The Texas Railroad Commission website vs the Oklahoma Commerce Commission website.
This is a little more than a simple reply to which I believe is easier and more of a break down from my point of view.
The new well database program Oklahoma Corporation Commission is using has a lot less bells and whistles than the old. No more capabilities to search by dates like spud, permit, first production, etc and you now have to use other programs to search for these which OCC doesn't explain to people where to or how to find so most don't even know about the imaged document or how to use the case processing searches. The new database has duplicate wells listed, wells listed that are not even in the county yet alone in the tract you did the search on. There is no GIS mapping, no oil production listed and gas production you have to use both the old and new database to look up production as the new only goes back 2 years. Gas production is many times not shown at all on the new database and even if it is, it is sometimes under or over reported so you can not trust their figures. Oklahoma's OCC database is just about worthless and a joke and embarrassment especially since we are one of the major producing states with I believe only Texas having more activity.
Texas Railroad Commission's database is antiquated and has way to many pop ups. I don't have problems using their web site or database but so many don't find it simplistic enough to use and get lost using it, many I have spoke to can not even figure out how to use it therefore making it useless to them. I believe it all starts with the states legal descriptions that go in part by survey names which is bazaar to put it politely. If you don't input the survey name identically the same as they have it, which is seldom the same as the legal description on the title, it will not work or find it. At least in most states (other than Texas) they use the most simplistic method of description being a numerical directional system of section, township and range, too bad the Texans were not so wise to use the same simple method. Then again who in their right mind uses descriptions in their legals as from the big rock or to the crooked oak tree, enough said, they had to be on drugs.
From someone who uses both easily but has heard from many, the Oklahoma's database is much easier to use but not very helpful to most. I think they only hire people with below normal IQ or perhaps it's the program engineers that have below normal IQ. Anyway around it both suck compared to like Colorado or North Dakota's system. That's my 2 cents on the subject.
Mineral Joe,
The reason I posted the question, is it just me or does the Texas Railroad Commission not want mineral owners to understand the jig saw puzzle they give to us to try to decifer? Most of their crap doesn't make sense. I agree with you that the Oklahoma Commerce Commission website is easier to navigate. They may not offer as much but it is easier for me to navigate. Thanks for your '2 cents' worth. Have a good day.
Clint Liles
Joe
i'll be the novice voice, in full agreement with your POV of the Texas absurd legal discriptions compared to Oklahoma's.
Your post reminded me of when I left the Tulsa area, where I was raised, for Houston. The grid system of street design and addresses predominantly used in Oklahoma then made sense - but in Houston the streets wandered everywhere (or nowhere) and were likely to change names after passing through an intersection. Where in Tulsa I could drive straight to an address I'd never been to, in Houston I may have ended up never finding the address I was going to.
Alot like the differences of the legal descriptions you addressed. Maybe it's the 4 months of insane heat?
btw- for Clint's poll, I can find interesting things on OCC's site from a novice's POV. I've only tried Texas' a few times and given up - hitting a road block of not having enough information available to me for it's demands.
Mineral Joe said:
This is a little more than a simple reply to which I believe is easier and more of a break down from my point of view.
The new well database program Oklahoma Corporation Commission is using has a lot less bells and whistles than the old. No more capabilities to search by dates like spud, permit, first production, etc and you now have to use other programs to search for these which OCC doesn't explain to people where to or how to find so most don't even know about the imaged document or how to use the case processing searches. The new database has duplicate wells listed, wells listed that are not even in the county yet alone in the tract you did the search on. There is no GIS mapping, no oil production listed and gas production you have to use both the old and new database to look up production as the new only goes back 2 years. Gas production is many times not shown at all on the new database and even if it is, it is sometimes under or over reported so you can not trust their figures. Oklahoma's OCC database is just about worthless and a joke and embarrassment especially since we are one of the major producing states with I believe only Texas having more activity.
Texas Railroad Commission's database is antiquated and has way to many pop ups. I don't have problems using their web site or database but so many don't find it simplistic enough to use and get lost using it, many I have spoke to can not even figure out how to use it therefore making it useless to them. I believe it all starts with the states legal descriptions that go in part by survey names which is bazaar to put it politely. If you don't input the survey name identically the same as they have it, which is seldom the same as the legal description on the title, it will not work or find it. At least in most states (other than Texas) they use the most simplistic method of description being a numerical directional system of section, township and range, too bad the Texans were not so wise to use the same simple method. Then again who in their right mind uses descriptions in their legals as from the big rock or to the crooked oak tree, enough said, they had to be on drugs.
From someone who uses both easily but has heard from many, the Oklahoma's database is much easier to use but not very helpful to most. I think they only hire people with below normal IQ or perhaps it's the program engineers that have below normal IQ. Anyway around it both suck compared to like Colorado or North Dakota's system. That's my 2 cents on the subject.
Concerning absurd legal descriptions, Texas was a state long before Oklahoma. The system of surveying and property descriptions in Texas began with the Kingdom of Spain and continued by the Empire of Mexico. Then the ragtag army of rebels conquered Mexico and gained its lands by the unratified Treaty of Velasco, formed the government of the Republic of Texas and later entered the United States by Treaty. Then the lands were formally annexed by the United States by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, ending the Mexican War and setting the border as the Rio Grande, or in Spanish the Rio Bravo del Norte.
Absurd would be to try to re-do 300 years of settled property descriptions to fit a square mile on a round surface. Dad told me that just because I cannot understand something does not mean it is wrong -- like me trying to understand Stephen Hawkin.
To begin using the RRC databases, all you need is the county and abstract number. From there, you can find most anything.
