Terribly long mineral descriptions


#1

Two questions about this mineral chunk. One. Is there a shorter way to describe it for a production/well search, and Two. Can someone with access see if this description is all in my name, or was this the description before my mother inherited it and left it to me? (ie: might have been split between my mother and her brother before half of it passed to me.)


#2

Mine for Garvin County look like that too; none of my other deeds have descriptions quite that long. I wonder if Garvin County has a unique history of mineral ownership?


#3

Partial answer to your post–there is a deed from Carol to the Forkners recorded in book 1501, page 83.

If you go to the County Clerks Office, all instruments are indexed by the Section number (for each township), ostensibly in chronological order.

If you have questions, the ladies working there are most helpful. Just don’t abuse their good nature–doing land research is not really in their job description.


#4

No. Several other counties in old oil areas have the same problem. Carter, Stephens, Grady, Caddo, Coal, and so on.


#5

The Forkners? Is that a group, or person? Must have been from before she died. I inherited all of Carol’s minerals as of 2016. She died in January, 2016. I am her only child.


#6

Michael_R_Mathias_Jr

Try searching in just the root quarter of the description for production data… e.g. the SE/4 in the description “S/2 SE/4” or NE in “NW/4 NE/4 NE/4”. Also keep in mind some sites require differing inputs - some require you to add the /4 distinction, others you simply input SE.

In terms of shortening the description going forward you could describe the “E/2 SE NE & E/2 NE NE” as the E/2 E/2 NE. Tread lightly here - title examiners prefer to see property described the same way over time…Also you want to be sure this description is valid before changing how you describe it in title docs/leases going forward… you could cloud your own title, or worse… another mineral owner.

In searching for your name in Garvin co the last instrument filed of record is an Order /Final Decree in the Estate of of C.C. Mathias, dec’d case PB-2017-46 at Bk2193,Pg422 date 9/29/17. I believe the picture you provided is from said doc


#7

Yes. That is from the land descriptions my attorney filed after my mom, C. Mathias died. The issue is, she and her brother inherited minerals, and I am not sure, since both of them are dead, if that description was derived for her half, or for the whole that was split between them. There are no current offers, and I am not needing the info for any other reason beyond future use. I’ve had other leasers, in other counties come back saying land records show my portion isn’t correctly described, etc… that what I inherited is half. But not in every case. My mother’s records were shaky at best. We found many of my (leased) royalties by back tracking her tax records. The list of descriptions in that filing were given to me by her, but even she was unclear on them.


#8

Chances are that they each received an equal portion of the undivided amount of minerals owned in the tract and the tract description would still stay the same. There can actually be hundreds of mineral owners in any given legal description…especially in Garvin County. I would keep the description the same.


#9

Ahhh I see now…

The actual description will not change unless you liquidate or acquire more lands. As you point out - what could be inaccurate is the net mineral acreage stated… to use your example an “Undivided eighty 80 acre mineral interest” could be 40 acres (or less) now due to the split in title you referenced (or others in the past). It could be this description has been copied from a prior conveyance when 80 nma was owned by you predecessor in title… this is very typical and would not surprise me.

Anymore, most use language along the lines of “an undivided MI in the…” to avoid creating confusion. Frankly when I come across stated NMA’s in a description I think to myself “that’s helpful - if it’s right” and usually end up making a note as to the conveyance doc purporting to convey XX amount when truly ZZ is owned…

Either way you clearly seem to be in title to a mineral interest - determining the true proportion would require a title search all the way back to patent - IMO. This CAN be done by yourself - you’ll need some help and patience and be able to go to the Garvin County Clerks Office in Pauls Valley… or you could contact a landman or attorney. Typically an independent landman will charge $250+ per day for research and be aware most love to milk the clock… Best case you find a landman who is, or has been working this area…

Southern and Central OK are my front and back yard - I’m happy to refer you to the landmen i know or provide your some assistance along the way.


#10

Thanks Darla. I’m just trying to look and see via the well/production search site to see if anything is happening there. My other minerals in Garvin have substantial value. I’m hoping, eventually someone will want to lease this section.


#11

Thanks. I am just looking to find out if there is any production on this chunk. Or any interst to drill if there isn’t.

The other half of my grandparents portion went to my uncle, and then to his wife, and she follows my lead, so in any lease or sales option, I would still be speaking for the whole piece, but only own half.


#12

Darla, one more question. I received a letter this week, asking my mother to join the Oklahoma Mineral Owner Registry. Is it a legitimate resource for oil and gas companies or a $42.00 a year scam? Obviously they are 2 years out of touch if they are mailing things to my mother, at my Norman, Ok. address, when my mother lived in Louisiana.

The website is www. OwnerRegistry .com


#13

Completely understand. I’m a landman professionally and represent my family’s trust and cousins interests personally.

As it pertains applications filed at the OCC: there doesn’t seem to be any pending activity currently in the 9spot area adjacent to section 25-4N-3W.

Production search yields: SE/4 Chapman-Ballard Tract 1 - operator EnerguQuest II, LLC

NE/4 Logan Weston - operator Lance Ruffel O&G and Chapman- Rosier - operator XTO Energy


#14

I would not “join” or pay them.


#15

SCAM. Don’t walk away, run, Michael, run.

Everyone should stay away from the Mineral Owner Registry. I have reported them to the Secretary of State but nothing has ever come of it.


#16

Thanks! I am using the form to start my next fire.


#17

Good idea. A waste of money.


#18

Well darn, I heard the registry was a waste of money, but decided to give it a try. Oh well.


#19

VickiG–There is no harm to you, except to your checkbook. So it is correctable since you don’t have to repeat the error.


#20

When we first got a letter from the Registry my husband said “throw that in the trash”. “People wanting to know about your minerals can find you the same way the Registry found you…in the public records.”