drill results from massive target due anyday!, page-44

In the mud log from the previous well the red line on the left is rate of penetration (ROP). In the center is a representation of the sand/shale observed in samples recovered from drilling mud. The first curve on the right side is total gas and the group at the far right is from the chromatograph for C1 (methane) through C4 (heavier hydrocarbons). In the text above the zone with the show there is a tabulation of component percentages.
The increased gas begins above the point where sand begins and where the ROP suddenly increases (drilling break). This is consistent with the reported enlargement of the borehole due to shale sloughing due to low mud weight (11 ppg). It was not recognized at the time by the operator that this is the top of the overpressured section.
The apparent thickness of sand is distorted by the manner in which drilling continued and continued sloughing of formation into the borehole. The reported sand thickness from logs was about 20-25', not the near 60' observed in lithology.
You can also note in comments that fluorescence was observed in samples.
Mud logs are very useful, but are also somewhat qualitative observations depending on many factors: drilling rates, mud properties, geologist's skill and experience in the area, etc.
The 3 previous wells along with the current one are apparently the only penetrations of this interval in the area. So there is no other control or data available to map the extent of the sand. It is described as a "barrier bar" type of accumulation, which would imply some degree of lateral persistence, though can be cut locally by tidal channels. This was what the first offset to the original Farmcraft #1 found.
The "10 feet of reservoir" used in my previous comment was only for example purposes and simple math. Remember though total "sand" and thickness of effective reservoir are often 2 different numbers. In a barrier bar sand the basal portion is often less permeable than the upper part. Open hole logs and sidewall cores will help with this analysis.
Bottom line with all the info that's been provided, everything is very encouraging.
If a reminder of uncertainty, the timeline required for value creation and an objective perspective look "bearish" compared to the sometimes wild expectations occasionally observed in these comments, well it seems a matter of semantics. There is a fair amount of upside potential in AUJ and with the diversity of assets it may be lower risk than GGP. Who knows.... At the least, one can be hopeful that the first AUJ oil and gas venture looks like a modest success.