That's my retirement plan - accumulated gaps. I cash them in and, voila!
I've spent my career amassing these gores - all to my advantage. Mwa ha ha!
FrancisH, post: 400383, member: 10211 wrote: Not an intelligent thing for a professional surveyor to be saying in a public forum. Have you thought WHERE those EXTRA land came from?
If your client gains then someone must have lost same amount of land. Land is finite, you can't have everyone in the US have MORE land.Someone mentioned about competence of US surveyors?
My data collector has a scale factor setting in it. 1.005 and voila! More land for you Mr. Client!
Could this last post about moving monuments be FrancisH?
http://clsaforum.californiasurveyors.org/phpbb3/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=3012&start=25
So you see my fellow surveyors, it seems that I am not the only one noticing the stupidity of surveying practices hiding behind Cooley's 1870s logic.
You actually see Cooley ' s logic as stupid? (Read inappropriate).
You actually see Cooley ' s logic as stupid? (Read inappropriate).
Cooley's logic was appropriate for the 1800s when it was published. It is now 200 years after the fact. Surveyors used pacing & chains then, today we are using cm/mm TS & GPS.
It's like NASA using vacuum tubes for the space station.
The issue Cooley was addressing still exists. You are are proof of that.
The issue Cooley was addressing still exists. You are are proof of that.
The reason they are still existing is because you so called professional surveyors refuse to move forward and quote him every single time you can't reconcile a monument's position.
You can't carry out your job?You quote Cooley.
You can't locate a monument?You quote Cooley.
You can't face a neighbor with a gun?You quote Cooley.
The guy must be turning in his grave with all of you guys calling out his name till today.
It is inumerable justices in our appellate courts that quote him in deciding boundary disputes.
We are continually being given guidance to the proper way to retrace previous surveys. It is not just a mathematic exercise - it is evidentiary. Not all that complicated really.
You never explained. If the distance measured between two monuments disagree with the call, which one is moved to correct the problem?
We are continually being given guidance to the proper way to retrace previous surveys.
That's a first, I wonder if those same judges are giving advise to doctors on how to treat their patients? What medicines to give? Proper dosages too?
As to tort liability and duty of care, emphatically yes.
Expert testimony establishes facts to be determined, and the ruling is delivered based upon the proper application of law.
When we are licensed, we are examined on the appropriate application of retracement principles. A bit of subdivision issues are raised, but the tools we employ are not as important. Results and consistency are.
Is it not the same in your area?
Warren,
Nice tries engaging FrancisH. I included a 2007 Colorado Appeals Court case (Morales v. CAMB) earlier in this thread and FrancisH was unable to understand legal precedent. To him those old court cases (and new ones that stubbornly rely on precedent) are meaningless with the advent of modern, accurate survey instruments. As you can see from his reply (excerpt below), those old court cases are invalid once surveyors started using "cm level" accurate instruments! Another example of his willful ignorance on display....SIGH!
An aside, the Colorado court case Morales v. CAMB never cited Cooley's Dictum, but that didn't stop FrancisH. Poor bunny.
FrancisH, post: 400002, member: 10211 wrote: You are really digging rulings from ancient times to cover present cases aren't you. The Cooley doctrine came up with 'monument over plat' because of inadequate surveying technology in the 1800s.
You keep on referring to this ruling even when technology and training have improved to cm level accuracy. The excuse used by Cooley is not relevant in today's environment. When will you get that into your head?
FrancisH, post: 400383, member: 10211 wrote: Not an intelligent thing for a professional surveyor to be saying in a public forum. Have you thought WHERE those EXTRA land came from?
If your client gains then someone must have lost same amount of land. Land is finite, you can't have everyone in the US have MORE land.Someone mentioned about competence of US surveyors?
I guess if you're hiding behind a pseudonym, you can say pretty much anything you want on a public forum.....
Gene Kooper, post: 400411, member: 9850 wrote: Warren,
Nice tries engaging FrancisH. I included a 2007 Colorado Appeals Court case (Morales v. CAMB) earlier in this thread and FrancisH was unable to understand legal precedent. To him those old court cases (and new ones that stubbornly rely on precedent) are meaningless with the advent of modern, accurate survey instruments. As you can see from his reply (excerpt below), those old court cases are invalid once surveyors started using "cm level" accurate instruments! Another example of his willful ignorance on display....SIGH!
An aside, the Colorado court case Morales v. CAMB never cited Cooley's Dictum, but that didn't stop FrancisH. Poor bunny.
Gene, you're hiding behind the law to keep from doing a professional survey job (I just thought I would answer your question since FrancisH didn't bother).
FrancisH, post: 400393, member: 10211 wrote: The issue Cooley was addressing still exists. You are are proof of that.
The reason they are still existing is because you so called professional surveyors refuse to move forward and quote him every single time you can't reconcile a monument's position.
You can't carry out your job?You quote Cooley.
You can't locate a monument?You quote Cooley.
You can't face a neighbor with a gun?You quote Cooley.The guy must be turning in his grave with all of you guys calling out his name till today.
You've made clear your belief that we rely too heavily on Cooley's advice. On what basis are these beliefs founded? Assuming our actions should be guided by court decisions, which I believe we could all agree is indisputable, Is there more current legal authority at odds with Cooley that we should be considering? Or do these opinions of yours rest solely on the simplistic reasoning that because this decision is old, it is outdated.
and don't give me anymore of this Singapore crap, we all know that's BS
OMFG. Is this thread still going?
Some one should call the SPCA, you guys must be up to about the 5th or 6th horse that's in the process of being beaten to death here :dizzy:. Not being from the US it's been an interesting conversation to follow, although a little repetitive..!
As someone who has never had the inclination to engage in boundary surveys, even I can understand why monuments and precedent control. To do otherwise in a country as long settled as the USA would be to rip the fabric of land ownership apart - and anyone who can't understand that after being told more than once is a lost cause. Doesn't matter what the shiny new toys that measure to the mm say.
In The Sandpit, post: 400484, member: 99 wrote: OMFG. Is this thread still going?
Some one should call the SPCA, you guys must be up to about the 5th or 6th horse that's in the process of being beaten to death here :dizzy:. Not being from the US it's been an interesting conversation to follow, although a little repetitive..!
As someone who has never had the inclination to engage in boundary surveys, even I can understand why monuments and precedent control. To do otherwise in a country as long settled as the USA would be to rip the fabric of land ownership apart - and anyone who can't understand that after being told more than once is a lost cause. Doesn't matter what the shiny new toys that measure to the mm say.
The fact that this has gone on so long may be more a reflection of us than anything else. Would you continue a conversation on the street with a crazy man for 40 days straight? Have to give it to him that he has kept things lively. Speaking of keeping things lively, I'm surprised Kent McMillan hasn't weighed in on this one. That ol' boy loves a heated debate more than any of us out there. Hope he's doing ok.
