 |
|
01-30-2017, 07:16 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 1,786
|
|
While capitalism has its faults, it still is based on the principle of supply and demand, and that people still have "freedom of choice" which can be an effective check and balance. Freedom to choose can yield surprising results...just look at the US election.
__________________
Common sense is so rare these days, that it should be considered a super power.
|
11-05-2020, 06:38 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: alberta
Posts: 1,950
|
|
the alberta case of cn versus turta in 1905 I,believe how is that for a case I read over 37 years ago
Quote:
Originally Posted by schmedlap
The legal regime is that most AB land title ownership does not include mineral rights - they are retained by the Province and can be licensed to qualified extractors - with compensation to the public (owners) and any relevant private owners of the surface title in terms of access, damages, and interference with surface access.
Some AB land titles include mineral rights - mostly those lands granted and titled before AB became a province. An example is much of downtown Edmonton - though one is unlikely to get the permits to frac next to Scotia Place (?). There is some of this in the "boonies", and many pure separate mineral titles held and leased and/or with royalties (or not) by private owners.
They are "sold off" in the sense that any qualified private enterprise that meets the regulatory requirements (most commonly oil and gas companies) can, and does, acquire surface leases or mining rights and leases via the legal processes in place, with compensation to the private surface title owners or the public (crown land, lease payments, royalties), via the regulatory processes in place. That is how it now works.
So, what are you talking about? Are you just ignorant of the way it now works, or are you raising some different legal regime?
|
|
11-05-2020, 06:45 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,058
|
|
“compared to approximately 10% in Alberta”
Quote:
Freehold minerals in Alberta | Alberta.ca
Most mineral rights in Canada are owned by the Crown, but a minority are owned privately by individuals and corporations.
Two sets of rights exist for land in Alberta: surface rights and subsurface rights. The majority of the subsurface rights are owned by the Crown, but when Canada was first homesteaded, individual settlers were sometimes granted title to both the surface and subsurface. This practice was discontinued in the late 1880s. Land granted to the Hudson's Bay Company (HBC) and the Canadian Pacific Railway Company (CPR) also included mineral rights and some of these lands were subsequently sold to settlers, however, the granting of minerals of any kind with these sales was later discontinued.
Following Canada's pattern of development, the prevalence of freehold mineral ownership decreases moving into western Canada. In Manitoba approximately 75% of mineral rights are privately owned, compared to approximately 10% in Alberta. The corporate successors to the HBC and CPR own most of these mineral rights, but individuals and family corporations also own a portion.
Not all freehold mineral rights are the same.
Since today's freehold mineral owners obtained their mineral rights in different ways, not all mineral rights are identical. Some people have ownership of all...”
https://www.alberta.ca/freehold-mine...n-alberta.aspx
|
Quote:
Five FAQs About Mineral Rights - Rae and Company
Excerpt:
Who owns mineral rights?
There are often different surface rights and mineral rights owners on the same land. The Alberta Crown (government) owns approximately 81% of the mineral rights in the province. The other 19% are “freehold” mineral rights, owned by private individuals and companies.
The Crown always owns gold and silver mineral rights.
Can I buy or sell mineral rights?
Like other types of property, mineral rights can be bought or sold....”
https://raeandcompany.com/five-faqs-...eral-rights-2/
|
Last edited by KinAlberta; 11-05-2020 at 06:51 PM.
|
11-05-2020, 06:50 PM
|
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 0
|
|
Geez I thought since Alberta votes PC I thought you guys would think it would be a great idea to sell the rights. Government can’t run anything correctly I thought everyone said . You guys are starting to sound like shall I say it Liberals!!
|
11-05-2020, 06:52 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,058
|
|
Its an old thread created after Albertans voted NDP. :-)
Quote:
Owning Mineral Rights - Redhawk Investment Group
“Individuals, entities, and family offices from countries outside of the United States and Canada can own US minerals. Actually, the United States and Canada are the only places in the world that private individuals can own minerals. In most instances in other countries, the government retains ownership to all the mineral rights. In the US, mineral owners have the right to buy, develop, lease, bequeath, and sell their interests. Owners may realize substantial monetary gains from producing properties in the form of lease bonuses and royalty payments or from sale or lease of the minerals, in our case oil and gas. Best of all, ownership rights to the minerals never expire.
