Another surveyor I've known for years asked me to help him with a survey. He had promised an old friend he would provide some answers to this friend and a neighbor that have been squabbling over a fence line. As the months have flown past this surveyor friend of mine has been unable to get a crew out to his friend's place. I told him we could help out with the field work, and he would take it from there.
He emailed me the descriptions and it is pretty apparent the answer rests in the location of the center of section. We hit the ground yesterday and scoured up all the evidence we could find. I started looking through it early this morning and noticed immediately the crew DID find a capped pin at the center of section. Although its location is more in favor of the neighbor than the friend of my friend, it's not in a real good spot geometrically. A more modern bearing-bearing intersect would place the center of section in favor of my surveyor buddy's friend.
Guess whose cap is on the center of section pin?? My surveyor buddy.
I called him up early to give him the news. There was silence on the phone until he said "You gotta be kidding me..." He apparently had done the work years ago and didn't ever remember working in there until I told him we had found his pins. I emailed him what we had found yesterday and it's up to him to hash it out and for his client.
So it's up to him now to explain to his client how the neighbor is apparently "correct"....because of a pin he set himself years ago.
He didn't see any humor in it, but I did. I wished him luck and sent him an invoice for the crew.
If that pin has been relied upon then it is "fixed" for position. Right or wrong. No error. Especially if it has been years since it was set and accepted.
But I feel for your friend. Not a position I would like to be in.
Since I'm on the outside I do find the irony to be amusing. Thanks.
We did a survey a few months ago, and the crew came in and said they had found one of our corners. We scoured the records and couldn't find the calculation sheet.
Then, in a moment of epiphany, I remembered, 15 years ago, when I was first starting drafting, working on a job where the fences looked similar, but we never finished the project, and for 15 years, the calculation sheet was in my drafting drawer, and I pulled it out and found where I had calculated the entire tract, we just surveyed. I found my new calculations to be a bit more refined than 15 years ago, but close. 🙂
paden cash, post: 328900, member: 20 wrote: Another surveyor I've known for years asked me to help him with a survey. He had promised an old friend he would provide some answers to this friend and a neighbor that have been squabbling over a fence line. As the months have flown past this surveyor friend of mine has been unable to get a crew out to his friend's place. I told him we could help out with the field work, and he would take it from there.
He emailed me the descriptions and it is pretty apparent the answer rests in the location of the center of section. We hit the ground yesterday and scoured up all the evidence we could find. I started looking through it early this morning and noticed immediately the crew DID find a capped pin at the center of section. Although its location is more in favor of the neighbor than the friend of my friend, it's not in a real good spot geometrically. A more modern bearing-bearing intersect would place the center of section in favor of my surveyor buddy's friend.
Guess whose cap is on the center of section pin?? My surveyor buddy.
I called him up early to give him the news. There was silence on the phone until he said "You gotta be kidding me..." He apparently had done the work years ago and didn't ever remember working in there until I told him we had found his pins. I emailed him what we had found yesterday and it's up to him to hash it out and for his client.
So it's up to him now to explain to his client how the neighbor is apparently "correct"....because of a pin he set himself years ago.
He didn't see any humor in it, but I did. I wished him luck and sent him an invoice for the crew.
He could look @ his old survey and notes. It's entirely possible that he used a controlling corner that is no longer there (or differs from one you found) to set his pin. If that's the case y'all might look for the earlier controlling Quarter-Corner that might jive with his Center-corner pin. (Center-Quarter Corners that you don't agree with aren't necessarily wrong, and might have been set from more "original" exterior corners)
Tom Adams, post: 328922, member: 7285 wrote: He could look @ his old survey and notes. It's entirely possible that he used a controlling corner that is no longer there (or differs from one you found) to set his pin. If that's the case y'all might look for the earlier controlling Quarter-Corner that might jive with his Center-corner pin. (Center-Quarter Corners that you don't agree with aren't necessarily wrong, and might have been set from more "original" exterior corners)
Oh, we found a couple of things out there that are suspect. What I think he actually did was place the 'center of section' pin as a restoration of some older metes and bounds surveys that are close by. Did he do it correctly? Don't know, doesn't matter to me. My brief conversation with him indicated he might have been guilty of a "youthful" error early in his career....that he is now wishing he might have done differently.
Glad it's his bailiwick, not mine!
ps - I've had plenty of my own skeletons come out of the closet and chase me...
paden cash, post: 328925, member: 20 wrote: Oh, we found a couple of things out there that are suspect. What I think he actually did was place the 'center of section' pin as a restoration of some older metes and bounds surveys that are close by. Did he do it correctly? Don't know, doesn't matter to me. My brief conversation with him indicated he might have been guilty of a "youthful" error early in his career....that he is now wishing he might have done differently.
Glad it's his bailiwick, not mine!
ps - I've had plenty of my own skeletons come out of the closet and chase me...
Me too. Though most of mine have been relatively easy to deal with, outside of the embarrassment.
paden cash, post: 328900, member: 20 wrote: ....the crew DID find a capped pin at the center of section. .. Guess whose cap is on the center of section pin?? My surveyor buddy.
There should have been a CCR on that C1/4 with your buddies name on it.
