Burke County, ND - Oil & Gas Discussion archives


My family owns mineral rights in Burke County

Township 161 North, Range 94 West (Spacing unit 1280 per Continental 10/9/13) Section 34: All; Section 27: E ½

Township 160 North, Range 94 West (Spacing unit 623.99 per Continental 10/9/13) Section 6: E ½ NE ¼

and we received a letter from Continental stating they were getting ready to spud a well on Section 27 in October of 2013. When I received the letter I contacted a cousin who is more knowledgeable about mineral rights and she told me how to search for wells in ND. I searched all our right in Burke County and low and behold I found the Points 1-6H well that was pumping on section 6 which Mr. Starkweather referred to in his recent post. We did not have a lease for these rights.

After several conversations in October with Continental and a landman, a lease was executed for all of the mineral rights as Continental was preparing to spud the well on Section 27.

In late January of 2014 I was informed by Continental that they received a new DOTO (Division Order Title Opinion) and would have to rework the entire Points 6 well. They stated, "We are hopeful to have the ownership corrected for the March check write, but with time permitting, we are pushing to have it reviewed sooner."

The Cecelia 1-27H1 on Section 27 has an information relases date of 4-17-2014.

With all this said, how long after completion of the well should we expect to receive royalties? How long after production does it usually take for royalty payments to be made? Do mineral owners receive royalty payments the month after production?

I want to believe that the drilling company is upstanding but if they are not, what recourse does a mineral owner have?



I spoke w a person from Continental....not the production engineer but a person I've had decent conversations with for 2 years on/off. Not fully in the know either other than looking at graphs that RW may well be aware of in the journals and so on, (I have not discovered these), I was told it probably won't get any better than what it is now and that it is "normal" for production to fall off. RW suggested a pump was not in place. The rep said there was and that Continental always posts a pump. Truthfully I have no faith in that comment. As far as gang busters in a return, sure I had higher hopes and with fracking or however minerals are extracted, I'm like any other royalty owner and have to believe that Continental is doing the right thing. Unable to pay for a rig, the help to work same, not living in that area, all most of us outsiders just have to pray that honesty will prevail and in my case that extraction will increase. Funny always to see production values decrease yet at the pump prices continue to climb.

Always eager to know how productive anyone else's might be.


scott losee, there were 12 tanks and all pipingfor4 wells , there is2 stacks there now but the tanks and piping have been removed, there is no longer a permit to drill either. I don't know whats happening. garicia and Ellison wells. location 159n section 12 range 93 west. I would like information,if anyone knows, bob skalicky.landman for oasis ?????


T Starkweather, right now my DH and I are planning a trip to ND with our grandson this summer. My goal is to see the town where my mother grew up (Powers Lake, ND) and visit the area I have mineral rights in Montrail and Burke counties. I have the location for Cecelia #1-27H1 (Township 161 North, Range 94 West Section 34: All; Section 27: E ½ - (Spacing unit 1280 per Continental 10/9/13) well which they are working on getting into production soon. I plan to try and locate the Points 6 well also. Not sure how close I will be able to get to that one. Won't be going until July so hopefully both wells will be in production then.


Janis, in 1996 I had a personal/family interest to pursue that made me decide to drive to both ND and MT to get as close as possible to the section and/or land where family mineral rights had been maintained. I saw a few pumping rigs scattered but otherwise saw nothing much but rolling hills, 3 foot high grass and yet after a rain, had all I could do to navigate with my 2WD truck at the time due to the slick mud that passed for roads.

In 2012 I passed thru again on my way to Williston to attempt a talk with the attorney I had retained to do probate for my mother's affairs regarding mineral rights bequeathed to 2 siblings and myself. It was a Friday and unaware the office was closed, I still stopped to talk to a realtor to try to get an idea of what was going on.

A sea of activity throughout the area from road construction to housing to hauling of oil in tankers, etc. was seen this time but I did not get to where the Points well was located for it hadn't been put in to production at that time. Your effort and a statement of what you've found would be interesting to not just myself but others. So thanks as like yourself, I might make another trip that way this late summer.


T Starkweather, I was told the Points location is at 48.7077° N, 102.8705° W but they weren''t sure of the county roads to get there. Do you have that info? We just purchased a new car and don't know how to put GPS locations in without an address or cross secting roads. I did talk to someone in Powers Lake and he said that the roads are paved now but not sure if they are around the wells. I would think they are to make it easier for the oil trucks. I have a ton of distant relations in Powers Lake which is only 30 minutes from the Points well so the trip has a lot of sentimental value to me but I'm still hoping I can find the well.


Hi everyone, Would someone please explain what is water flooding that Crescent Point Energy is doing in Canada? What's the difference with their cement liner that is reducing well costs in their big Torquay announcement-north of Divide and Burke Counties.



Mary Beth, if you notice they mention mile long wells. They would be more efficient than 10,000 foot wells because 70% of the oil comes from the first 3/4 mile. The extremely expensive 2nd 5,000 feet of an ND Bakken well does very little after the field pressure diminishes. The operators in ND just drill 10,000 ft laterals because it holds more land.

