Dang!!! that's crazy!
Evidently he interpreted his survey manual that bearing trees should be within 300 links as ALL trees within 300 links... job security
Looks like property description with a timber tally.
Question. From someone who only sees fir trees around Christmas. Was the standard to measure to the apparent center of the tree or to the nearest side of the tree at the time this work was performed?
Holy Cow, post: 366762, member: 50 wrote: Question. From someone who only sees fir trees around Christmas. Was the standard to measure to the apparent center of the tree or to the nearest side of the tree at the time this work was performed?
Generally speaking...
Public Land Surveys were to the CENTER of the tree.
Mineral Surveys were to the FACE of the blaze.
But......
Loyal
Holy Cow, post: 366762, member: 50 wrote: Question. From someone who only sees fir trees around Christmas. Was the standard to measure to the apparent center of the tree or to the nearest side of the tree at the time this work was performed?
Center of the tree... so taped measurements were usually taken to the side center and a bearing to the front center. You might find an old stump hole of an original bearing tree and easier to determine its average center in case to reset an obliterated corner monument.
Holy Cow, post: 366762, member: 50 wrote: Question. From someone who only sees fir trees around Christmas. Was the standard to measure to the apparent center of the tree or to the nearest side of the tree at the time this work was performed?
I've seen it done so many different ways.
Mark the tree at breast height or above for certain trees like a cypress.
My recommended procedure in obtaining a measuring point is to use the center of mass at the ground.
Trees can lean or start to grow toward the light.
When you are talking stones, rock piles and pine knot monuments and trees that have grown from 8in to 42in or stump holes where witness trees once stood, the nearest vara and/or nearest foot is a good thing.
working with him?
How about retracing just that one corner...................:pissed:
Nope, not enough witness trees to perpetuate the corner, 200-300 more would do the trick. 😉
My kind of surveyor. More is better.
🙂
N
I'd druther see this, than:
2 witness trees, and one is a dead tree, and the other is a dogwood, or some species, in that area, that does not last.
Yes, it *might* have been overkill.
But I have seen too many underkilled ones!
🙂
N
Wow! Have you retraced this surveyor before? Do you think he put more weight on this corner because it was on a state line?
Darrel, you are down here in our neighborhood. I would buy the beers if you supply the stories :). Jon
Nate The Surveyor, post: 366839, member: 291 wrote: My kind of surveyor. More is better.
🙂N
Nate, ever hear of too much of a good thing;-)
MightyMoe, post: 366895, member: 700 wrote: Nate, ever hear of too much of a good thing;-)
remember, yer talking to a guy with 87 kids....
Timber: fir. lol
Likely that he had caught flak for not providing enough BTs on his last job.
Jp7191, post: 366842, member: 1617 wrote: Darrel, you are down here in our neighborhood. I would buy the beers if you supply the stories :). Jon
I think Daryl Moistner could trade stories for beer in anybody's neighborhood...a welcome to Arkansas any time!!
DDSM
