surface leases

[farmers_son]

Cakadu: exactly so with the arbitration. I see the arbitration word being used to describe the EUB and SRB process but once you sign a lease arbitration becomes something else altogether.

You can argue decreased land values and you would be right. However the reality is that the landowners along the line will determine the value of the right of way because most will sign, in effect creating a market value for right of ways.

The land agents the power line companies use are particularly skilled and will use a combination of incentives, threats, coercion, unkept promises as well as the old standby: sign for what we are offering and if someone else gets more we will pay you the difference without the hassle of fighting our offer.

The real cost of having a powerline across your property is never determined. The landowners themselves decide what the line is worth and I would expect that 100% of the time they sign for less than they should.

[farmers_son]

If the proposed line were planned to cross my property I would be getting an current 'market' assessment of my home and three acre site, then ask the assessor to factor in what that assessment would decrease with the power line adjacent.
Linda if there area wildlife corridors in jeopardy, that may be the catalyst for changing the location. You have raised many valid points, and certainly if you have a group of people advocating to have the line moved it may carry weight.
Many years ago a dam was proposed on the Pembina River and people in the community caused such an uproar that the dam was never built. Same for the Glacier Power proposal near Peace River. The town of Peace River made enough pionts at the joint EUB/NRCB hearings that the project was denied. If groups opposed to the power line all band together and have valid reasons for their opposition it will get some attention.

[cakadu]

IF we could all band together with common concerns that would be great emrald. From what I have seen and heard thus far (bearing in mind the spin the media puts on things) many in opposition to the line are standing up and just saying no they don't want it in my backyard. That is playing right into the power companies hands and opens the door for the type of tactics that f_s refers to. Divide and conquer is generally the rule of the big guys, so sticking together with valid and logical points is the best way to approach this, from my own perspective.

I very much want proof that our land values will not be adversely affected by this development happening.

What would be very interesting emrald is to see if there were any benchmarks in terms of wildlife disruption etc. done when the line originally went through for the *****on Dam. I would be willing to be that 20 odd years ago when the dam was built, things like that were not taken too much into consideration. Still, if there were some proof to show how much the wildlife and natural capital was affected, it might be something that could be used to bolster the opposition's case.

Something to look into to be sure. I'm sure organizations like the Federation of Alberta Naturalists would have some information because they were around when the dam was originally built. Come to think of it, some of that history may just come in handy when they want to start developing around the reservoir, also known as Glennifer Lake.

[cowman]

I have no doubt in my mind I will get these conditions I want. I guess I've been around the block enough that I know how the system works?
You know there's the "way the law says it is" and then there is the real world? I've been paid more money($300 acre more) on a pipeline than anyone else got. It wasn't reflected in the "land price" but as an extra "consulting fee"! The landman isn't stupid, he knows how litigation can slow things down and if he has to give you a few extra bucks and you can give him a creative solution, he'll be happy to oblige? I also got a $500 "advance" to let them survey this particular lease....if they drill the hole the money comes off the surface lease, if they don't I keep the $500...not at all a requirement by law, but simple if they don't want to get a court order, delivered by a mountie before they enter the land?
I would actually prefer not to have any more coalbed wells so have no problem making it tough on this company. In fact I hear rumors that this particular company is about to skip town, as they screwed the company they were subleasing from! Tuck their tails between their legs and run back to the USA? Good riddance...and I'll enjoy their $500!

[cowman]

Linda, the Three Sisters Project in Canmore is a prime example of how wildlife corridors are protected.
The Nature Conservancy of Canada may be of some help with wildlife issues.
It is unfortunate that folks don't form a group as more voices certainly will get more attention particularly if they are all singing from the same songsheet.
Cowman, the compensation you have received is certainly great in your pocket and hats off to you, however, it points out how companies will take advantage of those who are new to or uninformed as to how they can use the system to their advantage. I think there should be transparency and level playing fields for all who receive surface lease compensation. It certainly does not bode well for a good neighbour policy of any company that will pay more to landowners because they can match wits with the landmen !!!

[silverback]

Cowman,
you wouldn't be referring to a company with 3 letters making up their name would you? If that's true, it is very interesting.

[cowman]

silverback: They are no longer paying the royalty checks. The checks are now coming from Petrofund. In addition Encana is now drilling wells on land that Petrofund has tied up...land that was supposed to be sub-leased to MGV. Without a doubt they had a horrible drilling season and never got half their work done?
Emerald: If you want transparency then you should be a member of your local surface rights group? I send in all my information. The extra I got for the pipeline was a "consulting fee" the survey entry $500 recorded as a "goodwill gesture". If anyone in the surface rights group wants the info...it is there. I never did anything that hasn't been done before, in fact I learned about both of these tricks from a neighbor who is notoriously tough to deal with. The main thing here is being able to share information...something farmers seem to have a real problem with? Want to keep their financial dealings a big secret or something! And so the oil companies pick them off at their leasure?

