In Florida...
> Nope, never.
>
> Not required.
🙁
I always do. It is required by virtue of being a professional and not a button pusher.
It is one of those things that it doesn't matter if it is not required by rule, regulation, standard or law, you do it anyway.
In Non-recording states, i.e., Oklahoma, Texas, Kansas, etc., it is even more important to do so than in recording state, though is should be the GOLD STANDARD everywhere.
Yes, I do.
> I call the monument out by description because
>
> 1) It is required in the standards of practice:
> (4) Written description. A written description prepared by a professional land
> surveyor shall be complete, shall accurately describe the actual boundary
> survey and, contain the following information:
> (e) A notation as to whether each monument was found or set;
> (f) The identification of each tree utilized as a new corner monument,
> including breast height diameter, species of tree, method of marking, and
> a notation whether the tree is a record monument or a newly established
> monument;
> (g) A complete description of each "set" monument, to include, if appropriate,
> the monument’s length, diameter, type of material and the identifying cap
> or other identifier that was used;
> (h) A complete description of each "found" monument that complies with the
> following:
> 1. It is sufficiently accurate and adequate for subsequent identification
> by another professional land surveyor; and
> 2. To the extent possible, the description shall include the monument’s
> dimensions, type of material and the identification cap or other
> identifier that was used;
>
> and
>
> 2) In my area of practice, as in many others, it is not unusual for the older surveys to have been marked with just any type of scrap iron that could be found. With the number of times I have found the corner area marked by several different pieces of metal, I am always glad if the description states what was supposed to mark that corner. Given the inaccuracy of measurements that are sometimes found, the described monument is often the deciding factor between accepting the T-post driven most of the way down, the #5 rebar beside of it, or the 1" pipe between the two.
AMEN!!!:hi5:
Sometimes it makes sense to rewrite a defective or wanting description. To do so without reluctance along with a true need for revision, is poor practice.
jud
> > Rewriting the description is like a third party rewriting the terms of a contract years after the fact.
>
> When you survey in Appalachia, you're going to rewrite a lot of descriptions. When you retrace a boundary that is described as:
> Beginning at two poplars on the line of Gear, thence a southeast direction 75 poles to a 36" black oak, corner to Stephens, thence along the line of Stephens to the head of a drain, thence 25 poles to where Jones' horse stood, thence 90 poles to the beginning, containing 45 acres, more or less.
>
> You would be doing your client an injustice by not rewriting that description, which, by the way, has been used in each of 6 conveyances since 1885. The bad thing is, that description is the norm.
>
> To answer the question, yes, we do call out every monument in every description.
I agree 100%. If Leon was dividing that property, it appears that he would write:
Beginning at two poplars on the line of Gear, thence a southeast direction 75 poles to a 36" black oak, corner to Stephens, thence along the line of Stephens to a monument set, thence North 75 degrees 18 minutes 32 seconds West, 1190.56 feet to a monument set, thence 109.30 feet to where Jones' horse stood, thence 90 poles to the beginning, containing 22 acres, more or less.
If you figured out where Jones' horse stood, describe a monument at that location so the rest of us will know. Also put a fricken call to and from it so we can figure out where it was if the monument you set is destroyed.
Two of my property corners are Federal Park Service concrete monumentsw with brass disks. On the propery survey, they are called "monuments", with no further description. If I had done the survey, I would have at least named the owner of the monuments and the inscriptions.
Not that I don't feel for you, but if the description worked 6 times already since 1885 and you are able to locate the property today, how come it won't transfer title again?
That's not to say you can pop it in the GIS and see the lines in Google Earth. But transfer of title and location of the boundaries are not completely one and the same.
At a minimum wouldn't you need to cite the original and then state that such and such surveyor measured it like this or refer to a survey on record that shows how it measures up.
If you rewrite the description every time how do you prove you deeded the same parcel of property? Maybe I'll rewrite so my client gets the access strip he always wanted as he is willing to pay for the service. Appears that the new and improved is better but it may cause problems in other ways.
