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
How much would you bet the 0.11' off with a bearing to the second is the result of one RTK observation ? There would be far less of this if we actually recognized the capability of our equipment and kept it at the minimum standards in displaying them on a document.
This is exactly how I see it.?ÿ In the states I'm licensed in I render professional boundary opinions, not title opinions (and if I don't render a professional boundary opinion - why are they paying me?).?ÿ?ÿ
(Again, in the lens of where I practice): I almost cannot imagine a scenario where I would be forced to justify why I held a pin found 0.1 feet from the stated deed position.?ÿ I can imagine scenarios where I would have to defend where I didn't.?ÿ This is admittedly an oversimplification of the issue, there are times when .1' matters a lot, but those have thankfully been rare.?ÿ And are also why I charge a lot more for high $ value commercial property surveys.
Someone in this forum once wrote this:
Are we slapping math on the ground, or are we producing a professional product based on the conditions we find in the field? I have never retraced a survey and matched my field data exactly with the record data on all the monuments. In your example, if I had a good reason to reject one of the monuments, and it would have to be a good one, I'd drive another monument. Everyone that does not have a surveyor's license is going to look at the monument in the ground and think, "that's my corner". This bull excrement of calling for fictitious point a few gnats buttocks away from a monument needs to come to an end. It makes us look ridiculous. Either accept what's there or put your big boy britches on and drive your own.
Oh, wait.?ÿ I wrote that.
https://surveyorconnect.com/community/surveying-geomatics/virtual-pin-cushions/paged/3/#post-391663
?ÿ
I still stand by it too.
?ÿ
?ÿ
We encounter this sort of thing fairly often on city surveys.?ÿ The thing you almost trip over because it is so easy to find is quite regularly not what you were looking for.?ÿ Temporarily remove the item that made your S-stick scream and you will then find a new signal precisely where you were expecting it.
@linebender
Ok, that brings up one thing I hate...
The equipment note says both total station and GPS...but I want to know about a certain course. Did you measure between those with your total station? Did you make a quick RTK observation? Is it a combination?
The issue for me is if I were doing a retracement on either of those and I saw that there was a .04' difference I honestly wouldn't even think about it. No surveyor with a lick of sense should think that there are two different monuments just two slightly different measurements. It's the same thing when I have to plot out a plat and it has a 0.01' closure error I don't care about it.?ÿ
You need to add 'relied on' to that list. We had 100 years here between GLO and recording. That's a lot of off record monuments that we should be honoring...
Surveyors should understand and not invoke the 0.04 foot difference in the first place.?ÿ To everyone else in the world there are two corners out there 0.04 feet apart, whatever that mean.?ÿ They have no clue.?ÿ Surveyors should be more careful and eliminate this crap to start with.