OK I will say it...
the question thing comes across as pompous and annoying like we are a bunch of little kids sitting at the feet of the master.
I know it isn't meant that way.
If you want to write a dissertation, then do so and we can at least rip into it.
Robert
> As to your presumption, it's flat wrong.
Oh, it's not my presumption that a survey described in its title as containing a league contains a league unless proven otherwise. It's the policy of the State that is reflected in the tax rolls all across the entire State of Texas. In the oil & gas business all sorts of other agendas come into play and I suspect that you're probably confusing what plays out in areas where there is oil & gas production in commercial quantities for the rest of the state.
> Let's ask all of the oil companies the state has forced to get leases from in east Texas in titled grants without first proving the grant was in excess.
You'll have to break that one down. Oil company leases oil & gas from private mineral owner, and you want to have them lease what from the State?
A real property boundary is created when monuments are accepted that limits ones ownership.
Robert
Well kent, the leases come from the glo, so I'm standing by my statements.
Robert
> Well kent, the leases come from the glo, so I'm standing by my statements.
Well, you're quite wrong if you think that the GLO gives oil & gas leases to lands in which the mineral estate is privately owned, as is presumptively the case with titled grants. The scenario that probably took place was that corrected field notes for the grant were filed in the GLO and that is what established the State's undivided interest in the excess acreage.
There is no motivation for the private owner to contest that. The excess acreage boils down to more money for the surface owner and nothing from the pocket of the mineral owner.
OK I will say it...
I'll bet that of the surveyors responding to this thread totaling what, 500 years experience, nobody has the right answer. Bet?
I hate to be negative, I really do, but it almost seems like a little Lucas has rubbed off on JBS with the result that he has adopted the attitude that surveyors in general are a bunch of doofuses.
In looking at the fact that a boundary is an invisible legal division line between two interests or estates in land, one must look at both common law and statute law to determine how courts and legislative bodies have determined the various methods by which boundaries can be created. In applying the methods of boundary location, the surveyor can identify three methods by which the surveyor, the court, or a landowner can create a boundary. It should be remembered that one does not have to be a surveyor to create a boundary. Courts can adjudicate and dictate a boundary, two or more contiguous landowners can create mutual boundaries, a single landowner can create a boundary by personal actions, and surveyors can create boundaries by their actions.
Brown
OK I will say it...
> I hate to be negative, I really do, but it almost seems like a little Lucas has rubbed off on JBS with the result that he has adopted the attitude that surveyors in general are a bunch of doofuses.
Don't you imagine that the reason Lucas doesn't post to internet message boards is that it would too revealing? I mean a bucket of reality washes away quite a bit of BS. It's one thing to pontificate in the directions of the four winds. It's quite another to deal with the actual real world situations that actual land surveyors are hired to deal with and to have one's own actual work scrutinized.
OK I will say it...
> the question thing comes across as pompous and annoying like we are a bunch of little kids sitting at the feet of the master.
>
> I know it isn't meant that way.
>
> If you want to write a dissertation, then do so and we can at least rip into it.
I kinda have to side with Dave on this. Whenever I read something along the lines of:
"I never really knew (or understood) these answers until recently..."
my natural instinct is to believe that I'm about to be delivered a sermon on either Dianetics or Amway.
Kent
Just to continue on my negative theme of the evening, I think Lucas has run dry of topics for his articles. Other than checking to see if I'm a footnote in the latest edition, I don't pay any attention anymore. I've never been to one of his seminars, although I would go if he'd come within 100 miles of here (I need the CEU's) so I don't know how he holds up to debate.
I suppose national seminar givers probably have a hard time in Texas like they do in California. Things are different from the rest of the country in some pretty significant ways and I've only seen a couple of speakers go to the trouble of learning about the subject before they get here. Gary Kent was one who I thought was extremely well-prepared when I saw him.
OK I will say it...
> Whenever I read something along the lines of:
>
> "I never really knew (or understood) these answers until recently..."
>
> my natural instinct is to believe that I'm about to be delivered a sermon on either Dianetics or Amway.
LOL!
OK I will say it...
> I hate to be negative, I really do, but it almost seems like a little Lucas has rubbed off on JBS with the result that he has adopted the attitude that surveyors in general are a bunch of doofuses.
