Being a out-of-state mineral right owner myself, I don't see anything unfair about the law. I have seen a number of notices in the Dunn County Herald. Most of the notices mention some defunct company or person out-of-state. 20 years is a long time to show no interest.
On Oct 28, 9:27 pm, Larry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Lapsed mineral acres are very small percent of the mineral acres known > to be owned. Probably less than a tenth of one percent. The ND > statutes adopted in the late 1970's are similar to statutes in effect > in other states. > > Reversing the ND statutes would be unlikely as so few people have a > problem with the statute. And the few people that do have an issue > likely do not live in the state where they feel they have been hurt. > > On Oct 28, 9:03 pm, rr70ss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > If you do a statement of claim every 20 you are ok. If you have not done > > one since July 1, 1983 then a statement of claim may be in order. I am > > sure there are some out there where the surface owner is trying to obtain > > the mineral interests back cause I have seen the notices in the Williston > > Herald. But yep someone did some talking to someone and got a law passed, > > which is really unfortunate for many who don't even know they have O&G > > interests in the state and if the landman cant find them then the notice > > might not make it to them either. I think most of it was the > > out-of-staters who came in and bought farms without the mineral interests > > and are hating whats going on around them and not collecting a check. This > > way they can gain some back maybe. > > > In a message dated 10/28/08 17:44:32 US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL > > PROTECTED] writes: > > > Does anybody know if surface owners have been successful in gaining > > ownership of minerals under North Dakota 38-18.1 NDCC. As I > > understand, this law gives surface land owners in North Dakota the > > right to claim ownership of minerals on any inactive (unleased) parcel > > where they are the owner of the surface. This seems highly unfair as > > many of the minerals in Western North Dakota have been in active since > > the late 70's or early 80's and naturally they were not under lease > > until the recent spike in oil prices and good results in the BAKKEN, > > and thus have been inactive for more than 20 years. This law seems > > like it is very unfair to mineral owneres and needs to be recinded. > > The law can be viewed at: > > >http://www.legis.nd.gov/cencode/t38c181.pdf. > > > Please let me know your thoughts > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bakken Shale Discussion" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bakken-shale-discussion?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
