FishUSA.com Forums
Forums Home Search Photo Gallery Calendar Policies Logout Old Boards FishUSA.com Tackle Shop My Profile My Forums My Subscriptions My Address Book My Inbox Member List RSS News Feed

Log In      

Oil Spill into Chappel Fork

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Pennsylvania Boards] >> Northwest PA >> Oil Spill into Chappel Fork Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/21/2008 9:04:07 PM   
Fishtamer

 

Posts: 113
Joined: 1/21/2007
Status: offline 		What do you guys think about the 2 morons who were mad at their former employer, an oil company, so they opened the valves on some tanks & drained approx. 45,000 gallons of crude onto the ground? It went into North Fork, Indian Run & Chappel Fork, as well as some making it to the Allegheny Reservoir. It was a dad & his son. They are in jail with $500,000.00 & $550,000.00 bail for creating a catastrophe,etc. I think it's time for them to sleep with the fishes that they killed. What do you think?
Post #: 1
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/21/2008 9:17:19 PM   
pghmarty


Posts: 4406
Joined: 12/5/2004
From: Bradford Pa then Pittsburgh
Status: offline 		Andrew Horton of 18 Clark Dr and his 22 Year old son Christopher Horton of 112 Hemlock St Bradford

That area was about as clean as you will find in PA.
When I boat on Kinzua there is no scrubbing the scum line off-take it out in PGH and there is always a scum line

(in reply to Fishtamer)
Post #: 2
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/23/2008 1:28:07 AM   
fish7

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 8/6/2008
Status: offline 		at least they are safe in jail.,,alot of people would love to chat with them 

(in reply to Fishtamer)
Post #: 3
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/23/2008 1:54:48 AM   
pghmarty


Posts: 4406
Joined: 12/5/2004
From: Bradford Pa then Pittsburgh
Status: offline 		I doubt they are safe there-DANCE CARD MIGHT BE FULL!

I would think they have PO'd people there also.

(in reply to fish7)
Post #: 4
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/23/2008 9:10:09 AM   
eye-c-man

 

Posts: 789
Joined: 2/13/2001
Status: offline 		What a senseless act. Why don't people think before they do ?

< Message edited by eye-c-man -- 8/23/2008 9:20:32 AM >

(in reply to pghmarty)
Post #: 5
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/23/2008 6:02:41 PM   
strandman220

 

Posts: 28
Joined: 7/20/2008
Status: offline 		HANG EM HI

(in reply to eye-c-man)
Post #: 6
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/25/2008 12:37:57 AM   
MuskyMastr


Posts: 1907
Joined: 6/30/2005
From: 20' up a 100 year old white oak
Status: offline 		I was up there last weekend and this past wed, thurs and Fri, Serious cleanup and assessment operation going on.  It is a shame....that is a beautiful section of stream and area.

My money says the allegheny defense fund paid them to do it cause they couldn't pin enough on the oil & gas operators.

_____________________________

I love the smell of a warm gut pile in the morning.

(in reply to strandman220)
Post #: 7
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/25/2008 10:33:42 AM   
Kinzuakitty

 

Posts: 15
Joined: 7/22/2007
Status: offline 		MuskyMastr

I live in the Allegheny National Forest and the oil and gas operators ARE out of control.  Our air wreaks of oil, our road (township road)  is a disaster and the water supply is in jeoporday.  Average, taxpaying citizens who own the surface have rights too!!  What these two guys did was inexcusable and they should receive severe consequences. To say they were paid by the Alleghney Defense Project is absolutely outrageous. I know people in that group and they are well informed and dedicated to protecting the forest...not destroying it. The National Enviromental Protection Act (NEPA)should be in place in the ANF for the drilling like it is for any other project or action in the ANF and like it is in other national forests. It would not stop such incidents but it would help minimize the damage to the ecosystem. Some amount of scutiny and environmental protections should be in place.

(in reply to MuskyMastr)
Post #: 8
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/25/2008 11:57:58 AM   
MuskyMastr


Posts: 1907
Joined: 6/30/2005
From: 20' up a 100 year old white oak
Status: offline 		Bottom line is that when the feds bought it if they were seriously interested in preserving the forest then they should have went after the mineral rights as well.  Until then someone else owns it.

