AI Assistant
Notifications
Clear all

Section 6 proration

17 Posts
9 Users
0 Reactions
1,383 Views
Cam Lear
(@cam-lear)
Posts: 2
Free
Topic starter
Translate ▼
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

I am trying to study for my state exam and I've been getting some mixed information on how far north of the East quarter corner of section 6 would the 8th corner be. Would it be the standard 20 chains and then the excess or deficiency from the eight Corner North, or would it be a prorated distance between the East quarter corner and the Northeast section corner.


 
Posted : April 19, 2017 11:38 am
okie-mike
(@okie-mike)
Posts: 19
Free
Translate ▼
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

[MEDIA=youtube]VkuKvdIv-bE[/MEDIA]

Good video about section 6 breakdown.


 
Posted : April 19, 2017 11:50 am
paden-cash
(@paden-cash)
Posts: 11086
Free
Translate ▼
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

The 2009 Manual indicates on Page 65, Figure 3-40 that the NEE/16 corner in Section 6 would create a standard S/2 of the NE/4 with excess or deficiency being contained north of that corner in Lot 1.


 
Posted : April 19, 2017 12:00 pm
loyal
(@loyal)
Posts: 3735
Free
Translate ▼
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

paden cash, post: 424374, member: 20 wrote: The 2009 Manual indicates on Page 65, Figure 3-40 that the NEE/16 corner in Section 6 would create a standard S/2 of the NE/4 with excess or deficiency being contained north of that corner in Lot 1.

Welllll... IF you are performing an ORIGINAL (Federal Authority) Survey of Section 6, and monumenting OR Platting said 1/16th Corner, then yes Chapter III is correct.

IF on the other hand, you are performing a Dependent Resurvey of a Section 6 that did NOT (originally) monument said 16th Corner, then see Chapter V (5-48) Page 137. Unless of course, said 1/16th Corner has been previously established by others.

Loyal


 
Posted : April 19, 2017 12:35 pm
thebionicman
(@thebionicman)
Posts: 4529
Free
Translate ▼
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

One minor point of order...
Please refrain from the use of the term 'standard', unless of course we are talking about corners on certain parallels....;)


 
Posted : April 19, 2017 12:46 pm

Cam Lear
(@cam-lear)
Posts: 2
Free
Topic starter
Translate ▼
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Loyal, post: 424381, member: 228 wrote: Welllll... IF you are performing an ORIGINAL (Federal Authority) Survey of Section 6, and monumenting OR Platting said 1/16th Corner, then yes Chapter III is correct.

IF on the other hand, you are performing a Dependent Resurvey of a Section 6 that did NOT (originally) monument said 16th Corner, then see Chapter V (5-48) Page 137. Unless of course, said 1/16th Corner has been previously established by others.

Loyal

Thank you very much, I hadn't made it to page 137 yet and that is exactly what I was looking for.


 
Posted : April 19, 2017 12:49 pm
Kris Morgan
(@kris-morgan)
Posts: 3855
Free
Translate ▼
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

I remember reading Clark's on boundaries 20 years ago. Since Texas doesn't really have T&R things, and it went over it (in great detail), I remember thinking, after the explanation about how the Township and then the subsequent sections were laid out, who in their right minds would ever want to survey in Section 6!?!?


 
Posted : April 19, 2017 1:33 pm
paden-cash
(@paden-cash)
Posts: 11086
Free
Translate ▼
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Kris Morgan, post: 424386, member: 29 wrote: I remember reading Clark's on boundaries 20 years ago. Since Texas doesn't really have T&R things, and it went over it (in great detail), I remember thinking, after the explanation about how the Township and then the subsequent sections were laid out, who in their right minds would ever want to survey in Section 6!?!?

Only if someone is holding a gun on me...;)


 
Posted : April 19, 2017 2:08 pm
holy-cow
(@holy-cow)
Posts: 26020
Member P&R, Founder
Translate ▼
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Some can be downright fun. If you view hitting your big toe with a 4 lb. sledge fun.


 
Posted : April 19, 2017 7:03 pm
Gene Kooper
(@gene-kooper)
Posts: 1339
Free
Translate ▼
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Geezo....scratching my head at the aversion to working in a section with a few government lots!


 
Posted : April 19, 2017 7:13 pm

MightyMoe
(@mightymoe)
Posts: 10688
Member P&R, Founder
Translate ▼
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Gene Kooper, post: 424431, member: 9850 wrote: Geezo....scratching my head at the aversion to working in a section with a few government lots!

I believe the "newer" sections have advantages over the older ones, the later ones,,,,post 1875 or so cleaned some issues with lots like actually showing them on the plat,,,,some of the old sections look more difficult.


 
Posted : April 19, 2017 7:18 pm
Gene Kooper
(@gene-kooper)
Posts: 1339
Free
Translate ▼
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

MightyMoe, post: 424433, member: 700 wrote: I believe the "newer" sections have advantages over the older ones, the later ones,,,,post 1875 or so cleaned some issues with lots like actually showing them on the plat,,,,some of the old sections look more difficult.

Would you post a couple of examples that illustrate your point?


 
Posted : April 19, 2017 8:02 pm
thebionicman
(@thebionicman)
Posts: 4529
Free
Translate ▼
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

I enjoy looking at the various treatments of Lot 4 Section 6 by territory and era. Even today i get a good laugh when folks say 'the BLM does it this way'.


 
Posted : April 19, 2017 9:08 pm
MightyMoe
(@mightymoe)
Posts: 10688
Member P&R, Founder
Translate ▼
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Gene Kooper, post: 424437, member: 9850 wrote: Would you post a couple of examples that illustrate your point?

sure:
Old:

not so old:

more the era I'm used too:

point being is that for me I understand how to handle Section 6 on the last plat, the other two,,,,,,,,that would be a struggle


 
Posted : April 20, 2017 6:50 am
Gene Kooper
(@gene-kooper)
Posts: 1339
Free
Translate ▼
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Sorry Moe, I was curious about early surveys in the area(s) you work. In Colorado, the baseline was run in 1859. The early township subdivisions didn't have 7 lots in Sec. 6. These examples are west of Denver.

1862 example.

1867 example with earlier subdivision that created fractional secs. 6 & 7.

1877 example.


 
Posted : April 20, 2017 12:17 pm

MightyMoe
(@mightymoe)
Posts: 10688
Member P&R, Founder
Translate ▼
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Gene Kooper, post: 424536, member: 9850 wrote: Sorry Moe, I was curious about early surveys in the area(s) you work. In Colorado, the baseline was run in 1859. The early township subdivisions didn't have 7 lots in Sec. 6. These examples are west of Denver.

1862 example.

1867 example with earlier subdivision that created fractional secs. 6 & 7.

1877 example.

1876 is as early as they get where ive worked, have to say those look interesting


 
Posted : April 20, 2017 1:08 pm
paden-cash
(@paden-cash)
Posts: 11086
Free
Translate ▼
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

In Oklahoma all 3 of those examples could very well be the exact same section with the earliest being the only officially accepted survey.


 
Posted : April 20, 2017 1:15 pm