I might have misspoke on the case law part, it may have been a board action and not ended up in court.?ÿ It was referenced in course work at OSU last century when I was young and carefree.?ÿ I'll see if I can find my notes with refences over the weekend (I still have quite a few of my lecture notes).
?ÿ
ahem??cough cough..??. speaking as a Licensed Forester in Maine, one of those states that does require licensure, ?ÿI definitely don??t flag along boundaries lines. That would be a violation of my license. Having worked at a civil/survey firm, those things were pointed out early on??to stay in your lane so to speak.. ?ÿAnything along a boundary, that work needs a PLS??.. granted I flag very few cut blocks, not really my gig. I believe there have been Licensed foresters cited by the state board for just such activity. ?ÿ
It has come up at several trainings ?ÿand state workshops, when making a forest stand map, the state foresters do make a point to recommend ?ÿalways add the ??NOT A LEGAL SURVEY" disclaimer. ?ÿI can see how this could be an issue if in a state that does not require licensure for foresters... nothing for the board to cite.
Now for arguments sake, say the harvest block appeared to be well within what the landowner directly shows to be his/her land. If the harvest is inside what they believe to be the boundary and where he/she points out the line, if the landowner wants to take that on, is that OK? ?ÿI would and do recommend a surveyor, ?ÿbut does the LO have the ultimate responsibility in such a case? I would happily give him/ her a roll of flagging, but wont hang it for them. Safe or no?
https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/17/title17sec2511.html
See above, interestingly, it is a crime for a harvester or owner to NOT mark established property lines prior to a timber harvest. This may lend weight to what @Murphy was alluding to. Note the abutting landowner notification requirement, and fair warning of harvest about to commence.
?ÿ
That's brilliant!?ÿ
Stops them dead in their tracks, gives the surveyor time to research and go to the site, mark the true line and then bill the timber company.
You make an excellent point Bill. When I was elevated to Forest Engineer for a Southeastern US paper company in 1965, I inherited a loosely supervisory responsibility for 37 (untrained for accurate surveying methods) general forestry field crews operating out of forest offices scattered across several states. Upon coming into the position, I learned that in the years prior (to 1965), the vast majority of our several million acres of forest lands had been ??surveyed? by these field crews, with the vast majority of maps I inherited being absent any certification by a licensed surveyor. These maps were the result of the company's ??boundary recovery? program.
By company policy, in areas absent previously established monumentation, or absent substantial fencing, the company had contracted with private surveying companies to perform boundary surveys.
However, for the marking of lines for timber harvesting, or for the company's ??boundary recovery? program, these forest work crews did mark the lines, but they were simply running between found monuments. There was no setting of monumentation based on deed bearing and distance, etc. I believe that was typically standard practice in the industry, and was likely the reason we had to take 3 semesters of surveying in forestry rather than training folks to become licensed surveyors.
?ÿ
@i-ben-havin Very well said.?ÿ Back in the seventies, when I was a forestry student at Louisiana Tech, I worked with a survey crew who was employed by Continental Can Paper Mill in Jonesboro/Hodge, Louisiana.?ÿ The crew was supervised by a Registered Land Surveyor who had a degree in Forestry from LSU.?ÿ He was also a veteran of WW2.?ÿ This survey crew maintained boundary lines on the large acreage of company timber land tracts scattered throughtout Northwest Louisiana.?ÿ They surveyed the boundary lines with a transit and chain.?ÿ Set 3" concrete monuments for corners.?ÿ Blazed and painted the boundary lines.?ÿ Recovered and proved up old section corners.?ÿ I don't know if timber companies employ their own survey crews anymore.?ÿ Sad because they did a great job preserving the monumentation we take for granted today.
I am proud to be a land surveyor registered in Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas and Arkansas.?ÿ And I am equally proud to be a member of the Society of American Foresters and a Registered Forester in Mississippi.
?ÿ
@t-ford?ÿ
I remember as a kid, riding in the back of the suburban, through central and southern Georgia, observing the world through the massive glass windows as we whizzed by the tobacco fields interspersed by amazingly long rows of perfectly straight aligned pine trees on the Continental-Can production tree farms, at first not sure why they were all so straight, and being imbued by my dad that it was indeed a farm for trees. I was 8. Mind blown. Who farms trees??ÿ I still had the world to learn, and now still more. Haven't heard anything about Continental-Can in decades, but it's still on the hard drive?ÿ and that horrible smell of the processing chemicals just woke up too. Thanks for your support of mine and for sharing your memories.