Is drilling out of control there?  It has changed some of my favorite hunting and fishing areas in the world, forever.  I am as upset by it as anyone.  However you have a choice where you live, just as I have a choice where I hunt and fish.  If the "oil smell" more likely natural gas, unless you are very near the current spill site becomes to annoying, you just as I have a choice. 

I hate to sound anti environment, I really am not, and this spill is obviously a tradgedy, the extent of which is only now being uncovered, but, they have to drill somewhere.  I am an environmental biologist, but I heat my house, I drive a vehicle, I buy plastic products etc.  We are all consumers to some extent, so we can not continue to use these products and then scream "not in my backyard".

I have looked at close to 300 wells in the ANF and on surrounding privately owned properties in McKean county, it is not the wells that are the problem.  The roads are what are causing the damage.  The runoff & associated sedimentation from the access roads is the problem and the oil & gas industry does not have exit plans to remove them.

As far as my comments about payment, I will say this, every group has its extremists, and I have had the displeasure of meeting a few from the ADP that fall in that category.

_____________________________

I love the smell of a warm gut pile in the morning.

(in reply to Kinzuakitty)
Post #: 9
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/25/2008 1:02:27 PM   
Kinzuakitty

 

Posts: 15
Joined: 7/22/2007
Status: offline 		Just because you own the property does not mean you can do anything you want. There are laws, ordianances, regulations in place that provide oversight as to how your actions may impact on the community and environment as a whole. Try putting up a building on your property without getting a building permit or following the zoning laws.  Try removing a Mountain Laurel bush from the ANF which is on the surface and owned by all of us. I agree they must be afforded REASONABLE access but just because they own the mineral rights does not mean they should be able to do anything they want.  Tell the people on Gibbs Hill that it was the roads that ruined their water.  I do agree the roads are a big problem but the Forest Service let the oil/gas companies take for FREE the stone/gravel (not considered minerals)to build their thousands of miles of roads.  The Forest Service now has  decided maybe they shouldn't have done that .....500 gravel pits later. Please don't try to compare where I choose to live with where one chooses to hunt and fish.  There would be very few people left in McKean and Warren counties if they chose to live where they would own their mineral rights. I do think citizens who pay taxes on their land should have a reasonable expectation to not have their air and water contaminated and their property values thrown in the toilet.

(in reply to MuskyMastr)
Post #: 10
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/25/2008 1:56:30 PM   
flyfishermanPA


Posts: 595
Joined: 8/5/2008
From: Butler Pennsylvania
Status: offline 		Such a senseless act

(in reply to Kinzuakitty)
Post #: 11
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/25/2008 2:02:28 PM   
MuskyMastr


Posts: 1907
Joined: 6/30/2005
From: 20' up a 100 year old white oak
Status: offline 		IF the Gibbs hill water issue was caused by oil & gas operators, those owners should prove it and recieve thier proper compensation. Drinking water supply contamination, loss etc. are rare problems for the oil & gas industry.  
As far as the laws, ordinaces and regs in place for a community, the same types of regulations exist for the oil & gas industry and that division of the DEP enforces them everyday.  If there are gross oversights of these laws by the operators in the ANF then they should be reported.  It is my experience that in today's world of oil & gas, environmental damage due to the process is the exception rather than the norm that it was 50 years ago.  Over 90 percent of the sites (oil & gas locations) I investigated last year showed more damage from historical and current logging activities than oil & gas development.

As far as owning the mineral rights and not being able to do whatever they want, the reverse is true as well.  Just because surface owners like the property the way it is, does not mean that they get to keep it exactly the way they want.  They bought the property without the rights to control what is under it.  State and federal regulations govern how what is under it can be accessed.  If those regs are unsatisfactory write letters, get it changed.
People who pay taxes do have a right to have a reasonable expectation to have thier air & water clean. 
There are regulations in place to assure this.  If the regulations are being broken, report the violations, the DEP loves a slam dunk.

As far as where you live, I would live there too if I and my spouse's jobs permitted.  As they do not I am relagated to 60 to 90 days a year in a second home and although it is a second residence.  I can guarantee you that I take better care of that area than most of the people in that area (Marshburg).

How many violations have oil & gas operators been cited for in the ANF since thier work there commenced?

_____________________________

I love the smell of a warm gut pile in the morning.

