- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Haynesville Shale
Posted on 6/8/08 at 11:36 am to TigerV
Posted on 6/8/08 at 11:36 am to TigerV
quote:
I am sorry about sources of information, but I have to keep some of that close to the vest. Just to let you know that I have seen some of the data collected in texas as well as in LA. Of course, not all of the data is complete and i would love to take a look at some more, toc and fracture systems for one. What I do know is thickness? and I can tell you that the shale thickens west. Does this make East TX better, not always, there are obviously going to be and there are already some very good wells in LA.
I understand where you are coming from there since I also have access to some information that I can't reveal. I think a lot of the reasons that no one has discussed East Texas and it's potential is that so much of Harrison and Panola counties are HBP. Shelby county has a lot more open acreage than these two, and there has been more "chatter" in that county than in the others. I have been told that somewhere around Carthage is the edge of productivity, but again until more wells are drilled no one can say. Even if that is true, it still will include a large portion of Shelby, Panola, and Harrison counties. I think that more prospective acreage ultimately lies in Louisiana, but the farther East one goes it seems to become more speculative than proven.
2
Posted on 6/8/08 at 11:40 am to TigerDog83
I heard from a friend that they are drilling a "Haynesville Well" up in Plain Dealing? Maybe he was mistaken because i think that would be way too far north. Why is it that when the shale turns to sand that the Haynesville isn't good anymore?
This post was edited on 6/8/08 at 2:23 pm
Posted on 6/8/08 at 11:57 am to TigerV
Dear TigerV: (I am trying to improve my blogging etiquette.)
Thank you for the dialogue that you have been a large part of on this blogging venue. I do not want to give you the impression that I am at odds with you. On the contrary, I wholeheartedly agree with you on many points. I just think we are coming to this discussion from two separate paths that (hopefully) will merge to the same place: a positive growth for all who are involved in this Haynesville shale story.
I apologize to you if I misunderstand or misinterpret some of your points and if I am not better relaying to you some of mine.
I joined this discussion in an effort to better understand the curent atmosphere that surrounds NWLa. And, believe it or not, you have been extremely helpful. I applaud you and the other "in the know" bloggers who are sharing vital information with those of us who are getting involved from the landowner's standpoint.
I read everything that you blog, disagreeing with some things, but agreeing with many others. And, I have been interested in all of your opinions. You have given me many points to "chew" on concerning this business of O&G and E&P.
Thank you for all the information that you have provided for so many. I do appreciate receiving your comments.
DrWAVeSport 6/8/08
Thank you for the dialogue that you have been a large part of on this blogging venue. I do not want to give you the impression that I am at odds with you. On the contrary, I wholeheartedly agree with you on many points. I just think we are coming to this discussion from two separate paths that (hopefully) will merge to the same place: a positive growth for all who are involved in this Haynesville shale story.
I apologize to you if I misunderstand or misinterpret some of your points and if I am not better relaying to you some of mine.
I joined this discussion in an effort to better understand the curent atmosphere that surrounds NWLa. And, believe it or not, you have been extremely helpful. I applaud you and the other "in the know" bloggers who are sharing vital information with those of us who are getting involved from the landowner's standpoint.
I read everything that you blog, disagreeing with some things, but agreeing with many others. And, I have been interested in all of your opinions. You have given me many points to "chew" on concerning this business of O&G and E&P.
Thank you for all the information that you have provided for so many. I do appreciate receiving your comments.
DrWAVeSport 6/8/08
Posted on 6/8/08 at 12:08 pm to GeneralLee
quote:
What about the prospects off of Swan Lake Road a couple of miles north of I-220? Also, I heard from a friend that they are drilling a "Haynesville Well" up in Plain Dealing? Maybe he was mistaken because i think that would be way too far north. Why is it that when the shale turns to sand that the Haynesville isn't good anymore?
It's not that when the formation turns to sand that it isn't a good target. It's just that the Haynesville sand (stateline trend on La/Ark state line) is already heavily drilled. Crystal, El Paso, Apache, and others have exploited this trend heavily since the 1970's and very little potential exists, save for the occasional infill well. the shale is thought to thin to the North and there is no shale in that area (I have mudlogs and porosity logs and none indicate any gas charged shale in the Haynesville/Bossier formations). Swan Lake area is probably going to be prospective for the shale since it is so much farther south. A well was recently drilled in Longwood, and the results were spotty. Many companies are combining this well with the J-W well across the river from Benton, and the Samson Forcap 22#1 well three miles Northeast of Benton to draw a "zero out" line at this location (Townships 19N and 20N). As to the supposed Haynesville well near Plain Dealing, that probably refers to the three infill Haynesville SAND wells that were recently permitted by Petrohawk in Bossier/Webster parishes. These are UNRELATED to the Haynesville shale, but many landowners are having trouble understanding the differentiation.
