One of the most wonderful things about surveyorconnect.com is learning the differences in common practice around the U.S. and around the world.?ÿ What is common in one small area can vary tremendously from other areas.?ÿ I knew about Colonial and PLSS and their basic differences before going in on the earliest version of what we have today on this site.?ÿ What has been brought to my attention since then is wonderful.
In my area, descriptions focus on listing the bearings and distances of a tract but generally leave out the descriptions of what was found or set as monuments.?ÿ You must look at the survey to discover those details.?ÿ That is an abhorrent practice in many other areas.?ÿ Texas employs a practice that may require six standard pages of words to describe the boundaries of a six-sided tract.?ÿ In fact, it has been quite a while since someone from Texas has provided us such an example.?ÿ Would someone please provide us an example from your own work??ÿ That would be educational to some of our newer members to the group.
We have the opportunity to learn here of the vast differences in what one should know, or at least be somewhat educated about, to practice in a different area from where they have been practicing.?ÿ For example,?ÿ I know it's an apple tree if one drops from the tree and hits me on the head.?ÿ I don't know diddly about the differences in the 10 or more varieties of oak tree, for example.?ÿ But, there are many areas where this is very important knowledge to possess.My neighoring State, Missouri, has both Spanish and French land grants, in addition to the standard PLSS but studies in dendrology would be critical in many areas of the State.?ÿ Some of the Western States have tracts that were defined prior to the arrival of the first PLSS surveyors.?ÿ And, somewhere there is a thing called the Three Mile Method, whatever that is.?ÿ Plus, working in the portion of Ohio where the the first iterations of the PLSS were laid out must be an exceptional challenge.
Thanks to all, from Mark Deal to Wendell Harness, who have provided a forum for all to join.
3-mile method (page 10)
https://www.plsc.net/docs/SideShots_Aug2020_web_version.pdf
It's also spelled out in the BLM manual.
And, somewhere there is a thing called the Three Mile Method, whatever that is.
A fairly common thing in Oklahoma.?ÿ If you should encounter such a case examine the original field notes and you will know what to do.?ÿ
Nevertheless, I learn more from this site than if I attended all 50 state conferences.
That is absolutely correct.
Another great thing about this site is that we all can contribute something and we all can learn something.?ÿ Sometimes a question by a neophyte turns into a case of some of the more senior visitors here learning that what they have been doing is not necessarily correct.?ÿ They probably won't jump up and admit it, but, it is the truth.
I suppose this would be described as the one mile method.?ÿ
These surveys monumented the North, South and E-W Center section lines with "1/8th" corners. The surveys bounded the N-S 80 acre parcels of the sections. Original surveys Circa 1883-1884.
See, we all can learn from one another here.?ÿ I had never such a section.?ÿ I've seen a few that ended up that way, but not courtesy of the GLO.
Still hoping one of Texas brethren will be kind enough to do a copy/paste to provide us with an example of a Texas survey descriptions (field notes).?ÿ I recall some that were presented here years ago including discussing the history of monuments found and including descriptions of existing monuments that fall on line or nearly so on the way to the vital monument for the subject tract.?ÿ "Assumed to be................." being a common phrase relating to an existing monument.
I suppose this would be described as the one mile method.?ÿ
These surveys monumented the North, South and E-W Center section lines with "1/8th" corners. The surveys bounded the N-S 80 acre parcels of the sections. Original surveys Circa 1883-1884.
Those would still be 1/16'th corners, although they would be not be reestablished, if lost in the manner of a "normal" section.?ÿ
?ÿ
I suppose this would be described as the one mile method.?ÿ
These surveys monumented the North, South and E-W Center section lines with "1/8th" corners. The surveys bounded the N-S 80 acre parcels of the sections. Original surveys Circa 1883-1884.
Those would still be 1/16'th corners, although they would be not be reestablished, if lost in the manner of a "normal" section.?ÿ
?ÿ
They are actually called 1/8th corners in the field notes and scribed on the monuments with a 1/8.
?ÿ
I suppose this would be described as the one mile method.?ÿ
These surveys monumented the North, South and E-W Center section lines with "1/8th" corners. The surveys bounded the N-S 80 acre parcels of the sections. Original surveys Circa 1883-1884.
Those would still be 1/16'th corners, although they would be not be reestablished, if lost in the manner of a "normal" section.?ÿ
?ÿ
They are actually called 1/8th corners in the field notes and scribed on the monuments with a 1/8.
?ÿ
Right, but they serve as 1/16th corners and the modern nomenclature is 1/16.?ÿ
?ÿ
I suppose this would be described as the one mile method.?ÿ
These surveys monumented the North, South and E-W Center section lines with "1/8th" corners. The surveys bounded the N-S 80 acre parcels of the sections. Original surveys Circa 1883-1884.
Those would still be 1/16'th corners, although they would be not be reestablished, if lost in the manner of a "normal" section.?ÿ
?ÿ
They are actually called 1/8th corners in the field notes and scribed on the monuments with a 1/8.
?ÿ
Right, but they serve as 1/16th corners and the modern nomenclature is 1/16.?ÿ
?ÿ
Ok
?ÿ
?ÿ
They are actually called 1/8th corners in the field notes and scribed on the monuments with a 1/8.
Seems like they were 1/8 corners when they were set, because they were dividing into 8 pieces, so might legitimately still be called that. Even though in other places and times similarly situated ones were 1/16 corners, I don't see that necessitates changing their name.
?ÿ
They are actually called 1/8th corners in the field notes and scribed on the monuments with a 1/8.
Seems like they were 1/8 corners when they were set, because they were dividing into 8 pieces, so might legitimately still be called that. Even though in other places and times similarly situated ones were 1/16 corners, I don't see that necessitates changing their name.
?ÿ
They are interesting monuments, I've found two with stones marked with 1/16, then under those stones the original 1/8 stone was buried. All the marked 1/8 stones I've recovered were set with the 1/8 mark in the ground, the stone needed to be pulled to see the 1/8 mark.?ÿ
?ÿ
