Sask. oil and gas

[ivbinconned]

“Every five years” you’ve got to be kidding??

“gold mines for some folks”…now that maybe true…what about the rest?

“should be compensated for input costs such as fences, etc.,…but cowman says…

“The lease holder is a "grazing lease holder"...nothing more? He is renting the grass,”…

so why should the lease holder pay for any improvements, sometimes at great cost…with copper and cowman only giving a five year lease??

“If you want to get a windfall from surface lease or right of way...then go buy the land?”…Now I can agree with that…will the crown sell it?? Horse probably will not want someone else to buy it…and the greens will sure oppose selling it!!

“The lessee knew full well he was buying a "grazing lease"?...
I suspect that many were expecting and payed for a lot more than that!!


You all advocating wealth distribution only by the government…be careful what you wish for.

By the way do any of YOU have a crown lease?

[cowman]

Ivebinconned: Of course the leaseholder expects more than the grass...as the government has let this happen. That doesn't make it right? That is why I said the government should buy out the leaseholders rights.
I just threw out 5 years as an example, it could be somewhat longer? How much private rented pasture is rented out on more than a year to year basis? Of course the leaseholder should be compensated for fences etc.? Basically just like private rented land...you wouldn't expect to have to build the fence for the landowner for free.
I don't know if the grazing fees reflect a fair price for the grass...I do know the Alberta citizen is losing millions in surface rights money? If there wasn't a cow on the grazing leases the taxpayer would save millions of dollars!
And no I don't own a grazing lease, never have, and have no desire to ever have one.

[coppertop]

a few years ago a high profile person in the province was able to snap up a grazing lease just off highway 22, he does NOT own a cow, and rents the pasture out, but collects the surface lease revenue every year. It was rumoured that he had 'inside' information before he acquired the lease. Many real cattlemen were interested in the lease but it was gone before anyone knew it was available. That is the sort of sweetheart deals that have ticked people off with the grazing lease structure.

[ivbinconned]

But Cowman you also wrote this…

“As a cattle producer...you just removed my biggest competition...bigger than every darned South American and Australian that ever drew a breath!”

How do you arrive at that conclusion, when you state you believe as I do that the land should all be owned privately….there would STILL BE COWS ON IT!! Also I think you are wrong in another way about that as I think it is the tax deduction dynamics that sees many wealth lawyers doctors etc who invest in cattle to fill the feedlots and buy cows that impacts the ‘real” cattleman more than we know.

You also wrote…”The CROWN owns this land and the CROWN (citizens) should get the benefit of any added money from oil/gas/coal/diamond/development/etc.!

But they are! The lessee is only being compensated for the “surface” activity that he has to work around.

Until or unless this land is deeded this is still better than the crown i.e. Politicians given the pleasure of diversifying the economy…I’d much rather see you and Horse do that…in a heart beat! Any other way is a Castro sort of deal!!

“No one should have a "government advantage" in the cow business? Frankly there just isn't the revenue to compete with "welfare cows"?

Again HOIW would this change that you suggest ...change the market?? And make you and Horse (can’t believe you are on the same side) more profitable??? There could still be as many cows…maybe even more with the added incentive to improve ones OWNED land.

“I just threw out 5 years as an example, it could be somewhat longer? How much private rented pasture is rented out on more than a year to year basis?” LOTS

“I do know the Alberta citizen is losing millions in surface rights money? NO...IT IS CITIZENS WHO ARE GETTING IT! If there wasn't a cow on the grazing leases the taxpayer would save millions of dollars! AND SPEND IT ON HIGHER BEEF PRICES OR ON IMPORTED BEEF!!!

If the land was deeded ...still the public would have NO CLAIM, nothing would change!! Joe Blow, who leases now, would own, and gain the benefit, and good on him.



Copper, if what you say is true about the sweetheart deals, then that is “political corruption” and the lease holders in general should not be blamed or punished.
Crown leases in Saskatchewan are allotted to the smaller and less established producer.

Again I write…be careful what you ask for...there would as always, be un-intended consequences.

[Horse]

IVBC i have to ask you do you own a lease .
As to how you presume all those cattle would still be there i dont know , the real problem is if you have a lease you are compeled to own cows or you may lose it and there goes the welfare cheque, now if you could just have a lease that costs you a few hundred a yr and you get thousands in welfare why would you want the bother of having cows?
You stated in sask they tend to give to the smaller producer well that would be nice but how do they get the land back when you get larger or make more land for the smaller guy?
What is the deal on sask leases do you get total ownership like here?
As for fencing a fence is capatilazed over 10yr but of course there is still a residual value and if someone was to out bib you on a lease there could easly be a figure put in place to compensate the prior owner, you see there are solutions if anyone realy wanted to look.
Cowman is right most of the land would be better off left to wildlife and the gov would make far more on the sale of hunting lisnces not to mention the recerational and resources.
On politicl coruption I an sure we dont have the market cornered as you have stated befor you also have it in sask and federaly.

