Garvin County, OK - Oil & Gas Discussion archives

You need to read through one of those orders to see how they are calculated.

Chris,

Is that the Ratliff City Fusilinid Unit? We have a small bit in that based on rights in section 16-1S-3W. I should have copies of the orders for that one if you don’t have them.

Rick, where is that website link to the unitization orders? I am stuck in OCC and can’t find it……I think I am in it, too. I will look for our orders in the paper files we have.

Found a back door…

Chris, here is the map from the Tatum Unit in Carter. Let’s move to the Carter forum. Do any of these tracts ring a bell? Lots of the other units don’t have maps. I am in a different one to the north.

oops it didn’t paste the first time. Here is the unit map

Williams 1H-7X Completed 7-2N-3W Covers section 7 and 18.

1059 bod 3096 gas I think that is the best oil numbers I have seen out of Stephens or Garvin Counties.

http://imaging.occeweb.com/OG/Well%20Records/1DD18E43.pdf

Congrats Hutch! Come on 17!

Thanks all for the feedback on my unitization puzzle! :slight_smile: I’m going to pick this up in the Carter County forum. I’ll try to find an equally confusing on in Garvin to talk about here :slight_smile:

Karla, thanks but if you mean that well pad Linda was talking about that was a false alarm. We’ll probably get some more wells one of these days.

I’m trying to get up to speed on the mineral interest my mom has on S20 -2N -3W Newfield pooled without her. I think it’s going to be about 0.476 acre.

That’s pretty impressive #'s on the Williams. A couple of perfs in 19 couldn’t have hurt. That’s quite a bit better than the Williams 1-19 came in.

Rick you ready for some of that ?

You bet, Ron!

David, below is a link to the original pooling order which was extended in the link Hutch gave. You can look up all the documents for the pooling on the OCC site http://imaging.occeweb.com/imaging/OAP.aspx – go there and enter 201202539 as the Case # at the top & search.

In the pooling order you can see all the names pooled. If your mom is not on that list & didn’t sign a lease, the other thing to see is if her interest is held by production by another operator.

http://imaging.occeweb.com/AP/Orders/0302FEB6.pdf

David, here’s the latest:

http://imaging.occeweb.com/AP/Orders/occ5017382.pdf

Catching up on 5 months of sharing offers to lease:

22-1N-1W; $1500 @ 3/16, from Greenstar is the highest of several. (CLR spacing)

23-1N-1W; $500 @ 3/16, from Parker is highest of several.

24-1N-1W; interest from Freedom

19-1N-1E; $450 @ 3/16, from Freedom

31-2N-2W; $1,400 @ 3/16, Striker is highest of several

16-3N-4W; $1800 @ 3/16, Echo is highest of many (NFX is pooling)

28-4N-4W; $1,900 @ 3/16, Greenstar is highest (CLR spacing)

Standard disclaimers apply here – I am just relaying offers I received in hopes the information is helpful to others. Your insights always appreciated. Good advice often heard on this forum: don’t take the first offer or sign their form lease without negotiating the terms - lease forms typically start out very favorable to the operator, not you.

Thank you Chris and Michael.

Chris, those offers in 1N-1W& 1E are in a neat little window of Woodford condensate along a structure. What better thing than to drill the source rock of an old shallow field! I am getting some nibble around the edge of it in the $475 range. Good luck!

Chris, do you have interests in 28, 4N, 4W? I guess you do since you go on to say you have received offers. My family has mineral rights there but I am afraid it is all HBP from the NEPHSU. That link you provided a week ago to the Tax commission showed all six or seven of our NEPHSU wells as plugged even though the OCC site only shows two plugged. Sure wish we could opt out of participating in the NEPHSU. Are you receiving royalties from a Woodford vertical well there?

Lynden, on 28-4N-4W it looks like the NEPHSU (that is a link to the order) only encompasses the W2 W2 of the section; part of our interest (W2 NE NW & E2 NW NW) is in that and part is out.

I’ll have to find our original lease to see what is held & try to decipher that vs. the unitization impact. Although I have 4 offers on that section I bet they all just sent them based on the CLR spacing order respondent list so no telling if CLR made a mistake or perhaps we have something that isn’t hbp. Fingers crossed it is the latter cause otherwise it is going to be an old lease.