Federal Judge Halts Attempt to Frack Land that Was Protected by Permanent Conservation Easement
A permanent conservation easement is often placed on a property by a property-owner to make sure that a property can never be developed or subdivided. It is often done in return for payment from a county or a conservation organization or a federal tax deduction. In northeast PA. there was an attempt to get around this permanent restriction in order to allow fracking.
Excerpt:
"... in Stockport Mountain v. Norcross Wildlife Foundation, U.S. District Judge James M. Munley of the Middle District of Pennsylvania granted defendant Norcross Wildlife Foundation’s motion for summary judgment, finding that the conservation easement on the land it co-owned with plaintiff Stockport Mountain Corp. unambiguously bans drilling.
Munley said Section 4(c) of the easement, prohibiting “‘industrial or commercial uses of any kind,’” clearly precludes drilling.
Munley rejected Stockport’s argument that the parties could not have intended to ban shale gas production because they didn’t even consider it as a possibility when they executed the easement in 2002."
Read more:
http://www.law.com/jsp/pa/PubArticlePA.jsp?id=1202617155709&kw=Judge%20Rules%20Conservation%20Easement%20Bans%20Drilling&et=editorial&bu=The%20Legal%20Intelligencer&cn=20130827&src=EMC-Email&pt=PM%20Legal%20Alert&slreturn=20130728151910#ixzz2dIF2s7yO
= new reply since forum marked as read
'they didn’t even consider it as a possibility when they executed the easement in 2002,' but if they HAD, they would have executed the easement IN SPADES!!!
