FrancisH, post: 396417, member: 10211 wrote: I am really more amused by your hiding behind your laws your ineptitude in surveying work. you always argue that monuments are sacred and their positions take precedence over deed. but how do you know if those monuments were not moved?no floods, no erosion, no earthquake in past 200 years? how do you know if those monuments were not placed there by some client that wanted to increase his land area? you removed a monument and place it 10 feet away, after a few days & rain you could not even tell if the monument was disturbed or not. even the passing of a bulldozer near a monument would push that monument away from it's position ever so slightly. even survey control markers established by the government here are re-checked every 10 years or so.
the answer my friend is you can't be sure of those incidents I mentioned. so the assumption that the monuments are in their present spot for past 200 years also has same weight as a case where it was moved intentionally a year ago or by nature.since the surveyor who made that survey 200 years is no longer around, you have to rely on what was written by him on the plat and retrace it.if you rely on his monument position so heavily, why can't you also place same weight on the measurements on his plat?
Francis, It sounds like your a difficult person to discuss things with and only want to argue. We have surveyors around here that also think they are better measurers than everyone else, and set monuments where they think are 'more correct' positions. (So it isn't all americans that are inept by your standards).
The only other argument I might mention is what happens if a licensed surveyor is hired to set someone's boundary and the owners on both sides rely on that line for setbacks, landscaping and everything else and another surveyor comes along with a different opinion. Why couldn't the owners, who agree on the legally set existing line rely on that?
Name-calling and accusing everyone who disagrees with you as being inept doesn't really help your credentials around here (unless you are running for office that is).
FrancisH, post: 396417, member: 10211 wrote: but how do you know if those monuments were not moved?
The burden of proof is on you; you prove to me that, that monument has moved and we can both do the happy dance and move on.
If not; then it's an original monument, undisturbed, in it's original position and it holds...
FrancisH, post: 396414, member: 10211 wrote: you seem to forget that your "bona fide rights" applies to the adjoining land owners too? a wrong boundary line/monument on one side affects the other side's claimant too. you gain, the other lose and vice versa.
The word "boundary" is a legal term of art..most boundaries are based in agreement. The courts here will uphold valid and legal boundary line agreements (not all are). We have this funny concept here called the "legal fiction." Generally, it is presumed that the boundary has not moved if it can't be proved that it has moved. The legal fiction is that the agreed boundary (the agreement can be implied or inferred) is the same boundary as that called for by the Deed. I realize a lot of Engineers have trouble with these ideas but Judges clearly don't. An established monument is not wrong, it can't be wrong by definition. Established meaning the owners have mutually recognized and agreed it is their mutual boundary corner. If a property owner loses acreage it is only because they agreed to it in exchange for having a fixed and stable boundary.
Okay... What's next?
Shall we argue about which side of the road to drive on?
How about Fly Rod v. Casting Rod, or 30/06 v. .270, or Ginger v. Mary Ann?
:sleeping:
Loyal
Loyal, post: 396448, member: 228 wrote: Okay... What's next?
[MEDIA=youtube]zZ3fjQa5Hls[/MEDIA]
Loyal, post: 396448, member: 228 wrote: Okay... What's next?
Shall we argue about which side of the road to drive on?
How about Fly Rod v. Casting Rod, or 30/06 v. .270, or Ginger v. Mary Ann?:sleeping:
Loyal
What? The answer is clearly Barbara Eden.
RADAR, post: 396451, member: 413 wrote: [MEDIA=youtube]zZ3fjQa5Hls[/MEDIA]
There will never again be anyone withe the grace and style of Fred and Ginger.
FrancisH
Please allow me to bring you up to speed about the methods of surveying here in the United States. There are two distinct camps of surveyors, and they are very different.
