I own minerals in 9-16N-11W and 14-16N-11W in Blaine County. I'm getting offers to lease in both sections. Does anyone know what leases are going for and if there is any activity in this area?
there is an application in for 9-16n-11w for a Zella 1-9-4 by CLR. The application is approved and they are in the pooling phase, "OCC cause number 201504465". CLR in currently drilling a well in 14-16n-11w. You should have been contacted about both sections if you have mineral interest in those units. Frieda J Mowdy is one the mailing affidavit.
Continental has a pooling hearing scheduled for 1/19/16 for 9=16N-11W. Pay close attention because if you are not leased by the time the orders come out, you only have 20 days to reply. At this point in time, I would personally wait for the pooling and take one of their options. My personal preference is the 1/4th or 1/5th if they offer it. They have a well planned. Of course, you can continue negotiations with companies while the hearing is pending. Be sure and get the best clauses. Friend me if you need help. Otherwise, the pooling is a very good option at this point. Recent pooling in 13-16N-11W was for $1575 3/16th, $1500 1/5th. Section 18 was $1750 3/16ths and $1500 1/5th, so you can see the general range.
14 -not so much activity yet. Should get what 13 got.
Given the drop in oil prices this week, some of these hearings might be delayed and prices might go down on offers. The oil business is cyclic, so what goes down may eventually come back up. This is a long term game.
Is pooling the same thing as a communitization agreement?
not an attorney, but I think the communitization is about the same thing but on a federal level for BLM lands. Pooling is the state level word.
http://www.blm.gov/style/medialib/blm/ut/lands_and_minerals/oil_and_gas.Par.27843.File.dat/CA-HANDBOOK.pdf this is what I found
Any experts out there?
Strangely enough that is a complex question that would require a long discussion to adequately answer. Unitizations, Poolings and communitizations are all distinctly different but similar enough to lump them together.
Simply stated from a mineral owner perspective the terms are synonymous. Whereas, an operator, working interest owners and title landmen could run into trouble if they treated communitization agreements so simply.