When retacing older metes and bounds surveys that were done with a magnetic compass what is your methodology? I'll post more later, after we see how this fleshes out a little.
If I find a couple of monuments, I will try a scale to fit between the found monuments and then look at the proposed new points to see what we can find. Of course you have to consider the location of any ditches, fences, walls, hedgerows, etc. In other words, all situations are different and have different solutions.
I believe it was F Henry Sipes (WV LS #1) whom I met many years ago who advocated using a magnetic compass to retrace a survey that had originally been done that way. You can use online tools to determine the magnetic declination at the time of original survey and the present magnetic declination.
When I started in surveying I used two instruments: a Wild T-2 and a K & E transit. The transit had a magnetic compass built in. We would use the compass when doing boundary work in WV.
Here in rural Maine this type of survey is quite common. I use a hand compass (adjusting for the change in declination) and a Garmin to do the reconnaissance but the physical evidence recovered will normally control the boundaries. It's rather rare for the called bearings to become the conclusive factor.
_____
"We have not found any evidence that Thomas Jefferson said or wrote, 'Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not.' " --monticello.org
So is that the only way to retrace an older compass survey? Or can you draft the deed description much like you would a subdivided lot, and then recon, locate evidence, etc. Is it not still at retracement of the original survey?
Using this calculator it turns out my current number is 2 degrees 45 minutes east. The day I was born, it was 8 minutes 31 minutes east. Perhaps this is why they refer to old people as having lost their bearings.
Pretty much the same as Cee Gee. I can usually find enough evidence of the old boundaries to work with the angular relationship between the lines rather than the actual bearing.
Before say, 1950, every metes and bounds around here was run with a compass. That's pretty standard fare for all of Texas. Most haven't been resurveyed.
As far as methodology, same as newer retracement. Go hunt the corners, find the evidence, rotate to a line to check the others.
If you put it on the grid, and you KNOW when it was run, then you may have some more info for using the method that Kent uses. Typically, for residential stuff, we don't know when the survey came about, and thus, can only speculate as the mag declinations weren't inserted into the deeds very often.
Yes, when retracing lines originally surveyed in the 19th century, I always start with an estimate of the predicted grid bearing of the line derived from the USHD software that is available on line. In Central Texas, it is usually a very good approximation and narrows the search for evidence quite efficiently. This is particularly important when the evidence is sparse and widely separated. Two or three line trees per mile with visible marks is sparse, for example.
Typically, since many surveys adjoin lines previously run, you need to make the calculation for all of the senior adjoining surveys as well since those lines were usually not rerun and have their own meridian that the bearings refer to.
> Yes, when retracing lines originally surveyed in the 19th century, I always start with an estimate of the predicted grid bearing of the line derived from the USHD software that is available on line. In Central Texas, it is usually a very good approximation and narrows the search for evidence quite efficiently. This is particularly important when the evidence is sparse and widely separated. Two or three line trees per mile with visible marks is sparse, for example.
>
> Typically, since many surveys adjoin lines previously run, you need to make the calculation for all of the senior adjoining surveys as well since those lines were usually not rerun and have their own meridian that the bearings refer to.
Agreed. In the timber, they only set the junior corner in the marked line and ran their lines out. This is why some junior corners constitute a bend in a senior line. It's rare but if you have the proof, then it can work. For me, it has to be very specific in the notes. Most time they don't say they were with a marked line, only Survey No. so and so.
Comp the lot based on bearings and distances, don't worry about closure. Resection in on 2 section corners or other control, and finally, set your own corners irregardless of monuments found. After all, we can do it much better now than back in dem ol' days. They were using chain and compass, we have GPS.
Make note on map "100 year old iron rod found N26°23'56.355"E 0.35642 feet of TRUE (correct) corner".
I wasn't advocating pin cushioning the project. I'm just asking for what the concensus is if it's possible to get one on how you would approach such a job. Is it possible without breaking out a compass and tape (chain) to "retrace" a boundary survey that was done with a compass and chain? I was under the impression you can but then I have heard a differing opinion lately that you can't truly "retrace" and recreate a boundary that was created with a compass and chain unless you run it with the equipment they had when the boundary was created. Kind of sits a little off with me, and just wanted to see what others thought. Thanks for all of your input so far.
I think the "original equipment" theory is largely based on the premise that only a magnetic compass similar to the original will reproduce the local variation that may have occurred due to large iron deposits and such. It's probably overkill for nearly all recon. As to a final boundary determination: if there is ABSOLUTELY NO evidence of boundary location other than a very old magnetic direction call, I suppose this approach would arguably be a good one. I'd be very wary, and probably thinking BLA.
I posted a little blurb about “Compass Surveying” and the retracement thereof back in April (see link below).
http://beerleg.com/index.php?mode=thread&id=63039
My take on this is (and always has been), that IF you AIN'T following a compass survey with a COMPASS, you AIN'T following in the footsteps...
Now that doesn't mean that EVERY line must be walked with a compass, but it NEVER hurts to do so (except the next morning when it usually does for me).
🙂
Loyal
That idea may have merit, but I ain't buying it!
For instance, does a surveyor have to follow my procedures when I used a solar transit in combination with a transit line over the noon hours?
Does a surveyor who is retracing my surveys that were measured with a Distomat or HP 3800 have to use the same devices?
I don't think so?
Keith
Keith
“Have to”...NO.
BUT, it's pretty hard to find evidence of the original line when you AIN'T on it (and are therefore looking in the wrong place).
Remember, we ARE talking about “pure” compass lines here, not solar attachment (or solar compass) lines.
Local attraction can (and will) put you CHAINS away from the “instrument straight” line in a half a mile. That can make things a little complicated.
🙂
Loyal
>In the timber, they only set the junior corner in the marked line and ran their lines out. This is why some junior corners constitute a bend in a senior line.
I assume that this is some local East Texas practice? Everywhere else in Texas I'm aware of, original survey lines run from corner to corner, regardless of where some marks in timber or other intermediate marks such as line mounds, none of which are mentioned in the patent field notes, may be.
Loyal
Well, maybe you are right! Would that practice prevent the double corner monuments that are a finger length distance from each other?
Keith
I disagree with Loyal. It's 2011 and there is nothing wrong with using modern methods to retrace or 'follow the footsteps' of the original "surveyor."
Mete's and Bounds usually means Colonial Surveyor, right? Not always I know but this sort of question is mostly related to the Colonial States.
most of my original surveyors were local men, sailors and they probably used a ships compass or other compass when dividing up their lands. Then they would plow the line and set stones at the ends.
When I recover those ditches and stones I am retracing the original surveyor, whether it be by total station, gps, K&E (haven't used that in years) or whatever...
It's the evidence that matters, not how you get there...
