SUMMARY 



In order to clear iij) the property' i)roblems in certain sections 6l 

 the town, avdid the accumulation of disputable areas, and record 

 the finding's in a way which would be convenient and practical, the 

 town of Fremont voted to have a i^roperty map made. It was de- 

 cided that this" would be based' on a' paced survey since this would 

 o-ive fair accuracy at a low cost. The work was undertaken in co- 

 operation with the Experiment Station of the University of New 

 Hamnsl-.ire with the understandin.of that land utilization data would 

 be taken at the same time especiall}- for the Station. 



[Mapping- in the field Avas given precedence over tracing out deeds 

 as these were incomplete and hard to find. 



The resulting ma]) showed the features which would help identify 

 the boundaries of each lot (fences, monuments, etc.) as well as the 

 location. The owner and acreage of each lot was printed on the 

 map. 



Fremont was found to be 64>^% woodland, 217c pasture, 11% hay- 

 land and improved land, and the remaining; 3^% swamp. 



The ownerships are typicall}' either large or small, with compara- 

 tively few between 25 and 75 acres. About 15% of the holdings 

 exclusive of corporations are in the 100-acre-or-over class, with an 

 avjrage of 240 acres, and cover five-eighths of the total area of the 

 town. 



The Boscawen map was made under the direction of the State Tax 

 Commission to find out how much a township map of this sort would 

 cost. The two surveys differed in some important particulars. 

 The records of property holdings in Boscawen were available 

 through the assistance of local surveyors. They were fairly com- 

 plete and accurate. For this reason, these records were used in 

 preference to work in the field. The chief difference between the 

 finished maps was that the Boscawen one showed the position ot 

 the lines without indicating identification marks. A feature devel- 

 oped in connection with this survey was the card index system, 

 throug-h which the permanent record of the lots could be kept with- 

 out changing the master map except when a lot was subdivided. 



The results obtained from the surveys have been satisfactory in 

 that they have recorded the facts with a fair degree of accuracy and 

 at a low cost. It is estimated that this cost should rang-e between 

 5 and 10 cents an acre, depending on the special aims of each town 

 and the local conditions affecting the survey, especially as respects 

 the tyi)c of ov.nership, the condition of the lines and records (deeds, 

 previous maps, etc.). 



In cases where such a survey is contemplated but only a small 

 fund is available at the time.,, much can be accomplished by securing 

 a base map, and plotting or sketching in the ownerships. Such a 

 map would cost about $25 to $50, which would be offset by the saving 

 in time when the complete survey was made. Such a map would be 

 particularly valuable if note was made of the exact reference in the 

 countv records of each deed. 



