This happens far too often. Once is too many.
PLSSia in action. The filing of section corner reports with the State has been a practice for let's say 25 years. They are to also be filed with the county or counties where the corners have been documented. So, the very first step for many projects is that the surveyor checks the online indexing to discover what corner records are available that would impact their project. Should they discover any, they make an online request and within a few hours or a few days they have that information available to aid them.
The problem comes in when the surveyor uses that information as the only database. First, many times these corner records are for projects in adjacent sections. The subject section has no center corner data on file. So, Joe Quikndirty, finds the four quarter corners and calcs a solution to his problem.
HOWEVER, if he would do the proper research at the County level he might find 20 surveys performed over the past 150 years or so in that section. He might also discover a variety of deeds hinging on a center of section established decades prior to any requirement to file corner records anywhere, let alone in some computer file in a State office. He might also discover that some of the quarter corner records are for "fantasy" resets by some of his "Quikndirty" cousins who actually believe those corners are on a straight line and midway between record section corners instead of at a monument set 90 years ago and relied upon for a dozen surveys that he doesn't bother to search out in his haste. That information can not be found in his initial search of the corner records on file with the State.
A common whine heard when contacted by someone who discovers the folly of his ways is something like, "Well, golly. All we are doing is running a pipeline for 40 miles. We can't afford to sort out every detail of every section that happens to be along our route." What he doesn't seem to understand is the impact that the descriptions he prepares can have when they end up on legal documents for the landowners along that route. Chaos may ensue, soon or at some later date. This is exceptionally true when his descriptions conflict with properties owned by people who were not a party to the pipeline project. (Sorry, pipeline guys. Not attacking what you do. You are merely an easy example to use.)
Holy Cow, post: 370074, member: 50 wrote: This happens far too often. Once is too many.
PLSSia in action. The filing of section corner reports with the State has been a practice for let's say 25 years. They are to also be filed with the county or counties where the corners have been documented. So, the very first step for many projects is that the surveyor checks the online indexing to discover what corner records are available that would impact their project. Should they discover any, they make an online request and within a few hours or a few days they have that information available to aid them.
The problem comes in when the surveyor uses that information as the only database. First, many times these corner records are for projects in adjacent sections. The subject section has no center corner data on file. So, Joe Quikndirty, finds the four quarter corners and calcs a solution to his problem.
HOWEVER, if he would do the proper research at the County level he might find 20 surveys performed over the past 150 years or so in that section. He might also discover a variety of deeds hinging on a center of section established decades prior to any requirement to file corner records anywhere, let alone in some computer file in a State office. He might also discover that some of the quarter corner records are for "fantasy" resets by some of his "Quikndirty" cousins who actually believe those corners are on a straight line and midway between record section corners instead of at a monument set 90 years ago and relied upon for a dozen surveys that he doesn't bother to search out in his haste. That information can not be found in his initial search of the corner records on file with the State.
A common whine heard when contacted by someone who discovers the folly of his ways is something like, "Well, golly. All we are doing is running a pipeline for 40 miles. We can't afford to sort out every detail of every section that happens to be along our route." What he doesn't seem to understand is the impact that the descriptions he prepares can have when they end up on legal documents for the landowners along that route. Chaos may ensue, soon or at some later date. This is exceptionally true when his descriptions conflict with properties owned by people who were not a party to the pipeline project. (Sorry, pipeline guys. Not attacking what you do. You are merely an easy example to use.)
Stop fretting Cow, those sections are all mathematical anyway. B-)
You only need five monuments for each 1/4
I've seen it both ends of the spectrum. Some of them blow through and bound 12 sections a day...and their filed "references" all look alike, with little or no info. And some I've seen are so intricate and technical it makes me think the BLM crews are moonlighting for the pipeline companies.
All that kind of work has all but petered out here recently though...
EDIT: About five years ago I did a large multi-section survey for a wind farm darn near in Texas. There were dozens of corners I filed. One quarter corner in particular I found a RR Spike in a deep dark hole in a two-lane asphalt road, no previous corner filed there. If I remember it was close to a split, both line and distance, and looked right down the old quarter-line fences. With no other evidence or records, I called it the quarter corner and moved on.
About a year ago a pipeline company blew through there. The surveyor set an on-line split 1/4 corner there, about 2.5' from the spike I had found and referenced. He even noted the spike on his filed record....buy 'em books and all they do is eat the pages...