This post was edited on 6/8/08 at 12:11 pm
Posted on 6/8/08 at 1:07 pm to TigerDog83
I am the last unleased owner in a section in T23N. The lease I'm now being offered is about what the other owners were offered almost two years ago (before Haynesville Shale became public) but the lessor volunteered to put an exclusion in the lease for Haynesville Shale and Haynesville Sand as their primary interest is Cotton Valley. From what I've read my land is about 12-18 miles too far north (as implied by lessors offering to exclude Haynesville). The lease wording does not address depth. It seems to me a depth clause (100' beyond any finished depth?) might be more practical. Any suggestions? I've really appreciated your posts and they have been very helpful.
Posted on 6/8/08 at 1:26 pm to dsquareg
If you are that far north than you have no Haynesville SHALE on your land. It would be hard to exclude on a lease because, quite frankly, it doesn't exist there. I've seen logs from that area and there is no shale. The Haynesville SAND could be a prospective target, and you probably wouldn't be able to exclude that zone because the operator would consider it a target. I would attempt to sign the lease with the lessor for your acreage in order to expedite a well being drilled. If you don't sign and continue to hold out you risk being pooled into a unit and being forced to participate thereby waiting until wells payout for your share of royalties. If everyone else in your section has already signed you are at a disadvantage now because your tract of land is now in the minority. It will also be difficult to secure a higher royalty/bonus than the rest of the lessors in your section.
This post was edited on 6/8/08 at 1:29 pm
Posted on 6/8/08 at 1:34 pm to dsquareg
Tigerdog83
Thanks for your explaination, since becoming involved in the Hayneville shale play, have been trying to learn everything I can, and have found the information on this message board to be the most helpful. I don't get the evil oil company sentiment, I leased for $4000.00/acre with 25%, could have got a lot more several weeks later. I should have also bought Google at $200.00, thats business!
Thanks for your explaination, since becoming involved in the Hayneville shale play, have been trying to learn everything I can, and have found the information on this message board to be the most helpful. I don't get the evil oil company sentiment, I leased for $4000.00/acre with 25%, could have got a lot more several weeks later. I should have also bought Google at $200.00, thats business!
Posted on 6/8/08 at 1:39 pm to JWS3
Do any of you know anything about whether or not there is a good probablilty of gas up in Blanchard area? Please respond if you do. Thanks in advance.
Posted on 6/8/08 at 1:42 pm to JWS3
quote:
Thanks for your explaination, since becoming involved in the Hayneville shale play, have been trying to learn everything I can, and have found the information on this message board to be the most helpful. I don't get the evil oil company sentiment, I leased for $4000.00/acre with 25%, could have got a lot more several weeks later. I should have also bought Google at $200.00, thats business!
It's unnerving to see so many landowners who think they were taken advantage of because of the escalation of bonus prices, but you are correct in saying "that's business". People already forget that these companies are taking huge risks and are spending billions of dollars on this play without having a whole lot of production data to play with. Not everyone is rational in the way they see things, but once this play gets more defined through drilling and production some kind of moderation will probably return to the lease prices. If everyone had that "crystal ball", things might be different but it never works that way. No company would pay any more than they had to, because this makes no sense for their stockholders and the company itself. The run up in prices is a result of fierce competition for leasehold. $300 per acre has been a great bonus price in North LA for years. People have become jaded rather quickly.
Posted on 6/8/08 at 1:45 pm to TigerDog83
quote:
Do any of you know anything about whether or not there is a good probablilty of gas up in Blanchard area? Please respond if you do. Thanks in advance.
Petrohawk already had a large block of land leased there from two years ago. They are still actively leasing in the area, so that's probably an indication they think it is still prospective.
Posted on 6/8/08 at 3:03 pm to dsquareg
From recent discussions with my neighbors, I believe that I am one of the last left in my area that hasn't leased. My family and I live in South Bossier (rural) and own the rights to a little under 1.5 acres. We were contacted back in Dec-Jan timeframe from TwinCites and they tried convincing us that $300 per acre and a ten year lease was a great deal. No, I didn't accept.
Being family with many in the O&G business (most working outside of the greater S/B area) they recommended that we wait to sign anything. We surely weren't worried about the possibility of losing a few hundred in bonuses. Now, looking at it and talking with folks around here I'm not sure if my mineral rights have already been force pooled. I know that the farm land area surrounding my neighborhood has already been leased, and I believe O&G would already have enough of a percentage within this area to force the pooling and have the approval to do so. Does anyone know how I can find this out or is there a law requiring them to provide me notice of this?
How easy would it be to find out who owns the majority of the leases in my area? And should/could I attempt to lease with the same company or play on another company? I contacted my HOA president yesterday looking for others in my area, that haven't signed yet. I am hoping that there are a few left and then maybe we will have a little more to stand on.
