And, after 4 months of training, I found myself at the starting line of the Galveston Half Marathon.
I'm still not very comfortable referring to myself as a "runner," but I did manage to run the full half marathon. I did feel for the guys and gals who were running the full marathon, as they still had another lap around the course.
13 miles is a long, long way to run. I started off well, running between 8:30 and 9:00 for the first 6-7 miles. Then I started to get tired. I got slower and slower throughout the run, which is unfortunate, as I was about 2 and a quarter minutes shy of the pace I'd hoped to complete the half marathon. I don't have the results available yet, but my app on my phone indicates that I finished somewhere around 2:02.
The route was nice. You turn the corner, go up a little bit near the Pleasure Pier (which
just sounds like something from Pinocchio to me), turn right and you're
on the seawall. Running on the seawall was gorgeous - you can't be any
closer to the beach, and there's hardly anyone out in the water. you
run along the seawall for a mile or so, then do a short turnaround and head
back for a few miles before you go up a small incline and through some
resorty-looking area, then back around and into Galveston city again. The meanest thing the planners did was make the stretch after the last
turn like 10 city blocks. These aren't normal city blocks, though -
these are industrial strength, Texas sized city blocks, to match the
Texas sized last mile, which by my estimation was about 7.3 standard
miles. It's rather disheartening to run block after block without
seeing the finish line get any closer. But, I did keep going. I'm
happy to say that I did run the entire race, and then very quickly made
it to the port-o-can, because I had to go from about the 0.4 mile mark.
I think, if they were to ask my input, the one thing I'd request, not that they care, or that it might even be feasible, is that they reverse the route, so that you're running along the seawall for the last portion of the race. That 10 block run at the end would be much less daunting at the beginning, in my opinion.
Galveston was a nice location for a half (or full, I'm sure) marathon, but I'm not sure I'm going to sign up again next year. We'll have to see how I'm feeling. I was really wiped by the end of this. Part of it might have been the temperature - I'd been training between 30-50 degrees, but the run day temperature was in the mid-60s, which was less pleasant than I'd hoped, oddly.
I do feel better now, if a little tired.
Sunday, February 01, 2015
Tuesday, January 13, 2015
Running For Some Reason
So, back in October, I decided that I needed to start exercising again, as I saw my weight starting to creep upwards again. I didn't have time to go to the gym every day, as my work has me driving about a 200 mile round trip each day, so I had to come up with a different plan.
For convenience sake, I opted to go for a quick run in the mornings before I headed out.
Long story short, after about 2 months, I decided to sign up for a half-marathon. I will be running the Galveston Half Marathon in about 2.5 weeks, this after buying my first pair of actual running shoes shortly after Thanksgiving.
I'll let y'all know how it turns out.
For convenience sake, I opted to go for a quick run in the mornings before I headed out.
Long story short, after about 2 months, I decided to sign up for a half-marathon. I will be running the Galveston Half Marathon in about 2.5 weeks, this after buying my first pair of actual running shoes shortly after Thanksgiving.
I'll let y'all know how it turns out.
Saturday, August 23, 2014
Confounding
So after our TKD class recently, we went out for a "Staff Meeting," wherein the adult students/instructors get together at a local restaurant and chitchat about things while having drinks.
During our meeting, one of the guys mentions that our community has a Hindu temple in it and while mentioning it, he noticeably cringed. As he does this, I ask him, "And that is a problem?" He at first starts to say no, but in the middle of his sentence, changes course and then expresses to me that he does have a problem, because (and I'm abridging this quite a bit) in his mind, there are two religions in this world, one which believes you are imperfect and must atone for said imperfection, and one which says you can achieve perfection through good acts, and that is the wrong one. He then expresses to me that America was founded on religious principles, and cites, among others, "In God We Trust" on our currency as evidence. I pointed out that it was not put on our (paper) currency until 1955 (I was mistaken, it appears to have actually been 1957), to which another one of our colleagues said I was right, but that I was also wrong - he didn't expound on how I was wrong other than to agree that the United States was founded on Christian ideals.
The conversation then moved to the situation in Iraq and with ISIS/ISIL and why this is the end of days and why doomsday preppers are not all bad (I never said the preppers were bad, but I did say that ISIS could be compared to what might happen if our doomsday preppers decided to organize and try to push for what they believe is inevitable/right - mostly joking), but I digress.
The issue that this conversation brings for me is the notion, again, that this country is a Christian Nation, or that we exist based on Christian principles. As to the latter, we have plenty of evidence that this nation is not a Christian Nation based on the founder's acts - notably, the Constitution, our governing document, which in its corpus makes no reference to God whatsoever, and the only mention of religion is in Article VI, Paragraph 3, which recites that "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." I've already written in the past regarding Thomas Jefferson and the Danbury Baptist Church as well as his Letter to Levi Lincoln regarding same, as well as a letter to the Methodist Episcopal Church in Pittsburgh, PA. Further, we have the Treaty of Tripoli, which includes in its body the sentence "As the government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian Religion, —as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of (Muslims) —and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any (Mohammedan) nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries." Unfortunately, I was unable to expound on my position, because explaining these facets requires far more time and effort that "we are a nation founded on Christian Principles" does, and it was time to get going...
I have stated before - the United States is a nation founded by Christians. It is not, however, a Christian Nation. This is an important distinction, and one which is lost on many people, including, perhaps, my dinner friends.
Tuesday, April 15, 2014
Taekwondo Student Oath
I've noticed in the past that several Taekwondo Dojangs operate under the tenets of Taekwondo, as I referenced in a previous post. In addition to these tenets, I've found that our school also obeys a student oath. While there appears to be a relatively similar oath among different schools, our particular dojang works under the following five guidelines:
1: I shall observe the tents of Tae Kwon Do.
2: I shall respect the instructor and fellow students.
3: I shall never misuse Tae Kwon Do.
4: I shall be a worthy representative of Tae Kwon Do.
5: I shall strive for self-improvement and will always be eager to learn.
Of these, I find that our child students appear to have the most difficulty with number 5. There are times where it appears as though they are simply going through the motions. This appears to happen most often around the 5th kub (Blue Belt in our school), or about half-way to the Black Belt examination. I personally refer to this as the doldrum stage of Taekwondo. While it's imperative for the instructors to attempt to keep the students interested, it can be difficult to make children want to learn when it's clear they aren't. Often times, this is where you can see which students are in class because their parents want them there (they already spent this much time, effort and money, the student must finish, *or* "my kid is going to do *x*"), as opposed to the ones who are their because they want to finish what they started, or truly enjoy what they are doing.
For my part, I usually try to really get the kids interested by showing them the utility of what they learn, as well as increasing the bag work and especially the kicking - the parts that are "fun," while still trying to direct them in the proper form/technique.
Good times.
1: I shall observe the tents of Tae Kwon Do.
2: I shall respect the instructor and fellow students.
3: I shall never misuse Tae Kwon Do.
4: I shall be a worthy representative of Tae Kwon Do.
5: I shall strive for self-improvement and will always be eager to learn.
Of these, I find that our child students appear to have the most difficulty with number 5. There are times where it appears as though they are simply going through the motions. This appears to happen most often around the 5th kub (Blue Belt in our school), or about half-way to the Black Belt examination. I personally refer to this as the doldrum stage of Taekwondo. While it's imperative for the instructors to attempt to keep the students interested, it can be difficult to make children want to learn when it's clear they aren't. Often times, this is where you can see which students are in class because their parents want them there (they already spent this much time, effort and money, the student must finish, *or* "my kid is going to do *x*"), as opposed to the ones who are their because they want to finish what they started, or truly enjoy what they are doing.
For my part, I usually try to really get the kids interested by showing them the utility of what they learn, as well as increasing the bag work and especially the kicking - the parts that are "fun," while still trying to direct them in the proper form/technique.
Good times.
Monday, April 14, 2014
Tenets of Taekwondo
When I first enrolled in Taekwondo back in 2001 when I arrived in San Angelo, I took classes from an instructor who may have been skilled in Taekwondo. However, as many people no doubt have picked up over the years, skill at an activity does not equate to the ability to teach said activity (see, e.g. Thomas, Isaiah).
When I started up with Taekwondo again back in 2012, it came as some surprise to me that the was more to the art than just learning patterns and how to defend one's self. I learned that there were principles, a dogma, to Taekwondo - which are referred to as the "tenets" of Taekwondo.
Perhaps these tenets are not universal to all schools or forms of Taekwondo, but I've since come to find the same tenets referenced by other schools, both in ITF and WTF styles.
The Tenets of Taekwondo, as our school teaches them, are as follows (please forgive any misspellings on the hangul, it's been over a decade since I used it with any semblance of regularity):
Ye Ui (예의) = Courtesy
Yom Chi (렴치) = Integrity
In Nae (인내) = Perseverance
Guk Gi (극기) = Self-Control
Baekjul Boolkool (백절 불 굴) = Indomitable Spirit
While our school expounds on these tenets, I will not repost what the school wrote, however, in the event there are questions as to what is meant by any particular tenet, I will be willing to share my personal take on any one or more.
When I started up with Taekwondo again back in 2012, it came as some surprise to me that the was more to the art than just learning patterns and how to defend one's self. I learned that there were principles, a dogma, to Taekwondo - which are referred to as the "tenets" of Taekwondo.
Perhaps these tenets are not universal to all schools or forms of Taekwondo, but I've since come to find the same tenets referenced by other schools, both in ITF and WTF styles.
The Tenets of Taekwondo, as our school teaches them, are as follows (please forgive any misspellings on the hangul, it's been over a decade since I used it with any semblance of regularity):
Ye Ui (예의) = Courtesy
Yom Chi (렴치) = Integrity
In Nae (인내) = Perseverance
Guk Gi (극기) = Self-Control
Baekjul Boolkool (백절 불 굴) = Indomitable Spirit
While our school expounds on these tenets, I will not repost what the school wrote, however, in the event there are questions as to what is meant by any particular tenet, I will be willing to share my personal take on any one or more.
Friday, April 11, 2014
On Progression of Minors in Taekwondo
Back in March, my youngest son and I both tested and achieved our first Dan (1st Degree Black Belt) at our Taekwondo school. This was a pretty significant occasion for both of us. My daughter will be testing for her black belt in the fall.
I will note a couple things - first, my son is 9, and he's been taking classes for about 2.5 years. I understand that typically this is below the average time frame for promotion to a first Dan, however, it is not outside the minimum parameters found at Taekwondo-network.com. By comparison, I started in Martial Arts in the mid-90s, and all the time I trained combined, I'd say I probably took closer to the 3 year average, though by strict calendar counting, it took me about 18.
I've read on various websites opinions by various practitioners as to whether a minor (particularly someone below the mid-teens) can accurately reach a black belt rank. After mulling over what I've read on the matter in opposition to children attaining black belts, I think I would have to disagree with that opinion.
The general premise from what I can gather is that minors should not be able to achieve a black belt because they cannot physically hold their own against an adult. I believe this to be an unfair comparison. By this measure, then one could argue that unless you can match the talents of every black belt of your Dan in a particular style, then you should not be entitled to hold said black belt.
In one tournament I attended, one of the individuals I sparred against was in his mid-60s and had a pacemaker. At the time, I was an 8th gup, and I believe he was 5th. I was able to beat him pretty handily, as I was more physically capable than he was. By extending the argument that a minor could not hold his own against an adult, one would putatively have to hold the position that my opponent that day would not be entitled to achieve his Dan, as he was not able to keep up with an (at the time) overweight, out of shape middle aged guy, so there's no way he'd have been able to keep up with a 1st degree, fit 20 year old. I disagree with this notion.
The black belt is, as much as anything, a symbol of accomplishment - a sign that you have mastered the patterns presented and that you have an understanding of the practical application of the motions contained therein. If we were to take a peer-based approach to the examination of this, as opposed to a mass-based approach, then it would seem to me that a minor who has mastered these concepts has indeed earned their ranking. Withholding a Dan certificate, or arguing in favor of withholding, simply because of one's age seems more a matter of pride as opposed to any rational position, if one takes this approach.
Another argument I've read is that children lack the mental acuity to appreciate the value/importance of a black belt. This, again, in my opinion, is a very subjective argument. I've seen 30-40 year olds who have less mental wherewithal than my 9 year old. I've seen some 12-13 year olds who, if you were to tell me they ran their households, I'd have absolutely no problems believing you. Conversely, I know multiple 20-somethings who still don't know how to write a check properly. Age does not, simply by passing, bring wisdom or understanding. Using mental maturity as a lodestar does not provide, to me, much of an argument against promoting minors. If a child can show mastery of skills and a sense of respect for the benchmark he or she has achieved, it is my opinion that it would be petty to withhold said recognition based solely on one's prejudice as to mental maturity.
Again, these are simply my opinions. I do not profess to be "right," nor do I believe that because someone holds an opinion contrary to mine that they are "wrong." I am merely unconvinced that theirs is the correct position.
I will note a couple things - first, my son is 9, and he's been taking classes for about 2.5 years. I understand that typically this is below the average time frame for promotion to a first Dan, however, it is not outside the minimum parameters found at Taekwondo-network.com. By comparison, I started in Martial Arts in the mid-90s, and all the time I trained combined, I'd say I probably took closer to the 3 year average, though by strict calendar counting, it took me about 18.
I've read on various websites opinions by various practitioners as to whether a minor (particularly someone below the mid-teens) can accurately reach a black belt rank. After mulling over what I've read on the matter in opposition to children attaining black belts, I think I would have to disagree with that opinion.
The general premise from what I can gather is that minors should not be able to achieve a black belt because they cannot physically hold their own against an adult. I believe this to be an unfair comparison. By this measure, then one could argue that unless you can match the talents of every black belt of your Dan in a particular style, then you should not be entitled to hold said black belt.
In one tournament I attended, one of the individuals I sparred against was in his mid-60s and had a pacemaker. At the time, I was an 8th gup, and I believe he was 5th. I was able to beat him pretty handily, as I was more physically capable than he was. By extending the argument that a minor could not hold his own against an adult, one would putatively have to hold the position that my opponent that day would not be entitled to achieve his Dan, as he was not able to keep up with an (at the time) overweight, out of shape middle aged guy, so there's no way he'd have been able to keep up with a 1st degree, fit 20 year old. I disagree with this notion.
The black belt is, as much as anything, a symbol of accomplishment - a sign that you have mastered the patterns presented and that you have an understanding of the practical application of the motions contained therein. If we were to take a peer-based approach to the examination of this, as opposed to a mass-based approach, then it would seem to me that a minor who has mastered these concepts has indeed earned their ranking. Withholding a Dan certificate, or arguing in favor of withholding, simply because of one's age seems more a matter of pride as opposed to any rational position, if one takes this approach.
Another argument I've read is that children lack the mental acuity to appreciate the value/importance of a black belt. This, again, in my opinion, is a very subjective argument. I've seen 30-40 year olds who have less mental wherewithal than my 9 year old. I've seen some 12-13 year olds who, if you were to tell me they ran their households, I'd have absolutely no problems believing you. Conversely, I know multiple 20-somethings who still don't know how to write a check properly. Age does not, simply by passing, bring wisdom or understanding. Using mental maturity as a lodestar does not provide, to me, much of an argument against promoting minors. If a child can show mastery of skills and a sense of respect for the benchmark he or she has achieved, it is my opinion that it would be petty to withhold said recognition based solely on one's prejudice as to mental maturity.
