Recognizing disturbed pins as being disturbed

Posted by: @holy-cow

↑

It is essential to fully analyze your situation before you start setting bars. 

Hard to believe that has to be said. 

I've taken some heat on these pages over the years for being skeptical about found monuments that don't match the record dimensions - within statistically predictable limits. IMO, if you find a monument that doesn't match the record dimensions you have some work to do to prove that the monument is in its original and undisturbed position before accepting it as the true corner. I've seen too few instances of record dimensions being truly bolluxed and too many instances of monuments being messed with to think otherwise.

Even if said monument is of long standing it doesn't always follow that is controlling. It has to be called for in the writings, or at least known to the adjoining parties and recognized as being the corner, no matter how long it has existed. If you have to dig it up that may not be the case. Proving that an uncalled for monument is controlling can be a tricky thing.    

A disturbed monument is no longer marking the corner. It should be removed and replaced (if possible). One of the old timers would set aluminum caps and mark the owners names with a line dividing them, pointing correctly on the cap. It was a great way to determine if the cap had been messed with; we've taken up the same procedure for caps. Not that it helps much for most monuments that aren't set with that type of care but over the last few decades it's shown a number of company caps that were pulled and reset, they never seem to think about rotating them correctly.  

Regarding monuments with no pedigree, it depends heavily on the state and sometimes the area. When I surveyed in rural Maine, many of the deeds were bounds only descriptions, never a plat, and you just hoped to find something or anything in the ground and hopefully near a scabbed over blaze. In other states and areas, a #3 rebar as opposed to a #4 or #5 would give you reason to pause. I suspect if I were more familiar with PLSS surveys, I'd feel more like Norman, but my experience is that it's impossible to prove a negative so, in my areas of practice in the East, I will generally assume the uncalled for monuments hold unless there's evidence to suggest the contrary.  

To Holy-cow's point, I can't imagine locating a monument near a fencepost, and particularly a fence corner, without also locating the fencepost. It's a perfect example of when a PLS should question the monument.

Posted by: @murphy

↑

Regarding monuments with no pedigree, it depends heavily on the state and sometimes the area. When I surveyed in rural Maine, many of the deeds were bounds only descriptions, never a plat, and you just hoped to find something or anything in the ground and hopefully near a scabbed over blaze. In other states and areas, a #3 rebar as opposed to a #4 or #5 would give you reason to pause. I suspect if I were more familiar with PLSS surveys, I'd feel more like Norman, but my experience is that it's impossible to prove a negative so, in my areas of practice in the East, I will generally assume the uncalled for monuments hold unless there's evidence to suggest the contrary.  

To Holy-cow's point, I can't imagine locating a monument near a fencepost, and particularly a fence corner, without also locating the fencepost. It's a perfect example of when a PLS should question the monument.

it is difficult for sure here in the east at times. I try my best to tell my crews look. Take a picture write down what you see.  Iron rod found. Then a walk around you see ground rods located pipes and who knows what else. I say look is it found flush or half a foot below or half a foot above. Bent disturbed if bent give me a cardinal direction. The crew chief has to be taught the why. It’s not just a rod in the ground always marking the corner sometimes it’s nothing it’s just close.  Keep looking because it could be more than 1 rod at a location. 

i enjoy following an deed or plat where the surveyor prior gave a little more information like size and type of what was found or set. 

Posted by: @olemanriver

↑

Posted by: @murphy

↑

Regarding monuments with no pedigree, it depends heavily on the state and sometimes the area. When I surveyed in rural Maine, many of the deeds were bounds only descriptions, never a plat, and you just hoped to find something or anything in the ground and hopefully near a scabbed over blaze. In other states and areas, a #3 rebar as opposed to a #4 or #5 would give you reason to pause. I suspect if I were more familiar with PLSS surveys, I'd feel more like Norman, but my experience is that it's impossible to prove a negative so, in my areas of practice in the East, I will generally assume the uncalled for monuments hold unless there's evidence to suggest the contrary.  

To Holy-cow's point, I can't imagine locating a monument near a fencepost, and particularly a fence corner, without also locating the fencepost. It's a perfect example of when a PLS should question the monument.

 

it is difficult for sure here in the east at times. I try my best to tell my crews look. Take a picture write down what you see.  Iron rod found. Then a walk around you see ground rods located pipes and who knows what else. I say look is it found flush or half a foot below or half a foot above. Bent disturbed if bent give me a cardinal direction. The crew chief has to be taught the why. It’s not just a rod in the ground always marking the corner sometimes it’s nothing it’s just close.  Keep looking because it could be more than 1 rod at a location. 

i enjoy following an deed or plat where the surveyor prior gave a little more information like size and type of what was found or set. 

 

Hopefully they are writing something more descriptive of "Iron rod found"!

Posted by: @norman-oklahoma

↑

I've taken some heat on these pages over the years for being skeptical about found monuments that don't match the record dimensions - within statistically predictable limits. IMO, if you find a monument that doesn't match the record dimensions you have some work to do to prove that the monument is in its original and undisturbed position before accepting it as the true corner. I've seen too few instances of record dimensions being truly bolluxed and too many instances of monuments being messed with to think otherwise.

