[dalmations202]

Originally Posted by wmbwinn

agreed with Alexamenos. I know from prior discussions that Dalmations lives in a rural area as I do. I have some personal knowledge and experience on the issue of mineral rights as well. The value is heavily, heavily taxed. Of course, those with mineral rights are not complaining. It is basically free money with a passive income for which you do nothing. At some point, the family owned land where oil/gas was found, but they sold the land and kept the mineral rights. Thus, they no longer have any real investment in the passive income.

So, I understand both sides of the arguement.

I just hate the fact that I can't buy land with the mineral rights because someone has held the rights for eons because, as I have been told -- why give them up?

They might make something years from now worth more than all the land is worth right now. I'll never sell the mineral rights on the land where I live ...several generations down will have them -- regardless of what happens to the land (unless they start taxing the possible value yearly, in which case they'd have to give them up)

IMO, any land with non-producing wells, mineral rights should go back to the landowner after 10 years of non-production. All mineral rights separated from the land should be taxed heavily every year (if you are going to tax the land). Right now land owners are taxed more than mineral rights are "unless" they are producing.