What if the deed is wrong and the survey is right?
NorthernSurveyor, post: 396985, member: 149 wrote: I will share a best practice that is very good when work with older measure and different inaccuracies of alignment (bearing, angles, azimuth) and distance terrestrial measure.
1. Enter land description (plat, deed m&b) measurements into weighted least squares adjustment (WLSA) and weight bearings and distances for measurement accuracy for bearing & distances based on significant figures of measure, what your estimate is for the equipment of the era (was it a compass, transit, theodolite or total station for alignment; was it chain, steel tape, edm or total station for distances); and also any knowledge of how surveyor work accuracy if you have retraced him before. Run adjustment of record measure and analyze. Any record measure blunders will quickly be identified and isolated.
2. Seed a good geodetic coordinate if you have one from prior work, and you are going to use GNSS for recovery. Rerun adjustment and you have now great "look for" coordinates if your going to use GNSS..
3. Go to field, do your recovery and measurement of located controlling points,
4. Add to the WLSA your measurements (GNSS or terrestrial) with proper weighting for centering, sighting, angles, distances if terrestrial or centering and GNSS measure. Disable record measure and adjust your measurements so you QC all is good with your survey.
5. Enable record measure and run together an analyze. You will quickly see how record alignment and distances fit. Something like a long or short chain or lack of slope correction, tension, or temperature correction will show. Angles you first weighted at 10" might show as 20 or 30. After this you have a reasonable basis to re-weight the original measure.
6. Rerun WLSA with new weighting. If you have missing corner markings, this adjustment may be your basis of best location of original corner points. There are some variables here, and you need to finalize your decisions based on legal principals and your professional decision.
The beauty of using a WLSA is that it adjusts all measurements the least (consequently the name of WLSA) and you can rely on your higher accuracies of your work, while really fine tuning the original measure to provide the most likely location of missing corners based on the original land description measure. I have used WLSA with only record measure to isolate multiple blunders in the original land parcel dimensions. WLSA--- POW several dimensions adjust hugely such as wrong bearing quadrant, distance drafted 10' off and so on.
Try it, you might like it. I do. Its been a long time since I have surveyed on my State license, but I started doing this in the 80s when WLSA packages such as StarNet, GeoLab (my favorite) and Columbus came available.
This is how we know if a monument has been disturbed.
This is how we find the age-old blunders.
This is how we know the adjoiner or the fence builder moved the pin.
This is how we know who pulled the steel tape and how long or short that made the distances on the ground.
What is the difference between a raw observation and a measurement? A measurement is a weighted mean (with an accompanying standard deviation) developed from a set of raw observations.
Redundancy. Not raw observations.
A network least squares analysis is developed from a network of measurements developed from redundant raw observations.
I wanted to quote NorthernSurveyor's post to highlight it and say thank you for posting it. This is 95% identical to how I do my analyses using Star*Net and Columbus and Primacode Transform.
Often the discrepancies between a deed and what we find on the ground can be accounted for by understanding how the measurements were made.
This is the layer of analysis that many modern surveyors with modern equipment skip entirely, and why so many pincushions exist.
For all the fuss about technology and precision and math, all of that is only half the boundary surveying task. Even if non-surveyors set a non-standard monument in a mathematically "wrong" place, after some years (could be 7 or 10 or 20 depending on place and circumstances) if the owners and adjoiners have agreed to it (even silently) or relied upon it (by building to it), the monument is the boundary and everyone has unwritten rights.
Look up in Black's Legal Dictionary the phrase "droit droit". It's old Law French that basically means "perfect title". We Common Law Westerners have two kinds of title, written and unwritten. The name of the game is to get both kinds and have them agree with each other. The unwritten title is occupation, what you own and occupy on the ground. The written title is the piece of paper with the deed and description on it. "Droit Droit" means the occupation and the paper title match exactly as proven by a recent recorded survey.
What a boundary surveyor does here in the USA is compare the written title with the owner's occupation of hopefully the same place on the ground.
Hopefully they match within current statutory standards. In my state that's half a foot, or 6 inches times 25.4mm -- quite close to Singapore's 15cm.
If they do not match, it is up to the owner to deal with it, most likely with a recorded survey in hand to take to court or some other administrative process.
Sun came up -- off to work. Glad this thread is still here, let's be civil. I haven't been able to log in from my phone for a few days so I have to catch up sprinkling "likes" around and replying. Best thread ever.
