I know a little about section 144 block 34 H&TC as it lies in our ranch (Cross V Ranch LP, over 100 years old). This does not mean Cross V owns that section, just that it is open range land in our fence. Cross V does own a small undivided interest in the section as do a significant number of others. The section is probably a bit messy with regard to ownership because I know that Cimarex was asking about the whereabouts of about 15 potential mineral interest owners at the time division orders were processed for the 4 horizontal wells in that lease. I do know the county tax records for surface ownership are a bit messed up in this section - showing 22 owners with a total of over 650 acres when the state has about 13 acres that were taken for Highway 80 and Interstate 20. I also bought a small surface interest with a clear chain of title that is not on the tax roll and it is not easy to even get it on the tax roll in that situation, because the appraisal district does not consider themselves as one to resolve those questions - they just substitute one owner for another if they get a deed from an owner on record to a new owner. The issue in your case should be what deed gives your family the mineral rights? By saying you get a tax bill, I would assume you think you own surface with the minerals? If you have an attorney, I doubt I could help you further, but you are welcome to send me a message through the forum with more information or questions. CB Wilson
We are getting contradictory information as to the location of our mineral rights in Ward County. Does anyone know of a landman that goes to Ward County court house so that we can get verification of the location of our rights? We have been told it is NW/4 of Sec. 35, Bk 4, H &TC Co., between sec. 35 and sec. 34, bk 4 is the north line of section 35, also known as water tracks no. 3, 4, 5 and 6 as shown in certain plat dated 4/2/1901, vol.3, pg.1, containing 160 acres more or less.
One person has said it is abstract 162, another in 303…we just need to find a way to pin point exactly where it is. Any leads appreciated.
Shell is inquiring about an extension on a lease we signed in 2011 with Anadarko in Section 184, Block 34, H & TC RR Co. Shell is offering $2000/acre for 3 years. Current lease doesn’t expire until 6/2016. Can anyone provide advice if this is a fair offer and if we should accept an extension this early?
We have land in the same area. Our lease expires in 11-2016.$2,000 for 3 years is just about what I have heard. I was told the hang up was so many people owning so little and they have not found all the land owners.
Wanted to advise everyone that Cimarex Energy has released their mineral rights below 5000 feet of the Bone Springs Formation in their lease. The well is “The True Grit well #1” in Block 1 Section 1.
Linton,
Here’s your Operators and Approved Permits from 08/01/2015 thru 09/14/2015/19 approved permits/2 pages:
http://webapps2.rrc.state.tx.us/EWA/drillingPermitsQueryAction.do?p…
Clint Liles
I own some mineral rights in Section 5, Block33 of the H&TC Ry. Co. Survey in Ward County. The lease I have expires at the end of April 2016. The company who I have the lease with has approached me for a new lease when the existing one expires. This company offered me 40% less on the $/acre on the new lease than what I got nearly three years ago. The company use the price of crude to justify their low offer. I told them this amount would not work and to up the amount to something approaching 2000/acre. What would a reasonable /acre offer for a 320 acre parcel of land be in this area of Ward County.
One final note. My lease once had a producing well on it back in the 1960s. It was putting out about 400 barrels/day and the operator at that time shut things down for no apparent reason and cemented the well. It wasn’t producing water and production seemed to be steady until that time. I can not figure out why an operator would shut down to what appears to be a good well.
Regardless, I kind of view the lease as having proved itself in the past and consider it as money in the bank for negotiating the new lease. Does that make any sense?
@David - I will keep your email in mind once I know more details and see what the counter offer they make. If they don’t offer much more, then we may go shopping.
My family owns 50% of the minerals rights and the landsman already has been in contact with other owners as well. So, I would imagine most of the leg work has been done for him on locating owners.
I realize that area of Ward County is out of the sweet spot, yet it makes me wonder why the oil company would come back to us for another bite at the apple and offer a new lease given that fact. Additionally, there have been numerous calls from landsmen asking use to sell mineral rights or to lease. I realize this might be a typical thing to happen, but it does make me wonder if they know something that we don’t.
@David James
I would be interested in seeing the link where you got the production information to Section 5, Block33 of the H&TC Ry. Co. Survey in Ward County. I have looked at the Texas RRC web site and can not locate it due to my unfamiliarity with using the site.
When searching for production on the Tx RRC site, you have to look by operator or RRC ID number.
Below is link to production query options on the RRC site.
http://webapps.rrc.state.tx.us/PR/publicQueriesMainAction.do
Can anyone please tell me if there is any activity in the area where my property is? It is Section 4 Block 33 H&TC.
David. No I am not currently under a lease. Thanks for info.
Thank you Mark! After I submitted my question, I went back an reread an offer I received. Basically, the operator wants to amend the primary term on the existing lease agreement signed in 2013 for six years taking it into 2019.
I should have read things better before posting my question. Thank you for your time! Now all I have to figure out is whether the $/acre offered is reasonable or not.
Maybe someone can answer this question for me. What is a typical primary term with option period used in a oil lease agreement? Is it a three (3) year primary with a two (2) year option? What are the advantages / disadvantages of a lease agreement with a six (6) year primary term? Is a six year primary term commonly used?
It seems to me if a six year primary term is used, it basically saves the operator money by hot having to exercise the option and come up with more money. Is this a logical assumption?
I generally don’t recommend a 2 year option as their may be a significant change in the economics and bonus prices at the end of year 3.
NGL / plant product prices have been really low for the past few years - but what you are quoting is way low to the $7-$15 per bbl price I have seen.
Could this be really per gallon instead of per barrel? That would give you a reasonable NGL price number
Family estate received offer to do 3-D seismic survey on land located NW of Barstow. The rate offered is $20/acre. Is this a competitive rate?
Luxe Energy acquires acreage in Ward County and Reeves County from Endeavor Energy Resources and Finley Resources : http://www.mrt.com/business/oil/top_stories/article_2ab2f30a-c61d-1…
We have a lease with Anadarko E&P Onshore LLC and SWEPI LP and will expire on Nov 10. 2016. Now Anadarko E&P Onshore LLC and SWEPI LP would like to extend the lease for $1,500 per net acre for 3 years.We got $2,000 per net acre on the existing lease. This offers expires in 30 days.
Does this sound like a good offer or should I come back with a counter offer of $2,000 per net acre.
This is in the same area as Cathy Cinotto.
Richard, I’ve seen SWEPI pay $3k/acre in Section 182, Block 34 to extend the lease. You can also use this as an opportunity to add more favorable lease terms (increase the royalty, add pugh clause, add cost free royalty clause, etc…) in the event you were not happy with your first lease. If you need assistance with lease terms, you may want to consider reaching out to one of the forum sponsors that works with mineral owners:
Best of luck!