IOWA Monument Destruction Bill

I know one person who has filed charges under this law. Don't know the outcome. I'll check.

Repeat offenders should get the electric chair!

Hard to prove unless you witness the act. Odds are against seeing it done and the police will not investigate. A useless piece of legislation just taking up space in the books.
jud

Ditto Jud. Not much of a solution, although the intent is there at least.

How are they supposed to know a monument is there? Are they supposed to get a survey where they intend to dig? What if they take out an NGS first-order benchmark, who is going to pay to re-establish that? As a matter of fact, if they pay for it, who is going to do the work?

In my opinion, someone related to surveying should be part of "one call" notification. (A county surveyor's office?). Also they should be staffed enough to do it. The surveyor staff should come out with appropriate documents and look in the vicinity of the proposed dig. Dig up property corners, find metal sound in the road, and paint it, bring subdivision maps and NGS Datasheets for that area, whatever they need.

At the end of the dig/installation, the survey department comes back out (if anything was marked) and makes sure whatever they located was not disturbed.

Fines should (if possible) include re-establishment of the monument. Different fines for different levels of monuments. a first-order benchmark may be $50,000, or a propety pin might be $1000; etc.

I don't have all of the answers, but it sure strikes me, that unless a surveyor came out and pointed at, or put a flag by, a mark the offender has the simple argument that they didn't know it was there and they didn't see it.

Whatcha' think?

Tom

The general malaise about the respect for the cadastral survey monumentation infrastructure is universal it appears.

We have Sections 442 and 443 of the Criminal Code of Canada per:

CRIMINAL CODE OF CANADA SECTIONS 442 AND 443

Interfering with boundary lines
442. Every one who wilfully pulls down, defaces, alters or removes anything planted or set up as the boundary line or part of the boundary line of land is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
• R.S., c. C-34, s. 398.
Interfering with international boundary marks, etc.
443. (1) Every one who wilfully pulls down, defaces, alters or removes
(a) a boundary mark lawfully placed to mark any international, provincial, county or municipal boundary, or
(b) a boundary mark lawfully placed by a land surveyor to mark any limit, boundary or angle of a concession, range, lot or parcel of land,
is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.
Saving provision
(2) A land surveyor does not commit an offence under subsection (1) where, in his operations as a land surveyor,
(a) he takes up, when necessary, a boundary mark mentioned in paragraph (1)(b) and carefully replaces it as it was before he took it up; or
(b) he takes up a boundary mark mentioned in paragraph (1)(b) in the course of surveying for a highway or other work that, when completed, will make it impossible or impracticable for that boundary mark to occupy its original position, and he establishes a permanent record of the original position sufficient to permit that position to be ascertained.
• R.S., c. C-34, s. 399.

BUTone has to prove "wilfully" and catch them at it as above!

We all know (I hope)that the destruction, altering etc. of the cadastral monumentation is theft.

So, on road projects particularly, if there was pre and post construction inventory of the existing cadastral monumentation as part of the contract, with a $$ holdback and a recognition that some monmuments will go as regrading etc. happens, with appropriate tweaking of the particular contract, would this serve as a basis to set a common contract requirement for resetting monumentation ?

There would be then no need to prove "wilful".

There would be a recognition of the "theft".

Consider this; If your child left their bike on the front lawn in the evening and it was gone in the morning, is this "theft" ?

If during construction, the front monuments (being a base for the side/rear monuments) disappear, is this not theft ?

You thoughts colleagues please.

Cheers

Derek

> > If during construction, the front monuments (being a base for the side/rear monuments) disappear, is this not theft?

Not sure I would go so far as to say theft for a construction project senario. I would say negligence. To say theft, I think, implies willful intent. Negligence is just carelessness to replace them.

One Surveyor's Story

I emailed an Iowa surveyor I know who sought relief under the new law. Here's his reply:

"I filed a report with the Jasper County Sheriffs office alleging the ex-wife living on the property pulled my monuments the evening of the day I set them. A Deputy Sheriff accompanied me to the site and I showed him where we had set them and the evidence, i.e. holes and disturbed areas. The evidence was disguised well as I believe she had help from her neighbor, a female army vet demolition expert. The acreage had also had gates chained and padlocked across entrances and no trespassing signs put up that same evening.

"While we may not have gotten the desired result in that case the story has spread throughout the county that this Professional Land Surveyor is serious about monuments. Our client (her ex-husband) and ourselves had no more trouble with her or her neighbor. The deputy told me he would be happy to assist if we ever had the problem in the future."

> In my opinion, someone related to surveying should be part of "one call" notification. (A county surveyor's office?). Also they should be staffed enough to do it. The surveyor staff should come out with appropriate documents and look in the vicinity of the proposed dig. Dig up property corners, find metal sound in the road, and paint it, bring subdivision maps and NGS Datasheets for that area, whatever they need.

I can see it now. Someone neeeding to find their property corners calls in and says they are going to be digging in an area and needs to know if any corners will be disturbed. Someone from a public agency finds and flags monuments for free. They then "change their mind" and decide not to pursue their project and avoid having to pay a surveryor.

> > In my opinion, someone related to surveying should be part of "one call" notification. (A county surveyor's office?). Also they should be staffed enough to do it. The surveyor staff should come out with appropriate documents and look in the vicinity of the proposed dig. Dig up property corners, find metal sound in the road, and paint it, bring subdivision maps and NGS Datasheets for that area, whatever they need.
>
> I can see it now. Someone neeeding to find their property corners calls in and says they are going to be digging in an area and needs to know if any corners will be disturbed. Someone from a public agency finds and flags monuments for free. They then "change their mind" and decide not to pursue their project and avoid having to pay a surveryor.

Steve, why are monuments some big secret? Don't you think we monument the properties to mark the property lines?

Yes, someone could possibly trick the system, and have a third party dig up the property pins, but those monuments are there to be seen. They're called "monuments" for goodness sake. They are physical objects placed to establish and show the property owners and/or the public where their corners are.