Help school an LSIT here fellas. I'm in Washington. It's clear to me what original surveyor means in the context of platted subdivisions including the GLO township subdivisions. Beyond that, it's a little hazy. When a property is an aliquot part or metes & bounds within a section, how can one say whether or not a found monument at one of its corners is an 'original' one that should be accepted if there's no record of when or by whom it was set? But the alternative is to base everything off one's measurements of the section, and since that is never going to be the exact same that just leads to pincushion hell and conflicts between neighbors, no? What is the answer here; what am I missing?
I know the way the guy I work for wants it done and that's what I'm going to do while I'm here, but I'm curious what others out there have to say.
That's a common anxiety for a LSIT and it proves you care about what you're doing. The short answer is that in many instances you can’t know for certain. Surveyors must hit the preponderance-of-evidence mark but we can fall short of beyond-a-reasonable-doubt. This is important because it allows you to refrain the question from, “What evidence do I have that this is the original monument or in the original monument’s original position”, to “What better evidence do I have of where the original corner is or where the affected parties have believed it to be”.
Since you can’t possibly know if farmer Brown crept out on a moonless night and moved the old axle five feet south or any of the infinite other ways a monument could be moved, you must presume that, absent direct evidence of the contrary, the found monument represents strong evidence of the intent of the grantor. Stick to the facts then assign weight to them. Theories with no evidence must be discarded completely. Fact: A pipe set six inches above ground level has the potential to be seen whereas a mathematically correct point does not. Perfect is the enemy of good.
That's a common anxiety for a LSIT and it proves you care about what you're doing. The short answer is that in many instances you can’t know for certain. Surveyors must hit the preponderance-of-evidence mark but we can fall short of beyond-a-reasonable-doubt. This is important because it allows you to refrain the question from, “What evidence do I have that this is the original monument or in the original monument’s original position”, to “What better evidence do I have of where the original corner is or where the affected parties have believed it to be”.
Since you can’t possibly know if farmer Brown crept out on a moonless night and moved the old axle five feet south or any of the infinite other ways a monument could be moved, you must presume that, absent direct evidence of the contrary, the found monument represents strong evidence of the intent of the grantor. Stick to the facts then assign weight to them. Theories with no evidence must be discarded completely. Fact: A pipe set six inches above ground level has the potential to be seen whereas a mathematically correct point does not. Perfect is the enemy of good.
Wow, this is VERY well said. Thank you for this.
You aren't missing anything. All you need to do is decide if you are going to pin cushion hell. Figure out who the original surveyor is of the statutory line and you are off to a good start. Surveyors tend to look at the way things were or should have been and go forward. Courts tend to look at facts regarding the way things are and go backward applying the appropriate law to the facts.
...how can one say whether or not a found monument at one of its corners is an 'original' one that should be accepted if there's no record of when or by whom it was set?
Well, the first thing is to become familiar with the history of the recording laws in your state. Here in Idaho for example the recording of surveys didn't become mandatory until 1978, but of course there were guys running around setting pins before that.
I've found pins that didn't appear to have a record, but when I asked around the survey community I was able to get copies of (unrecorded) surveys by guys that were working prior to 1978 that showed exactly where the pins I'm finding came from.
So the point here is just because you don't have the record for a monument doesn't mean it doesn't exist. And even if the record was lost or destroyed that doesn't mean the monument is no longer valid.
But the alternative is to base everything off one's measurements of the section, and since that is never going to be the exact same that just leads to pincushion hell and conflicts between neighbors, no?
Well, no... I'd be asking you why you're rejecting a found monument. Are you rejecting it simply because you don't have the record for it?
The first three rules of civil engineering:
Rule #1 is: Where does the water go?
Rule #2 is: Where does the water go?
Rule #3 is: Where does the water go?
That was told to me by an engineering colleague.
The first three rules of land surveying:
Rule #1 is: Where are the monuments?
Rule #2 is: Where are the monuments?
