ND bill would pay landowners share of...

ND bill would pay landowners share of oil income

There are 19 comments on the WDAY story from Jan 15, 2011, titled ND bill would pay landowners share of oil income. In it, WDAY reports that:

North Dakota landowners who must allow oil companies to drill on their land should share in the profits, because energy exploration has brought them headaches while cutting them out of the bounty, a group of lawmakers said Friday.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at WDAY.

MJ KAVALSKI

Harrisonburg, VA

#1 Mar 13, 2011
WHY SHOULD THE LAND OWNER GET MORE MONEY?? THEY ARE GETTING THERE FAIR SHARE. THERE MUST BE A LOT OF MONEY HUNGRY PEOPLE IN STANLEY.
wHY ARENT THY FARMING.
rshacklefordt

United States

#2 Mar 13, 2011
That is one of the/ ost ignorant comments i have ever read.

A lot of land owners don't have the mineral rights and are actually harmed by drilling.

Also farmers are not by default rich.
parforthecourse

North Palm Beach, FL

#3 Apr 3, 2011
MJ KAVALSKI wrote:
WHY SHOULD THE LAND OWNER GET MORE MONEY?? THEY ARE GETTING THERE FAIR SHARE. THERE MUST BE A LOT OF MONEY HUNGRY PEOPLE IN STANLEY.
wHY ARENT THY FARMING.
The landowners should get more money because it's THEIR LAND! Mining and oil drilling can destroy an entire farm! They deserve to be paid well!

Since: Feb 09

mpls, minn

#4 May 30, 2011
I am a little offended by the allegation that mineral owners insist on allowing companies to drill on any ones land. I do not own a great deal of mineral rights, but when getting them leased there was a bit of confusion and I soon learned what the term 'non participating owner' meant. I still have the certified letter here in my file showing what percentage of the well costs I would be responsible for and also the legal action that could be taken against me for holding up the establishment of a pool of mineral owners in a unit. I have also made several trips out to the Watford City area; I know that the companies build their own roads out to the well sites. With these roads specifically to the wells and their storage capacity at the well sites I find it hard, if not impossible to believe that trucks carrying the kind of weight in product that these trucks are loaded with are just driving out over raw farmland. This legislation would overrun any agreement made between me, any other mineral owner in the area,and the drilling / production companies. That apparently is OK. My question is...What about the agreements made between the surface owners and the drilling companies to allow the roads and the pads to be put in on their land? I am sure you all thought that your compensation was fine at that time. Now you all have second thoughts about your decisions and want to stomp all over our contract rights, that a good many of us sought out and paid for legal advice for before agreeing to. Please do not forget the vast amount of tax revenue and other misc. business that all of you are benefiting from. Once again I do not own a great deal of mineral rights out there, but the validity of my contract for royalty rights should not be invalidated by any legislation based on a persons lack of responsibility or the lack of willingness to see that these matters were addressed properly by themselves or the legislature in the beginning. After all this resource in western North Dakota has been known about for a very long time...It did not just pop up in the last few years as some seem to suggest. Thank You
Wifey

Wartburg, TN

#5 Jun 11, 2011
Breeann Sorenson is living with and sleeping with my husband. He went up there to work in March and b!tch got a hold of him. Tell me EVERYTHING you know about the wh0re. When you see them together, just know that he is married as the day is long. We WERE NOT seperated. That's what he told her parents. SHE knows she stole him. I'm MUCH MUCH better in all ways than she is, but apparentley she likes to d!ickmatize people. Gangbangs? More married people? Anything you know to be a fact, let me know so I can tell my husband who doesn't know how stupid he looks with such an ugly slut chick.
Sheyenne

Fergus Falls, MN

#6 Jun 22, 2011
first of all, upon purchasing their land, they knew the mineral rights were not included in the price they paid, yet, they chose to buy it anyway. If they didn't want such situation, why didn't they just lease surface rights from whomever owned the land, or better yet, just say NO and not buy the land. Nobody held a gun to their head to make them buy that surface acreage. DUH!!!

That being said, how about the mineral owners being allowed to have an equal percentage of the pay from the crops the farmers grow above their minerals?
Smith

Lignite, ND

#7 Jun 22, 2011
Is gravel considered a mineral in Burke Co. N. Dak.?
Kennedy 817

Hurst, TX

#8 Jun 24, 2011
Gravel is part of mineral rights
Bob in PA

United States

#9 Oct 5, 2011
What do y'all think is a fair share of minerals money for the owner of the land, if said owner owns and properly negotiates a lease for mineral rights? Please consider:
This seems a bit like the old Cookie monster and Grover having a milk and cookies party routine. Grover brings a cow, and CM brings cookies. At the party both should have a fair share of BOTH the milk and cookies (50 percent?, but, of course CM gobbles all the cookies), and after the party, Grover wants to take home a healthy cow with no bites taken out of it. If anyone knows of an oil deal that went this way, please post. The best deals in the world seem to be about 15% to the landowner and some lease and/or damage payments that might compensate for the years of loss of use of the drilling land. Then there's the middle east where big oil paid pennies, essentially took over the governments, then left us taxpayers to try to put down the anger of the citizens who feel some considerable anger at having lost their oil and perceived rights. Then there's the environment issue - I'm sure all the wells in the Gulf were drilled under "best practices" and everyone was told that our drilling technology was so reliable that virtually no possibility of accident need be considered. How do you think the shrimpers who lost their livelihoods feel about this after the Deepwater Horizon tragedy of human errors? What do you think of insurance for landowners against such damage on land? Anybody seen an insurer willing to step forward on this?
Barb

