Due to The decision in the North Dakota Supreme Court regarding N.D. Owning all mineral rights from the high water mark, some mineral owners have lost mineral acres they had thought belonged to them. On the other hand, due to the movement of the river, some mineral owners’ high water mark has moved away from their land giving them more land. How does one document the gained mineral acres?
Suzanne, I'm not absolutely certain but the corps of engineers may have the information you need.
Ty RW
Suzanne,
As a victim of the thoroughly corrupt agencies and courts of the state of North Dakota, I can attest through personal experience that you will have great difficulty trying to prove anything even if you can get a state or federal agency to cooperate with you by supplying evidence that accretions fell in your favor. The state pretty much thinks that it all belongs to them back to the time when North Dakota became a state. I tried to get aerial photographs, surveys etc. from the ACE and I can tell you that the lower level employees were cooperative but as soon as a manager or supervisor got wind of the request, all of their records suddenly did not exist or were otherwise unavailable. Good luck to you.
Thank you Dogbert. It is quite the battle. We have encountered exactly what you speak of in regards to the state employees not cooperating in providing ANY information. It is quite an eye opener in regards to how I have always perceived my country to be and the way it really is. This is not the way the country was as I was growing up. It is very alarming.
Dogbert said:
Suzanne,
As a victim of the thoroughly corrupt agencies and courts of the state of North Dakota, I can attest through personal experience that you will have great difficulty trying to prove anything even if you can get a state or federal agency to cooperate with you by supplying evidence that accretions fell in your favor. The state pretty much thinks that it all belongs to them back to the time when North Dakota became a state. I tried to get aerial photographs, surveys etc. from the ACE and I can tell you that the lower level employees were cooperative but as soon as a manager or supervisor got wind of the request, all of their records suddenly did not exist or were otherwise unavailable. Good luck to you.
Typically a survey should remove all doubt. In addition to accretion (losing of land) you also have reliction (gaining of land). As one side of the river gains, the landowner on the other side loses.
This only applies to the normal meanderings of a river. An event that quickly and permanently moves the course of the river, like a flood, typically leaves the land ownership as is.
Buddy Cotten
When inquiring from the Dept of Trust Lands the inquiry was replied to by an assistant states attorney!!! Needless to say we dropped all inquiries of the Land Trust Dept because why would the states attorneys office reply for the trust lands dept.??? It certainly made me think exactly what EPL just alluded to. We’re supposed to play a guessing game. It appears the area I inquired about actually gained from looking at the survey from 2011 but Continental is indicating my 90+ acres turned to something like 7 while my cousin, who has the exact same undivided interest as I, is told he has 20 something acres. He and I should each have the exact same amount of mineral acres regardless of where they determined the high water mark to be. I have a feeling this high water mark decision opened the door to more court actions by many more people for the very reason mentioned by EPL. We can’t just guess where the water mark is and what nut would want to sign a waiver??? I am surprised at North Dakota because I always viewed ‘the people’ as honest upstanding people. I know my people, who settled and ranched there, we’re upstanding, honest people who wouldn’t do underhanded things. If you read some of the history of the state you’ll see where they stood together and had each others’ backs. Where did it all go sideways? Who is it in government that the people would allow to put this face on North Dakota. Shame. Shame. Shame.
Suzanne, it's the greed. The money may not belong to the public servants but they get to decide where it's spent, almost as good. Then too, allowing oil companies to treat mineral owners however they like and even intervene on the oil company's side in a private deal between mineral owner and oil company, the answer is money. They want the oil companies to be happy for the revenue they generate for the state. A well for you is also at least 15% in taxes for the state, severance, production and income tax. Then too, some public servants go to work for oil companies after leaving public service. There was talk of abolishing the unnecessary state income tax in ND, it was voted down. Greed.