The MYSTERY STAKE EXPLAINED!
Seems EnCana had everything lined up to start drilling except for having Dad's signature. We, the LANDOWNERS, were the last in a long line of people to know about this new CBM development planned, plotted and surveyed (without permission) on our own land. If we hadn't discovered that EnCana's landman, Kevin Rollock, had outright lied to us during his first morning visit to our home, it's likely EnCana would have got their 7 NEW wells as easy and as cheap as they got the first 6 wells and pipelines on our land.
At the time I didn't even know what 'CBM' or ‘coal bed methane’ meant. We believed the scripted answers Rollock reassuringly spewed in response to our basic questions. He even gave an impressive performance that he cared about the ‘concerns’ we expressed as we related to him some of the problems we had experienced with the existing six wells and subsequent pipelines that were already on our land. He took two full pages of notes and assured us he would pass along our ‘concerns’ to the appropriate EnCana departments. We had no reason to not believe him.
Prior to Rollock's February 17th visit, I had very little to do with the oil and gas negotiations or activities on our land, other than the fact that over the years I had picked up a lot of their garbage from our fields. Dad had always dealt with the flow of landmen and industry reps that would just drop by unannounced, and at their convenience. For Dad this started when the first Nova (now TransCanada) pipeline was installed in 1964. Previous to that, the very first well was drilled and shortly after abandoned in 1957. Maps now indicate it as: 00/07-16-26-22, a Husky abandoned well.
I know that among the many topics discussed during Rollock's first visit to our home, the issue of rental reviews was brought up. He told us about the procedures we would have to go through to challenge a compensation review in the future. He also told us he would include this issue on his list of 'concerns' that he would be addressing to EnCana on our behalf. This fact is anecdotal as this topic never shows up in subsequent written correspondences from Rollock.
Documents and correspondences received in March and April between Rollock and my dad will support my allegations that this man knowingly lied to us, and about us. To this day the first issues of violating industry directives as discussed with Rollock were never adequately addressed. The first documented discussion about rental reviews appears from the notes made by Mr. Chris Sillito and Mr. Luigi Vescarelli during the June 20, 2006 meeting with them.
The parade of industry dictators really ramped up when we didn’t roll over and go away quietly like they had become accustomed to in the past. Every time we held firm on a position requiring nothing more than a small token of honesty and due diligence from an EnCana rep, we were sorely disappointed as it was EnCana's tactic to trade out the current landman and send in a new face. On several occasions when we brought up commitments made to us by the previous landman, the current new face would inform us that "we are dealing with him/her now” and “what we were told by previous reps is now out the window”.
What a glorious pattern of dealings for this way no one was ever held accountable for their words or actions while sitting at our kitchen table. Except us.
This map shows what our land would look like if Encana had their way in 2006... (the next 7 PROPOSED well site locations shown in yellow)
NEW PROPOSED EnCana Oil/Gas Development,
ECA ECOG ROCKYFORD