Meredith Shale & the PGC (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Pennsylvania Boards] >> Off Topic Discussions - Pennsylvania



Message

MuskyMastr -> Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/5/2008 12:25:51 PM)

I think the PGC should reduce the cost of our hunting licences and would like to see a movement statewide to do so.  It is estimated that our 1.4 million acres has an estimated 5 billion dollars ($5,000,000,000) worth of timber on it.  So there is 5 billion right there in potential revenue.

Then there is the current Meredith shale gas leasing currently going on.  Here in lawrence county where leases are much lower than other areas of the state (around $750 per acre here, up to $3000 per acre other places) and producing well heads paying upwards of $43,000 (Washington co. the #1 well in the state currently) a month to the land owner.

So here is the math
5 billion in timber harvested over the next 50 years + 100 mil a year
Then lets average and say that they can get 1000 an acre for meridith drilling on the game lands

1.4 million acres x 1000 per acre = 14,000,000,000

these figures do not include wellhead revenues, someone is being duped, who is it?

So explain to me why they need a license increase?



pxatim -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/5/2008 12:50:11 PM)

You want to log all the timber in the entire state???



jon_e_si -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/5/2008 1:18:26 PM)

Timber is a renewable natural resource - properly managed you realize the "multiple-use" - "sustained yield" concept of forest management! Too much "Public" land is under utilized andd in some cases (particularly National Forests) the mortality exceeds the growth!!BIG WASTE!!



MuskyMastr -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/5/2008 1:31:26 PM)

No I said that Harvested over a period of 50 years.  And that timber estimate is for quality timber not all timber.   I also don't think that we need to log all of it.  You realize that 1% of that is 50 million?  And if that 5 billion is a gross over estimate,   so what  the point is that with the new gas deals and timber value, the PGC should have plenty of money and actually enough to reduce license prices.



RIZ -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/5/2008 3:05:31 PM)

i believe the PGC is harvesting 0.7 to 1% of the timebr per year.  they are on a 100 year schedule.  as for shale gas.  not every acre has gas and they only need a couple of acres to get all the gas out in a larger, several 1000 acres, area.  but getting the shale gas is not a very cost efficient and environmentally clean process at this time. 

so what is your source for the 5 billion in timber on PGC land?



MuskyMastr -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/5/2008 3:21:56 PM)

Catch up,  land in the state is being leased at record rates for merdith shale drilling.  The process is now efficient enough that there are over 400 wells producing from this layer currently and many are producing huge numbers.  When they lease a property it is per acre by parcel.   The sportsmans club I belong to just leased our 125 acres for 750 an acre and we are in a poor area for this shale layer.

So lets say that only half of the acreage has gas.  Thats 700,000 acres at 1,000 per acre.  you do the math.  How are they having financial trouble?  If they can prove financial problems fine, but it seems to me they ought to be able to have a little cash flow.



RIZ -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/5/2008 3:32:22 PM)

that would be great if that is the case.  have you asked the commissioners?  also were did you get the timber numbers?



MuskyMastr -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/5/2008 3:59:35 PM)

The timber numbers came from a DCNR forester, so I did my own research.  A penn state study finds average timber values between 2000 to 3000 per acre, with figures of 7000 per acre not being uncommon.
So if we assume a safe number of 3000 per acre of timber and that roughly 1/3 of the game lands are not forested, 1/3 of 1.4 million acres is roughly 462, 000 acres so for ease of math lets say 1,000,000 forested acres @ $3000 per    that comes out to  3 bil   at the harvest rate you suggest which is roughly 1%  that's 30 million a year.

Now lets say that I have grossly screwed up in my math and that there are only 500,000 forested acres and the average price is only $1500 of timber per acre  that gives us $750,000,000  x 1%  =  that would be 7.5 mil.





Grendel -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/5/2008 4:13:25 PM)

I am beginning to believe that sportspeople are the most frugal beings on the planet.  Charge us up the wazoo for:

1. Tobacco
2. Movie Theater tickets
3. Dinners that could not fill the stomach of a roach
4. ___________________________ (insert whatever here)
5. Alcohol (which is the most outrageously priced "desirable good" around)  All the money that Anheiser Busch makes off those commercials, I should be able to get a case of Bud for $5.00. 

