Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Gwen Peavy on June 30, 2012 at 12:32

Skip, We (part of the Jinks) around New Ramah Baptist Church s31-T14-7W catti-cornered from  where everything in Ashland is, our (yes we were with Mark O'Neal) and after the minimal offer of roughly 300 an acre 3yrs with a 2yr carryover, they informed me (I called several times) that at this time they were not taking up any more leases. That was roughly end of 2009/2010 - Jan. Hope this helps. I am the one that asked if they drill in one section but they angle diagonally and under another section. Whats to keep them from syphoning the mineral out from under the next section or section diagonal from it.

 

Permalink Reply by GoshDarn on July 1, 2012 at 6:36

Gwen:

I'm sure you typed "Skip" as a typo.  Skip, as far as I know, doesn't have family land in and around Ashland.

I'm GoshDarn, a.k.a. -- GD.  I was born and raised in La. and got my undergrad degree from LSU.  I first signed onto GHS back in May of 2008 (first lurking, then becoming a member), long before many landowners even knew about the Haynesville Shale. 

Now, to answer you concern about "siphoning" -- the State of La. regulates the drilling.  And basically, since the focus of the big CHK horizontal wells to date in the Ashland Field has been Nat. Gas shale rock, "siphoning" would be nothing to worry about in regards to "stealing" the minerals from a nearby section since shale rock does not move and the fracking process is limited per the confines of the horiz. (more or less).

Now, that's the short answer.

Also, in the Ashland field, CHK was the unitizing operator for the 8 units, having purchased many of the old previous leases from another operator years back.  So, either CHK would have to pay the landowners in whatever section drilled for the production of NG . . . or CHK would have to pay the landowners in the next-door section if -- IF -- siphoning was an issue.

But it is not.

Finally, there are a number of other issues with CHK's leases (i.e., clauses) and various shenanigans (for those who might not be spending much time watching the news, etc.) -- but those issues are basically mute points if someone isn't presently under lease with CHK (more or less) as of right now.  Yet, there could be a court case at some point in the future. 

Maybe or maybe not.  Possibly doubtful, but that's for some lawyers to decide.

Lastly, hang in there.

The three CHK wells in the Ashland field and the associated pipeline and processing station validates the geological formations.

So, IMHO, now it's sorta a bigger issue of operator cash flow, the price of NG, the national demand for NG, the other more efficient shale plays for the rigs, and a few other complex issues.

Nevertheless, I'll tell you what my dad told me a long, long time ago.

Never sell your land and never sell your minerals (i.e., only "lease" your minerals for a fair and reasonable price to a reputable operator).  And if you have, y'know, say a number of acres, I'd also recommend that you use a good O&G attorney before you ever sign anything.

Finally, there are good landmen and then there are those who are not as honest as some of the real pros who've been working in La. for decades.

Also, the wise will continue to stay up-to-date via GHS (well into the future).

Take care.

GD

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Permalink Reply by Marc Stepman on July 1, 2012 at 3:50

HI

CHK let our lease expire about a year and a half ago.  I have not heard anything from anyone else.  Ours was in the Topy Creek field in Bienville Parish.  I have heard smaller operators are after shallow formations and one well is being drilled in the Castor Field or the site construction has started.  There seems to be some pipeline construction going on or the survey is being done by SAM.  I do not know the exact route of the line.  Maybe some one else does. 

Marc