Posted on 01/09/2008 6:01:24 PM PST by bruinbirdman
Why didn’t he buy the mineral rights then?
In the west, it is often the case that the federal government came in and stripped off the mineral rights from the land quite some time back.
On our farm in Nevada, the desert land entry started with all the rights, and then just before the Dep’t of Interior deeded the land over to the first owners, the feds stripped the oil and gas rights off the land and held them ‘in trust’ for the ‘American people.’
After that, you cannot buy the mineral rights - you can only lease them.
he can simply buy the company if he wants to stop them bad enough...
Minerals rights aren’t always for sale.
NV Dave has the correct answer upthread.
Haha, classic!
For working cattle ranches, such as Diamond Cross, a steady supply of water is a crucial factor in America's arid West.
Mr O'Toole said the lawsuits were not meant to block development. "That's not the point. The point is we can't lose all that water and at the same time have no provision to put it back," he said.
OK, if the above is true then it's a reasonable position and there should be some reasonable way to work this out.
If it's true.
If he doesn’t own the mineral rights, and never did, I don’t see how he can legally prevent drilling. Since he’s a billionaire, he can buy off the courts, but an honest judge would tell him where to shove his Mars Bars.
His professed concerns over the supposed huge amounts of water used in drilling are BS.
“Mars billionaire fights energy firms over drilling “
Sure.
I wouldn’t be shocked if the guy behind Mars candies and about a
million cavaties isn’t a big investor in dental drill and NO2 gas
delivery systems.
And owns a good chunck of the electrical utilities to run the drills.
Yeah, I’m a cynic/skeptic.
But as Andy Grove of Intel says “Only The Paranoid Survive”.
Best Regards,
MaxMax.
Drilling doesn’t take that much water. I used to work out on a rig in the desert. The water was brought out once in awhile in a tanker truck. Most of it was just recirculated down (and up) the well.
As far as other environmental aspects - modern drilling is pretty clean, it has to be with all of the regulations involved. Of course a few new dirt roads will traverse his property.
I wonder if his grandparent’s ever got shut down or sued when their chocolate batches stunk up the neighborhood?
He lost his court case yesterday.
With all the riverrs around their property, I don't think "water" is the real reason for a dispute. The Mars are "recluses".
yitbos
They did more than that. The Federal Goverment owns most of the mineral rights AND most of the surface in Alaska. The State Goverment owns a much smaller but significant portion, about 28%. The natives were awarded about 11% of the land and mineral rights. Private ownerships of land is Alaska is less than 1% of the state.
Land Ownership in Alaska, with map
http://www.conservationgiscenter.org/maps/html/landown.html
State Law is unconstitutional. This is a basic infringement on property rights.
I take the same position on “ground rents” that some cities have.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.