Again, these are simply my opinions. I do not profess to be "right," nor do I believe that because someone holds an opinion contrary to mine that they are "wrong." I am merely unconvinced that theirs is the correct position.
Thursday, April 10, 2014
A little bit on Taekwondo
So, as I think I've mentioned before, I got my introduction to martial arts back in the mid 1990s at a school in the Monterey/Seaside California area, which taught Tang Soo Do. I didn't mind the school, but had to leave after a few months owing to a PCS.
Fast forward about 4 years and I find myself in San Angelo, Texas, where I decide to resume my training at a taekwondo school in town. Several warning flags pop up as I sign up - first, he wants a 6 month contract, second, he doesn't seem to be focusing too much on patterns, and third, in the time I went there, I don't remember ever sparring at all, though we did do several 1-step run throughs with what he referred to as "the hapkido."
I can't say with any real certainty that the instructor was a bad instructor, or that he was giving substandard training - I just know that the training he offered wasn't a match for what I sought.
Approximately 2 1/2 years ago, in an effort to get my youngest son active in something, we decide to check out the Taekwondo program at the local YMCA (my daughter was already taking Gymnastics there, and so the location was chosen out of convenience as much as anything else). The program is a supplemented ITF program (i.e. the school studies the tul patterns as opposed to the poomse, however, the primary instructor has added several patterns that are referred to as "free spar" patterns to complement the tuls). My son took to this like a duck to water - he appears to be a natural, at least as far as the patterns goes. He's impatient with his sparring, though he does enjoy the sparring.
The school does a pretty good job of combining the patterns with the sparring, though I do wish that we were able to integrate the 1-step sparring a little more, just to help with the spacing and timing training.
Some of this is due to the scheduling difficulties inherent in training at a YMCA, as there is only room to have 3 consecutive one-hour classes twice a week.
At any rate, I do enjoy the classes, and the kids appear to enjoy them, as well.
More on TKD later.
Fast forward about 4 years and I find myself in San Angelo, Texas, where I decide to resume my training at a taekwondo school in town. Several warning flags pop up as I sign up - first, he wants a 6 month contract, second, he doesn't seem to be focusing too much on patterns, and third, in the time I went there, I don't remember ever sparring at all, though we did do several 1-step run throughs with what he referred to as "the hapkido."
I can't say with any real certainty that the instructor was a bad instructor, or that he was giving substandard training - I just know that the training he offered wasn't a match for what I sought.
Approximately 2 1/2 years ago, in an effort to get my youngest son active in something, we decide to check out the Taekwondo program at the local YMCA (my daughter was already taking Gymnastics there, and so the location was chosen out of convenience as much as anything else). The program is a supplemented ITF program (i.e. the school studies the tul patterns as opposed to the poomse, however, the primary instructor has added several patterns that are referred to as "free spar" patterns to complement the tuls). My son took to this like a duck to water - he appears to be a natural, at least as far as the patterns goes. He's impatient with his sparring, though he does enjoy the sparring.
The school does a pretty good job of combining the patterns with the sparring, though I do wish that we were able to integrate the 1-step sparring a little more, just to help with the spacing and timing training.
Some of this is due to the scheduling difficulties inherent in training at a YMCA, as there is only room to have 3 consecutive one-hour classes twice a week.
At any rate, I do enjoy the classes, and the kids appear to enjoy them, as well.
More on TKD later.
Monday, October 14, 2013
Tournament Post-Mortem
So, I've not competed in 3 taekwondo tournaments, with a fourth coming up next month. The Apple completed his fourth and the Princess her third, so we are all on pace for testing for our black belts on schedule.
It does give me some concern that my school requires tournaments as a prerequisite for testing for black belt, but I do understand the utility of it. I just wish it wasn't so expensive (6 tournaments x 3 individuals x $75 - $1350 just for the tournaments, to say nothing of the equipment or the tuition for classes, which I understand and accept), or that there were alternatives available (say, for example, a seminar or something to substitute for one or two tournaments, or something).
At any rate. I only did patterns this time. I probably should have sparred, but with just me and the two childrens, I thought it best to let me miss out on the fighting so that I could get them home at a decent hour.
I've done better in tournaments, so while I'm disappointed, I'm content to know that I'm really just there this time to check a box. One more and I can test for my black belt, and 3 more in order to get the certificate.
The Apple should be able to get his certificate when he tests in the spring, and the Princess and I should get ours when she tests in the fall.
It does give me some concern that my school requires tournaments as a prerequisite for testing for black belt, but I do understand the utility of it. I just wish it wasn't so expensive (6 tournaments x 3 individuals x $75 - $1350 just for the tournaments, to say nothing of the equipment or the tuition for classes, which I understand and accept), or that there were alternatives available (say, for example, a seminar or something to substitute for one or two tournaments, or something).
At any rate. I only did patterns this time. I probably should have sparred, but with just me and the two childrens, I thought it best to let me miss out on the fighting so that I could get them home at a decent hour.
I've done better in tournaments, so while I'm disappointed, I'm content to know that I'm really just there this time to check a box. One more and I can test for my black belt, and 3 more in order to get the certificate.
The Apple should be able to get his certificate when he tests in the spring, and the Princess and I should get ours when she tests in the fall.
Saturday, October 12, 2013
Too Early in the Morning
But we're driving off to go show off our patterns and whatnot.
I'm a little anxious, as I am wont to be on the day of the tournament, but it's one more down, and then we are that much closer.
The kids should do well. They are sharp, and don't seem to let the nerves get to them.
I'm a little anxious, as I am wont to be on the day of the tournament, but it's one more down, and then we are that much closer.
The kids should do well. They are sharp, and don't seem to let the nerves get to them.
Monday, October 07, 2013
Meanderings
So we have a Taekwondo tournament coming up this weekend. This will be my third, the Princess's third, and the Apple's fourth, which means he has enough tournaments to be eligible to test for his black belt at the next Black Belt testing date, which I believe is in March of next year. We have another tournament next month in San Antonio that we are planning on attending, which would qualify the princess and myself for the belt, and would put the Apple one test away from earning his certificate to accompany his belt.
Y'all don't really know this, because, well, I don't think any of you read this anymore, but even if you did, I really haven't posted much about it, but I'm pretty giddy in that over the past almost 5 months, I've been working at getting myself into a shape that isn't round. I've been relatively successful. In all, before my workout this morning, I had lost 39 pounds, give or take, from where I was at the outset of this endeavor. I have been trying to incorporate more cardio and weights into my daily routine, as well as two one-mile walks with the dog, and my aforementioned taekwondo.
It's been tough to lose it, but I can honestly say that I feel better with it off.
Y'all don't really know this, because, well, I don't think any of you read this anymore, but even if you did, I really haven't posted much about it, but I'm pretty giddy in that over the past almost 5 months, I've been working at getting myself into a shape that isn't round. I've been relatively successful. In all, before my workout this morning, I had lost 39 pounds, give or take, from where I was at the outset of this endeavor. I have been trying to incorporate more cardio and weights into my daily routine, as well as two one-mile walks with the dog, and my aforementioned taekwondo.
It's been tough to lose it, but I can honestly say that I feel better with it off.
Sunday, September 01, 2013
Movie Night
So the wife and I had a movie night last night. We chose a couple romantic-comedies with foreign flair (yes, I went with Rom-Com - but there was a dearth of Meg Ryan, so I think we're okay).
The first movie we watched was a French movie called "Romantics Anonymous." This was a cute film - a Chocolate maker with severe social anxiety gets hired at a chocolaterie (or however you spell it), thinking she was going to make chocolate, but is actually hired as a sales rep by the head of the company, who also has a social disability, particularly with regard to talking to women.
The movie was cute, and there's no way that a movie of this nature could get released from Hollywood. I don't know if I'd watch it again, but it was not bad.
The other movie we watched was Outsourced. We watched this movie a few years back, right when we got Netflix, and thought it was cute then. I actually enjoyed it more the second time. This is a movie about an American sales manager whose department gets outsourced to India and he has to go out to Mumbai (I think) to train the new manager and sales representatives on being more passably American on the telephone. It is my understanding that the television show was spun off/premised on this movie, but I'm not sure.
There are parts where the movie is a bit slow, the acting isn't always top notch, and in a couple spots the pacing does seem a little forced, but the characters are likeable, and the movie is well worth the time. Particularly on a date night at home.
I recommend both, but definitely think Outsourced is an under the radar gem.
The first movie we watched was a French movie called "Romantics Anonymous." This was a cute film - a Chocolate maker with severe social anxiety gets hired at a chocolaterie (or however you spell it), thinking she was going to make chocolate, but is actually hired as a sales rep by the head of the company, who also has a social disability, particularly with regard to talking to women.
The movie was cute, and there's no way that a movie of this nature could get released from Hollywood. I don't know if I'd watch it again, but it was not bad.
The other movie we watched was Outsourced. We watched this movie a few years back, right when we got Netflix, and thought it was cute then. I actually enjoyed it more the second time. This is a movie about an American sales manager whose department gets outsourced to India and he has to go out to Mumbai (I think) to train the new manager and sales representatives on being more passably American on the telephone. It is my understanding that the television show was spun off/premised on this movie, but I'm not sure.
There are parts where the movie is a bit slow, the acting isn't always top notch, and in a couple spots the pacing does seem a little forced, but the characters are likeable, and the movie is well worth the time. Particularly on a date night at home.
I recommend both, but definitely think Outsourced is an under the radar gem.
Friday, August 23, 2013
Physical Fitness
I started my first course in Martial Arts about 15-16 years ago while I was in Monterey. I can't remember exactly which school I attended (it's entirely possible the school has closed down since then), but I remember they did Tang Soo Do and they also had a cardio kickboxing class that my friend attended.
Unfortunately, I was unable to commit myself to continuing with Tang Soo Do after 3-6 months, particularly after I moved from Monterey. I found myself out of martial arts completely until about 2001, when I signed up with a Taekwondo dojang in San Angelo, TX. I was unimpressed with the quality of instruction there, and did not stay longer than about a month.
It wasn't until I got my youngest (the Apple) into Taekwondo a couple years ago that I really started considering getting back into martial arts. I feel a little odd taking martial arts classes at the Y (I keep hearing Daniel LaRusso saying "Not at the Y, a real school!"), but I find the instructors are good people, they teach the kids well, and so I figured I'd take a chance with it.
My son is currently 2 steps away from black belt, and should be testing for candidate within the month. I am one belt behind him and my daughter, who started up a few months after me, is just past her halfway mark.
I don't know how much more physically fit taekwondo has made me, as we only have classes 2 nights a week for an hour at a pop, but I know that it did help. Adding the cardio and weights to the mix has really been the biggest benefit for my current bit of getting healthy.
I'm taking a short break from getting back to work, and just felt like rambling a little.
Unfortunately, I was unable to commit myself to continuing with Tang Soo Do after 3-6 months, particularly after I moved from Monterey. I found myself out of martial arts completely until about 2001, when I signed up with a Taekwondo dojang in San Angelo, TX. I was unimpressed with the quality of instruction there, and did not stay longer than about a month.
It wasn't until I got my youngest (the Apple) into Taekwondo a couple years ago that I really started considering getting back into martial arts. I feel a little odd taking martial arts classes at the Y (I keep hearing Daniel LaRusso saying "Not at the Y, a real school!"), but I find the instructors are good people, they teach the kids well, and so I figured I'd take a chance with it.
My son is currently 2 steps away from black belt, and should be testing for candidate within the month. I am one belt behind him and my daughter, who started up a few months after me, is just past her halfway mark.
I don't know how much more physically fit taekwondo has made me, as we only have classes 2 nights a week for an hour at a pop, but I know that it did help. Adding the cardio and weights to the mix has really been the biggest benefit for my current bit of getting healthy.
I'm taking a short break from getting back to work, and just felt like rambling a little.
Thursday, August 22, 2013
Losing Touch
I swear I've not completely given up on this blog, but I just don't find myself with anything interesting to write.
Since my last post, I started working out more, and eating (somewhat) more healthily. The goal was to not get winded while walking up the stairs to check on the kids... I take that as a sign that I was not in great health.
Since then, I've lost 35 pounds, give or take (39 if you count the post-workout weigh-in, but since we're in Texas I attribute most of that to water weight lost through sweating).
Feeling better.
Since my last post, I started working out more, and eating (somewhat) more healthily. The goal was to not get winded while walking up the stairs to check on the kids... I take that as a sign that I was not in great health.
Since then, I've lost 35 pounds, give or take (39 if you count the post-workout weigh-in, but since we're in Texas I attribute most of that to water weight lost through sweating).
Feeling better.
Friday, May 03, 2013
The Dominant/Servient Estate Theory, Part II
Today, I'm going to continue on my self-study summary of the Dominant/Servient Estate Theory as covered in the Texas Law of Oil and Gas, Second Edition.
The authors note that generally, the mineral owner's rights are established at the time of severance. This means that a landowner who severs the mineral estate from the surface must thereafter consider the mineral estate when they are developing the surface - you can't harm or destroy the minerals. Likewise, you can't subdivide the surface and put in covenants that limit or prevent the development of oil, gas, or other minerals in such a manner that deprives the mineral owner of their rights. This is also the case for subsequent purchasers of the surface estate, who then take their parcels/tracts subject to the mineral owner's pre-existing rights. The authors note, and in drafting Oil and Gas Title Opinions, this is where we would most often see this come up, that the mineral owner's implied rights of surface use are not affected by subdivision deed restrictions which might limit the use of the lots for residential purposes only. Finally, the authors note that a grantor who reserves the minerals and the right to use all the subsurface water for oil and gas exploration and production are not affected by surface subdivisions.
In the next paragraph, the Authors note that unless it's expanded by subsequent agreement, the rights of surface and subsurface use imbued on the mineral estate are limited to the surface estate from which it is severed. This is to say that if I own the minerals under Blackacre and the minerals under Whiteacre, I cannot use the surface of Blackacre to develop the minerals under Whiteacre without a separate agreement with the surface owner(s) of Blackacre. The text lists the disposal of salt water - you can inject salt water beneath the leased premises, but not for water from wells off the lease. The text does list an apparent exception.
Pooling or unitizing provides a different issue, and one which the authors address quite well.
The authors note that generally, the mineral owner's rights are established at the time of severance. This means that a landowner who severs the mineral estate from the surface must thereafter consider the mineral estate when they are developing the surface - you can't harm or destroy the minerals. Likewise, you can't subdivide the surface and put in covenants that limit or prevent the development of oil, gas, or other minerals in such a manner that deprives the mineral owner of their rights. This is also the case for subsequent purchasers of the surface estate, who then take their parcels/tracts subject to the mineral owner's pre-existing rights. The authors note, and in drafting Oil and Gas Title Opinions, this is where we would most often see this come up, that the mineral owner's implied rights of surface use are not affected by subdivision deed restrictions which might limit the use of the lots for residential purposes only. Finally, the authors note that a grantor who reserves the minerals and the right to use all the subsurface water for oil and gas exploration and production are not affected by surface subdivisions.