Even if said monument is of long standing it doesn't always follow that is controlling. It has to be called for in the writings, or at least known to the adjoining parties and recognized as being the corner, no matter how long it has existed. If you have to dig it up that may not be the case. Proving that an uncalled for monument is controlling can be a tricky thing.    

I mostly agree but I think you have one thing backwards. A found called for monument is controlling unless the preponderance of evidence points to it being disturbed. 

The reason you have taken heat here is that some suspect you are rejecting monuments based only on measurements. 

@aliquot well here you get on most of what I have retraced or followed in recent history irf iron rod found off iron pipe found stone   Older surveys were a lot more descriptive like irf with #3 or in inches. Stone size given iron pipe size or if it was pinched top or not. I’d vs id on size. Which this is how I was taught years ago describe the monument give me above or below or flush with surface condition etc. Not much of that these days. Just irf and off to the races.

@olemanriver I dont understand why...It is especially frustrating when there are three "iron pins" near the corner. Caps, not plastic, with enough room to identify the corner, aren't that expensive.

@aliquot no caps here much not required. Can see some old plastic caps once in a while or remnants of them. I have in a short time seen my share of pin cushions though. Even heard the arguments at the bar of why ones set corner was better than the others. When I first jumped back into this side of the house I went out to one of the first boundary surveys and found 3 pin cushions on a property of 5 breaks total. What was bad was some were a half a knuckle apart. So that’s less than a half an inch lol. One knuckle is an inch that’s my best scale I never lose it or forget it. It’s always with me. I do remember a few 3 1/2” caps I believe that was the requirement on some in Colorado back years ago where instead of pin cushions there were punch dots all in some of those caps where each person showed how well they could measure I reckon. I remember doing a sketch once as we located the center cross and drawing up and measuring all the other punch’s. It was a long time ago but I think I did use it for a standard deviation problem during school for extra credit. Lol.

Posted by: @norman-oklahoma

↑

It has to be called for in the writings, or at least known to the adjoining parties and recognized as being the corner, no matter how long it has existed.

I don't agree with that at all.  Lots of monuments were set in good faith before recording laws came along so there may be no written record of them.  And it wasn't the convention (in Idaho anyway) to describe monuments in descriptions either.

I did try raising an argument along the lines of what you say once though and I got a little bit of a roasting by the PLS I was talking to.  His argument was basically how did this monument appear in the immediate vicinity of the corner we're trying to locate?  Magic?  Keep in mind this is Idaho which is pretty rural and you're finding a pin in the middle of sage brush nowhere where the next closest monument is probably a quarter of a mile or more in every direction.

It's a situation where rather than be suspicious of the monument you found it's a question of why was it here instead of anywhere else in the surrounding 160 acres?  The argument becomes it's not a coincidence.

Posted by: @aliquot

↑

I dont understand why

From what I can tell, it relates to there being no potential for a given boundary monument to greatly impact noncontiguous parcels within the Colonial system. While there are certainly some exceptions, such as the few National Parks in the East, it's not an everyday occurrence to go more than one or two calls off the subject tract to look for monumentation. I'm guessing that this leads to greater acceptance of found monumentation as there are typically no notes or records to push math or symmetry. I personally can't see why typing, "Found #5 Rebar" or "1 IN Pinch Top Pipe" is such a big deal, but I suppose if your business model is cheap and fast it's better just label everything EIP.

I can add that I've walked back some of the details I used to provide on plats due to their potential to bite me. I used to label the height above grade of monuments, (e.g. FOUND 2-INCH OD PIPE AG0.5-FEET) until a crew gave me a bad measurement and an all-to-happy-to-litigate client used it to claim I was negligent. In my crew's defense, they claimed a rebar was 0.5' below asphalt when it was only 0.3' and he was going to find fault no matter what because he had a predetermined conclusion that didn't match reality. Sadly, the last I heard the fella was suing his cousin (neighbor to the north) and pretty well ostracized himself from his family over a five foot strip of land. 

Posted by: @bstrand

↑

His argument was basically how did this monument appear in the immediate vicinity of the corner we're trying to locate? 

In such a case it seems probable that the fence was built in reliance on the pin. That would be evidence that at least one of the adjoiners knew about the pin. The other was then probably aware of the fence, at least. But not necessarily if an absentee owner. Either that or the reverse is true, and the pin was set in reliance upon the fence. Which it was seems important. I don't have a collection of Idaho case law, but I can point to several Oregon and Washington cases where the court considered fences to be where they were simply to restrain livestock and that they were never intended to mark boundaries.

For example, in the well known Oregon case of Dykes v. Arnold a long standing center of section marker was held over math. But they did have records of how and when that monument got there and a string of records that documented it being relied on for a century. It wasn't just a newly discovered goat stake.

In the Washington case of Merriman v. Cokely (SC) monuments were set in error and left unchallenged for a decade. The court ruled that iron rods deep in a patch of blackberries were not sufficient on heir own to put the adjoiners on notice of their existence. There needed to be a fence or something substantial like that to put adjoiners on notice of a claim of right against them. There wasn't so the adverse claimant failed.  

In the Oregon case of Gibbons v. Lettow a fence was known to exist for over 60 years. The survey line turned out to be over 40 feet away. The court ruled for the survey line because the adverse claimant could not prove any continuous adverse use of the disputed strip.  

I could go on a long time. You can look these up. I'm betting that there are plenty of Idaho cases along the same lines.