Bismarck, ND

#10 Oct 8, 2011
Many of these land owners are just that. Land owners. They purchased this land KNOWING they did not own the mineral acres under the land they bought from families who moved on over the decades. The families that sold the land to their neighbors, were smart to retain the mineral acres. Also, many of these land owners are not even farming their land. Many have their land in CPR (government hand out) or rent to a neighboring farmer. My family owns shares in our grandparents mineral acres, along with the unlce who "owns" the land. He is already sharing the benefits of the mineral acres like the rest of us, why should we have to also pay him another share because they drilled on the land he owns. By the way, his land is all in CPR.
pounder

Williston, ND

#11 Oct 25, 2011
Barb wrote:
Many of these land owners are just that. Land owners. They purchased this land KNOWING they did not own the mineral acres under the land they bought from families who moved on over the decades. The families that sold the land to their neighbors, were smart to retain the mineral acres. Also, many of these land owners are not even farming their land. Many have their land in CPR (government hand out) or rent to a neighboring farmer. My family owns shares in our grandparents mineral acres, along with the unlce who "owns" the land. He is already sharing the benefits of the mineral acres like the rest of us, why should we have to also pay him another share because they drilled on the land he owns. By the way, his land is all in CPR.
That is CRP, not CPR.
Katie

Gilbert, AZ

#12 Dec 9, 2011
The land owners paid a price for what they bought knowing full well the benefits and the risks. If they were to have a share in the mineral rights or revenue, then the purchase price would have been higher to reflect that. The request of the landowners is rediculous. If they are paid anything at all, they should be thankful for the generosity of the oil company.
bored

Wiggins, CO

#13 Dec 10, 2011
Bob in PA wrote:
What do y'all think is a fair share of minerals money for the owner of the land, if said owner owns and properly negotiates a lease for mineral rights? Please consider:
This seems a bit like the old Cookie monster and Grover having a milk and cookies party routine. Grover brings a cow, and CM brings cookies. At the party both should have a fair share of BOTH the milk and cookies (50 percent?, but, of course CM gobbles all the cookies), and after the party, Grover wants to take home a healthy cow with no bites taken out of it. If anyone knows of an oil deal that went this way, please post. The best deals in the world seem to be about 15% to the landowner and some lease and/or damage payments that might compensate for the years of loss of use of the drilling land. Then there's the middle east where big oil paid pennies, essentially took over the governments, then left us taxpayers to try to put down the anger of the citizens who feel some considerable anger at having lost their oil and perceived rights. Then there's the environment issue - I'm sure all the wells in the Gulf were drilled under "best practices" and everyone was told that our drilling technology was so reliable that virtually no possibility of accident need be considered. How do you think the shrimpers who lost their livelihoods feel about this after the Deepwater Horizon tragedy of human errors? What do you think of insurance for landowners against such damage on land? Anybody seen an insurer willing to step forward on this?
I got 17%, their using horizontal drilling(sideways), They drilled on the corner of the field and put the road along the fenceline. No damage, no socialism.
bored

Wiggins, CO

#14 Dec 10, 2011
They're Got $500/acre for a 3 yr lease. They pay for any and all damage to crop ground.
Cabot007

United States

#15 Jan 9, 2012
Wifey wrote:
Breeann Sorenson is living with and sleeping with my husband. He went up there to work in March and b!tch got a hold of him. Tell me EVERYTHING you know about the wh0re. When you see them together, just know that he is married as the day is long. We WERE NOT seperated. That's what he told her parents. SHE knows she stole him. I'm MUCH MUCH better in all ways than she is, but apparentley she likes to d!ickmatize people. Gangbangs? More married people? Anything you know to be a fact, let me know so I can tell my husband who doesn't know how stupid he looks with such an ugly slut chick.
WOW, and you're saying he's stupid. How old are you, 13?
Stanley rental house

Los Angeles, CA

#16 Jan 10, 2012
701---629--5278--3bdrm 2ba ..in STANLEY...3500..MO...HURRY...a sk for Robert
finally a house

Los Angeles, CA

#17 Jan 10, 2012
701..629..5278..get it now ..ask for Robert 3bdrm 2 ba..3500..mo.
Mateytwo Barrett

United States

#18 Jan 13, 2012
So, insanity has gripped the legislature in North Dakota. The suface rights owners get paid damages for the location sites. As far as I can determine, it is generous- especially when you consider the productive capacity of most of the land being developed. The entities that own said surface rights would have been aware of the situation. This type of suggestion smacks of socialism. As one will recall, this nation is based on private property rights.
HappyCamper

United States

#19 Jan 21, 2012
You're crazy, and so are all the other idiots out there paying that much rent for a house. That's why I have my own camper, and pay less then $300.00 a month. Good to know there are still some decent people in North Dakota..
Stanley rental house wrote:
701---629--5278--3bdrm 2ba ..in STANLEY...3500..MO...HURRY...a sk for Robert

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Williston Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
What is Williston like (Apr '12) Jan 26 Tigre 63
News North Dakota Employer Harassed Worker Because o... Dec '16 Rainbow Kid 2
News No Matter Who the President Is, Islam Is an Ame... Nov '16 Rosa_Winkel 20
Asphalt paving and sealcoating scammers still a... (Jun '12) Oct '16 Stoneking asphalt... 41
Watford RIdge Suites Sep '16 Johnny 1
Baseball and football Sep '16 Woopigsooie 1
Coming for work (Jul '16) Jul '16 Hillbilly fracer 1

Williston Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Williston Mortgages