Mineral Joe and Larry,
It was brought to my attention by my brother, Clif Liles of the companies here in Texas that sell the information we are talking about for a rediculious price. Maybe the Texas Railroad Commission is charging these companies a nominal fee for this info and the state is making money on this deal. In other words why give it away free if you can capitalize on the info. Individuals can't afford to pay $200/$300 per month for this info. But oil companies and others can write this off as an expense.
Larry some of the streets in Dallas are the same way.
Clint Liles
Call the OCC or Tax Commission in Oklahoma and ask why is it that only in Oklahoma you can not get the reports for both oil and gas without having to pay mega bucks for it thru companies like Drilling info.
I can not tell you how many times I wish I had an abstract number as having an abstract number makes things much simpler but so many times an abstract number is not within the legal description and one only has a survey name and block number and block numbers are not always anymore defined any better than a survey. Just because something has been around for a long time (even 300 years of it) doesn't make it right, simple or give it justice to continue as is. Changing something that's say round to try and fit in a square doesn't make sense I understand but there's ways to make change for the better. I have seen survey names written in several different ways, take a survey name from a legal description, input it into the RRC database and see what you get. A person would have a difficult time finding Dallas on a map if it were also sometimes called llasda and you never know when they are going to call it Dallas, Llasda or if they decide they want to call it Asdall. Justifying not making changes are why nothing got changed. I understand it works, not well but works but so does electoral votes and Lobbyist but we need to do away with them also. I do understand though that legal descriptions in Texas will never change and we will probably never stand as citizens and demand the bribery (lobbying) or truly absurd electoral votes cease and be done away with, but we can all dream of how much more wonderful life could be.
Actually, MJ, the information is available from the state -- by mail -- for a nominal fee and a three week wait. Can't remember the name of the agency that holds the natgas information. Keeping it on the commission website just makes too much sense.
Mineral Joe said:
Call the OCC or Tax Commission in Oklahoma and ask why is it that only in Oklahoma you can not get the reports for both oil and gas without having to pay mega bucks for it thru companies like Drilling info.
"how much more wonderful life could be." I read these few words and I think about the injustice Mineral/Royalty Owners are receiving because of the crooked Texas Supreme Court Justices in the back pocket of the oil/ gas companies.
Clint Liles
Understand what you said. Who is going to undertake the costs of re-surveying 67,626,240 acres spread out over 254 counties to make it easier for non professionals to read a map?
Mineral Joe said:
I do understand though that legal descriptions in Texas will never change and we will probably never stand as citizens and demand the bribery (lobbying) or truly absurd electoral votes cease and be done away with, but we can all dream of how much more wonderful life could be.
I never said nor even remotely thought they need to re-survey anything as that would be next to impossible and absolutely ridiculous. I also don't think it's just simply impossible to make it better or to improve without something dramatic like a re-survey as you suggested, not I. I somehow doubt that professionals find the present method to be such a prefect system either and if given the opportunity they'd have designed such a ridiculous and poor method. After understanding how the poorest of design that is the Texas legal description and how RRC's database works using variations of the actual descriptions and windows popping up everywhere I am able to navigate it but it's sad to think it's purposely set up solely for professionals only to easily use or that they are able to navigate it more easily than the non professional mineral owners.
MJ,
My comment was not to challenge you. Consider this to be one of those things that if you heard the tone of my voice, you would not have taken offense. My apology.
I understand and agree totally with what you said. I wish that there was the SEC TWP RNG in Texas. It would make everything easier, especially running title. Make it a snap. Counties in Mississippi even have sectional indices. What a godsend!
As to the RRC website, it took someone to sit me down and give me a quick lesson. Truly, the easiest way to navigate is to go to the GIS portion, which it sounds like you have by referring to the popups. I have to keep remembering to close them when I do a new search, or query on the drop down list on the GIS County level map page. What drives me really nuts is that the RRC requires that oil production be reported on a lease basis, rather than a well basis.
Is the website ill conceived? So much so that there is an industry built around taking the data and putting it in an useable format. There is another industry in researching for you on the 4th floor (I think) of the RRC building. If DrillingInfo can do it from downloaded RRC data, then the RRC could do it. Even charge a modest fee for access. Just takes a little programming, and Austin has no shortage of those. Maybe there is collusion to keep DrillingInfo in business. Who knows -- and I am certainly not going to suggest that!! Then some people will start having to think too much.
guys.. ya'll seem like a good crowd to ask about this. Looking at a spud report and a drilling permit at OCC;
http://imaging.occeweb.com/OG/Well%20Records/1DCFF7E8.pdf Spud
http://imaging.occeweb.com/OG/Well%20Records/1DD052D5.pdf Drilling permit
I notice both show the location being on section 14, but everything else reflects section 11 - even the point of entry on the drilling permit and the hole's name. Also the local gossip I've been getting from up there has always been that it was on section 11, from when the pad was 1st built.
I figure there's either a continuing failure to catch a typo, which isn't likely when both sides are proof-reading a legal document, or there's something here for me to learn. Care to take a look?
Buddy,
it's just one's thoughts and opinion, no need for apology any more than I should have, besides you'd probably win out in the long run anyway when it comes down to it. You are right in that facial expressions, the tone of a voice, there is so much one just can not express online that adds to the character and meaning of what one says, the true meaning can get lost without it. I totally agree on Texas oil reports. Has anyone ever looked at and used Michigan and Arkansas databases, those are totally weird, had to be designed by a hillbilly. I think all states need to check out Colorado's or North Dakota as an example of where to start in building a functional GIS/Database system that people with an IQ above 70 can use with ease .