Could be a good issue to talk about?
If you are in the PLSS that is.
But, it is not about two corners an inch apart.
Keith
Hi
This topic help me a lot in developing my project. I will contribute more when I finished it.
Keith
From Moe's original post:
"Because all the historical breakdowns of both Section 13 and 18 used the more northerly of the stones that is what I have decided to do. But it is a head scratcher"
It sounds like this has been all private for awhile now and it has been subdivided previously. Therefore it would be appropriate to consider the original subdivision of the section and the historical land use/occupation patterns.
Also did the whole section get surveyed at once, or was the East half surveyd, then the West half done as a later completion survey? If that were true, and you were the original subdivider you might consider running the Ctr 1/4 for the East half at a mean bearing between N and S lines to intersection with the N-S centerline and doing the same for the West half, which would result in two Center 1/4 corners.
From the original post this doesn't seem to be the case. If the original subdivision was done as shown and the interested parties have been living with it you aren't the guy to "fix the survey" and make it "right".
This isn't a Chapter 3 problem, it's a Chapter 6 situation.
Have a good weekend, or whats left of it.
DJJ
Jim McCavitt told me the story of a BLM dependent resurvey in the 1970s that found one set of original corners on a range line. Jim said it was very heavy brush. A fire burned the area and lo and behold he said there is another set of original corners out there which BLM found in recent years. He said it's understandable they didn't find the second set because of the heavy brush and they thought they had the original corners. But they run parallel to one another I can't remember how far apart.
The GLO surveyors were very fallible and often made mistakes such as setting new corners when they couldn't find the original (but not saying so in the notes), etc.
They're an inch apart on the map LOL.
It seems that it would be more equitable to split the north-south centerline especially if the occupation looks like that. But the OPer says there are already C1/4 monuments out there.
Keith
I agree, how the Section has actually been Surveyed and occupied will answer the question of how to subdivide it, or more to the point, retrace how it has already been subdivided.
Section 7, T17N, R16W, MDM is another example of a Section that was surveyed by several different GLO surveyors in a piecemeal fashion creating a mess.
It does depend on how the 640 acres was returned on a survey plat or plats?
If one plat, then there would be one C 1/4 corner and the midpoint on the n-s centerline would be a good method.
Keith
Some would actually believe that Chapter 3 would be the only guidelines and a "straight" line should be run between 1/4 corners for the e-w center line!
In their terms, that would be the legal corner as defined by statute!
Keith
The whole issue of using Chapter 3 only will be discussed in detail, ....sometime later.
Keith
Center 1/4 sec. cors.
I really thought the argument was over on how to deal with an existing center 1/4 sec. cor. monument, but there still are a few who actually believe that the guidelines in Chapter 3 are the only guidelines to use!
Keith
Center 1/4 sec. cors.
Nobody wants to challenge that statement?
Keith
Center 1/4 sec. cors.
Uh, straight line? Hmmmmm. Yes, if by straight you mean a line of constant bearing, then straight it is.
But, then again us private surveyors have no use for the curve!!!!
Curves, we don't need no stinkin' curves.
Except on our women of course 🙂
Center 1/4 sec. cors.
Theres nothing prettier than looking back over a 6 mile line that you just retraced and see all the flagged corners on the curve!
Not quite as pretty as a curve on a woman tho.
Keith
If you want to get more materials that related to this topic, you can visit: Resume samples 2011
Best regards.