In the next paragraph, the Authors note that unless it's expanded by subsequent agreement, the rights of surface and subsurface use imbued on the mineral estate are limited to the surface estate from which it is severed. This is to say that if I own the minerals under Blackacre and the minerals under Whiteacre, I cannot use the surface of Blackacre to develop the minerals under Whiteacre without a separate agreement with the surface owner(s) of Blackacre. The text lists the disposal of salt water - you can inject salt water beneath the leased premises, but not for water from wells off the lease. The text does list an apparent exception.
Pooling or unitizing provides a different issue, and one which the authors address quite well.
Wednesday, April 24, 2013
The Dominant/Servient Estate Theory, Part 1
This is the first subsection to the Rights of Surface and Subsurface use section of Chapter 2 in Texas Law of Oil and Gas, Section 2.
When we look at the mineral fee ownership and the different rights, one of the rights we briefly mentioned in our last post was the implied right to use the surface in ways necessary to carry out oil and gas production operations. As an aside, I have seen numerous deeds where there has been a severance of the mineral estate but the mineral owner has waived their right to enter on the land - keep an eye out for this on your conveyances. It should be elementary to conclude that entering on the surface in order to carry out exploration, drilling, producing, transporting and marketing operations could in many circumstances result in interfering with the right of the surface owner to use the surface. How to deal with that - first we have to determine which estate is dominant. In Texas, we have case law that has established the mineral fee as the dominant estate, and the text cites numerous cases on point (I will limit my reference herein to Vest v. Exxon Corp., 752 F.2d 959 [5th Cir. 1985]). This means that the mineral fee owner can actually enjoin actions by the surface owner or lessee that interfered with reasonable use, operation and development of the mineral estate (again, more case references here - see the text for the particular cases). The text also discusses the historical chain of the doctrine that established the mineral estate as dominant back to the Kingdom of Spain, where Spanish law held all minerals were owned by the sovereign, and he necessarily had the right to use the surface of privately owned land for mining purposes.
The implied right to use the surface includes several activities that are often exercised by a company that has executed an oil and gas lease with the mineral owner. This includes conducting seismic tests (I can't remember but I think I saw an episode of Psych where the guys came across seismic testing equipment - maybe it was Monk?), building storage tanks, building roads (to get to the drillsite), and using the landowner's water for drilling and secondary recovery operations (secondary recovery includes adding pressure to the minerals subsurface to push more of them to the wellbore for production).
We will cover more of this subject on another post.
When we look at the mineral fee ownership and the different rights, one of the rights we briefly mentioned in our last post was the implied right to use the surface in ways necessary to carry out oil and gas production operations. As an aside, I have seen numerous deeds where there has been a severance of the mineral estate but the mineral owner has waived their right to enter on the land - keep an eye out for this on your conveyances. It should be elementary to conclude that entering on the surface in order to carry out exploration, drilling, producing, transporting and marketing operations could in many circumstances result in interfering with the right of the surface owner to use the surface. How to deal with that - first we have to determine which estate is dominant. In Texas, we have case law that has established the mineral fee as the dominant estate, and the text cites numerous cases on point (I will limit my reference herein to Vest v. Exxon Corp., 752 F.2d 959 [5th Cir. 1985]). This means that the mineral fee owner can actually enjoin actions by the surface owner or lessee that interfered with reasonable use, operation and development of the mineral estate (again, more case references here - see the text for the particular cases). The text also discusses the historical chain of the doctrine that established the mineral estate as dominant back to the Kingdom of Spain, where Spanish law held all minerals were owned by the sovereign, and he necessarily had the right to use the surface of privately owned land for mining purposes.
The implied right to use the surface includes several activities that are often exercised by a company that has executed an oil and gas lease with the mineral owner. This includes conducting seismic tests (I can't remember but I think I saw an episode of Psych where the guys came across seismic testing equipment - maybe it was Monk?), building storage tanks, building roads (to get to the drillsite), and using the landowner's water for drilling and secondary recovery operations (secondary recovery includes adding pressure to the minerals subsurface to push more of them to the wellbore for production).
We will cover more of this subject on another post.
Tuesday, April 23, 2013
Attributes of the Mineral Estate
Here in Texas, the state Supreme Court has attributed five "essential attributes" that imbue to the ownership of a severed mineral estate, including (1) the right to develop, (2) the right to lease, (3) the right to receive bonus payments, (4) the right to receive delay rentals, and (5) the right to receive royalty payments.
The text of Texas Law of Oil and Gas, Second Edition then suggests that it might help to understand these attributes might be better understood by separating them into two types of of actions that a mineral fee owner might take. The right to develop, which would include exploring, drilling, producing, transporting, storing, and marketing, as well as the implied right to use the surface in ways necessary to carry out said operations and the right to authorize others to do so.
The remaining attributes would result from a transaction whereby the mineral fee owner grants the aforementioned rights to a mineral company (usually through what's called an "oil and gas lease"). The right to lease, listed second above, would also be referred to as the "Executive right," while the bonus (usually a lump sum payment on the execution date of the lease as consideration for transferring the right to develop), delay rentals (periodic payments for the right to defer drilling), and royalties (a right to a stated fraction or percentage of the value produced without any deduction for costs) are financial benefits that the lease usually provides to the executive right holder.
Now, it's possible to have a lease situation where the parties have divided ownership of the mineral fee. As an example, the text describes a situation where one person might share the lease royalty, but not the bonus or delay rentals, and then states that the situation in question would require a determination as to where another benefit (atypical) is a royalty. Of course, the parties could always agree to a different arrangement.
Moreover, it's important to note that a mineral owner is not required to choose only between choosing to lease or choosing to develop. Other options, such as participating in a Joint Operating Agreement (for example), are available to the mineral fee owner as well.
There is more to this particular section, please read the text itself for a more thorough understanding - as I've mentioned before, this is more as a study aid for my personal benefit while buffering my knowledge base.
The text of Texas Law of Oil and Gas, Second Edition then suggests that it might help to understand these attributes might be better understood by separating them into two types of of actions that a mineral fee owner might take. The right to develop, which would include exploring, drilling, producing, transporting, storing, and marketing, as well as the implied right to use the surface in ways necessary to carry out said operations and the right to authorize others to do so.
The remaining attributes would result from a transaction whereby the mineral fee owner grants the aforementioned rights to a mineral company (usually through what's called an "oil and gas lease"). The right to lease, listed second above, would also be referred to as the "Executive right," while the bonus (usually a lump sum payment on the execution date of the lease as consideration for transferring the right to develop), delay rentals (periodic payments for the right to defer drilling), and royalties (a right to a stated fraction or percentage of the value produced without any deduction for costs) are financial benefits that the lease usually provides to the executive right holder.
Now, it's possible to have a lease situation where the parties have divided ownership of the mineral fee. As an example, the text describes a situation where one person might share the lease royalty, but not the bonus or delay rentals, and then states that the situation in question would require a determination as to where another benefit (atypical) is a royalty. Of course, the parties could always agree to a different arrangement.
Moreover, it's important to note that a mineral owner is not required to choose only between choosing to lease or choosing to develop. Other options, such as participating in a Joint Operating Agreement (for example), are available to the mineral fee owner as well.
There is more to this particular section, please read the text itself for a more thorough understanding - as I've mentioned before, this is more as a study aid for my personal benefit while buffering my knowledge base.
Wednesday, April 17, 2013
More on Adverse Possession
I've already started a summary of the Texas Law of Oil and Gas Second Edition's section on Adverse Possession. This post will be a continuation of that summary.
One thing to consider with regard to a severance vis a vis the statute of limitations is that the severance *must* occur prior to the claimant's entry onto the surface. Put another way - an adverse claimant who takes possession of a tract of land that is not severed takes possession of the entire tract (the surface and the minerals). A subsequent severance would be subject to that possession and would require the ouster of the claimant. The authors note a limited exception where the owner conveys the surface estate to the adverse possessor by a deed wherein he reserves the mineral interest.
The next section of the text then discusses Thomas v. Southwestern Settlement & Development Co., where the court held that when there's a purported severance by a person who doesn't held good title the subsequent occupancy/entry of the surface will not affect the title of the mineral estate. Please note that the court here was dealing with a claim under the 5 year statute of limitations. On the other hand - a severance completed by the adverse claimant who maintains the surface "has no more effect on the running of the statute of limitations than a severance by a true owner after an adverse entry takes place." (see Texas Law of Oil and Gas, Page 2-7). The text also notes that the most common cases involve oil and gas leases that the adverse claimant who occupies the surface. So, if you adversely claim a tract, and then execute an oil and gas lease, you need the continued surface occupancy to benefit the mineral estate. The opposite has been held to be true, as well, where an adverse possessor who conveyed the surface and reserved the minerals - where there is a continuous surface occupancy by the grantee, the limitation title to the mineral estate is ripened.
Now, you can acquire title to a mineral estate through adverse possession where the estate's been severed, however, according to Blocker v. Davis (241 S.W.2d 698, 702 (Tex. Civ. App. - Fort Worth 1951, write ref'd n.r.e.), "such a dominion exercised over said minerals as would have become notice to owners of the mineral estate" must be exercised. This would probably include drilling followed by production (continuous) of minerals over the severed estate. The text also provides other examples - check the book for those.
The text also discusses claims to limitation title by a lessee that remained in possession and continued to produce after the lease terminated because of a period of Non-production, e.g. Natural Gas Pipeline Co. v. Pool (124 S.W.3d 188 (Tex. 2003), but it's best to read this on your own, as well... particularly given the length of this post already.
Next time, we'll get into section 2.1[A][1]b - Attributes of the Mineral Estate
One thing to consider with regard to a severance vis a vis the statute of limitations is that the severance *must* occur prior to the claimant's entry onto the surface. Put another way - an adverse claimant who takes possession of a tract of land that is not severed takes possession of the entire tract (the surface and the minerals). A subsequent severance would be subject to that possession and would require the ouster of the claimant. The authors note a limited exception where the owner conveys the surface estate to the adverse possessor by a deed wherein he reserves the mineral interest.
The next section of the text then discusses Thomas v. Southwestern Settlement & Development Co., where the court held that when there's a purported severance by a person who doesn't held good title the subsequent occupancy/entry of the surface will not affect the title of the mineral estate. Please note that the court here was dealing with a claim under the 5 year statute of limitations. On the other hand - a severance completed by the adverse claimant who maintains the surface "has no more effect on the running of the statute of limitations than a severance by a true owner after an adverse entry takes place." (see Texas Law of Oil and Gas, Page 2-7). The text also notes that the most common cases involve oil and gas leases that the adverse claimant who occupies the surface. So, if you adversely claim a tract, and then execute an oil and gas lease, you need the continued surface occupancy to benefit the mineral estate. The opposite has been held to be true, as well, where an adverse possessor who conveyed the surface and reserved the minerals - where there is a continuous surface occupancy by the grantee, the limitation title to the mineral estate is ripened.
Now, you can acquire title to a mineral estate through adverse possession where the estate's been severed, however, according to Blocker v. Davis (241 S.W.2d 698, 702 (Tex. Civ. App. - Fort Worth 1951, write ref'd n.r.e.), "such a dominion exercised over said minerals as would have become notice to owners of the mineral estate" must be exercised. This would probably include drilling followed by production (continuous) of minerals over the severed estate. The text also provides other examples - check the book for those.
The text also discusses claims to limitation title by a lessee that remained in possession and continued to produce after the lease terminated because of a period of Non-production, e.g. Natural Gas Pipeline Co. v. Pool (124 S.W.3d 188 (Tex. 2003), but it's best to read this on your own, as well... particularly given the length of this post already.
Next time, we'll get into section 2.1[A][1]b - Attributes of the Mineral Estate
Friday, April 12, 2013
Texas Oil and Gas Law - Adverse Possession, Part 1
It's been a while, but we're back. The last time we spoke, we discussed the mineral estate generally. Today, we will go over the concept of Adverse Possession with regard to the mineral estate.
When the surface estate and the mineral estate are jointly owned (i.e. there has been no severance), then adverse possession extends to the minerals underneath. In other words, if you acquire title to the surface estate through limitation title, then you also get the mineral estate (the whole bundle of sticks).
Now, when we talk about adverse possession with respect to the mineral estate, the first issue that must be addressed is when the severance occurred, as well as whether the severance was a total severance or a partial severance.
Let's tackle the easiest portion first - if the mineral estate was completely (100%) severed from the surface estate prior to the first date of occupation of the surface by the claimant, then the claimant cannot acquire any interest in the mineral estate. This is logical, as the mineral owner's estate is separate and distinct from the surface.
Now, if there was a partial severance, which has been known to happen, then the adverse possessor would be able to gain limitation title to the portion reserved (i.e. the non-severed portion).
The authors of Texas Law of Oil and Gas note that a surface owner in possession is in no better position than an adverse possessor. The state has had several cases where the surface owner has asserted limitation title to the mineral based on continuous surface occupancy that did not reserve the mineral severance (and based on tax payments), the state has noted that even where the instrument that separate the surface and the mineral rights was not recorded, possession of the surface under a chain of title that contains a mineral severance cannot be adverse to the mineral estate.
We will continue with Adverse Possession on another post.
When the surface estate and the mineral estate are jointly owned (i.e. there has been no severance), then adverse possession extends to the minerals underneath. In other words, if you acquire title to the surface estate through limitation title, then you also get the mineral estate (the whole bundle of sticks).
Now, when we talk about adverse possession with respect to the mineral estate, the first issue that must be addressed is when the severance occurred, as well as whether the severance was a total severance or a partial severance.
Let's tackle the easiest portion first - if the mineral estate was completely (100%) severed from the surface estate prior to the first date of occupation of the surface by the claimant, then the claimant cannot acquire any interest in the mineral estate. This is logical, as the mineral owner's estate is separate and distinct from the surface.
Now, if there was a partial severance, which has been known to happen, then the adverse possessor would be able to gain limitation title to the portion reserved (i.e. the non-severed portion).
The authors of Texas Law of Oil and Gas note that a surface owner in possession is in no better position than an adverse possessor. The state has had several cases where the surface owner has asserted limitation title to the mineral based on continuous surface occupancy that did not reserve the mineral severance (and based on tax payments), the state has noted that even where the instrument that separate the surface and the mineral rights was not recorded, possession of the surface under a chain of title that contains a mineral severance cannot be adverse to the mineral estate.
We will continue with Adverse Possession on another post.
Monday, April 01, 2013
The Mineral Estate
Once a mineral estate has been severed from the surface estate on a tract of land, that mineral estate becomes a fee simple estate in and of itself. This means that it's not subject to abandonment and also receives, as the authors of Texas Law of Oil and Gas Second Edition note, the benefit of the doctrine of accretion (the gradual buildup of land from water). Moreover, you can receive ad valorum taxes separate from what's imposed on the surface estate and contracts regarding the mineral estate must comply with the Statute of Frauds, et al.
