One of many of my favorite Quotes

"The plat and all is perdy, but it is as worthless as a porn, to a blind man."

~N

Is it just me? Or does he say the same thing over and over?

> Is it just me? Or does he say the same thing over and over?

When training an old dog new tricks, repetition is the key to success... 🙂

> > Is it just me? Or does he say the same thing over and over?
>
> When training an old dog new tricks, repetition is the key to success... 🙂

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Albert Einstein ...

:dog: :good:

The Lucas Effect

I'm a 25% of the way into The Pincushion Effect and an 100% conflicted about it . To start off, I'm a reader of his column and a subscriber to his newsletter. I believe he makes very valid points about boundary law while simultaneously having a distorted view of surveying as is is currently practiced.

I've always been intrigued by his emphasis on the "pincushion"; mainly as viewed from my experience. I've been surveying twenty-three years and have seen, at best, half a dozen pincushions. Of those, I'm only convinced that one was a result of "measurementitis" rather than plain old fashioned failure to find the other monument. So to start off, to me (and I have to assume others, I'm unique, but not that unique), Lucas seems to frame his valid discussion as a passionate attack on a rather statistically insignificant "problem" and comes off more zealous than reasoned.

Right off the bat (Chapter 1, Page 1) Lucas makes the assertion that surveyors fall into two camps: 1) Technicians who feel their "only duty is to locate the boundaries in accordance with the measurements in the clients deed" and 2) Professionals who locate the "true boundary line between coterminous landowners". I actually put the book down for a week at that point thinking that anyone who believes that the beliefs on boundary determination of 50,000+ surveyors and be divided into two distinct and diametrically camps (with little or no middle ground to speak of) is lacking the intellectual subtlety that I look for in a author. As I read the book further, and thought about it more, I developed a hypothesis that I call "The Lucas Effect".

There are thousands of boundary surveys performed each year here in Maryland. Boundary disputes involving two surveyor's differing viewpoint on the boundary determination process that: go to court, get appealed to a higher court, and get reported as case law opinions occur once very three to five years. 90% of the canon of Maryland boundary case law is contained in about a dozen cases over the last 150 years. If anyone's practice consisted of consulting on these cases, reading and commenting on them in a magazine column and a newsletter and lecturing on them on the continuing education circuit, they'd end up with a distorted view of surveying as currently practiced. Sequestering yourself for a year and doing nothing but reading case law on boundary disputes would lead anyone to the conclusion that half the surveyors in the U.S. are morons. I think this, to some extent, colors Lucas's view of the profession, his job requires him to seek out the worst examples of surveying practice.

The other part of the book that I hate is the overall tone. I can't blame the author for that, for if The Pincushion Effect is nothing else, it is a work of it's times. Like most persuasive speech today, it totally abandons the classical techniques of of rhetoric and dialectic in favor of debate. Reasoned argument is replaced by trying to prove you're right and the "other side" (as if there were "two sides" to begin with) is wrong. The whole "the way I say to do it is 'professional' and anyone else is a 'technician'" tone mirrors the "deed staker" "expert measurer" cr@p here - which is no different than (on the national political level) the right and left throwing around the terms socialist and fascist respectively. It's childish, vapid and intellectually dishonest.

So, I'm holding out reading the rest of it (for various reasons unrelated to the book itself); but what I get so far is that's full of important material that needs to be read by every boundary surveyor. Unfortunately, from my perspective, the material deserves a better author. (And for God's sake a decent professional legal editor, there are so many sentences that are half fact "the case says this" and half conjecture "we can only assume the surveyor thought this" that they started to make my eyes bleed.)

Naivete is trying to do something over again the same way and expecting to get identical results.

> >
> Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
>
> Albert Einstein ...

I've always thought that was the dumbest thing I've ever heard. We do the same thing constantly every day and we constantly get different results. This little gem of wisdom completely and illogically disregards the effect of external variables influencing our actions and the things we set in motion as well as the very slight internal variations of the conducting of our actions, which of course extrapolate into significant and even enormous differences in the final results. It also stupidly ignores the effect of random chance in the universe.

I flipped a coin and it came up heads. If I flip again am I insane for not expecting heads?

Stephen

The Lucas Effect

James:

Thank you for this thoughtful and well-written post. I haven't read the book, but your points could apply to most of Lucas' columns as well. My experience with pincushions matches yours -- I've only seen a handful among the hundreds (thousands?) of corners I've seen over the years. And, as you've stated so well, the character and competence of the surveyors involved hardly fit the simplistic dichotomy Lucas so often presents.

The Lucas Effect

You are correct about the urge to debate rather than have a discussion. That must be genetically burned into us.

The pincushion problem seems to be more prevalent in some States. I don't see it that much here. It is more common to see monuments called off a little which I used to do until I realized it is just silly. If the Forester compasses his way through the forest and he sees the big hunk of concrete sticking up two feet he isn't going to start correcting up 2 tenths by 3 tenths from the top of the monument. We have a boundary that has been the subject of litigation and as a result there are some line monuments that are no longer on the line. So I set aluminum monuments next to them (several feet away in most cases) so that the next Forester through there has a monument to use because you can see pink "Timber Harvest Boundary" flagging going to the old monument. They will use it if it is there. If the monument is off a little but it is the monument to use then I give my measurement to it and don't set a new one.

