I actually DID what Francis H says, one time.... I went to set a corner, and found a monument. I reached down, and tugged on it, and it turned out to be a 1/2" x 5" rebar, in the grass.... It moved easily! I knew the surveyor who had set it... and I saw what leaving it would do, and I RESET a "Disturbed" marker. I this ONE time! I have rejected a few, because they were disturbed, but that one above was crazy!
Unwritten measured distances between established boundaries win over the written time after time.
Then why bother to measure using a transit,total station,GPS all these recent years then?
You say one thing then turn around and get the latest mm total station to use for a boundary survey?
Now that is funny.
Surveyors have no right to try to influence change in the way property rights are interpreted. Surveyors are licensed to protect property rights
And yet the original surveys, subdivision surveys, town site surveys are all done by surveyors.....
The way I understand it, why hire a surveyor then? Or why is there a surveying profession in the US? If his job was that of a lawyer or landscape architect.
The way you describe your profession, you are phasing out the need of the public for a surveyor.
Let me see:
1. correct measurement of distance is not important - why use mm TS/GPS?a tape is much cheaper & lighter to carry around. hey just use your feet to pace out distances.
2. what ever the surveyor think is correct doesn't matter, just ask your neighbor where he thinks his boundary is and that's it.
3. as long as there is a monument somewhere in the USA, it's correct, no matter if it was just a cap that some kid in 1800s nailed to the ground to hold his cow in the pasture. hey, I can't prove that it's not a survey cap then surely it must be a survey cap.
that's funny in a sad kind of logic.
Nate The Surveyor, post: 397211, member: 291 wrote: I actually DID what Francis H says, one time.... I went to set a corner, and found a monument. I reached down, and tugged on it, and it turned out to be a 1/2" x 5" rebar, in the grass.... It moved easily! I knew the surveyor who had set it... and I saw what leaving it would do, and I RESET a "Disturbed" marker. I this ONE time! I have rejected a few, because they were disturbed, but that one above was crazy!
Nate, I just had a Section Corner that was lying loose on the ground. It was a brass cap that was set in 1994, typical 3" brass top on a pipe, it looked to me like the flanges were not flared and I'm guessing that it got frost heaved straight up and out of the ground. The flanges were still straight and it wouldn't be unusual for that to happen. It's possible for it to also happen to a rebar, but maybe not where you work.
A Harris, post: 397195, member: 81 wrote: Grasshopper, you have proved nothing.
Hey! As a Grasshopper First Class, (and one who still believes I still hold the most advanced Grasshopper rank on these forums), I suggest that your use of the term here, diminishes and demeans the position.
I thought a Grasshopper was one who knew little but wanted to learn; not one that knew little with NO desire to learn. Big difference in my mind.
FrancisH, post: 397213, member: 10211 wrote: Then why bother to measure using a transit,total station,GPS all these recent years then?
You say one thing then turn around and get the latest mm total station to use for a boundary survey?
Now that is funny
I agree with that comment in many ways. The latest mm total station is best suited for engineering survey. Of course if I had one I might use it for boundary measurements. Sometimes established boundaries are evident before the first measurement is made. I have found the most valuable surveying tool is a shovel.
FrancisH, post: 397198, member: 10211 wrote:
You as a professional surveyor whose main job is to measure the earth cannot turn your back and say monuments are correct.
My main job is to render a professional opinion on the limits of ownership between various parties. The measurements that I take are only a tool to point me in the right direction. After I have considered all of the pertinent information I produce a product to show my opinion to a degree of accuracy that you suggest. Keep in mind if you only hold measurements, odds are you are going to be precisely wrong.
linebender, post: 397222, member: 449 wrote: I agree with that comment in many ways. The latest mm total station is best suited for engineering survey. Of course if I had one I might use it for boundary measurements. Sometimes established boundaries are evident before the first measurement is made.
:gammon: :gammon: :gammon: :gammon: :gammon: :gammon: :gammon: :gammon: :gammon: :gammon: :gammon: :gammon: :gammon: :gammon: :gammon: :gammon: :gammon: :gammon: :gammon: :gammon: :gammon: :gammon: :gammon: :gammon: :gammon:
I'm a firm believer that the vast majority of boundary confusion is being caused specifically by increased precision of the equipment we've been "blessed" with....
[USER=449]@linebender[/USER] you fixing to retire soon or are you going to hang out till the last bird leaves the nest? is he about 10 y.o. now?
