A couple of observations:
If we are discussing a prorated 1/4 that was set .5' "off" in 1975 and was computed from existing section corners 1/2 mile away it would meet any 1975 accuracy standards. So why would it be rejected?
If this is a 1/4 on an east-west line then half the time it should be about .5' from a mid point position. a couple of inches south of a mid-point and .33' east or west of mid-point. Basically in a township about a quarter of the 1/4 corners will fall east or west of mid point when correctly prorated.?ÿ
acknowledging monuments move-- freeze/thaw cycles, subsidence, erosion, etc.?ÿ
That's actually backing up referencing monuments, since they've moved, but the boundary line isn't supposed to, in theory.
The monument is the corner.?ÿ The corner is not an infinitesimal point created by algorithms.
So what if a large tree branch sheared off due to ice overloading, hit the top of the monument and moved the top a half inch.?ÿ The tree branch did not change the legal description.
Well, that is my point. There isn't one. You do not get to determine boundary in Washington.
I think a lot of people get bogged down on the wrong issue. Jeff Lucas puts it well in?ÿThe Pincushion Effect by saying that there are 2 questions when determining boundaries: "what" and "where". The "what" is a legal question and outside our area of practice as surveyors. The "where" is our area of practice. In other words, I can't say for sure that you actually own Lot 1 of the plat of Shady Deal Estates, since there are items well outside my area of practice that may affect ownership, such as adverse possession, prior title, etc. I can say where the corners of Lot 1 are. I think many people get too afraid to say anything that may be construed to be a legal opinion "what you own", and therefore fail to say "where are the lot corners".
So, on a smaller scale, you northern surveyors must experience this monument shifting annually due to frost heaving.
not sure if that's actually big enough to read, bottom line: S7?ø04'54"W 83.69'(M) S7?ø16'16"W 83.95'(R1)
@david-baalman?ÿ Me too except I don't append "(M)" to my measured values.?ÿ And if my measurement is within a few hundredths of record I'll tell a little lie and hold the record values.?ÿ I figure my measurement techniques are no better than a few hundredths (up to a several hundredths on mile+ long lines), i.e. I don't generate points accurate to the least count reported on my map (01" and 0.01'), rather I generate error ellipses and if the monument is within the ellipse I'll hold record measurements.?ÿ I've been chided for doing so, the claim being I'm not reporting my actual field measurements.?ÿ We're quibbling over a few hundredths here folks.
Whether a found undisturbed monument of record holds is a different issue, no amount of mathemagician flimflammery trumps its position as the "true " corner.?ÿ There are exceptions, for example lot sideline rear monuments abutting the subdivision boundary (a senior line) are closing corners and good for bearing, but not distance, though some may disagree.
Owners should be able to rely on their ancient monuments when exercising their dominion, more modern resurveys be damned.
?ÿ?ÿ
The monument doesn't even have to move.?ÿ It's the difference in the measurement process and equipment that provides plenty of these microscopic "CORRECTIONS".
I'm with you, man.?ÿ Traverse closure error at 0.2' and someone's going to put measured value up against the record by an amount that's far less than that.
Frost mostly raises things out of the ground if they don't extend deeper than the freezing.?ÿ Sideways motion is much smaller, and usually negligible for things like a rebar or pipe.
If you are willing to hold a position different than the monument, then you should obliterate it and place a new one.
Whoa, hold your horses!?ÿ I've never obliterated a found monument including those not of record except when working for the BLM on Federal lands when directed to do so.?ÿ As private surveyors I doubt we have the legal authority to destroy monuments.?ÿ I may be misconstruing your statement; are you writing that you'd obliterate the found monument and not report it or obliterate it and report its position in relation to your survey??ÿ If the former I think you're engaging in criminal activity and if the latter you've still perpetuated it but only through math, which is a poor substitute for its (former) physical location evidence.
One could conclude I'm advocating pincushion surveying but that's not the case.?ÿ Your "new" monument must substantially change the record, feet not inches and the rejected monument should remain in place?ÿ so subsequent surveyors can unravel the record.?ÿ Think of it this way, could be your survey is the one that's screwed up (no offense) and the previous monument should hold after 50 years of repose upon resurvey.?ÿ Not gonna help if it's gone.
Please don't go around obliterating monuments to "help" landowners and somehow validate your monument as the true corner.?ÿ In a small way we're archeologists and disturbing the on the ground evidence diminishes the record.?ÿ
?ÿ
FYI, the 0.04' that comes up so frequently on this board came about a couple of boards ago in a thread where I commented that a survey technician I knew well had been tasked with creating a tract adjoining one I had laid out a few years earlier.?ÿ He found my two bars and found his distance to be 0.04' shorter than my distance.?ÿ So he held one of them as being perfect and the other being off by 0.04'.?ÿ Maybe that was one the that was perfect and the other was 0.04' short.?ÿ Maybe his rodman didn't hold the rod perfectly vertical on one monument or the other one or both.?ÿ Maybe it was my rodman who did that.?ÿ We will never know.?ÿ Still, there was no need to change the distance for his tract description.?ÿ Now, the world thinks there are two different monuments out there in the woods 0.04' apart.
Firstly, I didn't reject it...and the guy who did is now gone from this earth.
But, my understanding was that while half a foot was within the accuracy standards of the time...that was not within HIS accuracy standards.
That said, I have access to HIS records, and am grateful for it!
The two surveyors talked all the time, from what I know (never met either of them...and never will). They may not have been friends, but they certainly communicated.?ÿ
Dont get the sense that either of them was lazy. Arrogant...it seems to be the norm for most surveyors.
And, I get to resolve the discrepancy. I have a parcel next to the monument that has a survey from Surveyor #1, and the same owner has the parcel to the south surveyed using the data from Surveyor #2. And I get to do a survey over both together. Fortunately, there are corner monuments...and they will hold.
I'm with you there. My late mentor used to say "We need to be surveyors, not just expert measurers." Temper the science of measurement with the art of surveying.
Along these lines, (no pun intended)
I was surveying a small parcel, near hot springs. I had a computed point 3' from a fd rebar. I was being sorely tempted to pull the existing monument, and set my own. I decided I should look for more evidence. I brought the metal detector. Pulled out the found capped rebar, to metal detect the area. The rebar was only 3"long!
I searched thoroughly. I wound up keeping the 3" rebar and cap, and setting my own. Was it totally right? Well, knowing the surveyor whose cap was on it, I know he was not worried at all, as his tolerance for such is quite high. And, this kept the neighborhood intact, and I eventually told Mr 3" surveyor about it. He said, "thanks, I'm not sure how that happened, but you did the right thing".?ÿ I don't make this a habit, but a 3" rebar in soft soil is difficult to be sure it does not move.?ÿ
N