(in reply to Kinzuakitty)
Post #: 12
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/25/2008 2:52:34 PM   
SomethingFishy

 

Posts: 8
Joined: 8/25/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MuskyMastr

I was up there last weekend and this past wed, thurs and Fri, Serious cleanup and assessment operation going on.  It is a shame....that is a beautiful section of stream and area.

My money says the allegheny defense fund paid them to do it cause they couldn't pin enough on the oil & gas operators.


First, as proven by the wrong name for them you used, the Allegheny Defense Project, nor ANY of their members would advocate "paying to cause an environmental disaster". You OBVIOUSLY do NOT know that group. They are a thousand percent law abiding citizens, and do not in any way shape or form advocate "environmental terrorism". 

I seriously doubt you have ever talked to any of them.

They are simply, selflessly trying to protect the publics land, water and streams, so YOU can fish on them.

The guys who did this did this totally on their own behalf. It was nothing more that Snyder Brothers employiees pissed at their ex-employier and trying to "get even".

It, like ALL the sabotoge going on in the ANF was done by "oil workers" against "oil producers".

I seriously doubt anybody from the ADP would talk to you very long, so I doubt you can begin to understand their very reasonable, and passave stance on environmental issues.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to MuskyMastr)
Post #: 13
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/25/2008 3:00:47 PM   
pghmarty


Posts: 4406
Joined: 12/5/2004
From: Bradford Pa then Pittsburgh
Status: offline
quote:

Allegheny Defense Project


http://www.alleghenydefense.org/

   Storage Tank Oil Spill Underscores Need For More Public Oversight Of Proposed Oil And Gas Developments In Allegheny National Forest The recent oil spill from seven storage tank batteries owned by Snyder Brothers, Inc. that devastated North Chappel Fork and Indian Run in the Allegheny National Forest underscores the need for more public oversight of oil and gas development proposals according to a coalition of environmental and recreation groups. While the cause of the spill has been attributed to two former employees of Snyder Brothers, the groups, which include the Allegheny Defense Project, Tionesta Valley Snowmobile Club, Allegheny Outdoor Adventures and Friends of Rimrock, claim both the Forest Service and Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection bear responsibility for the spill as well. “These storage tank batteries never should have been located so close to these streams or their tributaries,” said Ryan Talbott, forest watch coordinator for the Allegheny Defense Project. “Obviously, the individuals who recklessly opened the valves on these storage tanks were responsible for the final step of this disaster, but if the Forest Service and DEP exercised greater concern for our streams before an environmental disaster, maybe they would have realized that permitting so many storage tanks full of oil near a wild trout stream was not in the best interest of protecting this unique habitat.” ADP says the Forest Service must now comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and allow the public to review and comment on proposed oil and gas development projects before the agency approves any more drilling activities in the Allegheny National Forest. “We cannot rely on the Forest Service alone to review oil and gas development plans,” said John Stoneman from Allegheny Outdoor Adventures. “All too often, the Forest Service gives the green light for oil and gas companies to drill wells and locate storage tanks in sensitive wetlands and high-quality watersheds. If the Forest Service followed the law like other national forests in allowing public review and comment on private mineral developments, an alternative location for these tank batteries could have been suggested that would have prevented this tragedy.” According to ADP, the only recourse for the public if it wants to review oil and gas drilling proposals on the Allegheny is to file a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the Forest Service. By the time the Forest Service responds, however, the road construction and drilling has already started. According to Bill Belitskus, ADP’s board chair, the documents should be made available to the public before any road construction or drilling takes place. “The Forest Service only does a cursory, internal review of the environmental impacts from proposed oil and gas drilling projects,” Belitskus said. “In some instances, impacts to threatened and endangered species were not considered until after the Forest Service had already approved the drilling. It is this kind of after-the-fact analysis that can lead to results we are now seeing with this oil spill.” ADP recently filed a FOIA request for documents pertaining to the Forest Service’s internal process for approving oil and gas drilling projects. ADP has made many of the Forest Service documents available on its website. One oil and gas case file offers a pointed exchange between Darryl Pierce of Papco, Inc., the company that wants to drill at the Rimrock Overlook, and Bradford District Ranger Anthony Scardina over whether Papco needs approval from the Forest Service to drill on the Allegheny. Mr. Scardina wrote to Mr. Pierce: “I must caution you that you may not proceed with any timber harvest, ground disturbing actions, or commercial activities on National Forest System lands without written approval from me. This approval will be in the form of a Notice to Proceed letter, with an attached Operating Plan, providing the conditions that constitute reasonable access across National Forest System surface ownership to your privately held sub-surface ownership.” ADP says this confirms that the Forest Service says one thing internally and another publicly regarding its role in regulating oil and gas development. “On the one hand, the Forest Service tells the public that it can do very little to regulate oil and gas drilling in the Allegheny because it does not own the mineral rights,” said Karen Atwood of the Tionesta Valley Snowmobile Club. “On the other hand, when it chooses to, the Forest Service can exert firm control over oil and gas drilling projects and the documents ADP received prove that. Now it is long overdue for the public to be included in the process.” The bottom line, says the coalition, is the agencies in charge of regulating oil and gas drilling are not doing their job and must follow federal environmental law during the permitting process and involve the public with formal notice of proposed development plans and required public comment. “This is Pennsylvania’s only national forest,” said Reg Darling from Friends of Rimrock. “The public, however, is completely ignored when it comes to the impacts to surface and water resources from oil and gas drilling. If we are to learn anything from this tragic oil spill, it is that the Forest Service must comply with federal environmental regulations for conducting an environmental analysis with public comment. I’m sure the public can come up with better locations for oil storage tanks.” ##