FrancisH, post: 397377, member: 10211 wrote: There you go again, you again have 3 options- your deed, adjoiner deed or parole evidence.
That statement implies that you do not understand that you must have 1 basis for boundary.
3 options again brings uncertainty to how to solve discrepancies.
parol
Francis describes a system where title and location are synonymous. It could be done if the surveying is heavily regulated, like building inspectors regulating new construction. I don't think the American public is willing to accept or pay for such a system. The other issue is such a system could not be applied by fiat to existing boundaries.
In the U.S. written title covers the location of what the owner legally possesses even if the location is not precisely consistent with the current description. Unwritten title occurs in the case of Adverse Possession but this usually covers entire parcels, not conflicts over strips between owners.
In cases of conflict between measurements and monuments, our common law rules of construction are clear, monuments control unless there is clear and convincing evidence of a contrary intention of the original parties to the Deed.
regarding "not getting the acres my deed says I own" ...
Get it surveyed before you buy it. "Let the buyer beware" is a basic Westernism, or "Caveat Emptor" if I recall the correct Latin.
We presume that you (the buyer) are competent to do your own due diligence which hopefully includes a survey but for various reasons since 1871 or 1933 almost never does because our citizenry has come more and more to depend on title insurance rather than getting a survey, and, since WWII most people only stay in one place for 5 years and so are never there long enough to take advantage of accrued unwritten rights, and probably aren't aware of them anyway. They are betting on cashing out the equity of the house and that doesn't require a survey, because the next buyer will accept what the deed says at face value. Buying a house in America is interesting because there is a flurry of papers to sign and no one wants anyone to mention "survey" because those surveyors are always moving the lines and causing problems and holding up or entirely sabotaging the deal. Because real estate deals with the paper titles and they hate it when those change.
Some of FrancisH's critiques include that we USA surveyors make money by doing a survey that doesn't "correct" anything, that we perpetuate ongoing business by not fixing the ground to match the deed, or in that strange USA custom fix the deed to match the ground, so that everything is happy ever after.
I can see why that might be the perception, however, as others in the thread have stated, it is not our authority to fix it. We can measure, analyze, decide which monuments to hold and why. We can include parol evidence, and show the modern measurements next to the deed measurements on the recorded survey map. We can provide all the evidence and opinion that a court would ask for and many times make going to court a moot point.
(perhaps someone who knows more could write about the "race to the courthouse" and the sequence of recording deeds, is there ever a "race to the courthouse" situation with the sequence of recording a boundary survey?)
Consider that there is are entire industries that make money from indeterminacy, i.e. from not knowing exactly where the boundary is, so they can keep cycling the title through the real estate process ... if we surveyors seem like part of that, it's our reluctance to do anything but "go plat" on a boundary survey without showing today's measurements or the relation of the monuments to a modern datum. Showing "record" and "measured" seems to be the happy medium that is our custom -- it shows what the updated deed would read if the owner chose to have it changed.
There went 3 hours I'll never get back.
At least you are now fully prepared for the final exam that is scheduled for 3:00 p.m. tomorrow.
Francis,
I'm curious about your assessment of the English method of cadastral surveying, given the centuries of surveying, and laying out of plats and descriptions.
There exists a myriad of systems of documenting boundaries between claimants of stewardship of land.
Those who are entrusted with the establishment of those limits by placing monuments at those locations, and memorializing descriptions of those tangible and retraceable points are held in the highest esteem by society.
It is a noble endeavor to accept this responsibility. To conflate this activity with incompetence invites a presumption of condescension which is unwarranted.
[USER=9900]@Warren Smith[/USER]
Sounds unWARRENted to me....
Yes, on a serious note... a professional surveyor looks at EVERY solution.
I'd like to see new licensees read this whole thread.
Great continuing education, for some!
In all the answers that I got when I asked why don't you consider what you measure today as basis for the layout of the boundary corners, I get primarily the answer - "our job is mainly based on the laws of the US...."
You know, almost all professional services from survey, construction, sanitation, architecture, medical etc, have governing laws. You design & construct a building based on existing building codes, you dig wells & sewers based on exiting sanitation regulations, you treat patients who are sick based on health protocols. Yet it was only here that I heard surveyors say that their job is really not to measure but to facilitate between land owners in the location of their boundary lines.
