I can't say that I like pin cushions but I don't see them as a problem either. They do serve to inform the public in a couple of important ways.
Boundary surveys are merely the opinion of the boundary's location. Surveys are not binding on any landowner and they're importance rests on the landowners and adjoiners use. Multiple monuments at a corner give landowners notice that there is a difference of opinion for the correct location. Then landowners can see the importance of who is selected to do the survey, as all surveyors are not equally competent. Removing monuments obscures the truth.
Diamonds may be forever but boundaries aren't. From time to time boundaries need maintenance. Failure to monitor corner monuments can impede a surveyor's work to find a precise location. In this regard, multiple monuments are often the result of landowner neglect rather than surveyors incompetence.
The year is full of days celebrated for one subject or another. There is even a 'Talk Like a Pirate' day. Why can't we have a Boundary Day, where landowners find and photograph their corners. Until then surveyors should take every opportunity to educate the public.
Multiple monuments at a corner give landowners notice that there is a difference of opinion
I've witnessed pincushions causing confusion amongst landowners more than any other feeling or emotion.
Most of the pincushions I see in North Carolina are in cookie cutter subdivisions. My guess is that poor business practices are the root cause. On the corporate side, there's always this push to grow, get more work, move more money. This naturally leads a PLS or project manager to get into a cycle of working for their field crews, meaning, taking on projects that are not, or are unlikely to be, profitable just to keep the crews billable. Concern over utilization rates, makes it easy for those working in larger firms to just spank some metal in the ground and move on as they're already eating ten or more hours a week so they can put their best forty hours on the timesheet.
I'd speculate that just as many or more pincushions in my area come from mom and pop shops. I'm not sure why they can't find a way to charge an appropriate fee for boundary surveys, but I see it over and over. You're not going to solve boundary issues when you're charging $800 for a subdivision survey and paying your party chief just over fast food wages. Many have hearts of gold, but are staggeringly ignorant when it comes to running a business. I worked for a PLS/business owner that once said, "I'll never except credit card payment for one of my surveys. No one is going to go in debt paying me". He died bitter and broke. I would think that rising real estate costs would get small firms to increase their costs, but I've not seen this happen.
The "sacredness" of original boundary markers is an ancient concept. It's so ancient that it was laid out in the bible and even when Deuteronomy 19-14 was written it was already long established.
By the time of the establishment of the PLSS it had become so ingrained in western law that it's unquestioned.
Don't think that pin cushions create no damage to the landowners. For the most part they are inconsequential, the legal concept of de-minimis probably can be usually invoked. However, as surveyors we must be aware of Slander of Title, protect the client and ourselves from falling into causing harm and leaving the client with a more secure boundary should always be the goal of a land survey. Cleaning up a bunch of conflicting monuments creating conflicting lines is part of the job.
We have a few pictures of pin cushions in the office, one has a PK nail within a BLM cap, apparently that cap wasn't close enough to their mathematical position.
I was mistaken; there's actually TWO PK's in the quarter corner cap.
We have a few pictures of pin cushions in the office, one has a PK nail within a BLM cap, apparently that cap wasn't close enough to their mathematical position.
I was mistaken; there's actually TWO PK's in the quarter corner cap.
Stop it!!!!!!!!!!!!
Looks like a couple I posted
It seems I hold a minority opinion on the subject of pin cushions. I admit that pin cushions are confusing to landowners in the same way that a difference of opinion on this forum might be confusing to a non-surveyor. If pin cushions are a problem, what is the solution? Some surveyors think they have the authority to remove all but one monument leaving the one they think is correct.
What if we applied that same concept to the differences of opinion posted in this discussion? Should the last poster delete all previous posts that are at odds with his own opinion? As far as I know this forum is open to the public and we wouldn't want the public to see surveyors in disagreement.
Pin cushions are most definitely a problem. They reflect a lack of diligence in finding existing monuments. They reflect a lack of judgement when a second or third pin is set tenths apart from existing pins. To think that everyone is entitled to express their thoughts in a forum is equivalent to every one is entitled to set a pin in a pin cushion is certainly fundamentally incorrect. The example shouldn't have even been used. We expect differing opinions in the forum. The profession, the landowners, and the courts should not expect the proliferation of pin cushions.
Read Jeff Lucas's paper uploaded above.
He expresses it better than I do.
Putting a cloud on landowner's title isn't a trivial act.
Also, how many pin cushion monuments even have a record?
Usually, the ones I see are not of record, they simply appear.
If you know the surveyors setting the monuments, contact them, I find that an excellent option.
I've agreed to have my corner pulled before. It happens. Better to protect landowners than my ego.
In a retracement survey, all a surveyor has to offer his client is an opinion on the boundary location. The opinion may indicate an existing monument or one the surveyor sets. Landowners are free to select any monument for their corner, be it the right one or a wrong one, or even one they set. It's not the surveyor's job to force a location on landowners. I like to think the court wants the truth, all the truth, and pulling monuments obscures the truth from both landowners and the court. Pulling pins is intentionally destroying evidence.
@lurker In PA you could set those. Or hub and tack. Or nothing at all (as many do)
I like to think the court wants the truth, all the truth, and pulling monuments obscures the truth from both landowners and the court.
Let me be the contrarian and say: "setting more monuments obscures the truth"
A surveyor should only set a monument when it is necessary to indicate his opinion on a corner's location. The decision to set a monument is at the discretion of the surveyor. Like many here I think some monuments are set inappropriately. It would help if more surveyors would study the doctrine of de minimis.
While a surveyor might be wrong to set a corner, it's also wrong to pull that monument. Two wrongs don't make a right.
There is not right with every monument, there is only one corner position. The surveyor needs to use his expertise, experience and knowledge to resolve these messes. You can't simply walk away with multiple monuments. One corner, one monument. You have to work through it and fix it, it may take time, lots of contact with other surveyors, but it can be done.
There is not right with every monument, there is only one corner position. The surveyor needs to use his expertise, experience and knowledge to resolve these messes. You can't simply walk away with multiple monuments. One corner, one monument. You have to work through it and fix it, it may take time, lots of contact with other surveyors, but it can be done.
One corner, one monument? You've been reading too much Jeff Lucas.
Read Jeff Lucas's paper uploaded above.
He expresses it better than I do.
The link to the Lucas book only had the contents. Would you like to refresh my memory of what he said on page 56 (2.05 First Surveyor Concept).
Is this where he suggests that the first survey is the original survey?
I liked what was in this publication: