Cana Woodford Shale (AKA Anadarko Woodford) - Oil & Gas Discussion archives

Francis, are the two wells you benefit from located in their drilling unit or do they occupy the surface of someone who does not benefit from them by royalty ? Mineral rights being the dominant estate I think the operator should have the right of ingress to plant a well atop the leased minerals, but I see no reason they should be allowed to plant a rig on the surface outside of the drilling unit if said surface owner does not wish it and will not bargain for the use of their surface.

My two wells have the spud hole and the bottom hole in the section which we were pooled into: Section 29. I agree the operator should have spudded section 20’s well in section 20 but they didnt. They spudded it in section 29. I believe the same thing happened to section 28? They are drilling from section A into section B and section B gets the royalty while at the same time loosing no surface area.

I didnt know my off hand coment would draw such a discussion. Sorry for all the confusion fellas. LOL

Can someone explain the directional drilling regs in OK? Is Francis correct? she wouldn’t get any royalties and the well is located on her property? That isn’t how it works in Michigan. I would think that her property would be part of the drill unit (DU). If she is explaining it right then I can understand the aggravation she is feeling. Why wouldn’t the gas/oil company simply place the well off her property?

Wilson

Wilson, See the explanation below by Gabe Bass an Oklahoma attorney.

Francis, Isn’t Francis male and Frances female? Not being nosy but have noticed several of us referring to you as Her…

Dear Francis,

Without reading back over all of the histrionics of the previous posts, did you read your lease to see if you perhaps inadvertently granted a subsurface easement? That would be my first stop to try to understand what is going

Is the well site in Section 29 with the downhole in Section 20 on your surface in Section 29? If not, have you confirmed that the surface owner in Section 29 did not consent to the placement of a well site on them?

To Sweet Stephanie: I am sorry that I have offended you. I do like drilling wells. I have 2 of my own. Please forgive my ignorant use of the word bogus. I will try to abstain from further use of that word in the future.

Sicncerly,

Francis

Our well in Dewey County is in section 1 16N 14W but there is also a well spudded in the same section but is producing out of section 36 in 17N. The well location is on the north end of our section and goes vertical until it curves about 9000 feet down to go horizontal in section 36. I was told it takes about 500 feet to complete the curve and go horizontal so it is well into section 36. We do not own the land in our section but I am sure the landowner received damages from Devon Plus damages on our well site plus damages laying the gas line for a mile North of our well. To get paid damages for land that is sand hills and black jacks is not bad. Several years ago my aunt was paid damages for the same road that a oil company had made years before. The road improved access to her property and she got paid twice for the same road. Because of the need to move heavy equipment and oil trucks up the section line the oil companies have hauled in rock to improve the section line roads so trucks would not become stuck in the loose sandy roads. Just wanted to add my two cents.

Oops, Francis! I used “her” again and honestly unintentionallly. Also, I was never offended. Not to worry.

Larry Trook, that was the type of scenario I had in mind only francis owns surface and minerals where top hole is but no minerals in an adjacent section where well is producing from. They would only pool bottom hole section owners and pay surface damages to top hole surface owner/s.

Sorry again… I havent realy investigated anything deeper than the spud report. All this was started over an off hand comment I made a few pages back. We were talking about a different subject, and someone came unglued, and whamo we are spinning tires in the mud.

Marathon applied for 6 more wells in 23-4n-5w Grady Co. C.D.# 201201965

Sorry that is 27

David, Correction on Cimarex, they are drilling in 16 only. I mistook Range 9 for section 9.

Hey Michael Hutchison, I Have question if you have a little time can you check on the occ website again for section 4-13N-9W for increased density or if anything is going on, someone said that Devon had several wells staked in the section to the south that were going to be drilled north into 4-13N-9W. I’d really appreciate it, thank you!

David, You are right but what I found was Chesapeake has a location exception that puts the surface location in sec. 9 and bottom hole in sec. 4. Looks like sec. 9 is a launching pad, Cimarex is drilling from 9 south into 16. Chesapeake has been having some money problems and has been selling off some of their properties, maybe Devon has it now. Interestingly Chesapeake got that location exception in April 2011 and filed for an extension of time to drill in March 2012.

Thanks Michael! So was their an increased density too? If you are ever around Calumet look me up and I’ll show you around. Take care and thanks again.

David Do you know J. J. Smith from Calumet ?

I don’t think I do.

Mark, Mine is 22-17n-14w in Dewey Co. We have a lease and an order for spacing. We’ve been told that ours will be drilled this year. You might want to call Devon and see if they’re interested in yours. Good luck.