?ÿ
@murphy?ÿ
You kind of put the onus on the abutter, when the forester basically surveyed without a license
The onus is on the abutter no matter what.?ÿ Even if the clearing limits were marked by a PLS, there's no guarantee the PLS will do much more than the forester and loggers will still be tempted to pluck a few valuable trees over the line if it suits them.?ÿ Creating more regulation or disallowing forester the ability to flag cutting limits will not remove the necessity to defend property.?ÿ?ÿ
?ÿ
Murphy is correct. Real Property has to be defended. It evolved for the benefit of the community, not the individual. The idea was that if the King grants the benefits of title to someone they will use the land productively to benefit the community. If the owner disappears then whoever occupies and uses the land can eventually gain a good title.
It doesn??t seem fair to our modern sensibilities but in an earlier time community was more important than any single individual. He who sleeps on his rights will lose them.
In addition, establishing boundaries is one of the most fundamental duties of ownership. This is not the same as a third party such as a Forester holding out as an unlicensed Land Surveyor. It is not illegal to mark your own boundaries, it can??t be. Courts have enforced owner established boundaries in numerous thousands of cases.
Obviously it is best to bring in a licensed professional expert to assist in marking out boundaries but it is not absolutely required. If the property owner unilaterally marks a boundary then the adjoiners can object but they had better do so within a reasonable time period or the Court may refuse to hear their complaint.
Straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak.
Thanks for your input on this, Roger
I was wondering if Murphy was having one of those romanticized, yet cloudy, hearkening for the good ol' days, type of reminiscing of things.?ÿ But his continuing posts in defense of this type of thing makes me thing not.?ÿ Oh, well
@murphy?ÿ
Even if the clearing limits were marked by a PLS, there's no guarantee the PLS will do much more than the forester
That's either a very skilled forester or a pretty lax surveyor, then.?ÿ And it better be more than a compass line, or almost guaranteed there'll be some meanderings, and some cutting over the boundary line.
If I'm contracted to mark a line that I know is going to be used as a guide for cutting trees, I'm going to be damned sure that I'm setting enough stakes or flagging trees, so that there'll be no mistake.?ÿ
As said, tree damage is treble, (don't know why that term is used still today vs triple), damages.?ÿ And your, "few valuable trees over the line", could end up being an expensive idea.
I can only guess that when your old man was doing this, land was far less expensive, and the cost of a survey outweighed the value of the land, and maybe even the trees.?ÿ And who could really tell out on the back 40, in an area where there were no walls and fences.?ÿ Probable best that this type of thing become just a thing of the past
Boundary Line Maintenance by a forester, farmer, deer hunter or local minister is not illegal in Louisiana.?ÿ As long as that individual does not represent himself as a Professional Land Surveyor, imply that he is a Professional Land Surveyor or use the word surveying in conjunction with what he is doing then he is not surveying without a license.?ÿ If you look at any state forestry association or society publication you will probably find one or two forestry consulting firms advertising Boundary Line Mainterance.?ÿ?ÿ
A forester can testify in Court about the location of a property line in a rural area as long as he does not say that he is a Professional Land Surveyor and the Court probably will recongise him as a expert witness.?ÿ The law in Louisiana says that timber theft can be accessed at 3 times the market value of the trees cutt.?ÿ Every Forester and Logger knows this,?ÿ But if criminal intent is not proven to the court will normally just the market value is accessed and not tripled.
Foresters are not a bunch of local yokels running around in dented up pickup trucks with chainsaws in the back.?ÿ They are University educated with a Bachlor of Science at a minimum.?ÿ Most consulting foresters I know have a master's degree.?ÿ A few have a PHD.?ÿ Some states, not all of them, have a Board of Registeration for Foresters.?ÿ These boards have continuing education requirements to practice and renew registration.?ÿ Did I mention a very through written exam after your application and references and experience and education have all been reviewed and approved?
I am NOT trying to justify a forester or anyother person practicing land surveying without a license.?ÿ But we as a profession are placing ourselves in a box that is becoming more and more inaccessible to the public we are licensed to provide our services to and protect.?ÿ And we are not the only professional group that has a code of ethics and knowledge of land descriptions and natural resources.
