Shreveport raises minimum per-acre for mineral rights
The city of Shreveport has raised the minimum per-acre it will accept for energy leases on city property.
The minimum is $27,500 per acre and a 25-percent royalty, the City Council voted Tuesday. It amended the previous minimum of $22,500 per acre, councilman Monty Walford said.
Energy companies looking to drill must obtain mineral rights from property owners. The city owns thousands of acres of parks, streets and rights of way.
City officials are making sure there are no more recurrences like a case during the administration of former mayor Keith Hightower, when the city leased mineral rights under Cargill Park and the city's two airports for $1 an acre plus royalties. That was done before energy companies began to aggressively pursue mineral rights for the Haynesville Shale.
The minimum is $27,500 per acre and a 25-percent royalty, the City Council voted Tuesday. It amended the previous minimum of $22,500 per acre, councilman Monty Walford said.
Energy companies looking to drill must obtain mineral rights from property owners. The city owns thousands of acres of parks, streets and rights of way.
City officials are making sure there are no more recurrences like a case during the administration of former mayor Keith Hightower, when the city leased mineral rights under Cargill Park and the city's two airports for $1 an acre plus royalties. That was done before energy companies began to aggressively pursue mineral rights for the Haynesville Shale.
Views: 174
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Gone Fishin on -
And up from the foot comes a bubblin crude....
-
Permalink Reply by ETOilman on -
You know...and this is the honest to God's truth. The first lease I ever bought was in Virginia...Southwest Virginia in the mountains. As I sat down at the kitchen table with the notary after supper, 6:30 to be exact, the Beverley Hillbillies came on. We laughed about that for ten minutes. I remember the man asked if he was going to be like Jed Clampett.
-
Permalink Reply by Gone Fishin on
-
lol laughing to hard to type..
-
Permalink Reply by po boy on
-
No bids and they RAISE the reserve?
This seems like a good time to point out I was not born or educated here.
-
Permalink Reply by Carolyn Reynolds U on
-
You will learna lot if you stay!
Carolyn Reynolds
-
Permalink Reply by Ben Johnson on
-
they are going to miss out just like they did on the top 28 basketball tourney
-
Permalink Reply by Rick on
-
The last line of this discussion says, "That was done before energy companies began to aggessively pursue mineral rights for the HS". Well, it was done before some of the companies got involveed but CHK and PHK have been in this area for a lot longer than the news of the HS has been, they have been drilling to and producing from this zone for years, just not from horizontal holes and you can bet that someone involved in that land steal had pretty good information on what was just ahead, that lease is not that old.
Now that the stupid move to lease for $1 is public, some of this administration is trying to get ahead of the game, the only thing is, you can't get a head start except at the beginning, anything else is catch up. If they hold out for $27,500 and get it for whatever land they didn't give away, that will bring their average up to $13,750.50 per acre, which is still about $16,461.50 per acre less than Caddo parish got for land in the same areas. They are gonna have to do alot more catching up to balance that.
-
Permalink Reply by Liz Cb2 on
-
Hood Goldsbury got the $1 lease. That was according to Tom Dark for the City of Shreveport. Just old Shreveport politics.
-
Permalink Reply by Bobi Carr ("parker") on
-
I am just curious. If the lease was for $1 but the royalties were high enough, could this have been a legitimate deal to entice an opperator.
I doubt it with politics being what they are.
But does anyone know anything more about the deal?
-
-
Parker, all I can say is that how many people would EVER lease their land for $1? Five or ten years ago they would have at the very least gotten $100 per acre.
I personally do not know about the deal so it would be somewhat unfair to speculate; however, it just doesn't make sense.
I was watching Channel 3 when the reporter asked Tom Dark how much the land leased for and when he said "$1" he hung his head low. It was obvious that was a question he did not want to answer. How embarrasing could that be?! I almost felt sorry for the guy.
It was a fantastic deal for Goldsbury.
-
Permalink Reply by Bobi Carr ("parker") on
-
I am not taking up for anyone.
I definetly like politics in Bossier (along with everything else) much better than Shreveport.
But to be honest, 5-10 years ago, many would have paid someone to produce.
Did the lease produce?
Support GoHaynesvilleShale.com
Top Content
Blog Posts
The Lithium Connection to Shale Drilling
Shale drilling and lithium extraction are seemingly distinct activities, but there is a growing connection between the two as the world moves towards cleaner energy solutions. While shale drilling primarily targets…
ContinuePosted by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher) on November 20, 2024 at 12:40
Not a member? Get our email.
Groups
-
San Augustine, TX
386 members
-
Miller County, Arkansas
27 members
-
Sabine Parish, LA
455 members
-
South Caddo Parish Group
440 members
-
Natchitoches Parish
400 members
-
Bienville Parish, LA
244 members
-
Fayetteville Shale
149 members
-
North Caddo Parish
358 members
-
Central Texas Gas
63 members
-
Cass County, TX
119 members
© 2024 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).
Powered by
