Can anyone explain these official field notesƒ??

Their comments regarding a ƒ??provenƒ? QSC in an old Engineering firm field book donƒ??t seem ƒ??clear and convincingƒ? to me. The other 3 QSCs (found) measure exactly mid.pt. & on line and are called the corner at SP measure. The nail and tag is virtually on line at the mid point and the ƒ??provenƒ? location is west 71 links and 119 links south of the mid point. They accept a mix of engineering firm concrete posts and county concrete posts.

Prorate from a 1948 resurvey that found the original some distance from the mid-point.

I can't speak directly to the questions you pose, however, the name ƒ??Moorhead Engineering Company, Ocala, Floridaƒ?, is most revered in Florida. I worked there off and on from 1959-1963, while completing my forestry studies at the University of Florida. A few of the more memorable surveys by Moorhead included the Southern Bell Telephone right of way East coast Miami to Jacksonville survey, the original Cross-Florida Barge Canal and all the subsequent re-authorized surveys, a Florida Power Corporation high voltage right of way West coast St. Petersburg to Pensacola survey, and the original Florida I-75 corridor survey.

This is the oldest continuous engineering and surveying company of Florida, beginning operations around 1884. When I worked there, they had a dedicated (walled off and locked) survey records department, and a dedicated survey records manager (Phillip Yeargan) who was in his 50's and had been with Moorhead since he was a teenager. Field books numbered in the thousands. I have no idea the number of field crews, as they had so many crews who lived on the road and I never saw them in the Ocala office. The numbers of Florida licensed surveyors who got their start is very large. I personally know at least a dozen PLS's who came up through Moorhead. The 1st Florida PLS society President H. O. Peters got his start there, and my old partner and Florida PLS society Prersident Ben Blackburn, also got his start there.

One of the things that will always stand out re Moorhead Engineering, is their absolute requirement of searching for original corner evidence regardless how long it might take. I can recall spending up to 2 weeks digging up large areas looking for charred remains of bearing trees buried a foot or more deep in the Florida soil. There were even times when Moorhead would rent a bulldozer to move dirt. By the time I worked there they had already proven a very large number of original corners in Central and North Florida (they began operations in 1884, not long after the Original surveys), and they had the field note records for every one of them in their huge records department.

Since I had already completed two semesters of surveying, the summer when I was 19 yo, Moorhead outfitted me with a truck, equipment and a couple men (in their 30's-40's), so I was privy to the fact of the quality of surveying they expected. Also, from personal experience, (in order to locate control corners for current projects) many times I was given old records of previous field work detailing searches for original corners. Also, this company had a history of many successful court appearances. Even my Florida Supreme Court case (Seddon v Harpster, Lake county, 1979, on behalf of my client Fred Harpster, Lake County Engineer), benefited from my use of Moorhead corner information.

The above being said, anyways, in my personal opinion anything Moorhead stands behind, you can take it to the bank and cash that check.

@i-ben-havin it appears from the Rivers v Lozeau case text that Morehead subdivided the section using the single proportionate nail, not the proven quarter section corner. ?ÿCanƒ??t say for sure because donƒ??t have a map or anything. The case says the Morehead SW1/16th and CS1/16th concrete monuments are about 28 feet too far north.

It appears that Lozeau needed an easement from the Forest Service so they retained Surveyor Britt who found an aluminum monument at the SW1/16th corner. I assume thatƒ??s how Lozeau became aware of the conflict. The BLM dependent resurvey only did the section exterior, they did not subdivide the section.

I found Brittƒ??s map attached to the easement from USFS into Lozeau.

One of the authorities Iƒ??m using for a boundary problem cites this case extensively (I think the author was one of the experts involved) so thatƒ??s the reason for my curiosity.

Probably the "falling" was reported perpendicular to the 1948 section line, not from the new 1948 quarter corner. If the BLM did not match the 1948 record distance a single proportion for the point of the "falling" would have been required.?ÿ

I don't know the whole story, but a monument noted as set at point that was different from the "proven corner" probably shouldn't be accepted, unless it was accompanied with a very good explanation.?ÿ

Probably the "falling" was reported perpendicular to the 1948 section line, not from the new 1948 quarter corner. If the BLM did not match the 1948 record distance a single proportion for the point of the "falling" would have been required.?ÿ

I don't know the whole story, but a monument noted as set at point that was different from the "proven corner" probably shouldn't be accepted, unless it was accompanied with a very good explanation.?ÿ

@aliquot Iƒ??m assuming they had a distance along the line from SC to SC which they proportioned against their own measurement then pulled over the distance of the falling. The bearing and distance should be SC to their set monument. The note is not as clear as it could be.

@dave-karoly?ÿ

The bearing and distance is the section corner to the the 1/4 corner they set based on the 1948 falling. What isn't quite clear is what they were proportioning, but it sounds like they proportioned the distance from the SC to the rejected 1/4 corner in order to use the 1948 failing to the accepted position.?ÿ

@aliquot I have no idea how Moorhead wouldƒ??ve done it but maybe they staked stations along line, simple enough in flat ground. Then come back and set the nail/tag on-line at the midpoint. Then a Moorhead Surveyor found the ƒ??provenƒ? corner and measured its station and offset (falling). BLM chained the mile, compared their distance to Moreheadƒ??s and prorated the station of the proven corner, after which they pulled the offset (falling) and set their monument. This is just educated guessing on my part.

My predecessors in that era did deflection angle traverses then pulled over to line from their traverse points. Sometimes they produced a straight line on an assumed bearing with the transit then went back and pulled over to the true line but producing a line is not always practical in mountainous forest.

Moorhead set the 1/16th corners in 1964 so unfortunately it appears they didnƒ??t realize they had found the true 1/4 corner in 1948.