Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Catfish on February 25, 2009 at 4:19

Sections 13,14,15,16 are all included. How long have the 12 sections in south Haughton been forced?

Permalink Reply by Eric S. Clarke on February 26, 2009 at 11:12

They were offically granted as units with a pooling order issued Dec 16 2008 Lousiana Department of Conservation.

Permalink Reply by Eric S. Clarke on February 26, 2009 at 14:41

I just got word that there are now 24 more section in our area they are looking to force pool all in T18 R12 and now have heard they are working on leasing in the area of T19 R11 and R12. This is our entire coverage area and they say no to groups because it crosses section lines. Here they are working to force pool almost entire townships and ranges at a time.
Eric

Permalink Reply by Eric S. Clarke on February 26, 2009 at 15:19

I am correcting this information the 24 more sections is not curretly valid. The person that gave me the information was looking at the wrong information and it is still only the four sections you have listed, but i do however look for more to be done soon.

Eric

Permalink Reply by sesport on February 26, 2009 at 16:26

Eric - Do you guys have someone who can check records to see how much acreage is already leased? I'm guessing it's barely over the 50+% needed to force pool. In these economic times, my guess is that they shouldn't want to have 49% UMI. I'm thinking they can force pool & drill to HBP, but their investors/shareholders won't like it very much that so much $$$$ is going to UMI.

Keep communicating & meeting with your group ... keep them informed ... give them a "go to" person/people in case your members & neighbors feel pressured. Get your chattiest people, maybe some retirees, on the phones to call around & put the word out, keep the word out. Especially the elderly as they may not be comfortable with computers & the internet. SHGLC had someone calling my family about every week.

Hope this helps, best to you all - sesport

Permalink Reply by Eric S. Clarke on February 26, 2009 at 16:41

Thank you. That is why we have started up with and going to continue with our meetings. We are using the papers and news to get our information out. We have our records and data base that lets us keep up with the acreage we have by each section. Thank you for your support and words of encouragement.

Permalink Reply by sesport on February 26, 2009 at 16:55

Than you know whether you've got that 49% in your hand, I'd say hold if you've got the full house. LOL

Have a good evening - sesport

Permalink Reply by sesport on February 25, 2009 at 0:07

GH - One of the strategies that I recall reading/hearing about, but have a vague understanding of, is "top leasing." As I recall, it's one strategy used when current lease is about to expire. As I've said, I'm not exactly sure how it works, but your group might want to ask your counsel.

Good luck - sesport :0)

Permalink Reply by Hicksbaugh Ltd. on May 24, 2009 at 3:45

I could use some advice on this. I have some land in T20N-R11W where a company called Diamond Oil is getting ready to drill. Interestingly, they want to drill on a part of the unit where I own 100% of the surface and minerals. I am unleased. They want to pay $600 per acre plus a 20% royalty. Obviously, I'd like at least 25%. What do you recommend.

You mentioned that is I am forced pooled I have to share in production and transportation costs. Would that cost include drilling costs? I understand that at these low gas prices there is a reasonable chance that some of these wells will never recover their drilling costs (eg, break into the black). I really don't understand the forced pooling statute. There is also a discussion that I will be penalized 300% of the drilling costs before I begin to participate in a well. Is that right?

They are also telling me that if I am forced pooled, they can enter upon my land and drill without a lease (use both surface and drill underneath the surface). They may be right on that, but that sure seems to run contrary to basic private property rights.

What do you think.

Permalink Reply by Hicksbaugh Ltd. on May 30, 2009 at 6:19

Thank you very much. A second (and perhaps 3rd) question on pooling. If leased and the lessee elects to go nonconsent subject to this 300% penalty, what is the likelihood of being paid royalties absent having to go to court?

Second, I am being told that with a pooling order they can enter may land (surface and sub-surface) and drill even though there is no lease. That is pretty amazing to me. What if my lessee (a non-operator) has executed an agreement with no suface operations?

Last, as a prerequisite to forced pooling, must the proposed operator offer the nonoperator a farmout agreement - or just participate or be subject to a 300% penalty ultimatum. The latter sounds awfully harsh.

By the way, I believe the trend is moving up into T19N, R11W and T20N-R11W. I have pre-app notices for 5 units in that area.

Best regards and thank you.

Permalink Reply by Rick Sanders on March 4, 2010 at 4:39

once again thank you Eric for watching over the flock. The old adage for war and hunting prey is to pick off the weak ones on the outside of the pack. Even the most fearless hunters will not go into a pack for a kill, its to dangerous . Keep this clan together and be patient, even the best hunters will bow to the pack. Thanks Rick in Philadelphia 30 acres Bellvue

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page