A few weeks ago I found this!!! Another surveyor had called out the stone and set a 38 bar...I could go into dates of when this all happened but I am wondering how everyone feels about adopting old corners.
I suppose a bit more context is needed for this, but isn't it our goal in retracement to find called markers?
I have seen and heard of perpetuating a non-magnetic marker with a magnetic 'accessory' aka a bar immediately adjacent. Seems a good practice to me.
Jacob Ellis, post: 368709, member: 11603 wrote: A few weeks ago I found this!!! Another surveyor had called out the stone and set a 38 bar...I could go into dates of when this all happened but I am wondering how everyone feels about adopting old corners.
Thats good, calling for the original, i will usually see a bar set alongside to help find the stone magnetically. The stone of course is the corner not the bar.
I'm having trouble getting a photo uploaded that I took in the field but I too think it is a good practice to set a magnet or iron bar next to the stone to assist in locating said point but the plat called the stone out and stated the 38 bar to be the corner. I have buried magnets next to stone piles in Jefferson County before...I feel like I have been very fortunate (and lucky) to have the experience of recovering more than a few "original corners"...with due diligence you will find some of the old "original corners" are still there!
If the stone is substantial I will drill it and set a cap with magnet stamped per the Manual. If it's loose or very small I flip it and set a stamped aluminum monument. In any event it gets a corner record. That's Idaho and Washington. In Utah I call the County Surveyor and go from there.
In the photo it does look like it is only a reference but like I said it was stated on the plat that the stone was X.x' north and X.x' east of the corner where he set a 38 bar. Dang I compressed the file and still can't get it to load the photo
Missouri now wants us to dig the stone up lay it on its side and set a 58 iron bar where the stone was!! BOO!!! Save the original corner!
Jacob Ellis, post: 368709, member: 11603 wrote: A few weeks ago I found this!!! Another surveyor had called out the stone and set a 38 bar...I could go into dates of when this all happened but I am wondering how everyone feels about adopting old corners.
I am bad give to drive a rod beside a rock or some other non-ferrous object that is the corner. I cap it and note on the plat and the field notes that the corner is the rock/stone/copper pipe, and that I set a 1/2" steel rod w/cap by it.
Helping the next surveyor find it is the goal. How we do that remains to be seen. Telling everyone what you did and what you held, in some detail, is paramount. How you get there is of course, up to you.
I have a real problem with setting a bar beside the stone. Not because it has ill intent. But, because it will lead to pin cushioning. Some not so well educated surveyor will find it... and NOW we have a problem.
I have several answers.
YOU got the original stone. GREAT. It is a primitive monument. IF you wish to hold to it, DO IT. IF you set a nail, or a rebar, set them UNDER the stone. IF it is a large stone, not not very movable, drill it. Or set an X on the top.At the point of measure.
Don't start the pin cushioning game.
There are some GLO monuments, in Montgomery CO, that have this disease. The 1932-1937 BLM made monuments. Brass disk, concrete, rebar inside it. Went to set the corner, and FOUND another surveyors pipe. So, they set the BLM cap a foot or so away. Took me a while to decide what to hold. Some of the field notes do not say. I finally, "Rejected" the BLM marker, and treated it as "An accessory to the corner". But, it was NOT a plain thing. We should leave PLAIN footsteps.
IF you feel you have a "Superior Monument" ie, your rebar, well and good. IF you are making an accessory, stamp it, WC, 1.0' E to Cor. But, don't feed the pin cushioners.
Have a great day.
N
I guess want I really want to know is...have you ever called out a stone or "original corner"? And I need to retract the statement that "Missouri wants us to replace found stones with a 5/8 bar" because it's Kansas City that wants us to do this...not nesscesrly off subject but I want say glo notes are fabulous and most were written with the utmost of details
Well said Nate
Nate that's is exactly why we buried magnets next to the stone piles in Jefferson Co. that I mentioned earlier and didn't set iron bars...I have noticed that some surveyors do not always get the plat and or records of the adjoining parcels or trace out all records in the area usually causing them to miss very important information.
Jacob Ellis, post: 368728, member: 11603 wrote: Missouri now wants us to dig the stone up lay it on its side and set a 58 iron bar where the stone was!! BOO!!! Save the original corner!
I LOVE seeing this kind of passion in young surveyors!
In surveying; you can be right and still be wrong. Never give in!
