Hi Brian,

As for explaining what the figures mean, your second example helps. You have three numbers, separated by hyphens. They correspond respectively to hectares, ares and centiares. An are is 100 square metres, a hectare is a hundred ares (10000 m2) and a centiare is a hundredth of an are (a square metre).

In Mexico, as in the US and the UK, the comma is a thousands separator and the decimal mark is the point.

So in the example in the question, it means an area of:
1,623 hectares (1623 x 10000 = 16,230,000 m2)
plus 61 ares (61 x 100 = 6100 m2)
plus 17.503 centiares (17.503 m2)

Add them together and you get
16,236,117.503 m2
Or in other words
16,236,117 square metres and 5030 square centimetres (since there are 10000 cm2 in a m2).

I'm not sure what the conventions are when translating a text where these numbers are used. Maybe it might be best to leave the numbers and add a note to them to explain what they mean. You could express it as a number of hectares, which would be

1,623.6117503 ha

Or do it all as hectares and square metres:

1,623 hectares and 6,711.503 square metres.

Then of course there are online converters if you want it as acres or as square feet.


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 31 mins (2013-09-26 13:12:45 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

SORRY: miskeyed the figures: in the first part of my answer it should be

1,623 hectares and 6,117.503 square metres, NOT

1,623 hectares and 6,711.503 square metres


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 38 mins (2013-09-26 13:19:02 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

In fact, if you want to give an equivalent in acres (which is standard for land measurement in the US and the UK), it would be

4012ac 1393.3ft²

I used:
http://www.metric-conversions.org/area/hectares-to-acres.htm

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 20 hrs (2013-09-27 09:26:37 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

OK, Brian. That seems a sensible solution. The single figure in hectares is simple and straightforward and everyone will understand it. Hectares are familiar units everywhere. Leaving it as it is without comment doesn't seem a good option: if you and I were confused, others will be too.