...”
https://www.redhawkinvestmentgroup.c...ralrights.html
|
Last edited by KinAlberta; 11-05-2020 at 07:11 PM.
|
11-06-2020, 12:58 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: central Alberta
Posts: 12,628
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cement Bench
the alberta case of cn versus turta in 1905 I,believe how is that for a case I read over 37 years ago
|
My family has land 3 miles from Turta's discovery well and we still have the mineral rights. It's my understanding that if the land stays in the family the mineral rights stay intact. If the land is sold outside of the family the mineral rights revert back to the crown.
Imperial oil signed a 99 year lease back in the 1948 or 9 with my grandfather and even though the Leduc field isn't pumping much oil anymore Imperial Oil still has to pay until 2048. Took them several years to reclaim 3 wells and several acres contaminated with salt water.
Saddest part is that these mineral rights are now causing grief in settling an estate. Some are greedy to have them and some want to sell them. And every time you divide the rights among family, over time no one is getting much because they only have 1 or 2 percent. Example: Grandpa got homestead land with 100% of the rights. He dies and his 10 kids get 10 % each. Then they have kids and when they pass their 4 kids get 2.5 % each. By the third or fourth generation descendants are only getting a percent. And some folks in the family are going fight about them at some point.
Alberta's mineral resources are quite under developed in my opinion. And now, instead of oil and gas, Alberta may start developing and pumping lithium from some fields or use past oil reservoirs for carbon storage. Mineral rights in certain areas made farmers or land owners prosper in Alberta. Mineral rights should stay with the land title. That way it gives the land owner a vested interest and possible income from the mineral and oil resources.
__________________
___________________________________________
This country was started by voyagers whose young lives were swept away by the currents of the rivers for ten cents a day... just for the vanity of the European's beaver hats. ~ Red Bullets
___________________________________________
It is when you walk alone in nature that you discover your strengths and weaknesses. ~ Red Bullets
Last edited by Red Bullets; 11-06-2020 at 01:05 AM.
|
11-06-2020, 05:20 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Saskatoon
Posts: 1,592
|
|
Short term gain for long term pain.
Selling a major capital asset, for short-term budgetary shortfall, is insane.
Sell the farm, and it's gone forever.
|
11-06-2020, 06:24 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Calgary Perchdance
Posts: 18,876
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by comaderek
Geez I thought since Alberta votes PC I thought you guys would think it would be a great idea to sell the rights. Government can’t run anything correctly I thought everyone said . You guys are starting to sound like shall I say it Liberals!!
|
Alberta mineral free market system means companies pay for the right to try and find oil and gas via the Crown Land Sales.
Then the company decides where and when to drill. Takes in 100% of the risk. They may even do nothing and a few years later have wasted their initial land sale purchase.
Once drilled they retain the rights to a portion of the mineral zone so long as they get production. All other rights and after production they revert back to Albertans.
Not sure you understand the process... but clearly Alberta is doing it right. Running the process so that there is no risk to Albertans.
__________________
It is not the most intellectual of the species that survives; it is not the strongest that survives; but the species that survives is the one that is able best to adapt and adjust to the changing environment in which it finds itself. Charles Darwin
|
11-06-2020, 06:52 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,058
|
|
I don't understand why this isn't understood. It’s already the case for 10-20% of the subsurface rights in alberta and largely the case near every where else. Private vs public land ownership.
We have a very socialized resource system. It’s not capitalism. Its somewhat more like socialism. Resource royalties flow into the public purse not into individual / corporate / private hands. That could be privatized. Even vast areas of crown land (surface rights) could also be privatized/sold off.
It would be de-socializing that situation. Private owners could do that as a few do right now. Oil companies could buy and own the land and the mineral rights. If they ceased production they’d still own the oil left in the ground.
The crown (Alberta government) could sell off all subsurface rights. It would receive the market value up front. The new private owners could do what the crown does now. Nothing would revert back to the crown.
