I love this shit.?ÿ
OK?ÿ We have an answer as to what it tells you.?ÿ My question, as applied in the 1970s and 1980s, is WITWWWOSGAC??ÿ That is: WHO IN THE WIDE WIDE WORLD OF SPORTS GIVES A C***?
It's an indexing system to quickly get you close to the map's location. It's helpful in non-PLSS areas.
@holy-cow I'll give you one answer: If you testify as an expert witness (which I understand LSs do routinely), and given that old maps are often relevant to current work, you might be asked random questions at your deposition, such as what mysterious notations on old maps mean. Your answer to questions about the arrow number table, before this thread, would be some form of "I don't know." At trial, a cross-examination question could be, "Mr. Cow, isn't it true that there were several numbers on this map that you could not explain at your deposition?" Answer: Yes. "And Mr. Cow, you had absolutely no clue. Isn't that right?" Answer: Yes. His closing argument could include: "You heard this so-called surveyor admit that he couldn't make heads or tails of several important items on the map. So you should not trust his work."
In summary, it's better to know than to not know.
I understand your thinking.
My experience, starting in 1978, in no way tied anything to State Plane numbers. Period. That is, until GPS equipment became available and was used widely. For common boundary survey work, that was not used as part of the information gathered, even though it might have been available to the surveyor. I'm not saying no one used it. I'm saying it was not commonly used by the majority of land surveyors in practice. Thus, answering "I don't know", is correct. Given the opportunity, I would have noted to the court that not all symbols and shortened forms of information can be deciphered by all, using the example of FIP, which might be Found Iron Pipe or Found Iron Pin.
@holy-cow My day job is expert witness work, has been for over 30 years. Your testimony is limited to answering questions, just like a percipient witness, so you don't necessarily have any opportunity to explain why you didn't know. This is particularly true when you have a less skilled attorney for a client, or they have had their confidence shaken by your not knowing. Your client may think that letting you explain might just be digging the hole deeper.
But really, the reason I'm pushing back is that I really enjoy Gary's curiosity and skillful detective work, and I cringe when reading a post that belittles it. Learning new information is good, at least if your head is in the right place.
This is why it critical that you work closely with the attorney who has hired you. Educate them as much as possible before ever getting into the courtroom Search for the type of oddball questions that could come up and have the attorney prepped for that sort of thing.
In this case, I could look bad for not knowing what that symbol meant. On the other hand, I could prep the attorney that I have literally worked with thousands of surveys, probably ten of thousands without ever seeing such a note. Discredit the creator of the plat for being unclear.
Thank you for a bit of rudimentary advise for novices on expert witness practice. As a veteran expert witness with more trial experience than nearly all of my clients, it comes off as defensive and patronizing.
But that's off topic. The topic is your belittling Gary's ingenious cracking of the mystery. Just take it back and we'll be done with this thread. Let's stick to Ask a Surveyor, not Ask an Expert Witness.
I take it back. I take it back. I take it back.
Now, we can all move on.
Just take it back and we'll be done with this thread.
lol
Sacramento County used to put 2 numbers like that usually near the bottom right corner, NAD27 map coordinates. I haven’t seen 2 sets like that before.
