J-B Oper. Co. request to "redefine Lower CV Zone 10,030' to 12,100'..."

Question: Why would Commissioner of Conservation grant to J-B Oper. Co., et al, (or any other O&G, E&P) a "redefining" of the Lower Cotton Valley Zone (Reservoir A)"...(or any other Zone, for that matter)...."in the Elm Grove Field"...(or any other field, for that matter)..."as being that gas/condensate bearing interval encountered between depths of 10,030 feet and 12,100 feet (electrical log measurements) in the J-W Oper. Co.-Cohort Energy et al. 22 No 1 Well, located in Section 22, T16N, R13W, Caddo Parish, La...

Along with 10 additional requests...including application to drill in these sections in the Hosston Zone/Res. A, CV Formation/Res. A, and Lower CV Zone/Res. A... and somewhere they include the kitchen sink, I think...
J-W, et al., is force pooling all sections shown on their "map," to include Sect. 17, 19, 20, and 21...as these sections contain J-W's "proposed unit wells."

Again, I ask, why the "redefining of the depths" of the Lower Cotton Valley Zone in this application to the C. of Conservation? I understand the intend of the land grab of the sections, I am not quite sure if I understand the depth change request... Dare I say (imo) that these "requests" are NOT geared toward improving the lot of mineral owners in these sections.

Thank you for your responses. I do appreciate every bit of info that I have learned from all you fellow "shalers."

The letters are coming folks. So I hope we are all prepared to see life moving at an even quicker pace around the HS.

Views: 356

Attachments:

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by CAS on July 27, 2008 at 12:18
The only way this would matter is if the landowner's mineral lease contained a stratigraphic pugh clause (like mcgill said). Otherwise, production from any lands pooled with the landowner's tract will maintain the entire lease as to ALL depths, regardless of what those depths are named.

It's also important to note that the overwhelming majority of mineral leases DO NOT contain stratigraphic pugh clauses. Sounds like a bunch of pointless bellyaching to me.
Permalink Reply by Jaybird on July 27, 2008 at 13:00
Cas,

We are negotiating our lease right now, and since Claiborne Parish has not started to receive the recognition it deserves for being part of the Haynesville Shale, we are concerned when the O&G's all around our property are asking to redefine the depths of the Cotton Valley 2 miles from us.

While areas in nearby Shreveport have made the news that they are in the Haynesville Shale, Claiborne Parish is not being mentioned in all of the hype so all we are doing is trying to get the recognition that we deserve.

If bellyaching gets my family $3,000 to $20,000 per acre instead of the measley $150 per acre offered by KCS which we politely declined, I will belly ache until my tummy stops aching.

It's hard for us to stand by and watch these companies asking to "redefine depths of certain plays" when the depths they are asking to 'redefine" are associated with the depth of the Haynesville Shale.

Jaybird
Permalink Reply by Mike Billings on July 28, 2008 at 6:46
J-W drilled a well last year next to my farm, section21 T20N R14W to the depth of 10,182 drilling for CV. We signed the lease 2/13/06. They got a dry hole. They tried to complete for CV and Hosston sands. They had trouble with frakking. Sonris now has the well waiting to be plugged and abandoned. Do you think their filing has to do with trying to keep the lease from expiring in 6 months? It must kill them to know they are 500 feet shy of Haynesville. (well #234524). I have received offers to top lease. There are currently two Haynesville wells being drilled a few miles south of us on Hwy 71. (#238018, 238017).
Permalink Reply by Mike Billings on July 28, 2008 at 7:07
They paid 200/acre bonus 2.5 years ago. 1/5 royalty. The recent offers started at 3,000/acre and 1/4 royalty for the top lease. 25% now the balance when the old lease expires.
Permalink Reply by Mike Billings on July 28, 2008 at 7:18
Is it possible to drill the same well deeper and try for Haynesville? If so, would they be able to drill horizontally?
Permalink Reply by sesport on July 28, 2008 at 7:34
"Well I could see a company doing it once or twice just to scare the holdouts in the other sections. It would definitely make the news. hehe. We aren't to that point yet I don't believe. Hopefully we can work together with all of these coalitions and HOAs to come to a mutually beneficial arrangement."

This is Randy's comment over on the discussion about why leases are being made in urban areas. This was one possible reason I had contemplated for all the rush to lease activity. My thought was that the O&G Cos. want to wrap this (leasing) up so there are no holdouts to deal with when major profits are reported 10 yrs. down the road.
Hmmmmmm??? Something to think about.

RSS

Support GoHaynesvilleShale.com

Top Content 

1 Global EV Outlook: IEA

Global EV Outlook: IEA
2 Texas Standard article - Potential lithium boom simmers in East Texas

Texas Standard article - Potential lithium boom simmers in East Texas
3 Texas Smackover Lithium Play

Texas Smackover Lithium Play
4 AI boom to fuel natural gas demand in coming years, report says

AI boom to fuel natural gas demand in coming years, report says
5 Arkansas Smackover Lithium Play

Arkansas Smackover Lithium Play
6 Ashland Field Comprehensive Update

Ashland Field Comprehensive Update
7 SWN wells in King Hill

SWN wells in King Hill
8 Plunging Haynesville Production Leads Overall Natural Gas Supply Cut; Price Response Muted

Plunging Haynesville Production Leads Overall Natural Gas Supply Cut; Price Response Muted
9 New technology helps US shale oil industry start to rebuild well productivity

New technology helps US shale oil industry start to rebuild well productivity
10 Franklin County in the spotlight

Franklin County in the spotlight

Not a member? Get our email.

Groups



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

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service