Because it's a fee estate, the owner of the mineral rights has the same basic rights that any other fee owner has, including the right to use, convey, and dispose of the property, as well as creating lesser estates (such as a Life Estate).
Adverse Possession is the next section, but it takes up a decent amount of space, so I'll address that another time.
Because it's a fee estate, the owner of the mineral rights has the same basic rights that any other fee owner has, including the right to use, convey, and dispose of the property, as well as creating lesser estates (such as a Life Estate).
Adverse Possession is the next section, but it takes up a decent amount of space, so I'll address that another time.
Thursday, March 28, 2013
The Legas Effect of a Severance
Today we enter into Chapter 2 of Texas Law of Oil and Gas. The first section of Chapter 2 is "The Mienral Estate and The Surface Estate.
When we look at general property law in Texas, from the time of Patent, the owner of the land owns the oil, gas and other minerals below the surface in Fee Simple (the authors cite Texas Co. v. Daugherty, 107 Tex. 226, 176 S.W. 717). It is, however, possible to sever the ownership interest between the surface and the oil, gas and other minerals. The most often means of doing so is via a mineral reservation in a deed, however, it's also possible for there to be a conveyance of the oil, gas and other minerals via deed or other conveyance.
There are legal consequences and other considerations involved in a severed estate. For example, the authors cite Glasscock Underground Water Conservation District v. Pruit (915 S.W.2d 577 - Tex. App.--El Paso 1996, n.w.h.), where surface owners claimed that their having joined a water conservation district bound the owners of the severed mineral estate to... annex the land described in (a petition) be annexed into the Glasscock Underground Water Conservation District. However, the court held that the owners of the mineral estates held equal right to use, dispose and tax the water. The conclusion reached by the court was that the surface owner also owns the water beneath his land, so he can entrust exclusive jurisdiction of it tot he district he chooses to join, howeve,r the subsurface water owner does not have the exclusive right to use. The owner of the dominant mienral estate has a right to use water belonging to the surface estate for various exploration and development purposes (this would be a part of the bundle of sticks included in the mineral estate), and only if the owners of the mineral estates remain in the Santa Rita Water District and began withdrawing water for secondary recovery would there be the need for conflicting assertions of jurisdiction and regulation. This sounds to me a bit as if the court punted on the issue, but that's what the conclusion is.
Tune in next time when we delve into the Mineral Estate.
When we look at general property law in Texas, from the time of Patent, the owner of the land owns the oil, gas and other minerals below the surface in Fee Simple (the authors cite Texas Co. v. Daugherty, 107 Tex. 226, 176 S.W. 717). It is, however, possible to sever the ownership interest between the surface and the oil, gas and other minerals. The most often means of doing so is via a mineral reservation in a deed, however, it's also possible for there to be a conveyance of the oil, gas and other minerals via deed or other conveyance.
There are legal consequences and other considerations involved in a severed estate. For example, the authors cite Glasscock Underground Water Conservation District v. Pruit (915 S.W.2d 577 - Tex. App.--El Paso 1996, n.w.h.), where surface owners claimed that their having joined a water conservation district bound the owners of the severed mineral estate to... annex the land described in (a petition) be annexed into the Glasscock Underground Water Conservation District. However, the court held that the owners of the mineral estates held equal right to use, dispose and tax the water. The conclusion reached by the court was that the surface owner also owns the water beneath his land, so he can entrust exclusive jurisdiction of it tot he district he chooses to join, howeve,r the subsurface water owner does not have the exclusive right to use. The owner of the dominant mienral estate has a right to use water belonging to the surface estate for various exploration and development purposes (this would be a part of the bundle of sticks included in the mineral estate), and only if the owners of the mineral estates remain in the Santa Rita Water District and began withdrawing water for secondary recovery would there be the need for conflicting assertions of jurisdiction and regulation. This sounds to me a bit as if the court punted on the issue, but that's what the conclusion is.
Tune in next time when we delve into the Mineral Estate.
Wednesday, March 27, 2013
Cycling Operations
I'm going to start today's post with a word for word restatement of the first sentence in the Cycling Operations section of Texas Law of Oil and Gas, Second Edition (by Ernest E. Smith and Jacqueline Lang Weaver):
From an operational standpoint cycling operations are somewhat similar to pressure maintenance and, like pressure maintenance, are typically undertaken early in the life of a reservoir.
Companies use cycling when we have reservoirs with both condensate ("wet gas") and law-condensate gas ("dry gas") - note this is a very cursory overview of the difference between wet and dry gas. For a better description, look here. If the operator allows the internal pressure of a reservoir to decline too much, then the heavier hydrocarbons could liquefy, which would make them unrecoverable. In order to help prevent this from happening, companies will produce the wet gas, take out the heavy hydrocarbons, and then re-inject the dry gas left over back into the reservoir to help maintain pressure, and push the remaining wet gas toward the wells which allows for a longer life of the reservoir.
The authors note that a loss of title case for cycling operations is not as strong as that for pressure maintenance. Chemically, dry gas is different than wet gas, so one can argue an earlier in time reduction to possession. Additionally, the authors report that there is often some expectation that the dry gas will be produced at a later time (this would be part of why they participate in cycling operations).
There is still a problem inherent in injecting dry gas into a reservoir with multiple operators with multiple producing wells.
The authors cite Corzelius v. Harrell (Tex. 509, 186 S. W. 2d, 961) as a related, though not on point, case - where the courts and the parties appeared to assume that the rule of capture applied to reinjected dry gas.
That's the end of Chapter 1. Next time, we'll move on to Chapter 2 - Types of Interests.
From an operational standpoint cycling operations are somewhat similar to pressure maintenance and, like pressure maintenance, are typically undertaken early in the life of a reservoir.
Companies use cycling when we have reservoirs with both condensate ("wet gas") and law-condensate gas ("dry gas") - note this is a very cursory overview of the difference between wet and dry gas. For a better description, look here. If the operator allows the internal pressure of a reservoir to decline too much, then the heavier hydrocarbons could liquefy, which would make them unrecoverable. In order to help prevent this from happening, companies will produce the wet gas, take out the heavy hydrocarbons, and then re-inject the dry gas left over back into the reservoir to help maintain pressure, and push the remaining wet gas toward the wells which allows for a longer life of the reservoir.
The authors note that a loss of title case for cycling operations is not as strong as that for pressure maintenance. Chemically, dry gas is different than wet gas, so one can argue an earlier in time reduction to possession. Additionally, the authors report that there is often some expectation that the dry gas will be produced at a later time (this would be part of why they participate in cycling operations).
There is still a problem inherent in injecting dry gas into a reservoir with multiple operators with multiple producing wells.
The authors cite Corzelius v. Harrell (Tex. 509, 186 S. W. 2d, 961) as a related, though not on point, case - where the courts and the parties appeared to assume that the rule of capture applied to reinjected dry gas.
That's the end of Chapter 1. Next time, we'll move on to Chapter 2 - Types of Interests.
Monday, March 25, 2013
Pressure Maintenance
Well, it's been a while since I've done a post on Oil and Gas Law, but that's changing now.
When last we spoke on the subject, we discussed Gas Storage. Today, we're going to address a related subject, Pressure Maintenance.
One of the ways of storing gas is through injecting gas into a producing reservoir. Essentially, what you're doing is increasing the efficiency and lengthening the life of an oil reservoir spurred by solution gas expansion or from a "gas-cap drive." (the authors of the Book link to Tex. Nat. Res. Code Ann Sec. 91.176). They do this by removing gas that has been produced with the oil and then they will re-inject it at various places in the oil reservoir. to help keep up the pressure that produces the oil.
Inasmuch as gas and oil migrate, there is no way to ensure that the gas that is re-injected will not end up moving to other parts of the oil reservoir and then be produced by other companies who might hold a lease on a different spot. The question that would arise when it's re-produced would be, "who owns it?" As of the time of printing of Texas Law of Oil and Gas (second edition), there has not been a Texas case on point - the authors note that this is native gas withdrawn and replaced, citing the correlations to the wild animal theory. Additionally, gas withdrawn for reinjection is done so expressly not for future withdrawal, but to make the efficient production of oil last longer.
The authors cite a couple cases related to the subject that differentiate between a true pressure maintenance situation where multiple parties own leases in a reservoir and where only one does, as well as reinjection into a depleted gas reservoir for storage, but the crux of the matter is, while not decided as a matter of law, ownership of native gas that has been reinjected for the purpose of prolonging production of an oil well would belong to the subsequent producer of said gas.
When last we spoke on the subject, we discussed Gas Storage. Today, we're going to address a related subject, Pressure Maintenance.
One of the ways of storing gas is through injecting gas into a producing reservoir. Essentially, what you're doing is increasing the efficiency and lengthening the life of an oil reservoir spurred by solution gas expansion or from a "gas-cap drive." (the authors of the Book link to Tex. Nat. Res. Code Ann Sec. 91.176). They do this by removing gas that has been produced with the oil and then they will re-inject it at various places in the oil reservoir. to help keep up the pressure that produces the oil.
Inasmuch as gas and oil migrate, there is no way to ensure that the gas that is re-injected will not end up moving to other parts of the oil reservoir and then be produced by other companies who might hold a lease on a different spot. The question that would arise when it's re-produced would be, "who owns it?" As of the time of printing of Texas Law of Oil and Gas (second edition), there has not been a Texas case on point - the authors note that this is native gas withdrawn and replaced, citing the correlations to the wild animal theory. Additionally, gas withdrawn for reinjection is done so expressly not for future withdrawal, but to make the efficient production of oil last longer.
The authors cite a couple cases related to the subject that differentiate between a true pressure maintenance situation where multiple parties own leases in a reservoir and where only one does, as well as reinjection into a depleted gas reservoir for storage, but the crux of the matter is, while not decided as a matter of law, ownership of native gas that has been reinjected for the purpose of prolonging production of an oil well would belong to the subsequent producer of said gas.
Friday, March 15, 2013
Cruisin'
Okay, home and rested!
So, this was my first ever cruise, and I chose to go with the whole family, as well as with my father and step-mother. We had fun.
Because it was our first cruise, and because there were so many of us going, we decided to go with Carnival, as it provided the best value and the timing was best suited for when we wanted to sail. If you decide to go, check multiple lines (I looked at Carnival, Royal Caribbean and Norwegian, the latter of which did not have anything in the Western Caribbean, at least not in the time frames we were sailing), and different departure ports. I was able to save about $800 by driving to New Orleans for our embarkation as opposed to the same cruise out of Galveston one day earlier. Even factoring in gas, lodging, and meals, that was still over $500 less that we had to pay.
The cruise ship itself sort of felt aged, decor-wise, but it was about 15-20 years old, so that seems reasonable. I would say the food was decent to fair; not outstanding, but with Carnival, I was not expecting 5 star dining. I did buy the soda card, which was about $35 for me and $25 for my son - this gave us unlimited soft drinks on the boat (normally $4 a glass), but I drink soda pretty regularly, so I made out ahead by going this route.
Alcohol is not cheap, but there's so much to do that finding time to have more than one or two glasses would take real effort.
There is plenty to do on the cruise ship, yet at the same time, we found plenty of time where we were trying to figure out what to do "now." We're not young, and I'm not exactly in beach shape, so hanging out by the pool trying to tan was not really in the cards for me - mental note, I need to drop about 25 lbs before my next cruise.
The shore excursions were pretty cool - we saw some Mayan ruins (Dzibilchaltun), which were impressive, and we hired a private driver for our tour of Cozumel, which was definitely money well spent. We took a tour of a tequila factory as well as a chocolateria, where the kids got to grind their own cocoa beans for hot chocolate. Definitely a good things for youngsters.
On the cruise, there are kid's areas - Camp carnival for kids up to age 11, Circle C for ages 12-14, and O2 for 15-17. These areas are full of fun activities for the kids, but there are limits on the hours of operation - I think we managed about 2-3 hours at a time with the kids in these areas. My 14 year old more or less just had run of the ship, but the other two we kept closer tabs on. There were some kids who were just left to fend for themselves, and in my opinion, shouldn't have been, but that's a different story. All in all, we had a great time.
One thing we did on the ship was a wine tasting/pairing, which was really good.
Now, Carnival ships have had a rough go of it lately, with Costa Concordia, Triumph, Dream, and Legend each having varying degrees of calamities strike. Unfortunately, our ship also had some problems, however, nothing so severe as to prevent us from getting to and from the various ports safely. We had an issue with steering due to a malfunction on the starboard azimuth (I don't know what it does, but it apparently affects steering), which required a technician to be flown in to Progreso to work on during our shore excursion.
We really enjoyed our cruise, and I would be more than happy to do another one. I have already tentatively started trying to plan a family cruise for Summer 2014, hopefully somewhere new - maybe Jamaica and Grand Cayman, or, if I could swing it, the Mediterranean. If you decide to take a cruise, sailing to Progreso and Yucatan is an absolutely great first cruise.
Sorry I went on so long, but once I started recapping the cruise, I couldn't find a good place to stop - there's a lot more to share, but this covers the basics pretty well.
So, this was my first ever cruise, and I chose to go with the whole family, as well as with my father and step-mother. We had fun.
Because it was our first cruise, and because there were so many of us going, we decided to go with Carnival, as it provided the best value and the timing was best suited for when we wanted to sail. If you decide to go, check multiple lines (I looked at Carnival, Royal Caribbean and Norwegian, the latter of which did not have anything in the Western Caribbean, at least not in the time frames we were sailing), and different departure ports. I was able to save about $800 by driving to New Orleans for our embarkation as opposed to the same cruise out of Galveston one day earlier. Even factoring in gas, lodging, and meals, that was still over $500 less that we had to pay.
The cruise ship itself sort of felt aged, decor-wise, but it was about 15-20 years old, so that seems reasonable. I would say the food was decent to fair; not outstanding, but with Carnival, I was not expecting 5 star dining. I did buy the soda card, which was about $35 for me and $25 for my son - this gave us unlimited soft drinks on the boat (normally $4 a glass), but I drink soda pretty regularly, so I made out ahead by going this route.
Alcohol is not cheap, but there's so much to do that finding time to have more than one or two glasses would take real effort.
There is plenty to do on the cruise ship, yet at the same time, we found plenty of time where we were trying to figure out what to do "now." We're not young, and I'm not exactly in beach shape, so hanging out by the pool trying to tan was not really in the cards for me - mental note, I need to drop about 25 lbs before my next cruise.
The shore excursions were pretty cool - we saw some Mayan ruins (Dzibilchaltun), which were impressive, and we hired a private driver for our tour of Cozumel, which was definitely money well spent. We took a tour of a tequila factory as well as a chocolateria, where the kids got to grind their own cocoa beans for hot chocolate. Definitely a good things for youngsters.
On the cruise, there are kid's areas - Camp carnival for kids up to age 11, Circle C for ages 12-14, and O2 for 15-17. These areas are full of fun activities for the kids, but there are limits on the hours of operation - I think we managed about 2-3 hours at a time with the kids in these areas. My 14 year old more or less just had run of the ship, but the other two we kept closer tabs on. There were some kids who were just left to fend for themselves, and in my opinion, shouldn't have been, but that's a different story. All in all, we had a great time.
