This isn't a record for Texas by any means, but it's still novel to see a call for a bearing tree 960 varas (about 2667 ft.) distant from a corner marked by a surveyor in 1838. The rest of the story is that the tract was only 1344 varas by 1344 varas and the 960 vara tie to one BT was basically toward another corner 1344 varas distant (but 23 ft. off a direct line to it).The other bearing tree of another corner was only 400 varas (1111 ft.) distant from the corner.
Both corners fell in what was prairie in 1838 and, while at first impression they seemed otherwise, the BT calls turned out to be remarkably useful. The 1838 surveyor was canny enough to choose trees of species uncommon in the area of the survey (Blackjack and Black Oaks, Q. marilandica and Q. velutina) in lieu of the usual hardwood species in that area (Live Oaks, Q. virginiana) that otherwise would have been an excellent choice considering their longevity.
from the early 1850's, out on the "Grand Prairie" that is in N & NW Tarrant County, i've seen directional calls to witness trees but no distance because they were so far away.
somewhat better than the call "to a stake in the Grand Prairie" w/ no witness, but not much since the tree called for in the previous example is no longer in existence.
Years ago while doing a boundary line survey for the US Forest Service, I came across a section corner in the middle of a valley, no trees around. Reading the 1880's notes, I found that 2 bearing trees originally set for the corner were nearly 1/2 mile away to the east where the land rose and there were some trees. To the west were the other 2 bearing trees, more than 1/2 mile away, to the west of the quarter section corner. In each case, 2 of the trees were north of the line and 2 to the south, one in each of the 4 sections as they should have been, and not very far off the section line. I suspect he set them as he ran the line rather than going back to mark and measure them. I remember finding several of the trees.
> In each case, 2 of the trees were north of the line and 2 to the south, one in each of the 4 sections as they should have been, and not very far off the section line. I suspect he set them as he ran the line rather than going back to mark and measure them.
Yes, I'm pretty sure that was how the 1838 surveyor tied the tree 960 varas away and only 0deg30min off the land grant line he ran. The tree he used was apparently the first hardwood of significant caliper and uncommon species that they encountered near the line as it left the prairie and entered the timber. The bearing was almost certainly calculated from the offset to line and the passing distance on that line.