An editorial by Perry A. Trunick of POB Magazine appeared in my email this morning. The editorial shares Mr. TrunickÛªs concern about the ÛÏRights of Access for SurveyorsÛ (March 1, 2017). A link to the article follows:
http://www.pobonline.com/articles/100803-editors-points-rights-of-access-for-surveyors
While Mr. Trunick has concerns about the lack of continuity of the statute law and the concern for the completion of projects, he omits several important aspects in order to show favoritism of pipeline surveying.
Surveying for a pipeline would not even be considered qualifying experience to become a licensed land surveyor. The surveying that is being proposed to plan a route for a pipeline does not involve property lines unless there are negotiations to secure a documented easement.
Even when a state has a statute to allow access rights for surveyors it does not relate to the construction of utilities. The rights of access do not extend to corporations, giving them permission to encroach on private individuals and attempt to take away the enjoyment of their private property rights.
The statute is written to allow surveyors who are in the process of making boundary determinations enter on properties in search of evidence. One does not know where the property boundary is without a proper survey so the statute is an enabler to that end.
There is no intent in the statute that would allow a private construction project administrator to explore private property to see if it would benefit them to take the land for construction purposes.
The pipeline industry is trying to use a different interpretation of the statute because it benefits them. Similarly pipeline surveyors are trying to assume the identity of land surveyors in order to benefit from the statute that allows them rights of access. The statute only allows rights of access for surveying a boundary.
Well said.
I agree, that was well said.
In Oregon, the recentely passed ROE law for surveyors just says that we can enter land for surveying purposes. NO stipulation for boundary resolution or property lines. Just for surveying. I know it has been used to tie a manhole on private property, or to get to a cell tower, but the way it is worded it could even extend to doing a full topography of someones property without the owners consent. (I supose you could say 'topography mapping isn't surveying"...)
From the article...
"While weÛªre at it, why not push for some federal preemption through a blanket provision giving all land surveyors certain rights of access? This wouldnÛªt preclude liability for damage the surveyor might cause or other responsibilities licensed professionals already bear."
Just what we need another freaking law.
Arizona's Right of Access statute allows a Licensed Surveyor to enter private property for the purpose of performing a boundary survey only.
What I take exception to, is the surveyors who feel their right of access excludes them from the practice of common courtesy. I mean, sure they have the right to access my property, and I may not be able to stop them, legally, but if I catch someone off in the back of my wooded property, surveyor or not, he's trespassing in my opinion. A simple phone call and a humble demeanor can go a long way sometimes. Of course I don't mind if a surveyor is on my property, in the pursuit of his job, because I am a surveyor myself, but don't SNEAK onto my property like some thief. Call me, or knock on my door. If the dogs don't get you first, I'll let you do whatever you need to do.
As one of my old Party Chiefs used to say " You may have right of entry but the land owner has the right to bears arms, you see which one wins "
jakethebuilder, post: 419711, member: 9380 wrote: If the dogs don't get you first, I'll let you do whatever you need to do.
HEY NOW! I resemble that remark 🙂
CA's language...specifically mentions boundary, but then also says, "and to perform surveys...", so it does leave an opening to allow for the other areas within our practice.
The right of entry upon or to real property to investigate and utilize boundary evidence, and to perform surveys, is a right of persons legally authorized to practice land surveying and it shall be the responsibility of the owner or tenant who owns or controls property to provide reasonable access without undue delay. The right of entry is not contingent upon the provision of prior notice to the owner or tenant. However, the owner or tenant shall be notified of the proposed time of entry where practicable.
not my real name, post: 419681, member: 8199 wrote: An editorial by Perry A. Trunick of POB Magazine appeared in my email this morning. The editorial shares Mr. TrunickÛªs concern about the ÛÏRights of Access for SurveyorsÛ (March 1, 2017). A link to the article follows:
http://www.pobonline.com/articles/100803-editors-points-rights-of-access-for-surveyors
While Mr. Trunick has concerns about the lack of continuity of the statute law and the concern for the completion of projects, he omits several important aspects in order to show favoritism of pipeline surveying.
Surveying for a pipeline would not even be considered qualifying experience to become a licensed land surveyor. The surveying that is being proposed to plan a route for a pipeline does not involve property lines unless there are negotiations to secure a documented easement.