But dang blast it, do not charge us more for the best deal around.  Oh one more thing, make sure that I get a Deer or my limit of Trout everytime or else I will really complain about things!   LMAO

Doc



MuskyMastr -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/5/2008 8:33:43 PM)

Doc, I would pay whatever they asked for a hunting and fishing license.  I just am wondering how they are having financial troubles, with the types of income these gamelands are now producing.



Grendel -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/5/2008 8:37:01 PM)

I would too Musky!  Several years ago I would have been asking the same questions, but now have come to the realization that, just like everything else, rising prices, reduced participants, and the need to try to maintain a steady state, have put a hurt on all independent agencies.

Doc



pheasant tail 2 -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/5/2008 9:53:49 PM)

Musky,

I think you are referring to the Marcellus Shale Formation. And yes, is true, acreage in Washington County is being leased for as much as $3,000 per acre by certain companies. Royality payments are currently ranging between 14.5 and 17.5 percent.

Take care

PT



RIZ -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/5/2008 10:38:26 PM)

musky 

the PGC made over $15 mil in 2007, latest available numbers, on timber sales.  it looks like they are using the resource.  and they get 2.2 mil from oil and gas leasing.  so what's your point?



MuskyMastr -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/6/2008 1:43:57 AM)

My point is that the revenue from the marcellus shale will dwarf the monies collected on timber, so where is the need for an increase?



RIZ -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/6/2008 9:38:56 PM)

soyou think the PGC is purposely trying not to make money?



Grendel -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/6/2008 10:43:37 PM)

I think once one knows what the operating, infrastructure, and other budgets are, there is nothing but mere speculation regarding the weath, or lack thereof, of the PGC, or any other state agency.

Once again, Anheuser-Busch is making a killing in beer sales.  So when is the cost of their beer going to go down?

Doc



pheasant tail 2 -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/6/2008 11:06:37 PM)

Just as a point of reference. The Bradford County Board of Commissioners recently leased 900+ acres for 2.4 million. This payment was only for the lease. The royalty payment is scheduled to be 16.5 percent.

Considering the amount of SGL's acreage under the PGC, 900 acres is a mere spec on the map  Perhaps the PGC is already bound by existing lease agreements?   

Take care

PT 




jon_e_si -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/7/2008 8:02:08 AM)

Did you mean "Marcellus"??

Marcellus Shale Gas: New Research Results Surprise Geologists!
Range Resources - Appalachia



eyesandgillz -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/8/2008 12:45:50 PM)

And do you want the gamelands littered with well sites, graded and stoned roads, brine pits, etc?  I agree, it is wise to use the resource but make sure you do it responsibly and not go overboard.  Timbering, if done correctly, serves a great purpose in the ecosystem by creating new browse and on the old roads, grasses etc.  Wells, on the other hand, pretty much only produce edge habitat and I would think the brine pits would offset any environmental gains you get from the increased edge habitat.  PA Hunting licenses are by far, they best deal in the US when compared to other states and their opportunities provided.  I would welcome an increase and a law tieing future increases to inflation so we don't have to go through this debacle every decade.   Additionally, increase to the doe tags at least 3 fold.  They will still sell most of them.  Just my humble opinion.



jon_e_si -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/8/2008 1:08:22 PM)

Turkey, deer, etc. love well sites!



MuskyMastr -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/9/2008 12:33:55 AM)

Actually the leases are already in place.....It is not a matter of wanting them littered with sites.  PGC is VERY actively leasing all gamelands for drilling.



RIZ -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/9/2008 10:21:29 AM)

so musky is the PGC doing what they can to generate revenue?



MuskyMastr -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/9/2008 1:21:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jon_e_si

Did you mean "Marcellus"??

Marcellus Shale Gas: New Research Results Surprise Geologists!
Range Resources - Appalachia


Sorry Jon_e_si

I was looking as some geological information as I was typing and mixed up the two different layers.  Thanks for the correction.

RIZ,
While some of the lease agreements include land swap, most generate revenue.  So yes they are trying to generate revenue.  My point is that these gas leases should put them into the black for years to come, so why the increase?



