Fight over dinosaur fossils comes down to what’s a mineral

Associated Press ^ | November 16, 2018 | Amy Beth Hanson

[Olog-hai]

About 66 million years after two dinosaurs died apparently locked in battle on the plains of modern-day Montana, an unusual fight over who owns the entangled fossils has become a multimillion-dollar issue that hinges on the legal definition of “mineral.”

The 9^th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last week that the “Dueling Dinosaurs” located on private land are minerals both scientifically and under mineral rights laws. The fossils belong both to the owners of the property where they were found and two brothers who kept two-thirds of the mineral rights to the land once owned by their father, a three-judge panel said in a split decision.

Eric Edward Nord, an attorney for the property owners, said the case is complex in dealing with who owns what’s on top of land vs. the minerals that make it up and addresses a unique question of mineral rights law related to dinosaur fossils that no court in the country has taken up before. His clients own part of a ranch in the Hell Creek Formation of eastern Montana that’s rich with prehistoric fossils, including the Dueling Dinosaurs whose value had been appraised at $7 million to $9 million.

Lige and Mary Ann Murray bought it from George Severson, who also transferred part of his interest in the ranch to his sons, Jerry and Robert Severson. In 2005, the brothers sold their surface rights to the Murrays, but retained the mineral rights, court documents said. […]

A dispute arose in 2008 when the Seversons learned about the fossils — a 22-foot-long (7-meter-long) theropod and a 28-foot-long (9-meter-long) ceratopsian. …

[Mr Rogers]

“Yes, the dinosaur bones are COMPOSED of minerals, but no, their value is not the value of the MINERALS, but of their form.”

Oh. Like diamonds.

[dangus]

>> “Yes, the dinosaur bones are COMPOSED of minerals, but no, their value is not the value of the MINERALS, but of their form.” <<

>> Oh. Like diamonds. <<

If you have any worthless, uncut diamonds on your hands, please send them to me. I’ll gladly send you postage and my address.

(Dinosaur fossils are typically silica, calcite, etc. — utterly worthless minerals.)

[Bernard Marx]

From a technical point of view the answer to the question seems easy. Here's the difference between a mineral and a rock:

"A mineral is a naturally occurring, inorganic solid with a definite chemical composition and a crystalline structure formed by geological processes. A rock is an aggregate of one or more minerals whereas a rock may also include organic remains and mineraloids. Some rocks are predominantly composed of just one mineral."

Rocks like silicified dinosaur bone, are composed of several minerals. But for that matter, unfossilized bones are made of minerals too. Seems to me that "mineral" wins.