The first holds measurement as sacred. They use only one second guns without knowing what a second even is; for a calculator is a mundane and outdated tool of the past. Basic mathematical skills, logic, or reasoning are also archaic as computers can accomplish these tasks much faster and with more accuracy. They adjust out three hundredths error around a city block using least squares and then run the data through a complex program to determine which point is gospel and which should be used to rotate to. They look only for points that are called for or of record for everything else would be of no value. They provide always a record configuration of the boundary for their client and blow past anything that may be in the way. All occupation not matching record configuration is a historical mistake, and shame on these ignorant property owners for not getting a surveyor earlier.
The second camp needs no measurement tools at all; for measurements are irrelevant. In fact, the term measurement for them is a bad word and they are indignant toward anyone who may mention the term. They accept anything that might resemble a monument, and will tell you eight ways to Sunday that a monument should be held. Then the next week, repeat these same reasons again. They are intolerant to any mention of complexities that may be involved with any boundary resolution beyond holding everything. They fancy themselves surveyors, attorneys, judges and title officers all wrapped up in one. They continually cite lowty court decisions and consider the most iron clad boundary resolution as one where the owner can show them a piece of metal in the ground next to a fence.
FrancisH, post: 396398, member: 10211 wrote: Not sure what the point is, but here if your survey layout is erroneous by a margin that is thicker than the thickness of a dividing wall (~20 cm), adjacent owner can haul the land owner (my client), the contractor (wall builder) and me to court for trespassing and illegal occupation. How's that for responsibility?
My point is that measuring is the easiest part of our job. Many proffesional land surveyors here actually leave that part to their technicians.
Ya know, RogerLS, that was beautiful. Never heard it quite put like that.
So strong, and poignant. Somewhere between a whole field of sweet smelling wild roses, and a skunk!
🙂
Thanks
"I would rather have a monument set in the correct place and measured wrong than have a monument measured accurately in the wrong place"
If I've heard that once, I've heard it a million times from my mentors.
Was something Colonel Hendrix taught early in Survey Class.
Was part of the "first day" instructions for new hands and repeated when necessary.
It is among the phrases I say in court when pressed against the witness stand over trivial stuff just to get the attorney's eyes to pop out and start shouting at me. I never get tired of that happening.
😎
Francis,
Is there a reason that you feel compelled to bash American land surveyors' methodology?
I don't see this as a defensive move on your part, for no one is criticizing your locale's standard of care.
Perhaps it is provocation on your part.
It is telling that in Singapore only 1 year of experience is required to become licenced. The benifit of certified boundaries based on coordiantes is that much less skill is required on the part of the land surveyor. There is no way 1 year could prepare someone to survey on their own here. A much greater set of skills is required here.
It is pointless to argue about which system is better because the effort to get the United States to the Singapore system would be gargantuan. Even if someone agreed to pay for it, all the currently practicing surveyors could comfortably work for the rest of their lives using current law to create the required cooridiantes.
The cost-benifit analysis of converting our cadastral system is drastically different than a land poor country like Singapore.
There are legal limitations to what can be done too. Suppose we pass a law that all boundaries will be resolved as soon as possible and enetered into the national cadaster. An army of technicians and experts are hired to get this done. The problem is we can't apply a law retroactively here so every property owner has a right to have their day in Court. I may have what I think is the best answer but the owners are free to disagree with me and they can hire a Lawyer and put forth their evidence and arguments. Then if they don't like the Trial Court Judgment they can appeal on a broad range of complaints against what the Trial Court did.
Maybe most people would acquiesce but to really fix it there would need to be agreements put in place. I don't think a third party Surveyor not working for any of the property owners would be as persuasive as a property owner's good faith action of hiring a Surveyor so they can avoid trespassing on the neighbor.
