How Many More Times (can you break down the section) ?
When the section breakdown of record didn't match the fences, I had to know, so 5 hours later I had 5 static GPS shots and two robot setups for ties across the hollow down by the creek. A few more hours in the office cave and I have figured out: The East 1/4 has been inconvenient or missing or both since the 1970s, and someone did a breakdown where they use the midpoint of the N/S center line and not the intersection or any mention of a center of section monument. Said midpoint being 5' or so south of the intersection. If I re-do all my aliquot parts from that, it matches the occupation exactly, the chainlink to the hundredth, the 4x4 post to a tenth. They were "wrong" but it's what they did and people relied on it and built to it.
Those who never travel to the theoretical center corner are the most at fault.?ÿ It sure speeds up the field work, though.
are you using a prorate of the E1/4 to position the math center?
?ÿ
Am I not correct to say that the Bureau's manual of Surveying Instructions 1973 breakdown?ÿof a Section does not include the Center of Section; and that not until case law decisions, did we have a legal avenue to which we could use the center of section. And there IS NOT case law yet to determine whether we treat the Center of Section as a center 1/4 or an intersection? (And then again, the judge in the county north of me would rather you just drive an iron rod at the four fence corners and go home.)?ÿ?ÿ
ALSO, nowadays, I find myself saying 'Kenny?' a lot when breaking a section down. I could continually go back to further define why a monument is where it is and would the Section be better if I set another one elsewhere. Fortunately, when asked, Kenny always says "Bud, you got to know when to hold'em, know when to fold'em, know when to walk away, know when to run, you don't count your money, when your sittin' at the desktop, there'll be time enough for countin', when the closing's done". Thanks Kenny.?ÿ
The early manuals were somewhat rigid, containing several statements that become less true every day. Track through to the 2009 manual and you can see a progression to include forms and standards of evidence that recognize the impact of the actions of owners. Case law regarding monuments and fences can fill libraries. I know, I own one.
We teach and test subdivision of sections because it is repeatable and objective. It's beyond time we demand more of our profession. The age of mathemagicians is past and we need to act like it.
My .02, Tom
No, using the time honored county aerial survey section breakdown, NAD27 from the 1930s and updates 1972 in this section. Used for all surrounding jobs is not all recorded surveys in the section. But the local guys were more likely to spend a day measuring it themselves than drive an hour plus traffic to the county seat.
?ÿ
?ÿ
it looks like they did exactly that, question is, "correct" it lo these many years later, or describe what I find?
?ÿ
There is what they should have done, and then there is what they did. What they did would have been correctable, I suppose, before time went by and people built to it and more time went by. Now that it is what it is and has been for so long, what is left but to narrate what happened, as best as the evidence can tell us? Anything else would disturb the harmony of the neighborhood.
?ÿ
A nearby survey includes: Found 2 3/4" Iron Post At Corner Of Chainlink Fence, Held As Monument.
(see what he did there?)
We teach and test subdivision of sections because it is repeatable and objective.
It's great if we are subdividing new stuff. Can we really approach a survey from the outside in with perfect Manual procedures and call the occupation wrong after unwritten rights have tolled?
Idealism is great until reality slaps you in the head so hard and so frequently that you have no choice but to forget you ever heard of idealism.
Idealism involves there being one and only location for each and every section corner, including the center corner.?ÿ Reality is something completely different.?ÿ It's the difference between learning theory in a classroom and then learning how to apply that in the real world by making adjustments as required
One example of reality involves the Instructions that say the north-south quarter section is to be parallel with the east section line.?ÿ The term "east section line" assumes there is no bend of any kind at the east quarter corner.?ÿ When the east section line was said to have been monumented by a stake and pits at each of the three corners involved, todays surveyor would record his measurements to the nearest arc-second based on his opinion of where the center of the stake is.?ÿ No one in my part of the world has ever found three such undisturbed stake and pits monuments from more than 150 years ago.?ÿ But, if they did, they would not be in perfect alignment.
How Many More Times (can you break down the section) ?
None if everything fits the ??wrong? [Justice Cooley explains this] sectional breakdown. ???? ?ÿ
I do have a good one from this month:
Old description starting at the C1/4. A metes description, the only bounds are the 1/16th lines for the SE4NW4 and the C1/4. Then in the late 1990s a surveyor broke up the section, set the C1/4 and some 1/16th corners. Land was sold in the E1/2 and SW1/4 holding the 1990 era survey which was done using a math breakdown.
Now I'm surveying and I'm concerned with the NW4. At the C1/4 there is the 1990s era cap, 20' to the SE is an old fence corner. The fence corner fits the metes description but not the newer surveys for the 1990 era houses that were built. The fence corner would also fit other fence corners at the NE1/16 and the CE1/16 if it were to be used to breakdown the section. Some of the exterior corners are prorates, the north tier of 40's are federal lands.?ÿ
Anyway, it's an interesting one.?ÿ
One section I've done work in over the last couple decades has been 'broken down' atleast three times. First appears to have been in the 1950's and an iron pipe was set but no record of the survey recorded. Second time in the 1970's when several subdivisions were completed and a primary monument was set that appears to have been set based on intersections from the quarter corners (most of which are now gone) and within the last decade by another prolific surveyor of superior measurement ability who appears to have proportioned in the missing quarter corners to arrive at his solution and of course he set his own C 1/4 about 2' away from the 1970's monument and 5' away from the original iron pipe.?ÿ Depending on which subdivision I'm working in, I have to choose between the three which to hold. Why they couldn't just acknowledge the original pipe, even though it wasn't math perfect, is just a pebble in my shoe.
Kenny who?
Just kidding, but it made me think of a conversation I overheard last evening.?ÿ The 49 year-old fellow says, "That guy reminds me of Jackie Gleason."?ÿ The 43 year-old gal says, "Who's Jackie Gleason?"?ÿ He tells her that he played the sheriff in Smokey and the Bandit.?ÿ She says, "Oh, him.?ÿ We watched that movie last evening while we were camping out."?ÿ Meanwhile, Mr. Geezer here was imagining the closed fist and "To the moon, Alice.?ÿ To the moon."