If a leasehold agreement was formed between and oil company and a private owner, royalties would go to the private owner, not to the province. Once extraction stopped that lease would end and the private landowner (subsurface and possibly surface) would regain total control over that land.
Known value would attract higher prices. Other sales would be purely speculative as to what value was below the surface. There would be no more royalty receipts because the present value of the known resources would be in the price received upfront. Right now the province essentially holds an option on the future. That optionality would be sold.
Last edited by KinAlberta; 11-06-2020 at 06:59 AM.
|
11-06-2020, 09:24 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,706
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by KinAlberta
I don't understand why this isn't understood. It’s already the case for 10-20% of the subsurface rights in alberta and largely the case near every where else. Private vs public land ownership.
We have a very socialized resource system. It’s not capitalism. Its somewhat more like socialism. Resource royalties flow into the public purse not into individual / corporate / private hands. That could be privatized. Even vast areas of crown land (surface rights) could also be privatized/sold off.
It would be de-socializing that situation. Private owners could do that as a few do right now. Oil companies could buy and own the land and the mineral rights. If they ceased production they’d still own the oil left in the ground.
The crown (Alberta government) could sell off all subsurface rights. It would receive the market value up front. The new private owners could do what the crown does now. Nothing would revert back to the crown.
If a leasehold agreement was formed between and oil company and a private owner, royalties would go to the private owner, not to the province. Once extraction stopped that lease would end and the private landowner (subsurface and possibly surface) would regain total control over that land.
Known value would attract higher prices. Other sales would be purely speculative as to what value was below the surface. There would be no more royalty receipts because the present value of the known resources would be in the price received upfront. Right now the province essentially holds an option on the future. That optionality would be sold.
|
I fully understand what you're saying, and I think it is an absolutely TERRIBLE idea.
The Canadian model, with our vast expanses of public "crown" land and resource/oil and gas regulations, are the gold standard for the entire world. Other countries have, and continue to, come to Canada to learn how our system works in order to implement it in their own resource sectors. It ensures that the Canadian people have access to our wild places, and that they get maximum value for their resources in perpetuity, and that those resources are developed in the safest, most efficient, and most environmentally responsible manner of any jurisdiction in the world.
To sell those mineral rights, let alone the surface rights, for a one time cash payment, TO THE GOVERNMENT, would be insanity in my opinion. It would be the definition of short sighted thinking.
|
11-06-2020, 10:27 AM
|
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 0
|
|
Well in Manitoba where I am from out PC government is thinking of selling all crown land. Our premier wants to privatize everything and only cares he balances his books while he is in office . Screw the future.
Reminder PC governments want to privatize everything like they are doing with service part of your healthcare I have heard in threads on this forum. Which tons say is good. I call bs as service will suffer as people want to make profits instead of worrying about the service they provide . They will pay their employees crap so they will have zero incentive to do a good job and if they try to again complain they will get fired.
In the pandemic you only need to look at care homes to see how private companies run them. The worst outbreaks in care homes are in private run care homes not government funded ones. Their PPE probably is sewing two Kleenex together and putting it on with rubber bands. Do u think a private run care home is going to spend a ton of cash to buy a N95 mask now and lose money? No way. They will let their employees get the virus with inadequate PPE and let their residence die instead of spending money.
Also PC government often remove government auditing agencies and let the private sector audit themselves . No wonder private care homes suck.
Our premier tells us how bad our debt is but what he does is lumps our government run hydro into his debt calculation . Doesn’t say the building a hydro dam is good debt like a company would define it as they are taking on debt to make more money and it will pay for itself in the future. Our premier is just an idiot.
|
11-06-2020, 10:49 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 301
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by KinAlberta
I don't understand why this isn't understood. It’s already the case for 10-20% of the subsurface rights in alberta and largely the case near every where else. Private vs public land ownership.
We have a very socialized resource system. It’s not capitalism. Its somewhat more like socialism. Resource royalties flow into the public purse not into individual / corporate / private hands. That could be privatized. Even vast areas of crown land (surface rights) could also be privatized/sold off.
