An interesting note in a set of dependent resurvey notes (1956):
The surveyor had questions about the existing corner but accepted it.
I have no problem with him doing that.
The interesting thing to me is that there was another resurvey two decades later in the area that rejected an old accepted (by landowners) set unmarked stone and 2" pipe. No mention of it in the resurvey notes. And to this day the landowners have yet to move any occupation lines to the BLM corner and are still using the stone and cap 90' north of the prorated brass cap. I think at the end of the day the older surveyor used the correct theory.
And then there is the one where the surveyor accepted the SW township corner as a fence post long occupied by landowners, landowner testimony and the SE township corner by same methods. 🙂 Then this jackwad surveyor from out of town comes up and finds the original beautifully marked, set SW township corner about 10 chains away. :-O You guys got that straightened out yet?;-)
Pablo B-)
Or.......he could have prorated it over the fence corner and been 12 chains from the original:-(
Now that sounds interesting Pablo. You got any links to articles on that case?
My guess is the "jackwad surveyor" Pablo is referring is no other than himself;-)
Has never got to court. Been lots of talk, negotiations, land exchanges...but the real issue is too much time has transpired between the dependent resurvey and lands patented thereafter, based upon the erroneous resurvey....Long story short, yes the jackwad was me.+o( Clues can be found in the dependent resurvey/retracement notes in the township and range lines of T58N.,R85W and 84W, 6th p.m.
Pablo B-)
If the original corner is found and proven I don't think there is any question where the section lines is. After all that time where the boundary lines are between private landowners is a whole different issue and question. Where Uncles boundaries are if there are federal boundaries would go to the original. There could be two sets of boundary lines, federal and private if the estate has been split (surface/mineral). This is fun isn't it?
If the original corner is found and proven I don't think there is any question where the section lines is. After all that time where the boundary lines are between private landowners is a whole different issue and question. Where Uncles boundaries are if there are federal boundaries would go to the original.
Ah; so young, so naïve, thinking it would be that simple;-)
I once had those ideas of simplicity. But when it comes down to it you can be right but find yourself being put in the chipper like the the guy in "FARGO" :-O after dealing with the BLM. Mighty Moe and I could go into retirement if we compiled a story about this.
Pablo B-)
Interesting note-
By the way Pablo: I've been told there isn't a resolution at this time. Of course they are retracing the "easy survey" now.
I should think so!
The entire township is stuffed full of original monuments or monument positions that have good history behind them back to the original.
The only questions in the entire township are what to do with the two miles between the NW corner of 4 and the NW corner of 6. Seems simple until you are out in the field, hehe!!
Otherwise the whole township is resurveyed, and of course, the north line........
They said they were going to accept the 1950 resurvey........then they got thinking about the implications of doing that and the whole thing grinded to a halt......:-@
Maybe the theory of going with the latest plat isn't all it's cracked up to be.....we will see. Hopefully before everyone has passed away.|-)
Going on 13 years now. I still have the report I did for the State, pages and pages of text trying to explain what the problem was. We had a big meeting with effected owners and commissioners, the governor was there, and the commission said we use the latest survey, and I said but there are two latest surveys and they are 1500' different on the ground. It never made an impression, no one could understand it.