Even when a state has a statute to allow access rights for surveyors it does not relate to the construction of utilities. The rights of access do not extend to corporations, giving them permission to encroach on private individuals and attempt to take away the enjoyment of their private property rights.
The statute is written to allow surveyors who are in the process of making boundary determinations enter on properties in search of evidence. One does not know where the property boundary is without a proper survey so the statute is an enabler to that end.
There is no intent in the statute that would allow a private construction project administrator to explore private property to see if it would benefit them to take the land for construction purposes.
The pipeline industry is trying to use a different interpretation of the statute because it benefits them. Similarly pipeline surveyors are trying to assume the identity of land surveyors in order to benefit from the statute that allows them rights of access. The statute only allows rights of access for surveying a boundary.
I believe your comments perfectly demonstrate why these laws differ in different jurisdictions. In some states, maybe even yours, surveying is only defined as boundary surveying. In other states, that is not true. Surveying for a pipeline would qualify as acceptable experience in many states.
not my real name, post: 419681, member: 8199 wrote: An editorial by Perry A. Trunick of POB Magazine appeared in my email this morning. The editorial shares Mr. TrunickÛªs concern about the ÛÏRights of Access for SurveyorsÛ (March 1, 2017). A link to the article follows:
http://www.pobonline.com/articles/100803-editors-points-rights-of-access-for-surveyors
While Mr. Trunick has concerns about the lack of continuity of the statute law and the concern for the completion of projects, he omits several important aspects in order to show favoritism of pipeline surveying.
Surveying for a pipeline would not even be considered qualifying experience to become a licensed land surveyor. The surveying that is being proposed to plan a route for a pipeline does not involve property lines unless there are negotiations to secure a documented easement.
Even when a state has a statute to allow access rights for surveyors it does not relate to the construction of utilities. The rights of access do not extend to corporations, giving them permission to encroach on private individuals and attempt to take away the enjoyment of their private property rights.
The statute is written to allow surveyors who are in the process of making boundary determinations enter on properties in search of evidence. One does not know where the property boundary is without a proper survey so the statute is an enabler to that end.
There is no intent in the statute that would allow a private construction project administrator to explore private property to see if it would benefit them to take the land for construction purposes.
The pipeline industry is trying to use a different interpretation of the statute because it benefits them. Similarly pipeline surveyors are trying to assume the identity of land surveyors in order to benefit from the statute that allows them rights of access. The statute only allows rights of access for surveying a boundary.
Heck, I remember back when the Iroquois were complaining about this.
FROM ONTARIO SURVEYS ACT
Right to enter land, buildings
6. (1) A surveyor or a person in the surveyorÛªs employ while making a survey may,
(a) at any time enter and pass over the land of any person; or
(b) at any time suitable to the occupant of a building enter the building,
and do any act thereon or therein for any purpose of the survey, but the surveyor is liable for any damage occasioned thereby.
Offence for obstructing
(2) Every person who interferes with or obstructs a surveyor or a person in the surveyorÛªs employ in the exercise of any of the powers conferred by subsection (1) is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a fine of not more than $100. R.S.O. 1990, c. S.30, s. 6.
Examination re boundaries, etc.
7. (1) Where a surveyor has reasonable grounds for believing that a person has information concerning a line, boundary, corner or post that may assist the surveyor in ascertaining its true position, or has a writing, plan or document concerning the true position of a line, boundary, corner or post, the surveyor may examine such person under oath or require such person to produce such writing, plan or document for the surveyorÛªs inspection. 2009, c. 33, Sched. 6, s. 89.
Application of Public Inquiries Act, 2009
(1.1) Section 33 of the Public Inquiries Act, 2009 applies to an examination under subsection (1). 2009, c. 33, Sched. 6, s. 89.
Statement under oath
(2) The surveyor may cause evidence taken by the surveyor under this section to be put in writing in the form of a statement under oath. R.S.O. 1990, c. S.30, s. 7 (2).
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"liable to a fine of not more than $100"
I've sold Draw Tickets for $100 !!!!!
Bushwhacker, post: 419716, member: 10727 wrote: As one of my old Party Chiefs used to say " You may have right of entry but the land owner has the right to bears arms, you see which one wins "
The right of trespass is not bullet proof...
