What does the Strip and Gore Doctrine imply about land ownership after conveyance?

The Strip and Gore Doctrine pertains to the ownership of land and specifies that when a property is conveyed, any strips of land that are contiguous to that property but left out of the conveyance may not legally revert to the grantor. The correct answer reflects this understanding by stating there is no intent to reserve a fee in the adjoining strip.

In essence, if lands are conveyed to a new owner, the doctrine asserts that the grantor does not automatically retain rights to any adjacent land that might be considered a strip, unless there is explicit evidence of such intent to retain those rights. Thus, by affirming that there is no intent to reserve a fee in the adjoining strip, the answer aligns with the principle that once land is conveyed, the rights to adjacent strips default to the grantee unless otherwise specified.

Considering the other options: reserving a fee in adjoining land suggests a claim that contradicts the doctrine’s premise, stating that strips must be explicitly stated in the deed implies that any omission would create ambiguity about ownership, and the notion that surveyors decide land disputes is irrelevant to the legal implications of the doctrine. The principal takeaway here is that upon conveyance, rights to adjacent strips or gore areas are not automatically reserved for the grantor, unless there