Skip to content

If This Is Destruction, Can I Have Some Please?

2011 September 28

One of the prevailing myths about natural gas development is that it will somehow destroy property values, making it impossible for homeowners to sell.  Not surprisingly, the folks making this argument never offer anything more than speculation about how land and home values are sure to decline.  Curiously, they make this argument while simultaneously suggesting the natural gas boom is creating housing shortages, as if shortages would produce anything other than increased prices.  So much for how well they listened during Econ 101!  Fortunately, real data on real estate markets in the Marcellus Shale region exists — and the facts once again contradict the naysayers’ fears.

Many of you know I have a planning and research consulting practice, in addition to my role here at EID Marcellus.  Among my clients are various public and private entities who require analysis of real estate development trends throughout New York and Pennsylvania.  Recently, we did some studies of land values in both states for purposes of determining how much agricultural and forest properties were worth.  What we found for areas affected by natural gas development was rather astounding.  We learned, based on eight comparable sales over the last year (some 336 acres in land in total), that farmland values in Bradford County, Pennsylvania averaged $6,984 per acre for properties of 10 acres or more.  Fourteen sales in Susquehanna County (1,182 acres) averaged $4,993 per acre.  Sullivan and Wyoming County properties averaged $5,579 and $7,215 per acre, respectively.  Lycoming County saw an average value of $4,547.  Not bad, right?

Now, compare this to similarly rural Wayne County, which is still waiting on the DRBC to allow gas exploration, where the average was $2,921 per acre; or Pike County, where it was $3,168 per acre, despite both counties being much closer the New York City, that factor having traditionally driven property values in those areas.  Indeed, it made Pike among the fastest growing counties in the nation in recent years and property values had risen steadily there as a result.  Lackawanna County (e.g., Clarks Summit, North Pocono areas), despite being a much more urban area, likewise only produced an average value of $3,889 per acre.  The divergence in values is pretty startling, to say the least.

We can also compare these values to some recent numbers for New York State where we found agricultural properties in counties generally adjoining Bradford and Susquehanna Counties (Broome, Chemung, Steuben and Tioga Counties) sold for prices of $1,200 to $2,400 and typically well below $2,000 per acre.   Because New York is a high tax state across the board, there is always a discounted value compared to properties in lower tax Pennsylvania, but we are talking a 3:1 ratio here, which is hardly explainable by taxes alone.  Do you think it might just have something to do with natural gas?

A review of sales patterns over the last several years provides a clue.  We did similar studies last year to update reports done by other consultants.  We found the average value for Bradford and Susquehanna County was only $4,113 per acre then, and the year before another consultant suggested the figure was $3,278 per acre.  That sure looks like a pattern to me, but don’t just take my word for it.  Last week, I spoke at a Pennsylvania Board of Realtors convention on this subject and another panelist was William Them, a Bradford County realtor, who indicated much the same thing.  Here is what he has to say:

Bill Them confirms an across the board increase in property values (both homes and land) since natural gas arrived.  It has reduced the velocity of sales, opened up brand new rental markets and made previously unsellable properties worth listing.  There are far more cash sales and properties with gas rights are selling for $7,500 to $10,000 per acre according to him.  Overall, the market is up 25% in his judgment, despite an economic and real estate recession that has depressed prices elsewhere.  Similar reports were heard from other panelists (Brent Fish of Fish Real Estate in Williamsport and Kim Skumanick of Lewith and Freeman Real Estate in Clarks Summit, which may be viewed below:

Our anti-gas opponents, of course, will say (have said) this is only a case of large landowners getting rich while everyone else suffers the destruction of their property values.  Even the New York State SGEIS seems to make this case, albeit with several qualifications.  It says (on page 6-250) “significant increases in property value are expected where the subsurface mineral rights and land are held jointly with land ownership and the exploitation of the subsurface resources is not limited in some way.”  But, then, based on a review of conflicting literature, it goes on (see page 6-253) to make the following very ambiguous statement:

In conclusion, the above literature review suggests that being in proximity to a well could reduce the value of a property, but that proximity to a gas pipeline might not reduce the value of a property.  The proposed natural gas development would have an overall regional effect of increasing property values due to the expected in-migration of construction and operations workers and the increased economic activity that would occur in the area.  Likewise, properties that still included unexploited sub-surface mineral rights would increase in value due to the potential of receiving royalty payments.  However, not all properties in the region would increase in value, as residential properties located in close proximity to the new gas wells would likely see some downward pressure on price.  This downward pressure would be particularly acute for residential properties that do not own the subsurface mineral rights.

Putting aside the obvious speculation involved in this conclusion, is it correct?  Well, the data we analyzed certainly confirmed the general increase in property values, especially as it applies to larger parcels.  Nevertheless, it most definitely does not support the idea that home prices fall near wells.  As an example, there were 10 single-family home sales in Dimock Township, Susquehanna County (you may have heard of it) over the last 12 months.  Sales information was available for six of these and they sold for an average price of $79.47 per square foot, though some were rated in poor condition. The average lot size was 1.87 acres.  The newest was built in 2000 and one was over 90 years old.  Sales histories were available for three units previously sold in the years 2001 and 2006 and none suffered any decline in value.  The average gain in value was 34%.  It doesn’t look like property value destruction to me.  But, if it is, can I have some please?

