2
40 years
Scale 1.04;-) ; Surveying 37:-O ; Licensed 27:beer:
DDSM
1
43
1. One (mayde 2)...it depends!
2. 44 years, 34 Licensed
1. 1
2. 34
1 or 2
24 years, 16 Licensed
> Thought I might put some numbers together if I can get a large enough number of replies.
>
> Q1: When weighing found evidence at an obliterated quarter corner; how important is it that the point be on a line between the two opposing section corners? On a scale of 1 to 10 where 1 represents no importance and 10 represents max importance.
>
> Q2: How many years have you been surveying?
>
> (This was just the main disagreement we chewed on at the office today.)
Q1: Depending on the particular situation, from 1-3
Q2: Surveying 40+/- of the last 45
Registered nearly 26.
B-)
> Thought I might put some numbers together if I can get a large enough number of replies.
>
> Q1: When weighing found evidence at an obliterated quarter corner; how important is it that the point be on a line between the two opposing section corners? On a scale of 1 to 10 where 1 represents no importance and 10 represents max importance.
>
> Q2: How many years have you been surveying?
>
> (This was just the main disagreement we chewed on at the office today.)
A1: 2, My goal is to restore the location as the corner was originally set.
A2: 12 years, Took my first surveying job in 1999 while going to school. My first License was 2008.
Q1: 1
Q2: 10
Does not matter what GLO Corner, local evidence must be checked in all directions that apply to determine if that local evidence is reasonable. Being on or off line is another judgement call that should be based on other evidence and experience.
1973.
jud
2
Surveying 48
registered 33
Jerry
10 - Wouldn't be a quarter corner otherwise; now if you ask me whether it has to be on a "straight" line between the two....:)
28 years, not licensed in a PLSS but do teach it and took a national exam (didn't we all?)
1
28 years.
Being a Colonial Surveyor with a CFeds License I will chip in...
1 for finding it on a straight line (they're curved!)
and 32 years practicing. 30 years licensed...
1 and 46
A1: I've never seen an original that is right on line between the section corners. The more recent BLM resurveys I've followed have been in the mid to late 80s, and the most recent original govt surveys were in Alaska performed in the 60s (IIRC - Daryl might remember the dates of the more recent BLM original PLSS - we worked out of the same camp and often on the same crew in the mid 80s). Those surveys seemed to have been performed quite well, but still never found a Quarter Corner on line (plane or rhumb) between the section corners.
Following surveys performed in the mid or late 1800s in mountainous country, "on line" then might equate to "off line by nearly 100 ft" by todays measurements. Did a little retracement with the BLM near Gillette, WY in the 80s. The original surveys were performed during a time when there were indian wars going on. "On line" then might mean "off line by several hundred feet" as measured with modern equipment and without worry of taking some arrows while you work.
So, define "on line" and qualify it to the area and era of the original survey. There are some places/surveys that where the record shows no bearing break, but I find the mon 200' "off line" it creates no worries. There are others where finding a mon 5' off line might cause some concern. There is no government survey I've followed where 2' would cause any concern at all.
So, my final answer is 0 to 8, depending on the width of the line, the date of the original survey, the terrain, the political/social/human factor at the time of the original survey, the original surveyor, ......
A2: 31 years
And licensed 40.
Poll results
33 responses representing 1078 years of practical experience place the importance of a quarter corner actually being on a 'tangent' between the opposing section corners at "very little" to "none". Here's my take on the whole mess: I wish all that replied would get licensed and practice in Oklahoma. It would then be a better place.
It seems like every week I run into 2 or 3 filed Corner Records that have reset a quarter-corner by single proportionate method. Now while I don't disagree with the method in theory, I think resetting a quarter corner in a ditch, 5' from the fence, at a location where there's almost exactly the proper R/W distance between the fences, is maybe missing the point...
Our Corner Record form has three choices at the top: Existing, Obliterated or Lost.
Almost every one of these "in-line" splits calls the corner "Obliterated". My personal opinion is that if you're reduced to a proportioned location, the corner is "Lost".
An example:
There are iron pins (not original) monuments at the NW and SW corners of a section.
The distance between them is within 3' of the distance reported in the 140 year old
original notes. At the mid-point distance you can look east and west and look straight down the well-aged quarter line fences within a foot or so. The statutory R/W in this area is 4 rods. From fence corner to fence corner measures 65.2 feet with a rag-tape and there is a 24' county road centered between the posts. The fences run north and south from these posts as pretty and straight as you please.
But...there's about a 30 minute P.I. in the fences from north to south at this location. Some bonehead(s) drive a pin 5' from the fence and files a corner record. Apparently he, and several others like him, disagree with a thousand years of practical experience.
Thank you gentlemen for helping me make my point.
Poll results
It is simply wrong to use proportionate measurement methods to reset an obliterated corner. Sounds like they are correct that it is obliterated if the fence and road evidence fits so well (assuming no significant conflicting evidence), but then they revert to being sub-professional ignoramus mathmagicians and resort to proportionate measurement because they lack either the experience or the training, and the common sense to recognize valid physical evidence and be comfortable using it. Manipulating numbers by rote procedure is so much easier.
So are these LSITs (or preLSITs) that you're trying to convince, or something else like engineers, architects, or real estate agents?
Poll results
>Apparently he, and several others like him, disagree with a thousand years of practical experience.
>
No easy way to turn a colleague, future employee, future employer, friend, etc in to the board. It is one of the weaknesses of the system. I would love to see a reasonable discussion of how we could better effectively police ourselves.