where is that presumption stated in Ca Law
Relative to your abbreviated scenario, my first questions would be "Why did the 2nd surveyor disregard the points of the 1st surveyor? Did he simply think himself better at measuring and calculating, or did he have a more valid reason?"
A surveyor coming across an existing monument should begin with the presumption that it was set by correct methods (or substantially correct methods), and if not finding sufficient evidence to the contrary, should not haphazardly and negligently disregard valid property rights which may have accrued to the provious monument by presuming to move the corner to its "correct" position. That's simply discourteous and potentially harmful to the landowners and certainly harmful to the image of the profession.
If your the 2nd surveyor to come along, you set a new monument in the "right" place, explaining why the previous guy was a know-nothing, sloppy knucklehead, what reason do the landowners have to believe that the other guy was the poor surveyor rather than you being the poor surveyor?
From the typical landowner's perspective, unless they see significant gain or loss according to which corner they choose to honor, it's just a matter of surveyor's never being able to agree or measure the same as each other. They must think that either all of our equipment is defective or that none of us know what we're doing.
Rejecting monuments without very good reason is just self destructive on a profession level.
Also, as a matter of common law, an act lawfully performed such as a surveyor performing a survey, is presumed to be correct until shown to not be by clear & convincing evidence.
Keith
Well, Loyal, it can, but the number may not be a distance in measured, linear units.
In many areas of California, we measure distance in time. Three miles at 4:00am may be three or four minutes. That same distance at 7:00am may be 20 minutes.
It all falls back to my favorite line..."It depends..."
Things like this seem always to be answered by the silly statement that I have always made about surveys: The only accurate survey is the full-sized thing marked out there on the ground. And all the maps, plats, calculations, theory, etc. are nothing but attempts to reflect what the full sized map out on the ground looks like.
So if the original surveyor was not a quack, and he drew the map out there on the ground, the other surveyors ought to be working off that map out on the ground, not the one on paper. I have thought about that for more than 30 years, and I really can't see where it is has ever been conflicted--except in gross error or fraudulent conditions. It is actually the essence of the Natural Hierarchy.
> Things like this seem always to be answered by the silly statement that I have always made about surveys: The only accurate survey is the full-sized thing marked out there on the ground. And all the maps, plats, calculations, theory, etc. are nothing but attempts to reflect what the full sized map out on the ground looks like.
>
> So if the original surveyor was not a quack, and he drew the map out there on the ground, the other surveyors ought to be working off that map out on the ground, not the one on paper. I have thought about that for more than 30 years, and I really can't see where it is has ever been conflicted--except in gross error or fraudulent conditions. It is actually the essence of the Natural Hierarchy.
Frank, well said. The courts have trying to tell us the very same thing for many, many years, yet we stubbornly ignore them, insisting on worshipping the God of Measurement. We have been enabled in this mis-guided adventure by many influences and forces both inside and outside our profession, the least not being the many licensing Boards that usually are made up of Engineers. Go Figure......
Frank,
I have sent emails to the Director of BLM and to the Director of Eastern States and alerted them of this nonsense and so far after a month or so......not a response!
Guess they don't care?
Keith
But, it will be pursued ....
try a tweet!
Think they read tweets?
BLMers.......
Should the Secretary review his statutory authority and the delegated authority to BLM?
It is a thought!
I know of several cadastral experts that could help in the review.
Think about it or get with it.
Keith
BLMers....
Go to the thread opening post and read and reread and think about my proposal!
Get serious about your resurvey problems.
If you can't , I know who can.
Let the phones hum!
Keith
Maybe we can have a review of the bogus theory that I have talked about.
And maybe BLM can come up with a consistent concept in subdividing PLSS sections, or amplify the Survey Manual for those who refuse to abide by it.
Just a thought!
Keith
