You should get a license in a filing state just for the life's experience. Take a trip up to Kansas or something. I know you couldn't hack coming to Utah.
I can write a big ole description. Did a fairly extensive one this spring for a boundary line adjustment. It didn't even make it past the next conveyance. The title company rewrote it to the local secret decoder ring rules. Left out all the white space, one simple paragraph. Didn't even retain the basis of bearing, why would you need that? Either left out or shortened all the calls. Geez, it would have been less work to call me and request the text file other than all the typing. Maybe they had to do something for the fee. But hey, it's gotta look like all the other traditional descriptions in the record. I suppose if a surveyor actually needed it they could stumble across the description in the records.
> I can write a big ole description. Did a fairly extensive one this spring for a boundary line adjustment. It didn't even make it past the next conveyance.
So, basically you're saying that you have to rely upon hiding maps away in some drawer in the recorder's office and just writing quickie little metes and bounds descriptions that are fairly worthless by themselves because ... title companies.
In Texas, it's essential to have the boundaries of a tract of land described by metes and bounds within the deed itself if the grantee is to avail himself of certain statutes of limitation. Otherwise, description of land by reference to some other document, such as a map in some drawer somewhere, won't be sufficient.
No, my description was used and recorded in the recorders office (within a conveyance deed) for the boundary line adjustment. We're right up there with Texas believe it or not! Then about a week later one of the parcels was sold and the title company rewrote the description. Really hacked it to the bare bones. I suppose I should feel good that there was enough info in there for them to do it!
So after the boundary line adjustment we had two parcel descriptions with the exact same description and calls along the common boundary. Now we don't but the bearings and distances are equal so I suppose that's all they really care about. Calls to monuments with punch marks are not required data here, but we can put them in if we want so they can clean them out.
Isn't this really all just academic. A GIS shape file will rule in the end, isn't that where we are headed? We as surveyors think there is a legal issue with that but they'll just blow right though it to save money. When the measurements get so precise you can land it into a punch mark, why do you need monuments at all? If a landowner needs to locate their boundaries just use the phone.
> Without all that the site would go dark!
😀 :good:
Not saying there ain't any, but I've never seen a call to a tree as the corner in Utah. Bearing trees yes, but corner trees no. A really cool one would be at the center quarter corner. Commencing at the center quarter corner cottonwood, thence............
If it was a cottonwood, it would be the big strange cedar yonder that the turkeys roost in.
"It's like political discussions between republicans and democrats. "
I wouldn't drag republicans and democrats down to that level B-)