Thanks Goldwasher, thats what I thought. I have a lot claim in Iowa Hill and that's how I did it. I was just confused as Clay posted the actual legal description of your claim location has to be in either aliquot parts or metes and bounds. I assume that's for areas without lots
Lots, by definition, already have a legal metes and bounds description. Every lot is surveyed on the ground and in that survey documentation you will find the metes and bounds legal land description for the lot - including acreage. By claiming a whole government lot you
are claiming land by a metes and bounds survey description.
Goldwasher is right, you can't subdivide a lot. That's because it's not aliquot (regular) by nature. Claiming a portion of a lot requires another metes and bounds description.
This stuff can be difficult to grasp but it is a system and when you learn the system it becomes much more clear.
When I have questions about the legal description of a piece of public land I just reach out for my copy of the
Specifications for Descriptions of Land from the Cadastral Survey - the people who actually survey all this public land.
Here's how the BLM Cadastral survey explains what a lot is and isn't and why you can't subdivide a lot.
"lots are a legal subdivision of a section and designated by section and lot numbers such as “sec. 3, lot 1.” Lots cannot be described as aliquot...
Lots and other irregular tracts/parcels do not have aliquot characteristics. When they are subdivided there is a remainder. The uncertainty of the location of the remainder intended by the subdivision renders the description ambiguous and subject to more than one interpretation...
For example, is the division line to be determined by a straight line between equally divided opposing lines, or at proportionate linear measurement of opposing lines, or with regard to equal areas? If the latter, it is still a question of how the equal areas are to be achieved, i.e., whether the division line to be determined is parallel with the opposing boundary or run to form a parallelogram, etc."
Making the location of your mining claim "
ambiguous and subject to more than one interpretation" is not something that's really gonna fly since you have to give a legal land description of your claim so that it can found on the ground. That's why you can't claim the "south half" of a lot but you can claim the "south half" of a quarter quarter section.
So we come back to the same restrictions on describing your mining claim or any other legal description of the public lands - by aliquot part or metes and bounds. There are no other choices.
Spend some time reading the book, it's only 48 pages and there are some real revelations in there for those who intend to locate a mining claim.
Heavy Pans
