CZ, maybe he won't spend his whole working career in WV.
Carl...
I have the utmost respect for you and your opinions on pretty much everything you post about. However (sorry)...your post reminded me of many posts that I see (and comments overheard) from folks who (apparently) never really bothered to READ the ENTIRE Manual, and take from it that which is (or might be) of value far beyond the limited confines of ORIGINAL PLSS Surveys or INDEPENDENT PLSS Resurveys (all of which are done under Federal Authority ONLY).
“Yes, he can throw a rock into the PLSS, specifically the Old Seven Ranges, the Ohio Company Lands...”
“And what is the 2009 Manual's relevance in retracing surveys there?”
“NONE”
While I will certainly stipulate that the relevance of the 2009 Manual is pretty minimal in that area, I can not agree with a flat “NONE.” The history contained within Manual concerning this area is MINIMAL at best, and the EARLY Instructions to Surveyors (i.e. Tiffin et al) are not really covered in any real detail, BUT some of the field procedures and general guidelines outlined in the later Chapters are relevant to most ANY Retracement Survey (PLSS or otherwise).
“It may contain procedural grains of truth valuable to surveyors everywhere, but is it the only textbook which contains them? Is it the best?”
Of course it's not the “best” reference book for ALL survey related matters, NOR was it ever intended to be. There is no “best survey text book,” nor can there ever be “just one.” A Professional Surveyor's Library is ever expanding, and some of the RELEVANT books therein may not be directly related to “Land Surveying” at all!
“I am constantly amazed at the almost religious attachment of some surveyors to the latest iteration of the Manual. That attitude has done more damage over the years to the profession of land surveying than probably any other source, in my opinion.”
Within the context of this thread, I would have to pretty much agree with that statement, BUT with a caveat or two. It is NOT the fault of the Manual or it's authors, that some surveyors are idiots. Nor is the Manual (any edition) intended to be (or ever promoted as being) the LAST word on the ALL subjects covered, or absolute in the possible remedies therein recommended or prescribed.
“I have seen green, lazy, and undereducated surveyors grab a Manual and double proportion in obliterated section corner after section corner without actually going to the trouble to determine if they were actually "lost". I have seen physical evidence and state case law ignored in deference to the Manual. The damage has been most particularly in states which were patented out completely in the 1800's.”
As have I (so often I could puke)! Again, this is NOT the fault of the Manual, but the Fault of the Idiot who didn't read AND UNDERSTAND the ENTIRE Manual. One must also bear in mind, that in cases where no Federal Interest Lands are involved, the Manual is advisory at best, and even where there are Federal Interest Lands involved, one must be very careful about adopting a one size fits all solution (there AIN'T ONE).
“It is just mischief making by some surveyors in western states, still mostly owned by the federal government, and still under the tutelage of the BLM, to recommend the 2009 Manual as some kind of cure-all super surveying text to those in the earlier parts of the PLSS, and even, in this example, of a metes and bounds state.”
There is certainly a little truth in that statement, but “cure-all super surveying text” is simply disingenuous. The Manual IS a formal set of guidelines for the Federal Authority Surveyor, but even in that sense, it is NOT absolute or all encompassing.
Once you get past the first four Chapters, there is a wealth of information and commentary that strikes a reasonably well balanced combination of the need for proper research, common sense, application of relevant case law, earth science, ethics, and an overall PROFESSIONAL Attitude towards retracing, evaluating, and restoring previous surveys of “most” ALL sizes, shapes, colors, and TYPES.
This information (and insights) were NOT contained in the EARLY Instructions and/or Manuals, but can be invaluable to those folks wishing to retrace ANY old survey. Obviously much of the information is PLSS specific (or at least heavily influenced by the “agricultural” Surveys of the PLSS), but there are also chapters relating to Water Boundaries, Metes & Bounds Surveys, and even Spanish Land Grants that were in some cases metes w/o bounds.
If I had to go forth and survey with just ONE book in my library, the BLM Manual would probably NOT be my first choice (depending on what I planned on doing), but it deserves a place on just about every bodies bookshelf.
