I find it really hard to believe that any state would consider wind a mineral. ND has passed a law stating that wind rights can't be separated from surface rights. That alone would tell you that in ND wind is not a mineral, as you know mineral rights can be separated from the surface.
CHEYENNE, Wyo. - As developers pursue the construction of wind farms in Wyoming, some questions linger about the nature of wind rights and how they relate to land ownership.
Wyoming lawyers generally agree that whoever owns the surface of the land also owns the rights to develop wind resources. But the Wyoming Legislature has not addressed whether landowners can sever wind resources from their property, as state law allows for mineral resources.
"The prevailing thought is yes they can (be severed)," said Lynne Boomgaarden, director of the Office of State Lands and Investments, "for the reason that wind is a commodity that has value as do the minerals below the surface of the land, and you can severe the minerals."
Federal law doesn't address whether wind rights can be severed from surface estate. Some nearby states, including South Dakota, North Dakota and Nebraska, have enacted laws tying wind resources to the surface estate. Nebraska passed its law this year, while North Dakota addressed the issue in 2007 and South Dakota in 1996.
Kim Avilla said:
Thanks! I do believe he has some of the mineral rights, it appears that he has filed a legal document stating specifically that he owns 'all' the rights to said property so that is our concern. We also are very confused about what is considered a 'mineral right' in North Dakota. I have read some states consider 'wind' to be a mineral right when it comes to Wind Farm leases do you know if ND is one of those states? Also I have been reading the USGS 2008 report about the Bakken Shale and they show the map covering all of ND west of Grand Rapids north to Canada, is this an accurate estimate of possible oil/gas production areas? Thanks again in advance for any information you can give us!