Rule #3 is: Where are the monuments?
If you find the monuments you're golden, the default is to accept them, if you decide not to you better have a really, really good reason. Too many modern surveyors take the opposite approach and their default is to reject monuments, and they use the wispiest of reasons to do so.
Hint math isn't a good reason to reject a monument.
Here is one thing to consider, if you decide to reject a monument, then you better clean up the area, it's up to you to fix it, remove the "offending" one and protect the property owners. Not a lot of fun, but hey you decided to do it, now finish the job. One corner, one monument.
Perfect is the enemy of good.
It took me a long time to come to grips with the fact that we collect evidence - not proof - of boundaries, and our solutions are the most probable locations based on the preponderance of that evidence. We rarely, if ever, have proof beyond reasonable doubt.
One must understand the history, precedents and measuring capabilities of those who laid down the network they are trying to solve today. For example, many times one may find the measurements made with steel tapes across lawn areas appear to be shorter than record. Something akin to 99.9 feet instead of 100.0 feet. Go get a steel tape. Try making the same measurements with that tape over mowed and unmowed lawns with small obstacles along the way that prevent the ideal straight line from being possible. Learn what is possible. Don't find fault with those who went earlier. Find fault with your understanding of what you should expect to find.
you must presume that, absent direct evidence of the contrary, the found monument represents strong evidence of the intent of the grantor
This is definitely how I look at things. The monument, whether called for or not, holds, until I find that it's in conflict with other better evidence.
I'm constantly shaking my head when I'm seeing plans showing a new monument set in the vicinity of a found monument that is "off"
The longer I do this, and the more I see threads like this one, the more I think that pincushions ought to be the first course or lesson of any survey class or curriculum. Hat tip to those who are doing it right!
The longer I do this, and the more I see threads like this one, the more I think that pincushions ought to be the first course or lesson of any survey class or curriculum. Hat tip to those who are doing it right!
All the boundary law/cadastral courses I took stressed the importance of not blowing off evidence just because it did not "fit the math". If evidence is correctly gathered and evaluated, the priority of calls & rules of construction properly applied, pincushions will be part of the discussion, but only in passing, because the fundamentals of boundary work should never result in true pincushions.
At least, not in the sense that we are discussing, where two monuments near each other both purport to represent the same corner. There are cases where monuments end up close together, but are not representing the same corner.
I assume every monument/corner I find is original; undisturbed; or a perpetuation thereof, unless I can PROVE otherwise.
I'm not going to reject a monument just because I don't have a record of it being set.
I am fortunate that I started my career in the era of theodolites and steel tapes, with the occasional stand alone or top mount EDM. Understanding the measurement tools and methods/procedures of those before us, who we are supposed to follow in the footsteps of, is critical to the evaluation of acceptance based on where we measure them to be with the tools of today. Additionally, looking at multiple monuments from the same survey and their relative positions, compared to the record, can reveal "evidence" of measurement quality, patterns, and help to isolate true blunders or outliers from the "norm" of when and how they were set.
Boundary determination is the ultimate puzzle, to me, and no two are the same. I don't do it any more, but I sure miss it. It took a lot for me to not accept established and accepted monuments (of record or not) regardless of their positional deviation from where my measurements said they were, or should be. I don't recall ever setting a pin cushion, but may have noted the positional difference between locations on a few maps over the years, but again, it would have required extraordinary circumstances for me to have done so. Now that I think about it, I am not even sure I ever called anything "off" from where I calculated it to have been unless I was sure it was a goat stake that had been erroneously accepted, or the monument had clearly been grossly disturbed or moved from its original location.
I found an original lead cap this morning in a subdivision where every lot corner was a lead cap and the surveyor was known for his substantial monuments, but I rejected it because it was beside a pad mounted transformer and sticking up almost a foot (all the others are just below ground level), leading me to conclude some utility worker trying to be helpful stuck it back in the ground.