[cowman]

cowman our family has been members of the local surface rights group since the 1970's.

[sagewood]

Interesting information. I have managed to keep the CBM wells off my home section by insisting on complete fencing, trees to soften the industrial look, no structures, removal of the pipeline when the wells are finished, no flaring, dust control, weed control---the list goes on. So far I have been told that my project 'is on hold'. I can only hope it stays that way for a long time. I too, like all in agriculture, could use the money, however, I cannot sell my soul to the devil for what they consider fair payment. Once they get your signature, and you cash the cheque, you are pretty much on an up hill battle to make them keep to their conditions. With the brain-dead people they are hiring lately (i.e. they can walk and chew gum at the same time), it is a full-time job just to ride herd on them and make them adhere to their conditions. Mostly the field people say they knew nothing of the conditions and because they are in a hurry to finish their job and get back to town, they will take every short cut in the book.

Well enough of my rant for the day--for those who need it, Norma Lafonte, (403) 934 2393 or nlafonte@aol.com. She works with the Wheatland Surface Rights Action Group c/o Box 26, Site 14, R.R. 1 Strathmore, Ab. T1P 1J6. That is the last information I had for her. Norma proudly states that she has never worked for an oil company in her life. Those folks around Strathmore have had their fill of companies like Husky and Encana, so an attendance at one of their meetings is very enlightening.

Funny you say MGV is a goner--I predicted that Encana would work like a fiend in this area (east of Airdrie to Drumheller) to build up this field and then it would be sold--when I suggested this in front of one of their landmen--silence was the only sound to be heard--they are not good with the bluff. They have very successfully used the divide and conquer statedgy in this area and farmers have been sticking out their eager little hands the minute the landmen drive on their place--I believe my land is marked with a large, red flag!

And yes, Jim Fisher did retire, thus we do not get those in-depth interviews that he used to do which helped a lot of us know what was new and happening on the ag. scene.

All the best for 2006, and keep fighting the good fight..

[cowman]

Sagewood: You seem to have a good read on the situation. If you don't want these scoundrels around you can make it very difficult to keep them out?
Now I like money as much as the next guy, but when I started learning just how intrusive these coalbed boys might be, I started wondering just where this was going? I do have one coalbed well...probably one of the first in the province...on my land...and other than a problem of letting cattle out, due to ignorance, it hasn't been a problem. But one day I realized this: Do I want to be in the gas business, or do I want to run cows? Now I'm involved in various oil and gas things...but do I really want that in my home turf?
Dollars can't buy my home. Whether they are oil and gas dollars or developement dollars? In the big picture what do I do with dollars? Maybe I could go be a playboy or something? Sorry...those days are over and I'm not some old mid life fool!
I have decided that I don't want or need these petro-bucks...I just want to live out my days raising my cows and growing my veggies and living life how it was supposed to be lived?
So yea, I am unreasonable, in the eyes of the young oil men. I really wish they would just go away as they have nothing to offer me.

[farmers_son]

We need to be clear on one thing. You cannot keep the oil industry and power lines too off your land if they really want to be there. Sure there have been a number of good tactics discussed in this thread but bottom line you can’t stop them.

The people who are facing powerlines across their property have a much tougher battle than someone approached about a coal bed methane well. When you really think about the matter it is outrageous that the provincial government gives energy companies the right of arbitration, the right to take a persons property by force and at cost so the energy company can profit. Maybe there was a justification years ago when the electrical generation companies were utilities and had regulated rates but now it is a free market for them. Everyone involved in the energy value chain is making very good profits except the farmer whose land is taken by force or with the threat of force for a power transmission line. If the landowner got paid what it is worth in the free marketplace to sell the right to have a transmission line on that land then there would be no problem at all. The location of the line would be determined by the marketplace and the landowners would be happy.

If there is a clear cut example of how ag producers are genuinely oppressed by government it is in the way producers land can be taken by force without their consent. Everyone involved in the energy sector is doing very, very well and are enjoying record profits. No one expects the energy sector to provide oil and gas or electricity at cost but that is exactly what the grass roots producer receives, his and her costs and nothing more. We do not live in a free enterprise system in this province as long as the energy sector is given the right to take farmers land by force.

