Be Prepared to Defend Your Arrogance, Karoly!
LOL.
Be Prepared to Defend Your Arrogance, Karoly!
Negative Karoly
I don't affect private property rights (except my own).
The owners do that.
AH'S JUST A FIELD SURVEYOR! AH DON'T KNOW NOTHIN' 'BOUT BIRTHIN' NO BABIES!
Yes, that's true, the meridians are a great circle and the base lines are a rhumb line.
What does the deed to the north state?
Aliquot part
Welcome Back Keith
Is that non-bender a "senior line inflexible surveyor"?
How about this
Are you certain the bars are the originals reflected in the corner record?
Is half a foot of error something you might expect, or at least not be surprised by of a survey performed 35 years ago under whatever conditions existed at that time?
Did that surveyor's basic methodology seem to be correct and free of gross error (as opposed to simple differences in measurements or even somewhat sloppy measuring)?
Does it appear that the bars are in their original positions?
From what you've posted, presuming the bars are those of the CR, half a foot would not alarm me. If there was moderately thick brush, maybe some hills or other obstructions on line, I would almost expect a half a foot from a crew using a transit and chain. Without such obstructions, it's rather sloppy, but not at all unexpected in rural land where landowners aren't generally concerned about a few inches. Maybe on the edge of what would have been the accepted standard of care in 1977, but not absurd.
People have a right to rely on the results of a valid survey performed by a licensed surveyor, even if it is a bit sloppy and on the edge of the acceptable standard of care. We should not be lightly rejecting older and recognized corner monuments.
As a retracement surveyor, you do not have the authority to correct the percieved mistakes of the previous survey. If you think it fails to represent reasonable work of 35 years ago so miserably that you must reject it, you had better have really good reasons such as demonstrable incorrect methods and/or reliance on incorrect points to control the survey.
Based on what I've read, I say BEND THAT LINE LINEBENDER!
> The boundaries are established already. The corners are existent. Re-laying out the Deed is inappropriate when the corners are already existent.
Tell that to the guy who owns the entire parcel, north of the line.....
No need to tell the north adjoiner anything. If you performed your search for evidence you already have discovered that he knew the line was where it was staked and fenced for the past 3.5 decades.
> No need to tell the north adjoiner anything.
I'm not going to tell him, Non-bending Senior Line Surveying Inc. will tell him though.....
so, if you owned the land to the north, you might a be a little peeved when you find out you lost some land.
> > No need to tell the north adjoiner anything.
>
> I'm not going to tell him, Non-bending Senior Line Surveying Inc. will tell him though.....
I'd like to see the judge's reaction when "Non-bending Senior Line Surveying Inc" testifies that a senior non-monumented line over-rules a staked, established, and long recognized boundary.
I'd really like to hear "Non-bending Senior Line Surveying Inc's" answer to the following questions
"So, Mr. Non-bending, if an established, recognized, and long accepted monument is 1/2 a foot 'over a senior line' is too far, please state a legal precedent or any other recognized authority that has established exactly how far is too far?" Is .45 feet too far? Is .35 feet to far? Is .25 feet too far? Is .15 feet too far? Is .10 feet too far? Is .05 feet too far? Is .01 feet to far? Is .005 feet too far?
Once again. We can never set the monument "exactly" on the line, and the law does not require impossibilities.
The north adjoiner did not "lose" any land. His boundary was found where it has been for at least 35 years, right where he knew it was all along. The only thing lost was the surveyors mind when he tried to understand that a resurvey is different than an original survey, and that -- hold on to your hat -- measurements do not define the boundary, monuments do.
> i take it the triangle to the north has record title in another party? probably no boundary agreement or other document clarifying the locus?
>
> i would show the whole thing just as you have it. inform your client that he may not have record title to the triangle but he may have acquired title by other means. location complete, title issue to attorney, drinks are on the house.
I agree. We may all know the law on this (or think we do) but, at least in my state, that doesn't make me a judge to move or correct the line, nor even a lawyer to give legal opinions.
:good: well said good sir.
> so, if you owned the land to the north, you might a be a little peeved when you find out you lost some land.
If you owned the land to the north and a surveyor came out and found a "called for" line tree that "bends the line" or more correctly, "is the best evidence to perpetuate the original location of the line being ran and maintained on the ground", would you be peeved?
The boundary is the section line and section lines marking their aliquot counterparts will be broken down over time and marked in good faith unless one can show otherwise. Yes we are always searching for the original lines and resurveys of them sometimes are the best evidence of their location, but not always conclusive. That's why each boundary line of a survey is a case in itself to be evaluated with all of the best available evidence. The best thing we can do is leave footsteps for our future brethren so that there is no questions. Theoretical or real.
Cheers,:beer:
The line tree is a good analogy. No one would argue (I trust) that a line tree bends the line. When a monument has existed unchallanged for 35 years it holds the same standing as a line tree. IMO. Let's read the Manual for guidance once again.
Once fixed on the ground by the local surveyor as contemplated by law, the monuments thus established are original monuments set by the original surveyor and have equal status with those monuments set by the GLO/BLM surveyors. To prove that they are something less, there must be more than a “mere demonstration of technical error … when lines have been run and marked and corners marked and fixed by local survey, [there] must be positive evidence of an intentional departure from the legal principles governing recovery of original corner location. In short, the local surveyor is an original surveyor as contemplated under federal law and infallible as to location absent fraud or gross blunder. Once a section has been subdivided, it must remain always subdivided. “The law gives these activities repose."
The Bureau of Land Management assumes no control or direction over the acts of local and county surveyors in the matters of subdivision of sections and reestablishment of lost corners of original surveys where the lands have passed into private ownership, nor will it issue instructions in such cases. It follows the general rule that disputes arising from uncertain or erroneous location of corners originally established by the United States are to be settled by the proper local authorities or by amicable adjustment.
IMO the proper local authority is the owner of the land contrary to the beleif of many surveyors. If it has been accepted by the owners for 35 years the matter has been amicably settled and no surveyor is authorized to change it.
> ...that doesn't make me a judge to move or correct the line, nor even a lawyer to give legal opinions.
Maybe not, but you're a surveyor licensed to determine boundaries.
Good observation Sean. I noticed that in first grade. Then when I began to survey the law told me I had to map the world flat by measuring on the horizontal plane and work in a rectangular system. Go figure.
