StLSurveyor, post: 435933, member: 7070 wrote: This is somewhat a very good point to bring up.... I have a number in Arkansas, and Missouri and these places are kissing cousins as far as surveying goes. With that being said I am applying to Texas and their board and survey standards stresses thing very differently than AR and MO. The tests and standards in MoZark land stress minimum standards, PLSS section breakdown procedures to the umth degree and don't test basic boundary law principles in retracement, junior senior rights, legal description writing, and survey reports. Kent has a very good and simple remark. If Surveyor A wrote a complete description, calling out the monuments, adjoining lines, (not just to "a point") and prepared a report which was filed in conjunction with Surveyor A plat then Surveyor B could go out and recover those points there would be no pin cushion possibility and no question of what was original. And Nate, Surveyor C, would not even be needed.
So what I am saying is that based on my experiences with these states and their boards, Texas clearly has an advantage in that they stress procedures rooted in boundary law and not so much measurement standards, proportion and protraction. As a result, too many of us up here in Hill Billy land are too focused on measurement....It is so very common to see plats where surveyors call off another surveyor monument by 0.81', does that make them a bad surveyor or an excellent student? If the monument is there - it's there. Right there! Not 0.81' over there....
"As a result, too many of us up here in Hill Billy land are too focused on measurement..."
So - does this mean that Arizona is part of Hill Billy land too? We have a huge number of expert measurers here with almost no concept of boundary law...
If the point of the mathematical offsets is to hit a senior line, then I'm good with it. If it's only to hit the record distance, then I am not ok with it.
Shawn, it all comes down to the "Definition" of the original line.
Client hires surveyor. shows him several locations. Surveyor pins them. And then SURVEYS it.
BUT, his field procedures are weak. And, his NUMBERS fail to match his pins, by 0.85'.
Along comes Surveyor B, and he HOLDS the numbers, not the pins.
N
Nate The Surveyor, post: 436140, member: 291 wrote:
Along comes Surveyor B, and he HOLDS the numbers, not the pins.
N
And there is the rub...
N10,000, E7,000, Z100.00
PLS - IL, MO, AR, KS, MN, KY
In my opinion, a good survey plat should explain how you made the determinations you made.....especially why you may have rejected a found monument. I would guess that surveyor b rejected the found monuments because s/he was holding numbers over monuments, but a statement explaining something like "owner a told me that he watched the utility company dig up the monument and they drove it back in the ground when they were done" might make you change your mind.
After you visit the site, giving surveyor b a call asking how they came up with their location my be good.
You should always carry several "found pins" with unreadable plastic caps on them just to be able to say you held a found iron at your calculated position.
;):scream::drool:
Nate The Surveyor, post: 436140, member: 291 wrote: Shawn, it all comes down to the "Definition" of the original line.
Client hires surveyor. shows him several locations. Surveyor pins them. And then SURVEYS it.
BUT, his field procedures are weak. And, his NUMBERS fail to match his pins, by 0.85'.
Along comes Surveyor B, and he HOLDS the numbers, not the pins.
N
I can't see how surveyor B's location was used to establish line if he didn't set anything.......
Maybe I misread and he did set them.
MightyMoe, post: 436302, member: 700 wrote: I can't see how surveyor B's location was used to establish line if he didn't set anything.......
Maybe I misread and he did set them.
That is my initial take too. I'm looking forward to Nate's BOTG* report.
*Boots On The Ground
I will confess I'm a bit confused too I will find out which way it is.
Nate The Surveyor, post: 436310, member: 291 wrote: I will confess I'm a bit confused too I will find out which way it is.
Don't forget what the great Paul Reid always said: "One corner, one monument".
MightyMoe, post: 436392, member: 700 wrote: "One corner, one monument".
What's a matter? Don't like "Multiple Choice"?
🙂
Nate The Surveyor, post: 436395, member: 291 wrote: What's a matter? Don't like "Multiple Choice"?
🙂
Just true or false....
Mark Mayer, post: 435946, member: 424 wrote: Are you saying that Surveyor A's monuments are called for in the deed, and are definitely identifiable, but Surveyors B & C computed alternate positions?
[EDIT] If so the thing to do is to hold the monuments and show your alternate measurements to them, along with the record dimensions. But not to show the monuments being "off".
This sounds like the right answer to me. How can they be 'off' if they're called for and are there? Sounds like surveyors B and C are holding the deed geometry over the found monuments. Not sure that's the right choice but I haven't seen the survey....