wow mlh… what area of GV did you hear of the 22 percent royalty?
Nistler status was A ( producing ) 11-25-2011.
Nistler well came off tight hole status today but no production data provided. Anyone have any insight into the production numbers of this well? Much thanks.
Thanks much. I will call NDIC tomorrow and post.
Could be slow reporting from the field or the state might be a bit slow on the data entry. When the operator misses filing or reporting something all that usually happens is a polite letter/ reminder from the NDIC saying something is past due. I guess you could ask the NDIC tomorrow, see what they have to say.
I saw that, just couldn’t find any numbers. Does this mean numbers will be coming soon?
NDIC will not have production data from the Nistler as you may have discovered. The Nistler is one of two exploration horizontals into the Scallion formation. You may also note that a sundry report shows it in the Three Forks/Sanish formation. They continue to pump out water prior to IP testing, and no clue as to how heavy that water is but depending on the data that Whiting recovers there remain the options of completing in the Red River or even the Tyler formations. This is purely speculation but the vertical rig drilling the next section east would be finished about the same time Whiting would be ready to rework the Nistler to the Red River as a vertical should the present bore location prove uneconomical to produce.
Zeb, thanks for the word. Please keep posting anything new you hear.
Zeb, do you know for a fact that the rig drilling the section to the east is doing a vertical well? I’ve seen that well, the Quale 21-30, described as both a horizontal and a vertical. I’d love to know which it actually is.
Eastern MT, I am told that it is a vertical by someone within whiting but i cant confirm that as fact although it does appear to be a different type of rig than was used on the Nistler but as you realize there are very few actual “FACTS” out there floating around
Well I’m OK with facts, opinions, and hearsay… just as long as they are labeled as such so we know what we’re dealing with. Information is welcome, sometimes even sketchy info is better than none at all.
Whiting has been pretty tight lipped about this “Big Island” prospect. They haven’t even discussed it in their past couple presentations. Normally that might “suggest” they’ve lost interest in the area. However, they continue with their one rig drilling program there, as well as filing for another new permit. Those “facts” indicate they are still intent on trying to prove up this prospect. Whether it is the Lodgepole, Three Forks, or Red River formations I continue to wish them well on their Big Island.
Eastern MT, I would comment more however when I offer my opinion and not facts rw is quick to attack…not my cup o tea
Zeb thanks for the info. That would be very interesting since Nistler was rumored to be non productive. Note that is just a rumor.
Regarding that same area; since I last posted Whiting moved a rig onto Sec. 3, and filed for a permit on Sec. 2 (both in 141N 105W). That is the same township as Nistler and the same general area as their Peplinski (sec 9, IP 200 bbls) and Brookhart (sec 14, still confidential) wells.
Zeb, we should probably place future posts on this up in the “Big Island” thread or start another if you prefer.
There are four 1,280 acre spacing units around the Nistler well (13 & 24, and 25 & 36 in 141-105, and then next door with 18 & 19, and 30 & 31 in 141-104). At the same time Whiting also put together four more up in 142-105 and 143-105. However WLL seemed to lose interest in those when their Jones well (Sec 35, 143-105) didn’t pan out.
Well said Eastern MT, we are all aware of the great deal of speculation surrounding Whitings intent is section 25 with the Nistler. Now we can add another cause for speculation as to that intent. Fact: A new pad will very likely be surveyed on 25 adjacent to the existing pad several yards to the southwest as an agreement with the surveyor is being processed.
Yes I am told it is a double spacing unit, one of four such units in GV county. Yes, still anyone’s guess as to how the Nistler will play out. My thinking is that Whiting has a “hold card” which will become much more clear in this coming year.
I felt some people from Golden Valley County may not know about or be aware of the “Big Island” venture so I thought it would best be posted here but thank you anyway
Zeb, you are right. This ‘page’ does bring things to everyone’s attention. Though I’ll continue to plug things into the “Big Island” post just so they’re consolidated in one place.
For those who don’t know, “Big Island Prospect” is the name Whiting Petroleum uses to describe their exploration activity in most of Golden Valley County. I think they may consider their drilling along the NE edge of the county as another prospect name. Though the bulk of their activity in the county is their “big island”.
While other oil companies are present in the county, for now Whiting is the most active company operating in the county. For those who are interested you might look at the “Big Island” post above periodically, or check the “follow” option to be alerted to new posts.
From the NDIC website.
On the May hearing docket, Whiting applied to create seven new 1,280 acre drilling units in T142 R103. Previously Burlington Resources (Conoco) applied to create six. So that Township may be poised for some new activity.
Elsewhere, in T141 R104 Sec. 22, Whiting is moving a rig in to drill their “Rieckhoff 44-22” well. This is the same section where last year they completed “Maus 23-22” in the Red River formation. I don’t know, but since they’re so close, this might be a test to see how tightly they can space their R.R. wells in this area.