The survey plats are available through the BLM's website for every township/range. The web address is http://www.glorecords.blm.gov/, the relevant link is "Survey Plats" and then "LSR" Just because I am feeling like a nice guy today I downloaded it. A quarter-quarter section is 40 acres, and including the correction lots here is your acreage breakdown:
E2SW4: 80 acres
Lot 3: 35.05 acres
Lot 4: 35.07
If you take your total acreage (150.12) and multiply it by your fractional interest that will give you your total net acres in that tract.
Brian Burns said:
The East half of the SW Quarter, lots 3 & 4 in section 7 of township 140 N range 105W of the fifth principal meridian in Golden Valley Country, ND.
Does that help??
Thanks!
http://www.glorecords.blm.gov/
Go to Search documents. (If you are on a Mac, use Chrome and not Safari). Pick LSR, then North Dakota and Golden Valley county. Type in your Township and Range, 5th meridian, Pick Master Title Plat. Hit search. It will give you a pdf. I save the pdf and then I open it in Adobe and enlarge it to the section I am interested in. In this case, do you have Lots 3 & 4 and the e/2? Watch where the commas are. Lots 3 and 4 are irregular for section 7.
I scanned section 7 for you. Tried to attach it.
2541-7140N105W.pdf (42 KB)
Brian, these folks have given you the answer to your question on the "Gross" acres. That is the size of the surface area where you have your interest.
If you are new to this keep in mind when you lease you are paid for the "Net" mineral acres you own under these gross acres. So unless you own 100% of the minerals under this tract you'll be paid for something less than the 150.12 gross acres which make up the surface area.
The distance measurement used in metes-and-bounds descriptions doesn't have to be in "poles." In fact, I have never seen that measurement used in Texas, from my experience it is either feet or "varas," a distance equal to roughly 2.77 feet, if I recall correctly, that is a holdover from the Spanish, and on rare occasion "chains." I do seem to recall "poles" from my work in Pennsylvania.
Nancy Mosley said:
For metes and bounds states, this is useful:
http://tractplotter.com/
Metes and bounds, for those who don't know, is a directional and distance calculation, often involving trees, stone piles, stakes, etc and going from one of those north (or south) a certain number of degrees (think trig), east (or west) a certain number of "poles". 160 square poles is 1 acre.
Thanks for that additional information about vares. This works on tractplotter. There is a good explanation about the various types of measurement and the abbrreviations to use with that program.
Yes.
If you buy the Deed Pro Softwear, for about $200.00, it will make a plat from the metes and bounds (legal) and will make a set of metes and bounds from a plat. It will calculate the acreage and square feet, as well as the length of each property line. Search Deed Pro Softwear online.
Sandra Nikirk
Montgomery, Texas
Not to Hijack your thread but if a person has a ALTA survey that says they have 163 acres in a quarter section should they also get 163 mineral acres? The land was sold as 163 land acres and I kept all minerals acres. In previous leases it was believed that there was only 160 until the ALTA survey thus the people with the new lease say I only have 160 mineral acres. How do I correct the mineral acres or convence the people with the lease there is 163. The Alta survey is on file with the county court house
J, the short answer is... IF you have ALL minerals under a tract then your NET mineral acres should exactly match the GROSS acres of that same tract be it more, or less, than the standard 160 acres in a quarter section. In your case it may be 163 acres, in other cases that quarter section may be only 157.23, or whatever number.
However, convincing the Lessee of this is may be a challenge. If they refuse to accept the facts of the survey, you should insist on language in the Lease agreement such as; "This Lease includes only 160 net mineral acres. Lessor may own additional oil and gas mineral interests in the lands covered by this Lease. Lessor intentionally excludes any additional mineral interests from this Lease, beyond said 160 net mineral acres."
This is not a perfect solution, yet you can't force them to accept the survey. This leaves you with the 3 net acres dangling. However, it prevents the Lessee from gaining your 3 acres without compensation. Without a clause to the effect of the one above they would gain ALL of your interest under those lands (be it 160 or 163).
