Chuck Karayan published two articles on monuments in issue 102 of the California Surveyor in 1993:
Issue 102 California 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.
If I could, I would add 3) the surveyor that set the monuments made an honest attempt to set them under that standard care of other professional surveyors in the area at the time the survey was made, and applied the rules and principles commonly accepted in good surveying practice to establish property boundaries.
All of those things are nice to have but don't discount a monumented line when there is substantial evidence of good faith acceptance although what the Surveyor did those many years ago may make me sigh and put my face in my hands.
Many County Surveyors in California have drawers full of unrecorded Surveys that they have acquired over time. By our standards those can range from pretty good to pretty lacking (set and found shown, only set shown, no indication of anything set or found shown). Even the pretty lacking ones are evidence of a Survey and if the property owners used that Survey (even though I don't personally like it) it shows good faith on their part.
Again that is not to say you can just blithely accept any old thing; there has to be some evidence and logic to your reasoning.
Yeah, I agree. There are a lot of exceptions that make the above mentioned 3 step process not so black and white. But they are good rules for starting a boundary survey.
When I wrote the (3 I meant it more for retracement surveys, not original surveys.
Exactly! The most unmentioned and arguably the most important evidence is historical evidence. When formulating these rules we have to keep in mind that in addition to all the goat stakes out there, there are countless monuments set in good faith "surveys", the record of which are long gone. The job is not to redo it as it should have been done, but to investigate and determine how it most likely was actually done. That requires acknowledgement of historical inaccuracies and mistakes in mathematics and measurement by those describing and monumenting land boundaries. The historical record is repleat with descriptions of these and the courts have long acknowledged these ancient truths as fact.
Show the monuments that control the boundary along with your own measurements. Of course they will be slightly or greatly different than record, no need to put all previous reported quantities on the map.
The fact that some states have codes or statutes requiring both record and measured only proves the point that professional opinion work should not be subject to detailed technical standards. There are situations where a detailed list of various recorded measurements over the years should be on the map, but this is not true in many circumstances.
Pincushions? Easy note: "several other marks found in vicinity. 1) nail erroneously set by...., 2) horseshoe pit stake erroneously held by... 3) etc., etc.,......."
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?
Keith,
I agree and my point was that we could discuss the issue at hand for a small snapshot of the map. My point is that we are having a 'philosophical' discussion on reporting techniques and that we aren't trashing the specific surveyor since his/her name wasn't mentioned, and without them being able to defend themselves.
If they were here, they would have the ability to state their side.
>
> Pincushions? Easy note: "several other marks found in vicinity. 1) nail erroneously set by...., 2) horseshoe pit stake erroneously held by... 3) etc., etc.,......."
I don't necessarily agree with stating that the other monuments were "erroneously held". I suspect that the other surveyor might have had a reason for holding the other monuments. I know that when I find other monuments, that I don't know all of the history. I am showing my 'opinion' based on my best evaluation of the evidence I found (like another monument that seems more likely). For all I know, that pin that I didn't accept 2' away was actually set accurately and at a good bearing and distance from a controlling corner that I did not find today.
In a pincushion, I would show all the other monuments I found and show why I used the one I did.
Pin Cushion> JP and Jud
I wish somebody would explain that rationale!
Pin Cushion> JP and Jud
Keith, what rationale? The rationale that it is good not to state their name, or the rationale that they should be able to defend themselves if their name was given? Or maybe the rationale that it is perfectly fair for us to discuss the scenario at hand...
Maybe your comment wasn't directed at me. (?)
Pin Cushion> JP and Jud
My point was and is, that somebody could/ should explain the situation in the example!
Keith
no it does not,DAVE!
Surveyor comes along sets boundary and folks build to those points anbd occupy peacefully to the surveyed location. THIS IN NOT GOOD FAITH. THIS IS RELIANCE,ACQUIESCENCE AND FINALLY REPOSE.
THIS ENTIRE THREAD MAKE MY HEAD EXPLODE.
It seems that there is muddled and confused comprehension of what it is that surveyors are suppose to be doing in the first place.
With respect to boudnary location. our job is the collection of EVIDENCE
EXAMINATION AND EVALUTATION OF THE EVIDENCE.
One type of evidence is MEASUREMENT EVIDENCE. This type of EVIDENCE has its proper place in the scheme of things.
The surveyor has NO AUTHORITY TO DEFEAT THE INTENTIONS OF THE PARTIES TO AN AGREEMENT.
There are appropriate avenues for sorting out ambiguities. The surveyor needs to know what they are and to advise their clients accordingly.
no it does not,DAVE!
It certainly looks like your keyboard exploded.
DANE
Does the SURVEYOR have the AUTHORITY to DECLARE there are THREE PARCELS when the evidence of the INTENTIONS OF THE PARTIES was to create TWO PARCELS?
DANE
You CRACK me UP, Dave.
Don
Don
I broke my keyboard doing that.
And I just got finished yelling at my wife's computer because Adobe X is a piece of excrement.
So I downgraded to 9 which isn't much better.
