Hell's Half Acre

[DonAndersen]

Guys/Gals,

 

Was brought up within 1/2 mile of Hell's Half Acre. What got me thinking about the place. Some ditsy developer bought the land and now calls it "Seclusion Acres" or something similar. Really unfortunate that part Alberta's history is now "little acreages in the hills"

What is Hells' Half Acre - well it was where the Imperial Oil owned Gas Plant in Turner Valley flared the gas they couldn't sell. Eventually, the Alberta Gov't formed the ARCB and forced a change.

I recall being told by a guy that lived near and operated the separators @ Wellington One, that the well flared 10 MMSCF/D to recover 10 barrels of HC condensate. They did it for years.

I dug my copy of Hell's Half Acre - Early Days in the Great Alberta Oil Patch by David Finch out of my library and reread the book. Was great remembering some of the folks or their kids I worked or lived with when I lived in Turner Valley.

For those that either work in or form the support of the Oil/Gas Business in Alberta, the book is a great read. The Oil/Gas Business of today reflects the history of how oil companies dealt with pricing/labor/environment.

 

regards,

 

 

Don

 

 

 

[Guest Sundancefisher]

Yup...them were the olden days of oil and gas development. Times have changed big time since then. Now regulation and red tape is the norm in Alberta. 95% of the regulations are good and were needed. I think the flaring regulations were the best thing implemented.

 

Landowners and especially non landowners have way to much power and standing now in the province.

 

Well...What a shame all that gas is gone.

[Taco]

 

hellshalfacres.com

[jonn]

Yup...them were the olden days of oil and gas development. Times have changed big time since then. Now regulation and red tape is the norm in Alberta. 95% of the regulations are good and were needed. I think the flaring regulations were the best thing implemented.

 

Landowners and especially non landowners have way to much power and standing now in the province.

 

Well...What a shame all that gas is gone.

 

agreed, way to much power.

[Taco]

Landowners and especially non landowners have way to much power and standing now in the province.

 

explain

[jksnijders]

 

 

Yes, please explain further, in regards to the landowner comments..

[Guest Sundancefisher]

Yes, please explain further, in regards to the landowner comments..

 

In the states, the mineral right owner has first and foremost right to access the property in a reasonable and prudent manner. Insofar the surface owner has title knowing that fact, they don't even have the legal right to be compensated for the land use to access the mineral rights.

 

Now land owners can not only dictate timing, demand extra money, in some cases lessee of Crown land can exclude access or demand costly changes, people driving by can put up regulatory impediments, blocks of land owners can starve developement all to halt legal access to mineral rights below. Some play a game with super great operators by stalling and blocking efforts which in turn can cost mega dollars.

 

In the end the local economy suffers and people still want the roads cleared, rinks built, taxes reduced but NIMBY prevails.

 

Point is currently most operators go out of their way to appease the land owners...even so far as doing more than they need to. The regulations imposed however gives a lot of power to land owners to cause mega grief to companies trying to develop a public resource to the benefit of the public.

 

Now even the Local Indian Reservations are holding things up through huge regulations around past surface usage with reservations in some instance crossing over multiple bands jurisdictions.

 

In the past...regulations...poor

 

In the present...regulations...galore...

[Taco]

So you're saying that we need to go more to the American way of doing things in regards to trespass rights on private land? Other than the ClusterF*** that is the Crown grazing lease deal in this Province I fail to see what the problem is.

[jksnijders]