Another quote from Cooley

All history teaches us that different peoples, or even the same people in different stages of advancement, are not to be governed by the like modes and forms; and while we all concede this as a general rule, we are too apt, perhaps, when we compare with our own the system which prevails in the country from which we have mainly derived our ideas of government and law, to forget that we erected our structure on foundation ideas of democracy which never pervaded in the governing classes in Great Britian, and that the aristocratic sentiment, which is there controlling, is here, in a political point of view, insignificant.

The concept of 'following in the footsteps of the original surveyor' here in the US must be understood to include the owner(s) as original surveyors and realizing the record description is NOT a controlling element for a land surveyor except to the extent that it provides a place to start looking for the controlling physical evidence.

Remember, our land is allodial and it matters little where the grant boundary once was if our retracement is dealing with one of the parcels created by acts of the owners as opposed to a parcel created by law which is referenced in Black's definition of Alienation:

Alienation
In real property law, the transfer of the property and possession of lands, tenaments, or other things, from one person to another. The term is particularly applied to absolute conveyances of real property. The voluntary and complete transfer from one person to another. Disposition by will. Every mode of passing realty by the act of the party, as distinguished from passing it by the operation of law. See also Restraint on alienation.

Restraint on Alienation
A provision in an instrument of conveyance which prohibits the grantee from selling or transfering the property which is the subject of the conveyance. Most such restraints are unenforceable as against public policy and the law's policy of free alienability of land. See restrictive covenant.

When a surveyor fails to recognize boundaries established 'by the act of the party, as distinguished from passing it by the operation of law', the surveyor will be guilty of creating a 'restraint on alienation'.

Remember Wigmore?
From Wigmore;’s compendium on “Evidence”, 2nd. Edition, Vol. 5 Section 2476:
“It is not necessary, and it is not humanly possible, for the symbols of description, which we call words, to describe in every detail the objects designated by the symbols. The notion that a description is a complete enumeration is an instinctive fallacy which must be got rid of before interpretation can be properly attempted. …”

The surveyor INTERPRETS descriptions, we have no obligation to perpetuate them. The land owner has the obligation, by way of active occupation and control of their land, to maintain the 'original' boundaries but they also have the right to change those boundaries if they want to, BUT, the owner has no skill to accurately describe the location of the new legal boundaries. That is the job of the retracing surveyor.

If you do not know the rights and obligations of land owners here in the US, (and that means you if you own land), you cannot function in a profession whose responsibility it is to assist others to protect their property rights.

Our legal system has deteriorated to the point that, if you are diligent in analyzing case law, you will find that, given a simple fact set, there will be cases where judges have reached diametrically opposing decisions.

Richard Schaut

The Lucas Effect

I must say, that is a well-put critique. I have not bought the book yet, but I definitely am familiar with Lucas general philosophies.

I find that many of the real survey intellectuals have the similar attitude of 'I'm the expert and I'm right and if you say anything counter, you're wrong'. However, I have learned much from many of these guys. I have almost developed the opinion that many of the real intellectuals are lacking in emotional maturity (at least many in the surveying field). I have even wondered how they have ever learned anything. Many times you say something to people like that and the respond with their own collection of facts that don't even address your statement or question. Did they find a good author, or do they really opine over these things? Or am I simply beneath their discussions.

I do enjoy the Lucas sermons, but I can't disagree with you on his general tone.

P.S. Don't get me wrong, I don't want to be "lumping" all intelligent surveyors into that exact same mold. I have learned from some good teachers as well who seem to be able to both listen and explain.

Okay....I'm rambling a bit. Good post.
Tom

The Lucas Effect

Well, James, that was certainly well put. I wish that I had the ability to express myself as clearly. Actually, I wish I had the ability to think as clearly. Very insightful comments. Thank you,

Don

> > >
> > Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
> >
> > Albert Einstein ...
>
> I've always thought that was the dumbest thing I've ever heard. We do the same thing constantly every day and we constantly get different results. This little gem of wisdom completely and illogically disregards the effect of external variables influencing our actions and the things we set in motion as well as the very slight internal variations of the conducting of our actions, which of course extrapolate into significant and even enormous differences in the final results. It also stupidly ignores the effect of random chance in the universe.
>
> I flipped a coin and it came up heads. If I flip again am I insane for not expecting heads?
>
> Stephen

Step back a bit Dude! It is a statement about expectations.
If you flip the coin once and expect the result to be constant for future coin flips... maybe not insane, but rather silly.
If you flip it many times (over and over) you would find there is a variable result... in that case your expectations would verge on insane in my view.;-)

> Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

>Albert Einstein ...

Actually there is no evidence attributing that quote to Einstein. According to Wkikquotes: "Variously misattributed to figures also including Benjamin Franklin and Mark Twain. The earliest known occurrence, and probable origin, cites to Rita Mae Brown."

You got owned and you know it!

Now go have yourself a killer Labor Day weekend!!!

Stephen