?ÿ
Also note the definition of "established property line".
There are several ways marking lines for timber harvest happens in my neck of the woods.?ÿ One is the refreshing of already painted lines with new paint marks.?ÿ As we have many old Westvaco timber land tracts, which were very clearly marked in the past, this one is usually pretty straight forward for those areas.?ÿ Although I'm in Kentucky, this method would clearly fall within the "established property line" definition from the Maine statute.
Another method is a forester (or someone claiming to be a forester) uses information (i.e. monuments, deeds, tax maps, etc.) to determine and then mark a line.?ÿ This second method would fall squarely into the realm of surveying by most state definitions of surveying and seems to run contrary to the linked Maine code on harvesting timber near a property line as these new marks would not fall into the category of preexisting.
I have received calls from property owners to mark lines for a timber operation before where I would point out to them that there are existing painted lines marking the line from earlier surveying.?ÿ I'm happy to go out and verify/refresh these lines unless they wanted to just use the already existing marks.?ÿ Most choose to use the existing marks once they realize they are out there.?ÿ That is after all the reason for marking corners and lines - for people to see where their property is located.
I've also received calls after some timber has been cut and the neighbor (not the timber owner) now has to hire a surveyor to verify if the timber cutters are staying off their property.?ÿ If the harvester is staying back from some idea of the line by 10 feet or so, there is almost never an issue.?ÿ If they are cutting as close as possible, it seems to be only slightly better than 50/50 chance that no trees have been cut off the neighbor.?ÿ Whether that is a harvester jumping the line to get a really nice tree or a badly marked line varies.
Foresters [?ÿ .?ÿ .?ÿ .?ÿ ] are University educated with a Bachlor of Science at a minimum.?ÿ Most consulting foresters I know have a master's degree.?ÿ A few have a PHD.?ÿ Some states, not all of them, have a Board of Registeration for Foresters.?ÿ These boards have continuing education requirements to practice and renew registration.?ÿ Did I mention a very through written exam after your application and references and experience and education have all been reviewed and approved?
Not in California.?ÿ The Board of Forestry (and Fire Protection) license qualification requirements here are:
- (b) Furnish evidence of having completed seven years of experience in forestry work. [?ÿ .?ÿ .?ÿ .?ÿ ] ?ÿAt least three of the seven years of experience shall include having charge of forestry work, or forestry work under the supervision of a person registered .?ÿ .?ÿ .?ÿ?ÿ
- (4) Forest utilization which includes scaling, and logging involving felling, bucking, choker setting, and Skidding/Yarding. Up to two years of the activities in this subsection qualify.
- (3) Forest protection, which includes the prevention and control [?ÿ .?ÿ .?ÿ .?ÿ ] of wildfire. Up to two years of the activities in this subsection qualify.
- (2) Silviculture, [?ÿ .?ÿ .?ÿ . ] including stand improvement, forest nursery production, the techniques of seeding and planting, and reforestation.?ÿ(No maximum reportable experience limits).
Concerning the Exam, it's kinda hokey.
- A grade of 75 percent shall be necessary for successful completion of the examination.?ÿ
- Study Exams.?ÿ Copies of examination questions for the three (3) year period may be obtained upon payment of a fee covering direct cost of duplication.
Formal education in Forestry can be substituted year for year concerning the seven year experience requirement, but is not mandatory.?ÿ There is no continuing education requirement in California.?ÿ So essentially you could be a sawyer for two years and fight fire for two years, then do something like plant trees or other activities under the supervision of a licensed Forester for three years and sit for the "exam" without even a high school diploma.?ÿ That's fair.
I suspect California's requirements are more restrictive than most other State's and t-ford's assertions are in general inaccurate.?ÿ
Don't get me wrong, I've respected what most licensed Foresters bring to the table and they were well aware of my role as the LS involved.?ÿ I think becoming a "licensed Forester" is a justifiably fairly low bar considering most of their work doesn't involve boundaries but the tricky stuff concerning forest husbandry I'm not qualified to judge and leave it up to them.?ÿ In Cali, "the regulations shall not be construed to authorize a registered professional forester [?ÿ .?ÿ .?ÿ .?ÿ ] to practice land surveying."?ÿ?ÿA clear line in the sand most Foresters do not cross.