My family have been landowners in this area for a while, and have had to deal with oil/gas access and all the attendant nonsense. Surface lease payments 6-12 months late, facility/pipeline construction commenced without permission, (by one of the aforementioned Super operators..) There are no shortage of people who would just rather not deal with the hassle for the 2-3000 dollars a year compensation for surface access. (A pittance in the grand scheme of things, really.) We once had a seismic crew drive across every new border-dike in a 1/4 section flood irrigated field, after they were explicity told to stay inside them. Mistakes happen, granted, but it was a complete pain in the ass to irrigate for the rest of the summer. I've seen everything from spills to grass fires, gates left open, etc. etc. I've had to deal with irate landowners while working, courtesy of companies that couldn't organize a 2 car parade, waiting right until breakup to do workovers or completions, making a complete mess of right-of-ways, though wet-weather access was well discussed prior. County roads destroyed by rig moves or frac iron being moved in wet weather or near breakup are no big deal for the guys that only have to drive them twice, (and I've been both) but for someone that has to drive it every day probably looks at it a little differently. The Not In My Back Yard thing is interesting, I recall the battle Compton waged trying to drill some sour wells near Calgary a while back. That went over well. Not long after the Acclaim blowout at Enoch, I think.. My parents had one blow out about a mile from their house a few years ago. Sour, of course. I'm not arguing the fact that oil/gas development are pretty vital to the Alberta economy, or my livelihood. I've made my living both from farming and the oilpatch. I do however have a hard time swallowing the belief that companies put the public benefit before their own bottom line. Some are far better than others in the sense that they work extra hard to cultivate a nice public image, but again, I've seen that from both sides also.

 

 

[jksnijders]

 

Finally outsmarted this thing..

 

 

 

[Guest Sundancefisher]

My family have been landowners in this area for a while, and have had to deal with oil/gas access and all the attendant nonsense. Surface lease payments 6-12 months late, facility/pipeline construction commenced without permission, (by one of the aforementioned Super operators..) There are no shortage of people who would just rather not deal with the hassle for the 2-3000 dollars a year compensation for surface access. (A pittance in the grand scheme of things, really.) We once had a seismic crew drive across every new border-dike in a 1/4 section flood irrigated field, after they were explicity told to stay inside them. Mistakes happen, granted, but it was a complete pain in the ass to irrigate for the rest of the summer. I've seen everything from spills to grass fires, gates left open, etc. etc. I've had to deal with irate landowners while working, courtesy of companies that couldn't organize a 2 car parade, waiting right until breakup to do workovers or completions, making a complete mess of right-of-ways, though wet-weather access was well discussed prior. County roads destroyed by rig moves or frac iron being moved in wet weather or near breakup are no big deal for the guys that only have to drive them twice, (and I've been both) but for someone that has to drive it every day probably looks at it a little differently. The Not In My Back Yard thing is interesting, I recall the battle Compton waged trying to drill some sour wells near Calgary a while back. That went over well. Not long after the Acclaim blowout at Enoch, I think.. My parents had one blow out about a mile from their house a few years ago. Sour, of course. I'm not arguing the fact that oil/gas development are pretty vital to the Alberta economy, or my livelihood. I've made my living both from farming and the oilpatch. I do however have a hard time swallowing the belief that companies put the public benefit before their own bottom line. Some are far better than others in the sense that they work extra hard to cultivate a nice public image, but again, I've seen that from both sides also.

 

I was within the EPZ. I sent in a couple requests. One was to have the pipeline inspected. The other was to have the oil company on the hook for the costs of any emergency response order...and not the city.

 

I see no problems with reasonable requests. I see mitigation being the response for most problems. I see your problems as a poor quality operator...not a great operator. I have seen land owners just not accept that they need to work with the operator and not figure that their land is special and that what is under it should not be removed. Unfortunately for them but the fact are there has to be development. Anytime I ran into problem...it has been dealt with. I saw a file once where the land owner said the oil company was kill his cattle. Was livid...going to the other ranchers...demanding action. The company did a toxicity review. Spend tens of thousands of dollars trying to get to the bottom of it. In the end...turned out the farmer had been storing all his lead acid batteries and then had buried them in a little gully. The gully drained into the cattles drinking pond.

 

Another farmer would intentional leave his own gate open and blame the operator. Another asked for the well to be moved. Company agreed. Then provided the plans. They asked for another change. Company agreed. Then balked when the company was going into drill. Company said fine. Moved the well completely off the land and onto Crown land. Then the person objected to delay, delay, delay. Said they wanted it drilled in winter since they were European citizens and only vacationed here. Company agreed. Then then objected to winter drilling. Prices crashed. Well not drilled. Jobs lost. Revenue lost. Our taxes go up. Happens a lot.

 

Point is...if everyone got along...the process would be great. Problem is unrealistic land owners and some stark oil companies make it a problem.

 

As for Crown leases...the lessors have more control over everything...fishing, hunting, hiking and oil development. Money from leases goes to them. Crown get no rebate back for lost land. Kinda dumb...always has been.

[jksnijders]

 

Yes, I've seen things from that side also, where an oil co. was blamed for deaths of cattle, etc. And I've raised them also. So I've heard some pretty outlandish stories, and it always seemed ironic that the most valuable animal in the herd is the one that died. We have several wells on one piece of land a ways from here and have never had a problem. Same place has the amount of wells it does because the oil co. can't seem to get along with the neighbor. So they come to us. Several wells have been drilled since. (And a pipeline started without discussion..) I realize the amount of hassle that a company must go through to line up a drilling program, etc, and that delays, especially when services are busy, can be quite costly. As for the European citizens, if they can afford to own "vacation property" in Canada, they can probably afford to tell an oil co. to get stuffed for the simple fact maybe they think a drilling rig or wellhead will make their little Canadian retreat a little less pristine. And probably don't give a damn about revenue or development here. The jobs lost, revenue lost thing I'd say has a bit more to do with the pricing of natural gas and the royalty scheme changes, but ironically enough, for the 4-5 years leading up to 2005 (I believe the peak year for wells drilled in Alberta) you simply couldn't get enough work done, wells drilled, completed, etc. And the cry was for "more iron, more people.." I know, because I was doing it. The glut in supply both here and in the south has done wonders for natural gas prices since. As well as the service industry and its employment levels. (But then again when has the word "sustainability" appeared in the lexicon of the oilpatch..) I agree everyone needs to get along, but there are difficulties on both sides. As for the Crown lease thing, having a Crown lease isn't like renting a DVD, it costs alot of money to have something you still technically do not own. I could throw some numbers out of prices we've paid for land, and to think that shouldn't come with some say as to what goes on there is kind of a slap in the face. But the land access issue is another story entirely, I've seen the topic come up and managed to avoid it so far.

 

 

[DonAndersen]

Folks,

 

If you think it's bad now, you should read the book.

Between 100>200 mmcd/d went to flare.

After 1952, with the installation of a sulphur plant, sulphur recovery increased from 0>75% of plant inlet. Field operations still @ 0 %.

Fuel gas for local communities was sour - of course - the gas that went to Calgary was sweetended [some things never change!!]

And for those involved in the business, the lay-offs happened every few years and curiously were not the result of the NEP/Trudeau/Stelmach but the result of market forces.

Driller made $4/day - carpenters $20 - gambling was legal - sporting gals were not.

Two doctors for the whole oilfield - one delivered my wife, both sewed up my brother and me.

 

All in all, a good read and one that should be required for persons entering Alberta. Then they'd have some appreciation of what the oil/gas business is all about. Seems like now it's about double lattes and leather for pickup seats.

 

catch ya'

 

 

Don

 

PS - I'm with jksnijders on the oil vs land issue. Been on both sides of the fence - Big question is "Do landmen ever tell the truth?" From the many contacts I've had with them, haven't seen it yet.

 

 

 

[wtforward]

Sundancefisher...then there is Bill 50 ! Personally I wish we would hurry

up and get all the oil and gas out of the ground so we could get onto

more important things.

 

[Guest Sundancefisher]

Sundancefisher...then there is Bill 50 ! Personally I wish we would hurry

up and get all the oil and gas out of the ground so we could get onto

more important things.

 

hmmmm... Not sure what you mean?

 

Bill 50 is slated by environmentalists to allow Albertans better access to non fossil fuel power generation. Dams, wind, solar etc. Some may call them environmentally friendly...but personally I have problems with all power generation as being un-environmentally friendly.

 

Anyways...Bill 50 refers to transmission lines not oil and gas?

[Guest Sundancefisher]

- Big question is "Do landmen ever tell the truth?" From the many contacts I've had with them, haven't seen it yet.

 

 

Don. 99.9999% of all landmen tell the truth. It is required by ethics and the law. There are set packages that have to be given out to land owners on what the process is. As for compensation...that is always a negotiated figure with some ranges in place based upon set figures at the time like land values etc. Calling any profession dishonest is both unfair and disrespectful to many people and quite frankly I was surprised you of all people would do that. Like in any profession there are always going to the good and the bad. From bus drivers, to A&W tellers, to land owners, to police officers, to farmers, to doctors.

 

In any negotiation it take two to tango... If one side is coming at the discussions with obvious issues...it will reflect badly. If you feel the negotiations are un ethical...maybe give an example... I would discuss your concerns with the landman. If no resolution...go to his boss if a service company. If not satisfied...try the oil company the lease is being taken out for. If you are being unreasonable...take a step back and examine how the negotiations can be mitigated and compromised fairly.

 

Cheers

 

Sun

[DonAndersen]

Sundance,

 

I've had three contacts with landmen arranging for seismic, drilling leases and access. They are batting 3 for 3.

The first contact was on some land we owned SW of Calgary. Landman told us that they would do the spread in November with inspection to be done in early December. Well, it was the following spring before the spread was done. Took a phone call to the energy company to get that ironed out. The inspection revealed a collapsed shot hole big enough to fit a cow. Took a number of phone calls and pictures to get it filled in. The second was on some land where we were advised via a package that a company wanted to drill a well. The package detailed a number od documents that were to be provided. Took some time to get the documents. Then the package poorly described the well and surface facility. That took another meeting with their facility engineers to get that straight. In this case, landman contacted us regularly to sign up. Ya' right.

And the last was the blustering threats by a company landman not to allow us access to Ironside pond and not to hook up to the power line. In this case, the landman was a senior landman directly hire by th company. When the law with regard to access was pointed out to him + the fact that they did not own the powerline, he disappeared.

 

In two of the three cases, I did not receive any compensation nor was any required.

 

Sundance - you should get out more often.

 

 

regards,

 

 

Don

[Guest Sundancefisher]

Sundance,

 

I've had three contacts with landmen arranging for seismic, drilling leases and access. They are batting 3 for 3.

The first contact was on some land we owned SW of Calgary. Landman told us that they would do the spread in November with inspection to be done in early December. Well, it was the following spring before the spread was done. Took a phone call to the energy company to get that ironed out. The inspection revealed a collapsed shot hole big enough to fit a cow. Took a number of phone calls and pictures to get it filled in. The second was on some land where we were advised via a package that a company wanted to drill a well. The package detailed a number od documents that were to be provided. Took some time to get the documents. Then the package poorly described the well and surface facility. That took another meeting with their facility engineers to get that straight. In this case, landman contacted us regularly to sign up. Ya' right.

And the last was the blustering threats by a company landman not to allow us access to Ironside pond and not to hook up to the power line. In this case, the landman was a senior landman directly hire by th company. When the law with regard to access was pointed out to him + the fact that they did not own the powerline, he disappeared.

 

In two of the three cases, I did not receive any compensation nor was any required.

 

Sundance - you should get out more often.

 

 

regards,

 

 

Don

 

 

I appreciate your concerns for my fresh air needs. However...as you have now alluded to some of the landmen were just doing the basic land notifications at the behest of the oil companies. They are probably working for a service company and are told something...pass that along...then the oil company either changes it plans, have their plans changed for them as a result of operations, weather, local objections etc. which are out of their control or else maybe have financial needs to re-alocate capital and thereby defer a program.

 

Maybe there was a misunderstanding or miscommunication. However...in all instances it sounds like once the communication lines were opened and people understood what the issues were they were solved fairly.

 

I know of many of the opposite experiences. Where landmen are always welcome. They come early for coffee and cake etc.

 

Again...maybe you need to understand that everything is not black and white and that there are two sides to issues and that adults can always over come issues if they are reasonable and rational and not expecting the negative all the time.

 

Think positive Don...think positive. You will be happier for it.

 

Sun

[Taco]

I wouldn't put much stock in the coffee and cakes, it's just being country polite. Most did it too when the Taxman came calling for the farm's books. Dealing with oil companies and their minions has always been a big pain in the ass and takes away from the core business of farmers and ranchers.. growing food.

[jksnijders]

Are you a landman, Sundancefisher?

 

[DonAndersen]

Sun...

 

You should spend some time out talking to landowners about landmen. It's enlightening.

 

There was no misunderstading on my part.

 

Case one: They lied

 

Case two: The supplied incomplete documents with their package then lied

 

Case three: He lied.

 

3 for 3.

 

I'm fairly positive I reflect dealing with most landmen.

 

 

 

Don