# PA Court Ruling Could Cause Major Problems for Frackers **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 12, 2018, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pa-court-ruling-could-cause-major-problems-for-frackers/814063 "2018-05-12T21:09:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2018, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pa-court-ruling-could-cause-major-problems-for-frackers/814063/1 "2018-05-12T21:09:39Z")
[https://www.bna.com/frackers-feeling-shaken-n57982092520/](https://www.bna.com/frackers-feeling-shaken-n57982092520/) > [@](#): > > According to the rule of capture, a driller on one parcel of land may extract oil and gas from underneath adjoining properties as long as the driller doesn’t physically trespass over the property line. > … > In the April 2 opinion, the court concluded that due to distinctions between hydraulic fracturing and conventional drilling, the rule of capture “does not preclude liability for trespass” onto adjoining properties in situations where hydraulic fracturing is used. > > “Unlike oil and gas originating in a common reservoir, natural gas, when trapped in a shale formation, is non-migratory in nature,” Judge John L. Musmanno wrote. For natural gas trapped in shale to flow freely, the shale must be physically fractured. “Shale gas does not merely ‘escape’ to adjoining land absent the application of an external force,” he wrote. Whatever the pros and cons of fracking, I can see the logic behind the ruling. Thoughts? ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2018, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pa-court-ruling-could-cause-major-problems-for-frackers/814063/2 "2018-05-12T23:58:32Z")
Wow, i really screwed up the formatting on the OP. Maybe a mod can fix the closing quote tag. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2018, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pa-court-ruling-could-cause-major-problems-for-frackers/814063/3 "2018-05-14T23:00:43Z")
So under this ruling, you could only frack if you’ve secured rights for all of the land over the reservoir (however big that is), not just of the land where your operation is set up? Is there any chance this case could make it to a federal court, and hence be applicable outside of Pennsylvania? ---
**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2018, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pa-court-ruling-could-cause-major-problems-for-frackers/814063/4 "2018-05-15T00:03:03Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > So under this ruling, you could only frack if you’ve secured rights for all of the land over the reservoir (however big that is), not just of the land where your operation is set up? > > Is there any chance this case could make it to a federal court, and hence be applicable outside of Pennsylvania? I doubt it, mineral rights laws are very state specific. The problem becomes even more complex with Federal leases, which is most likely to make it to the federal system, but it is in limbo right now on overlapping oil/gas and coal leases. > **[Wyoming Supreme Court Sets Precedent For Jurisdiction In Mineral Rights Cases](https://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/open-spaces/2018-01-12/wyoming-supreme-court-sets-precedent-for-jurisdiction-in-mineral-rights-cases)** > > A coal company and an oil and gas company are stuck in legal limbo over who has superior rights on overlapping federal leases in the Powder River Basin.… Note how the BLM refused to take action in this case, which they have direct responsibility for. ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2018, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pa-court-ruling-could-cause-major-problems-for-frackers/814063/5 "2018-05-15T00:43:11Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > So under this ruling, you could only frack if you’ve secured rights for all of the land over the reservoir (however big that is), not just of the land where your operation is set up? > … I don’t think so. I think the point is that gas only flows if the rock it’s in is fractured. So to release gas from a neighboring property you would have to fracture the rock on that property. There is no connected reservoir in the usual sense. I’d imagine that it’s difficult to tell what’s going on underground. How do you know if a given fracture extended under a neighboring property and released gas there? ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2018, 11:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pa-court-ruling-could-cause-major-problems-for-frackers/814063/6 "2018-05-15T11:23:51Z")
If I’m reading it right, extracting hydrocarbons that flow from under the neighbor’s property to my well are ok (cue im\_drinking\_your\_milkshake.gif), but the court has ruled that sending fluids under the neighbor’s property is a tresspass. I don’t think (but would appreciate if someone who knows more could comment) that this is a matter of horizontally drilling under someone else’s property, but a matter of the fracking fluids permeating. Or the fractures propogating.