When reviewing surveys, I see a lot of different ways of depicting section corners-
in a different century, I was taught to put an appropriate symbol- full or closing- and label each section as appropriate.
It's not uncommon to see a section corner symbol- even if it's a closing corner and a simple "SW Cor Sec. 30. railroad spike"
Our administrative rules are a bit ambiguous- "?ÿThe surveyor shall clearly identify on the face of the plat or certificate of survey all monuments pertinent to the survey, and the descriptions of these monuments must be sufficient to identify the monuments."
?ÿ
Your opinions?
?ÿ
?ÿ
On my work it might make a difference whether a section corner was an actual corner of the subject property or a corner tied to the property's description...or merely a found corner tied into my survey as a check or tie and shown for posterity.
Nonetheless, I usually drop a bold hollow circle (prominent to the scale of the drawing) in on found section corners.?ÿ A description of the monument is always required, and maybe even a topo surrounding the monument to help the reader determine the location.?ÿ Of course the devil is in the details.?ÿ My descriptive text usually states the origin of the corner and?ÿits perpetuous pedigree.
In reviewing the work of others, I find many section corner symbols to be an empty triangle with a small dot in the center at the intersection of lines. ?ÿEvery other corner type is some other symbol which indicates a certain type of monument and whether it was found or set.
When reviewing surveys, I see a lot of different ways of depicting section corners-
in a different century, I was taught to put an appropriate symbol- full or closing- and label each section as appropriate.
It's not uncommon to see a section corner symbol- even if it's a closing corner and a simple "SW Cor Sec. 30. railroad spike"
Our administrative rules are a bit ambiguous- "?ÿThe surveyor shall clearly identify on the face of the plat or certificate of survey all monuments pertinent to the survey, and the descriptions of these monuments must be sufficient to identify the monuments."
?ÿ
Your opinions?
?ÿ
?ÿ
If it's a closing corner calling it the section corner with no qualifier does not clearly identify it.?ÿ
I prefer a symbol that tells me the type of monument (brass cap on pipe, etc). The legal designation of the corner is easy to show by text. The pedigree should be complete in the corner record referenced on the map.
There are other ways to depict these things. When reviewing the work of others I try to keep an open mind. Just meet code and make it clear...
Yes, the legal designation of the corner is easy to show, but still, a surprising number of plats neglect to show it, and a surprising number of surveyors mistake a closing corner, witness corner or reference monument for the true corner.?ÿ
And why do some surveyors insist?ÿ on calling something the "northeast corner of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of?ÿ section 1" when "S1/16" describes it better?
And in the ones I've looked at nobody calls them quarter corners.?ÿ Always the NW corner of the NE quarter, etc.?ÿ Not sure why.
I don't know either, except I have heard some say that a landowner understands "the nw corner of the northwest 1/4 of the northwest 1/4", but doesn't understand "NW Corner, Section 12" or "Corner common to Sections 1, 2, 11 and 12".?ÿ
The BLM describes all aliquot corners as "1/4" or "Sec. Cor", etc., and I don't think many landowners know the difference, so I stick to the BLM descriptions (west 1/4 corner, 1/4 Sec.1 and Sec 2. etc).
?ÿ
