Legal-eeze hair-splitting

meas·ure verb?/?meZH?r/: 1.Ascertain the size, amount, or degree of (something) by using an instrument or device marked in standard units or by comparing it with an object of known size. (from Merriam-Webster) - See more at: http://beerleg.com/index.php?mode=thread&id=213379#sthash.hYkHsRD5.dpuf

Standard units: Known GPS wavelengths
known size: Locations of positions of Continuously Operating REFERENCE Stations

As if a snotty barrister that studied the Law to avoid taking math courses is going to trip up a Professional Land Surveyor. HA!

Just put your brain in gear before engaging the clutch on your jawbone.

Why is using GPS for your measuring, considered "calculating" a measurement, and using a total station considered "measuring" it? I would suggest you are measuring whether you are using GPS, A steel tape, an EDM, or pacing. Do you "measure" using infrared light waves on a slope and having the machine "calculate" a distance in feet from the infrared light waves and reducing it to "horizontal" distance, or measuring using measurements to satellites and "calculating" the vector, and reducing it to "horizontal" distance?

Regardless of what device and methodology you use, I submit you are always "measuring" and "calculating" the distances. Do you remember when edm's started becoming a well-used measuring device? We were no longer reading a distance on a tape, but were just reading a measurement on a readout that was calculated by the light-waves it took to get to the prism and back. That was pretty high-tech at the time and many of us wondered how we really knew that was the real distance. We were measuring with the edm between marks and checking it with a tape to feel comfortable with the readout.

What's a penny?

I'm with Cliff and Tom here. The foot is based on the meter, and the meter is based on a circular reference to the presumed constant c. It's turtles all the way down no matter what we do. "All measurements are necessarily approximations."

I've found the quickest way to disabuse the uninitiated its to dump it on him and let him blink and think it through for himself before he changes the subject to $$, a convention even more "arbitrary"...;-)

Count me with the ones who say that GPS is measuring.

My own terminology is that a reading on a tape, an angle turned, a GPS vector is an observation. The result of putting together (we hope redundant) observations is your measurement.

I've struggled with this a long time.

When I started surveying, I was taught that there were 3 ways to MEASURE something:

• On line
• On an offset line
• Traverse and triangulate using random points

In that order; now, everyone uses some sort of triangulation/traverse program to tell them the relationship between the objects they are locating, measured with several types of electronic devices.

I still haven't figured it out; just because that's the way everyone does it, doesn't make it right.

I now put a note on most of my drawings:

All monuments were accepted in place, for positions shown, unless otherwise noted.

Distances shown are record distances and were found to be within an acceptable tolerance, unless otherwise noted.

measurements smeasurements.......... blah blah blah..... 😉

Once again, we are arguing about measurements, when we really need to remember that although measurements are important (in reporting the spatial relationship of found relevant evidence), they (measurements) are really low on the evidence scale. Don't allow yourself to get sidetracked in legal proceedings by the uninformed, into arguing measurements when the boundary evidence and law is what is really important.

Bill, that's what I teach. It's only a number unless you can tell me something about its reliability. Do you have a statistical analysis or at least a closure? Without that, it's an unsubstantiated number.

I think a smart attorney could question the numbers and possibly get them thrown out in the case of say an open conventional traverse, or an RTK shot. Of course, as Brian mentioned below, it might not make any difference. One could concede the other surveyors measurements are correct and still prevail on location of the boundary.

I haven't been to court a lot, maybe 6 times, but in those few cases, I've never been asked a technical question by an attorney from either side. Nobody asked me anything like do you check your equipment, did you set your PPM that day, do you check your tribrachs optical plummet. I'm not going to say it couldn't come up, but it hasn't for me.

I often set up and check between GPS points, most often when doing topo. As a rule, I like to see them check within 0.03 horizontal and vertical, but I'm not surprised when its a little bit more.

Evidence scale Schmevidence scale. 😉

All the evidence needs to be considered as a whole. Resort to an "order of seniority" is a last resort in my humble opinion. You need measurements. I sure hope you don't find that you think my lot belongs to my neighbor because you found fences and don't care about how far the lot is from the block corner. 😉

> ....Resort to an "order of seniority" is a last resort in my humble opinion.

I'm sure you really don't mean that. Monuments and other evidence of the boundary as established on the ground control over the measurements recited in the description, and are not a last resort. But you knew that.

Utility company digs up original stone, and places it back in the ground 5' away. Measurements, occupation and testimony supports that fact.

No, I don't just say "original monument holds over everything else because of seniority of calls/seniority of evidence". I look at all the surrounding evidence as a whole. Measurements are not a piece of evidence that should be ignored.

I do understand, Paden.

The standard non-surveyor only understands measuring as something done with standard tools. It may be in teaspoons or pounds of counterweights on an old fashioned scale. They understand measuring with real objects to compare with other real objects. Black boxes and magic don't "feel" real. Watching mercury expand in a thermometer tube to measure your body temperature is real. Having someone stick some plastic, battery-powered gizmo in your ear for two seconds doesn't 'feel' real.

With a "hard" measurement device, the user develops a feel as to whether or not the answer is reasonable, and if not, attempt to determine what went wrong.

With a "magic" measurement device, the user must take the answer on faith. Hoping that all of the potential errors did not occur.

It would be great if all depositions and proceedings concerning boundaries and surveying were attended by only surveyors, mathematicians and scientists.

I've found that the majority of time spent is educating everyone in the room about how we perform our work, not why we performed it a specific way.

I have fpound most attorneys will never engage a surveyor in his world of expertise. They don't ask questions like, did you close the traverse? Did you use compass rule on adjusting it?

The hammer you on the legal side, because that's their world. And they are very comfortable there.