SNAPSHOT OF THE PLAY: HA UNIT ORDERS/APPLICATIONS BY TOWNSHIP - 04/10/09

There are significant changes since the last post. Of the last 18 unit applications posted to the public hearing schedule, Petrohawk and Chesapeake account for 16. And 41 of the 43 sections represented in those applications. The first HA unit appears for the Sibley Field in Webster Parish (S32 - 17N - 9W). The play continues to expand along the east/central margin into Webster and Bienville parishes. A new Samson Contour unit app is not reflected in the township/section totals as it has not been posted to the public hearing schedule but members are receiving pre-conference notification letters. This app is interesting as it includes units for Hosston, Cotton Valley, Haynesville and Smackover zones. The HA zones are: Sections 33-36 - 20N - 16W, Section 6 - 19N - 15W and Sections 2-4, 9-16 - 19N - 16W. 16 sections in total. The letter is posted on the North Caddo Group Page courtesy of Coonman.

Tags: snapshot

Views: 75

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Landowner on April 11, 2009 at 4:07
Skip, Thanks for taking the time to keep of updated. Good information.
Permalink Reply by shelby on April 11, 2009 at 4:18
Skip,
I am located in Sec17, T-11 R-15. Can you please advise me as to the application numbers that apply to this section; if I am correct in reading the section map, the number 17 is indicated on the section map in my section; what does that number represent.
Thanks for any information you can share.
Shelby
Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on April 11, 2009 at 4:52
Shelby. The snapshot is a township grid. The number in each township indicates the number of sections which are covered by Haynesville drilling and production unit applications or orders. In 11N - 15W Sections 9,10,11,13-15,19,20,22-27,34-36 are Chesapeake units. There are no other sections under application or order at this time.
Permalink Reply by shelby on April 11, 2009 at 5:16
Skip,
Sure appreciate the explanation; based upon the number of Haynesville applications/orders for 11N-15W would you think some of the remaining sections like 16-17 would have good odds to ulitmately see applications for Haynesville depths? We are currently leased with Chesapeake.
Thanks,
Shelby
Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on April 11, 2009 at 5:33
Yes. Barring any unforeseen problems. It is a distinct advantage for a single operator to have multiple contiguous sections to develop. Especially as that development relates to gathering systems.
Permalink Reply by shelby on April 11, 2009 at 7:35
Skip,
Thanks for your opinion on this. Any ideas where the experts think the Southern fringe of the play is? Would you think Shelby County on the Texas side of Sabine will prove out the same as Louisiana side regarding Haynesville potentials? I've read on this site that distribution resources are better on the Louisiana side regarding pipeline infrastructure; is this the case compared to some of the more active areas across the river.
Thank you,
Emory
Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on April 11, 2009 at 7:50
Emory. I concentrate on NW. LA. and I assure you that it keeps my plate full. For E. TX., I depend on jffree1. If you find an answer to the southern fringe in E. TX, I'd like to hear it. I believe that you are correct as to less existing infrastructure in E. TX, but it's still a case by case scenario. Midstream companies are filtering into the play in NW. LA. and I suspect more will show up as production increases. Keep in mind there are only a relative handful of Haynesville Shale wells turned to production at this time.
Permalink Reply by shelby on April 11, 2009 at 8:58
Skip,
Have a great Easter and thanks for your time and insight.
Shelby
Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on April 12, 2009 at 8:40
Shelby, if you look at the attached maps you will see Shelby County appears to be in a good area of the play. I actually think the pipeline infrastructure in Texas is better than Louisiana in the southern part of the play.
Attachments:
Permalink Reply by Landowner on April 12, 2009 at 8:52
Les, Is the map presented by Chesapeake, the core area of the shale? Or is this map what they believe the total area of the shale?
Permalink Reply by Spring Branch,mineral owner on April 12, 2009 at 9:19
In my opinion the answer is total rather than core.
Permalink Reply by Landowner on April 12, 2009 at 9:55
Thanks Spring Branch. That was my opinion also, but there have been so many maps that I was beginning to wonder if each company was just showing what they believe was the core.

RSS

Support GoHaynesvilleShale.com

Top Content 

1 Leasing

Leasing
2 Texas Smackover Lithium Play

Texas Smackover Lithium Play
3 Haynesville gas production faces summer headwinds as activity hits 3-year low

Haynesville gas production faces summer headwinds as activity hits 3-year low

Not a member? Get our email.

Groups



© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service