Always looking for new junk to fill up the map with features to place on the map, it’s the…
Sure, you’re saying, “Hey Dan, just another boring grid overlay. Like UTM.”
No. Property, roads, and even e. g , Burkle addressing system - Wikipedia are all aligned on it.
And your United States Geological Survey quadrangles wouldn’t be the same without it.
I swear, it’s not just a figment of your imagination like your average grids grids are. Not as ‘real’ as administrative boundaries are but at least it doesn’t have touchy issues like my last flopped proposal,
So some massive import of township, range, principal meridians, standard parallels, and section lines one per mile would be just great… From official sources of course… What could be more accurate? Don’t worry I won’t do it … with my little cell phone.
Mentioned on that other thread, but townships would definitely be worth it, if the source is good.
An easy one would be Wisconsin. The State Cartographer’s Office there a whole bunch of awesome public data. They actually have a statewide parcel layer, too!
Surely you can’t be serious. PLSS is so junky and often stuff doesn’t match up to Township/Range and section lines. And in many Eastern US states metes and bounds property descriptions apply and PLSS doesn’t apply. Its such an obtuse and only applied in legal descriptions. You mention USGS topo quadrangles but those are no longer updated by the USGS now with the National Map. Might as well add a feature in OSM to support distances in chains or leagues. There are a number of PLSS viewers and web feature or tile servers for PLSS anyways at national or state levels. Organized townships which have administrative governments (township boards) as in Michigan can be mapped as administrative boundaries anyways, so no need for PLSS.