Half of an aliquot part is typically determined by connecting opposite midpoints without regard for area. However, half of a parcel that is not subject to PLSS rules is divided by equal areas (in California).
What is the correct procedure to subdivide half of a government lot within the PLSS system? By midpoint or area?
Thanks,
Jeff
Midpoint.
Thanks, Keith. That has always been unclear to me.
I believe there are exceptions to the midpoint rule. for example if a lot is in section 3 along the north boundary of a township:
1. if it is an east half or west half of lot 1 then the midpoint rule would apply.
2. if it is a south half then perhaps it is that area south of the NN 1/64th corner and may not be equal in area with the north half of the lot. However, if the deed specifically states the area and it is half of the total area of the lot, then the midpoint is most likely applicable.
As with so many things, it depends.
Jerry
If it us still owned by the gov't . Otherwise , if private, the contrary may be shown ( by area, or mid point if specified)
There is at least one BLM employee here in Oklahoma (Muskogee, I believe) that is of the opinion that the rest of us in Oklahoma "Have been doing it wrong for years."
Generally the smallest aliquot division at the time of the Original Survey in Oklahoma was 40 acres, by instructions.
His opinion, in an example of a (more or less 40 acre) Lot on the north closing tier of a township, was that further subdivision should be performed by giving the S/2 the standard distance (for example 10 chains) and allow the excess or deficiency to continue to fall on the side of the section that adjoined the senior line.
I have found evidence that conveyances were made with this in mind and mentioned this in a previous post:
[msg=170701]PLSS Question of the Day[/msg]
As I said previously, it's an interesting concept. But deed, area and occupational evidence usually speak for themselves.
Paden,
What you describe is all part of the "bogus theory" that I continually post about!
In other words, only chapter 3 is used and that procedure would be right for the original survey of the section.
Resurvey procedures would determine the aliquot part proportion (parentheticals) along the east-west lines of the northern tier of sections.
Keith
Well, I don't recall seeing instructions for dividing a government lot in half in the Manual of Instructions. I would think if a lot is in the private domain, and the lot owner wants to sell half of his lot, you are subject to Statute laws or case law. If I were writing a description for a land owner, I would go through pains of trying to write the description in a way that is clear as to what my client wants. (If he wants to sell 1/2 by area to someone, it is my duty to write it in such a way that some other surveyor doesn't come in and say he is obligated to stake it another way)
If I am retracing 1/2 of a lot, and I find that a previous surveyor divided it in half by area, I would honor that, as well as if he divided it by midpoint.
If the description was already written, but has never been staked, I would probably be inclined to use a logical area division and/or pay very close attention to the precise language of teh description. Accepted fences or improvements as not contested by the other owner, might be a good indication of the intent of the two adjacent owners. And like someone else said, it sounds like California has some precedent in case law to use area. There is a good example of 1/2 by area based on a California case in Wattle's book.
