Appointed!

[northfarmer]

northfarmer any ILO operator may apply to land spread vs injection. Municipalities used to have injection as a condition of their municipal permit but now that the Government has changed the rules municipalties can only comment on land use issues and whether the proposed operation is consistent with the Municipal Development Plan of the county. They can ask for injection to be a condition of the permit but it doesn't necessarily happen.

There are a lot of areas where there are no people but there are municipalities in the peace region that are getting saturated with hog operations and the communities are concerned. Groups that oppose applications for feeding operations only have standing if they are considered directly affected, which means they must live within a prescribed distance of the operation. Only if they have technical reason why the operation doesn't meet the criteria of the legislation will their concerns be taken seriously. When municipalities were responsible for the siting of feeding operations the community could and did shut the application down, that is not the case anymore.

One bad operator in an area can make it exceedingly difficult for any future ones to live in harmony with the community.

[cowman]

Emerald: It is sort of funny how there is this big fuss over a pig barn but not over a sour gas plant? The company asks for permission to build and voila they have their rubber stamp!
The pig barn might be unpleasant but it won't kill you in the twinkling of an eye!
These ethane lines I am talking about are very thick pipe and it is doubtful they would rupture from hauling a large manure wagon over them, but the fact is the farmer should get permission before he crosses and the fact is if he did rupture a line he would be liable...well if he wasn't instantly vaporized!
Another farmer was out trenching some run off sloughs close to one of these same lines a few years ago. That sure got some attention real fast! The oil company guy told him if he hit the pipe fairly hard with the trencher it could cause a breech!
Now these same lines run pretty close to my sons house. It is like having an atom bomb planted in your back yard!

[northfarmer]

Cowman, you get the point.

Thanks Emerald, I agree with you on your points and I am aware of the issues aournd ILO's.

The key issue is not ILO's, but the fact that oil and gas developments, their impact on the farmers and landowners seems to work off a different set of general rules, laws and regulations when it comes to their development and approval. I also recognize they cannot be viewed in the same light.

Specifically I feel that surface rights owners, which is almost what all of farmers are, excepting those fortunate enough to have mineral rights, have been getting rolled over by the quest to bring oil and gas and now CBM(cola bed methane) to the market at the least possible cost to the industry.

We need stronger representation on behalf of property rights owners, sorry I should say surface rights owners, to balance the govt, regulatory officals and the strong energy lobby.

That is why Harper has said that the most pressing constituationa issue is property rights. Poltical and court battles are now being waged over eminent domain ruling in the US courts over redevelopment of property.

It seems that we have the same underlying battle to be fought over access to our surface rights. Not suprisingly there are other threads that are talking about defending access to the public to our surface rights as a means of getting action on farm issues.

[northfarmer]

The oil and gas industry help pay the cost of the regulator which of course is the EUB.
The livestock industry pays nothing toward the cost of the NRCB and applying for a permit costs nothing so of course they are playing by a different set of rules. The big problem with farmers and oil companies et al, is the following:
If a group wants to oppose a development or band together to get a better price for a pipeline etc., there are always landowners that will not join forces with the rest and that is where the company or landman can use a divide and conquer strategy.

Seismic is a case in point. Some people allow them to go all over their land and think they are making a killing, others have very stringent conditions that they must follow, and their are those like myself, that will not allow them on period !!!

Legislators are of no help to get a fairer deal for farmers as far as resource extraction goes, remember the legislators are our MLA's who all feel that industry is #1, unless you happen to have the ear of an opposition MLA that can make some noise !!

[cowman]

The whole trick to dealing with any oil company is "be informed"? If you have a surface rights group in your area...become involved and share the information!
By law you can not keep out the oil company unless you own the mineral rights and haven't leased them. But you can make it very difficult for them? If you are trying your best to keep them out...never talk money! Put up every roadblock you can, give them the runaround when they are surveying, and tell them you will be retaining a lawyer! Often they will just say to hell with this and pass you by...you are too much trouble.
If it is more money you are after, be creative! That landman is just looking for a solution to get that well drilled without screwing up the whole area pricing structure! It isn't about giving you another $500...its about having to give everyone else $500!
Even a low producing well like a coalbed well can generate a good deal of money. The one I have on my land produces about $52,000 a month...so whether you get another $500 is irrelevant?