This computer has 8 which works fine. So I guess I'll have to downgrade her computer to 8 then endure the constant "upgrade me" messages.
DANE
What does the evidence show? I would need evidence to support MY OPINION that the grantor intended to retain an unsubdivided remainder parcel. My opinion does not impart marketable title.
There are gaps. They really do exist. The classic example of one is where there are two set of monuments set to mark the same subdivision section and these monuments are in different locations.
If the court would find a gap where you do not, then perhaps you need to reconsider the BASIS OF YOUR OPINION.
I suggest that there are in fact limits to the authority of the surveyor. Perhaps these limits are on the order of those listed in the 1973 BLM Manual or the 2009 edition. know this rubs you wrong Dave, but the facts are as they exist.
LIMIT OF AUTHORITY OF SURVEYOR
6-11. There are certain questions of a purely judicial nature involved in resurveys of every description where the decision is to be reserved to the Director of the Bureau of Land Management, particularly those relating to compliance with the general laws in respect to the entry of the public lands. Thus it comes within the realm of the surveying process to identify and mark out on the ground the various legal subdivisions of the public domain, but it is a judicial question beyond the function of the surveyor to determine whether or not specified lands have been duly earned under a certain entry. In the resurvey process the surveyor will determine whether or not lands embraced within a claim as occupied have been correctly related in position to the original survey. Where the demonstration of this question may be one involving more or less uncertainty, as is often the case, the surveyor will examine and weigh the evidence relating strictly to the surveying problem involved. He will interpret the evidence with respect to its effect upon the manner in which the resurvey shall be executed to protect valid rights acquired under the original survey. The surveyor has no authority to enter into an agreement concerning the exchange of one subdivision for another or to bind the Bureau of Land Management in this particular.
Chapter V - Principles of Resurveys 2009 manual
5·19. There are certain questions of a purely judicial nature involved in resurveys of every description where the administrative decision is reserved to the Director of the Bureau of Land Management. This is particularly true of decisions relating to compliance with the general laws in respect to valid entry of the public lands. In such cases the surveyor's duty is to identify and mark out on the ground the various legal subdivisions of the Federal interest lands, including Indian lands. It is a judicial question, beyond the function of the surveyor, to determine whether or not specified lands have been duly earned under a given law authorizing conditional entry.
5-21. One additional caution, addressed especially to surveyors employed by the Bureau of Land Management, is to bear in mind that their professional work is technical in character, but often must address issues of law and equity. Surveyors are not referees as to the justice or injustice of a situation. Surveyors can only act upon the equities or inequities that may appear to be involved if they fall within the Secretary of the Interior's duties and discretionary authorities.
The surveyor does not have the authority to decide boundary disputes, but may be regarded as one qualified by special knowledge and experience to testify in such cases. The cadastral surveyor acting for the Secretary of the Interior will permanently mark the extent of the Federal interest land. The authority to resolve boundary disputes and make final determination on the boundary of Federal interest lands is vested in the Federal courts. The court in its legal capacity hears evidence and makes findings of fact from the official survey records and the testimony of witnesses, including the surveyor.
DANE
This quote from the '73 manual is not indicative of the responsibility of the private surveyor!
When a surveyor is under contract to the BLM, the BLM is not compelled to obey state laws, therefore the surveyor is not required to obey state law.
However, in private practice, the surveyor is the same as any other state regulated professional, and we must know and obey state laws and legal fundamentals regarding land law!
IGNORANCE OF THE LAW IS NO EXCUSE!
Remember what Curtis Brown, author of 'Boundary Control and Legal Principles', said in his 1979 talk in Arizona:
In my early writings, I generally advocated that surveyors should locate land boundaries in accordance with a written deed; all conveyances based upon unwritten rights should be referred to attorneys for resolution. Within recent years there have been cases, and one in particular, wherein surveyors have been held liable for failure to react to a change in ownership created by prolonged possession. The purpose of this paper is to re-examine what a surveyor should do in the event title has been altered by a legal transfer of title by prolonged possession. This was 32 yrs ago, for gods sakes; catch up, you ______(fill in whatever derogatory designator fits).
Richard Schaut
Richard
You are misunderstanding the purpose of my quoting from the BLM manuals. Certainly the manual is instruction to federal surveyors. I am not claiming that the manual is instruction for anyone else per se. But, I reckon that since the federal government TELLS their surveyors that their SURVEY AUTHORITY IS LIMITED, then it is likely that states place some limits on surveyors practicing under state authority also.
"...wherein surveyors have been held liable for failure to react to a change in ownership created by prolonged possession."
I have not suggested anywhere that any surveyor fail to react to a change in ownership.
Don
> This computer has 8 which works fine. So I guess I'll have to downgrade her computer to 8 then endure the constant "upgrade me" messages.
You can disable those messages. With Adobe 8 with internet connection 1.Open acrobat 8 and click help. 2.Then click check for updates.It will check the available number of updates and the size of the update. You need to check for updates at least one time in-order to access the Adobe Auto Updater preference dialog box in this method. 3.Then click Preferences and uncheck automatically check for Adobe updates. 4.Press ok.
