Now let's hear our so called "conservative "wealth creators define "property". My hunch is that they'll remain very silent, because, apart from the ideological claptrap of hundreds of opposing opinions, there's no definition, even if Mr. Harper is anxious to put it into the Constitution.

The sordid fact is that there's no difference between surface and subsurface, or mineral rights, because they can not be separated and defined.

Another sordid fact is that by this law, jubilantly endorsed by the Campbell nuthouse, we don't own our properties.

Our gardens, or homes, our forests are on land composed of minerals. Our vegetables and trees feed on somebody else's minarals and property. The water in our wells also contains minerals, which belong to somebody else. The foundations of our buildings disturbed soil that doesn't belong to us, yet we pay taxes for it and have to submit to all kinds of laws the real owners of our properties are welcomed to ignore.

According to rumours, Mr. Bennett is a lawyer, so I would like to hear his definition of the separation between surface and subsurface rights. And never mind the usual ideological obfuscation and PR nonsense.

Neither he, or the rest of the nuthouse, or any of our "conservative" trolls can do it and whatever they may come up with I'll be happy to cut to pieces.

Ed Deak, Big Lake.

What's going on here? Just came back to the house from my thistle killing chores, growing on somebody else's minerals and soils, of course, expecting to read some vehement knocking of my leftist views by IAMC and neocon and noleftnut and workingman, and there's nothing after 3 hours!

Come on guys, now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of the wealth creating Party, and you're sleeping on the job. Gordie won't be pleased and Preston will cry his eyes out !

So, what is the definition of subsurface rights and property rights? If I put a spade into the ground on my own land, am I trespassing on somebody else's property rights?

Ed Deak

Ed - LOL. I've admitted before that you post some good stuff now and then. Before this deteriorates into another idealogical mud sling isn't it true that the Liberals didn't create this policy, only added the online registration capability?

In either case, I'm with you regarding the issue of mineral rights on private property.

Maybe it'll turn out that this test case could affect the law.

Regardless of the definition, I do not own any land, just rent a townhouse!

Oh wait I am co-owner of crown land that was stolen form the first peoples!

More clear written material about a matter which most BC residents would be interested in: if only it would show up on our public airwaves. But alas, it won't (except for publications like the Tyee and CBC). For which I remain eteranally grateful.

Talk about ineffectual governance! MLA Tom Christiansen "wishes there was something he could do"! It's simple, Tom! Do the right thing! You're a lawyer and you claim that "We are the government. We can do whatever we want!" Or have you "forgotten" making that statement TWICE! Your memory is very selective but then you are a politician! Have you heard of laws that are right and just or did you miss that lecture when you were studying to be a lawyer? MLA Bennett, the same goes for you as you, too, are a lawyer. Keep off of private land for mining purposes unless you have the written consent of the owner. You changed the laws to suit your purposes and you most certainly can change them back or have you not heard of "amendments" to legislation? Of course, you have! Bill 54 which drastically altered the Mineral Right of Way Act was passed under the Miscellaneous Amendments Act! See? "Amendments"! Stop making excuses and get on with it!

Although the article's title pits prospectors against landowners, it is mainly the present government and its deregulation ideology, speculators and former VSE scammers at blame here.

Kevin Falcon, now Transport Minister and in the early days of Campbellocracy, Minister of Deregulation, put forth the direction to scuttle most of the Mines Act and Regulations that prevented environmentally destructive practices and frivolous staking and exploration from taking place. Falcon, working on behalf of industry and investors provided the ground in which the current conflicts are taking place.

In the case of Falkowski's land, it was prospected without impact many years before being the mineral rights for barium were sold to a group of shadowy speculators and managed by the former holder of the Hedley gold 'recovery' mess beside the Highway #3 between Princeton and Keremeos. (Read archived David Bane's articles for VSE 'practices' or scams). The claims of rich barium deposits by the speculators are not borne by the prospectors own evaluation.

The level of destruction to take place on Falcowski's land is not warranted given the small size of barium deposits that can be recovered. The prospector claims that the barium is in a vein-like deposit and is best removed by underground tunnel methods rather than strip or trench mining where a massive amount of earth is removed to recover only a small percentage barium. Hence, the surface and subsurface of the agricultural land is forever disturbed and possibly destroyed for further grazing or haying practices.

Falkowski and his partner found problems with the Campbell-Falcon new Mine regulations where the amount of uranium that could be dug up while exploring for other minerals was greatly increased. The attempted to bring this to the attention of Vancouver's media moguls however only the Georgia Straight and Co-op Radio were the ones breaking this story two years before it appears here.

The Rock Creek area residents as well as other areas in BC already live at near maximum allowable levels of background radiation without any further disruption of the land which could release futher radiation in the form of radon gas and uranium.

In fact, uranium ore can found on the surface near Osoyoos in places.

I agree that more than a review of Mines Act legislation and regulations is required. A rewriting of the act and regulations is required to ensure that frivolous and destructive and dangerous exploration and mining does not occur in the province.

For the relief of property owners a legal mutual agreement of both the property owner and mineral company or prospector must be in place before exploration and/or mining of ore occurs. This should ensure that both parties are on an equal footing and provide for honest negotiations. Of course, with this in place it is not a given for either prospectors, exploration and mining companies from going ahead with their work without the owners permission. Honestly, the amount of land occupied for human habitation is this province is very low and surely there must be an enormous amount of mineral wealth in areas not so environmentally or socially sensitive.

The dispute mechanisms in place now must allow for other sustainability issues to be brought forward beside financial, such as social and environmental arguments.

Pity that surface and sub-surface rights weren't tied irrevocably donkeys' years ago. I think mining rights should be harder to get unless you show legitimate purpose. How about an adjunct to all land titles offering the option of owning or not owning sub-surface rights? That way the prowler living in the old bus would find it hard to locate a property having a residence that didn't own the mining rights. This would xfer a burden to the Lands Court but lift one from the Dept. of Mines.

Seems to me we don't really own our property anyay: It all belongs to the Queen.

I have been involved in some penny stock promotions many years ago and I left that business, because I did not have enough larceny in my blood, to stay in that con game. On the other side I am the first to admit, that if it was not for the free miners, prospectors, crooked promoters and speculators, US and Canada would not have had any minerals discovered and developed.
I use to say that if North Sea oil was hiding under London England, it would have never been discovered because of beaurecrcatic red tape. It is why in many countries even discovered resources are not recovered. Look at France or Israel. Nobody is even doing any exploration there. It takes some gutsy people like Gassy Jack or Whitey Wilson to develope rich country like Canada. If some investors got burnt, too bad, they had a chance to sell when price was high. If some landowners were too greedy, their children would probably sell or allow mining companies to develop. Resourcen in a ground are better than money in the bank. British Columbia has enough coal on the surface, to supply all the steel mills in the world for several hundred years. Why aren't we selling more of it? Because Chinese would go 2 miles underground to mine it and sell it for less. We can wait.

What really surprises me is not that the Fiberals are what they are, but that people seem to be surprised that they continue their old ways.

Folks, these expletive deleteds are going to destroy this entire province if you don't vote them out. It's that simple.

R. Smiley