In an earlier thread, a poster stated that he didn't really care if the bearing relation was off by 20° or more because only the internal angular relation of the boundary matters. With only two points recovered, all other points in a boundary can be determined, regardless of the bearing relation used to establish that boundary.
I have some real issues with this train of thought:
1. Why state a direction at all?
Locally, there is a lake community, developed in the 1950's, that is entirely owned by the share holders of a corporation, the lots in the community are leased to the share holders for 99 years. By the 1980's, as the improvement values continued to increase on the lease lots in the community, the need for determining the lease boundaries with more certainty than the haphazard method used up till then became more critical. Until a coordinate system was established for the community in the mid 90's, surveys were done entirely by interior angles, no bearings were published. For some of you, if the angular relationships are all you are really offering, why falsely suggest you are providing something else? Just give interior angles and perhaps a general "Northerly" or "Westerly", etc., designation to one of your lines?
2. Which of the following proposals seem more professional from the perspective of long term benefits to the public, the client, and future surveyors?
a. Those following my survey based on assumed bearings will need to find two of my monuments from my survey, sufficiently distant apart to determine what I assumed North to be. My definition of North is only assumed and is technically not credible nor reliable.
b. Those following my survey based on a reproducible bearing will have the option of finding two of my monuments from my survey, sufficiently distant apart to determine what I called North to be or they may independently determine North in their surveys and be on the same bearing relation as my survey. My definition of North is real and is technically credible and reliable.
For all of the whining about being treated like a professional I hear from surveyors ad nauseum, and the remedies being proffered such as college degrees, button up shirts, and continuing education requirements, it's easy to see from these kinds of discussions why we are viewed as a trade by so many. It's because many in our ranks function like a trade. You survey like a plumber fixing a leaky pipe instead of a professional exercising peculiar and special knowledge to meet your client's and the public's needs.
I normally use bearings (Geodetic or Grid preferably), but sometimes I get on an adjoining subdivision bearing basis. But I have seen subdivision plats from the last 20 or 30 years with no bearings at all, just angles. Those work fine too.
Sometimes it is only a generality, not an absolute
I have probably worked in over 100 old subdivisions where no bearings of any kind are shown on any line. There is a north arrow that points straight up on the paper, so one can assume other lines on the plat that run parallel with that arrow are more or less, some kind of, probably close to north in the real world. No specific version of north, just north. The subdivision was formed from all of an aliquot part of a section. Maybe 160 acres, or 80 acres, or 40 acres, or................down to 1.25 acres. That is all there is. Monuments are king. Long live the king.
Those of you who live in a different world must work within the constraints of that world. Fine. Do not condemn those whose world does not match yours.
I'm not sure why lack of bearings would make us non professionals.
Exactly how accurate are your bearings when you do a survey. I typically use interior angles (in the northeast. I show a magnetic north for reference only. I'll take a bearing on a traverse line to the nearest half degree or so that will get transfered to a property line after calculations are done. For that matter how accurate is your compass or the compass of the person who's work your following. Monuments hold over bearings or angles anyway.
> I'm not sure why lack of bearings would make us non professionals.
>
> Exactly how accurate are your bearings when you do a survey. I typically use interior angles (in the northeast. I show a magnetic north for reference only. I'll take a bearing on a traverse line to the nearest half degree or so that will get transfered to a property line after calculations are done. For that matter how accurate is your compass or the compass of the person who's work your following. Monuments hold over bearings or angles anyway.
That is until only one monument survives the process of evolution, i.e., development.
Who said "North really doesn't matter"? Just another straw man................
If the discussion is going to turn towards "professionalism" (as it should), then why even discuss a "one size fits all situations" type of standard? If we are truly professionals, why isn't the professional working on specific projects, each with unique circumstances, allowed to use his professional judgment as to what is proper for the projects?
Isn't it is about time we quit trying to impose these sophomoric "I know better than you do" self-righteous standards on each other? The first standard we should be judged on and held to, is professionalism; which is not, and never will be found in "one-size fits all" rules, statutes, and regulations.
Any monkey can be trained to follow detailed rules and regulations, but it takes a true professional to determine which methods, techniques, evidence, and laws apply to each situation, and to make the professional judgments necessary to solve the particular problems encountered. Enough is enough!!!!