IMVHO, I can not understand how anyone can afford to survey without doing a complete research of the project property and all the adjoining property.
I blame a lot of it on insurance. People get this foolish idea in their heads that if they have an insurance policy they can do all sorts of stupid stuff and it won't cost them a dime if someone complains. They're going to be paying for the insurance coverage anyway, so what the heck.
Holy Cow, post: 370074, member: 50 wrote: This happens far too often. Once is too many.
PLSSia in action. The filing of section corner reports with the State has been a practice for let's say 25 years. They are to also be filed with the county or counties where the corners have been documented. So, the very first step for many projects is that the surveyor checks the online indexing to discover what corner records are available that would impact their project. Should they discover any, they make an online request and within a few hours or a few days they have that information available to aid them.
The problem comes in when the surveyor uses that information as the only database. First, many times these corner records are for projects in adjacent sections. The subject section has no center corner data on file. So, Joe Quikndirty, finds the four quarter corners and calcs a solution to his problem.
HOWEVER, if he would do the proper research at the County level he might find 20 surveys performed over the past 150 years or so in that section. He might also discover a variety of deeds hinging on a center of section established decades prior to any requirement to file corner records anywhere, let alone in some computer file in a State office. He might also discover that some of the quarter corner records are for "fantasy" resets by some of his "Quikndirty" cousins who actually believe those corners are on a straight line and midway between record section corners instead of at a monument set 90 years ago and relied upon for a dozen surveys that he doesn't bother to search out in his haste. That information can not be found in his initial search of the corner records on file with the State.
A common whine heard when contacted by someone who discovers the folly of his ways is something like, "Well, golly. All we are doing is running a pipeline for 40 miles. We can't afford to sort out every detail of every section that happens to be along our route." What he doesn't seem to understand is the impact that the descriptions he prepares can have when they end up on legal documents for the landowners along that route. Chaos may ensue, soon or at some later date. This is exceptionally true when his descriptions conflict with properties owned by people who were not a party to the pipeline project. (Sorry, pipeline guys. Not attacking what you do. You are merely an easy example to use.)
I'm not going to relate all of the woes I've experienced over the last 2 years on a project where a section corner was in question or how that section corner related to boundary determination.
I will say this, however. It does irk me to no end when a surveyor writes an easement without doing full research on a given property. The "quikndirty" descriptions are horrible because when a "dewitrite" surveyor comes through and attempts to reestablish the location of that easement some time after it was written, that easement pretty much NEVER lands where it was intended to be. And that's all kinds of horrible.
I personally don't believe it to be either of the two. I would put most of the blame on surveyors dropping the prices to where doing the necessary research becomes a losing money venture. Sure, we would all like to have benefit of time to do the complete research, but if there is no money in the job then the poor surveying ensues. Ideally the client should understand that a thorough search needs to be done and will require time and effort of which the surveyor should be compensated. When the surveyor is hurtin' and needs work and the client will only pay but peanuts, center of sections are a dot on the paper....
Brian McEachern, post: 370322, member: 9299 wrote: I personally don't believe it to be either of the two. I would put most of the blame on surveyors dropping the prices to where doing the necessary research becomes a losing money venture. Sure, we would all like to have benefit of time to do the complete research, but if there is no money in the job then the poor surveying ensues. Ideally the client should understand that a thorough search needs to be done and will require time and effort of which the surveyor should be compensated. When the surveyor is hurtin' and needs work and the client will only pay but peanuts, center of sections are a dot on the paper....
Brian, I believe you are right on with your assessment. This is one of the biggest problems we face as a profession. Can you imagine the public's reaction if it was standard practice for a doctor, dentist, engineer, lawyer, accountant, or any other respected professional to perform a sub-standard service solely because the client doesn't want to pay for the service to be performed correctly?
[sarcasm]
"Yep, doctor, only take out half of my burst appendix because I wont pay the money necessary to remove the whole thing".
"Sure, I can do that, besides I'm hurtin" and need the work!"
[/sarcasm]
Last week a call came in from a woman wanting a price to do a residential survey. Did a bunch of talking and finally through out a range. She said she would talk with her husband and call back. Several hours later she did call back and said, "My husband says its not worth over $XXXX, but if you'll do it for that, put us on your list." I told her that it had been nice talking with her but I had work to get done, so goodbye.