< Message edited by pghmarty -- 9/2/2008 12:33:40 PM >

(in reply to SomethingFishy)
Post #: 14
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/25/2008 3:36:45 PM   
MuskyMastr


Posts: 1907
Joined: 6/30/2005
From: 20' up a 100 year old white oak
Status: offline 		First off welcome to the forum SomethingFishy


quote:

ORIGINAL: SomethingFishy

I seriously doubt you have ever talked to any of them........

I seriously doubt anybody from the ADP would talk to you very long, so I doubt you can begin to understand their very reasonable, and passave stance on environmental issues.




Actually I have had phone conversations with many good people in the organization, when they need advice from qualified environmental consultants.  And they actually talked to me for over a half an hour each time.  Bottom line is when they want to know the in's and out's of the oil and gas code the do talk extensivley with me and many other professionals like me.

I have also had conversations in a professional setting with persons who "claimed" to be affiliated with the Allegheny Defense Project (excuse me for using the misnomer orininally), who suggested; and one who actually belived that an event exactly like this "would be exactly what the doctor ordered to get the dills and dozers to stop"

I do not particularly like the damage that has been done due to drilling in this area, I think it is a shame.  I also do not work for the oil & gas industry.  I am a private consultant, with an excellent working relationship with all regulatory agencies in the state.

In response to the article posted by PghMarty, the ADP is once again barking up the wrong tree, the PA DEP is the agency that authorizes well permits and also grants wetland encroachment or stream distance waiver requirments.  They are granted the authority to manage the latter two through the US Army Corp of Engineers.  These permits include written confirmation of PNDI results regarding Threatened, engangered and sensitive species located in the area of the proposed site.  If conflicts are found, the permitee must then follow specific instructions from the regulatory agency in charge of those species, which can include US Fish and wildlife service, pa game comm, pa fish & boat, pa DCNR (plant).  If suitable measures are not proposed to protect the resource the permit is not granted.  Most of the forest service personel are included in the process to keep them abreast of the process and to allow for input regarding location.

Can anyone tell me how far from the stream these tanks were located?  If the limit of disturbance from installation (how much they cleared to build the site) is more than 100 feet from the stream then they are perfectly legal installations.  100 feet is not very far.
Don't blame the agency, get the regulations changed.  This would be a much more wise use of ADP resources.

If the ADP feels that wetlands are being encroached on without permit then they should report these violations, immediately.

Stricter regulations do exist in HQ and EV watersheds, of which there are many in McKean County.

Here is a link to the oil & gas operators manual.  They should study up before blaming the wrong agencies, or blaming agecies for following state mandated restrictions.

http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/subject/ADVCOUN/oil_gas/2001/01IntroChap1.pdf

Bottom line is that the forest service is not where the buck stops here.

< Message edited by MuskyMastr -- 8/25/2008 3:37:26 PM >

_____________________________

I love the smell of a warm gut pile in the morning.

