Paul in PA, post: 345191, member: 236 wrote: The Government does not have fee title to the majority of land it controls. Fee title flows from an issued Patent to a specific entity or person....
Here's a record conveyance in which title was warranted by the grantor to the grantee. Chain of title is complete from the original patent to this document. This indicates a "flow of fee title" to the grantee, a specific entity, the United States of America.
Paul, is this the ownership you claim doesn't really exist?
The USA has fee title to that particular tract of land, because they bought it. At some time in the past the land was patented creating a source for the continuation of holding the land in fee. However I do not see a flow of title because there is no reference to how the grantor obtained title.
The majority of lands in the public domain have not been patented and thus those are not held in fee by the USA.
Paul in PA
Paul, how can the government patent out land that they do not own?
Does it come back to possession? Basically the gov. is big enough to protect this land until it is patented out, after that it is big enough to protect you while you own it?
Dan Patterson, post: 345195, member: 1179 wrote: I guess you're right. That's kind of the definition of a gap. If it appears to be intentional it would be a gore. I still say SOMEONE owns it no matter what.
Agreed. 100%.
Scott Zelenak, post: 345021, member: 327 wrote: I'm in a colonial state and way back when I was young I heard the old tale of the surveyor finding a gap between property and somehow acquiring title.
The proprietors of East and West Jersey used to own new or unclaimed land so it never made sense to me.
But both entities closed shop.
As I said I'm not a boundary surveyor. I was just wondering if there's some theoretical scenario under which a piece of land could be not owned privately or publicly.
That is a point. my previous boss and I would discuss purchasing the 1' gap or less in between parcels and then having the "big box" company pay us millions because it would run right through the store. However, that is unethical, and we would lose our licences and jobs.......... Fun to think of....
PLS30820, post: 345272, member: 1439 wrote: That is a point. my previous boss and I would discuss purchasing the 1' gap or less in between parcels and then having the "big box" company pay us millions because it would run right through the store. However, that is unethical, and we would lose our licences and jobs.......... Fun to think of....
Never turns out the way you planned
[MEDIA=youtube]H27rfr59RiE[/MEDIA]
The government manages the land in gross for the people of the United States. The people of the United Sates own the land, not the government.
Secondly the US does not own the land in fee, fee title begins after the issuance of a patent.
For instance, BLM = Bureau of Land Management, not Bureau of Land Ownership.
Prior to that it was the Government Land Office whose duty was to disperse the land.
Paul in PA
"by and for the people" comes to mind.
however many consider The Government as a separate entity...
So it does come down to possession and who carries the bigger stick.
Some years ago some of my clients were attempting to reserve a narrow 1ft or 2ft strip of land along the outside boundaries of their property to prevent future access from where their road ended.
State of Texas passed a law preventing that happening and all such strips from preventing the public to connect to existing roads.
A Harris, post: 345154, member: 81 wrote: There are still some lands in limbo that need more money than the property is worth to clear the title.
Bingo! Although in theory all land is owned by *some entity*, the cost for the possessor to obtain clear title to the land may be prohibitive, and the *true owner* (if locatable) may be in the same boat (or not care).
I've seen lots of folks possessing land and treating it as if they have clear title; overlaps and gores between neighbors in hill country where the original survey did not consider topography so the owners agreed to "you work the high pasture and I'll work the creekbed" with no paperwork at the courthouse. Contemplate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slab_City&apos ;">Slab City; do the possessors or the State of California own the land (or have any rights)?
There's lots of land in limbo in the US (especially BLM & FS land), with transient possessors using possession as their only claim, risking ejection upon being caught. Also lots of tranquil incursions, for example a trucking company building a truck pad next to the highway on Federal wetlands and the Feds said "thank you", good spot for a turnout, no foul. Who *owns* that?
Land ownership is a tangled web; as surveyors we are always looking for "the line" and the "Courthouse Records" but we should pay attention to possession too, see Madson for the arguments.