[sagewood]

Farmer-s_son and Cowman, you both make good points. I am not one of those people who inherited my land--I worked three jobs for many years to acquire what was a dream of mine since childhood--to live on a ranch outside of Calgary--a direct result of visiting the Calgary Stampede as a child. Now that has given away some as to my age, however, I still I have some good years left and like Cowman, actually enjoy working 'hands-on' with my cattle and horses and I do grow a mean garden that benefits my family and neighbors. That being said, it is sad but true that the oilies etc. have more rights than do we in the ag. sector. They are never expected to operate at a loss, however, that is what ag. has been doing for years--now we seem to be off topic here, but if the oilies would pay, on an escalating scale, for the right to mine oil and gas from our land, then I know a lot of neighbors who would be happy--as in they could use the extra cash to ease their work and debt load and would not mind being actively involved in policing their weeds, gates, trespassers, garbage, etc. for the oilies. That being said, however, the oilies absolutely reject the notion of actually paying the landowner anything more than minimum amounts to gain access.

I realize that we cannot keep them off our land thanks to our provincial government, however, I do not believe that we, as land owners, need to bear the full brunt of the activity, noise, traffic, dust, etc. etc. I emphasize to these landmen that they are not only going to impact the balance of my life, but they will impact my son, my grandchildren, and perhaps even their children if the fields last that long and should my family choose to remain on this land. The decisions that I sign off on now will impact my family for the next 100 years--not a decision to be taken lightly in my view.

The oilies have found that they can actually afford to make their 'shacks' look like mini elevators east of Beiseker. Now if they can do that for one landowner, can you tell me why they cannot do that and a little more for everyone? Obviously money is no object when it comes to building a 'twin towers' office building for Encana in downtown Calgary. I am not saying that oilies should not make a profit, but the obscene profits they are sending to one or two people, could be reduced somewhat and given to landowners to keep them from going under.

Anyway, I will never agree with the oilies and their strategies and will continue to inform myself through attendance at surface rights meetings. The best way to head off disaster for yourself is to hear what has happened to others who dove headlong into an alliance with the oilies. Mostly, what I am hearing, is that all have wished they had never heard of these oil companies....that the citizens of S.E. Calgary where able to stop Compton Petroleum and that the EUB stopped bending over backwards for Compton was a small victory, but it is certainly not over. I think that a 'provincial' landowner's association might be the way to go so we have more clout....

[cowman]

Farmers son: You are quite right about not being able to keep out oil companies or power lines or for that matter a road, dam or whatever else the public needs. The fact is the oil companies do lease the rights to recover the oil and gas underneath the land and do have a right to access it.
The Alberta government is very much pro oil and pro big business and that is just how it is? In the big picture we all benifit from developement and no one should be able to hold up progress for their own selfish desires.
I do believe however the individual landowner has a duty to cut the best deal he possibly can? The only way you can do that is be informed and if you aren't then you need to get some help! Farmers are so cheap when it comes to spending money to help themselves.
The number one thing anyone can do is join your local surface rights group or the freeholders association if you have any mineral rights.
In a large number of cases you can make it very expensive and time consuming for the resource company? They might just say to hell with this...we'll just go down the road! The big trick is never talk money until you get all your other conditions met.

[cakadu]

Cowman, I'm intrigued by one of your statements - "...we all benefit from development." Please tell me more about that as I am trying to understand this viewpoint.

Sagewood has hit on something that the First Nations people have said for many a generation - what we decide now has an impact for seven generations.

How selfish is it to want to preserve some of what Alberta is known for -i.e. it's mountains, lakes, rivers, wildlife and pristine conditions? We value these things yet place no actual value on our natural capital. In one generation we have gone from being able to drink out of any river to wondering what is in the river and how safe is it to drink? The Canada West Foundation has an interesting article about this very topic which can be found at www.cwf.ca

I encourage people to read it. Like it or not, the reality is that in years past wars were fought over many things, in the future (coming faster than we think) wars will be fought over water. Everything we do impacts water and the watershed. Without looking after them, what are we leaving for future generations?

[cowman]

Well Linda I presume you like to have electricity? And probably enjoy driving a car and heating your home? Somehow the power companies have get to their product(electricity) around? Transmission lines are a necessity and if this electricity is primarily for export so much the better, because it is American money in every Albertans pocket.
The infrastructure has to be kept up if we want the economic benifits from a vibrant economy? And yes we have to have roads, pipelines, transmission lines, etc. for commerce.
A classic example of progress would be the Dixon dam in your area? Without that dam in place Red Deer would probably be in Drumheller this last year! It improved that river and it created a nice recreation area that will become a major resort area in the future, thus providing jobs and income?
Hopefully the RedDeer municipal airport will become an international airport soon...again jobs and business into the area?
Quite often we forget that commerce is a very good thing? It allows families and young people to get ahead and flourish? And sometimes it is required that you give up your own wants for the overall good of society.