CBM reducing land values

[cowdog]

By out of hand I mean that the Culture of Denial Spin-doctor could no longer hide them. There is a lot of problems and an answer question that go along with this CBM, I'll post a few more later, I got lots. By the way anyone heard of Ulta-shallow Gas, I understand that the EUB is currently biulding a data base on its potential here in Alberta?

[cowman]

Well again, thank you for the information, very interesting!
Maybe I am naive but I like to think people are not liars...until they prove otherwise!...even landmen!
I have not negotiated any agreement for several years without my lawyer. Without a doubt he has made me a lot of money...whether I paid him or the oil company!
I personally don't get all bent out of shape over gas migration. We have had gas in our water long before any drilling ever took place around here.
I have heard people who claim CBM has destroyed springs...and I do believe them. I recently had a CBM well drilled less than 100 meters from my springs? I was quite concerned but the company sent out a guy who showed me what they were doing, tested everything, and in the end I was satisfied there was no way this well was going to be a problem. I guess we all have to decide just what we can live with?
This province was not built on confrontation? We need to find a way to co-operate to develop this resource? Unless you own the mineral rights, you do not have a right to keep the owner from exploiting his property.
I am not saying the government or companies should be allowed to trample all over the farmers rights? I do not think we are getting a fair deal or are dealing on a level playing field?
Hopefully Mr. Stelmach will start to change that?
I am not against Surface Rights groups! I belong to one. Some of the members are a "little bit out there" but most are just farmers trying to get a better deal and protection for their farmland? I can understand that some people don't want any activity on their land and I guess they need to talk to the government about that! Most farmers welcome the oil company and their money!
I do believe the Surface Rights groups do a good job of educating the landowner and the people who step up and take an active leadership role are doing all landowners a great service! They spend a lot of time and effort without a lot of acknowledgement? My hat is off to them!

[GreenValley]

farmers_son: I would put it to you that if the company can directional drill they why do they need the right of expropriation? Why do they need to right to take your land by force if they can go to the neighbours land so easily. I think technology has advanced to the point where the Surface Rights Act could be abolished as the company can access their minerals without expropriation.

Due to fact the company has the directional drilling technology, the company could no longer making excuse for themselves. Here example what happen. When Petro Canada call us ask to permit surveyor to enter our land. The surveyor setup stake the wellsite ,it is close to river and is sitting on farm land cultivate fence in between them. Later days later company call back, told them NO and want to move to other place other than that site, adverse disturb is way too high and company say NO either. Again call back want to move other place and company say firm NO. So feel been no idea of what next of what to do. So I ask my Petro Canada worker friend, he suggest me go see EUB, so this is my last chance to see them. I went into EUB office and told them about whole thing, he said that company can use directional technology and can move just about anywhere. So he ask me to arrange meeting with me and landman at same time to give them full surprised. So I gave him landman time of appointment to meet us. In the morning EUB agent guy came in about 1/2 earlier hour before landman walking into my house. We talked to EUB agent about this, and waiting for landman to coming in. The landman finally came enter house and to his full surprised that EUB agent is there with us. Before he talking, EUB explaining to landman that we discussed on phone told them NO and want to moved to other location, and told them to must move to other location as offer them to move 3 different locations. After brief explaining to landman, EUB quickly leave. Then landman continue their proposed the contract and will ask boss about move to different location. In next day a call from Petro Canada say will do accept move to on 3 different locations. They send construction consultant to search the right location and call company back for proposed location, and they accept the different location than the company offer in first place. I really never forget that 2 mens in my house. Pretty scary at first but feel free at last. Reason is EUB agree that adverse affect is too low for adverse disturb is too high so offer other option is move to other location as long they has technology directional drilling. I hope that refer to CBM in future as well but with new CBM don't idea they will but give try. I feel kind EUB is my best friend but it didn't always.

[cowman]

What many people don't see is that there are some very good people working at the EUB and yes they can help you!
Now without a doubt the main goal is "get that well drilled" but they will try to make it work for everyone?
Many landowners are not against developing the resource...as long as it is done in a responsible manner? In fact I would guess the majority of landowners support developement?
The problem is there are some landowners who don't want any activity, no matter what, on their land? And that is okay if the owner of the sub surface rights can accomodate them? But at the end of the day the law does say the oil rights owner does have a right to access his property?
We live in a democracy. If the law offends anyone they have a right to try to get it changed? All you have to do is convince a majority of your fellow citizens that your idea is the right one?
Now personally I believe we need some changes how surface rights are dealt with? I believe the landowner needs to be better compensated and better protected? Ted Morton was the only leadership candidate who stated he would work to change that law...and that was a big part of why I voted for him! Obviously the majority didn't think so! So there it is...we have the status quo?

[coppertop]

cowman, the Surface Rights Board is under Morton's Ministry so it is going to be interesting to see if he follows through on campaign promises.

[cakadu]

Cowman, the "rights" of the resource owner should have to be balanced with the "rights" of the landowner. Perhaps I wouldn't feel so strongly about it if we were actually compensated for the land value that is lost and likely not recoverable in the future.

I would hazard a guess that many landowners are in "agreement" with leasing because of the circumstances that they are in and not solely because they want to see the development. How many producers actually want to have to farm around the leases?

[cakadu]

Cowman, the "rights" of the resource owner should have to be balanced with the "rights" of the landowner. Perhaps I wouldn't feel so strongly about it if we were actually compensated for the land value that is lost and likely not recoverable in the future.

I would hazard a guess that many landowners are in "agreement" with leasing because of the circumstances that they are in and not solely because they want to see the development. How many producers actually want to have to farm around the leases?

[cowman]

Linda: I am in agreement with you! There definitely needs to be a better compensation package in place? Unfortunately we have to work with what we have in place?
Coppertop: I agree it will be interesting if Mr. Morton can make some changes? I hope he can! But being realistic...A premier has a lot more bang for the buck...than a minister?
Hopefully Ed won't forget the little people who got him there?
So far I'm fairly ambivalant about Ed? He's doing somethings right, in my opinion, despite how he's getting trashed in the media. I guess the proof will be in the pudding?

[coppertop]

I would suspect that the Land Use Policy Framework may deal with some of what is being discussed on this thread. Surface rights were certainly a topic of discussion at any consultation meetings I have attended with respect to the Land Use Framework.

There will be further public consultation this spring, so it will be important to take advantage of the opportunity to provide comment on this issue.