Holy Cow, post: 366145, member: 50 wrote: must be able to afford survey quality GPS simply to find a reference point sure doesn't help out the otherwise highly skilled professional who doesn't
Raises hand. B-)
In my neck of the woods, this hasn't bee an issue to date and I do note/ understand/ agree that POB's or POC's (commencing from) are a different animal. For that matter, the distinction of a "control point or control corner" makes sense to me when a tying course (or two) is shown on the recorded map.
For my retracement, I would ask that you set reference or witness with line of sight (could be 1 , 10 or 1,000 feet depending on setting). An item that requires traverse just to "see" doesn't really "witness" anything.
Lastly, I am a proponent of on line. Either extended or shortened.
I agree when setting a monument it is best to put it on line. In the Forest we often set tags on bearing trees which obviously are not on line. I found two BLM RPs not on line about a half chain from the corner. They have big --> on them pointing to the corner. The corner has a capped pipe down about a foot in the edge of a gravel road. What did the Forester hook on to? Right, one of the RPs. They know BTs are not on line but a nice 3-1/4" cap must be the corner despite the giant arrow on it.
The boundary monuments are not set for the benefit of the land surveyor. They are set for the benefit of the land owners. How does a 5000' reference tie help a landowner understand where their property corner is?
Just because you have the ability to easily do something, does that make it the right thing to do? Careful not to get carried away with technology.
'Witness' monuments are by definition on a line. 'Reference' monuments are not.
Karoly nailed it. That was precisely what I was going to say. (edit: I meant his first answer....I didn't see the second one when I posted.)
I'm doing a 1950's era survey with three parcels. Each parcels POB is tied to a mid 1800's CGS triangulation station about about 16,000 feet away. To the nearest hundredth no less.
Like I said, this was done in the 1950's....the biggest tie I have ever seen to date (ever).
