[Imports] Fwd: Importing West Virginia State Forests Boundary

[Kevin Kenny]

On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 12:26 PM Minh Nguyen <minh at nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us>
wrote:

> There seems to be an assumption that the boundaries aren't defined in a
> way that don't overlap by a smidgen. I know very little about this
> specific example, but as someone who used to live on a property parcel
> that accidentally overlapped with two others, I find it less alarming
> than I probably should. Perhaps Attila could check if there are any
> close calls like this so we could discuss what to do about them here or
> in other forums where locals are present.
>

My experience is that in the backcountry, this is more the rule than the
exception. Very seldom do successive surveys, or successive digitizations
of the same plat, strike exactly the same lines. As often as not, a precise
survey would cost more than the land is worth, so the usual approach to
indefinite boundaries is, "if this ever actually becomes an issue, we'll
let the courts sort it out."

My uncle feuded with his neighbours over a property line for over forty
years.  When the property came down to my brother, he made up with the
neighbours fairly quickly and hired a forester to help sort things out.
With the aid of a metal detector, the guy was able to recover not only
buried survey pins at the corners, but also the remains of a barbed-wire
fence that had once been at the property line (but destroyed some time
before the 1940's). My brother didn't even need to come up with any cash,
since the line recovery revealed that he had a fine stand of red oaks that
he thought belonged to the neighbour, and the forester harvested some of
them in payment. I'm sure that they are fine furniture in someone's house
today. That's usually how these things are settled - by a handshake between
the neighbours. Later on, someone may be trying to float a mortgage, and
the bank will perhaps require a new survey. The usual effect will be that
any deviation to the line will have been established by use and adverse
possession, and the new surveyed line will become the property line.

Even 'obvious' wrong boundaries to state holdings may be meaningful.  In a
tract of land in New York known as Township 40, a settlement comprising
some two hundred private holdings, a fire station, a school, a church and a
power station was claimed to be state wild forest land for about 150 years.
The turbid history had included a faulty survey in 1771 and a fraudulent
sheriff's repossession for nonpayment of taxes (which, in fact, had been
paid in full) in 1862.  The legalities grew to be so complicated that they
eventually were resolved only by amending the state constitution, which
amendment became final in 2013. It was hardly controversial; it passed the
state legislature unanimously and carried about three-fourths of the
popular vote in the referendum. Prior to 2013, the state maps showed the
forest encompassing most of a small village.  Had I been conversant with
OSM at the time, and had it been anywhere near its present state of
development, I'd surely have mapped both opinions of the public land
boundary, partly as an aid to journalists covering the story.

We even have township county lines that don't quite close - because they're
tied to inconsistent surveys from 17th- and 18th-century land grants. The
answer in many cases to, "where is the boundary, exactly?" is "who wants to
know?"

In general, I map cadastre only of public-access lands, and if two or more
'authoritative' sources return different answers, I map both unless I can
answer to my satisfaction, through further research or fieldwork, exactly
which is right and how the error came to be.  The gores on what are almost
certainly indefinite boundaries don't bother me in the least.

I know this sounds totally bonkers to people who live in jurisdictions with
title registries. But the US has no foundation in any Domesday Book. New
York attempted to introduce such a system gradually in 1908 by having a
state registry for new land conveyances. The system was never popular, and
first became optional (with only a few lenders actually requiring
registration of title) and then repealed. The registry is still maintained
for existing deeds (which are mostly in Suffolk County), but Torrens
transfers are no longer permitted.

Because the USA.
--
73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/imports/attachments/20210813/d85628bd/attachment.htm>