Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Tree Farmer on June 30, 2010 at 16:25

That is troubling. I know of a landsman who worked East Texas and said that 3 years with 2 year renewal was common. She did not advocate a lease longer than 3 years. Here is another observation that I was told by a fellow that lives in Webster Parish. It was his assessment that the oil exploration companies were leasing blocks of 640 acres and drilling 5 wells on the unit. The movement was either north to south or east to west, I can not remember. The idea is that they started in North West La and are migrating East. Claiborne Parish was one of the more recent which is (as you likely know) next to Union. I also know of a landowner in Union Parish that is sitting tight waiting for 500 per acre.

Permalink Reply by Mary Alison Anders Knighton on June 28, 2010 at 11:56

this might be late but I had a side letter with my lease to make sure I had payment or a legal option out. Pinebelt paid as they said.

Permalink Reply by Marc Stepman on June 29, 2010 at 2:33

Hi Mary

Do you think Pinebelt will get over to the Marion area? Looks like they are trying to get a bunch of stuff leased up around this area. I have property over there. Just wondering

Permalink Reply by Mary Alison Anders Knighton on June 30, 2010 at 6:15

might have already put this out...I am not sure about whats going on in Marion but will find out as I have a reliable source.

Permalink Reply by Jim Beaver on June 30, 2010 at 13:57

PineBelt has offered us $225 per acre and 20% royalties for 4 years with a 3 year extension. I think we are staying put because 1) the large volume of acreage they are attempting to lease 2) the 7 year time period in which they are planning on drilling these hundreds of thousands of acres. They know know more than they are telling. Only time will tell the legitimacy of this play.

Permalink Reply by Larry on July 7, 2010 at 13:57

Received an offer from Pinebelt for $200/acre, 1/5 royalty, for 4 year lease and 4 year renewal on property located NW of Bernice. Is this in line with what everyone else in this area is signing for? This seems low. I would prefer 3 year, 1/4 royalty, and discuss bonus pay.

Permalink Reply by Marc Stepman on July 7, 2010 at 14:12

I think it sounds a little low. The time frame would worry me..

Permalink Reply by North LA on July 7, 2010 at 16:17

They are going up a little. We were offered $175/acre 3/16 about 2 months ago. I think we'll just wait.

Permalink Reply by Tree Farmer on July 14, 2010 at 15:07

I have been told that alot of people have already signed leases in Union Parish. I know of two who signed for the amount you quoted they both had 2,000 or more acres. I also know of people who are holding out for the prices that folks in Caddo Parish got a couple of years ago. 10,000-17,000 bonus per acre. The problem is that Union Parish is not part of the Haynesville Shale field. At best we are in Haynesville Sand. From what I know they are looking to drill in the Smackover zone around 10-12 thousand feet. If you do not sign you go into what is known as forced pooling which I know little about.

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on July 14, 2010 at 15:17

TF, Force Pool as it is codified in LA. Mineral Law pertains to all the mineral interests within the boundary of a drilling and production unit whether leased or not sharing in the production of all the wells drilled in that unit.. Many people react negatively to the term "Forced" without understanding the implications. In a majority of instances "Forced Pooled" is a very good legal concept that is relatively unique to LA. Anyone holding out for $10,000 - $17,000/acre because of leasing in Caddo Parish two years ago are practicing wishful thinking. I hope they do not need the mineral income because they Will Never Get Any at those terms. Unfortunately their uninformed and irrational expectations may affect other interests within the same sections. I doubt seriously however if they would care. It is depressing that 2 and 1/2 years into the Haynesville Shale Play, there are mineral owners who have no concept of the dynamics of the Play.

PS. My business is based on representing land/mineral owners. I have never represented an operator and have never taken a lease although I have consulted on quite a few for clients.

Permalink Reply by Tree Farmer on July 14, 2010 at 15:24

Can you elaborate on what a person who did not sign a lease but has acreage in an area where a well is drilled and producing. For example, If there were a 80 acre requirement for spacing between wells and there was a well on your neighbor's adjacent property so that your acreage would be part of the 80 acres what would you receive from the production. Also, what would be the difference between what is beneath the Haynesville Sand in Union Parish and the Haynesville Shale in Caddo Parish to cause the Union Parish play to be only worth a couple of hundred dollars an acre in bonus while the folks in Caddo Parish enjoyed bonuses in the thousands.

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on July 14, 2010 at 15:36

TF, you have to understand the basic differences between the shale and the sand. Or better expressed as the difference between "unconventional" reservoirs and "conventional" reservoirs. The shale is generally continuous in extent and productive over a large percentage of that extent. Thus the saying, "no dry holes". Which is true as all the shale is productive although some is not sufficiently so as to be economic at current nat gas prices. The Sand (conventional reservoirs) are not productive over large contiguous areas and do, unfortunately, produce a high number of "dry holes". Because of the nature of the shale, leasehold which is prospective for it commands an unusually high price. As well it should. Union Parish has no Haynesville Shale, it has Haynesville Sand. And with the possible exception of the SMK-Brown Dense, all the reservoirs known to exist there are "conventional". I hope my short and simple explanation has helped. However I will reiterate my initial comment. Those who expect Haynesville Shale lease terms without the existence of Haynesville or Bossier Shale under their land will find no takers.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• 10
• Next ›
• Page