Apropos to nothing but here goes:
Several years ago when I was posting a lot more and my phone number was on-line somewhere I received a call from another Surveyor seeking my advice. His number is a couple of hundred lower than mine so he probably got his license only a few years before me.
This is my recollection: he had a Record of Survey from the 1930s which retraced a section and found and set monuments. The Surveyor that called me had found most of the 1930s monuments which is good. The problem he was seeking advice on was his measurements didn't exactly match the 1930s measurements which were nearest minute and nearest tenth. What should he do? Call them off, set new monuments? That was kind of a shock to me, frankly. I said, you found the monuments, they hold, you just show your new measurements versus the 1930s record.
That was an eye opener.
Nate The Surveyor, post: 368741, member: 291 wrote: I have a real problem with setting a bar beside the stone. Not because it has ill intent. But, because it will lead to pin cushioning. Some not so well educated surveyor will find it... and NOW we have a problem.
I have several answers.
YOU got the original stone. GREAT. It is a primitive monument. IF you wish to hold to it, DO IT. IF you set a nail, or a rebar, set them UNDER the stone. IF it is a large stone, not not very movable, drill it. Or set an X on the top.At the point of measure.
Don't start the pin cushioning game.
There are some GLO monuments, in Montgomery CO, that have this disease. The 1932-1937 BLM made monuments. Brass disk, concrete, rebar inside it. Went to set the corner, and FOUND another surveyors pipe. So, they set the BLM cap a foot or so away. Took me a while to decide what to hold. Some of the field notes do not say. I finally, "Rejected" the BLM marker, and treated it as "An accessory to the corner". But, it was NOT a plain thing. We should leave PLAIN footsteps.
IF you feel you have a "Superior Monument" ie, your rebar, well and good. IF you are making an accessory, stamp it, WC, 1.0' E to Cor. But, don't feed the pin cushioners.Have a great
One corner-ONE MONUMENT
Up at NAVY landing, on the north side of Lake Ouachita, there is a section corner. Bobby Matchett, (PLS 427) set a 3" aluminum monument, as a WITNESS corner, some 3' S25E from the corner.
Another Surveyor, from the BENTON area, did a survey there. Guess what point he used as the Section Corner?
The witness corner.
He simply did not check the top of the monument.
The section corner itself was a huge old pine stump, fence corner. Been in common use for maybe 50+ years. As I recall, it was actually at the fence intersection, tied to the pine tree. And, the pine had grown. Over the wire.
Anyway. I held the computed corner, 3' to the NW of the WC.
BENTON is a pretty good surveyor.
But, he missed that one.
N
Nate The Surveyor, post: 368764, member: 291 wrote: Up at NAVY landing, on the north side of Lake Ouachita, there is a section corner. Bobby Matchett, (PLS 427) set a 3" aluminum monument, as a WITNESS corner, some 3' S25E from the corner.
Another Surveyor, from the BENTON area, did a survey there. Guess what point he used as the Section Corner?
The witness corner.
He simply did not check the top of the monument.
The section corner itself was a huge old pine stump, fence corner. Been in common use for maybe 50+ years. As I recall, it was actually at the fence intersection, tied to the pine tree. And, the pine had grown. Over the wire.
Anyway. I held the computed corner, 3' to the NW of the WC.
BENTON is a pretty good surveyor.
But, he missed that one.
N
I've seen Foresters hook onto an RM with a huge arrow on the cap, it was 33' from the corner and had a companion 66' across the corner from it. Both have steel post with monument sign next to them. I haven't seen a Surveyor do that, though.
Jacob Ellis, post: 368709, member: 11603 wrote: A few weeks ago I found this!!! Another surveyor had called out the stone and set a 38 bar...I could go into dates of when this all happened but I am wondering how everyone feels about adopting old corners.
I suppose it is a matter of semantics but when you said the other surveyor called out the stone, I imagine him walking up to the stone and saying, "you're a stone."
After taking the context of your additional posts, you mean that he called the stone off or out of position from the corner and set his monument at his calculated position for the corner? Doesn't seem that he did the right thing to me based on the information you have provided.
called "the stone out" = he didn't adopt the "original monument" and set a new corner less than a foot away and showed both monuments on his plat.
It was my first post, I will provide more information for the next thread I create. I am enjoying this thread!!
Jacob, I already like the way you think... I suspect you'll be an asset to wherever you practice.
Glad to see you posting.
N