FrancisH, post: 397203, member: 10211 wrote: Usually you get 3 points from 3 adjoining lots - left, right, top/bottom lots. The premise being these 3 lots surrounding your lot would not be erroneous at the same time since over time, these were surveyed/resurveyed by different surveyors. If those 3 lots surrounding you are in agreement then your lot won't have any gaps/overlaps with those 3 and you get the same peace from your adjoining neighbors. Only in our country, peace is brought about by actual measurements that agree with deeds. So if any of the 3 neighbors complain, then you show to that neighbor that the position of the lot surveyed was also referenced from a corner of his lot.So if he is saying my survey is erroneous then it also means his lot is erroneous.
Oh, I totally get the concept of tying to adjoining lot corners, and the more you tie, the better. And if your rules state that the three matching monuments must be from three different lots, top, bottom, left, and right that's even better than if you can just go from 3 monuments in one adjoining lot. I simply don't stop with other monuments.
Is this minimum standard by some kind of law or rule? Or is this your own, personal, standard you try to adhere to?
The office of the Description in the title deed is to identify the subject matter of the party's contract, meaning the land.
Most boundaries are based in agreement, virtually all artificial boundaries are. The agreement as to location may be in parol or may be implied from the physical evidence. Often the Deed is delivered with a bare identifying description then subsequently the owners establish their boundaries by parol agreement.
The Land Surveyor is hired by a property owner because she or he is an expert in locating property boundaries and can give advice with respect to them. Since the Land Surveyor is not the property owner he or she cannot impose a solution, this is Cooley's point. If all reliable evidence is missing then the Surveyor can measure over and set pins but this really just a proposed solution until the owners accept it by their behavior or written agreement (not required, however).
In boundary disputes the cases really boil down to finding out what the agreement between the parties was, did the correct parties make the agreement, and was it implemented. The short hand for this is "the intentions of the parties is the paramount consideration." The Courts focus a lot more on the human story of what happened as opposed to bare technical details such as mere measurements.
The first place to look for the agreement is the Deed but that is not the only place. It is our job to precisely locate the physical evidence and analyze it. I have yet to encounter a Superior Court Judge out there surveying the boundaries or even the lawyer in his Armani suit and wingtip shoes, they expect us to do our job.
FrancisH, post: 397213, member: 10211 wrote:
3. as long as there is a monument somewhere in the USA, it's correct, no matter if it was just a cap that some kid in 1800s nailed to the ground to hold his cow in the pasture. hey, I can't prove that it's not a survey cap then surely it must be a survey cap.
Ah yes, the old goat stake accusation. We who believe in the quasi judicial function of the licensed surveyor to determine the location of existing boundaries in accordance with state law keep our surveying determinations within the borders of our individual states. So yes a prominent part of that process is receiving the same testimony as a court would and using the facts applicable to state law to make those determinations. Is that determination final? Yes in most cases it should be and was the intended purpose for licensing. Unfortunately for property owners this quasi judicial certainty is only until the next surveyor arrives. I am not optimistic that licensure will be seen as a public benefit much longer as this disagreement in the profession continues to manifest itself.
Since the criteria for "exactness" in Indonesia is plus or minus 15 cm I'm going to go there to survey.
I won't have to use 3/4" brass tags with a nail to show the location of corners. I can use pie plates.
Any subsequent surveyor with any talent at all would surely land on the plate of å±15 cm was the rule.
My pie plate would be good for eternity!
rfc, post: 397217, member: 8882 wrote: Hey! As a Grasshopper First Class, (and one who still believes I still hold the most advanced Grasshopper rank on these forums), I suggest that your use of the term here, diminishes and demeans the position.
I thought a Grasshopper was one who knew little but wanted to learn; not one that knew little with NO desire to learn. Big difference in my mind.
Hey you have stripes and nobody has said anything about taking them away.
You have come far and remain open to knowledge and the advancement of our profession.
Never close your mind to the way of others, even when they will not bend to the supreme edits of mankind.
As they stand firm in their inferior knowledge of worldly endeavors, stay your path and enlighten others with your accomplishments.
carryon.............:clink:
FrancisH, post: 397198, member: 10211 wrote: Boundaries are based on where people think they are. Isn't that a silly concept?
This is exactly the case in most of the animal kingdom too.
