Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on September 14, 2012 at 16:04

I would suggest CLE at the LSU Mineral Institute.

http://host.law.lsu.edu/mli/

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by TangiHopeful on September 14, 2012 at 16:31

  Funny you should mention that. I contacted them a while back about a CLE they gave a while back that was supposedly being transcribed. It was supposed to be sent to Claitor's book store but Claitors said that the transcript had never been sent. I called the number at the campus and left messsages but my call was never returned. I still get the one page brochures in the mail telling me when the Mineral Institute is giving one of these and now I know that the next time they give one I need to just go over there and get it myself. It was supposed to be a really good seminar too and I hated not getting it. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on September 15, 2012 at 1:26

I'll check into it next week, Tangi.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by dbob on September 14, 2012 at 16:59

I was involved in a project a while back to put a well site on Texas state land that had been transferred under a conservation process - as actual title was transferred for the surface, in some respects, more restrictive than a conservation easement.   However, minerals were severed from the surface, and in Texas, the mineral estate has primacy over the surface estate.  Its probably worded slightly differently in Louisiana, but if majority share of minerals is not in the conservation easement, surface controlling authority can't prevent development.

However, surface damages can be much more costly than simple timber damages.   

That said, in that particular case, we found the least damaging spot, made the smallest well site possible, and maximized the number of wells from it.  Surface agency was paid well in excess of market value/conservation value for the damages, and there were conservation off-sets/mitigation as well.  I think net, it came out to about $50,000/acre when similar land nearby (but not close enough to drill from) was selling out right for about $3500/acre.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by TangiHopeful on September 14, 2012 at 17:11

  Wow. And I honestly think that the holders of some these easements would love to take the money for the minerals underneath them if we didn't disturb the ecosystem. They could then take the money and buy more easements and acccomplish exactly what they want. This could all work out very nicely if everyone keeps an open mind. I really like the part about heavy damages for surface damages. Thanks for your post.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by dbob on September 15, 2012 at 2:43

The state agency/conservation group had originally wanted an adjacent 1000 acre tract purchased and donated, and old oil and gas infrastructure on the property removed.  

The exceptional surface damages were negotiated downward from the above request  for the operator to avoid the need to go to court, which might have cost more in legal fees and did not allow for meeting a drilling schedule.   The agency had the threat of threatened and endangered species (which weren't harmed or harassed by the actual project) and could have continually caused delays and shut the project down for short periods if some accommodation on the surface damages weren't made.

The agency request to remove other oil and gas infrastructure had to be turned down, as the old tanks etc were on a separate, very old lease, under the control of another operator.  

Most of the wetland mitigation banks approved by the Army Corps have a conservation easement, but also allow for drilling if the minerals are not associated with the surface easement.  As the value of mitigation credits generated by the bank may be well above the land value, generating higher surface damages. 

Best regards

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Land Rat on September 17, 2012 at 14:08

Exxon has a very large servitude in Morehouse Parish along the Beouf River.  It was land held by Hope Producing Co.  The minerals were transferred in one, large, ~50,000 acre contiguous block and have been drilled every 10 years since the 60s.  There are also very large servitudes in coastal areas in south Louisiana held by different energy companies. 

The reunion of minerals with the surface after 10 years is a nice thing in Louisiana.  However, in an instance such as the Exxon servitude above, the existence of these large servitudes can prove to be a tricky thing for the purchaser of land.  Often title abstracts only go back 25-30 years when a purchase is made.  In this case the ownership and subsequent transfer of minerals would not be shown.  There are many landowners in this area who, to this day, do not know they don't own their minerals.

Probably your best bet for finding these types of situations is to look at old large-format tax parcel maps from the 50s-80s.  Many parishes have these framed on their walls.  When you see huge swaths of sections owned by timber companies or oil companies, you may be in trouble.  Also, bear in mind, that highways only interrupt mineral servitudes if the land was deeded to the parish/hwy dept. etc.  A simple right-of-way will not interrupt a servitude as it is the mineral "estate" (a term borrowed from common law and only analogously applicable in Louisiana) that must remain contiguous and not the surface estate. 

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page