Ain't my fault the records or full of crap but maybe my job to help sort it out. I live in a sea of fictional descriptions also but have come to the conclusion that rewriting them is not good practice, causes more chaos. I suppose if you come to a pile of crap you should add your golden crap to it.
Probably would except I'd add references (book and page) to the original deed that created the parcel. If you want more specific math you could add (measured bearing and distance to a rebar and cap set by me in 2001) to each coarse. So the original record is preserved and the new measure is included. If I can file a survey in the public records I might just add a reference to the survey so interested parties could go take a look, that would be cleaner. I realize there are handicaps in states without filing acts.
Of all the surveys I have viewed in this State over the past 30+ years, maybe one percent have included calling out the monuments. Virtually everything is either aliquot or lot & block or bearing/distance. Those reading.....thence bearing/distance to a FOUND 5/8" bar 36 inches in length.....are extremely rare.
I've wondered where that practice came from to Utah. Now I know, from Holy Cow's back yard.
Isn't the length of the bar irrelevant? You aren't going to dig it up to verify the length.
But, back to the original question, No I do not call monuments in stand alone legal descriptions, the monument calls are shown on the sketch accompanying the legal description or on the plat graphic recorded separately with the legal description on the plat. For the most part I will use the vesting deed description unless there is/are some terrible error(s) in it. If there is a minor error such as the usual cardinal direction typo, I will insert the corrected assumption in some way to indicate it is not part of the original description at which time I will end the description with "meaning and intending to be the same property as described in...". So now you are going to ask how I can survey around a property and "agree" with all the monuments? Believe me or not if you go back to the original vesting deed and ignore most of the surveys that have been done monument to monument over the years you can find the right answer, and most of those old Gurley and chain surveys were pretty darn accurate.
In Florida...
The monument calls are on the map, not in the description.
And I don't care how you all do it up north.
In my opinion, noting the length is a method of perpetuation. If there are 2 1" pipes with yellow paint, one at grade and one 12" above grade, and you have determined that the one at grade is the true corner, how do you distinguish between them except to use the heights?
What if years later someone yanks the pipe at grade? How will a surveyor in the future know to not use the pipe 12" above grade if the heights were not noted?
> In my opinion, noting the length is a method of perpetuation. If there are 2 1" pipes with yellow paint, one at grade and one 12" above grade, and you have determined that the one at grade is the true corner, how do you distinguish between them except to use the heights?
>
> What if years later someone yanks the pipe at grade? How will a surveyor in the future know to not use the pipe 12" above grade if the heights were not noted?
We weren't talking about above or below grade, we were talking about the overall length of the monument. If there are two pipes there you still aren't going to dig them up to verify length. I'm not so sure above or below grade calls do anything for perpetuation either, grades have a tendency to change over time for a variety of reasons. A direction and distance call to the "not accepted" monument would be more useful in that regard.
Texas requires it but they didn't used to. The old line surveyors around here began making the transition from the ubiquitous stake to actually describing the monument in size and type about the late 1960's. It give us a time frame of when the description was written.
If Texas didn't require it, I would still do it. I absolutely abhor descriptions that call to a stake or point. It's BS and some surveyors still do it today, or to an iron stake. If you ever see a description of mine where I'd labeled it an iron stake, there will be at least another sentence describing the shape, type of iron, size in at least 2D, and maybe 3D, but you can rest assured that I have no damn clue what it is, but want to make it as clear as I can to the next surveyor who comes along, or to the landowner who actually reads his deed.
To not do so is poor service to the client where the survey maps are not recorded IMHO. Where the maps are recorded, the descriptions, if written, should mirror the plat and not to a stake just because the plat describes it. BFD. What happens if they get lost or separated from one another?
:good:
Well said.
Larry P
This would be a good time for Kent to post one of his descriptions.
