Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Charles Randolph on December 17, 2014 at 7:14am

I, too, do not know of any Talisman leases in Potter; only the other 2 counties mentioned.

Permalink Reply by Ann Ticopa on December 17, 2014 at 7:04am

Definitely, holdings in both Tioga and Bradford.  Don't know about Potter.

Talisman (Fortuna) and ERI had a T/BR working arrangement ... which morphed into a Marcellus arrangement.  Talisman got some of those leases/wells when ERI was (mostly) sold to Shell.  But probably Talisman's most productive holdings in TC are their DCNR (and nearby private land) leases.

Permalink Reply by Jack Young on December 17, 2014 at 9:20am

They don't have anything in Potter County. Or western Tioga County for that matter.

Permalink Reply by Frank Walker on December 17, 2014 at 11:48am

Jack

Understood.  BTW, do you think this change way up at Talisman will in general have any impact whatsoever on their Lessors/landowners?

Permalink Reply by Jack Young on December 17, 2014 at 12:50pm

Probably not - I suspect they'll leave the current management in place. (They've got no significant organization in the US to merge the Talisman group into.) This ought to be a good deal for everyone, lessors included.

Permalink Reply by Frank Walker on December 17, 2014 at 1:13pm

It sounds like things could work out, Jack.  Certainly hope you are right.  

Permalink Reply by Ann Ticopa on January 30, 2015 at 6:38am

The following Talisman pipeline E&S permits for jackson Twp were denied by the DEP 1/28/15:
Jackson 6, knight to Empire, Mitchell to Busia, Schildt to Root, and Knight to Bowers.

Permalink Reply by Frank Walker on January 30, 2015 at 10:26am

Whoa!  Thanks for posting that, Ann.  I didn't even know Talisman was operating over in Jackson Township.  I know they are heavy into Wells Township, next door, though.

Probably there was a common problem with all the permits that resulted in denial.  They will fix whatever it is, I'm sure, and the permits will go through.

Course if the problem actually stems from policy changes attributable to the incoming Wolf administration, that would be another story entirely.  I seriously doubt that's the case.  But this is worth watching as a possible harbinger of trouble ahead from Wolf's DEP.  Things have changed and we "ain't in Kansas no more".

Permalink Reply by Ann Ticopa on January 30, 2015 at 2:48pm

That area dates back to East and Talisman's Trenton/Black River development.  They were working their way down from NYS but, afaik, never drilled a TC T/BR well.  They did some unconventional wells, some of which Talisman got and some went to Shell.   Iirc, Talisman sold their Wells Twp holdings to Chesapeake several years ago.  
I would not expect Talisman intended to do further development in Jackson/Rutland.  More likely getting their remaining shut-in wells online. 

Permalink Reply by Frank Walker on January 31, 2015 at 2:02am

Hi Ann

I cannot speak for all of Wells Township, or for any of Jackson Township.  But I can tell you with absolute certainty that Talisman continues to operate in portions of Wells Township.  And if Chesapeake is operating anywhere in Wells Township, I am unaware of that.  It is a frightening thought, though.

BTW, there was a TBR well drilled in Wells Township at least ten or more (guessing) years ago.  It was a dry and unproductive hole AFAIK.  I do not know what company drilled that well.  TBR here in PA never seemed to go very well as you moved farther and farther south of the PA/NY border.

Permalink Reply by Ann Ticopa on January 31, 2015 at 4:44am

Afaik, Chesapeake subsequently sold what they bought from Talisman.  Could be Talisman had kept (some) Wells Twp properties.  Talisman is one of the subscribers to the Tioga County Extension to the Empire pipeline.  So they at least were obligated to either ship a given amount of gas or pay a penalty.    

Curiosity got the better of me so I ran a Bradford/Wells DEP SPUD report ... 1/1/2009->present.
60 horizontal wells SPUD, all by Talisman.  First was 4/9/2010 and last 3/28/2011.  42 of the wells listed as "Plugged" and 18 as "Active".

Permalink Reply by Frank Walker on January 31, 2015 at 2:37pm

Josie, respectfully:

I believe Ann is trying to teach us that a "plugged" well is not necessarily an unsuccessful well.  And certainly that would be congruent with my own experience.

Regardless, I agree with Jack that "plugged" should mean finis.  But apparently, here in Pennsylvania, that "ain't necessarily so". 

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page