> b. Those following my survey based on a reproducible bearing will have the option of finding two of my monuments from my survey, sufficiently distant apart to determine what I called North to be or they may independently determine North in their surveys and be on the same bearing relation as my survey. My definition of North is real and is technically credible and reliable.
>
This option/approach applies in ALL surveys, regardless of "statements" ... unless you are doing Geodetic work constrained to something else.
:good: :good: :good: :good: :good: :good:
I should abandon my thesis on "Basis of Bearings" (or use your words as a summary)
Sometimes it is only a generality, not an absolute
:good:
I too work in a world where north is only a reference and is in a different place with almost every retracement survey I do.
I am amazed at the lack of consideration that surveying is a diverse field with many different practices.
North matters!
I think North matters. It is almost always within one or two degrees of my Suunto except when some fool puts the survey in true north.:pissed:
North matters!
Nah, not that long ago when many control surveys were based on a South Azimuth. Those old boys were smart, maybe South has the edge over North, we're just not as smart as those who surveyed the Nation, using Triangulation and Baselines methods.
jud
:good:
I agree with you 100%.
I will say, however, on a survey board, that sometimes questions or theoretical circumstances are not complete, and we have to generalize for the basic answer. It's just a discussion board. Unless we answer every scenario with 'it depends', there often has to be such comments that "can" be taken as "north arrows don't matter".
That's what makes Robillard's theories "bogus" or that occupation is always the only answer as to where properties are, or monuments rule no matter what, or the legal description is always the king.
Ain't no kings and queens in this country. 😉
Peter, I'm just wondering: Do you use a "thumbs down" avatar picture sometimes, too? If you disagree with someone and give them thumbs down, but your avatar is thumbs up, imagine the confusion!
> Peter, I'm just wondering: Do you use a "thumbs down" avatar picture sometimes, too? If you disagree with someone and give them thumbs down, but your avatar is thumbs up, imagine the confusion!
😀 I don't have a thumbs down avatar... I try to stay positive or keep my mouth shut (or use words to explain why they are a "dippy idiot").
( https://surveyorconnect.com "dippy idiot" ) does have some references, but I found no images. 😉
Try to match "Thence by Old Lady Swanson's ground a hunnert perch more or less" to anything exact. North really doesn't matter all that much to me. The implied angles are the key. That and knowing where Old Lady Swanson's points are.
Well said Shawn.
Straw Man...
You can clearly look at the replies to this thread and others like it and find several examples of individuals suggesting "North really doesn't matter".
As professionals we are still governed by the prudent man, even in the face of State standards of practice. In my opinion this is a discussion that should be had, amongst professionals, deciding as a profession if the prudent standard of care should include reproducible bearings and if so, to what degree. I have always been of the opinion, both in actual practice and in these discussions around the virtual water cooler, that determining reproducible bearings is not always necessary or beneficial. Is there a place for reproducible bearings in cadastral surveying? I believe so, and I have offered examples of such cases, as have others.
In my opinion north should always be based on a current magnetic compass bearing taken in the field by the survey crew. I agree that angles are what is important to us as surveyors. However, land owners pay thousands of dollars to have their property surveyed. What are they getting for their money if they can't use the plat and an affordable magnetic compass, stand over a monument, and at least be looking close enough in the right direction to have a chance at finding the next monument?
I should add that I am in Virginia and we don't have a Public Land System here. I have followed many (recent) plats that have been rotated to bearings from older plats (1920's). It is not uncommon for them to be 10-15 degrees off of current magnetic north. In some cases I have seen north assumed or "estimated" from tax assessment maps. A few years ago I followed a plat such as this that was 90 degrees off of magnetic north.
Land owners have purchased the right to have a reasonable chance at finding their own corners themselves, in my opinion. If not we are in the business of providing the an expensive drawing that is useless in the purchasers hands.
I don't know if it was me, but I agree. I don't give a rat's ass if the bearings vary 20 deg from magnetic or actual, or true, etc. As long as the relationships between monuments and the angles jive, I don't care what they're referenced to.
Yeah, I work in M-B states, and I'm never going to run a bearing alone to establish a boundary line.
Very good point, Chris.
We're not selling an abstraction, or shouldn't be.
Don