Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by RGV AG on November 19, 2013 at 2:13

Mr. Bell:

You are so right.  I am at that age where my eyesight is going and I am reading things with more and more errors, and I refuse to really believe my eyesight is going.  Thus I read that wrong.  

Correct, if that is the CMR 8-5H#1is well permit or docket number 407-2013-D, they yes we have a very small portion of minerals in that well.  Although the well has not been permitted yet and no division orders or what not has been received as of yet.  

Permalink Reply by Bernell McGehee on November 19, 2013 at 2:29

In order to avoid/clear up some confusion, Mr. Craig, I believe the well/unit to which you are referring is the...

CMR/Foster Creek 8-5H in Wilkinson County.

The CMR 8-5H is in Amite County.

The CMR 8-5H is having a rig set up on it as I type.

The CMR/Foster Creek 8-5H is on the docket for November, 2013.

Permalink Reply by RGV AG on November 19, 2013 at 2:33

Mr. McGeeHee:

You are absolutely correct, it has confused me a few times before.  That is why I have been interested in this November docket.  One of the few sources I have that has any type of information about the activity in the TMS told me that the original plan was to Drill the CMR/Foster Creek well in Wilkinson county in December of this year, but I do not think that is going to happen. 

The above likely explains he continuance that the permit received in the October permitting process. 

Permalink Reply by George Christopher Henson on December 4, 2013 at 15:23

Mr. McGehee, have you heard anything on the 'Roberts 8H'. I received an E-mail from a family member stating it has something to do with a new Encana unit in which our family has acreage.

Permalink Reply by RGV AG on December 4, 2013 at 16:13

Mr. Henson:

That well is being applied for on this months MSOGB docket:

http://www.ogb.state.ms.us/docs/20131218.Docket.pdf

It is in Section 32&33 T2N R1E and Sections 8,9, and 10 T1N R1E.  Wouldn't you know it, it is right next some of the small minerals we own, as our land butts up to Section 32.   It is another real big EnCana unit. 

Permalink Reply by Charles Bell on December 4, 2013 at 16:25

Good Luck, Ike!

Permalink Reply by RGV AG on December 4, 2013 at 16:35

Mr. Bell, thanks both myself and the Aggies can always use luck. 

The larger tract of minerals we have runs right up to, but is not in, S33 of the unit that this well is in.  Real close, but no cigar yet.  This is a great big unit, with almost 2000 acres in it.  It seems most of these units now are running North and South in the sections, but I could be reading things into that.  Sanchez has applied for 3 units as well on this docket.  All in either T2 or T1.  But one is up north close to T3.  It will sure be interesting to see the results of these wells, as well as the latest Goodrich ones too. 

Permalink Reply by mark edward marchiafava on December 4, 2013 at 17:19

there's always the mention of sections by some numerical identifiers.  Is there an actual map online where a person can SEE just what's what and where it is?

Permalink Reply by Waharold on December 4, 2013 at 17:33

Mark, this is a good map of Township, Range, and Section.  Just keep double clicking on the area of interest.

http://www.geocommunicator.gov/blmMap/Map.jsp?MAP=SM

Permalink Reply by mark edward marchiafava on December 4, 2013 at 17:44

thanks !   It appears I'm in 33NE.  My neighbor who is unleased says he's gotten 5 letters wanting to lease, but I've gotten none. I'm beginning to wonder if I actually HAVE any mineral rights.  The paperwork from when I purchased the land back in the 90's shows the seller conveyed 50% of the mineral rights. My neighbor mentioned the seller may not have HAD any mineral rights to convey !  When a title search is done, doesn't the attorney confirm the 50% mineral rights were the sellers to convey? 

Permalink Reply by Bernell McGehee on December 5, 2013 at 3:25

No, Mark, no attorney would confirm the mineral rights conveyed...at least not without being asked to do so AND receiving extra compensation.

Determining the mineral rights owned can take a fair amount of time and needs to be done by someone experienced/knowledgeable in how to research the land/mineral records.

As a personal anecdote, a few years ago I bought some property from a gentleman and just before we closed I learned he was reserving all the minerals.  I considered the minerals a part of the land and something he should have mentioned at the outset.  He "always" reserved the minerals was his attitude.

The deal came to a screeching halt for a short while until we agree to a 50/50 split. 

After this "warm" exchange he said, "Now that that is over, I'm not sure if I own any minerals!"

I have since leased and we now own 25%, but at the time he didn't know if he owned any minerals. 

Sounds like the gentleman selling to you may have just routinely reserved half whether he owned anything or not.

Permalink Reply by mark edward marchiafava on December 5, 2013 at 3:27

that's exactly what I'm afraid of now.  Let me find an attorney ASAP

Thanks

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 13
• 14
• 15
• 16
• 17
• …
• 19
• Next ›
• Page