Random Update Of A BR Dimmick Lake Well That Had a Significant Jump In Production -- January 25, 2018

So, you are a mineral owner. You have a payment due on your new Porsche. And you have a well or two. And your royalty payments are generally decreasing as production decreases, just as you would expect, nothing unusual. Than, all of a sudden your royalties jump 7x what you were used to getting and you know you don't have a new well. What's going on, you ask?

A reader had that experience. He took a look at "his" well and the production history:

• 16791, 436, BR, Demicks Lake 41-18H, Dimmick Lake, t3/08; cum 106K 11/17. The reader's well was only off-line for about a month, and this was the production history. It went from a well producing less than 100 bbls/month (worthy of being shut it) and now it's producing upwards of 5,000 bbls/month (in fact, it might be more once we see a few more months of data):

Pool	Date	Days	BBLS Oil	Runs	BBLS Water	MCF Prod	MCF Sold	Vent/Flare
BAKKEN	11-2017	30	4628	4869	1671	5654	5580	0
BAKKEN	10-2017	6	1035	700	2708	913	712	186
BAKKEN	9-2017	12	40	0	100	58	0	28
BAKKEN	8-2017	31	65	0	2	108	12	19
BAKKEN	7-2017	28	59	0	5	115	30	15
BAKKEN	6-2017	30	101	226	1	106	29	3
BAKKEN	5-2017	31	71	0	1	112	35	0
BAKKEN	4-2017	25	63	221	206	132	70	0
BAKKEN	3-2017	12	26	0	1	30	0	0
BAKKEN	2-2017	28	106	0	3	169	99	0

There was nothing to explain the jump. The jump was too small to indicate a re-frack. The natural question: was their other activity in the area?

So, he looked at the two nearest horizontals, which weren't all that "near." FracFocus has not data (yet) indicated these two wells were fracked. But the file report showed that they had been fracked:

• 33338, 420, BR, Demicks Dodge 1AMBH-ULW, Dimmick Lake, 4 sections, t12/17; cum -- ; API 33-053-07949, stimulated 9/17; 62 stages, 10.4 million lbs, all 100 Mesh;
• 33339, 168, BR, Dodge 1B TFH, Dimmick Lake, t12/17; cum -- ; API 33-053-07950, stimulated 9/17; Three Forks; 63 stages; 10.7 million lbs, all 100 Mesh

The graphic:

There are several story lines here, all of which have been discussed ad nauseum at the blog, so I won't continue to ramble. 

And, yes, the reader was able to make that monthly payment on his new Porsche.

By the way, two other questions should jump out at you. What about #17200, and what was the original production data for #16791?

First, #17200 -- unfortunately it showed no jump in production. Maybe we need to check again later on.

Second, what was the original production for #16791 when it was first fracked back in early 2008? Yeah, it was a pretty lousy well, #16791 after initial frack:

BAKKEN	7-2008	31	1244	1063	1839	941	941	0
BAKKEN	6-2008	30	926	856	87	1584	1584	0
BAKKEN	5-2008	31	3158	3140	370	6589	6589	0
BAKKEN	4-2008	30	5812	5775	826	11290	11290	0
BAKKEN	3-2008	31	4741	4528	2282	7237	7237	0