Why is the new Surveyor in the area always wrong? He might have done the Surveyor to Kansas standards. Seems like the established Surveyors in the area always bad mouth the new Surveyors, because they don't like new Surveyors in the area or worried they are going to catch the mistakes they have been making.?ÿ
I don't think that the HC was really meaning to pick on newly licensed surveyors with his comment, but was instead even talking about surveyors moving into an area they are not familiar with working in.?ÿ If you have worked in an area for many years, you know that the locating surveyors were notorious for not closing on the 3rd square of the day on Fridays, as an example.?ÿ In my area, I am familiar with which surveyors tended to give an extra 5 varas each section, the same as I know which ones were only going to run a straight line by pure accident.?ÿ If I am called to another part of the state, I do so beginning with lots of research of both old and more recent surveys, and don't go in planning to recreate everything square.?ÿ History itself says that most of what is around me is rarely a perfect square.?ÿ I have hundreds of pictures of where I have recovered original survey markers (many with marks clearly still etched in them) that the once and done surveyor walked right over, for reasons I cannot be sure of, but I can sayI suspect it was because it was lots faster to go to the fence corner, or to plunge a straight line and go 2640' and say this has to be it.
Why is the new Surveyor in the area always wrong? He might have done the Surveyor to Kansas standards. Seems like the established Surveyors in the area always bad mouth the new Surveyors, because they don't like new Surveyors in the area or worried they are going to catch the mistakes they have been making.?ÿ
I didn't see Holy Cow indict new surveyors in the OP.?ÿ I interpreted from this quote, "Newbys and one-and-dones can't take the time and effort to ever search through the survey records on file with the county." that HC was upset with quickie-dickie surveyors.?ÿ
This thread is not unlike any of a number of threads started by an Austinite surveyor who often complained of other surveyors who failed to do the required homework and research.
Wouldnt "Newbys" be a new surveyor?
Also why do some many people always have to bring an Austin Surveyor, if yall miss him so much give him a call.?ÿ
Why is the new Surveyor in the area always wrong? He might have done the Surveyor to Kansas standards. Seems like the established Surveyors in the area always bad mouth the new Surveyors, because they don't like new Surveyors in the area or worried they are going to catch the mistakes they have been making.?ÿ
Wouldnt "Newbys" be a new surveyor?
Also why do some many people always have to bring an Austin Surveyor, if yall miss him so much give him a call.?ÿ
Come on Scott.?ÿ I know y0u have better reading comprehension than your last two posts indicate.?ÿ HC didn't call out new surveyors. He decried new and one-and-done surveyors to an area that don't do their research.?ÿ And, no I don't miss Kent.?ÿ I merely pointed out that quickie dickie surveyors are not only a bane in southeastern Kansas, but apparently also a pox in Texas.
YMMV
?ÿ
Wouldnt "Newbys" be a new surveyor?
Also why do some many people always have to bring an Austin Surveyor, if yall miss him so much give him a call.?ÿ
Well, in this case HC proved the "Newby" wrong by locating the original corner 20' from where it was placed by the "one and done". It doesn't sound like he resorted to heroics to do it either. I have no idea what the KS standards say about thorough searches of records and the ground, but even if the standards?ÿ were met, the "Newby" obviously screwed up.?ÿ Meeting?ÿ state standards may provide some legal protection, but I never thought of using them to measure whether a survey is garbage or not.?ÿ
I, and hope, everyone else here don't discriminate against the new guys, but its hard not criticize any surveyor who doesnt do basic research and corner searches.?ÿ?ÿ
I seem to run into a number of surveyors in Oklahoma that have a really hard time with locating an obliterated or lost corner with nothing but historic occupational evidence.?ÿ Now I agree it is a slippery slope and might earn one the nickname "fence surveyor" but in some cases occupational evidence should be taken into account.?ÿ I guess it boils down to how one interprets the Manual of Instructions and how much weight one places on long established evidence and the court upheld rights of fee owners.
More than once I have seen well maintained fences on either side of a section line road, paralleling each other most nearly at say 66' being the total statutory R/W.?ÿ?ÿBoth fences are straight, but have an evident PI at the quarter corner, with no pedigreed monument or available records.?ÿ And, sure enough, someone placed a capped rebar at the "half?ÿway and on line" point.?ÿ Trouble being it fell 2' south of the?ÿsouth R/W fence.
Whether or not you or I agree with the placement of the pin is secondary to fact the location involves some established bona fide rights of both the fee estate AND the public,?ÿownership of which is?ÿdominant.?ÿ At times dealing with?ÿthese issues 125 or more years after all of the lands were patented can be complex push the Manual of Instructions a little further down?ÿon the dignity of calls.?ÿ The Manual itself plainly states the reconstructive process it lays out is only applicable on unpatented lands; the bona fide rights of the entryman must be?ÿconsidered.
At the beginning of my career the only way a surveyor could get a copy of the original GLO notes or subsequent plat was to write or call the BLM office in New Mexico.?ÿ If you were lucky you would receive some poor quality xerography to aid in your survey.?ÿ It wasn't until after 1978 this information was made public on a local level.?ÿ?ÿ
One of the glitches we discovered was asking for the "original survey" meant that is what you received.?ÿ If there was a "resurvey" you might have to actually ask for it.?ÿ Of course not knowing if it had been resurveyed kept some from asking.?ÿ Here's an interesting point that I believe was a result of the difficulty in obtaining proper records and someone following the Manual anyway:
The 1875 Resurvey found the original 1872 quarter corner in the location shown.?ÿ Today there is no actual monument at that quarter corner.?ÿ The only thing there is a prominent (and almost ancient) fence post and pull braces, along with a county maintained road.?ÿ I discussed this corner with Bob Dahl a few years ago and he humorously described it as a "great resurvey of a lousy original survey".?ÿ I wholeheartedly agree..
What is really interesting is that 125' or so north into the brush is a 1" drift pin driven in the ground at the "halfway and online" point between the opposing section corners (within about 5 feet).?ÿ Some surveyor relied upon the original notes and Manual to establish this point no doubt.
Thankfully none of the property owners have paid it much?ÿattention.?ÿ There is a recorded pipeline easement that seems to be tied to this pin.?ÿ I wonder who set it....hmmmm? ? ?ÿ?ÿ
?ÿ
Research is vital. ?ÿDo the complete search, not just what might be enough if you don't personally care. ?ÿHey, someone else is paying the insurance bill that supposedly will take care of any problems. ?ÿRight?
Newbys need mentors who do the job correctly. ?ÿOne-and-done's may not exercise the same care they would if it was in their home neighborhood. ?ÿBut, it IS someone's home neighborhood, every time.
It's not about WHO does the job, it's about doing it correctly-----every time-----no matter where the job is.