Family! Grrr!

[gja1000]

Yes, you are funny.

Mineral rights and surface rights did not used to be separate, but after oil/gas was discovered, maybe in the 50's (I'm not sure when) they became separate. Those of us who owned land before they became separate, own both the surface and mineral rights. Now, if you buy land or property, 99% of the time you only buy the surface rights and someone else (perhaps the state, or the original land owner, owns the mineral rights). You can sell your surface rights, but not your mineral rights or visa versa.

The ONLY thing mineral rights mean is that the person owning them has the POSSIBILITY of getting some money from an oil/gas company leasing the mineral rights so they can drill a well and extract the oil/gas. The mineral rights owner (me, Betsi, and Diana) get money from the lease and then IF the company drills a well and IF the well produces, then then the owner of the mineral rights (me Betsi Diana) will get a percentage of the profits from the oil/gas extraction and sale. I know some people who are extraordinarily rich from oil/gas, but most of us have had mineral rights all our lives and have little to nothing to show for it.

Here is some information about mineral and surface rights:

In most countries of the world all mineral resources belong to the government. This includes all valuable rocks, minerals, oil or gas found on or within the Earth. Organizations or individuals in those countries can not legally extract and sell any mineral commodity without first obtaining an authorization from the government.

In the United States and a few other countries, ownership of mineral resources was originally granted to the individuals or organizations that owned the surface. These property owners had both "surface rights" and "mineral rights".

Sometimes an oil/gas company does not want to purchase a property because they are uncertain of the type, amount or quality of minerals that exist there. In these situations the company will lease the mineral rights or a portion of those rights.

A lease is an agreement that gives the mining company the right to enter the property, conduct tests and determine if suitable minerals exist there. To acquire this right the company will pay the property owner an amount of money when the lease is signed (usually about 3 years). This payment reserves the property for the company for a specific duration of time. If the company finds suitable minerals it may proceed to extract them. If the company does not commence production before the lease expires then all rights to the property and the minerals return to the owner.

When minerals are produced from a leased property the owner is usually paid a share of the production income. This money is known as a "royalty payment". The amount of the royalty payment is specified in the lease agreement. It can be a fixed amount per ton of minerals produced or a percentage of the production value.

[Blueyes]

Yep, I inherited some from my dad which has been in the family forever. The shares have been divided so many times through our big family, that it's not much. Mike inherited some from his dad, too. All of it total is about 500. on a good month, lol! There are lots of gas wells in our area. We call it mailbox money

[gja1000]

Betsi, i have a gas well in Texas inherited from my step-dad (he adopted me) and I have no idea how many acres it is or amongst how many it is divided, but my check is about $20 PER YEAR!! LOL! Can you believe that!!!

[Janet]

Wow...that was really interesting. I honestly had no idea.

[Blueyes]

LOL, I have one like that Gayle! It takes forever for it to build up enough for the gas company to send a check

[DianaB]

Originally Posted by Janet

I feel so lucky!!!! I've never known anyone with mineral rights before! lol I'm so out in the woods that to be honest, I never even heard of it.

When you buy property you own everything that's under it......that's your "mineral rights" unless it's been sold or rented out. If so then it will affect the price of the property.......without mineral rights would be cheaper. You would definitely know if you didn't have mineral rights because it would be pointed out before your purchase.

Sorry, I didn't see your post explaining all of this before I posted. You did a nice job explaining.

Actually here most people own their mineral rights. It's just been lately that a lot of people leased their rights and it really fizzled for most. I'm not even sure if we have an oil and gas company left doing anything much. I imagine that things are a lot different in Oklahoma and Texas where there is lots of oil. I'm sure that mineral rights have been sold or leased for years which is why you're receiving checks.

[gja1000]

Ms Joyce and her sister Emma, were supposed to meet with the attorney today, but do you think they have let me know the outcome. NOOOOOOOOOO!

[gja1000]

Oops! I spoke too soon. Just got an email from the "sisters". Here's the jist:

What this whole deal was about was that this section of land has not had the drilling spacing specified by the corporation commission, ie, 640 acres and the depth of drilling that will be allowed. This has to be done by the drilling company before they start the actual drilling of a new well (I had no idea that this had to be done in this fashion). Also, the attorney said that nothing that they could do at the cooperation commission could ever supersede what we had on the lease agreement.

So, in other words, this was a big TOO DOO about NOTHING!!! I think I am more ticked than ever now - I was told that my not looking at the letter we got in November would cost us THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS NOW AND POTENTIALLY THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS LATER. Um, excuse me, but the only money we are out is the $200 I sent to them for their travel (Joyce drove all the way from Santa Fe, NM to meet with the attorney) and now, the attorney's fees. It's now a little humorous that THEY are the ones that have cost us money - NOT ME!!!

And one more thing. This is a quote sent to our attorney via email last week by Joyce: "Apparently, none of these individuals [this would be me, and my two other cousins - NOT Joyce, of course] realized that the document might need legal review or family discussion. In my estimation such documents should always receive Mr. Graft's review, to assure no threat to the standing lease" I feel that this statement screams, "We (me and my other two cousins) are stupid and Joyce is brilliant" I really didn't appreciate that sentiment being communicated to our attorney.

Oh well, you would think I might get an apology, but not yet......

[JJJ]

Well I would be huffing and puffing if it was my case.

I do hope they apologize that was just plain rude of her.

[Janet]

You must have a lot of self control Gayle. I'm doing much much better, but there was a time I would have either been on the phone or sending off an email letting her know how it made me feel. I love your restraint!

[gja1000]

Originally Posted by Janet

You must have a lot of self control Gayle. I'm doing much much better, but there was a time I would have either been on the phone or sending off an email letting her know how it made me feel. I love your restraint!

LOL! Janet, I already did that. Last week I told her straight out that I didn't like the tone of her emails, that I didn't appreciate her characterizing us (who received the letter) as incompetent and stupid. She tried to say that wasn't her intention, but yes, it was. She clearly made it known in a haughty way that she was the only one who could think well enough to KNOW this document needed legal attention and the rest of us did not (which of course it turned out that it didn't need attention at all).

Oh well, it's OK, I will never receive an apology but she will kiss up to me the next time I see her.

[Janet]

You could always send her some chapstick.....LOLOL

[DianaB]

Originally Posted by Janet

You could always send her some chapstick.....LOLOL

Good one!!!

Well, you probably don't have to worry about hearing from her for some time!!!

I'm glad that you found out that there wasn't a problem though. You probably could have talked over the phone with your lawyer, for a lot less money, and found out the same thing!!

[gja1000]

Originally Posted by DianaB

You probably could have talked over the phone with your lawyer, for a lot less money, and found out the same thing!!

YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES!!!!! You are spot-on, Diana. If they had just called and talked to the lawyer, all this angst could have been avoided. ARGHHHH!!

[Blueyes]

She really made a fool of herself! I bet the lawyer had no problem seeing that she had no clue what was going on. I have gotten letters that say basically the same thing, and there is really nothing to do about anything.