Thank you Mr. Penry. I agree completely.
> The "true" position often means different things depending upon the surveyor. Take the Center of Section for example. I maintain that the "true" position is where the first surveyor placed it if it was done by correct methods (intersection of quarter section lines). Now along comes another surveyor and he maintains that the "true" position is 5.34' north and 2.79' west of the monument because it fits his calculation of the intersection of quarter section lines.
around here 40 chains is 2640' +/-, just sayin....
Questions for Jud, and others
Pseudo, the answer, as always, it depends. I depends on location in the world, the intent of the parties, the intent of any fences in place, what previous surveyors did or chose not to do. Accepting and rejecting monuments is something we must all have the courage to do or we are in the wrong line of work. Here a narrative is required as a means of expanding on the graphics and justification and reasoning needs to be a large part of that narrative if there is conflicting evidence. Holding or rejecting a monument at one corner, should not effect what you accept or reject at the next, each one is a stand alone choice, even when there is none or only one monument. Holding every monument is not a hard and fast rule with me, it must pass the stink test before any monument is accepted, in other words, it must be in a reasonable and expected position and also be in harmony with what surrounds it.
jud
In my younger days, I too was a "iron pipe found 0.2' N and 0.2'W" surveyor. Over time, I've graduated to accept other surveyors monuments IF: 1) there is a record of a surveyor setting it and 2)if I believe it to be undisturbed. I show record vs measured.
That reality set me free.
Who was I to reject surveyor's monuments that were set 20 or 50 years ago? Am I better than them? Were they not trying to get it right, too?
Do I reject monuments? Sure, but there better be good reason.
Jud, very good point! Surveyors should know better than to pass judgment until all the facts are on the table. Jp
Pin Cushion> JP and Jud
"Pin Cushion
by Jp7191, Friday, July 22, 2011, 16:32 (1 minutes ago) @ jud
Jud, very good point! Surveyors should know better than to pass judgment until all the facts are on the table. Jp"
If we waited until ALL the FACT's were in , we would never get anything done.
We can only discern the available facts, that is, those available to us. We can never be sure of an unrecorded deed, maybe outstanding interests...and so on...
But, to reference three points to a mathematical corner, and showing one 0.01' off is stupidity. (even if it's 0.01 x 0.01 out of position, hahaha)
Unless this surveyor has a serious background in big machinery placement, I bet he balanced more than 0.01 out of his/hers traverse...
do you sincerely think that the math is that important?
Dtp
Pin Cushion> JP and Jud
Show me from what you see how you can know just what he thinking and was intending to show, all that is there is a part of a drawing with most of it missing, there may be some good and sound reason for what you see, only the one who started the post knows what that might be, the remainder has not been provided and no one has asked for it. That my friend, is the problem I have with this thread, not the shown measurement for which I know nothing about the reasoning.
jud
Pin Cushion> JP and Jud
With that little sketch the surveyor is showing four possible locations for the corner:
the mathematical one and three monuments...
What else could this possibly be showing?
What sort of disclaimers might you expect that would justify referencing a nail and shiner 0.01' x 0.01' out from a theoretical point?
I don't see or feel and "conclusion jumping" here..
Render an opinion on the facts before you, NOT what maybe coming down the pike.
Pin Cushion> JP and Jud
Don't see anything but the relationship between multiple points, I see no bearings or distances coming from other monumention and I see no statement making any claims. From the graphics it appears that the cap was held but there is also an arrow pointing at that area that must be calling attention to something. No this is weighted data presented to obtain an intended response. It is not the hundredths that is telling the story needed to be read here, it is the response that is the most telling.
jud
Pin Cushion> JP and Jud
> Don't see anything but the relationship between multiple points, I see no bearings or distances coming from other monumention and I see no statement making any claims. From the graphics it appears that the cap was held but there is also an arrow pointing at that area that must be calling attention to something. No this is weighted data presented to obtain an intended response. It is not the hundredths that is telling the story needed to be read here, it is the response that is the most telling.
> jud
Jud, I see your point, but: This is a forum for discussing survey matters. The picture is only a piece of the puzzle, and we don't see the whole story. However for discussion purposes, I think it is adequate talk about at least how that surveyor is reporting his corner point. It might be different and it might be more of passing judgement, if the name of the surveyor were revealed, and people were trashing him without seeing everything and without hearing his side.
As I stated before, I have seen nationally-respected surveyors report their differences in measured vs. found. And, although I personally disagree with that format, they argued that they are not "rejecting" the monument but simply reporting the difference. I prefer to decide what monument I accept, and report the record distance and what I measured. (regardless of how someone might take one word out of my paragraph and claim that I mean the exact opposite of what I said).
Tom
Pin Cushion> JP and Jud
Maybe a farmer would not understand the posted sketch, but don't think there is a problem with a land surveyor understanding it?
Notes on a map should be of a clarifying nature. I have no idea what the note means. If I were a map reviewer I would not accept the map no matter what the rest of it says or looks like. I suppose there could be a note legend that has a paragraph explaining what the note means, but that would seem a backasswards way of doing things. Might be acceptable though I doubt it. N? W? .01? really?
Surveyors job is resolve ambiguity not create it.
Pin Cushion> JP and Jud
Present company excluded of course I know several farmers that know more about surveying than some surveyors.
Pin Cushion> JP and Jud
You are probably right linebender!
Maybe this example is only a joke?
Nobody can think that irrationally!
Can they?
> Maybe this example is only a joke?
>
> Nobody can think that irrationally!
>
> Can they?
Oh, yeah! I'm perfectly capable of irrational thought.:-)
Don
Not that irrational Don.
I think disagreeing with any survey monument over a discrepancy of 0.01', under nearly any circumstances, is ridicules. There needs to be a balance between being a "COGO Cowboy", and a strictly "platted and measured surveyor". In the last 10 years it has been getting a little too popular to jump on a pin and call it gospel. Some surveyors keep saying that "monuments rule, monuments rule". But what happened to original monuments rule. If a monument has been set subsequent to an original monument, and it is the best evidence as to where the original monument was, than that monument can "rule" too. I enjoy reading Jeff Lucas's writings as much as the next guy, but some must think that attending one of his seminars gives you a license to jump on any stake the property owner is happy with and call it a property boundary. I do not think that he intends to provoke these types of thoughts.
Over time, I've graduated to accept other surveyors monuments IF: 1) there is a record of a surveyor setting it and 2)if I believe it to be undisturbed. I show record vs measured.
Amen to that.
It is very common to find a Deed description which was cooked up to facilitate the sale and then the new owner needed to know where this parcel is located so he could fence it and build his house so soon after they commission a survey and have the corners set. Almost immediately these monuments are put into use. It is very common that the survey never got filed anywhere particularly in rural counties but the monuments can be found.
I consider these to be original monuments although they aren't a perfect representation of the Deed geometry.
On the other hand you can't just accept them uncritically, for example, in the case where one or two monuments mark where new lines intersect an existing boundary. In that case the existing boundary may have better evidence than the otherwise original monuments (which are good for the "new" line for that Deed).
This is a short post and I realize there are an infinite variety of situations that could vary the answer. That is just the nature of Surveying boundaries. You can't write a single hard and fast rule. I even know of a real original quarter corner monument that marks no boundary; there is another non-original quarter corner monument blessed by a Superior Court Judge in 1972 which has been in use ever since. Never say never, every rule has a contrary case.