[ivbinconned]

"IVBC I have to ask you do you own a lease?”
YES I DO, INCLUDING IT, I AM STILL THE SMALLEST OPERATER IN THE CUMMUNITY. WISH THEY WOULD SELL IT TO ME.
THE IMPROVMENTS THAT I HAVE PAID FOR ON IT INCLUDE WATER SYSTEMS, FENCING, CORRALS BUILDINGS AND I BROUGHT IN POWER. FOUR FIVE YEARS STRAIGHT DURING A DROUGHT I HAD TO PAY THE FEES, WHICH ARE QUITE A BIT HIGHER THAN IN ALBERTA, AS WELL AS THE TAXES…WITH ZERO INCOME. COULD HAVE USED A COUPLE OF GAS WELLS!!

“As to how you presume all those cattle would still be there i don’t know, IF THE LAND WAS PRIVATLY OWNED…THERE COULD BE EVEN MORE.

the real problem is if you have a lease you are compelled to own cows or you may lose it and there goes the welfare cheque, now if you could just have a lease that costs you a few hundred a yr and you get thousands in welfare why would you want the bother of having cows?”

“You stated in sask they tend to give to the smaller producer well that would be nice but how do they get the land back when you get larger or make more land for the smaller guy?” CAN ONLY SPEAK FOR MINE WHICH IS ALONG TERM LEASE THAT HAS BEEN AN IMPORTANT, OR NOT, TO THE VIABILITY OF THIS PLACE. VERY QUESTIONABLE ON THE DRY YEARS. I SUSPECT IN THE DRY YEARS MUCH OF THE ALBERTA “SPEACIAL AREAS” CROWN LAND IS NOT VERY PRODUCTIVE AND RANCHERS SHOULD BE PAID TO STEWARD IT…OR DID YOU WANT TO SEND BUREAUCRAT'S OUT FROM EDMONTON??


“What is the deal on sask leases do you get total ownership like here?” THERE ARE LIKELY DIFFERENCES…DON’T KNOW WHAT THEY ALL ARE.


“As for fencing a fence is capitalized over 10yr but of course there is still a residual value and if someone was to out bib you on a lease there could easily be a figure put in place to compensate the prior owner, you see there are solutions if anyone really wanted to look.”

“easily”?? HAVE TO PUT YOU IN CHARGE.


“Cowman is right most of the land would be better off left to wildlife and the gov would make far more on the sale of hunting licenses’ not to mention the recreational and resources.”
HARDLY…THE TAXES THAT ALL THOSE “SO CALLED” WEALTH RANGERS PAY WOULD FAR OUTSTRIP HUNTING LICENCES AND THE BUROCRACY IT TAKES TO MANAGE IT.

“On political corruption I an sure we don’t have the market cornered as you have stated before you also have it in sask and federally.”
THAT IS EXACTLY AND PRECISLY WHY IT IS BETTER THAT THE MONEY GO AS SHORT A PATH AS POSSIBLE FROM THE OIL COMPANY INTO THE ECONOMY…SEND IT THROUGH THE GOVERNMENT AND THEY BUILD EMPIRES.

Hope you do not mind the capitalization, just a good way to distinguish my comments from yours.

Incidentally, the compensation in one area I know about in Alberta goes something like this.
A well drilled on private land …first year 5g and from then on 2g. On leased land the lease owner gets 3g the years drilled and then $1500 following years.

BUT the government does get some of the compensation too, $500 first year and $200 following years, PLUS royalties on the well from then on. So it is not like the taxpayers are not getting anything. It is still the most efficient way of spurring “local” economies. Especially those in the far outlying areas. It keeps people there and communities alive.

Not perfect Horse but better than Cuba. How compensation is handled on Saskatchewan leases…I do not know. But I hope it is high.

A very high degree of "property rights" dynamics should be applicable to lease's, if we are going to have them. That way the lessee's will treat them as their own and it will NOT be overrun buy every weekend hot tail pipe from the city.

[Horse]

IVBC I take it from your coments that it only gets dry on crown land or should we all get paid to stewart the LAND.
Hunting puts a lot more money in the provincial coffers than lease fees do and here in alta we get our lisnces from somewhere in the US and the game wardens dont even get gas for thier trucks where as our public land men have lots of gas to go fishing and hunting on tax dollars.
Where can the majority of city dwellers go if they arnt allowed some public land to play on not all familys can afford the national parks or the private camp grounds and what would all the farmers do if they couldnt cry THERES A COW OUT THERE.

