Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by NUDOG on October 15, 2009 at 3:50

Mr. Les, I keep reading about the depth clause in lease agreements on this site. Just wondering if it just for shallow rights to oil and if Haynesville and Bossier are too close together? THANKS!!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on October 15, 2009 at 4:22

Nudog, some newer lease agreements included a depth Pugh clause that kept deeper mineral rights from being held by shallower production.

In theory a mineral owner could include language to keep Bossier Shale rights from being held by a Haynesville Shale producing well. This may be difficult given the close proximity in depth of the two formations.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on October 15, 2009 at 4:30

The HA is just below the Bossier. A traditional pugh would not release the bossier in this case. Les is correct that you could have language to release shallower depths, but I would guess that this would be provision that most operators would be reluctant to give. Most operators want to keep all options open, and would like to be able to produce from all formations they penetrate.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by RC on October 15, 2009 at 7:01

Thanks again Les,
What is the protocol or likelihood that both strata would be drilled when a rig reaches a site that includes both the Haynesville and Bossier shales? I suppose I am weighing the economics of drilling and set up costs and the obvious need to secure as much acreage (by the O/G companies) as possible to avoid re-leasing.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by buckmaster on October 15, 2009 at 7:34

the Muench well is located about i mile east of 171 on hwy 512 Just east of Benson

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by RBH on October 15, 2009 at 4:25

thanks for the map. Seems to tie with the EOG/Phawk wells in Nac --"Carthage N Bossier" versus being Haynesville

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by amigo1 on October 15, 2009 at 6:21

I am new to all this. I would like to know why the people that lease your land never really let you kow what is going on. I have had mine leased (with another company) for 2 1/2 year. I am part of a unit; however, many calls have been made as to why I have not received the division order. The lease runs out in June 2010. I have found out that if they pay me by June 1st I cannot lease to anyone else. I have received no mney and it pumped June--2009 for a while but they closed it down and to my knowledge they have not pumped since then. I have received no information on anything. When I call the placed that leased it they always indicate two months. Can anyone shed some light on this? I am in the Shelby County, Texas area. Do you about any new wells going into that area? I have contacted the RRC last Friday, but have heard nothing.

Thanks

MTR

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by RBH on October 15, 2009 at 6:23

NAME OF WELL/OPERATOR?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by NUDOG on October 15, 2009 at 8:52

One more crazy question Mr. Les. In theory wouldn't your minerals be more valuable if you were sitting on both shales instead of one? If so shouldn't the lease money be more? Thanks!!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on October 15, 2009 at 10:08

Jay. Are a 6 MMcfd HA and a 10 MMcfd BO in one unit equal to one 20 MMcfd HA in another unit with no BO potential? The Bossier well we are discussing is in an area, Logansport Field, that has been discussed previously because of its sub-par HA completions.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on October 15, 2009 at 11:29

Skip, I would not give too much weight to the variations in reported initial rates between units in the same part of the play. There are just way too many factors and issues to be able to do direct comparisons. Rather I would view the information qualitatively to assess general regional trends across the play.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on October 15, 2009 at 11:47

Les. B. In general, I agree with you. However, I think Spring Branch may have been onto something when he initiated discussions concerning the sub-par CHK IP's in the Logansport Field. I've been conducting some research including that area of late and see exactly what he caused him to ask his questions. For those who missed that particular discussion, a link follows.

http://www.gohaynesvilleshale.com/forum/topics/wells-in-t11n-r15-r1...

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page