What?
Doctors don't say I treat sickness based on what the laws say. They treat their patients' sickness based on medical findings.
Civil Engineers build roads & structures don't use building codes but use heavy equipment, cement, rebars, bulldozers etc in their construction.
They do their jobs following guidelines but thier primary job is still civil engineering, medical diagnosis, etc.
Surveyors you say locate boundaries between landowners by following what the law written by Cooley in 1870s as primary guide.
They don't rely on what a TS/GPS tell them. Whatever results from those instruments don't matter especially if those results say that ground markers do not conform to descriptions. Leave all those technical surveying stuff like measuring and recording positions and computing coordinates and drawing plats to the "technicians". Really?
Is that what you are saying your job is as surveyors?
[USER=10211]@FrancisH[/USER]
Measurements are a part of the evidence as are calls to monuments, natural features, fences and a lot more. I don't know anyone who discounts measurements. Personally I try to measure as accurately as I can. Determining a retracement boundary actually means knowing the standards of practice and the laws in order to do it. Diagnosing an illness does not rely or case law so much but probably does take sometimes looking @ reference books.
You sound frustrated in this argument, and want to fling insults. I am sure you are intelligent enough to know what I just said, but you putting words into what others are saying and being sarcastic It's silly and unprofessional, and doesn't show any interest in understanding the standards in this country. But carry on.
Although this thread does contain a lot of excellent content for US surveyors and should be required reading for new licensees, the catalyst for capturing it seems ridiculous. Watching so many highly qualified, well spoken, and knowledgeable US surveyors attempt to reason with or educate a technician from another part of the world, who clearly has no ability or willingness to understand anything about the differences between making measurements and how we establish boundaries, and why, reminds me of the adage about wrestling in the mud with pigs. Fortunately, this technician does not work in the US and hopefully they never will. Doesn't mean we don't have plenty of them here, but arguing with this one is a complete waste of time, IMHO.
Carry on.
FrancisH, post: 397610, member: 10211 wrote: In all the answers that I got when I asked why don't you consider what you measure today as basis for the layout of the boundary corners, I get primarily the answer - "our job is mainly based on the laws of the US....
Is that what you are saying your job is as surveyors?
Are you saying that all you need to do, as a boundary surveyor, is find 3 pins that fit, slap the deed on the ground and you're done?
FrancisH, post: 397610, member: 10211 wrote: In all the answers that I got when I asked why don't you consider what you measure today as basis for the layout of the boundary corners, I get primarily the answer - "our job is mainly based on the laws of the US...."
You know, almost all professional services from survey, construction, sanitation, architecture, medical etc, have governing laws. You design & construct a building based on existing building codes, you dig wells & sewers based on exiting sanitation regulations, you treat patients who are sick based on health protocols. Yet it was only here that I heard surveyors say that their job is really not to measure but to facilitate between land owners in the location of their boundary lines.
What?
Doctors don't say I treat sickness based on what the laws say. They treat their patients' sickness based on medical findings.
Civil Engineers build roads & structures don't use building codes but use heavy equipment, cement, rebars, bulldozers etc in their construction.They do their jobs following guidelines but thier primary job is still civil engineering, medical diagnosis, etc.
Surveyors you say locate boundaries between landowners by following what the law written by Cooley in 1870s as primary guide.
They don't rely on what a TS/GPS tell them. Whatever results from those instruments don't matter especially if those results say that ground markers do not conform to descriptions. Leave all those technical surveying stuff like measuring and recording positions and computing coordinates and drawing plats to the "technicians". Really?Is that what you are saying your job is as surveyors?
Francis:
Surveyors decidedly do not rely on what a TS/GPS tells them, the GPS is not a magical instrument that spits out boundary solutions, they both are wonderful tools but there is more to a boundary than math. The GPS has no authority.
Since we all agree that older measurements are less precise than newer ones, how do you reconcile moving monuments to hold the older measurements, I'm just not getting it, it means either taking existing ground under no dispute from the neighbor or the client.
I recently had a boundary with old and new pins at the ten corners. they were about ten feet apart, the new ones were set in the early 2000's per a math solution, but like all those types of solutions it made the adjoining parcels smaller or bigger than record, the whole mess of moving monuments would need to be repeated through a whole 1/2 section of land to really "fix" it, but by the end of the big solution someone would have to lose and someone would have to gain. Now the ten original pins are remaining, the ten new pins are removed and all the neighbors are very happy.