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter! 

19 Responses
  1. Loren Salsman permalink
    September 28, 2011

    Great job, Tom.

  2. Hillbilly Lottery Winner permalink
    September 28, 2011

    By Golly Jed you and Granny gonna get some neighbors cause I is moving to beverly hills where da real estate is cheaper then two day old chittlings at at fish fry

  3. Harry permalink
    September 29, 2011

    I’d like to know what happens to the property values of homes that are located near homes with lots of signs in their yards that claim contaminated water. Wouldn’t the owners of these signs be lowering the values of neighboring homes? I would think theses home owners would be doing a lot of damage to property values in their area. Maybe they should be held accountable for this.

  4. Harry permalink
    September 29, 2011

    WOW! Looks like not only does the gas company have a suit against them but so do all the people who live in Dimock. Mostly the people who live on Carter Road. An item the litigants never say is that not all homes on Carter Road had/have water issues. Wasn’t one of the homes belonging to a litigant up for sale for numerous years before they bought it? That should tell them something about it.

  5. Getthefacts permalink
    September 29, 2011

    Did you ever hear the song that went “Sign sign everywhere a sign” Odd how these people expect people to respect and believe the signs they have yet they can ignore other peoples. They trespass,litter, and hunt where they don’t belong and they don’t care. Guess the signs are only for certain people.

  6. Getthefacts permalink
    September 29, 2011

    Someone needs to stop the liars! The water buffalos should be picked up and removed from the properties of the litigants. This should have been done a long time ago. If they can’t prove what they claim is in the water they shouldn’t be given any. If they won’t prove it they don’t have it. It’s just one more lie!! They were offered a free treatment system, twice the assessed value of their home (get to keep the home too) nothing is good enough for them. All they want is money. The water needs to be taken away and should have been talken a long time ago. They signed a bad contract with the lawyers and now it’s time to pay them. Litigants pay your laywers. Cabot take the water away and take back your settlement money too. They deserve nothing but a massive lawyer bill!!!!

  7. Loren Salsman permalink
    September 29, 2011

    Great points by Harry and Getthefacs. The signs are full of mistruths and false statements made in an attempt to extort money have hurt all of Dimock.

    • Tom permalink
      September 29, 2011

      Getting the truth out about Dimock was certainly advanced by your article, Loren. I encourage everyone to reread it, because all the facts are there. And, why aren’t we seeing those water tests for what’s in that brown jug?

  8. Amused Observer permalink
    September 29, 2011

    I was amused on Sunday to see and hear one of the Dimock water walkers and litigants come up to me and launch a series of vile, ugly, nasty expletives I initially supposed were intended to intimidate me (good luck on that). They poured out of her mouth as her face turned more red then a Cortland apple in late fall.

    It was all caught on film, but the film cannot be put on any reputable web site without an adult only rating. I’m sure she thought that was a good strategy. But, all those foul mouth words to vulgar for a brothel came out of her mouth just as the local news caster was filming a interview that would have exposed the lies she and other walkers were telling, making it impossible to air it. One has too wonder… Is this part of the civil disobedience training they received …. Was this the real reason for the foul mouth? We can only guess!!!

    Victor Furman

  9. Getthefacts permalink
    October 1, 2011

    Perhaps some of their so called friends may have had their eyes opened a bit. Now if they just realize how many lies these people tell. STOP THE WATER DELIVERY TO THEM!!!!!!!!!!If they can’t/won’t prove it they don’t have it.

  10. Harry permalink
    October 1, 2011

    Heard they were making statements about s treatment system that they claim doesn’t work and about people who couldn’t feed their family before Cabot came to town. These lies and statements of slander should and will come back to haunt them. None of them are true at all. Someone should hold them accountable for the lies they tell.

  11. The Ghost and Mrs Litigant permalink
    October 1, 2011

    The ghost of their lies are already back to haunt them….. they lost any respect in their community and now have to travel to NYRAD in Binghamton to get a friendly ear. However as soon as they start the drilling in NY NYRAD won’t need them anymore and will drop them like a cinderblock at a swim meet

  12. My daughter is having a Rough Necks Baby permalink
    October 2, 2011

    But I am cool with that….. at least he has job security with benefits
    a home in Mexico
    a company truck
    and lot’s of great other stuff

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. French Dressing Comes to Dimock | Energy In Depth – Northeast Marcellus Initiative
  2. Energy In Depth » Blog Archive » Lenders’ Bagels?
  3. Energy In Depth » Blog Archive » The Griswolds Go to Pittsburgh
  4. Energy In Depth Takes on the New York Times |
  5. The Art of the Denial | Energy In Depth – Northeast Marcellus Initiative

Comments are closed.