Jump to content

democracy in West Virginia


Pete

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Pete said:

This is such a huge issue in WV, since it is basically a natural resources state. The companies own the land under the land so they can come onto anyone's property and start digging, drilling and even shaving off the sides of hills. My mother's property there had been totally exploited for decades with old old rigs, the hills had been shaved away and company trucks were constantly driving up and down the roads. 

 

The nice part was the free gas, the roads they build had to be solid and dependable but it was a hassle to most of the people. That's a major reason the state had been Democratic for so long. The companies (Rockefeller is still a cursed name there) had so much power. Beautiful state and beautiful place, though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

This is such a huge issue in WV, since it is basically a natural resources state. The companies own the land under the land so they can come onto anyone's property and start digging, drilling and even shaving off the sides of hills. My mother's property there had been totally exploited for decades with old old rigs, the hills had been shaved away and company trucks were constantly driving up and down the roads. 

 

The nice part was the free gas, the roads they build had to be solid and dependable but it was a hassle to most of the people. That's a major reason the state had been Democratic for so long. The companies (Rockefeller is still a cursed name there) had so much power. Beautiful state and beautiful place, though. 

And yet they elected his great-grandson a member of the West Virginia House of Delegates 1966, Secretary of State 1968, Governor1976, and US Senator in 1984 - albeit after spending $12 million on his campaign, and then reelected him to the Senate in 1990, 1996, 2002, and 2008. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Nanker said:

And yet they elected his great-grandson a member of the West Virginia House of Delegates 1966, Secretary of State 1968, Governor1976, and US Senator in 1984 - albeit after spending $12 million on his campaign, and then reelected him to the Senate in 1990, 1996, 2002, and 2008. 

True that! 

 

I guess a giant sign from around mom's house just sticks in my head. This guy had a big barn by the highway painted with "Rockefeller, consolidated thieves and crooks!" 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tiberius said:

This is such a huge issue in WV, since it is basically a natural resources state. The companies own the land under the land so they can come onto anyone's property and start digging, drilling and even shaving off the sides of hills. My mother's property there had been totally exploited for decades with old old rigs, the hills had been shaved away and company trucks were constantly driving up and down the roads. 

 

The nice part was the free gas, the roads they build had to be solid and dependable but it was a hassle to most of the people. That's a major reason the state had been Democratic for so long. The companies (Rockefeller is still a cursed name there) had so much power. Beautiful state and beautiful place, though. 

So she or a previous owner signed over the partial or full mineral rights to the property for a percentage of the take, (usually 1/8) plus free gas up to a certain amount? Did they make her sign under duress, or when she bought the property did this not show up in the title search?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

So she or a previous owner signed over the partial or full mineral rights to the property for a percentage of the take, (usually 1/8) plus free gas up to a certain amount? Did they make her sign under duress, or when she bought the property did this not show up in the title search?

It's my understanding that the landowners had no choice in the matter. The mineral rights are a separate entity and the landowners above have certain rights--roads need to be built certain ways, gas wells can be accessed for free and other environmental concerns like water rights have to be addressed--but the company can come on your land and work, drill, dig whatever. It's not a contract issue its a legislative issue 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

It's my understanding that the landowners had no choice in the matter. The mineral rights are a separate entity and the landowners above have certain rights--roads need to be built certain ways, gas wells can be accessed for free and other environmental concerns like water rights have to be addressed--but the company can come on your land and work, drill, dig whatever. It's not a contract issue its a legislative issue 

You are wrong. That's not how it works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 3rdnlng said:

You are wrong. That's not how it works.

 

Might have been how it worked 150 years ago.  And it may still work that way to some degree - the Centralia mine fire certainly runs under private property, and I never recall anyone being paid for mineral rights.  Mining companies can't just dig ON your land without permission...but they can certainly dig under it.

4 minutes ago, Nanker said:

I believe Tibs is right on this, 

 

That !@#$ing hurts to read.  

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At one time the owner had to give up those rights, whoever that owner was. Now I'm not saying that many years ago there couldn't have been a little chicanery but if you buy a property today there will be a title search which will show exactly what you are getting title to. The mineral rights may have been previously sold so you are getting a property that allows the entity that has the mineral rights to come on to the property and extract the minerals. Typically speaking, natural gas royalties are paid on a percentage (normally 1/8th) plus a specific maximum for personal use. Also, the mining rights can be sold for a one time lump sum, so it might appear that the present owner is getting nothing but in fact they are getting a reduced price for the property since it has no mineral rights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...