My wife and I, along with her three siblings and their spouses, own 50 net mineral acres in the S/2 of 2-5n-3w. These minerals are currently not leased, and have not been for the past 30 years. We have been approached by several land men over the last two years, but each time they withdraw their offers because of concerns that these minerals are held by production related to the Flint Creek Unit that has been operating in this area since 1966. We have obtained copies of the unitization application and the subsequent ruling by the OCC to approve the creation of the unit. All of these documents clearly indicate that the land under which our minerals reside was not and has never been included in the Flint Creek Unit's boundaries. Our family has owned the land and minerals in question for 50 years, and have never received any royalty income from Flint Creek production. Some of the land men have indicated that leases that were in force back in the the late 1940's and 50's contained language which has created a "tie-in" between our part of section 2 and that part that is actually included in the Flint Creek Unit. Does anyone have any suggestions as to how to go about removing this barrier to leasing our mineral interests? Any and all help/suggestions would be deeply appreciated .
Hi Rick,
It seems like your land would have to be controlled by a lease which is currently getting paid by the Flint Creek Unit in order for adjacent production to be holding your non-producing minerals. That could certainly be the case if a lease was executed before the statutory Pugh clause took effect. First I think you need to get your hands on the actual document that made them nervous.
Perhaps one of your predecessors in title is getting paid on some portion of minerals that are in the unit and those funds are going to the State Treasurer? If the Operator of the unit has an HBP claim on your adjacent non-producing minerals because of a few lines of text in one lease from the 1940's, there is a decent chance, the Operator isn't even aware of this fact. So going to the Operator and asking for a signed release presents you with significant risk.
Your bringing this to their attention might result in the Operator going out and buying an expensive bottle of champagne to celebrate with as they write up an assignment of your acreage to sell to the closest horizontal operator. You need a release, but if they are legally controlling your minerals, I doubt they'll sign a release.
This looks like it has the right ingredients for a very expensive court fight, but who really would want to go through that?
Here's a simple idea you could easily try. Get a feel for what the market lease prices are and contact that Operator. Ask if they have any money in suspense for any of your family member's names or predecessors in title. Come up with a reasonable purpose that you need to talk with them. Present yourself like a guy who thinks he's smart but gives away tells he's actually dumb. You want to sound like a sucker. At the end of the conversation, as an after thought, I would mention you've been contacted by two different land men recently about leasing your acreage but confess your hesitancy to lease, despite strong offers, because they wouldn't reveal the name of their client, maybe the operator knows who they're leasing for?
If the Operator is not aware that they already control your property via HBP, there's a good chance he might try and jump at buying your lease from you with the goal of flipping it for an easy profit.
Yeah it's a stretch, but if the Operator hears you're getting approached by Landmen about leasing and says, "You can't lease those offset acres, we've go those HBP by our unit!" Then at least you know what you are up against.
On the other hand, if you could entice the Operator into purchasing a lease, I bet you could get some clean up language into the lease that would solve your problems for the future.
Is that too crazy of an idea for you?
Thanks Fred,
We will pursue this approach and see what happens. We deeply appreciate your input!
Rick Blackwell
Any news on what happened?
Flint creek what ever happened in this area? Also a Pugh clause? If you bought the minerals right from the lease owner, or say a 1/8 minerals rights has that changed the ownership?
I’m starting to think the whole thing is a tax credit scam why would u drill this crummy siltstone well. Well I don’t have to worry about them drilling on me now. There were 50 dry holes drilled around my place in past years. Now 51. 15 5n 1w. Where dreams of oil wells go to die
Rockhound, What well are you referencing? If you are talking about 15-5N-1W, you already have the Sharp 5N-1W 10 1HW well which is in the Woodford and has about 1BCF of gas and about 512,000 bbls of oil predicted. A reasonable well for that particular portion of the Woodford. They do frack the silty portion of the Woodford because it breaks easier than the tighter shales.
If you are talking about the Tigris 1-22-27XH well, it has a surface location in 15, but no perforations in 15 as the well goes south into 22 & 27. The well was fracked in early April. It is a bit premature to comment on its production since no public data is available yet on the OTC site. It will be several months before it is posted. Someone on the forum may be a working interest owner and care to share. it takes a while for a fracked well to clean up after the fracking. Most of the Woodford horizontal wells in sections in 5N-1W have taken several months to clean up.
I’m looking right at Tigris. It’s wet no oil no gas. The sharp has been made a disposal injection well. ?predicted? There’s isn’t 512000 barrels of oil in this section. It’s a dewatering project
How’s that big Juicy Mohave well doing 15 5n 1 w. The whole thing is just marginal. In real oilfields there is oil everywhere on th ground on the tank battery u can smell it. The whole place reeks of good gassy oil and you can hear the oil flowing. That’s not happening here
According to Enverus, the only active “Mohave” well is in New Mexico. It is a gas well in the San Juan basin. No “Mohave” well in the OK well records listing.
According to Enverus, the Sharp 5N-1W 10 1HX in section 10 & 15 in 5N-1W McClain County was still producing oil as recently as April 2024 and gas as recently as March 2024. Confirmed by OK tax site.
According to Enverus, the Sharp 5N-1W 3 1HX in section 3-5N-1W and 34-6N-1W McClain County was still producing oil as recently as April 2024 and gas as recently as March 2024. Confirmed by OK tax site.
Updates are posted approx two months after the production.
Mojave hole in the ground is a mile from Tigris 15 5n1 w and dry as a popcorn fart. Again
Sharp well is so good bp sold it
MOJAVE 1-20-29XH Right west of tigris
I don’t like the idea of cementing off possible production until we make a deal to produce it with the owners. Why plug possible production. Or sycamore could be taking fluid from your side.
This is a very interesting topic What if they find a defect in title oh lol. “The gyro went out when we lost the pipe tally”