One thing we did on the ship was a wine tasting/pairing, which was really good.
Now, Carnival ships have had a rough go of it lately, with Costa Concordia, Triumph, Dream, and Legend each having varying degrees of calamities strike. Unfortunately, our ship also had some problems, however, nothing so severe as to prevent us from getting to and from the various ports safely. We had an issue with steering due to a malfunction on the starboard azimuth (I don't know what it does, but it apparently affects steering), which required a technician to be flown in to Progreso to work on during our shore excursion.
We really enjoyed our cruise, and I would be more than happy to do another one. I have already tentatively started trying to plan a family cruise for Summer 2014, hopefully somewhere new - maybe Jamaica and Grand Cayman, or, if I could swing it, the Mediterranean. If you decide to take a cruise, sailing to Progreso and Yucatan is an absolutely great first cruise.
Sorry I went on so long, but once I started recapping the cruise, I couldn't find a good place to stop - there's a lot more to share, but this covers the basics pretty well.
Thursday, February 28, 2013
Real Assault on Our Rights
For all the palaver about assaults on our Constitutional rights with regard to the Second Amendment, let's take a moment to consider a recent decision affecting our Fourth Amendment rights. During his administration, President Bush appointed two justices to the Supreme Court. One of those appointees, Justice Samuel Alito, joined by the other four Conservative appointees, just issued the ruling in Clapper v. Amnesty
International. For those who claim to be concerned about threats to our Constitutional rights, this is a real and actual matter of concern.
In a nutshell, Justice Alito, joined by C.J. Roberts and Justices Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas, has placed warrentless wiretapping in a nifty (for the Government) Catch-22 - in order to bring a suit for damages arising from an unconstitutional search and seizure with respect to a warrentless wiretap of your communications, you have to prove first that you are in fact one of the individuals the government has wiretapped and are in their database. The rub is that the government holds no requirement to disclose the individuals who are the targets of the wiretapping.
As Glenn Greenwald notes, "a law without a remedy is worthless," as he quoted Alexander Hamilton in Federalist 15 - "It is essential to the idea of a law, that it be attended with a sanction; or, in other words, a penalty or punishment for disobedience, the resolutions or commands which pretend to be laws will, in fact, amount to nothing more than advice or recommendation." This shameful tactic of removing standing to shield the law from Judicial review is one that President Bush used with FISA; it's doubly shameful that President Obama has continued the tack.
In a nutshell, Justice Alito, joined by C.J. Roberts and Justices Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas, has placed warrentless wiretapping in a nifty (for the Government) Catch-22 - in order to bring a suit for damages arising from an unconstitutional search and seizure with respect to a warrentless wiretap of your communications, you have to prove first that you are in fact one of the individuals the government has wiretapped and are in their database. The rub is that the government holds no requirement to disclose the individuals who are the targets of the wiretapping.
As Glenn Greenwald notes, "a law without a remedy is worthless," as he quoted Alexander Hamilton in Federalist 15 - "It is essential to the idea of a law, that it be attended with a sanction; or, in other words, a penalty or punishment for disobedience, the resolutions or commands which pretend to be laws will, in fact, amount to nothing more than advice or recommendation." This shameful tactic of removing standing to shield the law from Judicial review is one that President Bush used with FISA; it's doubly shameful that President Obama has continued the tack.
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
Advice for Spring 2013 Texas State Bar Exam takers
Reposted from June, 2008, but still pertinent.
It's almost July; the exam is coming up in about a month. Some of y'all may be getting stressed, particularly about practice exam/simulated MBE scores. First off - the simulated MBE is to give you an idea of what the exam is like and to kind of remind you that this is coming up. Keep studying your rules of law, and you will be fine.
Remember, the exam is there to test how well you can spot issues, state the rule and apply it (this is your IRAC in action). You have to be able to keep your thoughts organized - take your time and let the answer come out. Don't panic. So long as you've studied, you should be fine. The exam is designed to be difficult, but passable. The idea is that you need to put in the effort to prepare for it. Remember that, and remember that you already learned most of this in law school and you're just refreshing your mind while studying for the bar, and you should be fine. You still need to actually study, though. That part is tough to pass by...
I can't tell anyone "how" to study for the bar exam. Everybody learns their own way. I can tell you what worked for me, if that gives you a launching point for your own preparation after BarBri ends.
Photog and I studied together. We went to BarBri together, then went to the school and studied together. One thing that helped us was that we were able to find a room where we could speak to each other without worrying about disturbing others. This way, we could go over practice questions and exams and discuss the answers to reinforce what we were learning. We actually chose the International Law Society office at STCL because we knew we would be able to study and still have things to take the focus off our stress.
We would start the day by doing about 30-50 multiple choice questions, either from the Barbri software or questions from other exam sources. We would read 10 questions, we would both come up with answers individually, then we'd share our answer. If the answers did not match, then we would "sell" our answer to the other before we checked the answer (on the software we usually did this one question at a time). After we checked our answer, we made sure we understood the reasoning for the answer, particularly if we got it wrong, or if we got it right but only because we guessed the correct letter. Attention to detail counts here. Read each word in the question and answer. Then we'd take lunch.
After the MC questions, we would start on the essays (should be the yellow book). Again, we'd read a question, come up with an answer, explain the rule of law, and support our position. For these, we usually were pretty close with our answers, but our reasoning might differ slightly, except in the situations where we simply had no idea about the topic of the question (this will happen - make sure you make note of it and keep going - don't get bogged down). We would do this for 3-5 hours, usually getting through 3-6 essays (don't worry about speed, which will come, worry about getting the rules down). Then it was time for coffee and coca-cola breaks.
Then, depending on our energy level, we would consider going over the Procedure and Evidence questions - you want to do these a couple times, just to make sure you're comfortable with the questions - there's a limited number of questions that they can ask, so you should have little trouble getting these in your head.
One of the things that we had to do was keep something around to occupy ourselves - we had toy swords and a Nerf ball that we would bat around, and a yardstick we would balance from time to time. I find that I need to keep active while I'm studying, it helps me focus. This is certainly not for everyone and if you are studying with anyone, make sure that your study partner is of similar activity requirement.
Finally, keep your sense of humor, don't get discouraged. Should you find yourself flailing or feeling like you don't know anything, just recite the common law standard for burglary (the unlawful breaking and entering of a dwelling house of another at night with the intent to commit a felony therein). This helps you refocus and get the ball rolling again - it can galvanize you. You know the information, you just need to practice getting it out. Like I said before - the exam is there to challenge you, not to try to fail you. If you ever need any bad jokes to ease the stress, I may know one or two.
It's almost July; the exam is coming up in about a month. Some of y'all may be getting stressed, particularly about practice exam/simulated MBE scores. First off - the simulated MBE is to give you an idea of what the exam is like and to kind of remind you that this is coming up. Keep studying your rules of law, and you will be fine.
Remember, the exam is there to test how well you can spot issues, state the rule and apply it (this is your IRAC in action). You have to be able to keep your thoughts organized - take your time and let the answer come out. Don't panic. So long as you've studied, you should be fine. The exam is designed to be difficult, but passable. The idea is that you need to put in the effort to prepare for it. Remember that, and remember that you already learned most of this in law school and you're just refreshing your mind while studying for the bar, and you should be fine. You still need to actually study, though. That part is tough to pass by...
I can't tell anyone "how" to study for the bar exam. Everybody learns their own way. I can tell you what worked for me, if that gives you a launching point for your own preparation after BarBri ends.
Photog and I studied together. We went to BarBri together, then went to the school and studied together. One thing that helped us was that we were able to find a room where we could speak to each other without worrying about disturbing others. This way, we could go over practice questions and exams and discuss the answers to reinforce what we were learning. We actually chose the International Law Society office at STCL because we knew we would be able to study and still have things to take the focus off our stress.
We would start the day by doing about 30-50 multiple choice questions, either from the Barbri software or questions from other exam sources. We would read 10 questions, we would both come up with answers individually, then we'd share our answer. If the answers did not match, then we would "sell" our answer to the other before we checked the answer (on the software we usually did this one question at a time). After we checked our answer, we made sure we understood the reasoning for the answer, particularly if we got it wrong, or if we got it right but only because we guessed the correct letter. Attention to detail counts here. Read each word in the question and answer. Then we'd take lunch.
After the MC questions, we would start on the essays (should be the yellow book). Again, we'd read a question, come up with an answer, explain the rule of law, and support our position. For these, we usually were pretty close with our answers, but our reasoning might differ slightly, except in the situations where we simply had no idea about the topic of the question (this will happen - make sure you make note of it and keep going - don't get bogged down). We would do this for 3-5 hours, usually getting through 3-6 essays (don't worry about speed, which will come, worry about getting the rules down). Then it was time for coffee and coca-cola breaks.
Then, depending on our energy level, we would consider going over the Procedure and Evidence questions - you want to do these a couple times, just to make sure you're comfortable with the questions - there's a limited number of questions that they can ask, so you should have little trouble getting these in your head.
One of the things that we had to do was keep something around to occupy ourselves - we had toy swords and a Nerf ball that we would bat around, and a yardstick we would balance from time to time. I find that I need to keep active while I'm studying, it helps me focus. This is certainly not for everyone and if you are studying with anyone, make sure that your study partner is of similar activity requirement.
Finally, keep your sense of humor, don't get discouraged. Should you find yourself flailing or feeling like you don't know anything, just recite the common law standard for burglary (the unlawful breaking and entering of a dwelling house of another at night with the intent to commit a felony therein). This helps you refocus and get the ball rolling again - it can galvanize you. You know the information, you just need to practice getting it out. Like I said before - the exam is there to challenge you, not to try to fail you. If you ever need any bad jokes to ease the stress, I may know one or two.
Lightweight Blogging
Just wanted to take a moment to share the fact that we're going on a cruise in a few weeks. You are not. Be jealous!
Sunday, February 03, 2013
Super Bowl
A couple things... first of all, I thought the commercials this year were by and large listless. Nothing terribly water-cooler quality to speak of. I did not care for the hot girl and nerd guy making out commercial, which I thought was wrong-headed, but it's not a surprise given the company it was made for.
I thought the game turned out to be quite good. I'm not suggesting that it would have changed the outcome, but I did think the officiating was markedly one-sided, to the point that I right now cannot recall one penalty Baltimore got called for during the game. Moreover, I do recall seeing at least 3 very blatant non-calls in the 4th quarter, one of which did have some impact on the outcome of the game (not saying it changed it, but it limited the potential for the game to end differently).
I'm happy for the Ravens, though I found myself pulling for San Francisco in the game.
Now for bed, then back to work.
I thought the game turned out to be quite good. I'm not suggesting that it would have changed the outcome, but I did think the officiating was markedly one-sided, to the point that I right now cannot recall one penalty Baltimore got called for during the game. Moreover, I do recall seeing at least 3 very blatant non-calls in the 4th quarter, one of which did have some impact on the outcome of the game (not saying it changed it, but it limited the potential for the game to end differently).
I'm happy for the Ravens, though I found myself pulling for San Francisco in the game.
Now for bed, then back to work.
Friday, January 25, 2013
WOMBAT
I'm taking a brief break from Oil and Gas writing today. Instead, I went and watched Movie 43, which was quite possibly the worst movie with the most talent I've ever seen. I don't understand how Kate Winslett, Hugh Jackman, Emma Stone, Halle Berry, Patrick Warburton, and so many others could let themselves end up in a movie that bad. I don't think I could quantify just how bad this movie was, and this is after going in knowing it was a January release.
One other thing I noticed, was that before the 20 minutes of movie previews (!), was something I've never imagined would be possible. It was a preview for a commercial. There was a commercial preview at the movie theater before the movie previews, complete with a reference to go look up the product for the complete Super Commercial (I'm guessing the "premiere" of the commercial will be at the Super Bowl).
We are screwed as a nation.
(WOMBAT is an acronym that means "Waste of Money, Brains and Talent")
One other thing I noticed, was that before the 20 minutes of movie previews (!), was something I've never imagined would be possible. It was a preview for a commercial. There was a commercial preview at the movie theater before the movie previews, complete with a reference to go look up the product for the complete Super Commercial (I'm guessing the "premiere" of the commercial will be at the Super Bowl).
We are screwed as a nation.
(WOMBAT is an acronym that means "Waste of Money, Brains and Talent")
Wednesday, January 23, 2013
On Gas Storage
Continuing my studies from Texas Law of Oil and Gas, Second Edition, I am currently on the authors' section on Rights in Natural Gas Injected into Underground Reservoirs (This begins on Page 1-21 for those following at home).
With regard to ownership over escaped oil, the authors note that disputed are more likely to be in the form of disclaimers as opposed to outright title assertions.
They then note that there is a distinction between oil and natural gas in the matter. When natural gas is injected underground for storage or other purposes, there can be legal title questions raised. They then note that there are several relevant factors to consider when title to natural gas is disputed, including among others the reason for injecting, the structure of the underground reservoir, the contents, the ownership of rights to production from the reservoir and the applicability of the Underground Gas Storage and Conservation Act.
It makes sense that natural gas is used more in cold weather for heating, or during severe weather as opposed to fair weather. In order to ensure a steady supply during periods of peak use, it makes sense that Natural Gas would be stored, and with gas, it also makes sense to make use of natural storage spaces, such as underground, such as from a previously depleted gas unit, or from leaching salt from a salt dome formation. With regard to the former, there is one challenge - the depleted formation will invariably still have some gas from the original source, which the authors dub "native" gas.
If we remember from our previous discussions, oil and gas that has been produced becomes Personal Property, as opposed to Real Property. Being personal property, ownership of natural gas that is stored underground can be abandoned like other property. If the storage company is unable or unwilling to assert control, such as through negligence, however, the Court in Lone Star Gas Co. v. Murchison, the authors note, held that the company that injected the gas that migrated to a part of the reservoir not subject to the company's storage rights had NOT abandoned the property because the primary tenet in the doctrine of abandonment is the intent to abandon, and the injecting company "unquestionably" planned to withdraw the gas during peak consumption.
Another concept of abandonment comes through the concept of commingling, where personal property which is fungible that belongs to two or more people becomes mixed in such a way that it's impossible to determine whose property belongs to whom. The Texas Supreme Court has held that commingling is not grounds for abandonment based on commingling in Humble Oil & Refining Co. v. West, where a reservoir that was still capable of producing (the book does not state whether it was producing, rather that it had not yet ended its productive life), was the target of injection. The injecting company in that case had to pay royalty on the native-gas portion of the withdrawals, and had the burden of establishing with reasonable certainty the property of injected gas to native gas.
That's plenty to read for now. Next time, I'll try to touch on Pressure Maintenance and Cycling Operations.
With regard to ownership over escaped oil, the authors note that disputed are more likely to be in the form of disclaimers as opposed to outright title assertions.