DDSM
I think a stronger argument could be made for a right of entry for a pipeline survey than for just boundary surveying. With a pipeline the survey is going to be part of an eminent domain proceeding which is spelled out in our most supreme legal document, the United States Constitution. The survey is part of the due process of law. It would be reasonable to think that if the government has the right to take your land for a public use, that you could not deny them the right to look at it (usually using the surveyor as an agent).
Bow Tie Surveyor, post: 419793, member: 6939 wrote: I think a stronger argument could be made for a right of entry for a pipeline survey than for just boundary surveying. With a pipeline the survey is going to be part of an eminent domain proceeding which is spelled out in our most supreme legal document, the United States Constitution. The survey is part of the due process of law. It would be reasonable to think that if the government has the right to take your land for a public use, that you could not deny them the right to look at it (usually using the surveyor as an agent).
But a non voluntary taking requires a court order, so a judge should have to order access if your state only allows entry for boundary surveying.
A pipeline is not a public use unless the government is building it.
aliquot, post: 419802, member: 2486 wrote: But a non voluntary taking requires a court order, so a judge should have to order access if your state only allows entry for boundary surveying.
A pipeline is not a public use unless the government is building it.
Exactly.
It would appear that some on here are not that familiar with pipelines, me being one; but the Government does not normally build pipelines. If the line is deemed to be for the greater good of the public then eminent domain and condemnation rights apply. Another case for right of entry would be if the surface owner does not own the mineral right and they are leased, then the mineral owner has the right to survey. In Texas I do not believe we have a Right of Entry Law, Louisiana's Surveyor's Right of Entry is very screwed up and confusing, Oklahoma, Arkansas and New Mexico are pretty straight forward. Deer Hunters with a hunting lease are usually the most problematic for me, when entering upon lands.
aliquot, post: 419802, member: 2486 wrote: But a non voluntary taking requires a court order, so a judge should have to order access if your state only allows entry for boundary surveying.
A pipeline is not a public use unless the government is building it.
The surveyor is not doing the taking, but is doing work to support a potential eminent domain proceeding. The information the surveyor collects is required for the constitutional requirement of due process. Getting a court to declare a right of access is nice to keep civil order, but in reality, I believe the court is just declaring a right that the surveyor already has and states that codify this in their statutes make it much safer for the surveyor to do his job. As far as I know, I am not aware of any surveyors being successfully convicted of trespass for entering lands that are connected with an eminent domain process.
People don't like to hear it, but the rights of fee simple land ownership in the United States are not absolute (being subject to eminent domain, police powers, taxation and escheat).
Unless something has changed without my knowledge, we do not have the right of entry in PA. If we are doing a survey in a residential neighborhood we will generally go at least 3-4 lots in either direction looking for pins and always knock on the doors first. I can't remember a time any landowner has had a problem, even in cases where they either didn't answer the door or came home to see us digging a hole in their backyard. I always explain to them to do it right we need to know where their corners are and more often or not they are happy to know where their pins are. The key is to always to be polite and respectful.
Bow Tie Surveyor, post: 419793, member: 6939 wrote: I think a stronger argument could be made for a right of entry for a pipeline survey than for just boundary surveying. With a pipeline the survey is going to be part of an eminent domain proceeding which is spelled out in our most supreme legal document, the United States Constitution. The survey is part of the due process of law. It would be reasonable to think that if the government has the right to take your land for a public use, that you could not deny them the right to look at it (usually using the surveyor as an agent).
I think the stronger right is in boundary surveying. Surveyors have been court ordered to enter private lands and "follow the footsteps of the original surveyor" since before States were formed, and continued that order after States were formed. If you want to own land in the U.S. there is an implied consent to allow carrying out our system of cadastre (flawed though it may be). The statutes are restrictions on the court ordered entry that give landowners some assurance that surveyors will not be wandering around in the middle of the night or damaging property. Private citizens hold property subject to the rights of the public, including the right of the public to manage the cadastre, which includes surveying it. The only sovereign holdings within our borders are native American, and even there it could be argued the U.S. will send surveyors without consent of the natives.
Please excuse my ignorance; considering where I work I should know more about this and I'm going to query a couple of our boundary gurus when I get a chance.
If a surveyor locates property corners and generates plats showing said corners for the purpose of determining how many feet of pipeline cross a property for pay purposes, would this not be considered boundary surveying? As far as I know, in all cases land owner permission has been secured prior to entering the property to locate said corners.