Norman Oklahoma, post: 329335, member: 9981 wrote: There should have been a CCR on that C1/4 with your buddies name on it.
Yes Mark, there SHOULD have. Since 1978 we have had dialogue at various levels about making C/4 corners (that weren't set by the original surveys) referencing a mandatory obligation. I don't know why it was left out of the original legislation. We just added another hunnert years to the "center of section" enigma in Oklahoma that plagues almost every survey...
How many surveyors don't keep a good record of jobs completed?
There are a number of good reasons to keep a track of past work, including avoiding this situation.
Is this where I get to plug developing a geodatabase (GIS) for survey control and job archiving:-)
Mapman, post: 328906, member: 6096 wrote: If that pin has been relied upon then it is "fixed" for position. Right or wrong. No error. Especially if it has been years since it was set and accepted.
OK, but what if one side relied on it, while the other side relied upon something else?
That's the answer I've been searching for.
I've seen it happen, it ain't pretty.
A few months ago we pull up to a job and my I-man says "Larry we did this job already. We set up right here". I say "no, I looked in my index of all our jobs and we haven't worked in this area. So kicks some leaves aside and finds a PK with the ribbon that only we use. Now I think my index is pretty good and I think my memory is OK, but I still haven't found that old job. And it's just one little island.
geonerd, post: 329365, member: 8268 wrote: Is this where I get to plug developing a geodatabase (GIS) for survey control and job archiving:-)
You can - but it will never be as good as recording the drawing...
Jim in AZ, post: 329395, member: 249 wrote: You can - but it will never be as good as recording the drawing...
In Colorado we record all drawings but an in-house database provides a central depository for all control
RFB, post: 329369, member: 142 wrote: OK, but what if one side relied on it, while the other side relied upon something else?
That's the answer I've been searching for.
I've seen it happen, it ain't pretty.
The statement "relied upon" has bothered me for my entire career. Didn't the original surveyor (or non-surveyor) who set it rely upon it? If not why would they have set it?
Mapman, post: 328906, member: 6096 wrote: If that pin has been relied upon then it is "fixed" for position. Right or wrong. No error. Especially if it has been years since it was set and accepted.
But I feel for your friend. Not a position I would like to be in.
Since I'm on the outside I do find the irony to be amusing. Thanks.
The statement "relied upon" has bothered me for my entire career. Didn't the original surveyor (or non-surveyor) who set it rely upon it? If not why would they have set it?
Jim in AZ, post: 329399, member: 249 wrote: The statement "relied upon" has bothered me for my entire career. Didn't the original surveyor (or non-surveyor) who set it rely upon it? If not why would they have set it?
A LOOOOONG time ago; I was the I-man on a crew; we found what appeared to be a 3/4" pinch top pipe under a bush. It fit fairly well; within a few tenths and it was the only thing around, so we accepted it. As we were packing up to leave; a lady came up to the truck and told us that her son had set that "curtain rod" years ago; I'm assuming by eye-ball. Sure enough, I went over and dug a little more to reveal that it was in fact a curtain rod.....
Jim,
In Arkansas it is the owners of adjoining land that do the 'relying'.
DDSM :beer:
- Where there is uncertainty as to the boundary or the owners of adjoining land are in dispute as to the dividing line, their parol agreement as to the boundary is conclusive upon them. Taylor v. Rudy, 99 Ark. 128, 137 S.W. 574.
- Where there is doubt or uncertainty, or a dispute as to the true location of a boundary line, the parties may, by parol, fix a line, which will at least, when followed by possession with reference to the boundary so fixed, be conclusive upon them, although the possession is not for the full statutory period. Turquett v. McMurrain, 110 Ark. 197, 161 S.W. 175.
- When adjoining lot owners fixed upon a tree as marking the boundary between their lots, built their fences pursuant to the agreement, and one of the parties made improvements with reference to the agreement and occupied a strip claimed by the other party continuously for about 20 years, the boundary so fixed was conclusive upon the parties and those claiming under them. Barnett v. Gentry, 173 S.W. 424.
- Proprietors of adjacent properties may, by parol agreement, establish an arbitrary dividing line between them, and acquiescence in such agreement will make it good; or an agreement may be inferred from acquiescence and occupation to the line. Jordan v. Deaton, 23 Ark. 704
paden cash, post: 329360, member: 20 wrote: Yes Mark, there SHOULD have. Since 1978 we have had dialogue at various levels about making C/4 corners (that weren't set by the original surveys) referencing a mandatory obligation...
If I set or accept a found center of section and file a CCR on it that makes it easier for the next guy to accept my work and move on. So I feel that the center of section is the most important one to file if only for my own protection.
Throwing out the term "relied on" at random and for all circumstances can be trouble. Even if you have case law, your particular set of circumstances might be different that the surrounding circumstances in the case law study.
Example; if two adjoining properties relied on a particular Center of Section, some other property may have relied on a mathematically more correct center of section for their point of beginning and they might have done that before the "bogus" corner was set. That bogus C1/4 might be the Center of section for those two adjoiners and not for anyone else.
The surveyor needs to look at all circumstances and evidence before he makes blatant and quick assumptions in my opinion.