They then note that there is a distinction between oil and natural gas in the matter. When natural gas is injected underground for storage or other purposes, there can be legal title questions raised. They then note that there are several relevant factors to consider when title to natural gas is disputed, including among others the reason for injecting, the structure of the underground reservoir, the contents, the ownership of rights to production from the reservoir and the applicability of the Underground Gas Storage and Conservation Act.
It makes sense that natural gas is used more in cold weather for heating, or during severe weather as opposed to fair weather. In order to ensure a steady supply during periods of peak use, it makes sense that Natural Gas would be stored, and with gas, it also makes sense to make use of natural storage spaces, such as underground, such as from a previously depleted gas unit, or from leaching salt from a salt dome formation. With regard to the former, there is one challenge - the depleted formation will invariably still have some gas from the original source, which the authors dub "native" gas.
If we remember from our previous discussions, oil and gas that has been produced becomes Personal Property, as opposed to Real Property. Being personal property, ownership of natural gas that is stored underground can be abandoned like other property. If the storage company is unable or unwilling to assert control, such as through negligence, however, the Court in Lone Star Gas Co. v. Murchison, the authors note, held that the company that injected the gas that migrated to a part of the reservoir not subject to the company's storage rights had NOT abandoned the property because the primary tenet in the doctrine of abandonment is the intent to abandon, and the injecting company "unquestionably" planned to withdraw the gas during peak consumption.
Another concept of abandonment comes through the concept of commingling, where personal property which is fungible that belongs to two or more people becomes mixed in such a way that it's impossible to determine whose property belongs to whom. The Texas Supreme Court has held that commingling is not grounds for abandonment based on commingling in Humble Oil & Refining Co. v. West, where a reservoir that was still capable of producing (the book does not state whether it was producing, rather that it had not yet ended its productive life), was the target of injection. The injecting company in that case had to pay royalty on the native-gas portion of the withdrawals, and had the burden of establishing with reasonable certainty the property of injected gas to native gas.
That's plenty to read for now. Next time, I'll try to touch on Pressure Maintenance and Cycling Operations.
Thursday, January 17, 2013
Ownership of Production
The other day, we touched briefly on the Ownership in Place Doctrine. This was extremely brief based on the amount of free time I had at the moment, and, as always, encourage you to review Texas Law of Oil and Gas, Second Edition for a thorough review of this and any other topics discussed herein with regard to oil and gas law in Texas.
Today, we're going to go over the concept of Ownership of Production. We know from previous study that Oil and Gas underground are part of the realty - in other words, they can be conveyed like and other interest in land, and they can be severed, as well.
This changes, however, once the Oil and Gas resources are produced. As a matter of law in Texas, once produced, oil and gas becomes personal property, and therefore out of the purview of the Rule of Capture. This means that once you get minerals to the mouth of the well, if (as the book gives for example), a pipe breaks and the oil flows across the surface of the operator's land onto adjacent property, then the owner of that property's mineral estate does not automatically gain control of the oil. With respect to gas, the authors cite Lone Star Gas Co. v. Murchison (353 S.W.2d 870 (Tex.Civ App. - Dallas 1962, writ ref'd n.r.e.)), where natural gas that is pumped into an underground reservoir for storage purposes by an injecting company, said natural gas retains its character as personal property.
This seems to be the logical position - once you've take steps to retain the minerals, such as injecting the gas into a depleted reservoir, you are not "unproducing" the minerals, and as long as you retain control, then you aren't abandoning it. As it stands, the authors note that the Underground Gas Storage and Conservation Act (Tex. Nat. Res. Code Ann. Sec. 91.171 - 91.184) actually outright states that natural gas is the personal property of the injector and not subject to the rule of capture.
This concept of classifying produced oil and gas as personal property does contain legal consequences, such as disposition on death, as well as what controls the sale - e.g. from the statute of frauds doctrine to the USS, as well as the type of security interest that can be acquired.
I will try to discuss the authors' section on Gas Storage in the next day or so.
Today, we're going to go over the concept of Ownership of Production. We know from previous study that Oil and Gas underground are part of the realty - in other words, they can be conveyed like and other interest in land, and they can be severed, as well.
This changes, however, once the Oil and Gas resources are produced. As a matter of law in Texas, once produced, oil and gas becomes personal property, and therefore out of the purview of the Rule of Capture. This means that once you get minerals to the mouth of the well, if (as the book gives for example), a pipe breaks and the oil flows across the surface of the operator's land onto adjacent property, then the owner of that property's mineral estate does not automatically gain control of the oil. With respect to gas, the authors cite Lone Star Gas Co. v. Murchison (353 S.W.2d 870 (Tex.Civ App. - Dallas 1962, writ ref'd n.r.e.)), where natural gas that is pumped into an underground reservoir for storage purposes by an injecting company, said natural gas retains its character as personal property.
This seems to be the logical position - once you've take steps to retain the minerals, such as injecting the gas into a depleted reservoir, you are not "unproducing" the minerals, and as long as you retain control, then you aren't abandoning it. As it stands, the authors note that the Underground Gas Storage and Conservation Act (Tex. Nat. Res. Code Ann. Sec. 91.171 - 91.184) actually outright states that natural gas is the personal property of the injector and not subject to the rule of capture.
This concept of classifying produced oil and gas as personal property does contain legal consequences, such as disposition on death, as well as what controls the sale - e.g. from the statute of frauds doctrine to the USS, as well as the type of security interest that can be acquired.
I will try to discuss the authors' section on Gas Storage in the next day or so.
Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Ownership in Place
The State of Texas adopted the Ownership-in-place theory in 1915. The premise is that because oil and gas resources lie in the ground, by necessity, they are part of the realty. The authors of Texas Law of Oil and Gas (see Previous Post) cite Texas Co. v. Daugherty (107 Tex. 226, 176 S.W. 717 (1915), which I won't re-state here.
The same case addressed the issue of what the authors dub the "fugitive" nature of oil and gas by noting that the materials are as likely to flow from the ground just as one who purchases solid minerals (e.g. coal) runs the risk that the minerals are not there. If the minerals are present, then they can be exploited.
Texas uses the Correlative Rights doctrine and the fact that claims of injury from drainage from adjacent property is based on conjecture to address the drainage issues.
More later.
The same case addressed the issue of what the authors dub the "fugitive" nature of oil and gas by noting that the materials are as likely to flow from the ground just as one who purchases solid minerals (e.g. coal) runs the risk that the minerals are not there. If the minerals are present, then they can be exploited.
Texas uses the Correlative Rights doctrine and the fact that claims of injury from drainage from adjacent property is based on conjecture to address the drainage issues.
More later.
Monday, January 14, 2013
Mineral Ownership Principals
This post is probably going to be boring for anyone reading it, because I'm basically re-stating the Texas Law of Oil and Gas, Second Edition, by Ernest E. Smitha nd Jacqueline Lang Weaver (I'm reviewing my work right now, and hope that this will help the study sink in that much deeper). Nothing I am writing is new, and while I am trying to re-state it, the ideas come from their research and writing. If I'm misstating what they've said, then I welcome corrections, however, I will not be posting any other citations for their work beyond this paragraph.
In Oil and Gas law, particularly here in Texas (which I single out due to the fact that my study materials are for Texas Oil and Gas Law), perhaps the first issue one encounters when dealing with Oil and Gas after locating it is the question, "Who owns it?" over the years, the concept that has controlled has been the Rule of Capture.
As the authors note, "the probable reason for the urle of capture was not so much the legal analogies but practical necessity." The concept apparently was adopted earliest in Appalachia and here in Texas beginning in 1910.
The basic notion of the Rule of Capture is, essentially, that a person owns all of the oil and gas produced by a well on his land, even if the well is draining oil and gas from underneath other properties. Note that this applies to wells that are bottomed on their land, not a well that has begun on their property and angled into another person's property - that would be a trespass.
There are remedies for the owner whose minerals are being drained, such as an offset wel. The landowners, in Texas, has this ability, as recognized by the Texas Supreme Court.
There is a lot to go through in this book, and I'm going to be doing it relatively piecemeal, so bear with me.
Again, this is the "lite" version of the material - please read Texas Law of Oil and Gas, Second Edition for a thorough working of the law.
In Oil and Gas law, particularly here in Texas (which I single out due to the fact that my study materials are for Texas Oil and Gas Law), perhaps the first issue one encounters when dealing with Oil and Gas after locating it is the question, "Who owns it?" over the years, the concept that has controlled has been the Rule of Capture.
As the authors note, "the probable reason for the urle of capture was not so much the legal analogies but practical necessity." The concept apparently was adopted earliest in Appalachia and here in Texas beginning in 1910.
The basic notion of the Rule of Capture is, essentially, that a person owns all of the oil and gas produced by a well on his land, even if the well is draining oil and gas from underneath other properties. Note that this applies to wells that are bottomed on their land, not a well that has begun on their property and angled into another person's property - that would be a trespass.
There are remedies for the owner whose minerals are being drained, such as an offset wel. The landowners, in Texas, has this ability, as recognized by the Texas Supreme Court.
There is a lot to go through in this book, and I'm going to be doing it relatively piecemeal, so bear with me.
Again, this is the "lite" version of the material - please read Texas Law of Oil and Gas, Second Edition for a thorough working of the law.
Saturday, January 12, 2013
Playoffs
I must say, I was kind of hoping that Peyton would fare a bit better than he did. While I think that pass was quite the mistake, I also think it's unfair to place the blame for the loss on his shoulders. He wasn't the one who gave up a 70 yard touchdown pass in the last two minutes of regulation to put the game in overtime.
On another note - I am not necessarily a fan of how Alex Smith got jobbed in San Francisco, but I'm happy to see the 49ers win and bid good evening to Green Bay's playoff season.
Thursday, January 10, 2013
Ouch
I'm watching 2 and a half men, and they just finished a musical number called "You're a douche." I don't think I've ever heard the word douche used so much in any one day, let alone 5 minutes. Now, I know the sow was never exactly high brow, but man, this is painful to watch anymore. I do hope this is it for the show.
Tuesday, January 08, 2013
Another New Year
I'm not convinced anybody is still reading this, and I'm definitely not convinced that I'll be posting any more regularly than I have the past couple of years, but to those who are still out there - Happy New Year!
Friday, October 26, 2012
More Taekwondo
No pictures this time, but I wanted to let you know that we had a tournament recently, in Brenham again - the 2012 Fall Unified Taekwondo Invitational Championship.
This was the second tournament for myself and the Apple. Additionally, last weekend was the Princess's first tournament. All things considered, the Binjo Ditch clan fared pretty well. The Apple finished first in patterns, which is outstanding, and just off the podium for sparring (Apple's dad is convinced the Judges missed a point that would have put him at third). The Princess finished second in both patterns and sparring, which is outstanding for someone new to tournament life. I had to watch the second match she fought as I was assigned to spar at the same table as soon as her group was finished. Speaking of which, my sparring went pretty well. I am now a Blue Belt, which in ITF equates to about half-way to a black belt. In my group, I was paired up against a yellow stripe (first belt acquired after white belt) and a yellow belt (second belt acquired). I ended up fighting both individuals in sequence, winning both matches and thus taking first in my group. Us old guys really are an interesting group to watch sparring. Fortunately, I've been doing some cardio at the gym for the past few weeks, so I wasn't as dead out of breath after fighting as I was last tournament.
I don't particularly care for the tournaments. I don't like to fight, and really only do the taekwondo for the physical exercise. However, the tournaments are a requirement for black belt (another issue I have with organized martial arts is the mandated tournaments). At any rate, I'll be sticking with Taekwondo until I either get my black belt or the kids decide they're done, or I just run out of spare time to do it. At any rate, it's definitely fun. I encourage it for all who are interested.
At another point I'll discuss my understanding of the differences between the different styles of Taekwondo... because I know y'all are itching to hear!
This was the second tournament for myself and the Apple. Additionally, last weekend was the Princess's first tournament. All things considered, the Binjo Ditch clan fared pretty well. The Apple finished first in patterns, which is outstanding, and just off the podium for sparring (Apple's dad is convinced the Judges missed a point that would have put him at third). The Princess finished second in both patterns and sparring, which is outstanding for someone new to tournament life. I had to watch the second match she fought as I was assigned to spar at the same table as soon as her group was finished. Speaking of which, my sparring went pretty well. I am now a Blue Belt, which in ITF equates to about half-way to a black belt. In my group, I was paired up against a yellow stripe (first belt acquired after white belt) and a yellow belt (second belt acquired). I ended up fighting both individuals in sequence, winning both matches and thus taking first in my group. Us old guys really are an interesting group to watch sparring. Fortunately, I've been doing some cardio at the gym for the past few weeks, so I wasn't as dead out of breath after fighting as I was last tournament.
I don't particularly care for the tournaments. I don't like to fight, and really only do the taekwondo for the physical exercise. However, the tournaments are a requirement for black belt (another issue I have with organized martial arts is the mandated tournaments). At any rate, I'll be sticking with Taekwondo until I either get my black belt or the kids decide they're done, or I just run out of spare time to do it. At any rate, it's definitely fun. I encourage it for all who are interested.
At another point I'll discuss my understanding of the differences between the different styles of Taekwondo... because I know y'all are itching to hear!
Monday, October 15, 2012
October
Hard to believe it's been so long since I posted. I remember when I did this multiple times a day. Amazing what having kids and work will do to your free time.
Monday, June 11, 2012
Still alive and kicking
We picked up a new car yesterday. It's a big improvement over the previous car, however, it's not quite the uber-vehicle I'd dreamed of (which I knew going in, so it's not a disappointment).
In other news, apparently Bristol Palin will be on a reality show that will show that she is a normal mom. Don't interpret what I'm going to say as a dig on Bristol Palin individually, however, it seems to me that anyone who is talking about what their reality show is going to demonstrate is not someone that qualifies among the ranks of "normal." In my experience, normal people don't put their lives in front of a cam-... actually... Maury, People's Court, Divorce Court, etc... perhaps reality show folks are normal...
Other than that - how are y'all?
In other news, apparently Bristol Palin will be on a reality show that will show that she is a normal mom. Don't interpret what I'm going to say as a dig on Bristol Palin individually, however, it seems to me that anyone who is talking about what their reality show is going to demonstrate is not someone that qualifies among the ranks of "normal." In my experience, normal people don't put their lives in front of a cam-... actually... Maury, People's Court, Divorce Court, etc... perhaps reality show folks are normal...
Other than that - how are y'all?
Monday, April 23, 2012
Deep Thoughts
Okay, maybe not too deep, but something that popped into my head...
How many people, if they were truly honest with themselves, would say that an accurate answer to "what did you want to be when you grew up?" is "envied?"
How many people, if they were truly honest with themselves, would say that an accurate answer to "what did you want to be when you grew up?" is "envied?"
Monday, April 16, 2012
What a Week
It was a rough week last week. I just got through what could be the most difficult Opinion I've ever worked on, and frankly, I'm exhausted.
Of course, I don't get to take a break because there are other Opinions that need working on.
Not that I'm complaining about having work. It beats the alternative.
Still, I could use a day off. Not that I'd know what to do with it.
Sorry, just a little rant. Trying to get it out of my system before getting back to the grind.
Of course, I don't get to take a break because there are other Opinions that need working on.
