I believe that there should be a repository in each state where surveyors are required to send a pdf of any ALTA that they create and sign. Give it a 180 day deadline from certification so that deals can be done without public knowledge, but make the survey public. Maybe redact the parties, but somehow, someway, make the surveys part of the cadaster.
A few thoughts...
In Idaho if you find a missing pin during the course of an ALTA you're required to set it and record a survey so that rule alone would take care of this issue for most ALTAs. Also, there's nothing stopping the client from requesting the ALTA be recorded.
I've never been a very big fan of someone without an ownership stake in a property being expected to foot the bill for a survey. I mean I've been home shopping off and on for the last several years and there's no way I'd make an offer on a property that didn't have a recent-ish survey. Worst case scenario is I'd do it myself, but for all the shoppers out there who aren't surveyors I'd be expecting the owner to provide me with a survey so I know what I'm buying.
So yeah I'd be more in favor of a rule that said if you're going to list a property then you need to have a survey done and recorded. The cost could be rolled into the price of the property so the shoppers are still the ones who ultimately pay for it, but I think it would eliminate the issue of these unrecorded ALTAs floating around.
@thebionicman I agree I should be more clear about calling PLSS lines the title lines. Title line can be an occupation line same as a written title. In my statement I am referring to the original "title" ie. patents or 1st grant/deed type of thing. The location of the PLSS original title lines is clear and contemplated in law as that AL court case stated. Adverse and the likes cannot move that patent line, however it can define ownership/title.
The Clement case and concept is purely to show that junior corners can be used to locate (reestablish) a senior corner or shed light (corroborate scintilla evidence of a senior corner) when the senior marks have been completely lost, but junior corners cannot "change" a senior boundary that is defined by the original/senior marks.
Agreed on acquired lands.
Re the recording of ALTA surveys: we would always strip out all the topo features and other non boundary info and file the remaining retracement plat of survey to satisfy recording statues. A lot of companies do not want any of the physical features open to the public, especially manufacturing facilities.
Really a good discussion forum here. Nice to see engaged surveyors working their profession.
In our state when the court decides on the location of a sideline of an aliquot part description the deed remains aliquot after the location is ruled on irrespective of an alternate location based on a surveyors opinion of where the aliquot line is properly located. The line lawfully established by the owners controls title rights over a line in the location it should have been run and title is quieted. You can say it's not the aliquot line until you turn blue. The court says it is and the title says it is. Not saying all states treat it like this but some do. Particularly midwest ag states. The court more often than not agrees with the fence line surveyor (gasp) provided they based the survey on the same facts the court considers.
Best available evidence can be used by surveyors and courts alike. It causes the "surveyed line" (trying to keep the idea of title out) and occupation lines to be one in the same. It is based on established lines being the best available evidence of the deeded line (better than title?). In areas like mid-west where the controlling corners of original surveys are pretty much all obliterated the best available evidence concept is very important. An established aliquot boundary is better evidence of the original controlling corner position than a proportioned position kind of thought process. Makes sense and I do not disagree.
As with anything surveying there are many exceptions to "rules" and many opinions. Hence the need for a professional opinion. Documentation of boundary resolutions is very important for future surveyors.
The entry man establishing the patent lines (at least in my area) didn't have even the possibility of a government (nor a private) surveyor stopping by and laying out interior section lines. It was up to the entry man to get it established. He may have found a 1/4 corner, compassed out a true direction and pulled a 1/4 mile of fence wire to mark out his patent. Since he marked out his land, and it stays that way undisputed then that becomes the 1/16 line. The official 1/16th line.
The math magical location is irrelevant. It's why facing those situations I never show the math solution, that simply clouds the ownership. Anyone with a surveying background should be able to see the kinked lines and figure out it's not a perfect breakdown without even pulling out a calculator. The courts don't establish these lines, the owners already did and they are the 1/6th lines. It's the surveyor's responsibility to identify them.
However, the interior lines can be "off" but the originally monumented section lines can't (for almost all situations, like everything surveying there are exceptions). Those were established with the original monuments and once fixed can't be changed. Ownership can drift back and forth across the lines, but the lines remain stationary. This gets illustrated with mineral rights, go ahead and claim ownership of a parcel into the next section, but I very much doubt you'll get paid mineral rights to the well pumping on your neighbor.
I'm in my 50th year of surveying. I've never seen an original government corner monument and I've surveyed in every county in this state. You have to deal with the hand you are dealt.
Wow!! I've recovered thousands of them. However, even without the existing monument that doesn't mean the corner is lost. Sounds like you're dealing only with lost or obliterated corners. Probably mostly obliterated ones. A lower level of monument than the existing one, but still way above a lost one.
We have found quite a few original survey monuments over the decades. Probably 50 percent of the ones where we have called on the County to provide a backhoe to search for them in/under the roadbeds. Very few have been visible above ground level as most of our section lines have had road built along them. Center cornerstones set by early surveyors are commonly found in place near a fence post or tree with fence wire going in the four cardinal directions.
Wow!! I’ve recovered thousands of them.
You've recovered thousands of GLO stones? Because I think that's what Norm was talking about.
Yes
90% of the original monuments were posts and mounds set a few years before roads were established on section lines. Prairie fires, roads and plowing did away with them in short order. There are a few county surveyors that left a record of stones set where the post was or from the remaining accessories. That's about as close as we get to original. I'm not referring to stones set by early surveyors. Found hundreds of them. Always thrilled to. But they weren't set by the original government survey. Most are corners of common report. But I've rarely called a corner lost. I consider existing exterior and interior aliquot corner locations of the same quality. The statement the manual makes about boundary marks being honestly established at a time when it was known where the original was could not be any more applicable than in this state.
In my hometown county, I would love to examine the old field books from the 1920's and 30's when roads were being regraded and graveled.
In the 1980's a guy who as a young man worked for the county surveyor wrote a reminiscence in which he described (as near as I remember the quote) "digging up the old stones and putting them where the should be."
I've always wondered if the surveyor was just lowering them and making records of ties or if he was trying to make a "better" grid. The kid probably didn't understand the job, but it's an odd phrase.
That's just an academic question now, of course, after decades of dependence on what he left.
Posts and mounds are unusual finds here also. There were some and they tend to vanish. We are lucky I suppose because the topography normally precludes county roads along a section line. A BLM surveyor once told me he'd almost never encountered pits, I explained that I've seen many, but mostly in a different state full of later surveys.
Kind of reminds me of searching for a 1930 benchmark tablet in an old bridge wing. I was disappointed when I got to the location that there was a newly constructed road bridge. I thought I'd just as well get out and see if there was a reset mark in the new bridge. I was surprised to find the old mark in the new bridge. About that time a county employee drove up and asked me if I was looking for the mark. He proudly told me they saved it. I asked if I could see the preservation notes. He got a strange look on his face. Notes? he said. We just dug it out and put it in the new bridge. I just said thanks for the information and went to visit the county engineer to let him know that exercise was worse than worthless and referred him to the resetting process for future reference.
Most of the county surveyors records that might refer to the original corner are from the 1870's to 1880's. I grew to respect one county surveyor that placed hewn stone marks carved from limestone in the shape of a concrete monument. He carved a triangle shape with a line underneath into the side. That man took his work seriously.
