Activity Feed › Discussion Forums › Strictly Surveying › Fence remnant
The legend should say what the symbols are. I thought most states required a legend on recorded maps.
It??s pretty simple. Look up the definition of remnants and fence. That should give anyone a good idea of what was found. The specific type of fence is immaterial unless it is called for in the record, especially considering that it was not held and the surveys are in agreement. All IMHO.
- Posted by: @flga-2-2
Ask your neighbor, if they don’t know ask them to ask the Surveyor.
Exactly. Since the surveyor hasn’t responded in the last couple days just walk over and ask your neighbor. He will have a better idea than strangers on the internet who live far far away.
Regarding no trace of the fence remnants, they could be small strands of barbed wire well below the surface that he suspected were present due to either the location of a line in an older deed, or an aerial photo or map, or intuition, or statements by his client so he then searched along the line with a pin finder and found bits of it under the sod. Not going further with his description of just exactly what the remnants are is not criminal… he is leaving conjecture and his opinion off the record and not proclaiming something like it’s “ancient barbed wire from the 1875 fence around the original homestead” or “the fence line shown on a 1938 Bureau of Reclamation aerial photo”. I’ve always contended that if I do a survey of a client’s land that I need to answer to the other person whose line I mapped and/or monumented. If the fence remnants are shown on the survey as being on your property then he really is answerable to you for entering your land and mapping items on it.
Finding non-visible remnants fifty feet away from the final conclusions strongly suggests there was a deliberate reason to search there. This is not common practice in the general case. Someone or some document suggests the possibility that a fence was, in fact, located in that approximate location at some time in the past. That, alone, does not necessarily mean anything important one way or the other. There must be corroboration as to WHY that location might have ever been considered to be on the property boundary.
- Posted by: @r-leonard
And I??m saying surveyors are fact-based but are most inclined to serve their client, and not a questioning neighbor like me.
I agree with JPH and others above. The surveyor’s mandate is to serve the public. If my client and a neighbor tell me different stories I’ll not favor my client’s story just because he’s paying the bills. Unfortunately the general public often mistakenly perceives me as “working” for my client which is not the case.
I’d rephrase you statement to: “Very few surveyors are inclined to serve their client, either deliberately or subconsciously.” Those that do are committing malpractice.
“Hey A$$#$%@, how much you gettin’ paid to steal MY land?”
I got into an argument over a possible marker while surveying some ranch lands. The neighbor wanted what he thought was a marker to be accepted while my boss at the time wanted the line held between a 1/4 and NE corner of a section line. That resulted in the supposed marked being 20′ off while the two found corners were original marked stones but were very short.
So I was in the field trying to explain my bosses reasons for rejecting the very sketchy evidence and I finally explained to the neighbor that they would be gaining 20′ of land………..argument over, neighbor happy.
@r-leonard “(surveyors) are most inclined to serve their client, and not a questioning neighbor like me.”
Ummm. There was a well known surveyor in Florida (now deceased) who would disagree vehemently with such a statement.
In private, he would posit a question that might go like this, ??Who should a surveyor think most likely to sue (him) over placement of a boundary? The client? Or, the neighbor??
Then would come the question, ??Why would I want to deliberately choose to do the thing that might make me more likely to face a lawsuit??
This surveyor reasoned ?? you don’t have to agree with him ?? he would be less likely to be sued by the client.
He would continue, ??If you ever recover evidence that is questionable, perhaps something that could cause you to have to flip a coin over which way to go. Never, choose to move the line over onto the neighbor. Always, choose to go with the solution that goes against your client (note the above quotes if you have trouble following his reasoning).?
He emphasized he had never been sued by a client, and that the only times he had ever been in court was due to an unhappy neighbor.
Personally, ain’t no way I would ever want to do something to help a client that could increase the potential to my being sued by the neighbor. Any surveyor that would make a career out of “helping” (hint, hint) the client would be courting trouble…in my humble opinion.
My experience is that if you go back far enough and dig deep enough it is unlikely you will be sued by either. Of course it can happen. I??m curious the number of times someone can expect to be sued during a 30 year career.
@r-leonard It’s also not at all supported by any facts. Traipsing in with vague questions, followed by disparaging our profession probably won’t get you much help.
If you have evidence of bias let’s hear it. I’m betting all you have is an assumption fed by paranoia.
@holy-cow holy cow you are exactly correct. There??s a document in the hands of the (hostile) neighbor that departs from the metes and bounds description. Metes&bounds, two CSMs, and land records all agree on record line. Neighbor doc does not, and reason for search. Still 50ft over the record line though. Still no word on remnants. I??d like to think the surveyor would offer some detail, he knows what??s there for sure. The work is done and I dont think he??s being retained by anyone currently. I can get a pin finder and look myself but want an official opinion.
@r-leonard
“but want an official opinion.” The answer is to retain a local surveyor, or all you will have is endless conjecture.
Ken
Log in to reply.