Purchasing property and understanding mineral rights

[uthornsfan]

The wife and I are potentially purchasing property in the Manor area.

Current surface rights owners own 50% of the mineral rights, estranged family members own the other 50%.

Based on what I know about co-tenancy and mineral rights, if the other 50% holder decides they want to lease out their mineral rights for exploration, we as the surface rights are up a creek and have no rights to refuse.

The exclusion to this is if we hold 100% of the executive rights.

My question is this. Is anyone familiar or had to deal with this. How worried should we be about sometime in the future losing access to parts of our property, or do you know of ways to prevent a co-tenant from exercising their rights?

[crazy2medic]

you wouldn't necessarily lose access to your property, however you can't deny them access, if they put in a gas well and the well head is on your property they can access it at will! need to get an attorney to explain this to you, you'd own the surface they'd own everything below ground

[uthornsfan]

The property is pristine wildlife habitat.

I dont need a road, I dont need a well, I need privacy and peace. It already has a 2 acre pond and I am interested in preserving the property as it stands.

I know they have very few restrictions and I still have full surface and water rights.

[Sidro]

The best bet for you is to buy their mineral rights for you to be safe. If they own the minerals you can not stop them from developing them. You could wind up with lots of traffic on your surface property due to oil production or saltwater injection facilities.

[DevilDawg]

Just for your peace of mind. I just did a quick scan with satellite view on google maps. Not many pad sites visible at all in that area. The majority is south and west of you anyway.

[WTR]

Unless you have access to a geological survey of the area, I would not buy land that did not convey the mineral rights. Also, be aware of any existing easements to the property.

[WTR]

Interesting.

I am not your lawyer, but I puzzle at why you would object to a well? Even if they don't find anything worth producing, you could get a nice road, a water well, and possibly a stock tank out of the deal. If they find something, that's even better.

How would that be better for him if he does not own the mineral rights?

[anygunanywhere]

Talk to an attorney that specializes in petroleum leases. We had to when we bought our place. Mineral rights owner signed agreement to not put any wells or equipment on our property.

[Lynyrd]

You didn't say how many acres, but with today's technology in directional drilling if it not a large tract of land the well can be next door. There are lots of possibilities, and lots of pitfalls.

[Scott Farkus]

I don't know anything about "executive rights", but as I understand it, yes, the owner of the minerals has every right to have them developed. If that means wells and roads and trucks on your property, then there will almost certainly be wells and roads and trucks on your property.

Don't quote me on this, but I believe there are some exceptions pertaining to minimum acreage, and it's been my understanding that oil companies typically try to work with the surface owner to minimize damage and disruption. There may or may not be some legal regulations to that affect, I don't know, and as mentioned, horizontal technology has helped things in this regard. But bottom line, you are correct- at the end of the day your surface rights to peacefully enjoy your property won't trump the mineral owner's rights to sell what he or she legally owns.

[MechAg94]

If the surface rights owner lost access/use of part of the property to develop mineral rights, is there some compensation that is due?