(in reply to SomethingFishy)
Post #: 15
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/26/2008 1:32:32 PM   
SomethingFishy

 

Posts: 8
Joined: 8/25/2008
Status: offline 		Well, Musky, nobody I know of in the ADP would ever suggest that this disaster is "just what we need".

And the information that PghMarty posted was a press release that included FOR THE PRESS, all the names and contact information they needed to write an article, not necessarily to be released to the public.  Is PghMarty a member of the press and do they understand this?  I'm sure those who are on the list don't appreciate this information being posted on a message board.

As far as "who has control over what", HAD the ANF applied NEPA to the location of well sites and tank farms, a lot of us would have objected to the location of a tank battery that could immediately drain into a high quality trout stream!  

I'm not sure how the ADP can go about getting regulations changed?


< Message edited by SomethingFishy -- 8/26/2008 1:34:31 PM >

(in reply to MuskyMastr)
Post #: 16
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/26/2008 5:53:12 PM   
LDD

 

Posts: 1012
Joined: 5/20/2004
Status: online 		Musky, it seems like you are well informed and level headed about the oil and gas exploration in the ANF. Let me ask you two questions.

Is it true that the state law mandates that all holding facilities have a dyke around them that is sufficient to hold all of the oil intended to be in the tanks? (There are dykes contructed around all holding tank facilities that I see...I too live here in the ANF)

Also, do you honestly believe that drillers abide by environmental regs. when they know they are not being watched or when they know that no one will be "stopping by"?

To answer your question about citations for drillers it does happen.  Last year a company was actually banned from drilling in the ANF because of their practices.  Their name escapes me but they are owned by a husband and wife from NY.




(in reply to SomethingFishy)
Post #: 17
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/26/2008 7:53:25 PM   
pghmarty


Posts: 4406
Joined: 12/5/2004
From: Bradford Pa then Pittsburgh
Status: offline
quote:

And the information that PghMarty posted was a press release that included FOR THE PRESS, all the names and contact information they needed to write an article, not necessarily to be released to the public. Is PghMarty a member of the press and do they understand this?


This information  was uncovered by by clicking on an article in the ADF home page.
All names an info were copy and pasted.
I they do not want this made public- THEY SHOULD NOT POST IT ON A PUBLIC SITE

If this qualifies me as a member of the press I want paid for most of my replies.
PM me and I will tell you where to send cash.


(in reply to SomethingFishy)
Post #: 18
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/27/2008 12:30:13 AM   
MuskyMastr


Posts: 1907
Joined: 6/30/2005
From: 20' up a 100 year old white oak
Status: offline 		LDD,
I try to be level headed.  They have destroyed some prime areas, but as I said before we are all consumers in one form or another.  To answer your question, it is not true that the dyke or containment system must be able to contain all of the oil in all of the tanks.  Some tanks require no containment system if they are under certain capacities.  But when required it must be able to contain all of the oil in the largest tank, so if it is a single tank installation then yes but as is often the case now we see multiple tanks in one area.  Below is the print copied from Chapter 4 Page 88 of the PA oil & gas operators manual.

To answer your second question, no I do not belive that they follow the environmental regs.  Most of what I do is delineate resources prior to site installation, however this is not required and many companies don't do it.  I would venture to say that 80% of the sites that are not investigated by professional delineators end up encroaching on wetlands in one form or another.  Some intentionally, but mostly unintentionally.  According to the regulations a one year old tractor rut with the proper vegetation can be a wetland.  Similarly you know what the terrain of the anf looks like, almost all of those dips and low spots that are 10' x10' are wetlands (many of them highly non productive at that).   So while wetlands are an invaluable resource, many of the ones being encroached on are man induced, through historic logging and other activites and not extremely productive parts of the ecosystem.   
B. Oil Storage Tanks and Containment (Dikes)
[font="ngldcc+centurygothic,century gothic"]
1. In order to prevent release of a significant quantity of oil from reaching the waters of the Commonwealth, and to protect life, health and property, storage tanks of 660 gallons each or a combined capacity of 1,320 gallons which containing crude oil must have a spill containment system. (Refer to 25 Pa. Code § 78.64 in Appendix 1).
Containment areas must be constructed to:
a. Have a capacity sufficient to hold the volume of the largest single tank, plus a reasonable allowance for precipitation based on local weather conditions and facility operation.
b. Be sufficiently impervious to contain spilled materials or wastes until it can be removed or treated.
c. Be compatible with the material or waste stored.
d. Provide for drainage of precipitation on an as-needed basis. Drainage lines must be kept closed at all times unless actual drainage is in progress. Drainage must be conducted under responsible supervision and must not cause a harmful discharge or sheen.
The Operator’s Preparedness, Prevention and Contingency (PPC) plan should identify the procedures, necessary equipment and personnel, including their location and response time, required to remove or treat spilled materials in an efficient and expedient manner to prevent pollution.

