Devon & Coterra Operator Intelligence: New Mexico Permits, Spuds & Lease Context

The September 18, 2026 review found 151 permit rows and 8 separately selected reported-spud rows in Eddy and Lea counties under Devon- and Coterra-named labels. One additional Devon permit row is held outside that county total because its location fields need review.

This is a New Mexico record screen, not a consolidated corporate drilling or production total. It starts June 20, 2026 and includes records available at retrieval on September 18. Permits are selected by issue date; spuds are selected independently by reported-spud date.

Devon And Coterra New Mexico Permits By County

The latest Devon permit date is September 11 and latest Devon spud date is August 2. For Coterra, those dates are September 9 and August 16, respectively, all in 2026. A zero here means no matching spud rows in this selected window, not proof of no drilling activity.

Repeat The Operator Lookup

Use the API reference to run the same search shape:

GET /api/public/permits?state=NM&search=DEVON&days=90&limit=200&page=1
GET /api/public/permits?state=NM&search=COTERRA&days=90&limit=200&page=1

Repeat each request with spuddedOnly=true for the independent spud-date screen. The four result sets each fitted on one page during this review. Check pagination.total and retrieve additional pages when needed. Each permits request uses six API units; these four one-page requests use twenty-four units, before any extra requests.

Name search is a substring match, not corporate-family resolution. Inspect the returned labels and apply the county screen explicitly. A separate CIMAREX search returned no rows in these windows; that is not evidence that all legacy Cimarex activity is absent from every dataset or period. Other labels, including WPX, are not included in this two-name total.

For a reviewed delivery, request the Devon/Coterra New Mexico table. Specify labels, counties, period and required output. Custom delivery is separate from self-service API credits; confirm New Mexico coverage before purchasing for a particular dataset.

What The Devon/Coterra Records Show

The record question is specific: which New Mexico permits, reported spuds and filed operator labels appear in the reviewed period. This page does not use a permit search to establish corporate ownership or a complete asset inventory.

For sales, research, and account planning, Devon and Coterra activity should stay separated until the public records clearly support a combined view. The stronger table keeps the operator name exactly as it appears in the source, then adds county, issue date, reported-spud date, source date, lease context, and map context.

Why Devon And Coterra Labels Are Reviewed Separately

After ownership changes, public records may continue to show activity under legacy operator names, subsidiaries, or source-specific labels. EnergyNetWatch keeps these labels visible before combining them into a parent-company view.

That matters because a commercial team can miss active rows if it searches only one parent-company name. It can also overstate the signal if every legacy or acquired label is forced into one total without checking source support.

Why The County Total Is Smaller Than The Name Search

The Devon-name search returned 140 permit rows: 76 labeled Lea, 63 labeled Eddy and one labeled Taos. Coterra returned 12: six Lea and six Eddy. The table at the top therefore includes 151 Eddy/Lea permit rows, while the broader two-name search returned 152.

The additional Devon row is held outside the county table for review. Its stored county label and location context are inconsistent. We have not silently reassigned it, changed the underlying record or counted it as an Eddy/Lea permit. This matters because one ambiguous row can change both a county count and the apparent location of an operator's activity.

The separate reported-spud responses returned five Devon rows and three Coterra rows, all labeled Eddy or Lea. Those eight rows are not a subset of the 151 permits selected by issue date. Some have permit dates outside the screen and spud dates inside it.

Example Devon And Coterra Permit Records

The Devon example's spud field was blank at retrieval. That means the reviewed permit row supplies no spud date; it does not prove the well has not been drilled. The Coterra example illustrates a distinct filed label. Neither example establishes a new contract, completion or first production.

Use New Mexico OCD permitting to check individual well identifiers and source documents. These examples were verified in EnergyNetWatch API responses, not independently reconciled against every official document during this review.

How To Use The Permit And Spud Signal

Permits show where activity has been filed. Reported spuds record drilling starts, but the two aggregate columns are independent date screens. A permit-to-spud conversion rate requires a matched permit cohort and an explicit follow-up period. Production windows answer a different question and should stay separate.

For a business user, the value is knowing which account labels, counties, and source dates deserve follow-up first. That can support a cleaner county list, operator table, map review, export, alert, or API workflow.

Infrastructure And Midstream Signals

What This Page Does Not Prove

This page does not prove that every Devon or Coterra asset has been fully integrated after the merger. It does not replace company filings, land records, or private commercial data.

The refreshed counts use permit and reported-spud records only. Lease, infrastructure, production and ownership conclusions require separate evidence. The records should be checked again as state sources refresh.

What To Monitor Next

• Later issue and reported-spud dates under each exact filed label.
• Any newly returned legacy or subsidiary labels, reviewed before grouping.
• Resolution of the held county-label discrepancy.
• New drilling-start evidence matched to a fixed permit cohort, rather than a ratio of the two independent totals.
• Separately verified lease, infrastructure and production records before expanding the account view.

The August 8 page used source-anchored July windows and showed 51 permits and 20 spuds across its matched label scope. This September screen uses a June 20 lower bound and explicit DEVON/COTERRA name searches. Do not describe the difference as growth or decline: both the window and matching basis need reconciliation before a valid trend comparison.

What To Request

Request the current Devon/Coterra New Mexico source-label activity table with permits, reported spuds, lease context, counties, issue dates, source dates, map links, exports, alerts, and API fields.

Related EnergyNetWatch Pages

• EnergyNetWatch Operator Intelligence
• Devon Q1 2026 Coterra Merger And New Mexico Signals
• New Mexico drilling permits by operator
• New Mexico oil and gas production data
• New Mexico permit county activity watchlist
• North Dakota operator production
• Operator activity chase lists
• Oil and gas data source dates
• Request EnergyNetWatch access
• Oil and gas data API

Sources And Data Notes

Company-reported production, merger releases, permit records, reported-spud records, and state production windows answer different questions. Permit and spud counts are filed-activity and drilling-start records by source label, not company-reported production totals.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does a Devon or Coterra permit confirm a completed well?

No. The permit is a filed activity record. The reported-spud count is separate drilling-start evidence; completion, production, and company guidance are different record layers.

Why are Devon-linked and Coterra-linked rows kept separate?

State sources can retain legacy or subsidiary labels after a merger. Keeping the labels separate shows which county, date, and source row support each part of the activity view.

How current are the New Mexico counts?

The records were retrieved September 18, 2026, using a June 20 lower date bound. The latest matched permit is September 11 and latest matched spud is August 16. These are matched record dates, not guarantees of reporting completeness.