I haven't had to do this before since it doesn't happen very often where I work. The BLM came in (in the 1960's) and surveyed a metes and bounds tract - one continuous irregular boundary meandering through 4 quarters in 4 different sections). Their plat has a line table like the one shown below, and the boundary goes on and off established section lines at some points. We have recovered the section & quarter corner monuments they set from this survey but can't find the other monuments that meander around the swamps. How do you typically draw this up, when the bearings are to the nearest minute? I assume the distances are pretty accurate, since they're listed to the nearest 0.001 chains. There must be some kind of adjustment to run on their traverse lines, but I don't know what the "recommended" method is.
Broken boundary adjustment.
Although with section lines involved I would limit adjustments to lines between established section lines and adjust along the sectional lines for those corners,,,,,,,,,,probably.
It's difficult to say without seeing it. If you want a primer on it I believe that there are some examples for HES surveys, that should be helpful. Sorry, I can't remember the book off the top of my head.
The BLM Public Lands Surveying Casebook has an subject survey of H.E.S. and Mineral Surveys which used a combination of Proportion, Grant Boundary Method and Broken Boundary Method (Compass Rule) in case E5-1. This book is available online at https://www.blm.gov/or/gis/geoscience/files/Case_Book.pdf
I know this will come as a shock, but I would suggest you look at placer mineral surveys where some of the lines are (or intended to be) aliquot lines and the remainder are metes and bounds. Here is an example from Colorado. The Deadwood Placer is on the GLO Records website. Lines 5-6 and 6-7 are intended to be on the 1/16th line and the township line. Other than that, take a look at how the BLM surveyed miscellaneous tracts via metes and bounds.
If there are any remaining federal interest lands, you may wish to have a chat with the BLM. You can also ask them for a copy of the special instructions in the Group File for that 1960s survey. If it hasn't been sent to the National Archives you can make a FOIA request.
Thanks, everyone, for the helpful responses. I'd "like" all your comments, but I don't think you can do that on the new site. Attached is a rough sketch of what I'm talking about, for reference.
Looks like about 1/2 Sectional and 1/2 B&D.
I would resolve the sectional corners like the BLM will do. Then you have some lines that are connections, then some that will be solved by BB adjustment or Grant Boundary.
You mentioned swamp land, were these monuments ever set or are the meander lines that will be different over time?
I believe you have your answers but I was curious if the BLM 60's survey was for the purpose of identifying omitted lands. From what I can tell it sounds like that might be the case.
@MightyMoe, I guess I sort of described the situation poorly in my first post. They indicate that they set all the monuments around the traverse in 1965. The terrain is mostly flat/hilly grasslands, with cattail sloughs (not really swamps). We didn't find their monuments in the road or offsets, except for the same section corners they used (there are roads along all section lines in this area).
At this point, I'm trying to draw it in to generate search points for the ones out in the field, and I don't know what to expect. Of course, I'll likely hold any of their pins we find, but I'm asking because I'll need to know what the generally accepted method is to restore those corners in between the ones we find, whether that be grant boundary, compass rule etc. The unadjusted boundary closure error is only 1.07' in 16,000' - which I think is pretty good.
@monte-king It was for a wildlife management area survey. They acquired private lands for waterfowl refuge and such.
