt on top. This all is a worst case scenario and is driven basically by the fact that most of the best places to drill (which don't have people living on them) are completely off limits to us. Wyoming legislature can pass laws immediately requiring drilling companies to 'fairly' compensate owners for water loss and anything else.


10 posted on 11/16/2005 10:06:20 PM PST by bpjam (Now accepting liberal apologies.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
I knew of an economic geologist near Tucson who post claims on urban property, told folks he was going to open a mine.

He was, however, willing to sell them the claim for X amount of $. He scammed a lot of dough this way.

They found him a number of years later, at the bottom of an old mine shaft, full of bullet holes.


They did try to drill for methane gas North of Anchorage. The company finally pulled out - too much in politics. Property owners were suing for ruined water wells, damage to property and so on. Bad business practice equals no business.
11 posted on 11/16/2005 10:17:27 PM PST by ASOC (The result of choosing between the lesser of two evils, in the end, leaves you with, well, evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

bump 4 later


12 posted on 11/16/2005 10:40:38 PM PST by prophetic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ASOC

Post Number 10 is correct, read the papers when you get the land, it will spell our who has what. This thing about surface rights and mineral rights is not new. They have been fighting over them for years.


13 posted on 11/16/2005 10:50:13 PM PST by BooBoo1000 (Some times I wake up grumpy, other times I let her sleep/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

Yep, my accountant out in Montana just bought up mineral rights to a whole valley. It seems that a bunch of the people living there didn't like it because they thought he should have given them first crack at them. Too bad for them - money talks and BS walks.


14 posted on 11/16/2005 11:30:23 PM PST by glorgau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
Like many ranchers, he owns the surface land – the land you can see. But the gas and minerals underground are owned by another individual, or the government, which leases them to gas producers

"The vast majority of Wyoming’s private property was created at the turn of the century when Congress granted homestead rights to the surface land, but reserved for itself sub-surface mineral rights."

Landowners Association of Wyoming

I think that the citizens of Wyoming should work towards a law that gives landowners the mineral rights to the property that they own. What if the federal government held all the lumber rights for all property, both private and government? Then anybody could get a license from the government and come in a strip your land down with a minimum of compensation to the landowner.

What Wyoming has now is facism.

15 posted on 11/16/2005 11:53:11 PM PST by cowboyway (My heroes have always been cowboys.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

West Virginia also has this system. I don't think it's just. But at the same time, I don't know how to fix it.


16 posted on 11/17/2005 12:08:09 AM PST by montanus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: digger48
Not eminent domain. The land with the surface rights is commonly sold separately from the Mineral Rights. Most landowners whose holdings have been in the family since homesteading days either reserved the minerals (kept the mineral rights) leased them, or sold them outright to get through some tough times. If they sold the land (and surface rights), they often kept the mineral rights.

The depth where the dividing line falls depends on the deed, as does the minerals involved, and varies from area to area as well.

It isn't unusual for a surface owner to be bitter about not having the mineral rights, but it is rare they don't know about that.

Keep in mind, though, there is the anti "BIG" oil jihad going on in the media. They want those "windfall profits taxes" on "BIG" oil, even though that will do diddley squat to lower consumer costs, and may, in fact, increase them now, and hurt the long term picture even more.

When Coalbed Methane became a hot item in Wyoming (about 1996 or so) I figured they should build two pipelines, one for the gas, and one for the water which has to be pumped out of the coal seam to get the methane gas to come out of the coal, and sell both.

I'm not sure how many ranchers have wells deep enough to be tapping the water out of those coal beds, anyway, but my bet is that the numbers are few.

17 posted on 11/17/2005 12:13:13 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: cowboyway
I think that the citizens of Wyoming should work towards a law that gives landowners the mineral rights to the property that they own.

Hell, I think that just because I sell my car, doesn't mean I shouldn't have the right to go drive it now and then, or to keep the new owner from driving it. /sarc.

Why should Wyoming, or any other government give the rights to something to someone who either sold them or never owned them, while taking those same rights from someone who either bought or leased them?

18 posted on 11/17/2005 12:17:17 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
What a waste of paper to print this drivel. This is all settled law and has been for decades. Mineral rights are severable from the real property surface rights.

The only thing that I disagree with is the ability of the mineral rights holders to create some truly awesome havoc on the surface. They have to compensate you, but have you ever lived near an oil well? The stench can be horrific.

I know it's the smell of money, but it's somebody else's money. I just wish most drillers would operate in a "kinder and gentler" way.

19 posted on 11/17/2005 12:29:27 AM PST by Comstock1 (I came here to kick ass and chew bubble gum, and I'm all outta bubble gum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe
Hell, I think that just because I sell my car, doesn't mean I shouldn't have the right to go drive it now and then, or to keep the new owner from driving it. /sarc.

Well, hell, just because I bought a car doesn't mean that somebody can't get a lease from the government to drive it when they need it.

Why should Wyoming, or any other government give the rights to something to someone who either sold them or never owned them, while taking those same rights from someone who either bought or leased them?

I think that the better question is, why should the government own any private property?

fascism - an authoritarian form of government typified by attempts to impose state control over important aspects of life: political, social, cultural, and economic. The fascist state regulates and controls the means of production.

20 posted on 11/17/2005 12:59:59 AM PST by cowboyway (My heroes have always been cowboys.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson