In my opinion, (and at my age, I've got plenty) your method is correct, and the most logical from a professional standpoint.
It may not be correct to some, but I'd bet a court would agree with it.?ÿ
????
?ÿ
Your scenario reminds of something similar I experienced working as a county map checker years ago, similar situation with two section corners producing a hiatus. I was looking at a Record of Survey, checking it against the record, and finding that my colleague supported both options equally backed in record. He noted the existence of the surplus monument in each case, and showed that he nicely fit record.?ÿ So of course I filed his map.?ÿ Any time that found monuments, apparently?ÿ in disharmony, can be reconciled with the record, the public wins - it's what we do.
The IBLA is the most problematic, as they are not governed by the duty to protect the public. That one is probably unknowable. The board...I cannot speak for them, but I attend classes and forums where members discuss issues and it would shock me if they didnt agree with RADAR.
My primary concern is what will the surveyors that follow me think and do when they see my work. Will I have created a right and bright path for them to follow, or will I have invited them to disregard my work? I might make it through this year, and maybe the board won't care, but if my kid buys land here in 50 years, and get it surveyed, will they be ashamed of my work? If I can do to others as I would have done to me, and if I can do so in a way that earns the respect of my peers, then that is enough for me.
I understand Paden's issue very well.?ÿ I can think of a case of two section corners about 30 feet apart.?ÿ The two sections to the north with their subdivisions mate up to one of them while the two sections on the south with their subdivisions mate up to the other.?ÿ Fortunately they are effectively at the same latitude but the longitude is way off.?ÿ In a different county there is a case of two quarter corners somewhere between 50 and 70 feet apart that should be once corner.?ÿ The section on the west uses one while the section on the east uses the other.?ÿ All of these corners were documented before I was born.
Pincushions are another story completely.?ÿ Saw a corner record today noting the found bar was 0.76 feet north of an incorrect bar.?ÿ This is in the middle of a paved road along the edge of a county seat town.
When a group of surveyors are discussing corners PLSS pin cushions are the 800-pound-gorilla-in-the-room.?ÿ
IMHO here's the catch:?ÿ Only one corner was originally set.?ÿ And by all that is holy that is the corner we are sworn to perpetuate, restore and utilize.?ÿ In a situation of more than one PLSS monument replacement at a corner, all duly filed per our statutes and all used in surveying the lands adjacent; we have failed.
Back when I was enjoyed hanging on the podium at seminars I use to find a surveyor in the room and then (with permission) look up a reference of an obliterated corner he or she had recently filed.?ÿ Then I would grill the surveyor over whether or not they would certify with specificity that the iron pin on the record sheet was indeed a perpetuation of the original corner.?ÿ It makes a lot of surveyors him-haw.?ÿ The most common response was "that's the corner everybody had been using".?ÿ?ÿAnd in that reply is a simple beautiful truth.
Of course none of us can guarantee a #3 rebar in an intersection is at the precise location of a sandstone shard dropped on the prairie in 1850.?ÿ Even with impeccable evidence there is always an element of uncertainty.?ÿ And that's the point I always tried to drive home.?ÿ As custodians of the original PLSS fabric we at times have to work on the wing of a wish and a prayer and listen to our gut.?ÿ?ÿ
Around here there are thousands of corners originally set by the GLO with nothing but wooden posts with pits and mounds as the accessories.?ÿ Those corners and their evidence are gone like a fart in the wind (apology to Warden Samuel Norton).?ÿ We have to have faith in those that came before us; whose notes are lost to time and with their intentions unknown to us.
So in the instance of pin-cushioned section corners; yes, we failed our task.?ÿ But don't despair.?ÿ Those locations are the exception, not the norm.?ÿ As bitter as it may be to admit failure, we've really done a pretty good job of keeping it all together.
I remember an old party chief I worked under for years.?ÿ When we would stumble onto a pin-cushioned corner he used to say, "Oh goody, I like problems with multiple choice answers!"?ÿ ?ÿ;)?ÿ ?ÿ ?ÿ
?ÿ
Apart from the unlikely event of the original pit and mound turning up the only way such a line will be finally settled is by an agreement among all the affected parties.?ÿ ?ÿ
By all means, tie your easement to the boundary of the property if you can. But the primary thing is to make sure that your easement can be located when the boundary is eventually fixed. I think that this may be a case where quoting State Plane coordinates in your description is appropriate.?ÿ?ÿ
The most likely place to find an incorrect bar is precisely on line and half distance between two existing bars at the section corners that were set by different people in recent years based on whatever procedure they happened to apply at the time.?ÿ The stone that was set (as opposed to the infamous stake and pits) is still present but they ASSUME it is gone because they didn't bang into it when they drove their bar.?ÿ The vast majority of ours are in roadbeds.?ÿ Who wants to waste time by calling DIG SAFE, waiting the appropriate period of time, then bring in a backhoe to dig whatever size hole by whatever depth until the stone can reasonably be determined to be absent OR IS FOUND??ÿ Me, that's who.?ÿ That's precisely the method employed by our DOT when there is any possibility the stone could still be present.?ÿ I will admit, I do not tear up paved roads, but the DOT will do that.?ÿ In some cases two holes are dug, one at the midpoint and one at what appears to be the true location which is quite a distance from the midpoint.?ÿ I know of half miles that show on the fictitious writings of the government contractor in the 1850's to 1860's to be at the midpoint that are found to be up to 300 feet extra long in relatively easy surveying conditions.?ÿ I can think of sections that bend at the quarter corner nearly 200 feet from where a straight line would indicate.?ÿ Many of our stones were set after the government contractor's work by the official County Engineer/Surveyor who was the only official surveyor in the entire county up until about 1900 or a bit later (setting stones). More recent work was carried out by surveyors deputized by the County Engineer/Surveyor until about 1950 around here.?ÿ There weren't thousands of potential surveyors showing up to set corners until licensure was approved and recognized. Guess when the pincushioning began in earnest.?ÿ There are a few old examples of having two corners, such as my previous example, that should not have occurred during the days of the County Engineer/Surveyor, but not many.
Then again Paden, it??s 2020, hell even this could happen....
????
The fatalism of not even looking for original corners is the bane of our profession. Its good to hear that some still do there jobs.
Of course pits will be long gone if they lie under a road, but there are still original pits out there in places. Posts are even more likely to be found. Evidence of them lasts a lot longer than most surveyors care to admit.?ÿ?ÿ
Nothing destroys the credibility of a surveyor faster than saying they don't look for original corners becasue they are all gone.?ÿ