Part of Modderdrift No. 106

Modderdrift No. 106 Ptn 1

1/106 on the cadastre · show on the map

The farm's own history, the grant, the original survey, sits on that page.

Farm number: No. 106
Portion: 1
On the cadastre: 1/106, portionregistered as MODDERDRIFT
District: Prince Albert
Modern surveyed area: 378.7 ha

Why this farm is here

A piece of a farm already in this model. 29 km from Klaarstroom.

parcel Cut out of Modderdrift No. 106
border Shares a boundary with Farm 222 Farm 222

What the record holds, in order

undated boundary change subdivision: from Modderdrift No. 106

Also bordered by, as the modern cadastre draws it

Ground that touches this farm on the Surveyor-General's current polygons and that none of the diagrams held here names. Derived from the geometry, not read off a document.

Cadastre

Surveyor-General diagram index for this parcel

Surveyor-General diagram index for the whole farm — where the original survey of this ground sits.

Research notes

[1 Aug 2026] IN THE MODEL FROM THE CADASTRE PULL ONLY, no document of its own. Added because Modderdrift No. 106's parent has no usable whole-farm polygon (see PAR-000099) and these three ARE the farm: together they come to 8,062.7 ha against the 1874 resurvey's 8,050.5 ha. Same treatment as the Rondabel portions. [TO VERIFY] its name and holders, from the Modderdrift deduction tables and the CSG diagram index. [2 Aug 2026, CORRECTED SAME DAY] An earlier note on these rows said about 5,070 ha had LEFT farm 106. That was wrong, and the diagram DOC-0154, the 1874 resurvey by J.W. du T. MelvillM, gives the farm as 9,399 morgen 70 square roods = 8,050.6 ha. RE/106 (2,614.0) + Ptn 1 (378.8) + Ptn 4 (5,069.9) = 8,062.7 ha - a 0.15% fit. THE THREE PIECES ARE THE FARM. Portion 4 carries WSTATUS='H' in the cadastre, so it is not a CURRENT parcel, but its geometry is the correct historical geometry and on a history site that is the geometry worth drawing. It is now pinned deliberately and marked geo_match='pinned-superseded'.

[13 Aug 2026] Renamed to the one form this model uses for every portion - the portion's own name, then the parent farm, its number and the portion in brackets - so that a name is legible in a list, a search result and a map popup without the reader having to know which farm number is which. It read "Modderdrift Portion 1 (No. 106 Ptn 1)" before. Nothing about the ground changed.

The research behind this page, kept separate from it: dated working notes, open questions, and what is not yet settled.

Open questions

What superseded Modderdrift Portion 4? priority 2 · LEAD-0063
Modderdrift No. 106's Portion 4, 5,069.9 ha, carries WSTATUS='H' in the cadastre - superseded. Its geometry is right: RE + Ptn 1 + Ptn 4 reconstruct the 1874 resurvey (9,399 morgen 70 sq roods = 8,050.6 ha) to 0.15%. So the question is not where the ground went - it is what replaced Portion 4 as the current parcel over that ground, and when.

What would settle it The deduction list on the VERSO of DOC-0154 - the diagram says so itself: 'For list of deductions see back of diagram'. Frans holds the front; the back is the sheet that answers this.

What the record is missing

Nobody is on record as ever having held this third order · B8 never-held
Modderdrift No. 106 Ptn 1 is in the model and drawn on the map, and carries no ownership record of any kind, not a grant, not a transfer, not an occupation.

What would settle it The Surveyor-General's diagram for the farm number names the grantee and the date; the deed reference on it opens the transfer chain.

Found by breaks.py reading the model against itself, not written by hand, each one is a shape of missing record, not a fault in the data. The whole set is on the questions page.