This morning I received a telephone call from prospective clients about a neighbor's forest cutting plan. Their land has been marked by orange flags and they do not agree. Would I be able to survey their boundary to determine if the orange flags are correct?
During the conversation I found out there is a forester and a logging company involved. Also, the timber harvesting plan had been approved by the State Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR). This means the State Forester has reviewed the plan.
While it is customary to advise the neighbors of their forestry activities the notice says nothing of a boundary survey to determine the extent of the cutting. While penalties would be levied against the forester for errors, the damage still would have occurred at that point. In my experience it would be better if the damage does not occur.
So what are the foresters relying upon to determine the extent of their harvest? The prospective clients told me one of them explained how they use a compass to run the line. Another was reviewing the extent of the boundary with an ipad device, that they assumed was running some GPS application. So, they wanted some verification from a land surveyor.
I told them it is the responsibility of the forester to have the boundary determined by a land surveyor and that if they are relying on devices such as a compass or a hand held computer they were most likely making an incorrect determination and they are breaking the law. Only a licensed land surveyor is legally permitted to perform land surveys.?ÿ
I have spoken with the forester on other occasions and inquired if he knew this law. He said they determine boundaries all the time without a surveyor, but they tell the client that is not the legal boundary. So I asked him, "Do you tell them it is the illegal boundary?"
Historic boundaries and conservation efforts.
Your prospective client should plant blue flags in a line parallel to the forester's line, one for each of the orange ones, but 10 to 15 feet toward the proposed logging. Then he should call the forester, tell him that he's surveyed his own property and that the forester should expect legal action if he cuts outside the blue flags.?ÿ
It is not illegal for a property owner to survey his own property, even though he might be in error on a couple of measurements. Should the logger disagree, he can hire a surveyor to determine the boundary.
If foresters were licensed by the state, like Land Surveyors, Engineers, and Geologists are in NY, this kind of nonsense would stop.
Many graduate foresters became survey technicians and PLS's prior to states adopting degree requirements
An excellent ruse. Two can play this game.
Historic boundaries and conservation efforts.
Foresters are licensed in this state, but the requirements, including continuing education, involve only forestry types of knowledge, such as trees and other plants.
Historic boundaries and conservation efforts.
Foresters are registered by the California Board of Forestry here. One of them told me he has a license to kill (trees).
This is what I posted about in your other thread about "instrument" surveys.?ÿ
As stated there, on both occasions the forester(s) said they didn't need an instrument survey, just a compass survey.
I took that to mean that they just wanted "rough" boundary lines for cheap.?ÿ I gave them prices for full boundary surveys and never heard back.?ÿ
"Do you tell them it is the illegal boundary?"
That's a great line. I may use it.
Does Mass require a permit to harvest timber??ÿ I'm just curious why the DCR would need to sign off on a harvesting plan.?ÿ
I have had this experience many times. I used to get frustrated by foresters doing this or asking for just the coordinates of the boundary corners so they could plug them into their resource grade GPS. My response of ok what datum was met with a blank jaw dropping stare. I have since joined the same state agency as a couple of the foresters that asked these things and now have the time to turn this rivalry between foresters and surveyors in to a solid working relationship by educating them. Letting them understand that it is better for them to let some one like that is license you perform such duties carry the liability of incorrect boundary establishment. It was a fight a first and multiple field interactions with I just stood there and took being told I was worthless and they would get around me by doing cutting line agreements. But, I found a boundary where they established with resource grade gps using calculated projected coordinates on a section that had never had a survey done and they encroached on 2 acres of ground that was restricted natural areas that banned mechanized equipment. They became quick friends after some serious repercussions.?ÿ
@csk21?ÿ
A land owner or, preferably, a forester submits a management plan to DCR before a timber harvest. The plan will describe what type of trees, soil and wetlands exist at the site and show methods to be used for controlling erosion, protection of wetland resource areas, endangered species and other buffer zones.?ÿ
The plan is reviewed by the state and the State Forester will visit the site to assure compliance before issuing a license or permit to harvest. There is a lot of information online about this. The one thing I have not determined is if there is any mention of how the boundary should be determined and apparently there is not.
Historic boundaries and conservation efforts.
This is a hard one for me to get upset about.?ÿ In forty-five years of logging, most of it as a one man crew with a cable skidder, my father never had any issues with flagging his own cut limits.?ÿ Gasp!?ÿ He even took deeds out and used them to find boundary corners, the horror, the horror.?ÿ Granted, he made a point of contacting abutters and Maine seems to have more stonewalls and blazed and painted lines than other states I've visited.
I certainly agree that a surveyor needs to be involved with public land boundaries (but who will speak for the trees?) but a certain amount of action is to expected from land owners.?ÿ Your situation is not one in which the system has failed, but rather a great example of how it should work.?ÿ The forester clearly marks the cutting limits for all who may be concerned to view.?ÿ The abutter disputes it and has the opportunity to hang flagging where he assumes his boundary to be or take action in another manner.?ÿ Is it a great inconvenience to the abutter? Yes, but it is a once in lifetime event and no more inconvenient than having a deed staking surveyor run a prorated line through your land.
I recognize that there may be something in the water in Maine, where I grew up, that makes me less prone to viewing every land owner as a helpless buffoon, with no agency in matters concerning their boundaries, but I'm not going to lose sleep over a forester doing what foresters have done for at least a century.?ÿ
?ÿ
?ÿ
They became quick friends after some serious repercussions.?ÿ
Repercussions. It??s the language they know.?ÿ
@murphy?ÿ
I can tell by your facetious remarks that you are not upset by this situation. There is no need to qualify your statements.
By the same logic, there would be no need to have my land surveyed if I wanted to build a fence or a garage. Simply hanging flags indicating my intent would put the neighbors on notice to either get their land surveyed or acquiesce.
Basically winning by intimidation.
Historic boundaries and conservation efforts.
@murphy?ÿ
I agree about the stonewalls, wire fences, etc.?ÿ?ÿ But I also know that not all boundary lines, even in Maine, are marked with something.
I'm sure you're dad was good, but I'd bet there were more than a few times he made an educated guess or cleared a compass line that may've been off a few feet, or a dozen.?ÿ But land was worth less years ago, and many people couldn't afford a survey, and only had a vague idea where their boundary was.?ÿ And people were probably less crazy and litigious.?ÿ
?ÿ
I've always felt that foresters/loggers marking boundary lines was a bit absurd, unless they played it safe and cut well within the property they were logging.?ÿ Otherwise, I see this as a thing of the past.?ÿ And I don't accept your argument that the abutter, should have seen the flags and by not doing anything, had his chance to hire a surveyor and is now SOL.?ÿ
You're putting the onus on the abutter rather than the landowner who knows he's about to do some major damage, and make some money.?ÿ He is the one who should be responsible for making sure that his contractor doesn't cross the boundary onto land of another.
Just because it's been happening for centuries doesn't necessarily mean that's the way to keep doing it going forward.?ÿ When foresters, loggers, and landowners start getting hit for damages maybe this practice will end.