It would be de-socializing that situation. Private owners could do that as a few do right now. Oil companies could buy and own the land and the mineral rights. If they ceased production they’d still own the oil left in the ground.
The crown (Alberta government) could sell off all subsurface rights. It would receive the market value up front. The new private owners could do what the crown does now. Nothing would revert back to the crown.
If a leasehold agreement was formed between and oil company and a private owner, royalties would go to the private owner, not to the province. Once extraction stopped that lease would end and the private landowner (subsurface and possibly surface) would regain total control over that land.
Known value would attract higher prices. Other sales would be purely speculative as to what value was below the surface. There would be no more royalty receipts because the present value of the known resources would be in the price received upfront. Right now the province essentially holds an option on the future. That optionality would be sold.
|
This is the worst idea I've ever heard. I don't accept your view that the current model is socialism. Socialism is state ownership of infrastructure and means of production, not the natural aspects of the state. The ownership and control of the land and resources is a fundamental part of nation states, and to sell these out to corporations would be akin to selling the sovereignty of the land. Further, if the Province did sell the resources, what recourse would it have to enforce environmental legislation to protect water and habitat? The laws would obviously be construed as impeding a corporations right to access its property. I'm no lawyer, but check that idea against the protective clauses in the USMCA and the TPP.
You must have a hell of an investor backing to resurrect this idea 3 years after initial posting.
|
11-06-2020, 05:22 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,058
|
|
I personally like our nationalized/provincialized system. Decades ago I’d read some interesting history on the mess private ownership created out of the US’s oil reserves and how it led to the creation of our conservation boards. Nonetheless I see it as essentially a socialized system.
Many people have an ideological bias against anything socialized even when their own private business essentially piggyback off socialism such as government owned resources.
So I’d like to see how they would create a better private system.
Quote:
socialism | Definition, History, Examples, & Facts | Britannica
Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources. ...
https://www.britannica.com/topic/socialism
|
Last edited by KinAlberta; 11-06-2020 at 05:28 PM.
|
11-06-2020, 08:31 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Lacombe
Posts: 120
|
|
[QUOTE=Red Bullets;4261860]My family has land 3 miles from Turta's discovery well and we still have the mineral rights. It's my understanding that if the land stays in the family the mineral rights stay intact. If the land is sold outside of the family the mineral rights revert back to the crown.
The mineral rights are seperate from land title. My grandfather got a portion of mineral rights when he bought a quarter east of Lacombe in the 50's, the land was sold 15ish years ago and since then they were transferred to my mom and now inherited by my brother from her estate.
But if they get split into to many small pieces they do revert to the crown though (I was told it isn't worth the oil companies time to deal with 16 people for one property)
|
11-07-2020, 07:40 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,058
|
|
[QUOTE=Gammaboy;4262470]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Bullets
My family has land 3 miles from Turta's discovery well and we still have the mineral rights. It's my understanding that if the land stays in the family the mineral rights stay intact. If the land is sold outside of the family the mineral rights revert back to the crown.
The mineral rights are seperate from land title. My grandfather got a portion of mineral rights when he bought a quarter east of Lacombe in the 50's, the land was sold 15ish years ago and since then they were transferred to my mom and now inherited by my brother from her estate.
But if they get split into to many small pieces they do revert to the crown though (I was told it isn't worth the oil companies time to deal with 16 people for one property)
|
They can only be split a limited number of times. However they can be rolled into a corporation where unlimited numbers of shares can be issued.
Something many people don’t realize about conventional oil is that upwards of half the oil can remain in the ground when the well is abandoned. Recovery rates often weren't all that great. Alberta has far from fully depleted its conventional reserves. Someday in the far off future Alberta's privately owned conventional reserves might have considerable retained and extractable value. Not sure how other mineral recoveries might compare.
An alberta based example of private mineral rights ownership:
Freehold Royalties Ltd
https://www.freeholdroyalties.com/freehold-home
Symbol: FRU
https://www.freeholdroyalties.com/si...rth-dakota.jpg
.
Last edited by KinAlberta; 11-07-2020 at 07:48 AM.
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:01 PM.
|
Linear Mode
