Mark -
I don’t have objections to those states which have laws stating that any mineral rights reserved will revert back to the surface owner if no production in 10 or 20 years, because without that you can end up with so many owners.
I believe Louisiana has a 10 year period, North Dakota a 20 year period - don’t know about other states.
I do object to some states that seem to take the position that if it’s a small interest, the company shouldn’t worry about it - for without money being placed in escrow I do consider it a taking without compensation.
Mark Phillips said:
Good question. In some jurisdictions, an interest that becomes “too small” is quashed by administration of state law* and the interest is returned to the surface owner. Also, there is brisk trade in some areas from time to time, so tracking all of that would be a lot of work. Clearly, the number ebbs and flows with the market for the products.
I am looking for a snapshot. If I could state, with some authority to back me up, that circa 2010 there were X million owners, I might gain some traction in discussions on how to best preserve and promote private ownership of property.
- As an aside, I feel such laws are patently unfair, as most severed mineral interests were secured by an agreement between willing parties. I know there are exceptions, and real estate in general is rife with traps for the naive. Nevertheless, those laws smack of an unethical taking of property for the benefit of a few; the polar opposite of the intention of public domain policy.