Perhaps this is a dumb question but I would like to know if you lease your land for drilling specifying NO Drill/No Surface Damage on the property are you less likely to be pooled in a drilling unit if one is nearby or does it matter?
I can't think of how one would have any effect on the other (speaking from my experience in Oklahoma...the answer may differ in other states). My guess is that the lessee would not sign such a lease unless they are already very confident that your surface would not be the chosen location for the pad.
Good to know Gabe. And it does make sense that they must be pretty confident that the surface would not be the chosen location for the pad in order to execute an agreement like that in the first place. Thanks.
I leased a tract in Grimes County with a no surface use clause. The company put the location on a neighbor's property.
6th Generation:
Did they pool any of your land in the unit?
Also, we have been hearing some stories about people living near Iola who leased their land and a drill site was even put on their land yet none of their mineral acreage was pooled in the unit being drilled. I don't know how that is even possible unless they do not own the minerals underneath in which case they would only receive bonus acres money for the surface rights, correct?
Yes, a portion of my minerals we’re pooled. It is a good idea to have a requirement in your lease that so many acres of youri minerals must be included in a pooled unit. Otherwise, the oil company might only pool a few acres of your land.
The surface owner may not own the minerals in the situation you are referring to. However, the oil company would have to negotiate with the surface owner regarding surface damages.