That's my 2 bits anyway...
Respectfully
Loyal
Not to get off subject on the worthiness of any particular manual then I would say you need the 2009 manual for the class. Borrow it or purchase it as the 1973 has differences. Some is the same and it has the same guidance, generally, on retracements, but there are some huge differences at times.
You would not use a 96' Ford manual to work on a 2011 Ford car even they both are Ford manuals.
Deralski
Good point Deral, but the inverse would be true also...
You would not use a 2011 Ford manual to work on a 1996 Ford car even they both are Ford manuals.
The real difference in this case, is that we are NOT BUILDING a 1996 Ford from scratch (Original Survey). Now whether or not there may be insights into the 96' Ford, in the 2001 Ford Manual, is the real question (probably not many).
In the case of a Survey, that might be a horse of a different color.
Some things haven't changed all that much since Hammurabi's time.
Loyal
The Sipe book is a great text; I have it. My step-father has a copy that Sipe signed and sealed for him. The WVSPS found about 60 previously printed books that are available on their website.
First, you have to bloom where you are planted.
Loyal...
Thanks for your comments.
I think that we are more in violent agreement on most things than any violent disagreement.
It's good to find other people who feel strongly about surveying and where it is going, and Loyal, you are certainly one of those people.
My views on the Manual are well known and I basically view it as a tool. As with any tool, if it is not used correctly, it will cause damage to something.
I do not own the 2009 Manual and do not intend to purchase it. But if I owned it I would scan it and put it on the internet for anyone to read. I have read all of the 1973 Manual.
My opinion of it as a tool is as follows, from "CLARK On Surveying and Boundaries (Fourth Edition)":
"Thus, while the 1973 edition represents the latest advance in engineering thinking, it is still not to be considered as a "Bible" of surveying, for the surveyor, in making use of it, must bear in mind at all times that a particular tract may have been surveyed under instructions set out in an earlier edition of the Manual or even in older areas before a manual was ever adopted. There have been numerous changes over the years in the federal procedure of subdividing townships and, once the technique in effect at the time was put into operation and the survey lines drawn in accordance therewith, these lines became forever fixed as soon as the surveyed tracts were sold. Hence the 1973 Manual must always be used with an eye toward the earlier editions and the instructions contained therein. An example of this is the subdivision of townships."
Evidence and Procedure says essentially the same thing and even indicates that applying a Manual to surveys in older PLSS areas such as Ohio would be "foolish".
As I stated in my earlier post, I think that Great Basin College is a valuable asset in surveying education. I hope that they can get ABET accreditation soon. I urge surveyors in states requiring a four year ABET degree to lobby their state board accept the degree from GBC. Or perhaps we need to reexamine the whole ABET thing.
I agree with the posters who have stated that a knowledge of the unfinished western PLSS can be of value to a broader audience of surveyors. I have spent time and money on continuing education courses presenting an "advanced" analysis of the western PLSS because I have an interest in it. It's otherwise useless to me in Ohio.
I am not a luddite about surveying. I have several bookcases full and will always have room for another useful or interesting book. And I do have a bachelor's degree.
Now let us see some interest from you PLSS states west of say, Nebraska, in the origins of the PLSS, and yes, even metes and bounds surveying.
Finally, if you have not surveyed boundaries in West Virginia, you have not met the challenge, or had the opportunity to meet the really nice people of that state.
Loyal
Loyal,
I would purport you need both Manuals. The one in effect at the time of the survey to understand the requirements/procedures at the time of survey and the current Manual to get guidance on current best practices for resurvey that is guided by the policy, case law and precedence that has developed since the time of original survey to present day.
If there had been improvements in the methods and procedures to fix or restore that old Ford since the original Manual was issued you would be best served about knowing about it!
Northern
I agree 100%
That could of course involve more than 2 Manuals, if we get into multiple GLO Surveys (Completion surveys, Dependent (or Independent) Resurveys), etc. etc.
Loyal
