Is PetroHawk about to &@(#$ my Section? (17N-13W-37 Pay attention...)

A little background - my section is 17W, 13N Sec 23 in South Bossier, on the river. PetroHawk has petitioned to have the section unitized from 10,910 ft to 11,487 ft. My section is a little weird, though. Living on the river, Section 23 has another section (37) going through part of it. Section 37 was the old river bed some years ago. PetroHawk's unitization letter made section 23 a square again and "annexed" section 37 that goes through it. Remember this is only for depths of 10,910 ft to 11,487 ft. See page 3 of the link for a better picture.

Unitization Letter

Now it gets interesting. I notice they get a well permitted in SECTION 37, even though the description puts it in section 23's unitized area. The true vertical depth is 10,598! Since it is not deep enough to be governed by the unitization field order, that well is not even going to pay our section. Am I right? See attachment below of the well permit.

Notice the description: 3720 feet west and 330 feet north of SE corner of section 23 in irregular SECTION 37!

So to sum it up, if they drill 312 feet deeper, the well will then fall under the field order and be in our section, but as it stands they are in another section.

Views: 87

Attachments:

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by SBossierGuy on September 10, 2008 at 11:54
Buck,

They can drill wherever they want. My lease only entitles me to royalties from section 23 wells. You can see why this concerns me.
Permalink Reply by SBossierGuy on September 10, 2008 at 12:40
2 things: First, where did you see this in Sonris? I see it in Sonris Lite, but not in Sonris. Second, if it is in section 26, the same scenario is playing out for the lease holders in section 26.
Permalink Reply by SBossierGuy on September 16, 2008 at 9:15
I knew it! Sonris finally has a pictoral location of the well I have been describing - 238603 - and it is where I thought. (Sort of - the irregular section is not drawn perfectly in Sonris.)

See my attachment - the irregular section is the old river bed in green. My section is 23 - the top one. I put a blue x where the well is described to be located. If that well is drilled to a depth of 10,598 ft, it will be in the irregular section 37. But if it is drilled to between 10,910 ft to 11,487 ft, it will be in the section 23 unit. Ain't that something. They can drill in my section, and based on a few technicalities, I don't get a dime. If you live in 17N-13W-37, you may owe me some mailbox money. Ha.
Attachments:

landownerPermalink Reply by sesport on September 16, 2008 at 16:33
Funny thing is I was checking Sect. 37 awhile back because it includes some SE S'port. neighborhoods (Kings' Pointe, Harts' Landing). These neighborhoods were joining with Shreve Centre Coalition. I understood my search to show that they're already HBP by producing wells. The rep from Harts' Landing said they have been receiving royalties for years. Also, I understand that The Haven is in that section, and the rights are held by Locke (haven't confirmed this yet with documentation, still looking).

S.Bossier, isn't that part of the application for the conferencefrom a few weeks back that was posted? Remember it had all that mumbo-jumbo about redefining the LCV? Would that be those 2 units south of the Jimmy Davis bridge?
Permalink Reply by James CD1 on September 16, 2008 at 16:50
I live south of Harts Landing -about 5 to 6 hundred feet and I am not under lease. Can you tell me who or what well is HBP. My section is 34.

landownerPermalink Reply by sesport on September 16, 2008 at 16:53
I'm also 34, as far as I can tell there are only 2 wells for us. One is plugged & abandoned, the other is an expired permit from yrs. ago. I THINK we're in the clear, but not 100% sure. I'll go back & see if I can fins the well serial numbers for you.

landownerPermalink Reply by sesport on September 16, 2008 at 17:12
Here's serial numbers.
149050, 200183
Oddly, they're both showing as being in Bossier parish.
Permalink Reply by James CD1 on September 16, 2008 at 17:35
Know about those 2, but wonder what well could be paying Harts Landing. If they are in section 34 why aren't we getting royalties also. Don't know how close to E. Kings Hwy your are but for about a week we have had a caravan of dump trucks all day long coming up from port and going into Bagley Rd.

Oil & Gas ProPermalink Reply by Randy on September 17, 2008 at 1:16
My mom lives in harts landing is on their board or whatever it is. I know they get royalties, it's not much. They may be in 2 sections then? They didn't ask me to look into it ever, so I never paid any attention.

Randy
Permalink Reply by SBossierGuy on September 17, 2008 at 2:28
These units are the ones south of the Jimmie Davis Bridge, but they aren't involved in the redefining the LCV.

landownerPermalink Reply by sesport on September 17, 2008 at 16:40
When I've looked up some of Hart's Landing addresses with Caddo Assessor before, I think they were also Sect. 37 like Kings' Pointe. I used addresses I found in real estate ads. The sections are irregular here. I haven't been able to find Sects. 35 & 36, it seems to jump from 34 across Kings' Hwy. to Sect. 37. I think it has something to do with the flow of the river years & years ago, about where the levee is right now. I discovered this when I added water features to SONRIS map. I'd see a thin blue line, which I think is the old river flow and now the levees, then add water feature and the current river flow fills in.

RSS

© 2026   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service