Have a large survey requiring land splits in three abutting sections. ?ÿWorked in one of them about eight years ago. ?ÿIn that survey there was a need for a section corner falling on a standard parallel. ?ÿAfter significant research and fieldwork, we?ÿhad to set that corner. ?ÿJump to today. ?ÿThe current project requires far more total research. ?ÿThe odds of that corner falling precisely on the standard parallel as determined based on much additional information are slim. ?ÿ
One of the sections involved in the current project is north of the standard parallel while the previous work was directly to the south of it. ?ÿThe section corner of the south section falls roughly 1200 feet east of the quarter section of the section on the north. ?ÿWithout even checking the field data ?ÿit is a virtual certainty that the bar previously set will NOT be perfectly centered on the alignment that will determined in the current survey.
Of course, one must realize the existence of errors in the original survey to lay out the standard parallel relative to the errors in the later work to establish the sections on either side of it. ?ÿThen consider the lack of information as to why certain monuments have appeared over time along the standard parallel and abutting sections. ?ÿThose found were set at differing times by different surveyors or unknown sources. ?ÿFound simply means found, not authenticated. ?ÿMuch has happened in the 162 years since the field notes were written and significantly longer stretch to the time of the alleged alignment of the standard parallel.
Just set a bigger monument.
?ÿ
You're welcome :-)?ÿ
?ÿ
Corners for sections on both sides of a standard parallel were often not set during the original survey. Are you sure you are not dealing with a corner of minimum control and/or closing corners?
How far off the line is it going to be? Are you recovering original or perpetuated evidence that you missed the first time. Or are you recovering monuments of unknown origin or proportioned positions?
You are in n a unique spot. Generally we are stuck deciphering a record that tells us an incomplete story. In this case you instead have to look inside and honestly say wether you departed from sound practice or not. That can be a more difficult task. The hardest part is saving the distance between the previous and current positions for last.
The deciding factor on that last corner isn't some magic, arbitrary or even logical distance. The question is always did you connect it to the original survey by proper use of completely developed evidence. To beat the dead horse again, 'Correct is an identity, not a distance'...
With the standard parallel situation comes the perfection assumed for a continuous line running for more than 100 miles that is supposed to be a precise distance from the top of the world at all times. ?ÿThe section corners for the sections to the north would have been set at that time. ?ÿThe oddity in this case is that the original layout of sections for the township to the south had to start on the standard parallel and extend southward a few miles to the north line of Indian land. ?ÿA common offset was assigned from the standard corners. ?ÿThe specific area has very shallow soils above native sandstone. ?ÿThe stones noted as being set at the time would have projected significantly and would have been an annoyance to the early builders of the county roads a short time following their placement. ?ÿIn nearly 40 years of working along this standard parallel I do not recall ever recovering what must have been an original stone. ?ÿVarious surveyors with varying methods and equipment have set monuments in attempts to establish the line ?ÿIt would be entertaining to see what would happen if someone were to attempt to re-establish this line with modern technology based on an extremely precise latitude.
And we both know it would also be horribly wrong. Our job today is putting the corners back where they were set in the first place...
Resetting a closing corner or moving a corner of minimum control to a senior line is not pin chushining. Although it is a little embarrassing if it is your own.?ÿ
There are many stones lying under country roads.?ÿ
I personally don't think it is ever out of the question to change one's mind. I would bet that every surveyor over the years will have to confront themselves - do I keep that old pin I set back in the day when I knew more than I know today? Or, do I use my experience to correct my own rookie mistake? In my experience, the few surveyors who refuse to EVER change their mind over the?ÿ years - cause the most headaches. Its a badge of experience to have changed your mind sometime after signing off on a survey.?ÿ
I live in a county where I have worked all my career, and I assure you I sometimes laugh, sometimes cry when I have to refer to work I did 20 years ago. Boy has my logic changed!
Whether or not improvements were built in reliance to your first pin, or if there is some type of reliance at all, is a legal factor.?ÿ Good luck!
?ÿ
?ÿ
IBLA has spoken on this issue:
In some instances, bona fide rights are protected only where BLM departs from a rigid application of resurveying principles to ensure that long-accepted survey lines are not disturbed, so that property boundaries are stabilized and title is secured. As BLM says: "After a long period of time, when acquired rights and boundary recognition have become established, boundaries should become fixed" (Answer at 9). See also Treatise ' 4.16, at 91 ("Lines long accepted should not be lightly cast aside for greater conformity to recent surveys"). Where an entryman or claimant has located improvements or taken other action in good faith reliance on evidence of the original survey and thus bona fide rights are found to exist, a resurvey is required by 43 U.S.C. ' 772 (1988) to take this into account. ?ÿ-Longview Fiber 135 IBLA 170, 182
After significant research and fieldwork, we?ÿhad to set that corner. ?ÿJump to today. ?ÿThe current project requires far more total research.
I do not envy you. It happens. God bless ya for considering all the possibilities.
Honestly, I probably research much more than my competitors and at least one mentor. He often wonders aloud "Why make a simple problem so complicated" when I spend time doing a little more research. Your current situation is exactly why.
Steve
Should I pincushion myself
So you perpetuated the closing corner the first time around and now you're perpetuating the standard corner??ÿ Would that explain the difference?
Anyway, I think I would treat it like any other surveyor's work-- if it's reasonably close count it and show record and measured and move on.
Off topic but relates.?ÿ As a map checker now I always find this amusing.?ÿ Surveyor "A" has no problem calling surveyors "B" monument out of position 0.15' continuously on surveys in the valley but never finds his own out of position (and he has 5 different crew chiefs working under his licence).?ÿ All measurements have error, even your own. :), Jp