Greyshades

That is an interesting profile picture. It's a little hard to make out what it is. Where did you find it?

Greyshades...Good Sunday morning to you. Thanks for the info. I do believe that the statutory force pooling is very different from the old "rule of capture." However, in the climate (looking at $13 for NG and $150 per Oil) don't you think that the costs associated with drilling, etc. are not nearly as threatening (again I say, under the conditions of today's prices) statutory force pooling is not so ominous a thing as it maybe has been in the past (80's and 90's)?

And, if the Chesapeakes, and the Petrohawks, and the Goodriches, and so on and so on...are willing to bet the farm, so to speak, on this Haynesville shale bonanza...the Barnett bonanza..., etc., then the force pooling is kind of like having your investment in the making of a hit movie, when the real money is made a year later when the DVD comes out.

I still cannot find a scenario...in this strike...where a mineral owner is dealing with bills from the O&G company from being statutory force pooled...in LA...

If the moneys are so great that O&G companies are willing to go into Billions of dollars of debt and spend Millions/Billions to purchases leases....just for the "promise"...it would seem to lessen the "scariness" of possibly finding yourself in this kind of situation. And...that is what I really have been looking for...someone with knowledge...who could tone down some of the "disaster" comments that are being made concerning same. (i.e., disaster for landowner).

Thank you for your reply. Am enjoying your comments to fellow bloggers.
And...agree with you, when I find myself doing the same..."What the X#@% am I doing blogging this stuff at 10:30 p.m on a Saturday night!" (Ha! Ha!)

Nice to meet you, blogwize. DrWAVeSport 6/8/2008
Sunday morning, coffee in hand, laptop in lap!

I thank you for your insight. In this new play, I have no doubt that some will get burned and others will become financially fixed for years whether they choose to sign leases or not. I believe it will be interesting times around here for many years yet to come. Is it here or is it not here? Time will tell.

I have friends who have a large ranch in west Texas, bought several years ago, and out there one doesn't even have the right to the water without permission (unless they catch it from rainfall in tanks). They have no mineral rights...but they own a multi-million dollar piece of land.

It's crazy how land and mineral rights are so different from state to state. I believe this is how we all stay just slightly off-track or unsure about the legalese of situations like these O&G plays. They don't happen very often, so becoming quickly savvy about things is taking a little bit of a toll on NWLa residents.

Thank you again for your helpfulness.

I have another odd question for you.
Was reading "AllExperts.com" today. A scenario was presented to the expert (6/10/08) concerning multiple O&G/s leasing in adjoining/adjacent properties and what this means to the royalty owners on either side, if only one company drills.

If you would comment on this for me. I would think that vertical and horizontal drilling will make two very different impacts on the above scenario. I suppose that vertical drilling can avoid royalty payments to both leasors, however the fracturing and hub-type drilling associated with horizontal drilling, I would think, would voluntary pool both.

Will be interested in your opine. Thanks!

Thanks for the quick and informative answer.I can tell by your responses that you are in the know on a lot of this subject matter!Thanks for helping us newbies!