I'm working on a large tract right now, and as part of my scope of work, I'm going to have to black out all the paint on about 3000 feet of the Chickasaw meridian.
That just don't seem right.
Personally?
Painted line is a painted line, don't matter the color.
Be sure to charge accordingly.......;-)
Tommy Young, post: 361642, member: 703 wrote: I'm working on a large tract right now, and as part of my scope of work, I'm going to have to black out all the paint on about 3000 feet of the Chickasaw meridian.
That just don't seem right.
What does that mean? Is there paint on the ground along the physical line? Are you going to paint back paint over the existing? I am thinking I am misunderstanding something. If you're just blacking it out in autocad, that should be easy.....;-)
Tommy Young, post: 361642, member: 703 wrote: I'm working on a large tract right now, and as part of my scope of work, I'm going to have to black out all the paint on about 3000 feet of the Chickasaw meridian.
That just don't seem right.
I presume that means black over orange/read painted tree blazes? That would make the line trees more difficult to see but would not be total removal of survey monuments.
Point of order.
The client is an adjoining land owner. They are buying the tract I am surveying. They do not want interior lines marked.
I would hand them a can of paint and tell them they can save $xxx if the do it themselves.
eddycreek, post: 361663, member: 501 wrote: I would hand them a can of paint and tell them they can save $xxx if the do it themselves.
Trust me, we're getting paid well enough to black out that line.
Are there not any historical or other laws that forbid that?
I would think that the Chickasaw Meridian line would be protected from obliteration because it is the basis of thousands of surveys. I think you are being asked to do something unethical and possibly illegal.
Are the marks you are "blacking out" marks you made? Otherwise, that in completely unethical and llegal in many states.
aliquot, post: 361679, member: 2486 wrote: Are the marks you are "blacking out" marks you made? Otherwise, that in completely unethical and llegal in many states.
This doesn't make a bit of sense to me. I'm not removing corners. I'm covering up paint. How is it possible illegal and unethical to black out an interior line of a land owner?
Tommy,
WTH are you talking about? What is "blacking out a line"?
If it is "a shame" and it "just don't seem right" why would you consider doing it?
My interpretation of the situation:
Tommy's Client owns a piece of property with a boundary line (apparently a long one) coinciding with a Meridian. Said Client is now purchasing the adjacent property now making the Meridian an internal boundary line. At some point in time the Meridian had been physically marked with paint. Client who now owns all the land on both sides of the line doesn't want it marked that way anymore and has hired Tommy to, among other things I'm sure, to paint over the existing paint with black paint.
No idea if that's right or not but it's my take...
Tommy Young, post: 361642, member: 703 wrote: I'm working on a large tract right now, and as part of my scope of work, I'm going to have to black out all the paint on about 3000 feet of the Chickasaw meridian.
That just don't seem right.
Interesting and sad that you have to erase footsteps of those who came before you. I get it though and I share your feeling of it just doesn't seem right. It's not uncommon for landowners to get overly protective of their lands and if it isn't benefiting them, they don't want any part of it.
Are the trees also blazed?
In 3,000' there must be 1 GLO corner; did you find it?
Some quick research reveals:
The original point has never been found
It looks like Tommy is working on about a half mile of the total line; about 81 miles. I would think that his survey will reference this small portion of the Meridian and any corners that reference it. I don't see anything wrong with that.
If you could cut the line trees down, why couldn't you paint over them?
I'm confused but obliterating a meridian line's markings, blazes, paint marks, line trees, et. al. doesn't affect the record, it only makes the next surveyor's job harder concerning recovery of original evidence. Your client may not like the line's location on his property, but for God's sake it's a meridian line with provenance and deserves perpetuation. His ownership may not be affected by its location.
I've never obliterated a prior survey's monuments and line markings; it's a criminal thing to do as an LS. Disagree and file an ROS, of course, but report the evidence you find.
RADAR, post: 361717, member: 413 wrote: Are the trees also blazed?
In 3,000' there must be 1 GLO corner; did you find it?
Some quick research reveals:
The original point has never been foundIt looks like Tommy is working on about a half mile of the total line; about 81 miles. I would think that his survey will reference this small portion of the Meridian and any corners that reference it. I don't see anything wrong with that.
That map on the link isn't right. The initial point is in Tennessee. The baseline is the Winchester Line, which was the state line as originally run by General James Winchester. That line was later discovered to be too far north, and the state line was re-run, however, the sectionalizing started at the original state line.
I'm confused too but full disclosure, I've never surveyed outside of the PLSS rectangular system...
How does painting over or removing PAINT marks = obliterating evidence? Unless the state we're talking about has a dedicated staff tasked with perpetuating the paint God will take care of the obliteration in pretty short order.
There had to have been physical evidence for someone to base the paint marks on in the first place and Tommy hasn't said anything to the effect that was being removed...
I have to be missing something here???