Grendel -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/9/2008 1:45:57 PM)

Musky,

Not sure why you do not understand.  I believe you to be an astute person and quite helpful on the boards.  think of the PGC as any other entity.  Oil companies, beer makers, ship builders, etc... all make some sort of profit, or try to enhance what it is they already have.  In the process, costs to consumers go up.  It is really that simple.  I think you try to make more of it than there really is.

Doc



pheasant tail 2 -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/9/2008 11:25:58 PM)

The difference in the payment between acreage that has been leased recently and leases that were obtained say five (5) years ago is vastly different. Five years ago lease payments were going for roughly $20.00 per acre with a 12.5 percent royality, give or take a percentage point or two,as opposed to 2008 were $3,000 per acre is being paid to lease the gas rights and royality payments of 17.5 percent are not uncommon. 

If the PGC is bound by existing Marcellus Shale leases hopefully wells will not be drilled within the five year lease agreement (average lease term). Should that occur, new leases would need to be obtained, hopefully reflecting the going rate per acre for Marcellus Shale gas rights.

It seems as if only a few people have offered their opinion regardling gas wells on SGLs. How does everyone else feel? I'm curious. I'm not terribly excited about the construction associated with gas well development. In my own recent expereince with a similar activity I felt the SGC handled the situation poorly. Until recently I owned a home and acreage adjacent to SGLs. In preperation for longwall mining activities, old gas wells had to be capped in the valley.  Like with the development of new gas wells, large roads were built to get the rigs in place, pads for the rigs were cleared, etc. While property owners have little say in the matter, we were compensated $1,000 per well site, no payment was made received for the cleared timber, other than it was piled up do with it as I wished. The 24/7 noise is another matter. The only thing I asked was that the work be started after deer season and be completed prior to turkey season. The company agreed to these terms. All was good or so I thought. After plugging the wells on my property, work on well sites on the adjacent SGLs began the Monday prior to turkey season. While is true the company did not work on weekends, hunters like myself were affected by the activity. I felt and still feel the SGC could ask like I did,that work be completed around hunting seasons. Perhaps I'm selfish?

Take care

PT




jackq -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/10/2008 5:56:44 AM)

I hope I not going off on a tangent here, but after reading some of the comments here and on other sites on this forum pertaining to the negative impact on the environment, I was curious as to how many still think it's a good idea to ...DRILL..DRILL..DRILL ???



jon_e_si -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/10/2008 11:17:41 AM)

You have a choice - drill and develop more of our reserves or pay $5.00+ per gallon of fuel. Again, we need coal, oil, gas, wind, solar, nuclear, tides, hydroelectric, etc. - a balanced and far-reaching, comprehensive energy program that has been ignored and neglected for years by our elected representatives (both sides), since the "oil embargo" of the early seventies, in favor of selected "special interests"!



MuskyMastr -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/10/2008 11:33:26 AM)

I am not in favor of seeing all that habitat fragmented, BUT if it is going to be, which it appears it is because they are signing leases.  Then I would like to see exit plans for the associated roadways, so that eventually there will not be just a huge network of roads through our gamelands.

Doc,
My point was only that with the types of revenue being generated by these sources, why the increase.  The operations producing the monies are not costing them anything.  It is simply a windfall for the PGC.  My friend is a resident of Alaska.  Every year the state sends every citizen of the state an oil revenue check (because the oil belongs to all of them) last year it was $1900.  So if PGC begins to reap the benefits of all the land and resources above and below it, then why not pass a break along to those who have paid for all those resources.



bingsbaits -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/10/2008 11:57:30 AM)

 
If the PGC was capable of running and maintaining the Game Lands to its fullest potential..
We would all be the benefactors..
I think that there is to much politics involved for it to be run properly..

Kinda like the pheasant stocking...Cost per bird for the PGC to raise last I remember was about $20 a bird..They could buy them from private pheasant farms for under $9 a bird..Why such a difference?? 



Grendel -> RE: Meredith Shale & the PGC (9/10/2008 2:15:55 PM)

musky,

I guess the monies generated from that program may be earmarked for something completely different from what license monies are used for.  It is a common practice among agencies to divert monies to "special" categories.  An increase in license sales would be used those expenditures that have traditionally been coverd by their sales, whereas the other would be used for difering programs/projects.

Doc



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>



   

0.031