I do know that Chesapeake has a rig fairly close (not to mention their new facility a few miles down the road) to our community and have been told that they have tapped the shale from there. I am not sure of the rig number or coordinates, but I see the lights and hear the trucks in the distance at night.
To all posting here, I really appreciate your time and knowledge and willingness to share. We don't expect to get rich, but it sure would be nice to have a little more to invest for our future.
Being family with many in the O&G business (most working outside of the greater S/B area) they recommended that we wait to sign anything. We surely weren't worried about the possibility of losing a few hundred in bonuses. Now, looking at it and talking with folks around here I'm not sure if my mineral rights have already been force pooled. I know that the farm land area surrounding my neighborhood has already been leased, and I believe O&G would already have enough of a percentage within this area to force the pooling and have the approval to do so. Does anyone know how I can find this out or is there a law requiring them to provide me notice of this?
How easy would it be to find out who owns the majority of the leases in my area? And should/could I attempt to lease with the same company or play on another company? I contacted my HOA president yesterday looking for others in my area, that haven't signed yet. I am hoping that there are a few left and then maybe we will have a little more to stand on.
I do know that Chesapeake has a rig fairly close (not to mention their new facility a few miles down the road) to our community and have been told that they have tapped the shale from there. I am not sure of the rig number or coordinates, but I see the lights and hear the trucks in the distance at night.
To all posting here, I really appreciate your time and knowledge and willingness to share. We don't expect to get rich, but it sure would be nice to have a little more to invest for our future.
Posted on 6/8/08 at 3:53 pm to TigerDog83
quote:
I am the last unleased owner in a section in T23N.
I see a lot of cartographical nomenclature like this. Where can I see a map that delineates things in those terms? It's like Greek to me.
Posted on 6/8/08 at 4:49 pm to Tiger JJ
Tigerdog83 or whoever:
If a owner doesnt sign a lease agreement, and is force pulled (over 50% of the section already leased) and has to wait for the for the O&G company to recover all there cost:
1. Since you didnt agree on the royalty package (example:25%). Does this mean that you will get all 100% of your royalty, since you didnt sign a lease agreement? If that is the case, then would that even be a better option for some people that have the time to wait?
2. How long before the co. recovers all there cost? I think you said it might be 10 years or so before you see anything, but if your getting 100% of the royalty rather than 20%, why not wait?
If a owner doesnt sign a lease agreement, and is force pulled (over 50% of the section already leased) and has to wait for the for the O&G company to recover all there cost:
1. Since you didnt agree on the royalty package (example:25%). Does this mean that you will get all 100% of your royalty, since you didnt sign a lease agreement? If that is the case, then would that even be a better option for some people that have the time to wait?
2. How long before the co. recovers all there cost? I think you said it might be 10 years or so before you see anything, but if your getting 100% of the royalty rather than 20%, why not wait?
Posted on 6/8/08 at 6:58 pm to Tiger JJ
Don't know specifically what you need but for land layout (Townships) and ownerships within each township (sections) maps are available for that Parish at the Parish courthouse for a very nominal (sometimes nothing) fee. The "T" in T23N stands for Township, in this case #23, The "N" is for north. There is also a R for range which locates the township east or west. Each Township is made up of 36 "sections" each of which is a one mile square of land and which conveniently contains 640 acres. In my case T23N is 2 or 3 Townships North of the Township 20/21 which seems to be where the Haynesville shale ends. Since each Township is comprised of 36 (6 X 6)sections, I know my land is 12-18 miles too far north for Haynesville Shale. Hope this was not too fundemental for you.
Posted on 6/8/08 at 7:46 pm to dsquareg
Thanks for the explanation. I was looking at the Petrohawk map and it seemed like it was using just a slightly different nomenclature.
Posted on 6/8/08 at 8:17 pm to Tiger JJ
Are the big companies buying land and the mineral rights? We have appx 150 acres in Red River Parish that we might be will willing to sell.
Posted on 6/8/08 at 9:20 pm to rubeedoo
In your answer to Blanchard prospects, thank you TigerDog83 for your info. Do you have any idea what people are getting for their leases in Blanchard area?
Posted on 6/9/08 at 9:06 am to BigBall
quote:
Do you have any information on North Natchitoches parish?
Are you asking about near the Bienville border or near the Sabine- De Soto border?
Posted on 6/9/08 at 9:10 am to TigerV
quote:
In your answer to Blanchard prospects, thank you TigerDog83 for your info. Do you have any idea what people are getting for their leases in Blanchard area?
I honestly am not sure in that area.
Posted on 6/9/08 at 9:11 am to TigerDog83
Are the wells that have been drilled on the Sonniers' land (on the west side of Benton Road about a mile south of the high school) Haynesville wells, and how well have they been performing? There must be some gas there if they drilled 3 wells so close together.
Page 10 of 59
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News