MyLandMatters and plat maps

[Rail Dawg]

Using the mining claim maps on MyLandMatters (best out there!!) I've come across a government lot in a section. This government lot is not displayed on the MT Plat maps and the area in question is shown as aliquot on the Plat.

Which is correct in this instance? I got the Plat map via MyLandMatters.

Thanks!

Chuck

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Clay Diggins]

Always always always go with the MTP. It is the official record. The MTP's on Land Matters are direct downloads from the General Land Office so you always know you are getting the most current copy.

The PLSS is not the official survey, only the pins on the ground are "official" parts of the survey. There are a lot of mistakes and gaps in the PLSS. We've spent months correcting these errors but there seem to always be more.

I'm puzzled by your statement that "the area in question is shown as aliquot on the Plat"? Aliquot parts are not displayed on the MTP, only government lots, patents, mineral surveys and sales are displayed on the MTP.

PM me the TRS of the area you have questions about and with some research I will figure out whether I need to correct the PLSS designation.

Heavy Pans

 

[russau]

As always , GREAT ADVICE !! Thanks' Barry !

 

[Rail Dawg]

The MTP shows an acreage amount for what would be a government lot on the PLSS. That is how it appears to me. May have to go PM route with Clay as I am not going to share my fishing spot with you high-graders.

Chuck

 

[russau]

AWW Chuck I only wanted about 20 lbs of gold !

 

[Clay Diggins]

The MTP shows an acreage amount for what would be a government lot on the PLSS. That is how it appears to me. May have to go PM route with Clay as I am not going to share my fishing spot with you high-graders.

Chuck

If an acreage is shown on the MTP it is a government lot and not an aliquot part Chuck. You should see a single digit number near the acreage designation, that's the lot number.

Aliquots (quarter quarter sections and smaller) are never shown on an MTP as they are only a protracted part of the survey and are not surveyed or monumented on the ground. Lots are surveyed and have corner pins.

Heavy Pans

 

[Rail Dawg]

If an acreage is shown on the MTP it is a government lot and not an aliquot part Chuck. You should see a single digit number near the acreage designation, that's the lot number.

Aliquots (quarter quarter sections and smaller) are never shown on an MTP as they are only a protracted part of the survey and are not surveyed or monumented on the ground. Lots are surveyed and have corner pins.

Heavy Pans

Your response goes into my vast holdings of notes from you. Thanks for taking the time both here and at mylandmatters.org to bring us good mining info.

Chuck

 

[mpgken]

Just wondering why Land Matter hasn't updated in over two months?
A lot changes in that time and Land Matters will be less and less a useful tool without it's normal monthly updates from the BLM.
Thanks for any insights as to why it is so out of date.

 

[Clay Diggins]

Just wondering why Land Matter hasn't updated in over two months?
A lot changes in that time and Land Matters will be less and less a useful tool without it's normal monthly updates from the BLM.
Thanks for any insights as to why it is so out of date.

It's only the mining claims maps that are out of date Ken. There have been many updates and new features added to the Land Matters maps in the last two months.

The fact is no one has been able to update their mining claim information since the BLM rushed their new MLRS database replacement for the LR2000. This is a hot subject in several industries right now - not just Land Matters, mining companies or the Diggings use this information. We have had several meetings with other concerned users of the mining claims data as well as maintaining communication with the BLM National Operations Center.

The claims maps are usually updated twice a month and Land Matters has been doing that consistently for more than seven years. The last time they were updated was February 1, 2021.

Our Landmark newsletter readers and Land Matters members have been kept up to date on this situation but I haven't had time to post much this year in the forums. Here's a brief explanation from the newsletter about what's going on and why no one has been able to use the new database.

The Claims Advantage Reports and the Land Matters website claims maps updates will be based on the new MLRS database. The MLRS replaced the old LR2000 database on January 25th.

The biggest challenge Land Matters faces currently has been the closing of the BLM LR2000 mining claims database system and the introduction of the new BLM MLRS mining claims database replacement. This is a very important database. It provides public access to the records of actions on our public lands. Land Matters currently links to this database on our Mining Claims Maps to provide access to detailed mining claims records.

We have been following the development of the new MLRS database since 2014 and expected it to be fully tested and working per schedule by early - mid summer 2021. This schedule was accelerated to a late spring introduction a few months ago, ultimately that changeover date was moved up to January 25th with very short notice.

We planned on having at least several weeks to transition to the new system. The BLM's shortened timeline has proven to be a problem from the beginning. The BLM National Operations Center has had several problems after going live on January 25 and still don't have a fully functioning MLRS claims system. They are aware of the problems and are working hard on getting everything sorted out. This has led to several changes to the database structure after it went live on January 25th.

It wasn't until February 19th that the BLM successfully uploaded a copy of the new MLRS database for Land Matters to study. There are huge differences between the old LR2000 database we had developed to present mining claims information on maps and the new MLRS database. The LR2000 version was about 10 Gigabytes in size and the new MLRS is about three times larger at about 30 Gigabytes. That's 30 Gigabytes of data twice a month, 3/4 of a Terabyte per year for the mining claims database alone.

Unfortunately the BLM still haven't been able to provide any documentation or a cohesive explanation of the many new categories in the new database. They are working on it. That leaves Land Matters and every other user trying to guess the structure of this new system until the BLM comes through. We hope to have a better handle on that soon but in the meantime the Mining Claim Maps can not be updated until Land Matters receives the rest of the required database information from the BLM or manage to reverse engineer this extensive database.

Although the BLM is still working to provide the required documentation on the new MLRS we have begun an effort to reverse engineer the database provided to this date. Unfortunately the BLM, once again, changed the structure of the MLRS claims database. We just received notice of this change on April 1st and have had to start over again.

The recoding and testing is going to take some time particularly because the BLM has no documentation or explanation of the differences in the new system. The old LR2000 database has thousands of pages of documentation but to this date the new MLRS database has no documentation. We will be working in the dark until we can get some more information on the BLM's MLRS database structure. As always Land Matters will continue working behind the scenes to present public information to the public for free.

Land Matters has dealt with several BLM system changes through the years and we will be taking on any new challenges with our users in mind. If you have any questions please feel free to contact us.

Thank You for Your Patience

Heavy Pans

 

[mpgken]

Thanks for the explanation Clay. I realize it is a lot of work and will be a problem. The land law examiners are also struggling with the new system. From what they had told me mlrs was going to be and what it currently is are two different things. It would be great if they could get mlrs to a state like is used in the Yukon Territory of CA. Bu that is most likely a pipe dream!
Anyway, thanks. I'll get busy and make my donation. I admit I have been lazy and really owe you a lot for the use of land matters.