Kent, your situation was much more difficult than mine in terms of locating that original.
However, with mine I find the "crime" to be more pathetic - missing 2 inch originals that were not that far below grade. I am just glad they missed so badly that the original looked to be undisturbed and will live another several decades.
> Kent, your situation was much more difficult than mine in terms of locating that original.
I don't know about that. The setting is shown in this photo taken after I reburied the works:
That's basically a natural area that probably looks now about as it did in 1940. There is very little ferrous metal around. Admittedly, that 12-inch long pipe 27 inches down didn't make a strong ping on the metal detector, but the digging in the alluvial soil was very light compared to most of the other soil conditions around there.
My experience with ferrous markers is that the length is critical as well as diameter, so if one assumes you have no calcs, and nothing visual in terms of fencing, I can at least give some (very miniscule) benefit of the doubt when it comes to finding your original.
Of course, since your competitor eventually did have calcs within a half foot, then all that benefit of the doubt flies out the window since you do in fact have nothing in your way and can crank up that detector to find that.
> Of course, since your competitor eventually did have calcs within a half foot, then all that benefit of the doubt flies out the window since you do in fact have nothing in your way and can crank up that detector to find that.
Yes, and if the newer rebar was driven flush when it was set, the pipe would have only been about 17 inches down at the time. In another 25 years, that rebar will be 20 inches down.
Thanks Bryan
Well, the first thing I do is look for evidence. I look for the obvious evidence, around fence corners or their projections and any other obvious situation where corner evidence may exist. I do this first, before calcing anything. It is only after, I cannot find physical evidence that I calc things to refine the search areas. My method takes longer, but I am probably not going to miss obvious evidence.
Now it could be in this case that the surveyor in responsible charge of this silliness, did not accept the 1930's pipe.
JUST A RURAL, COLONIAL STATES SURVEYOR
I will admit that I do not know the rules that you play by in a Public Land State, and therefore may not be in line with the following. I have some follow up comment and question.
As I understand it you found a monument that may have been used and depended on by others, and may have been set based on evidence that you are not aware of, and admit that you have no qualms about destroying this evidence without knowing its source or the rational used to set it in the first place. “If I were surveying the lot that that rebar is a corner of, that rebar would be gone since it is contributing nothing, only concealing the original 1938 surveyor's mark that is the true corner.” I have ethical and legal issues with the deliberate destruction of evidence. I do not have any problem with showing the evidence that I do not agree with along with my obviously superior conclusion. I just show it and my conclusion; I do not declare it wrong or destroy it. Once again I am both old and a Colonial States surveyor.
Secondly – I am curious about not setting something closer to the surface to monument your footsteps for the next generation. Can you expand or expound?
