- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
so the state gets mineral rights after erosion, but public doesn't get access?
Posted on 5/31/18 at 7:39 am
Posted on 5/31/18 at 7:39 am
LINK
It is private landowners, companies and individuals, that have lost more than 2,000 square miles of coastal marsh over the past century. That process is financially benefiting the state under an old law that grants the state government the rights to oil and gas deep below navigable waters, including coastlines where erosion has converted land to water.
The more land private landowners lose to erosion, the more open water the state can claim to pursue the rights to the minerals underneath. The alarming rate at which the coast is eroding means that the state is able to capitalize on one of its greatest threats. In the process, it's netting hundreds of millions of dollars in mineral royalty payments a year, records show.
It is private landowners, companies and individuals, that have lost more than 2,000 square miles of coastal marsh over the past century. That process is financially benefiting the state under an old law that grants the state government the rights to oil and gas deep below navigable waters, including coastlines where erosion has converted land to water.
The more land private landowners lose to erosion, the more open water the state can claim to pursue the rights to the minerals underneath. The alarming rate at which the coast is eroding means that the state is able to capitalize on one of its greatest threats. In the process, it's netting hundreds of millions of dollars in mineral royalty payments a year, records show.
5
Posted on 5/31/18 at 7:49 am to choupiquesushi
quote:
so the state gets mineral rights after erosion, but public doesn't get access?
these two are not related.
quote:
That process is financially benefiting the state under an old law that grants the state government the rights to oil and gas deep below navigable waters, including coastlines where erosion has converted land to water.
Public already has access to these waters. Try again.
Posted on 5/31/18 at 7:49 am to choupiquesushi
The politics of this state have been messed up for a long time. With as much money that comes through our ports and from our ground, there shouldn't be a single pothole on our roads and our teachers should make 100k a year Louisiana should be booming. End rant
Posted on 5/31/18 at 8:36 am to Ron Cheramie
quote:Pretty much sums it up.
With as much money that comes through our ports and from our ground, there shouldn't be a single pothole on our roads and our teachers should make 100k a year Louisiana should be booming.
Posted on 5/31/18 at 8:42 am to choupiquesushi
quote:
That process is financially benefiting the state under an old law that grants the state government the rights to oil and gas deep below navigable waters, including coastlines where erosion has converted land to water.
But it's only navigable if it was navigable at statehood. The state doesn't assume ownership of the "land", as far as I know.
Someone can correct me on that if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's why we have the issue we do. The state does not assume ownership. Otherwise, it would be public.
Posted on 5/31/18 at 8:46 am to Cowboyfan89
I believe it’s per the 1921 (or 29) survey. If it was water in that survey, the state gets it, if it was land it’s the landowners. Whenever I did coastal projects I had to either use the ROW, get landowner agreement, or stick it outside the 21 survey lines.
Also the landowner could reclaim and rebuild up to that survey line.
Also the landowner could reclaim and rebuild up to that survey line.
Posted on 5/31/18 at 8:48 am to choupiquesushi
Posted on 5/31/18 at 8:52 am to choupiquesushi
There are tons of places were private property extends a couple hundred yards out from the shoreline. Also no mechanism exists in Louisiana to separate surface rights from mineral rights. The article does not address either one of these issues nor does it discuss areas where disputes have been ruled in favor of the landowner. The state does not go around laying claim to things that have eroded away in the way the article would like you to believe.
I'd like to know why this chick wrote the article and where she got her information.
I'd like to know why this chick wrote the article and where she got her information.
Posted on 5/31/18 at 8:54 am to AlxTgr
Might as well throw in a comment about how CCA invented a time machine and lobbied for this law, really kick this thursday off right.
Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:01 am to AlxTgr
Of course I get DVs for bringing in logic. 
Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:05 am to Motorboat
Welcome....to my worrrrrrld. Won't you....come on innnnnn.
Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:12 am to eng08
quote:
I believe it’s per the 1921 (or 29) survey. If it was water in that survey, the state gets it, if it was land it’s the landowners.
Still doesn't matter in the context of this article. More land has eroded since then, but that new water does not become state water.
The writer isn't being honest in his assessment of the situation.
Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:40 am to Cowboyfan89
That’s my point, thatvsurvey is recognized by the state, they don’t just get to take the property once marsh erodes to water. They are bound to the navigable routes back then not today’s landscape.
Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:43 am to Cowboyfan89
Just read the full article, shot the state settled Bc they knew they would lose in court.
Posted on 5/31/18 at 10:00 am to eng08
quote:
That’s my point, thatvsurvey is recognized by the state, they don’t just get to take the property once marsh erodes to water. They are bound to the navigable routes back then not today’s landscape.
The biggest problem is the general public's misconception of navigability; especially naturally navigable. The State has the right to claim eroded property along naturally navigable water bodies (i.e. 1812). The State does not have the right to claim eroded property along navigable waterways that were made navigable through human intervention with private funds on private property.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News