_____________________________

I love the smell of a warm gut pile in the morning.

(in reply to pghmarty)
Post #: 19
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/27/2008 7:50:45 AM   
LDD

 

Posts: 1012
Joined: 5/20/2004
Status: online 		Musky, thanks for clearing up the dike specs.  I looked on that link but wasn't able to find it initially. 

I think the problem most people have is that they know the drillers and they know that most of the time the drillers are unconcerned with their impact on the environment.  I don't necessarily mean the guys working in the woods either drilling the wells/tending them etc...  I mean the guys driving around in the new SUV's who are concerned only about the bottom line.

On another note, as I drove to work today there was an oil spill in Ludlow.  It must have been a truck wreck.  It seems as though the spill was contained before it reached Two Mile though. 

(in reply to MuskyMastr)
Post #: 20
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/27/2008 11:43:02 AM   
MuskyMastr


Posts: 1907
Joined: 6/30/2005
From: 20' up a 100 year old white oak
Status: offline 		I hope that spill was taken care of in time.

Something fishy, the problem with nepa is that the forest service DOES NOT own the mineral rights to that area.  If they did then nepa would certainly be required, however because the subsurface rights are privately held, no nepa.

Here is the other problem.  Where was oil first discovered in the US?  New York actually, they were using surface flows to light a town 20 years before drakes well hit.  That withstanding PA is where drilling began, because of that, our oil & gas laws are the oldest (and sometimes most antiquated) in the nation.

Wait until the meridith shale monster rears it's ugly head, which it is in some places now already.  Does that mean they will re drill all of these areas again?

_____________________________

I love the smell of a warm gut pile in the morning.

(in reply to LDD)
Post #: 21
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/27/2008 12:11:30 PM   
pghmarty


Posts: 4406
Joined: 12/5/2004
From: Bradford Pa then Pittsburgh
Status: offline 		McDonald's on Main St in Bradford has a working oil well less than 10 feet from the building

(in reply to MuskyMastr)
Post #: 22
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/27/2008 12:36:35 PM   
LDD

 

Posts: 1012
Joined: 5/20/2004
Status: online 		Update on that spill in Ludlow...the sign said "Oil Spill Area" but it was actually diesel.  Looks like it was taken care of.

(in reply to MuskyMastr)
Post #: 23
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/27/2008 1:22:58 PM   
SomethingFishy

 

Posts: 8
Joined: 8/25/2008
Status: offline 		..... BUT the Forest service or more correctly WE own the surface!

Those in the oil business always try to make a point that IF we try to restrict their access to oil in any way shape or form,  that WE are taking something from them.  Access to their precious minerals.

What about OUR surface land that WE own? Should we willingly let them take surface from us?  What about the last 30 years or so of them taking our rocks, sand and gravel (or stone) FREE from some 500 "pits" around the ANF to build THEIR roads?   How do we get compensated fairly for that?

AND if you read the old newspapers from the mid 20's you will find that some very large tracks of mineral rights sold for very small amounts of money.   I found reports (legal notices in the papers) where some 2,000, 3,000 and even a 6,000 acre track of mineral rights sold for only one dollar!

So somebody who owns mineral rights that somebody in the past only paid 1/600th of a penny per acre for really don't bother me if we make them preform the minimum amount of "extra" work to protect the waterways or streams.

NEPA must apply because it's a surface activity on Federal property that affects a National Forest for Pete's sake!

It MAY have not applied in the past in THIS national forest, but that might be about to change ... and yes, thanks in part to the Snyder Brothers "sloppy" work in the past, and now the actions of two of their employees, the Horton team.


