> .....All that said...there are certainly exceptions...but in general a monument has to be called in some way for it to hold unequivocally from other evidence.
>
> An unknown pin being off by a tenth from the position of the actual corner as we determined it to be can make a big difference in boundary disputes, in where a fence is built, in where a shed is placed, etc. especially on small lots in expensive areas. Yes the court does not concern itself with trivialities but 10k to build then remove a fence is not a trivial matter to most.
Okay...it sounds like I can go out and dig up an original monument and move it to where it benefits me the most, and you will accept it unequivocally over later monuments (that were there when I moved it) that don't agree.
What about the uncalled for monument that is 0.1' off? How do you know? Maybe it was right on 30 years ago when it was set, but the original monument isn't where it once was. It may be that the 30 year-old monument was more correct back when it was closer in time to when the controlling monuments were set.
If I have seen evidence that an uncalled-for monument has been disturbed (bent, cap torn off, exposed a few tenths, etc.) I might rely on distances from good monuments to better place it. But in my opinion, you need to strongly consider uncalled for monuments. They may have been set by a licensed surveyor, who did it with due diligence and care, and within precisions acceptable at the time it was set. the adjoining property owners may have depended on that location to build improvements or fences. It might be time to reconsider that "original" controlling corner. And what if that original corner is now marked by a different monument than the original call in the deed? How are you going to reset it in its right place? What if it is gone altogether? I would probably set it from the local "uncalled for" control as opposed to going back to earlier originals and trying to place it by bearing and distance. I would have a hard time setting it 3-feet away from an existing local control becuase that original platted bearing didn't check.
I just think it's more complicated than you are describing. I have a tendency to want to rely on existing monuments (called or uncalled for) over a bearing and distance that may not be coming from the exact same point as it was when the description was made.
Good grief, now the proverbial 0.04' has changed to 0.07'??? My head is spinning, too. UNEXPECTED ERROR ENCOUNTERED, SHUTTING DOWN
Jeff Lucas should print this one out and give a 4 hour seminar. He would be screaming at the class by the time he was done. I know he feels pretty strongly about holding found monuments.
Robert
yea, I would feel funny speaking to a client/consumer that called me to ask where his corner is located in the yard and tell him to take the plat and a compass/ tape to the yard to find another rebar and measure it from the rebar and then also tell him to convert the feEt/tenths on the plat to feet/inches if he did not have a surveyor's tape.
Plus tell him to refresh his basic trig if he had any to find the hypotenuese distance also.
CLARIFICATION NEEDED
What was the original subdivision like? Nearest foot without bearings? Fully surveyed and published to the hundredth and say 20" bearings? Something better, something worse?
I will happily break some old plans, I am more hesitant with new modern plans.
The courts are weary of these monuments when other evidence exists.
Now that I beleive. The courts probably do grow weary of pin cushion or implied pin cushion monuments when other evidence of the established boundary exists.
:good:
> Jeff Lucas should print this one out and give a 4 hour seminar. He would be screaming at the class by the time he was done. I know he feels pretty strongly about holding found monuments.
LOL
I will be attending Jeff's "The Pincushion Effect" on Friday at Little Rock. I'll print it out and give it to him at the end of the seminar.;-)
DDSM:beer:
I can only imagine how he will shake his head and it will only enforce his opinion about some surveyors.
Mr. Keith
> I can only imagine how he will shake his head and it will only enforce his opinion about some surveyors.
Mr. Keith,
Will he shake his head at the missed opportunities to teach?
IMHO, your posts to this thread serve neither to teach nor enlighten but rather betray your inability to convey knowledge you supposedly gained from a position with the BLM. How old are you? Is it so difficult to nurture others in your chosen profession rather than condemn? 10 posts and all anyone knows is you're amazed and have a headache.
Oh well. Carry on.
G
Mr. George
I am just simply amazed at some surveyors posted rationale.
No darn wonder we have a problem with convincing the public that we know what we are talking about?
If you believe half of what has been posted on this thread, you need to do more reading someplace else that is credible.
Some need to put that measuring manual up and bring down the dusty survey manual.
By the way, did you see an answer to my question:
Just as a curiosity, I know my 1/16th corner monuments were not set with a micrometer back in the 60's and 70's when I set them and if you were to do a resurvey on private land against one of those 1/16th corners in the PLSS; would you accept it if it was a link out of position from your measurement?
What would be your comment?
Mr. Keith
Fantastic thread
It depends......that is the correct answer to all viewpoints expressed so far.
My experience shows that it is almost impossible to determine which monuments hold enough proof to declare that only those two or three are absolutely correct and all other monuments found are off some teensy bit relative to the perfect math and trigonometry hereby declared as THE GOSPEL according to (the surveyor of the day).
Fantastic thread
It depends is right of course, but one would think that we could have some standardized methods to begin with and allow for individual judgement, but some posts here are way out of bounds....in my opinion of course.
Keith
For me 98.6% of all my surveys I do this works just fine.
I would just hold to what I found if they all agree.
Snap from node to node to node back to node of each monument...bam I'm done.
Of course I'd check the four monuments against the rest of the adjoiners (Precision vs. Accuracy)
> For me 98.6% of all my surveys I do this works just fine.
> I would just hold to what I found if they all agree.
>
> Snap from node to node to node back to node of each monument...bam I'm done.
>
> Of course I'd check the four monuments against the rest of the adjoiners (Precision vs. Accuracy)
I understand what you are saying, but precision has nothing to do with where the boundary is located. It is, however, important in the record you create that preserves the evidence of the found boundary.