Just because your instrument outputs distances to the MM doesn't mean that you have measured to the MM.......
I had a party once that insisted on recording his edm shots in Metric because, yeah you guessed it, the edm output in meters was too 3 decimal places and therefore much more accurate that the foot setting that only output to 2 decimal places. I think that he's working for Francis in Singapore now. 🙂
[USER=1]@Wendell[/USER] if you do end up deleting this thread, would you send me a copy or maybe a heads up so I can make a bunch of screen captures? It really needs to be read by every young and upcoming surveyor that can get their hands on it.
Ya know, Adam has a valid point there.
In seeking to reason with FrancisH, we are also sort of reasoning with our inner child, who wants everything so cut and dried, as Mr Francis's world. But, most of us, have been THROUGH the enlightenment process... to an adequate degree, to not listen to that voice. Mr Francis is a representative of that to us. I do not despise him... It is a good mental exercise to consider all the above posts. Helps me keep focused... A LEGAL corner is worth more than a measurement... and a Legal corner, that is measured to properly is often our role.
If I were moderator... How could I keep my mouth shut? (I did ask my self that question!) What's Wendell the SURVEYOR'S opinion here? (not necessarily Wendell the moderator!)
Anyway, It's been a very interesting thread.
N
Francis makes a lot of interesting points.
There is no rancor from me, I'm just interested how a system making the numbers supreme works.
It became apparent that monuments here have special meaning pretty quickly as I began surveying, but like most I was hung up on the numbers early on, it took a while to shake that.
Of course today, almost no time is spent on numbers, adjustments, calculations,,,,,,,,it's been a long time that my calculator was punched all day long. Maybe that's a good thing, gives more time to think big picture.
Nate The Surveyor, post: 397211, member: 291 wrote: I actually DID what Francis H says, one time.... I went to set a corner, and found a monument. I reached down, and tugged on it, and it turned out to be a 1/2" x 5" rebar, in the grass.... It moved easily! I knew the surveyor who had set it... and I saw what leaving it would do, and I RESET a "Disturbed" marker. I this ONE time! I have rejected a few, because they were disturbed, but that one above was crazy!
Good on you!
A colleague of mine had a rule of thumb that any monument 0.4' out from calc'd record position was by definition "disturbed" ('50s well settled suburban subdivisions) should be rejected, removed(???) and pincushioned at the "correct" location. My position was (and still is) that a declaration that a monument is disturbed is based on field observation of the monument's condition, pedigree, patina, etc. proving a physical act has moved the monument from its original position, *not* mathematics from record. That being said, it's tricky; rarely you'll find what appears to be a perfectly good undisturbed monument 50' from record, *but*, very near the record math location is a mysterious uncompacted hole detected by probing, buried broken glass, bearing trees, a magnet or other memorials. An irate and somewhat competent landowner moved it to better his situation. So I shy away from a blanket "looks good, is good" conclusion without further investigation on monuments that are curiously out of position compared to its nearby neighbors.
I also find the arbitrariness of a hard number (0.4' above), ostensibly based on knowledge of the equipment's accuracy used to set the monument to be pedantic. I've declared 50 year old BLM pipes lying on the ground 25' away from a decaying rock mound mentioned in the record (desert vehicles snagging them) as disturbed (not obliterated) and reset them in the mound, even though the mound was a few feet from record. I've found original undisturbed stones 100' away from some jacklegs pin set in 1980 and declared it the corner.
It may be be just me, but I respect an original pedigreed monument above the readout(s) on my GPS/TS gimcrackery even though it's telling me exactly where I am. It's not telling me where the monument is, often. Yea, the occupation (fenceline) surveyors disagree with me, don't disturb repose by landowners, yada-yadah but I disagree. If ownership is based on ancient deeds with provable monuments and occupation is way out of whack, a boundary agreement (lot line adjustment in urban areas) if the owners are reasonable, or litigation if they're pissed off or rich enough.
So tell me this, up to what year of survey will this doctrine apply?
1700s? 1800s? 1900s? 1950s? 2000? 2010?
I mean you must realise that a survey made yesterday with gps at mm total station can't have a monument be off by 10ft. What survey year will you consider a 10 ft discrepancy as a monumenting blunder?
[INDENT]
This is exactly the case in most of the animal kingdom too.
And here I thought that monuments were placed so I would not have to pee at every corner of my lot.[/INDENT]