Holy Cow, post: 370332, member: 50 wrote: Last week a call came in from a woman wanting a price to do a residential survey. Did a bunch of talking and finally through out a range. She said she would talk with her husband and call back. Several hours later she did call back and said, "My husband says its not worth over $XXXX, but if you'll do it for that, put us on your list." I told her that it had been nice talking with her but I had work to get done, so goodbye.
More of this for the betterment of our profession.
Holy Cow, post: 370332, member: 50 wrote: Last week a call came in from a woman wanting a price to do a residential survey. Did a bunch of talking and finally through out a range. She said she would talk with her husband and call back. Several hours later she did call back and said, "My husband says its not worth over $XXXX, but if you'll do it for that, put us on your list." I told her that it had been nice talking with her but I had work to get done, so goodbye.
I've lost a few jobs because I wouldn't lower my rates, but the truth is I don't care. I tell people as nicely as I can that I don't lower my rates because it has never been in my favor to do so. I've got enough work to keep me busy and I'm not interested in being the cheap surveyor in town.
Or, you can have this happen:
proper research done in 5 sections. proper field search, proper field survey and recovery of all existent aliquot corners in each section. Including one section where a surveyor with transit and chain carved out the NE1/4NE1/4, as the only patent and only 160 acres disposed to the private sector, sets good 1/16 corners still existing today, and veered a little when staking out the center 1/4 corner in the same survey. Proper research finds deeds and metes and bounds tracts tied to the center line and center 1/4 corner AS EXISTING ON THE GROUND, DESPITE IMPERFECTION.
Conclusion by Mr. GPS? STRAIGHT LINE SYNDROME!!!! Discards the center 1/4 corner accepted for decades, files plat showing existing monument to be "off". While they are at it, set new 1/16 corners, near existing 1/16 corners, in the other 4 sections, all according to the STRAIGHT LINE SYNDROME. Proudly filed plats fully explaining why all the other existent monuments were "off".
Great research, horrible retracement. We now have 5 sections butchered with GPS. the public is worse off today than before they got our of their truck.
True story.
Warren, I'd sure like to see his explanation of why all the existing corners were "off". Maybe he ought to be turned into the licensing board for malpractice?
Nope, that wouldn't happen. What usually happens is the opposite - the surveyor gets turned into the licensing board for properly RETRACING the previous surveys and not following the "straight line syndrome". Then the surveyor gets to spend several years and tens of thousands of dollars defending himself against an over-zealous and mis-informed licensing board.
Been there, done that - got the tee shirt and the attorney bills to prove it...............
Holy Cow, post: 370332, member: 50 wrote: Last week a call came in from a woman wanting a price to do a residential survey. Did a bunch of talking and finally through out a range. She said she would talk with her husband and call back. Several hours later she did call back and said, "My husband says its not worth over $XXXX, but if you'll do it for that, put us on your list." I told her that it had been nice talking with her but I had work to get done, so goodbye.
The redneck in me would have told them that the price I gave them was no good anymore, and if they did want me to to the survey, it would be 25% more.
Brian Allen, post: 370384, member: 1333 wrote: Warren, I'd sure like to see his explanation of why all the existing corners were "off". Maybe he ought to be turned into the licensing board for malpractice?
Nope, that wouldn't happen. What usually happens is the opposite - the surveyor gets turned into the licensing board for properly RETRACING the previous surveys and not following the "straight line syndrome". Then the surveyor gets to spend several years and tens of thousands of dollars defending himself against an over-zealous and mis-informed licensing board.Been there, done that - got the tee shirt and the attorney bills to prove it...............
If the surveyors board in Colorado is like the one in Tennessee, they'd have said it was a boundary dispute, and they didn't have any jurisdiction.
Tommy, all of these plats are easily accessible. However, the surveyor in question does not like it when I talk "bad" about him, so I don't want to give out too many clues. Even though his work is public record, displayed by him in the public records, on his own accord, and he is proud of it. All the verbage about how bad and unacceptable the previous surveyors work is is stated right on his certified plats, easily available online for all surveyors interested in researching certain records.
I recall reading of disciplinary action filed against a licensed surveyor who attempted to operate somewhat like that. He would reject almost everything in existence and set his monuments by his own bizarre reasoning. Thus, chaos ensued everywhere he went. The BOR stopped that foolishness.
