LOL, when "curious" becomes "bothered"..... I'm not about to begin surveying in Texas where distances are measured in the time it takes to smoke a cigarette!!
Kent is right though, the early mariners in MA sure did know how to measure, angles as well as distances! (and monument with stone walls!)
> Kent is right though, the early mariners in MA sure did know how to measure, angles as well as distances! (and monument with stone walls!)
Is another element to the situation that you folks in Massachusetts are used to lawyers picking away at the details of your survey plans?
Q: "Mr. Foggyidea, the deed calls for EIGHT varas to the location where you indicate you found the remains of the bearing tree, so why did you re-establish the corner at 7.645 varas?"
A: Because my esteemed friend and fellow surveyor, Kent McMillian, told me that it would be suspicious if I set it at the record distance.
I'm still not understanding the reasoning.
You aren't reporting a found distance but a set distance, why not make it 8 varas?
Amen
The only time I've had to defend a survey in court I was following a survey that "combined" two previous surveys. One of which had ALL the bearings and distances to the second and the hundredth form the "original" survey. I don't know about you but I don't believe I could follow myself in a few years and get the EXACT same dimensions. Luckily the "surveyor" in question no longer practices.
Andy
Nice work...
"one of the products of my work will be a modernized metes and bounds description that gives all the details and geodetic positions of this and other old corners that I've been able to locate".
Kent, can you make this available when ready? It would be great to see this survey.
"... the actual evidence is the stumphole..."
I like that. The position of the mark on the tree, the inclination of the trunk, whether the measurement was made to the mark or to the center of the tree, or even how the measurement was made; while all of that may be relevant, you monumented the one thing you were confident of, the stumphole.
"Hey, this is where the tree was. I'm sure of that."
Very nice.
Don
I guess that what I'm trying to say is that if I replace a bearing point I'm going to make it match, as close as possible to, the original...
> I'm still not understanding the reasoning.
>
> You aren't reporting a found distance but a set distance, why not make it 8 varas?
Well, in my opinion, the best evidence of the location of the stake that originally marked the corner is the soft spot in the earth surrounded by the cluster of limestones. Likewise, the best evidence of the location of the bearing tree is the center of the approximately 12-inch diameter area where the probe could be easily run down 18 inches further than it could be in the surrounding soil.
So, considering that the bearing and distance between the markers at the corner and at the BT as located from the above evidence is consistent with the record, what you're proposing is a fudge that ignores the physical evidence in favor of the idea that somehow a distance of 8 varas, rounded to the nearest vara, must be understood to be an exact measurement.
If there were no evidence at the corner, then, sure, the tie by bearing and distance would ordinarily control the location of the corner and I would have monumented it at 8.000 varas. This isn't that case.
:good:
I agree. It is a found distance. He just put markers there to perpetuate what he found, but he didn't set anything from a calculation.
> I guess that what I'm trying to say is that if I replace a bearing point I'm going to make it match, as close as possible to, the original...
The problem with that is that instead of using the evidence of both the corner and the BT to corroborate each other, you end up taking the position that a distance reported to the nearest vara is necessarily exact and missing the actual evidence.
Who in his right mind would want to testify that all bearing tree ties expressed to the nearest vara should be understood as exactly those even-vara distances? I wouldn't when the fact is that a record tie of 8 varas is equal to any distance greater than 7.51 vara and smaller than 8.49 varas when the record shows a consistent practice of rounding of tie distances.
It's not that dissimilar to setting a monument with a drill hole to replace a found stone, at least here in Colonial Surveying world. Or locating a meandering stone wall. I have set points at what I consider to be the center of an intersection of a stone wall without setting it exactly at the rods or poles called for in the deed. It is a decision that has to made at the time and in the place!
I get it Kent, and I've done the same myself. Thanks for the chatting !
"I thought that the evidence at the corner, i.e. (a) cluster of rocks and (b) soft spot in earth consistent with rotted out stake, carried the day."
Monument controls!
Nice work Kent,
But I am envious of the box blade and and beautiful weather. I just spent 5 hours today digging through asphalt road and gravel road bed that was frozen for the first 18". The good news is we started with a 1/2" rerod on the surface of unknown origin. Down 6" was a 5/8" rerod, at 18" the rerod went into a 1.5" pipe and at 24" the pipe was surrounded by so many stones that we could not shovel any further. Confident it is the position of the GLO corner.
COTY
This gets my vote for COTY (Corner of the Year).
Wow. Nice job Scott. We did a lot easier one yesterday at a center 1/4 that was set in 1967. Right below the pavement was a nail pounded into a wood hub pounded into an 8 inch tall 1-1/2 inch dia. pipe (like a Turducken, ... only a Piphubail) and right below the pipe was the top of the original 1967 C 1/4 axle. We went crazy over that find. I’d a probably blown out an aorta from excitement had I been out with your crew.
> good stuff, Kent. Those witness tree stump holes last a long long time if the soil hasn't been tampered with.
Yes, I'm also constantly surprised to find how persistent fence post holes are. Even in sandy soils I've had good luck finding them with just a tape and a tile probe.
COTY
> This gets my vote for COTY (Corner of the Year).
Thanks, but I'm working on a project in South Texas that puts that one in the shade. I'll post photos in time and you may decide.
COTY
OK Kent, but all submissions have to be postmarked by 11:59:59 PM Pacific Standard Time on 12/31/2012.
COTY
> OK Kent, but all submissions have to be postmarked by 11:59:59 PM Pacific Standard Time on 12/31/2012.
I'll keep that in mind. :>
Or maybe it is just the property in Mass. tends to change hands more often than it does in large tracts in Texas. My experience has led me to conclude the more often a tract is subdivided, the greater the chance of losing the original footsteps.