I am working on my PhD in geography at the University of Kentucky and as part of my research, am studying changes in land ownership and issues with split estates as they relate to shale gas development in Doddridge county. I am especially interested in talking to any of the following: folks near the new Antero water recycling plant or who have sold land over there; anyone who has had issues with landmen, brokerage firms, or conflicts/questions about who has the rights to minerals; people who have sold surface rights to energy companies; people who work or have worked as landmen or abstractors; and anyone who has been involved in nuisance or other lawsuits. My study also includes Wetzel and Tyler counties.
I will be making and distributing a version of my study outcomes that can be used as a "guide" to oil and gas development issues and that summarizes my findings about how ownership is changing, the legal mechanisms involved, and some of the economic factors. I hope this can become a useful resource for folks in the future.
Please contact me if you'd like to participate by having an informal conversation/interview, which can be kept anonymous at your request. Thanks.
Lindsay Shade
617-863-7601
[email protected]
Lindsay, I sent you an email =)
Lindsay: I have had the bad experience of finding out that myself and 265 "cousins" are listed as owners of 24.5 acres of land and mineral rights in Doddridge County, WY. The land was inherited by the siblings of the owner and has passed down through two generations in my line. I see the names of the third and fourth generation on legal papers that Antero Resources has filed with the court against me. When I recently received notice that a hearing would be held on 8 Nov. at the Doddridge County court house (I am not able to attend) I noticed that in the last two months the other parties "holding out" from signing the lease had since signed leaving me the only party unsigned. Antero wants a judge to order me either to sell my holdings. If I continue to hold out the want the judge to order the county to seize my land (an unassigned .5 acre) and "sell it on the courthouse steps". ( I have to laugh at the civil War era wording of WY laws!) Interestingly Antero was paying people to sign the contracts a full year before they discovered I was a partial owner. Without going into the problem Antero has made for itself (i.e. payments being made before the total number of parties was known, vast variations of the amount paid to sign, etc.) I want to state what I pointed out to the one cousin/joint owner that seems to be willing to talk to me: Up near the top of the contract is a clause that without questions states that in case of personal injury/death happening while Antero is on my property the company CAN NOT BE HELD RESPONSIBLE. I call this an "Idiot Contract" because only an idiot would sign the lease. It appears that my co-owners either read the wording and failed to realize the meaning, or perhaps did not read any of the contract after seeing the word "Royalty" .
I seen the results played out here in Ohio many times, the person responsible for the injury/death is the owner of the property who signed a lease with the corporation. In other words the legal property owner could lose everything when the parties that suffered the injury or family of the dead party takes them to court seeking damages. The corporation placed their legal burden onto the party that leased the land/mineral rights to the corporation through the clause in the contract. The people are falling for it! Several of my co owners are claiming ( following the "suggestions" of the corporation) that I have denied them their "right" to receive royalties. They feel the contract is "safe" until I point out that several of the corporation's employees recently died while working on a compressor located on private property leased by the corporation. This has been mentioned on several "watch dog" websites, Several of my co owners finally realized the clause can not be taken lightly. Too late! Yet Antero wants a judge to force me to sell my holdings because I refuse to sign the contract. There are other problems buried in the lease, but I will not cover here. One of my cousins, who was one of the first to receive money for signing, recently told me that I was mistaken, the family only owned the mineral rights to the property, not the land. I pointed out that the contract states we do own the land and mineral rights to the property. This type of "confusion" plays into the hands of the corporation.
I am fully aware that I have placed my statement on this site were it can be read by anyone using this site. RCR