Most of the surveying problems in my area of Texas is because of the goofy hodge-podge, irregular layout as shown on this image.
This is a copy of a portion of a General Land Office map. The circles indicate places where there is or was a problem such as gaps, overlaps, or vacancies. There was problems in almost every case where the surveys were run on the 45 degrees.
This image only covers four or five miles square.
Gee, that looks pretty good compared to Virginia & West Virginia (and probably the other original metes & bounds states). It's things like this that make real surveyors.
These miles & right angles are a piece of cake! 🙂 😛
> Most of the surveying problems in my area of Texas is because of the goofy hodge-podge, irregular layout as shown on this image.
> This is a copy of a portion of a General Land Office map. The circles indicate places where there is or was a problem such as gaps, overlaps, or vacancies. There was problems in almost every case where the surveys were run on the 45 degrees.
> This image only covers four or five miles square.
Yes, the folks in PLSSia really don't appreciate how relatively easy they have it when they are dealing with the same original survey covering a whole township. In a situation of metes and bounds land grants, just the research is a formidible task. While the Official County Maps compiled by the GLO are useful such as that part of the Cooke County Map shown above, they often hide some really strange problems that the compiler glossed over. Either that or they show "problems" that really never were. On the project I'm working on at the moment, the GLO county map contains two Category I blunders: a major vacancy that doesn't actually exist and two surveys adjoining that don't and never did touch, the intervening patented survey not being shown at all.
> Most of the surveying problems in my area of Texas is because of the goofy hodge-podge, irregular layout as shown on this image.
> This is a copy of a portion of a General Land Office map. The circles indicate places where there is or was a problem such as gaps, overlaps, or vacancies. There was problems in almost every case where the surveys were run on the 45 degrees.
> This image only covers four or five miles square.
Add a T instead of PTD and it would look like our maps. 🙂
You guys have 90º angles and 45's? That's like fitting a square box in a round hole; you must need a really big hammer.
I bet your m&b cookbook is twice as big as the blm manual. 😀
> You guys have 90º angles and 45's? That's like fitting a square box in a round hole; you must need a really big hammer.
>
> I bet your m&b cookbook is twice as big as the blm manual. 😀
What M&B COOKBOOK? Local history and case law guide research and recovery. If you can't figure out what was intended :-S you have not done enough of one or the other. Beyond that make your own recipe and hope everyone likes the result.;-)
> .... Beyond that make your own recipe and hope everyone likes the result.;-)
Well that certainly makes things easier. Maybe just err on the side of your client, and probably get tips. 😛
Texas surveying choas, Kent knows this well>M&B study
this is a portion of the Mid Cape Highway valuation plans,
Looks just like Texas, No? NO! LOL
Texas surveying choas, Kent knows this well>M&B study
Mr. Poole,
Was that example you just posted, that of individual private land ownership parcels or original surveys.
John Harmon
John Harmon M&B study
This is a plan that was prepared prior to the Mid Cape Highway takings. It represents a field survey, sort of, and private ownerships.
It also has title information in another part of the plan. It is not a recorded instrument, at least not at the Registry of Deeds.
Not that you can read it on this plan but fences are shown, along with rock walls and corners found, such as stakes and stones. It's a valuable tool if you're working in the vicinity of the highway on an old boundary problem!
> > Most of the surveying problems in my area of Texas is because of the goofy hodge-podge, irregular layout as shown on this image.
> > This is a copy of a portion of a General Land Office map. The circles indicate places where there is or was a problem such as gaps, overlaps, or vacancies. There was problems in almost every case where the surveys were run on the 45 degrees.
> > This image only covers four or five miles square.
>
> Yes, the folks in PLSSia really don't appreciate how relatively easy they have it when they are dealing with the same original survey covering a whole township. In a situation of metes and bounds land grants, just the research is a formidible task. While the Official County Maps compiled by the GLO are useful such as that part of the Cooke County Map shown above, they often hide some really strange problems that the compiler glossed over. Either that or they show "problems" that really never were. On the project I'm working on at the moment, the GLO county map contains two Category I blunders: a major vacancy that doesn't actually exist and two surveys adjoining that don't and never did touch, the intervening patented survey not being shown at all.
Kent,
Here in the former Massachusetts Bay Colony, there was no standard means of subdividing townships, in fact there were no standard dimensions for townships or plantations. Generally, a parcel of land would be purchased from the Indians by a speculator or group of speculators and The General Court would approve the purchase.
The Propietors would subdivide it in any manner they chose.
I have linked here to Dividing the Land: The Early American Beginnings of Our Private Property Mosaic by Edward Price, which covers the development of private ownership in non-PLSS states.
This link only gives access to a small portion of the book, which covers portions of Connecticut and Massachusetts. The are sketches showing the layout of the Propietor's Lots in several townships on pages 44, 46, 50 and 51.
http://books.google.com/books?id=IJq_CWQ48ZoC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_atb#v=onepage&q&f=false
An interesting factoid, my great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great grandfather, George Hubbard was an early surveyor in Wethersfield and Milford, Connecticut, two of the towns shown in the text.