FrancisH, post: 396417, member: 10211 wrote: I am really more amused by your hiding behind your laws your ineptitude in surveying work. you always argue that monuments are sacred and their positions take precedence over deed. but how do you know if those monuments were not moved?no floods, no erosion, no earthquake in past 200 years? how do you know if those monuments were not placed there by some client that wanted to increase his land area? you removed a monument and place it 10 feet away, after a few days & rain you could not even tell if the monument was disturbed or not. even the passing of a bulldozer near a monument would push that monument away from it's position ever so slightly. even survey control markers established by the government here are re-checked every 10 years or so.
the answer my friend is you can't be sure of those incidents I mentioned. so the assumption that the monuments are in their present spot for past 200 years also has same weight as a case where it was moved intentionally a year ago or by nature.since the surveyor who made that survey 200 years is no longer around, you have to rely on what was written by him on the plat and retrace it.if you rely on his monument position so heavily, why can't you also place same weight on the measurements on his plat?
I find it interesting that you would argue advancement of technology for refined measurements and correct positions in one post and now you are arguing the consideration of 200 year old measurements, I consider all of your points mentioned valid reasons for further investigation of a position, would even go as far as saying we should attempt to disprove found positions prior to accepting them, but if all you have is a 200 year old dimension over 200 years of reliance then sir 15 cm or 5 feet isn't going to break my heart on a plat that has verified improvements that agree.
-min.JPG "DSCF0032 (2)-min.JPG")
So if I followed the deed, I went the 1/2 mile, and found what looked to be a pile of stone at the NEC, turned south and went to the southeast corner of the survey, , didn't find the pile of stone, turned west, closed, and called it good, like a surveyor in 1923 did, and created a vacancy, that's good, because I went the measurements. But I didn't look at called distances from the corner to reference marks, which really, I mean, I just created a vacancy, I shoulda looked a little harder.... Fast forward to today's times, with our modern down to the CM accuracy, I find the pile of rocks the 1923 surveyor called for at about the right distance at the NEC, but the vacancy worries me, so I check the original patent records for reference marks, and I find a call to an X carved on the hill. If I remove the vacancy, calculate a new corner, and go from the newly calced NEC, I find, surprise, an x cut into the rock on the hill. And at the newly calculated NEC, a stone mound. This takes away the vacancy. So, we follow our surveyor friend from across the waters, and we hold measurements, and we have somehow made some extra land. Or we hold the monuments, and while the landowner might have some acreage he didn't expect, the whole county is not screwed up and in need of resurveying. How can you put a jigsaw puzzle back together if the physical pieces keep changing sizes and shapes? I don't care what the picture looks like, if the actual pieces keep changing, it won't work. And, for what it's worth, my vote is for the 30.06.
Well, measuring is the FIRST thing, an apprentice surveyor learns.
Go to field, tie it all. Come back to office. Study.
All deeds, sometimes back to 1800's.
After much careful study, calc a set of coords, return to field, shovel, metal detector. Search.
Recalc based on some fd. Addnl cors.
Now, set corners.... Er, not so fast... Dug out another corner... Revise coords again..
Now, draw plat. Based on accepting some corners, and rejecting some, depending on legal status, history. Intent, and such.
Record plat... Now we are done... Except we now live with our survey.
Sounds like our colleague, is not doing nearly as much as we do.
Maybe he is not up to USA standards!....
🙂
No matter what it says in some advertisements "one size" does not fit all.
The burden of proof is on you; you prove to me that, that monument has moved and we can both do the happy dance and move on.
If not; then it's an original monument, undisturbed, in it's original position and it holds...
proof?actual present day measurements against deed description.since distance was recorded by surveyor 200 years ago, then if present distance differs above accepted survey tolerance then that's proof that it has moved.
How can you put a jigsaw puzzle back together if the physical pieces keep changing sizes and shapes?
you put a jigsaw puzzle back by either accepting markers on the ground if within tolerable survey error, if outside of survey tolerable error limits, then move the monuments to conform with deed description.
either way, you have to change something - ground monuments outside of error limits to reflect what was written in the deed description OR deed description to follow ground monuments. you can't have it both ways.
way I see it, if you add up all the deed description area recorded on plat, you might get a total area that is greater than area of US. in which case Canada & Mexico might go to war over area claimed.
strange to think about it, the country that launched the GPS satellites to take accurate measurements on earth has a backward system of recording land area within its border.