[ivbinconned]

Horsee...you don't listen with the intent to understand, you only listen with the intent to reply!

You completely ignor the FACT that these leese holders PAY TAXES!!

[cowman]

I understand the concept of the long term leaseholders entitlement to some sort of property rights. And understand how they have incorporated that lease land into their business.
I do believe some long term leases should be sold to the lease holder, especially in areas where there aren't other pressures on the land. In those cases I don't believe the lease should go to the highest bidder, but a price determined and the leaseholder gets first refusal. Otherwise Cargill might just end up owning everything!
Who owns the grazing leases? The people of Alberta do? If I own a piece of land and rent it to someone....should they benifit from a windfall...or should I? Not talking about production losses...the renter should definitely be compensated for whatever production he is losing?
A simple solution: When the leaseholder wants to sell his lease...the government buys it back...and all the implied equity? Then if they so choose they can rent out the "grass", the "hunting rights" the "recreation use", and the "surface rights"? More money into government coffers for government programs or possibly tax relief!
Everyone should benifit from Crown land...not just the leaseholder? The fact is right now the people of Alberta are paying the leaseholder to run cows on it!
If I as a private landowner am renting land to run cows and I'm grossing $650/cow/year and paying $150 to pasture her....how do I compete with the guy grossing $650...but getting a check for $300? I make $500...he makes $950!
I guess I could go buy a lease and get in on the gravy train, of screwing the taxpayer...but that isn't the point?
How about the city slicker? Isn't Crown land his too? How is he benifitting? If he wants to go fishing or hunting, or quadding or whatever....shouldn't he be entitled to use "his" land, too?
Alberta needs more recreation land. The fact is people will pay for that? They will pay to have places for wildlife to live? Why have a bunch of cows on welfare....when no one wants to pay a fair price for cattle?
Turn the grazing leases into a big playground for the owners(the people of Alberta)! We'll all make more money and the people will have a place to go to enjoy their property!

[ivbinconned]

“Everyone should benefit from Crown land...not just the leaseholder? The fact is right now the people of Alberta are paying the leaseholder to run cows on it! “

Cowman THAT is yours and horses blind spot…”everyone” is benefiting, the lease holder IS paying taxes on his income as he stewards the public lands!! A good question to ask you is, would YOU like to live 50 miles east of Wardlow or Cessford?? Take away surface rights on leases and you will depopulate the outlying areas even more.

“Who owns the grazing leases? The people of Alberta do?”
NO the lessee owns the “lease”. The people own the land.

Let’s say you have two apartments, a duplex to rent out, and one occupant is a mechanic making his 20 an hour and the other occupant is a commodity trader and he is making hundreds per hour with out leaving home. They have property rights as a renter and it is no business of the land lord how they use the space!! The landlord has no right to expect more from the guy making more money.

“If I own a piece of land and rent it to someone....should they benefit from a windfall...or should I?”

You know the answer to that…if your renter seeds barley and gets $2 dollars a bushel, would you demand more rent?? Most likely not. But are you telling me that if he seeded canary seed and lucked out and got a big crop and $10 a bushel…you would then demand more?? Don’t think he would want to rent from you any more.

“How about the city slicker? Isn't Crown land his too?” How is he benefiting?”

No! Only IF he is LEASING it! He benefits by the TAXES (is this not clear?) collected from the lessee and royalties from the well production. Please take note above the compensation is LOWER on the leased land…a plus for the poor “city slicker” you would have to concede!!
If the poor city fellow wants to go out for an adventure on leased land he can do so WITH PERMISSION, it is not a public park.

“We'll all make more money and the people will have a place to go to enjoy their property!”

Not all…how quickly you forget your fellow cowman. There are a lot more worthy targets deserving your animosity. Your neighbor with leases has his challenges to…but he is easier to blame.


Jealousy is very fertile ground for Marxist thought and that in my opinion is what this is all about. We are all lacking in understanding of how an economy works. But one thing we know for sure and that is that you Cowman and Horse are not in the least bit interested in moving out east into the wide open spaces on the east side of the province.

The fact that you would remove the compensation from lease holders and in fact you both advocate removing the cows from all this land reminds me of years ago the large beekeepers who were already wintering their bees advocated stopping the import of bee packages from California. Their selfish reasoning was that they knew this would wipe out a lot of their fellow beekeepers (believing there was an over supply of honey) which would then drive up the price of honey.

They succeeded in closing the border! The result was that bee packages from Ontario and Quebec doubled in price, the packer’s just imported honey from China, and the price of sugar doubled so wintering cost shot up. And did they whine!!

There are always un-intended consequences...as I said before, be careful what you ask for.