10,000 laterals do somewhat work where field pressures are high and the rock is more permeable but many of them are just for the land grab, those places where the oil will not flow by itself for more than a couple months before they have to install a pump to get more than a dribble of oil.

I suspect that the cement liner being half the the length costs alot less.

Water flooding is pumping water down a depleted well to wash oil from the rock and separate it at the surface. It has not been effective, that I have heard anyway, in ND. I expect CO 2 flooding will be more effective.


I rushed when I shouldn't have, for clarity, 1 mile, 5,000 feet and 10,000 refers to lateral length.


Diamond for Petro Harvester offered to lease my NW1/4 sec 15 T163 R90 for 3yrs, $150/a, 1/6 royalty with $100/a 2yr followup option in the Madison only. The Cornerstone lease expired in 2011 and have left the immediate area with focus in
the twsp to the west. Can anyone enlighten me with info of current prices and current activity in this area with 320 horizontal drill spacing in the Madison as well as the 640 or 1280 Bakken spacing of this immediate area. Thank you, Gary


Gary, I have a friend in that area who has 460 net acres. He was negotiating at $225 per acre 3 years with no option 19%, they also wanted free use of water and pipeline and electric easements in the lease. I told him that of they drill 5 wells as they easily could, that could be $50,000 that he was giving them as a gift in water. Same for pipeline easement. He rents out the surface also and it may interfere with his surface tenant if they actually drill 5 wells on his property. Basically his lese bonus would just about cover the things they normally have to pay extra and I didn't consider it a good deal. I don't know what he finally wound up with.

320 spacing does not mean there will only be one well per 320, only that one well WILL HOLD a 320 and royalty of one well will be diluted that much.

Madison and Bakken can have overlapping spacing, one does not affect the other. I would not lease both at the same royalty unless it was to lease the Madison at the same royalty as Bakken.


Thanks RKW for your prompt response regarding my T163N R90W NW1/4 sec15.Apparently Petro Harv.has 2 or 3 sites on & near T163 R92 they want to explore. With success they will then move east onto mine. They need my quarter to save the 80 they control for drilling the Madison 320 horizontal. I would hope they lay as many wells as is compliant in ND in order to recover as much oil as technology allows. But is there any pooling ability they can use to access my adjacent quarter in sec 16 without another lease? Did your friend who you referred to negotiate for the Madison,Bakken or all layers. Mine was leased to Cornerstone for 3yrs in 2009 3/16ths, $225 no option but they were to target the Bakken with 1280s. Th Bakken in that area with 1280s does not seem to persist economically at this time. Is 320 horizontal drilling in the Madison common practice or experimental? In the unlikely event that the choose to use my surface to site locate, are there issues that I can control to minimize the impact on the surface. I will be in contact with my renter for his input but it may be out of my hands. At any rate I am from old school and respect and consideration is just the right thing to do. Thanks again RWK ~~ gll


Gary, in my experience, Madison oil is where you find it. There may well be multiple wells needed and some of them may be poor. I wouldn't like the 320 spacing but I doubt there is much that could be done about it. If you look at some of Cornerstones recent drilling on the GIS map, I believe they will continue in that way.

The long lateral Madison wells I have seen anywhere were losers. If there are some Madison wells with 5,000 foot laterals out there that produce decently proportionate to their length, I'd like to hear about them because I have not yet run across any.

My friend was negotiating only the Madison and Spearfish.

I agree that the Bakken in that area will be uneconomic for some time because after the field pressure is gone, only the first 5,000 foot of the 10,000 foot wellbore has significant production under pump, they are going to have to get serious about producing and not just holding acres eventually.

My friend was dealing with Diamond Resources. The negotiations were long. I urged him to require a no deducts clause and Diamond agreed and then tried to stick marketing language in there which is all the deducts because they must be done before "marketing" the production. When I mentioned this, he told me he thought that was what it meant but he wanted my opinion. I would not find it flattering that the land company thought there was any chance of sneaking something like that by me. I could tell he was tired after 8 months of negotiation.


Diamond has become a total pain in the butt to deal with. Not only does it have to be watched during the negotiation phase, it will recommend suspending royalty payments at the mere whisper of a title issue. I stopped leasing with Diamond and told it not to even bother calling me.


got an lease offer sent to us for a 1/4 what seems is paid all around us and the wording in lease is beyond criminal anyone had luck correcting the one sided offered leases and getting paid at least what those around you are getting we are also the last ones left in a large block this company is buying


Don't think my last post "took".

Just contacted by Diamond for Petro Harvester re 163-91 Sec 31 SE4. Offering $400/acre, 3yr with 2 yr option, 1/6. Parcel is small, so bonus not that important, but 1/6 seems low. Any thoughts? R.W.??


Maybe ask for 17 or 17.5%. Diamond's gotta get their cut. So, if operator's are paying 20% in ND, on even large acreage positions, you've gotta make some room for the broker. How many acres do you have to negotiate with?


Anyone have any info what Cornerstone is doing around 163-90-6? I hear they are drilling but any success in that area?


Thanks Bart. They've apparently leased the bulk of what they want and are now cleaning up the "small fry". We've only got 8 net acres.


Andy, if you don't get what you want, I'd be willing to lease it from you and participate on the interest. You can email me at ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■.