Not that I'm complaining about having work. It beats the alternative.
Still, I could use a day off. Not that I'd know what to do with it.
Sorry, just a little rant. Trying to get it out of my system before getting back to the grind.
Monday, April 09, 2012
Time Time Time, See What's Become of Me
I miss blogging. I really do. Of course, most of the folks who I usually read/posted with no longer blog, which detracts some from the enjoyment of blogging, but I do like getting a few moments to put some random gibberish up on the screen.
I've unfortunately not been able to find a whole lot of spare time, recently, given the activity in which I find myself mired. Work has been very busy, and the children are involved in their extracurriculars, band, gymnastics, martial arts, etc.
I've also been active recently in Taekwondo. Learning the patterns, challenging myself to become at least a little healthier (or less unhealthy, perhaps?) has been really beneficial.
Unfortunately, all of these other things, plus housekeeping, cooking, caring for the dog, etc. means that I have less time to get in here and post random thoughts. I suppose the only real harm there is that they get bottled up in my head, but that really doesn't do much damage...
At any rate. I miss blogging, and I hope to be able to find a few moments every couple of days to throw something up here.
I've unfortunately not been able to find a whole lot of spare time, recently, given the activity in which I find myself mired. Work has been very busy, and the children are involved in their extracurriculars, band, gymnastics, martial arts, etc.
I've also been active recently in Taekwondo. Learning the patterns, challenging myself to become at least a little healthier (or less unhealthy, perhaps?) has been really beneficial.
Unfortunately, all of these other things, plus housekeeping, cooking, caring for the dog, etc. means that I have less time to get in here and post random thoughts. I suppose the only real harm there is that they get bottled up in my head, but that really doesn't do much damage...
At any rate. I miss blogging, and I hope to be able to find a few moments every couple of days to throw something up here.
Thursday, March 29, 2012
Wine
I started drinking wine about 2.5 years ago, after my wife and I enjoyed our trip to Italy. Great time. I never spent too much time on wine prior to this... my previous experiences with wine were that they were too sweet (white wines that I'd had), or they made the area at the back of my jaw hurt (red wines).
I have since learned that there really is a difference between the grapes, and the region where the grape is grown. I won't go into details, because I'd fudge it all up, but in a nutshell, I find that I really like a good red wine with lots of fruits and low on the tannins. My current red of choice is Inferi. It's a Montepulciano d'Abruzzo, from Italy. The flavors are full and have some oakiness to them, which helps make it a really smooth drink. In addition, there are a couple Spanish wines that I find I really enjoy, as well. Real de Aragon is a nice bargain with good flavors and low tannins (that's what made my jaw hurt, I've learned), that pairs well with lots of food. I love this as a table wine. I've also found that I enjoy Marquez de la Concordia Crianza, which is also a very nice to drink wine. Lately, I've picked up a couple bottles of Cubo, which is a tempranillo from Spain that also works really well...
I don't drink often, but I do drink about once a week. I find that enjoying a movie and a nice glass of wine is a good combination as I get older.
I have since learned that there really is a difference between the grapes, and the region where the grape is grown. I won't go into details, because I'd fudge it all up, but in a nutshell, I find that I really like a good red wine with lots of fruits and low on the tannins. My current red of choice is Inferi. It's a Montepulciano d'Abruzzo, from Italy. The flavors are full and have some oakiness to them, which helps make it a really smooth drink. In addition, there are a couple Spanish wines that I find I really enjoy, as well. Real de Aragon is a nice bargain with good flavors and low tannins (that's what made my jaw hurt, I've learned), that pairs well with lots of food. I love this as a table wine. I've also found that I enjoy Marquez de la Concordia Crianza, which is also a very nice to drink wine. Lately, I've picked up a couple bottles of Cubo, which is a tempranillo from Spain that also works really well...
I don't drink often, but I do drink about once a week. I find that enjoying a movie and a nice glass of wine is a good combination as I get older.
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Long Weekend
Technically, not for me, as I'll be working Friday and Monday, but for the family. The wife will be taking a girls' trip to Vegas with her best friend and a couple other ladies, leaving me alone with three kids.
Now the question for me is, how does one spend a long weekend alone with the kids? There aren't exactly any family-friendly movies out that we haven't already seen, and I don't know how excited I am to spend the weekend at home trying to keep them satiated.
I suppose I could take them to the Zoo, or the Aquarium, but I'm not a big fan of either of those. Maybe I should take the kids to Sea World. They'd probably enjoy that, but I don't know if I could handle 3 kids alone at the park.
Taxes are paid, so we are no longer swimming in wealth, but we've still got a bit packed away, which is nice. I guess we'll just make sure we get out to eat once or twice and try to make the most of it. Perhaps a trip to the national forest is called for.
Now the question for me is, how does one spend a long weekend alone with the kids? There aren't exactly any family-friendly movies out that we haven't already seen, and I don't know how excited I am to spend the weekend at home trying to keep them satiated.
I suppose I could take them to the Zoo, or the Aquarium, but I'm not a big fan of either of those. Maybe I should take the kids to Sea World. They'd probably enjoy that, but I don't know if I could handle 3 kids alone at the park.
Taxes are paid, so we are no longer swimming in wealth, but we've still got a bit packed away, which is nice. I guess we'll just make sure we get out to eat once or twice and try to make the most of it. Perhaps a trip to the national forest is called for.
Thursday, March 22, 2012
What Makes a Hero?
I was reading on another blog that I occasionally frequent, and there was a question that was posed in one of the posts, "does serving in the military make you a hero?"
Being a lawyer, my first answer was, of course, "it depends."
But then I thought about it. Timothy McVeigh was in the military. So was the defendant in the Fort Hood shootings. PFC England. Bradley Manning. Countless military members have been convicted and sentenced for crimes committed during service and after service. I had the duty of being a prisoner escort as one of my supplemental duties in the Air Force at my last duty station, and among the drug users and rapists that I escorted, I also had the chance to pick up an Airman who had been convicted of possession and distribution of child pornography while on a military base.
I have a hard time considering these individuals heroes.
But perhaps these are the exceptions that prove the rule? So I looked at the question a little more abstractly. By mere act of service, does that make one a hero? I mean, in reality, you become a military member by (1) Passing a physical, (2) signing a contract, and (3) making a promise (an oath of enlistment is little more than a formalized promise). Does satisfaction of those three elements in and of themselves qualify someone a a hero? Does it take something more, like successfully completing boot camp? Is there a lodestar service term that qualifies one as a hero, such as 6 months or 2 years, or 4 years?
I served 8 years in the Air Force, and by most accounts, without distinction. I struggled with my weight, however, I was promoted to Staff Sergeant in advance of the average. I complained, a lot, but I did my job, usually satisfactorily or better, depending on the day. I volunteered when I felt the urge, but I never consistently went above and beyond. Does the fact that I received an honorary discharge make me a hero? I sure don't feel like one, and I'd venture to say that the majority of men and women with whom I served felt or feel the same way, both about me and themselves.
I don't know what makes a hero. Perhaps it's all a matter of perspective. Interesting question to consider. Military members are people who volunteer to go into harm's way, sacrifice their Constitutional rights, and do so for pay that civilian counterparts would scoff at (I was offered a contract job when I separated that would have paid - to start - about 3-5k more per year than I made as an NCO, with full benefits). Is it possible that "the military" is heroic while the individual members need to be considered on a case-by-case basis?
Ponderings
Being a lawyer, my first answer was, of course, "it depends."
But then I thought about it. Timothy McVeigh was in the military. So was the defendant in the Fort Hood shootings. PFC England. Bradley Manning. Countless military members have been convicted and sentenced for crimes committed during service and after service. I had the duty of being a prisoner escort as one of my supplemental duties in the Air Force at my last duty station, and among the drug users and rapists that I escorted, I also had the chance to pick up an Airman who had been convicted of possession and distribution of child pornography while on a military base.
I have a hard time considering these individuals heroes.
But perhaps these are the exceptions that prove the rule? So I looked at the question a little more abstractly. By mere act of service, does that make one a hero? I mean, in reality, you become a military member by (1) Passing a physical, (2) signing a contract, and (3) making a promise (an oath of enlistment is little more than a formalized promise). Does satisfaction of those three elements in and of themselves qualify someone a a hero? Does it take something more, like successfully completing boot camp? Is there a lodestar service term that qualifies one as a hero, such as 6 months or 2 years, or 4 years?
I served 8 years in the Air Force, and by most accounts, without distinction. I struggled with my weight, however, I was promoted to Staff Sergeant in advance of the average. I complained, a lot, but I did my job, usually satisfactorily or better, depending on the day. I volunteered when I felt the urge, but I never consistently went above and beyond. Does the fact that I received an honorary discharge make me a hero? I sure don't feel like one, and I'd venture to say that the majority of men and women with whom I served felt or feel the same way, both about me and themselves.
I don't know what makes a hero. Perhaps it's all a matter of perspective. Interesting question to consider. Military members are people who volunteer to go into harm's way, sacrifice their Constitutional rights, and do so for pay that civilian counterparts would scoff at (I was offered a contract job when I separated that would have paid - to start - about 3-5k more per year than I made as an NCO, with full benefits). Is it possible that "the military" is heroic while the individual members need to be considered on a case-by-case basis?
Ponderings
Monday, March 19, 2012
Bragging on My Boy
So my oldest is 13. We refer to him as "the Boy." Good kid, sharp, mostly responsible, though can be a bit stubborn from time to time.
At any rate, we knew he was a sharp one from the beginning (all of my kids are pretty sharp; I think it comes from their mom's genes). We got some confirmation when he was added to the school's gifted and talented programs in elementary school (GT), and was placed in Pre-AP classes upon entering Jr. High.
This year, he was asked to take part in the Duke University Talent Identification Program (TIP). This meant that he got to take the ACT, and based on his scores, he qualified to take part in the summer program, which means The Boy is going to College for a month this summer.
We are quite excited for him. He'll be sending in his applications for classes this week, and when he's done, we'll get to figure out where we'll be sending our hard-earned money and our rather sharp young man for the summer.
I'm not sure how many kids get to take part in this every year, but I know I was never afforded the opportunity, so I'm very excited for him.
At any rate, we knew he was a sharp one from the beginning (all of my kids are pretty sharp; I think it comes from their mom's genes). We got some confirmation when he was added to the school's gifted and talented programs in elementary school (GT), and was placed in Pre-AP classes upon entering Jr. High.
This year, he was asked to take part in the Duke University Talent Identification Program (TIP). This meant that he got to take the ACT, and based on his scores, he qualified to take part in the summer program, which means The Boy is going to College for a month this summer.
We are quite excited for him. He'll be sending in his applications for classes this week, and when he's done, we'll get to figure out where we'll be sending our hard-earned money and our rather sharp young man for the summer.
I'm not sure how many kids get to take part in this every year, but I know I was never afforded the opportunity, so I'm very excited for him.
Sunday, March 11, 2012
Good Ole PNW
So I'm writing to y'all from the beautiful city of Lakewood, Washington... the land of Koto Teriyaki. And where your inimitable author matriculated from high school (yes, I had a permit for that).
It's been nice so far, visiting the family. Today we drove down to Mt. St. Helens, drove up the highway a bit so we could find a wilderness park from which we could gaze upon the direction where we'd see the mountain had there not been Washington State Cloud Cover blocking all vision in all directions from January through the third week of August.
The kids enjoyed it nonetheless, as we drove into the blast zone (the part of the park where the eruption reached). Great times were had by all enjoying the snow, the scenery and their dad freaking out driving over bridges that weren't quite secure looking enough for dad while passing over chasms over 600 feet high.
I was disappointed that we didn't get to see the mountain, but I can't say that I'm entirely surprised. I did hope that by getting up closer that we'd at least be able to see something of the mountain, but we settled for Toutle River, seeing the blast area there.
Such a good time. We enjoy the quality time with the family, and the strawberry rhubarb pie was better than I thought it would be, so it's win-win.
Monday, March 05, 2012
Monday, Monday
We're heading off to Vacation in a couple days, so I figured I'd take a moment before getting down to work for the day and post an update on here.
After more or less ignoring the blog for the better part of a year, I figured it was about time I started putting something on here, though I'm fairly certain Bruce is the only one who still reads it, and he doesn't appear to have a blog of his own anymore.
I found that I got myself a little too involved in politically-oriented posts before I took my break, and I think I'm going to try to make a conscious effort to do less of that on this blog and be a little bit lighter in fare here.
I hope y'all (Bruce) don't mind.
After more or less ignoring the blog for the better part of a year, I figured it was about time I started putting something on here, though I'm fairly certain Bruce is the only one who still reads it, and he doesn't appear to have a blog of his own anymore.
I found that I got myself a little too involved in politically-oriented posts before I took my break, and I think I'm going to try to make a conscious effort to do less of that on this blog and be a little bit lighter in fare here.
I hope y'all (Bruce) don't mind.
Friday, March 02, 2012
Vacation, All I Ever Wanted
In about a week, we start our spring break vacation. For the second consecutive year, we will be flying back to where we went to high school and the better half went to college.
We like the PNW, though we will be saddened some that some of our blog friends have left the area. I am not opposed to living in the greater Texas Gulf Coast region, per se, but there are times where I do think it would be nice to have family somewhere relatively nearby.
It'll be nice, though. Our week is more or less packed, Aquarium, Ferry, Volcano, Crossing the border, Public Market, etc. It should be fun, but I somehow think we'll be more tired when we're done than we were before we left.
And it'll be nice to eat some good Asian restaurant food
We like the PNW, though we will be saddened some that some of our blog friends have left the area. I am not opposed to living in the greater Texas Gulf Coast region, per se, but there are times where I do think it would be nice to have family somewhere relatively nearby.
It'll be nice, though. Our week is more or less packed, Aquarium, Ferry, Volcano, Crossing the border, Public Market, etc. It should be fun, but I somehow think we'll be more tired when we're done than we were before we left.
And it'll be nice to eat some good Asian restaurant food
Thursday, March 01, 2012
Due to the High Demand
I present you with two (2) pictures of your inimitable blogger in action at the 28th Annual Unified Tae Kwon Do Invitational Championships. I'm the guy who looks more like a marshmallow. The first image is from my first round match, which I lost, and the second image is from my second round match, which I won.
Cheers.
Cheers.
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Vignettes
Every now and then I go out and do stuff. Most recently, my youngest son (the Apple) and I participated in our first Taekwondo tournament.
The Apple signed up back around October or so, and really took a shine to it. After he'd been in it a couple months, he told me he wanted me to take it, too... and who can say no to their youngest child when they ask you to sign up and do something with him? So about the middle of January, I took my first class.
We did all right in the tournament. The Apple finished fourth in his group for his patterns, but unfortunately lost in his first round match for sparring and did not place there. He's a bit skittish about sparring, and since he's a bit short, standing back does not help him out.
I placed second in my group for patterns and surprisingly finished third in sparring. I say surprisingly, because I've not sparred before, and due to the low number of participants in my age group, I was paired up against individuals with significantly higher level belts than myself.
All things considered, we rather enjoyed ourselves. It was a good experience that I am sort of looking forward to repeating.