And you seem to think we never adjust the record to reflect the new survey, that also isn't true.
It's two different systems of land division, I do like this system much better, it protects the rights of the individual.
Francis- There is a basic concept that is still being missed though it has been mentioned many times, in many different ways; If boundaries were defined only by measurement, they would continuously move as our measurement tools become more precise over time. If this were the case, a survey done today would not be good 20, 30 years from now as our tools develop even further. To provide for STABILTY, our task as surveyors has been defined (through court cases) to locate boundaries as they were ORIGINALLY established. We analyze today's measurements in conjunction with any pertinent evidence recovered of the original line to make this determination.
Mr Francis,
I see it like this:
You are peering into the knothole, in a board, in the backside of a barn, and watching a cow get milked. Your hands are not on the cow, but mine are. (hand milking)
It's really difficult to hear you sling insults, "You are doing it wrong", when I have milking a cow down to habit, and you only have a part of the theory. I am not slinging insults, at you. I am saying that an American Surveyor has alot more to consider, than what you have to consider.
And, we do measure it all. It's just that to build a country, monuments need to stay put.
I have an imaginary section of land in my head. It has been surveyed many times over. And, each time it gets surveyed, by a surveyor who "Believes in the doctrine of correction", the corners get moved. On and on.
Until, nothing is free of moving, it's hard to build a town, country, and nation.
From where I sit, saying that "Alaska is in the wrong place, MOVE IT NORTH 10 feet" is not a practical use of measurements. Let's just update the coordinates.
OK?
Nate
Nate The Surveyor, post: 397656, member: 291 wrote: Mr Francis,
I see it like this:
You are peering into the knothole, in a board, in the backside of a barn, and watching a cow get milked. Your hands are not on the cow, but mine are. (hand milking)
It's really difficult to hear you sling insults, "You are doing it wrong", when I have milking a cow down to habit, and you only have a part of the theory. I am not slinging insults, at you. I am saying that an American Surveyor has alot more to consider, than what you have to consider.
And, we do measure it all. It's just that to build a country, monuments need to stay put.
I have an imaginary section of land in my head. It has been surveyed many times over. And, each time it gets surveyed, by a surveyor who "Believes in the doctrine of correction", the corners get moved. On and on.
Until, nothing is free of moving, it's hard to build a town, country, and nation.
From where I sit, saying that "Alaska is in the wrong place, MOVE IT NORTH 10 feet" is not a practical use of measurements. Let's just update the coordinates.
OK?Nate
To add to that, in buidling a City the first thing is the Surveyors set stakes at the block corners. Then either the Surveyors (or sometimes the builders) measured and set the Lot corners. Then the buildings got built either with party walls or walls touching. In the process all of the original stakes got wiped out (they built right up to the edges). If the City Engineer was doing his job maybe block control got referenced into the street and sometimes it is doubtful the City Engineer's control lines have any connection to the original survey. Then 40 years later, after a major earthquake and fire which burned down the entire City, one of the owners commissioned the City Surveyor to mark a Lot line, naturally there was a difference. So the Court observes, how do we know the block corner you are measuring from is the same as the block corner originally set there 40 years ago? Maybe your measurements are different than the original measurement? Let's just use the existing line between the buildings because we can't have the lines moving around all the time, it creates too much havoc, the primary thing we are after is stability so stop changing the answer.
It appears that it was common City Engineer practice in the 19th century to "improve" the block measurements. Cooley complained of this practice more than once and we have an early 20th century published case here were the Sacramento County Surveyor testified as an expert that the Sacramento City Engineer's centerline control from the 1870s was not connected to the original Sutter surveys (1840s and 50s) because the City Engineer wasn't retracing, he was improving on the original surveys.
Remember when the handheld GPS guy figured out when the common corner to Colorado, Utah, New Mexico and Arizona was several miles off? It hit the news big time.
We have a contemporary author of a book entitled "The Pincushion Effect" - Jeffery Lucas, in which he declaims the difference between a true retracement survey and one which "improves" upon the original survey. The result of the latter leads to said pincushioned corner monuments. Lucas, a licensed land surveyor and an attorney, cites statutes and judicial opinions in many of the states to bring home this point (pardon the pun).