The HuntingPA.com Outdoor Community banner

1 - 20 of 31 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,652 Posts
Feaser can spin it any way he wants but your Gamelands will be changed forever. The road building and widening will be the worst part. Constant activity and noise will be the norm. If you have a camp nearby and have to travel to get to it you will start to question what the benefit is anymore. Yes, the pipelines will function as long and narrow foodplots but they will also attract constant ATV activity. Hopefully, the gas money will allow the PGC to keep purchasing Gamelands and to keep performing habitat work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,889 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Yes i agree. And unfortunatly it will be forever changed. And im afraid it will never be the same. Its just another sighn of the times that i hate to see happen. And for at least the next few years at least it will be very hard to hunt i belive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
273 Posts
I wouldn't immediately jump to the idea that SGL 36 is going to become some sort of industrial hot zone and will be of no value to hunt. Lets review the facts.

SGL 36 is about 19,000 acres total. Of that, the PGC owns roughly 70% of the oil and gas rights. Currently this whole region is being developed all around the Game Lands, and SGL 36 is getting surrounded by activity. it makes good sense to take a measured approach to manage the impacts and take advantage.

The lease up for bid is for only about 3,177 acres. Which equals about 16% of the land area of the SGL.

For this lease, the operators will be limited to TWO (2) well pads only and locations pre-determined by the PGC. With an avarage well pad location being about 5 acres, that totals 10 acres+/- of surface disturbance. That's not even 0.1% of the land area affected. Yes there will be some temporary increase in activity during drilling and fracking, but that is also limited during hunting seasons by the lease terms. The locations will be near or adjacent to existing road infrastructure in order to minimize construction and habiatat disturbance, avoid wetlands and rocky areas, avoid critical habtats, and avoid conflicts with PGC surface habiatat management activities.

With the per acre bonus set at $2,000 per acre, the rental is expected to be a little over $6 million. It is a royalty bid, and the minimum acceptable royalty was set at 20%. The PGC policy is that much of the money from oil and gas development goes back into land acquizition escrows to replace surface habitat losses, and the intent is to acquire lands in the same Region and county as where the development happened.

It is possible that no bidders will come to the table with the given set of restrictions. The gas markets are volitile and things are changing every day. Just because a bid is offered doesn't necessarily mean that activity will definately occurr.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,884 Posts
+3

SGL 331(previously called SGL 93)Has had loads of shallow well drilling over the past several years.The PGC doesn't own the gas rights but they've done a very good job nehotiating the amount of disturbance.All of the well pads were fertilized,seeded and made into small foodplots.I'd rather have woods and clearcuts but it is what it is.My only real gripe is that now there's alot of access roads that go into some remote parts.You still have to walk in but the pressure today is more in these remote areas.They took a potentially bad situation and made it into one that's at least bearable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
905 Posts
+4

With Tom Corbett being the generous man that he is, projects like these are very important, when the PGC actually has the mineral rights, since they exercise large amounts of control and the money goes right back to the PGC. It's also important to diversify the sources of it's income.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,889 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
very good points and i smell what ur stepping in. Now that i see it from that point of view i am a +5 thank you.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
23,759 Posts
I love walking way back on a gameland or national forest to have a gas company truck drive by. I don't get why they can drive but I have to walk.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,796 Posts
It appears that there will be wells directly on the GL's per mustangs post.

However, if the surrounding area is being drilled, most likely the GC will attempt to be part of a well off GL like they did last year in Tioga County. They did lease the rights - but no drilling takes place on GL. But the rate of the lease and royalties is set.

In the Marcellus Play - there are lots of options for landowners. It appears the GC understands the in's and out's of the possibilities very well. So far the management group has done sportsmen a very good job. Far better than other state agencies in both disruptions and amount of royalties.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
303 Posts
I think the PGC is doing a commendable job in their approach to Marcellus drilling. They have a long history in leasing, and it shows. They are utilizing their leverage in gamelands holdings to maximize advantageous provisions in their leases, which translates into the most benefit to sportsmen, and minimizes surface impact to the resource. Kudos to the Commission, and especially to the division that handles leasing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27,829 Posts
PGC leased out a small SGL in northern Bradford County, and there were no pads. All drilling was going to be done from outside the SGL.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27,829 Posts


I had the great fortune to talk to Mustang06 at the last PGC meeting, or should I say, he talked to me. Can't get a word in edgewise with such an excitable fella. LOL

Anyway, this guy, as are others in the PGC are TOP NOTCH and very passionate about what they do.

They LOVE telling you the story they have to tell, and if we are smart, we shut up and allow them to speak. So much is learned from these one on one visits.

Again Dave, many thanks for all you and the others do for us. Well, except that Eric feller. LOL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,132 Posts
Dutch said:
PGC leased out a small SGL in northern Bradford County, and there were no pads. All drilling was going to be done from outside the SGL.
I know of one in Northern Bradford County , and I am quite sure their are well pads on SGL.

In fact CHK Energy calls it the SGL 289 , and there is a second well pad in the area, which appears to be on SGL.

Both have very minamal impact, and great food plot oportunity. Neither took much timber from what I saw from road.
I believe the money generated to do overall good for game lands, far outways the impact.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,132 Posts
As a side note, my cabin borders SHL 36, and I still support the lease.

What I am dead set against is the proposal of a wind farm on those mountains. There is currently a wind test tower on the Cahill's.
Wind farms are a joke.....and a waste of tax payer dollars!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,822 Posts
Dutch may be referring to 219 up along the NY /Susquehanna Co. border, That's where that guy dumped a bunch of drilling sludge awhile back...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
303 Posts
I agree with buzz about the wind farms. You can see the wind farm on Armenia mountain from our place, and it's 20 miles as the crow flies. Darned shame.
 
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
Top