Ring - Ring
Mr. property owner calls and explains that he needs a property line marked and that it should be a simple (cheap) matter. That he is having a small problem with his neighbor.
He tells me that the markers are all there and can I come out next week and put stakes in the ground ever 25' so that the neighbor knows where not to trespass on.
-- I tell Mr. Property owner that I will research this and that I will get back with him
BTW - The line he wants marked is a portion of his north line,
which is the N line of the SW 1/4
Also I asked him if he had a survey done when he bought the property 2 years ago
His answer - No
here's what I found (thus far)
I don't know put your stakes to a weighted mean or something like that.
Simple.
This rod man, he shot one,
He shot blind with a crooked plumb;
Knick-knack paddywhack,
Give a corner a stone,
This rod man came rolling home.
This rod man, he shot two,
The prism held on the pole with some glue;
Knick-knack paddywhack,
Give a corner a stone,
This rod man came rolling home.
This rod man, he shot three,
He bumped the legs with his knee;
Knick-knack paddywhack,
Give a corner a stone,
This rod man came rolling home.
Just how little does this client think your liability is worth anyway? (Rhetorical question BTW.)
Well that makes my Center of Section problem look positively easy!
Good luck.
Doug
Where does the exact mathematical intersection of the present day quarter corners lie?
That is THE ONLY TRUE LEGAL center of section, all other previously established monuments, occupation, evidence, reliance, etc. be danged.
sarcasm off.
> Where does the exact mathematical intersection of the present day quarter corners lie?
>
> That is THE ONLY TRUE LEGAL center of section, all other previously established monuments, occupation, evidence, reliance, etc. be danged.
>
>
>
>
> sarcasm off.
Brian, After a little more digging (computer research) I found this
The potential project is becoming a little more intriguing, however I'm not too sure that's how Mr. Property owner is going to be looking at this...
-
Don't you have a situation here where the boundaries have been established by the landowners for a long time. The center quarters where well documented and has been a part of the public records since 1979. We can argue or speculate about where the “legal center of section” is according to the original plan but since the boundaries have been long established by the landowners isn't it sort of a moot point. The legal center of section doesn't control any of the boundaries established by the landowners. Go ahead and precisely measure to it and put it in, give ties to it, whatever. If a boundary hasn't been established maybe it applies. Otherwise its just a good tie out point. The landowners deserve to have their established boundaries respected by others including land surveyors. Seems to me the 1979 surveyor well understood the establishment of boundaries law. I suppose his CAD, GPS and other modern technology wasn't blinding his judgment.
The day the property owners cause the Section to be subdivided and the monument is set and they respect the monument just set by the Land Surveyor, that is the day that monument becomes the legal center of section.
We may as well start over, let out a giant contract to redo the entire PLSS and we can all go out there with our highly precise equipment and get it right this time. Then we won't have any more of these silly notions that a monument set in 1935 doesn't count.
Maybe in 200 years they will be arguing over which molecule on the aluminum cap is at the perfect intersection of the center lines.
> Don't you have a situation here where the boundaries have been established by the landowners for a long time. The center quarters where well documented and has been a part of the public records since 1979. We can argue or speculate about where the “legal center of section” is according to the original plan but since the boundaries have been long established by the landowners isn't it sort of a moot point. The legal center of section doesn't control any of the boundaries established by the landowners. Go ahead and precisely measure to it and put it in, give ties to it, whatever. If a boundary hasn't been established maybe it applies. Otherwise its just a good tie out point. The landowners deserve to have their established boundaries respected by others including land surveyors. Seems to me the 1979 surveyor well understood the establishment of boundaries law. I suppose his CAD, GPS and other modern technology wasn't blinding his judgment.
LR,
I think 6th will verify this. The same surveyor did the work in 63 and 78 and filed the corner record in 79. Apparently occupation evidence, if there is any for the south 1/2 of the section, seems to match the c1/4 point he was perpetuating and the north 1/2 of the section matches the other two monuments found, which while a bit strange doesn't seem to create any boundary conflicts.
At least that is what I see.:-)
> > Don't you have a situation here where the boundaries have been established by the landowners for a long time. The center quarters where well documented and has been a part of the public records since 1979. We can argue or speculate about where the “legal center of section” is according to the original plan but since the boundaries have been long established by the landowners isn't it sort of a moot point. The legal center of section doesn't control any of the boundaries established by the landowners. Go ahead and precisely measure to it and put it in, give ties to it, whatever. If a boundary hasn't been established maybe it applies. Otherwise its just a good tie out point. The landowners deserve to have their established boundaries respected by others including land surveyors. Seems to me the 1979 surveyor well understood the establishment of boundaries law. I suppose his CAD, GPS and other modern technology wasn't blinding his judgment.
>
> LR,
>
> I think 6th will verify this. The same surveyor did the work in 63 and 78 and filed the corner record in 79. Apparently occupation evidence, if there is any for the south 1/2 of the section, seems to match the c1/4 point he was perpetuating and the north 1/2 of the section matches the other two monuments found, which while a bit strange doesn't seem to create any boundary conflicts.
>
> At least that is what I see.:-)
Well, I really did not have a chance to get into the particulars.
The potential client balked at my price.
He said he was going to call his realtor.:-O
It does appear that his line (N line sw1/4) is well defined, but he thinks that his line is bound by the South line of subdivision north of him. I'm not sure about the hiatus or if the subdivided property is into that area...
I hope the realtor can sort it our for him...
