Letter: Pipeline approach undermines property rights
(Editor’s note: Summit Carbon Solutions disputes the author of this letter owns land along the company’s planned pipeline route)
Trevor Jones of Summit Carbon Solutions (solutions to what?) believes we should take our emotions out of decision making.
I’m a third-generation farmer but neither my grandparents nor my parents owned any land. It made life a little harder for them. They had to move occasionally, and my parents finally gave up their life’s dream when I was a teenager. My dream then became to own land and farm. My family and I worked long and hard to do this. We drove older used vehicles, and farmed with older used equipment but we did it. We made those payments and paid those taxes, religiously.
LETTER: A family without a state
The Dakota Scout is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support a locally owned, operated and printed newspaper, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Then along comes a company that has the audacity to call itself a “Greenway,” and says; “That’s real nice, but we would like to use that land for our own purpose, which is profit of the government’s, at the taxpayer’s expense.”
When I repeatedly said no thank you, Mr. Jones and his colleagues say: You should agree to this, because if you don’t, we’re going to do it anyway.
Try removing the emotion from this situation.
Look into this, folks. This is not your local REA or gas company, and they are not building a hiking trail or bike path.
I hope all of you have the opportunity to realize your dream. But if you do, look out for Mr. Jones and his kind.
Thank you for sharing your story - so few first-generation farmers manage to own land, and I applaud you.
Not everyone understands that once the CO2 pipeline is buried, the landowner assumes all risk if there is an accident - even though the easement is permanent. And not everyone has tried to farm over ground that isn't properly repaired after a pipeline is laid. During the laying of the Lewis and Clark water pipeline on our land, the clay layer ended up on top, and yields were never the same in that half-mile stretch of ground. Also, it took many years after burying the pipe before the rut left from settling was gone.
I think Tom's main point is well taken. A small handful of people (not from South Dakota) will benefit massively from the billions of dollars of tax money poured into this grift, while relative crumbs are left for the rest of the people in its path. It should be Tom's choice if he wants to participate, guaranteed by the 5th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Taking away Tom's rights for the benefit of a private company should give everyone that owns a house, land, building, or farm pause.
I appreciate your hard work and thrift. I understand that a bike path would remove farmland but how does a buried pipeline affect your ability to farm the surface?