Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Two Dogs, Pirate on March 9, 2009 at 14:42

What parish is the mineral reservation located?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Olivia on March 9, 2009 at 23:45

He's in DeSoto Parish. I've got numbers from online for the tax assessor and the clerk & I may just need to call both, but if you have an idea which is better I'd appreciate it. Thanks!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ELLIS HUGH on March 9, 2009 at 14:58

Plenty of landmen here. Provide his name and parish and I am sure someone can dig it up for you.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Olivia on March 9, 2009 at 23:51

It's DeSoto Parish, 150 Acres, NW 1/4 Sec. 15, Twp. 12N, Rng. 12W

The mineral rights were left from his father to him (Peyton to Peyton), and I know lumber was harvested at one point, but I'm not sure if that was within the ten-year clock I've been told about & if it restarts once the harvest was done. The surface & mineral rights may no longer be separate, but I'm still learning how this works, so if anyone can look it up I'd appreciate the help. Thanks!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dion Warr, CPL on March 10, 2009 at 2:19

Olivia:

Not seeing a Peyton. There are two Parson tracts in the location in which you speak, one in the SE/SE/NE (Parsons), and the remainder is Parsons, et al (which would be approx. 150 ac., if the roughly 10 ac in the Parsons tract is indeed separate). A portion of this acreage used to be in Red River-Bull Bayou Naborton Paluxy Reservoir Unit (RRBB NAB PXY RA SU), which is curiously shown as active although no production is shown from the reservoir since May 1990.

There is a well on the Parsons (10 ac.) tract which is shown as productive since 1974 from what looks to be the Nacatoch formation; depending on the title, this well may be enough to hold the entire of the quarter-section (unless the ownership was completely separate prior to the creation of the reservoir unit).

FYI, a harvesting of timber on the subject lands is not a basis with which to either establish or deduce mineral ownership, nor does same interrupt the prescription of a mineral servitude.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Olivia on March 10, 2009 at 2:38

Thanks for your help. The Parsons is part of the family tract, so that may explain why the mineral rights kept getting passed on, so we'll look into it to see if the rights on the larger area are still good. Thanks for your help!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dion Warr, CPL on March 10, 2009 at 2:54

Olivia:

P. S. - Clerks of Court typically will not do mineral research for you, if you can find a deputy clerk that will, they will not certify their research. Mineral title research requires both title search and mineral history research of the records of DNR-OOC (or otherwise abbrieviated as LOC here and elsewhere) if the subject lands (or lands within a close proximity) have been drilled and/or productive.

SImilarly, assessor's offices will not be able to assist you. Mineral rights and associated items are not valuated and taxed in LA, unless improvements have been made to the surface (wellbore and/or associated equipment); then only the operator is assessed, and only as to the fixtures and/or equipment. Production is taxed at the state level via severance taxes on gross production from the well.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Two Dogs, Pirate on March 10, 2009 at 3:13

Dion I looked at it long enough to see an interest moving in 1971 that was just a real small fractional mineral interest going to 5 or 6 people through a JOP. Its probably HBP from a well back in the early 70s because I only see one new lease granted in the section to CHK.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dion Warr, CPL on March 10, 2009 at 3:51

TD:

What is odd to me is the status on the Parsons #2 well (SN 990222). 990 series always make me a little nervous; the fact that this well kind of 'appears out of nowhere' also has my interest piqued. There is one page available in the online well file, and the flow suggests a shallow production zone which would normally be a gas lease well (at which point it may only hold 10 acres in the unit), but if the reservation covers the quarter section, the well would be on the burden tract (or if the reservation was for any operations holding a portion a la R. S. 31:75, and the well affected more than 10 acres). RRBB NAB PXY RA SU was formed effective 6/1/79 (Order 109-J; supp. order resolves unit nomenclature)

Olivia, it would definitely warrant a more tract-specific research effort to resolve the issues on point.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Olivia on March 10, 2009 at 3:53

Thank you for the info. I'll see if one of my brothers (both are in MS) can get down there to figure it out. It's hard trying to do everything long distance.

I really appreciate the help. Have a great day!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Two Dogs, Pirate on March 10, 2009 at 4:16

Are receiving royalty checks?

Permalink Reply by Two Dogs, Pirate on March 10, 2009 at 14:25

Dion I havent looked into the wells so much as I have looked into mineral ownership, this tract is cut up backin the early 70s and before. I would like to give Olivia an answer but it would take a lot of work. Running records in DeSoto Parish, not online.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page