Sorry you feel that way, Steve. Actually, my true belief is that surveyors know a lot more about boundaries, title, easements, and property rights in general than most attorneys, title reps and real estate agents combined.
The only disappointment that I have is that our profession has been lying to itself to the point where we have been belittled into thinking that we have a minute and almost meaningless role in boundary determination. Measurement technicians, indeed!
I've been doing my best to encourage and enable surveyors through my classes, seminars and hundreds of hours on internet sites like this one over the years. I can only hope that my efforts aren't lost on all surveyors, but I'm sure they're lost on many. I can't help that, but I'm willing to continue my efforts in the hope that I can enable just one more surveyor to do more than he does now.
You're not the first surveyor to tell me that I "do too much, go too far, and make the rest of us look bad." Well, sorry. If you feel like a "doofus," then buck up, saddle up, and do something about it. You can choose to close the gap, or you can choose to let it widen.
The one thing that I have lamented over the past several years is that I never had a real mentor that could teach me how to do the things that I have learned to do. I'm doing stuff that I was told "surveyors could not do." You know who told me that? Surveyors! Well, now that I've learned to do this stuff, I'm taking the time to be a mentor to as many as possible.
I've got a lot of experiences yet to share with my colleagues. I love nothing more that spending time with them and like it best in live seminar settings where we can get down to the real rubber. I'm sure that anyone who has attended one of my seminars can attest to the fact that I provide a unique and exciting outlook for possibilities available to our profession that we've been missing out on for decades. If you choose not to attend, that's fine. If you choose to, that's fine as well. My commitment to our profession will be unaffected either way.
JBS
Kent
> Just to continue on my negative theme of the evening, I think Lucas ... I've never been to one of his seminars...
>
> I suppose national seminar givers probably ... I've only seen a couple of speakers go to the trouble of learning about the subject before they get here. ...
There you have it in a nut shell. The two most vociferous critics in this thread have "never been to one of his seminars." Neither Kent nor Steve have ever been to one of my seminars either.
Thank you both for your constructive criticism and support. I'm sure that your "negative theme" will serve as a real encouragement for others in our profession.
JBS
JB
I am very sure that the readers of this forum can come to their own conclusions and can readily see for themselves, those who advocate learning about our profession and those who think they know it all and only throw darts at constructive postings of survey law and survey procedures.
Keep up the good work JB!
Keith
Kent
> There you have it in a nut shell. The two most vociferous critics in this thread have "never been to one of his seminars." Neither Kent nor Steve have ever been to one of my seminars either.
But I've actually read what you've posted over the years and have a hard time believing that you weren't as serious as a heart attack when you posted the things you have. Surely you're not saying that you have to get paid to say what you really think, are you?
As for the Lucas, he has his own track record in print that I'd think it would be difficult to pretend doesn't actually characterize his views as well.
Kent
You ought to consider your own track record. Talk about stuck in a time warp. Same old story year after year. No growth whatsoever. Your view of land surveying has no future, it's already dead.
Kent
> You ought to consider your own track record. Talk about stuck in a time warp. Same old story year after year. No growth whatsoever. Your view of land surveying has no future, it's already dead.
LOL! I'll keep that in mind, but fortunately my clients don't know it. :>
keep on keeping on jb.
I wish there were a few more surveyors juch as yourself willing to take the high road, foster education, and present tought questions.:good:
I guess out of most of the responces to the question at hand I like jud's.
I like the nature of defending your land even though it doesn't go much to the actuall "creation"
Mercy, sNakes alive! I guess haters just gotta hate.
I've learned way too much from Mr. Stahl to be anywhere near that disdainful of his last couple of posts.
As it's much too early to be pithy, I'll just simply state:
Put me down as a Loyal Listener to Lucas
and a Jealous Jouster of those Juxtpaposed to JBS.
Rock on Mr. Stahl.
Leon,
I agree 100% with what you said. My point being that at some level, the land surveyor must realize that, right or wrong, their word is often (more often than not I would wager) taken as gospel or as law. Once you realize that, I think you can start to realize the ethical burden you have of making sure you know the law, and you apply principles that better serve the public rather than setting corners at some mathematical distance and bearing while ignoring all of the other evidence.