As I age, I am more and more prone to YIELD to found markers, and not place the dreaded note: .
Just kink up the lines, and play the game "Where it landed". Just become a document-er of "this is where it landed". We have a licensed surveyor profession, that is largely non regulated. And, corners are landing in some odd places. So, lets all make peace, yield to the reasonable stuff, reject the VERY bizarre.
Do the acceptable thing. Be a good guy. There is not much original evidence left anyway. (Perimeter of PLSS sections GLO corners).
Such is life. Whata ya think?
I'm finding some of the more strict button pushers, are becoming more and more mellow.
Since we as a whole group have abandoned the rules on surveying, a long time ago, more and more of the originals have slowly disappeared. So, as time goes by, finding bona fide originals becomes harder and harder. So, we have less and less basis to reject corners, set by sloppy surveyors. So, just keep on rollin with the flow.....
N
I have noticed a similar progression during the course of my career.
Licensed Land Surveyor
Finger Lakes Region, Upstate New York
> Since we as a whole group have abandoned the rules on surveying, a long time ago, more and more of the originals have slowly disappeared. So, as time goes by, finding bona fide originals becomes harder and harder. So, we have less and less basis to reject corners, set by sloppy surveyors. So, just keep on rollin with the flow.....
Nate,
I don't believe we have abandoned any rules but I agree it is increasingly difficult to determine, beyond a reasonable doubt, where a corner was originally placed. We are not facing any more difficulties than any other generation of surveyors. I mean in days past, original corners existed, but they were so "distant" or remote to a location that the survey was performed anyway, without a precise location of that corner. We can bound a section as quick as we can get around it. That hasn't always been the case.
As for acceptance of evidence; let me ask you a question. If you cannot locate a corner or any accessories and you rely on other "accumulated evidence" such as fences, improvements, prior surveys, etc. as accepted evidence...aren't we really saying "this is where it is, according to the best available evidence" ?
I do believe in accepting previously established corners, error and all. I do not believe there was any malfeasance when older corners were established. To believe that I have the lofty ability to judge the quality of a previous surveyor's work is pompous.
It does take a number of years to arrive at the conclusion that we merely retrace what has been laid out in the past, and then accurately reflect that graphically on our survey, bad distances and all.
Once you arrive at this conclusion, you can truly begin to "retrace". And that's really what we should have been doing all along.
:good:
As a surveyor, who has diligently searched for original evidence, and also lived long enough to see it destroyed, I do often complain, that the surveyor before me did not search for originals, and document them, and carry them forward. So, they are no longer there. I have lived around some serious "one way" surveyors, who walked all over evidence, setting new corners, 30' and 330' from original bona fide GLO evidence. And, that is what bugs me.
N
Correct me if I am wrong, Surveyors are issuing an opinion based on evidence found of all kinds, law, sometimes witness accounts, previous investigations by others, and so forth. The one thing surveyors are not doing is addr5essing the issue of ownership which is for the courts to decide if contested.
I am one step from the great seal and I hope the education, experience, and knowledge from others I have gained over the years will allow me to be an excellent professional in this profession.
A.C. Mulford, "Boundaries and Landmarks" (1912), page 3:
"For after all, when it comes to a question of the stability of property and the peace of the community, it is far more important to have a somewhat faulty measurement of the spot where the line truly exists than it is to have an extremely accurate measurement to a place where the line does not exist at all."
The longer I survey the more it seems the 1912 mindset sure had it figured out.
Title Companies insure ownership.
Surveyors determine location from evidence.
If the parties have reached the level of insanity wherein they submit their beef to the Court system then the Court will determine ownership or location after an extremely arduous, inefficient and painful process of inquiry.
While I agree we do not make binding determinations of ownership, I temper that with this one thing. Every boundary we certify is in essence our prediction of what a court is likely to decide given the available evidence. The key is knowing when it is beyond our authority and or ability to make a decision. That should be followed by knowing the tools that allow the owners to decide. After that is exhausted it may be time to bother the courts.. my 02 Tom
Agree! :good:
> "For after all, when it comes to a question of the stability of property and the peace of the community, it is far more important to have a somewhat faulty measurement of the spot where the line truly exists than it is to have an extremely accurate measurement to a place where the line does not exist at all."
One from Column A & one from Column B: I prefer an extremely accurate measurement of the spot where the line truly exists.
I like it so much I stole it for my signature.;-)
This question has been bugging me very much lately. I have done two surveys recently that I went back to and find new pins within a foot of my set pins and pins I believe to be original to the subdivision/ROW. My license No. is a 38XXX, while the other two are a 16XXX and a 20XXX. Do they just believe that since they have been licensed longer that their locations are "better" than mine. I have only recently (last 5 years) been licensed, but I have been surveying for 12 years previous. This kind of BS makes me want to relinquish my license and become a hub-pounder!