The Apple signed up back around October or so, and really took a shine to it. After he'd been in it a couple months, he told me he wanted me to take it, too... and who can say no to their youngest child when they ask you to sign up and do something with him? So about the middle of January, I took my first class.
We did all right in the tournament. The Apple finished fourth in his group for his patterns, but unfortunately lost in his first round match for sparring and did not place there. He's a bit skittish about sparring, and since he's a bit short, standing back does not help him out.
I placed second in my group for patterns and surprisingly finished third in sparring. I say surprisingly, because I've not sparred before, and due to the low number of participants in my age group, I was paired up against individuals with significantly higher level belts than myself.
All things considered, we rather enjoyed ourselves. It was a good experience that I am sort of looking forward to repeating.
Thursday, June 30, 2011
Advice for the July 2011 Texas State Bar Exam Takers
Reposted from June, 2008, but still pertinent.
It's almost July; the exam is coming up in about a month. Some of y'all may be getting stressed, particularly about practice exam/simulated MBE scores. First off - the simulated MBE is to give you an idea of what the exam is like and to kind of remind you that this is coming up. Keep studying your rules of law, and you will be fine.
Remember, the exam is there to test how well you can spot issues, state the rule and apply it (this is your IRAC in action). You have to be able to keep your thoughts organized - take your time and let the answer come out. Don't panic. So long as you've studied, you should be fine. The exam is designed to be difficult, but passable. The idea is that you need to put in the effort to prepare for it. Remember that, and remember that you already learned most of this in law school and you're just refreshing your mind while studying for the bar, and you should be fine. You still need to actually study, though. That part is tough to pass by...
I can't tell anyone "how" to study for the bar exam. Everybody learns their own way. I can tell you what worked for me, if that gives you a launching point for your own preparation after BarBri ends.
Photog and I studied together. We went to BarBri together, then went to the school and studied together. One thing that helped us was that we were able to find a room where we could speak to each other without worrying about disturbing others. This way, we could go over practice questions and exams and discuss the answers to reinforce what we were learning. We actually chose the International Law Society office at STCL because we knew we would be able to study and still have things to take the focus off our stress.
We would start the day by doing about 30-50 multiple choice questions, either from the Barbri software or questions from other exam sources. We would read 10 questions, we would both come up with answers individually, then we'd share our answer. If the answers did not match, then we would "sell" our answer to the other before we checked the answer (on the software we usually did this one question at a time). After we checked our answer, we made sure we understood the reasoning for the answer, particularly if we got it wrong, or if we got it right but only because we guessed the correct letter. Attention to detail counts here. Read each word in the question and answer. Then we'd take lunch.
After the MC questions, we would start on the essays (should be the yellow book). Again, we'd read a question, come up with an answer, explain the rule of law, and support our position. For these, we usually were pretty close with our answers, but our reasoning might differ slightly, except in the situations where we simply had no idea about the topic of the question (this will happen - make sure you make note of it and keep going - don't get bogged down). We would do this for 3-5 hours, usually getting through 3-6 essays (don't worry about speed, which will come, worry about getting the rules down). Then it was time for coffee and coca-cola breaks.
Then, depending on our energy level, we would consider going over the Procedure and Evidence questions - you want to do these a couple times, just to make sure you're comfortable with the questions - there's a limited number of questions that they can ask, so you should have little trouble getting these in your head.
One of the things that we had to do was keep something around to occupy ourselves - we had toy swords and a Nerf ball that we would bat around, and a yardstick we would balance from time to time. I find that I need to keep active while I'm studying, it helps me focus. This is certainly not for everyone and if you are studying with anyone, make sure that your study partner is of similar activity requirement.
Finally, keep your sense of humor, don't get discouraged - you know the information, you just need to practice getting it out. Like I said before - the exam is there to challenge you, not to try to fail you. If you ever need any bad jokes to ease the stress, I may know one or two.
It's almost July; the exam is coming up in about a month. Some of y'all may be getting stressed, particularly about practice exam/simulated MBE scores. First off - the simulated MBE is to give you an idea of what the exam is like and to kind of remind you that this is coming up. Keep studying your rules of law, and you will be fine.
Remember, the exam is there to test how well you can spot issues, state the rule and apply it (this is your IRAC in action). You have to be able to keep your thoughts organized - take your time and let the answer come out. Don't panic. So long as you've studied, you should be fine. The exam is designed to be difficult, but passable. The idea is that you need to put in the effort to prepare for it. Remember that, and remember that you already learned most of this in law school and you're just refreshing your mind while studying for the bar, and you should be fine. You still need to actually study, though. That part is tough to pass by...
I can't tell anyone "how" to study for the bar exam. Everybody learns their own way. I can tell you what worked for me, if that gives you a launching point for your own preparation after BarBri ends.
Photog and I studied together. We went to BarBri together, then went to the school and studied together. One thing that helped us was that we were able to find a room where we could speak to each other without worrying about disturbing others. This way, we could go over practice questions and exams and discuss the answers to reinforce what we were learning. We actually chose the International Law Society office at STCL because we knew we would be able to study and still have things to take the focus off our stress.
We would start the day by doing about 30-50 multiple choice questions, either from the Barbri software or questions from other exam sources. We would read 10 questions, we would both come up with answers individually, then we'd share our answer. If the answers did not match, then we would "sell" our answer to the other before we checked the answer (on the software we usually did this one question at a time). After we checked our answer, we made sure we understood the reasoning for the answer, particularly if we got it wrong, or if we got it right but only because we guessed the correct letter. Attention to detail counts here. Read each word in the question and answer. Then we'd take lunch.
After the MC questions, we would start on the essays (should be the yellow book). Again, we'd read a question, come up with an answer, explain the rule of law, and support our position. For these, we usually were pretty close with our answers, but our reasoning might differ slightly, except in the situations where we simply had no idea about the topic of the question (this will happen - make sure you make note of it and keep going - don't get bogged down). We would do this for 3-5 hours, usually getting through 3-6 essays (don't worry about speed, which will come, worry about getting the rules down). Then it was time for coffee and coca-cola breaks.
Then, depending on our energy level, we would consider going over the Procedure and Evidence questions - you want to do these a couple times, just to make sure you're comfortable with the questions - there's a limited number of questions that they can ask, so you should have little trouble getting these in your head.
One of the things that we had to do was keep something around to occupy ourselves - we had toy swords and a Nerf ball that we would bat around, and a yardstick we would balance from time to time. I find that I need to keep active while I'm studying, it helps me focus. This is certainly not for everyone and if you are studying with anyone, make sure that your study partner is of similar activity requirement.
Finally, keep your sense of humor, don't get discouraged - you know the information, you just need to practice getting it out. Like I said before - the exam is there to challenge you, not to try to fail you. If you ever need any bad jokes to ease the stress, I may know one or two.
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Saturday, March 26, 2011
Rewriting History
I have posted once or twice before on the First Amendment, particularly on the concept of religious liberty. It's been some time since I really got deeply involved in the concept, and I'm not likely to do so today, but let's gloss over the basic premise here real quick.
The first Amendment provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of Religion, nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."
Practically, this means that if you choose to practice a religion in this country, you are free to do so, and if you choose to not have a particular religion or religious doctrine foisted upon, you have that freedom as well. Over the years, this First Amendment has been found to apply not just to the Federal Government, but also to the states, incorporated through the 14th Amendment.
There have been a few Court cases that have provided some (not crystal) clarity on the meaning of the First Amendment, including the oft-cited (by me) Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U. S. 602 (1971) which explains how a proposed act would not be violative of said Amendment: (it must have) 1. a legitimate secular purpose, 2. a pimary effect that neither advances nor inhibits religion, and 3. the statute must not foster an excessive government entanglement with religion.
Additionally, we have Justice Black's explanation of the First Amendment in Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U. S. 1 (1947), in which he states,
Now that I've gotten the brief history that I said I wasn't going to get into out of the way, let's get to the crux of this post. What I'm looking at this morning is a quote by a member of the American Family Association, who has claimed recently that "Islam has no fundamental First Amendment claims, for the simple reason that it was not written to protect the religion of Islam. Islam is entitled only to the religious liberty we extend to it out of courtesy. While there certainly ought to be a presumption of religious liberty for non-Christian religious traditions in America, the Founders were not writing a suicide pact when they wrote the First Amendment."
If we go back and look at the legislative and Court history, we can see very easily how wrong-minded this notion is, but in order to combat untruths like this, we need to explain a lot. This is what makes untruths so dangerous - they are quick soundbites that (may) seem to pack a good amount of information in them but the explanation afterward takes so much longer to get through that people don't want to hear it.
I don't begrudge people their opinions, but before spouting off on those opinions, particularly of Constitutional Matters, I wish people would do their homework.
The first Amendment provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of Religion, nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."
Practically, this means that if you choose to practice a religion in this country, you are free to do so, and if you choose to not have a particular religion or religious doctrine foisted upon, you have that freedom as well. Over the years, this First Amendment has been found to apply not just to the Federal Government, but also to the states, incorporated through the 14th Amendment.
There have been a few Court cases that have provided some (not crystal) clarity on the meaning of the First Amendment, including the oft-cited (by me) Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U. S. 602 (1971) which explains how a proposed act would not be violative of said Amendment: (it must have) 1. a legitimate secular purpose, 2. a pimary effect that neither advances nor inhibits religion, and 3. the statute must not foster an excessive government entanglement with religion.
Additionally, we have Justice Black's explanation of the First Amendment in Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U. S. 1 (1947), in which he states,
The "establishment of religion" clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the federal government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect "a wall of separation between church and State.beyond this we have a few other cases that touch on the First Amendment, see e.g. Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577 (1992), Santa Fe ISD v. Doe, 530 U.S. 290 (2000), and Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97. One of the best resources for studying the history of 1st Amendment Religion Clause history is Kitzmiller v. Dover Area Sch. Dist., 400 F. Supp. 2d 707, which I encourage those interested in Religion Clause issues to read at least once.
Now that I've gotten the brief history that I said I wasn't going to get into out of the way, let's get to the crux of this post. What I'm looking at this morning is a quote by a member of the American Family Association, who has claimed recently that "Islam has no fundamental First Amendment claims, for the simple reason that it was not written to protect the religion of Islam. Islam is entitled only to the religious liberty we extend to it out of courtesy. While there certainly ought to be a presumption of religious liberty for non-Christian religious traditions in America, the Founders were not writing a suicide pact when they wrote the First Amendment."
If we go back and look at the legislative and Court history, we can see very easily how wrong-minded this notion is, but in order to combat untruths like this, we need to explain a lot. This is what makes untruths so dangerous - they are quick soundbites that (may) seem to pack a good amount of information in them but the explanation afterward takes so much longer to get through that people don't want to hear it.
I don't begrudge people their opinions, but before spouting off on those opinions, particularly of Constitutional Matters, I wish people would do their homework.
Friday, March 25, 2011
Abusing Open Records to Attack Academic Freedom
I am a little reluctant to repost this as I don't want to appear as though I'm taking sides or steadfastly agreeing with what he says, but if we presume for the moment that he is speaking the truth, then I agree that using FOIA as a sword with which to intimidate those who by your perception have insulted you is wrong on many levels.
Abusing Open Records to Attack Academic Freedom
Abusing Open Records to Attack Academic Freedom
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Tuesday
So I've been back to work for a bit more than a day now. I need to note that I don't particularly mind my work - It's a bit tedious, which is fine for me, and detail oriented, which I don't mind, necessarily - transactional work is more my cup of tea than adversarial work.
However, I do miss an office. I miss having people with whom I can interact. Frankly, I miss having friends, both work and personal. Virtual commuting doesn't do much for cultivating camaraderie, and socially, my wife and I aren't exactly good fits within the local community. While I was already a bit of a centrist, which doesn't always bode well in a solidly red district, my marriage has certainly moved me more to the left (I still am not a Democrat, but I'm starting to wonder if I will end up one). I get a little concerned with some of the conversations I hear in the neighborhood and at the church we had attended for some time. We stopped after the pastor exclaimed his fondness for Glenn Beck on the pulpit - we figured that was a signal that this church and our philosophies weren't a good match.
Anyway, I keep my ears open and look for something else that might pop up, but I think I'm getting to the point where I'm pigeonholing myself. Ah, well. That's what happens, I guess.
However, I do miss an office. I miss having people with whom I can interact. Frankly, I miss having friends, both work and personal. Virtual commuting doesn't do much for cultivating camaraderie, and socially, my wife and I aren't exactly good fits within the local community. While I was already a bit of a centrist, which doesn't always bode well in a solidly red district, my marriage has certainly moved me more to the left (I still am not a Democrat, but I'm starting to wonder if I will end up one). I get a little concerned with some of the conversations I hear in the neighborhood and at the church we had attended for some time. We stopped after the pastor exclaimed his fondness for Glenn Beck on the pulpit - we figured that was a signal that this church and our philosophies weren't a good match.
Anyway, I keep my ears open and look for something else that might pop up, but I think I'm getting to the point where I'm pigeonholing myself. Ah, well. That's what happens, I guess.
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Vacation
We just spent a week in Washington State for Spring Break. It was nice to get out of Texas for a bit, and while I spent a good portion of the time feeling anxious, stressed, or driving the car with anxiety or stress, it did appear that everyone had a good time.
We managed to take the kids fishing for rainbow trout, which the Boy thought was rather tasty. We also went to White Pass to do some sledding, and I was tempted (a little) to try my hand at skiing again - I went once about 18 years ago and dislocated my thumb, but had a great time. We took the kids to Seattle and saw Pike Place Market, the fishmongers, got some good (or so my wife says) coffee, bought some good smelling tea, went to the Seattle Center, Gasworks Park, the U, and a few other things here and there.
The wife really wants to move back up there. I'm not quite as enthusiastic, but inasmuch as I love my wife, I'll go where she wants. There's pretty good fishing and hunting up there, and my friends are all still there, as well.
I did have quite the bit of fun showing the posse a little bit about wine, and they seemed to have a good time with it as well.
Now we just need to get the wife a job up there (Bruce, Microsoft needs more admins), and maybe find a way to finagle admission to the UW MBA or LLM program for myself so I can look attractive to area employers.
We managed to take the kids fishing for rainbow trout, which the Boy thought was rather tasty. We also went to White Pass to do some sledding, and I was tempted (a little) to try my hand at skiing again - I went once about 18 years ago and dislocated my thumb, but had a great time. We took the kids to Seattle and saw Pike Place Market, the fishmongers, got some good (or so my wife says) coffee, bought some good smelling tea, went to the Seattle Center, Gasworks Park, the U, and a few other things here and there.
The wife really wants to move back up there. I'm not quite as enthusiastic, but inasmuch as I love my wife, I'll go where she wants. There's pretty good fishing and hunting up there, and my friends are all still there, as well.
I did have quite the bit of fun showing the posse a little bit about wine, and they seemed to have a good time with it as well.
Now we just need to get the wife a job up there (Bruce, Microsoft needs more admins), and maybe find a way to finagle admission to the UW MBA or LLM program for myself so I can look attractive to area employers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)