Trying to sort this one out. Along township line sections 34/3.
Very old county road on the section line. ¼ corner marker missing but all evidence puts it in the center of the road. Road at this point is a cut so marker is gone. Old fences come into the road from the north and south. The fence to the north goes north one forty then used to, before 1970, jog over to the east 30 feet or so then continue northerly for 2 forties heading for the north ¼ corner (these fences have since been removed). There has never been a fence the last forty length but the north ¼ corner is existent. So it appears that section 34 was divided using a point other than where the fences come into the road.
The fences come into the road at 2636 feet from the west section corner and 2688 feet from the east section corner. I've measured the whole township line and there are differences per half mile distance but none as great as this (by about a magnitude of 2).
So I suppose there are at least three possibilities. Existent, lost and obliterated.
1) Use the fences (existent).
2) proportion the distance (lost).
3) Extend the old fence line north of the jog back into the township line. This option would put the corner on the opposite side of the proportion from the fences (obliterated).
I'm still trying to sort out the dates but there is a possibility that the road was built (corner destroyed) before the fences where constructed (fences not built to original corner). Earliest photos available seem to be 1963. Be nice if the fences aren't on it but I believe they will maybe.
So far surveyors have used the proportion and about 3 years ago one filed a corner record accepting the fences (survey section three, only corner record on file).
At this time I'm still undecided, looking for more evidence. But these fences sure seem sort of funky to me. No matter how it's decided (if it is) some folks are going to be adversely affected. Time to suggest agreements I suppose. Maybe I have two quarter corners, one for most of section 34 and one for most of section 3. The GLO notes say they only set one.
If all that was set was one 1/4 corner, that's all there is..
If the section corners (or perpetuations of) east and west of your 1/4 corner are in place and accepted, I would think a proportional position would be the best location. It doesn't sound like the fences give you any evidence, except conflicting.
PS - a 30' jog in a 1/4 line fence could indicate evidence of an old road. Any records indicating such?
No road.
Any topo calls on the original notes that would lend creedence to one location or the other?
It is very difficult for me to hang my hat for a 1/4 corner on a fence location that contradicts the math. What year was the original survey performed?
Are you in 34 or 3? What was patented?
Could the owner have sold the W 1/2 mile of either the S 1/2 of 34 or the N 1/2 of 3? Just because a lawyer wrote the description as '1/4' does not mean that the owner and/or surveyor intended to create a 1/4 section.
Richard Schaut
I need to review the notes. I've looked before but not for some time now. There should be a topo call for a wash (swale) maybe 5 or 6 chains west of the 1/4. Problem is most of this GLO surveyors calls are to nearest half or even chain.
One problem for the fence going north is is is skewed to the west. If extended all the way north you'd be about a chain west of the north quarter corner. So even if they left the south quarter in the right place they didn't aim very well or didn't know where to aim to. It is straight for its 1/4 mile length. These fences are old also at lest three times or more ancient.
I believe I've got to go through all the evidence I can imagine before I can accept that the corner is lost.
This is why we get paid the big bucks. We all should own stock in Rolaids, Tums and Mylanta.
Sometimes fences are just fences. Sometimes they are the best representation of obliterated historical monuments. Trying to determine which is the true case is what makes a simple job get really, really hard. To further complicate matters, sometimes your other evidence is shaky, so proportioning in from shaky evidence increases gastric acid production. Were the section corner monuments in place when the quarter corner accessories came into being? Maybe. Maybe not.
Jogs where none are supposed to be seem to trouble surveyors more than about any other irregularity. It troubled me when I found two 80 + yr old established corners 33 feet apart at the center of section. One was a fence corner with an uncalled for stone and the other was a fence corner on line between quarter corners. Both have been there as long as anyone could remember and both have been used as points of local control for adjacent quarter sections. The fence corner with the stone controls the NW and SW quarter and the other fence corner controls the NE and SE quarter. None of the owners in the section dispute it. What right do I have to dispute it? What right do I have to correct a record that has served everyone fine for the past 80 years? I noted one corner as a point of local control for dividing the NW and SW quarters and the other as a local point of control for dividing the NE and SE quarters. No agreement needed, no segregated tracts. Wherever the Center of section should have been established is irrelevant. It wasn't established where it should have been and its too late to start over.
Is Section 3 a closing section?
DJJ
I can certainly appreciate the concept of established old boundaries. Most of the landowners in Section 34 are fine with how things are. There is one landowner that has been informed by a surveyor that the fences are "wrong." By accepting the quarter as per the fence intersection his at least 50 year old fence line will move into the adjoiner about 15 feet. He wants to build a new fence and he wants to build it on the new survey line. So far its all been talk, sort of a mild standoff, but if a new relocated fence is attempted to be built things are going to heat up shortly. 45 years of acquiescence was fine until a surveyor told him the fence was wrong. It appears to me that the fence was built to some early measurements that used a different location for the quarter corner. So yeah, if we are going to hold only one point for every section corner and make it all perfect all the old fences in the section are going to move. Some other improvements would also be affected.
Officially though there should only be on quarter corner and it should be located as close to where the original was as all the evidence would point one to. That doesn't necessarily mean all the boundaries should be made to conform to it. Maybe it's just an academic exercise in some respects at this late date.
13S/14S. No closing corners.
