-
Government Lot Numbering Order
As with nearly anything involving PLSSia, the correct answer is, “It depends.”
Standard numbering order for Section 1 thru Section 6 would have Lot 1 being in the area commonly thought of as being the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter and then progressing westerly one-quarter mile at a time until Lot 4 is in the area commonly thought of as being the northwest quarter of the northwest quarter.
River lots usually start on the north side of the section and work southward while weaving east and west along the way. Hard to describe precisely.
Numbering of lots in sections that were partly surveyed at one time and finished at some later date following some specific action that allows completion can produce an interesting layout depending on the areas involved. Where this is the most common in my area is a case of a treaty with one Indian tribe allowing the Government survey to proceed up to the treaty line. At some future date, following another treaty, additional survey work occurs which finishes against the first treaty line. This can result in some nice kinks in the section lines.
Then you have cases such as the one I encountered this week. It was a Section 1 with a river entering the section a short distance south of the northeast section corner. The result was that the area commonly thought of as being the northwest quarter of the northwest quarter was designated as Lot 1. The area commonly thought of as being the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter was designated Lot 2. Then, what might commonly be thought of as all that part of the north half of the northeast quarter lying west of the river was designated Lot 3 and was said to contain 56.3 acres. Lot 4 was the part of the section on the east side of the river and primarily in what might otherwise be thought of as the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter and a bit of the southeast quarter of the northeast quarter. Lots 5 thru 11 were all river lots as it twisted through the east half of the section. Lot 11 was a small tract of maybe two acres trapped between the river and the south section line with no connection to the remainder of the section.
The area of interest to my client was that portion of Lot 3 which was in what would commonly be thought of as the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter. I kept wanting to refer to that as Lot 1 based on how a river lot would be numbered. The fact that we were in Section 1 would also normally have Lot 1 in that area. I had to remember to correct myself on several occasions that it was just part of Lot 3 in this situation. That Lot 1 in Section 1 was adjacent to Lot 1 in Section 2 seemed impossible, yet accurate.
Here’s the odd part of why I was focused so much on that area of the section. I knew the client’s family owned a significant fraction of Section 1 and had looked at it on Google Earth before going to the site with him. We drove as far as possible then walked a few hundred feet further to an existing fence line that ran southeasterly from the north section line toward the river. He explained this was their east property line. I pointed eastward towards another eight acres, plus/minus, and said, “So, what about that ground?” I was told that area belonged to his cousins. Not having the deed with me, I had to rely on my memory of what it said and was positive there was no mention of some metes and bounds tract being listed as an exception. I suggested that perhaps his immediate family owned that extra land and he assured me that it stopped at the fence and always had been that way. A few days later I solved the mystery in the courthouse. The critical deeds confirmed that all that part of Lot 3 (as described above) that fell within the northeast quarter of the northeast corner had been severed from the part within the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter over 100 years ago. Thus the true line, per the deeds, separating his immediate family’s land from the cousins’ land, was near where we had parked the truck. They had been using about eight acres of the cousins’ land for decades. The split had taken place long before anyone in his extended family had purchased any land in that area. This is going to be interesting to watch play out as the client’s goal was to purchase roughly 20 acres from his immediate family with the most important part being that eight acres or so that, by deed, belongs to his cousins.
-
1 Reply
-
Better you than me. I personally avoid fractional lands like the plague…;)
Log in to reply.