PLSS Question of the Day

I'd run from the southeast corner to the northwest corner and call it a day. Are you going by previously set found monumentation, sectional breakdown prorating section corners found, or occupation?

Am I right? What did I win??

Easy as Pi

Sure hope some intrepid surveyor in days gone by set a north quarter corner since the Government didn't do it for you.

Then we get into the whole "what do you mean NORTHEAST xx acres. My first guess would be they meant an almost square tract with equal sides (609.56'). Some other twit might suggest a triangle with the legs being equal (862.05'). A more inventive type might suggest a quarter-circle (R=687.81'). Then again, maybe they really meant that fraction of the acres shown on the Government plat as applied to the actual number of acres in the Lot when surveyed.

Um just curious about the hint. When do BLM surveyors subdivide lots? My understanding is that patents are only going to be aliquot or lotted.

Easy, First Set Eleven Monuments

Assuming the 1/4s are in, set the center of section. (1)

Next set the 1/4 1/4s and the center of 1/4. (5)

Next set 4 aliquot 1/4 1/4 1/4s for lot 3 and the center of lot 3. (5)

The only unambiguous description of the 8.03 acres must include metes and bounds.

I said "metes and bounds", which is not neccessarily bearing and distance.

I'll give you my description later.

Paul in PA

Although around here the smallest GLO subdivision for fractional sections was 40 acres, it's the opinion of some that the 'standarding' of acreage should be continued when subdividing smaller acreages and closing on a line.

In other words, according to some in the BLM, the 'proper' way to subdivide a fractional "40 acre" lot would be to give the south half 10 chains and let the remaining error fall north of there.

I didn't say I agree with that school of thought. But in this particular instance it appears to me that was the intent of the conveyance. Along with the old-ass fences that seem to reflect this, also.

Easy, First Set Eleven Monuments

According to some on the CA CLSA board if you don't have the $1200 CFedS certification you don't know how to survey sectionalized land.

I don't agree with them, but opinions are like anus' everyone has one.

Easy, First Set Eleven Monuments

> According to some on the CA CLSA board if you don't have the $1200 CFedS certification you don't know how to survey sectionalized land.
>
> I don't agree with them, but opinions are like anus' everyone has one.

Nobody on the CLSA forum said that. What I and a couple others said was that a lot of surveyors think they know how to survey PLSS but don't know a fraction of what they think they do and end up screwing up sections. If they are educable, CFedS would do them (and the affected landowners) some good. Also said that CFedS is worthwhile training for any surveyor working in PLSS.

There are quite a few who have never worked for the fed govt or had CFedS training that are quite expert at PLSS surveying.

Landbutcher thinks it is a federal takeover of licensing laws and being pushed as a requirement for any surveyor working within the PLSS and that it is going to allow the unlicensed to go around describing themselves as CFedS certified. Notice that landbutcher didn't offer any comment on the question asked in the OP. Apparently, his last line is a self description.

At a quick glance, I was going thinking as HC was, square figure, but I see that your analysis is spot on. Had I done a little quick math with the Lot 3 acreage, I would have seen it.

With evidence of occupation matching your solution, I don't see how an intelligent & competent surveyor could offer a reasonable argument otherwise.

Was the N 1/4 Corner of Section 5 established by protraction area? I am betting 80% of the licensed PLSS surveyors do not know how to properly do it.

If I were subdividing sec. 5, in order to find the 8.53 acres, I would run center lines of the section, and at the N 1/2 of the N-S center line, proportion the C-N 1/16, and the C-N-N 1/64;
subdivide the NE 1/4, and proportion the C-N-NE 1/64 and run the center line between from the NW-NE1/64 to the W-E1/64 and you have the boundaries of the intended 8.53 acres.

This is of course if there is no other evidence of establishment of any of these corners.

I do not advocate subdividing a section ONLY by the protracted subd. of sec. lines and ignoring all other evidence of the corners.

Obviously, the aliquot part may not end up being 8.53 acres, just like the rest of the aliquot parts may not end up being 20 acres.

Keith

But of course you have to retrace the Standard and set the corner to the south.

I am assuming that you know where the 8.53 acres comes from?

Why wouldn't you take the fence line and go from there. They got them bona-fide rights to consider you know.

I am by no means a PLSS expert. I took a class from Steve Parrish at Great Basin last year on the PLSS and that is how we were taught to do it (South half gets 10 chains, north half gets remainder).

BUT, if there are ancient fences and other evidence of occupation, that would trump any mathematical breakdown.

That's how I see it anyway.

The ten chains would be proportioned against, just like the 20 chains.

The section is subdivided by calculating the aliquot part protracted distances and then used for a proportion.

But in this particular instance it appears to me that was the intent of the conveyance. Along with the old-ass fences that seem to reflect this...

Sounds like you have answered your own question. Since the deed was 1901 and the survey was 1899 you have to place some reliance on a previous survey. Since the deed contains an acreage statement of 8.53 Ac. opens the question to interpretation. I would say you're right on with your conclusion. Trying to reinvent a new subdivision of the section is idiocy when there is a survey in 1899.

Pablo

This is of course if there is no other evidence of establishment of any of these corners.

I do not advocate subdividing a section ONLY by the protracted subd. of sec. lines and ignoring all other evidence of the corners.

My earlier post!

:good: :good:

Yes, Keith, they taught us that too. The proportioned 10 ch (or whatever distance that was proportioned to be) goes to the south half and the remainder goes to the north half.

Yes, it is not a matter of holding the ten chains and whatever is the difference,,,,going to the north half. Both distances are proportioned.