Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Allen" data-source="post: 395270" data-attributes="member: 389">Define "small".  I know an awful lot of landowners who do own at least a fraction of the minerals under their surface acres, others own minerals under their neighbor's land.  Have things gotten complicated with mineral ownership through the years?  Yep, they sure have.  The bottom line though is that at one point in time the land changed hands and often the buyer decided to not pay that which was needed to also acquire the minerals, because they simply thought they were over-priced, unnecessary, etc. Some farmers and ranchers during the dustbowl years needed operating loans to see them through the tough years, so they used their mineral and gravel rights to buy down the interest on operating loans (this was largely a state program).  Remember, the ag guys thought this was a good deal because they were trading what they believed to be worthless rights for something tangible in order to keep the farm in the family.  Near as I can figure, the State wanted the gravel rights in order to build roads as they too generally thought the mineral rights were worthless, but they had to get something in return for the low interest rates to appease the non-ag interests in the legislature. Yeah, there are many reasons and paths leading to separation of the minerals from the surface, and it isn't stopping anytime soon.  Mineral owners routinely get offers to buy mineral acreage in ND, I have to imagine some without production and maybe a little doubt about if their holdings will ever get developed, do opt for taking the bird in the hand rather than waiting for a company to develop their minerals.  Let's face it, if you're getting up there in age and wanting to retire, it would have to be awfully tempting.</blockquote>

Verification: What is the most common fish caught on this site?

Reply to thread

Recent Posts

Friends of NDA