When the Lessee gets around to drilling under you they may return to try to clean up their error by leasing your remaining interest. Or you would be in a position to lease that piece to another party who wishes to participate. So I'd suggest you insist on language along the lines of the clause above. Good Luck.
Well, if the Lessee is going to try to screw you out of three mineral acres then they are not going to agree to that language, so I see no reason to insist on it in the first place. I would just show them the survey and tell them to make it 163 acres on the Lease. If they refuse, then if you think that you can lease the minerals to another company, tell the first outfit to come back when they are willing to be reasonable, if you don't think that you can lease the minerals to another company, then you have to decide if you want to lease 163 acres and get paid for 160 or stand on principle and lease 0 acres and get paid for 0.
Ever think about looking for someone to drill your 160 + ? Is it an odd shape that someone wouldn't want to drill? A potential lessee can become a lot more reasonable when they think you have options other than them. Same thing when they think you could lease to someone else who would participate for your interest so the operator would make nothing off your acres. There may not be anything you can do, at which point you have the decision that Pete Wrench pointed out. If you sit back passively, the less good choices become a lot more likely. Be proactive.
J guthrie said:
Not to Hijack your thread but if a person has a ALTA survey that says they have 163 acres in a quarter section should they also get 163 mineral acres? The land was sold as 163 land acres and I kept all minerals acres. In previous leases it was believed that there was only 160 until the ALTA survey thus the people with the new lease say I only have 160 mineral acres. How do I correct the mineral acres or convence the people with the lease there is 163. The Alta survey is on file with the county court house
Brian,
Remember that you are the owner of the minerals and can set your price for a lease bonus. It can be lump sum and shouldn't be tied to a per acre price when you can't agree. I have a client in CO that owns the surface too and the land man tried to deduct the acreage of a surface easement to save a few bucks. It didn't work. Landmen will also divert your attention away from the more important lease terms by quibbling over bonus. Lease terms in a horizontal well exploration area are far more important (maybe 10 times) than a few bonus dollars.
Don't be afraid to draw a line in the sand. Remember its your sand.
thank you all for your information...I do have two people looking at it and the one that I think would be more agreeable wants to give me $200 less mineral acre..but they are known to buy and sit on the lease just so someone else won't get it.. Just curious if I they refuse to add the language and only less the 160...could I then less the other three after I sign the less. Also once there is a division order would it not be caught there? And if caught there would they have to pay more bonus if I signed just for 160
the lease document will have a clause that gives the lessee all of your contiguous minerals regardless of the amount. Never sign a lease to just get the bonus. You will get slaughtered. If you think you can trick the 150 year old oil industry, forget it. GLH PS Be careful of unilateral extensions being based on acreage as well. I think you need an oil and gas attorney for your own protection. Add the cost to your bonus demand.
J guthrie said:
thank you all for your information...I do have two people looking at it and the one that I think would be more agreeable wants to give me $200 less mineral acre..but they are known to buy and sit on the lease just so someone else won't get it.. Just curious if I they refuse to add the language and only less the 160...could I then less the other three after I sign the less. Also once there is a division order would it not be caught there? And if caught there would they have to pay more bonus if I signed just for 160
Gary is right in that most Leases will have wording to the effect that all of the minerals under the tract (in this case, the quarter section) will be leased, even if the mineral acreage is more than whatever amount is specified in the Lease. So no, if the Lease says 160 acres and the quarter section actually contains 163 acres, all 163 acres are leased and you cannot go sign another Lease for the 3 acres. Besides, exactly which three would you be leasing?
J guthrie said:
could I then less the other three after I sign the less. Also once there is a division order would it not be caught there? And if caught there would they have to pay more bonus if I signed just for 160
Pete,
A pole = a perch = a rod, or 16.5 feet.
