Looks like mostly political stuff!
And control surveys!
Keith
Check back in mid November.
> Looks like mostly political stuff!
>
>
> And control surveys!
>
>
> Keith
The Board (and indeed the world) is a much nicer place when you filter out both Politics and Religion.
Larry P
It might only seem that way. During the week the survey discussions are quite prominent. But on weekends people often are tied up in weekending activities. I wish I didn't have to do some work catchup this weekdnd but the board is always a fun distraction. Also it might seem like less P&R if you turn offf P&R (oh but what fun).
Although I check the forum daily I only sign in when I post. Once signed in all the P and R threads pop up.
I have reconciled my brain with the fact that I can agree wholeheartedly with a persons approach to surveying while having no agreement in politics.
Perhaps a few lurkers like myself should come out of the woodwork to generate some discussion.
I would like to hear some about old time construction stake out procedures, maybe I will start a thread with my questions and see what comes of it.
There ya go party chef (chief)
Not too sure about stake out procedures, but somebody will be interested.
I was thinking more along the line about surveying PLSS subdivision of sections.....
And how BLM has two distinct procedures on how to do that!
Keith
PLSS System
Keep in mind that for a large percentage of the country, PLSS system and the BLM are completely irrelevant.
Ian,
Sorry you feel this way!
Do you have an interesting survey topic?
Keith
Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't you already determined that the 2 methods are right way vs the wrong way?
If there is any drop off in survey postings it could be attributable to more people out actually surveying, for a change.
clearcut,
Do you believe there should be two distinct methods of subdividing a PLSS section?
I think that I have never had 2 surveys or boundary resolutions that were the same.
My belief is that there often is no "right" answer, rather each situation needs to be considered on its own merits. Resolutions to discrepancies vary depending on the set of circumstances. Boundary resolution may be based one or more of the following: risk assessment, owner action and perceived defendability. All while recognizing the surveyor's role is not one of determining ownership, but rather of determining boundary location.
In those situations where I can convince myself that the boundary is established, and that location is contrary to the original intented location per the patent, then I can accept that primarily based on a risk assessment basis. But, and this is a big but, that is not a general rule and each situation needs to be weighted on the merits of the facts at hand, and the prior rulings of the jurisdiction for which I practice in.
I probably agree with all you posted, but you didn't answer the question.
Keith
> I probably agree with all you posted, but you didn't answer the question.
>
> Keith
Well, I think I did actually.
But to put it in simpler terms, yes because I don't believe fence corners or monuments set by incorrect procedures should always be accepted without question every single time.
"But to put it in simpler terms, yes because I don't believe fence corners or monuments set by incorrect procedures should always be accepted without question every single time."
Who said that?
You have missed the point and I will refresh your memory.
Most of the BLM land surveyors will subdivide a section by Chapter 3 (1973 Manual), if that is appropriate and no existing evidence of the subdivision lines and they will subdivide a section by the Manual resurvey procedures, if that is appropriate when there is existing evidence on the ground.
However, some in BLM will only survey by Chapter 3 methods and ignore any and all existing evidence on the ground.
This is being demonstrated by the example that Frank Willis in Louisiana brought up the other day and also is how the resurvey was performed in the Rivers v Lozeau court case in Florida.
You may not have read my remarks where I requested an explanation of the resurvey in Florida by those who did it or by those who approved it. Well that fell on deaf ears and no explanation was forthcoming.
And of course I have mentioned that many times and Ian thinks I keep beating a dead horse.
Well, to me, it is an important argument that must be settled by BLM and I am attempting to get that done.
You will of course hear/read the outcome when some solution is found.
Keith
Keith, my surveys always control. But that's because I know a politician. And, I have a source who makes curved monuments for me at below wholesale price. Of course I have to stake the planting area so I'm still only able to make chords myself.
PLSS System
:good:
Has the Board run out of surveying discussions? NO!
The surveying profession is looking at expanded opportunities and exciting applications of spatial data. So much to do and to discuss . . . .
See item shared with the WestFed Board last January. Lots of food for thought and spirited discussions.