< Message edited by SomethingFishy -- 8/27/2008 1:24:49 PM >

(in reply to LDD)
Post #: 24
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/28/2008 12:03:54 AM   
MuskyMastr


Posts: 1907
Joined: 6/30/2005
From: 20' up a 100 year old white oak
Status: offline 		Hey don't get me wrong NEPA is extremely good for business for me.  If they all have to start doing EIS I will be a busy boy.  I just don't happen to believe that it will change anything, yes the public opinion process will be included, but a few calls from harrisburg will change that, thanks to our current leadership.

You are right, we do own the surface.....and pa code states that surface owners can not impede reasonable access to subsurface owners.
What should have been included was more complete exit strategies for the sites.

I have a question for you, since you seem educated on the subject,  what type of site fees are the Forest service recieving per well & access?   Because while the lease agreements are with the subsurface owners, the site fees would go to the USFS.

_____________________________

I love the smell of a warm gut pile in the morning.

(in reply to SomethingFishy)
Post #: 25
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/28/2008 4:49:29 AM   
jackq

 

Posts: 193
Joined: 3/31/2008
From: Altoona/Newville, PA.
Status: offline 		Question......What is considered "surface" ownership?? Would I own just what's on top of the ground?? I guess what I'm trying to ask is how far down would I own??  Seems to me that what you all are saying is if I built a house and years later oil was discovered beneath it the mineral owner could come in and literally drill through MY
living room to get to HIS oil. Am I correct in that assumption??

(in reply to MuskyMastr)
Post #: 26
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/28/2008 8:52:50 AM   
MuskyMastr


Posts: 1907
Joined: 6/30/2005
From: 20' up a 100 year old white oak
Status: offline 		You would own exactly that the surface and it's resources.  The state provides that surface owners must provide for "reasonable access" to mineral rights owners.  They could drill in your living room, but the site fee they would be required to pay you would be enormous, probably 2x the value of the home.  They must pay the surface owner for site disturbance on the surface.  typical site fees around here where well go in farm fields etc.  include the value of the crops to be lost + roughly $3000.

_____________________________

I love the smell of a warm gut pile in the morning.

(in reply to jackq)
Post #: 27
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/28/2008 10:46:32 AM   
Kinzuakitty

 

Posts: 15
Joined: 7/22/2007
Status: offline 		Interesting!  We were not advised of any site fee regarding our property. We were told they could have reasonable access and that our water must be tested and if a well was drilled within a thousand feet and our water was contaminated or affected it was to be assumed it was the oil companies fault and their responsibility to correct it. Of course this could go into litigation and the companies know a private citizen does not have the time or financial resources to litigate against them. When I consulted with an attorney about the lost value of our cherry he said they could make an offer regarding potential value but did not have to.  I will be on the phone finding out what the site fees are in the national forest. 12,000 wells in the ANF should have generated some conderable site fees and then of course there is all the free gravel and the no bid timber sales.   Musky.. if you have seen 300 wells and their are 12,000 in the ANF alone and last year I was told  by DEP there were 52,000 in McKean County and growing everyday then you should be much busier.

(in reply to MuskyMastr)
Post #: 28
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/28/2008 5:42:48 PM   
MuskyMastr


Posts: 1907
Joined: 6/30/2005
From: 20' up a 100 year old white oak
Status: offline 		I do know that the game commission pretty much waives the upfront lease fees and sometimes the site fee per well in lieu of higher percentages of the gross percentage at the well head.  I would be upset if the forest service was not getting at least the timber value and should be getting more than that.
That however is because those are properties where the pgc owns the mineral rights so they can negociate.  I am not sure how that is handled by the usfs.



_____________________________

I love the smell of a warm gut pile in the morning.

(in reply to Kinzuakitty)
Post #: 29
RE: Oil Spill into Chappel Fork - 8/29/2008 1:56:27 PM   
heberie

 

Posts: 6
Joined: 12/2/2006
Status: offline 		I hope they throw the book at the Horton's and put 'em both in jail for a long time. The ANF is a priceless treasure. The reason the Feds didn't buy the mineral rights is probably because they couldn't afford to at the time. It was wise foresight that they bought the surface area, which at the time had been logged to death and was nothing like a "forest". 100 years from now, when all the rest of America is covered in asphalt, the ANF will be the last green area standing for our grandkids to enjoy. Given time, the forest and streams will recover from man's destruction, as it has in the past.

(in reply to MuskyMastr)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Pennsylvania Boards] >> Northwest PA >> Oil Spill into Chappel Fork Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to: