Yes. Climbers have Mr. Murray's permission to climb in the Southern Region.
You can tell your very generous donors what Shannon alluded to in her post. Only a land OWNER can challenge an act that interferes with the OWNER's access to its property. The RRGCC does not own the property and thus can only do a little. Shannon further mentioned that this illustrates how endangered climbing is in this region. Very true. If the RRGCC owned the property however....
Status of climbing on the Murray property from the RRGCC.
The RRGCC has seriously investigated the possibilities of the legal basis of Charmane's implied exclusivity. Charmane's attorney, Elizabeth Short, faxed to the RRGCC, at our request, one of the oil lease agreements that applies to the Murray property. It appears to be a standard lease that does not grant Charmane exclusive rights to the Murray property. There is no language, that all the attorneys that have looked at it, can see that justifies their actions. Nor is there any known legal theory that seems to justify their action. But Charmane has not offered any explanation either. So, we can only speculate.
Additionally, as part of the RRGCC's due diligence to ensure that we do have access to the land we are buying, before purchasing the property, there will be a title search and all lease agreements that apply, will be thoroughly examined.
Shannon
Additionally, as part of the RRGCC's due diligence to ensure that we do have access to the land we are buying, before purchasing the property, there will be a title search and all lease agreements that apply, will be thoroughly examined.
Shannon
Last edited by Shannon on Wed Oct 15, 2003 8:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Guest
My concern all along has been that if the surface owner or their guests block access to mineral extraction activities - such as climbers have done in the recent past - then the mineral rights owners may indeed have a legal right to restrict access (perhaps under specific circumstances). I hope this is not the case, but I have no idea. I certainly hope someone in the RRGCC has or is looking at Kentucky laws, as well as the contracts.
Fifteen years or so ago, the state of Kentucky still gave corporate mineral rights precedence over individual owner surface rights. Are there any grandfather-type clauses for longstanding agreements which may have been negotiated prior to the ammendment of the Kentucky State Constitution which changed this? Again, I hope this is being investigated.
Fifteen years or so ago, the state of Kentucky still gave corporate mineral rights precedence over individual owner surface rights. Are there any grandfather-type clauses for longstanding agreements which may have been negotiated prior to the ammendment of the Kentucky State Constitution which changed this? Again, I hope this is being investigated.
I find it interesting the Lee County Sheriff was present on the grounds with Robert Stamper, manager for Charmane Oil. Since this does not appear to be an "emergency response", it would have been a planned meeting. Gretchen: did you just happen to be there?
Sandy, I'm in agreement. The oil company would be foolish, not to have a "right to extract and remove without hindrance” clause in their contract. Even if this clause does not exist, one would have to construe that it is implied.
From 1919 through 1999 Lee County had a cumulative oil production of 85,190,521 barrels and represented 11.22% of Kentucky’s total oil production. The next closest county is Magoffin County with 35,695,276 or 4.70%. If my history and memory is correct the Ashland Oil Company got its start in the Big Sinking Oil field. In 2000 the top five oil-producing counties (Union, Henderson, Leslie, Lee, and Perry) produced 43 percent of the oil reported for the state. In other words “oil” is important to Lee County.
The Lee County Sheriff is an elected position. If this was a planned meeting, the Sheriff and Mr. Stamper had a conversation before they met. I wondered what was said? I would be surprised if any information obtained in the field, came as new found information to those present. And I would have to speculate conversations took place afterwards.
Sandy, I'm in agreement. The oil company would be foolish, not to have a "right to extract and remove without hindrance” clause in their contract. Even if this clause does not exist, one would have to construe that it is implied.
From 1919 through 1999 Lee County had a cumulative oil production of 85,190,521 barrels and represented 11.22% of Kentucky’s total oil production. The next closest county is Magoffin County with 35,695,276 or 4.70%. If my history and memory is correct the Ashland Oil Company got its start in the Big Sinking Oil field. In 2000 the top five oil-producing counties (Union, Henderson, Leslie, Lee, and Perry) produced 43 percent of the oil reported for the state. In other words “oil” is important to Lee County.
The Lee County Sheriff is an elected position. If this was a planned meeting, the Sheriff and Mr. Stamper had a conversation before they met. I wondered what was said? I would be surprised if any information obtained in the field, came as new found information to those present. And I would have to speculate conversations took place afterwards.
TN, as we drove into the SOuthern Region the Sheriff's empty cruiser was on the top of the hill. As we got closer to Oil Crack, we came across a van from Texas and the Sheriff & Robert Stamper were informing the out of town climbers that they were trespassing. So I introduced myself and a coversation took place between the Sheriff, Rober & Me. The result was that the Sheriff directed Robert to inform Charmane that this was not a criminal act and he would refer them to Civil to handle the matter of a property dispute.
Just genuinely disengenuous.
They definitely arrived seperate but as to their prior conversation, no idea. I certainly don't want to project an opinion on whether or not our conversation prompted the gates. It was a very non-confrontational discussion. I expressed the desires of the RRGCC to come to amicable relations with Charmane.
Just genuinely disengenuous.
By the way Gretchen, if you haven't done so already, may I suggest: Make notes of everything that was said. Don't leave it to memory. The more details the better. Include who was there and witnessed the conversation, what exactly was said and by whom. What the officer looked like if your don’t have his name. Include dates and time. If this is the information being sent out, lets document it, in case it needs to be referenced in the future.
Damn old habits die hard.
Damn old habits die hard.
Last edited by TrueNorth on Wed Oct 15, 2003 11:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.