in 2000, as county surveyor, I was commissioned to survey a part of an existing county road that defined several private property boundaries. Being paid by taxpayers, working for the public, what would the minds on this board do? I will supply a condensed, chronological sequence of events. No personal attack is intended. Even if anything personal is implied, all the information following is public record, filed by the various surveyors, whom, to a man, filed their information with a high degree of confidence and intention of WANTING the public to know their various opinions.
The road and various property is in mountainous and mostly thickly forested areas. GPS RTK can only be used for about half the measurements needed.
The GLO established the entire Section and all brass caps are in place. They did not set a center 1/4 corner or any 1/16 corners. the average elevation is 9,000. It is my own opinion that the entire PLSS system was enacted and ongoing for the sole purpose of deposing Federal property to private settlers. And that since day one, the law contemplated that private settlers had the authorization to start from the government surveys and set any corners needed that were not set by the government.
In the 1900's, the NE.1/4 was patented to the private sector.
The private sector settled, and eventually engaged their own survey of the NE1/4 into 1/16's.
In the early 1970's, a reputable surveyor A laid out several metes and bounds tracts. All that surveyors pins can still be found. several metes and bounds tracts were described from the "center 1/4 corner". On the ground, the surveyor A laid out the north and south centerline, setting several tract monuments along the way. He set the C-N1/16 corner, continued south, and committed a "human". Meaning that from this corner, he veered to the west of a perfect protraction, and set one property corner on the "human" line, and 200 feet further south, a pin for the center 1/4 corner that we now know is 27 feet west of a perfect protraction. he also set monuments around several metes and bounds tracts that still exist and match the record deed descriptions from the human line on the ground. all of the metes and bounds tracts in the NE1/4 were occupied and houses built. At the time, monument records were required by law, but no law requires a plat to either be prepared, recorded, or "deposited". One can find the deeds on record. several transfers of ownership have occurred according to the deeds, which are only accurate if measured from the "human" line. none of the deeds call out a specific monument, but on the ground, you will find a unique size of monument at each described corner.
Surveyor B did a retracement survey of one parcel adjoining the Human line, accepted the "human" center 1/4 corner monument, and recorded a plat along with the deed. this plat also refers to the county road in question.
In the mid 1980's, Surveyor C did several retracements of metes and bounds tracts, and a recorded subdivision, in the NW1/4NE1/4. He found surveyor A's unique monument for the NE 1/16 and accepted it, using it for a recorded subdivision. There was no need to re-bisect the section, or establish the center 1/4, but surveyor C did RE-BISECT the section, and set a new monument in the perfect protracted position. At the time, this was done by the crew chief, whom I know, without authorization from surveyor C. this crew chief was about 30, had been a surveyor for about 5 years, and was an outspoken doubter of the owner of the company, surveyor C. the crew chief felt that since surveyor C didn't know what he was doing, it was up to the crew chief to "do it right" and establish the center 1/4 corner even though he was not instructed to do so by the boss surveyor C. there is no required monument record for this perfect center 1/4 corner. there is no plat, legal description, or any document of any kind that mentions this perfect center 1/4 corner. the surveyor C did not authorize nor stamp it or seal it. Surveyor C office has no file for any job done for this monument, no land was surveyed, no bill sent, no coordinate list of any kind. The crew chief, in true pompous ass form, had no idea that there was already a monument and several metes and bounds tracts laid out from the existing monument. He did not know to even look for an existing monument. Therefore, the perfect center 1/4 monument, with surveyor C number on it, is a fraudulent monument that at the time, had no affect on any property right.
Surveyor D retraced on the metes and bounds parcels, found both center 1/4 corners, accepted the Surveyor A C1/4 noted the position of the Surveyor C - noting it is "not accepted" - found a combination of various monuments, and set a number of monuments including along the county road right of way. surveyor D filed monument records and "deposited" a land survey plat.
?ÿ
Surveyor E was hired to retrace one of the metes and bounds parcels in the NE1/4. He did so, found most of Surveyor A monuments, and deposited a plat showing that the Surveyor A center 1/4 corner was "accepted", and that Surveyor C C1/4 was "not accepted".
A number of retracement surveys were done in the NE1/4 by several surveyors without incident.
In 2005, surveyor F did a retracement survey in the NE1/4NE1/4 found and accepted the NE1/16 corner, but then did a complete new section breakdown (which was not required). Surveyor F agreed that the Surveyor C C1/4 was the prefect intersection, and deposited a plat rejecting the Surveyor A center 1/4 corner, and added a note on the plat saying essentially "I don't understand why anyone would accept a monument that is out of position"
?ÿ
In 2008, surveyor D was asked to subdivide one of the metes and bounds parcels. he did so, along the "human" centerline, set the CN1/16, filed monument records, and several monuments along the human line, and recorded a subdivision plat.
sometime, a government agency acquired the NW1/4 of this section.
In 2010, the government agency subcontracted to have the NW1/4 surveyed. Surveyor G, a private surveyor under contract with the government agency. rejected all of surveyor A monuments, and accepted Surveyor C. Surveyor G recorded a plat showing that all surveyor A, B, C, and D's monuments were rejected being "out of position", and adding a note stating essentially: "The Colorado State Board and the BLM Manual (2009) REQUIRE us to reject all monuments that are out of position".
The government agency officially stated in writing that they "authorize the acceptance of "local corners", they do NOT require subcontract surveyors to set multiple monuments". I spoke with several surveyors whom I know often do subcontract work for government agencies. Several of them knew the surveyor I was referring to when I asked "does the government agency you work for require you to set pincushions?" They ALL told me that they rarely set multiple monuments, and that they are not required by the government agency to set multiple monuments.
If you were hired by your county, what would you have done?
?ÿ
?ÿ
Surveyor A and his followers are correct in the way they did what they did.?ÿ Those who believe there is only one possible location of the center corner have not been surveying very long at all or have their crania up their colons.?ÿ If the only location is by working from the "original" corner monuments and then setting the center corner per whatever the Instructions dictated in whatever year the "original" survey was carried out, then almost every center corner in the country is "off" by some amount from that mathemagical point.?ÿ I am sure I have yet to work in a section where every monument is the "original" monument.
Quietly slipping into my asbestos-lined body suit now.
Addendum: I have a letter from the Colorado State Board stating that nothing in their statues or rules requires surveyors to reject monuments that are out of position or to set multiple monuments, nor do they encourage any such practice
?ÿ
Is it standard, or average practice, to set the center 16rhs ?
That's quite a bit of information to have going to the field. Was there any history of the sw1/4 ?
The best way I can describe is that what information we had, surveyor A made a conscious effort to properly bisect the 1-4 lines. (As opposed to stunning out). It is not standard practice at the time to set 1-16ths unless they are part of a desired boundary
BTW, more than once have I encountered a situation where what would be called the 1/16th corner has two monuments quite a distance apart and each is correct.?ÿ Both fell in sections where the western quarter mile (+/-) was lotted.?ÿ An owner acquired the entire northwest quarter then later split it into one-fourths by connecting the midpoints of all sides.?ÿ Meanwhile, the southwest quarter had the lots sold away separate from east half.
A portion of the area that I routinely work has Instructions where the north-south quarter section line is to be set 2640 west of the northeast corner and the southeast quarter, with the midpoint of said line being the center corner.