Kent ??
In a metes and bounds description, evidence along a line can hold as much weight or more than a property corner. We have to look at all forms of evidence in order to make a call.
Kent ??
> In a metes and bounds description, evidence along a line can hold as much weight or more than a property corner. We have to look at all forms of evidence in order to make a call.
It sounds as if you have a description of a property in mind that wasn't ever really surveyed or was surveyed so poorly as to be the next closest thing to not having been. That was probably common in the 18th century, but I'm surprised it's still the case when new boundaries are made.
Kent ??
> I know it's a difficult concept to grasp Kent, but when the property lines are marked properly and accepted by the landowners for decades, these markers can be used (if necessary) to reset the corner monuments.
> Even if the property line markers were installed sloppily, they will still lead you to the location of the corner. If nothing else, the marked property lines will give you a warm feeling when your pin set winds up it the intersection.
So, basically, folks in New Hampshire survey from fence lines except the landowners are too cheap to build fences? That has to save a ton of time for the surveyor who doesn't actually need to examine any of the conveyances in any chain of title. I suppose it sort of makes sense in the context of 1690 and earlier, but not 1960 and later so much.
Kent ??
Because of this we absolutely have to examine the chain of title. I have seen many original descriptions that call for evidence along a line instead of the straight line.
Kent ??
> Because of this we absolutely have to examine the chain of title. I have seen many original descriptions that call for evidence along a line instead of the straight line.
Isn't that contrary to the notion that somehow landowner "maintenance" is the key element by which boundaries are determined in New Hamphire? Why would a person bother with the written title?
What would you say is the average age of a land boundary in New Hampshire? With urbanization in Texas, I'd say almost certainly more than half of all Texas parcels wre created after 1950. Is it much earlier up there? I trust that land surveying hasn't been a licensed profession until fairly recently and so foresters, attorneys, and realtors did most of the "surveying"?
Kent ??
I am always researching back pre civil war before I find a creating description. Licensure was not started here until 1971.
Kent ??
> > I know it's a difficult concept to grasp Kent, but when the property lines are marked properly and accepted by the landowners for decades, these markers can be used (if necessary) to reset the corner monuments.
>
> > Even if the property line markers were installed sloppily, they will still lead you to the location of the corner. If nothing else, the marked property lines will give you a warm feeling when your pin set winds up it the intersection.
>
> So, basically, folks in New Hampshire survey from fence lines except the landowners are too cheap to build fences? That has to save a ton of time for the surveyor who doesn't actually need to examine any of the conveyances in any chain of title. I suppose it sort of makes sense in the context of 1690 and earlier, but not 1960 and later so much.
Now Kent, your just being silly here. I know that actually traversing along a property line is a foreign concept, but it can really be quite useful. You'd be surprised at all the interesting evidence you can find! Yes, in NH, we actually locate this evidence as it may shed light on the original line. We can also depict land features like rivers and ponds, possible encroachments and woods roads that can be of value to the client, as well as the development potential of the parcel. We might even come across some junior pins that you might miss be just visiting the lot corners.
I suppose you can save a lot of time (and walking) by just locating the corners with GPS and skipping all the evidence in between, but somehow I think our clients would feel cheated if we surveyed that way.
Kent ??
> I am always researching back pre civil war before I find a creating description. Licensure was not started here until 1971.
Is the other element to things that many of the parcels that are now being used as residential properties in New Hampshire were originally just wood lots?
Kent ??
> I suppose you can save a lot of time (and walking) by just locating the corners with GPS and skipping all the evidence in between, but somehow I think our clients would feel cheated if we surveyed that way.
What makes you think you can't locate all the necessary evidence to determine the boundaries using an independently reproducible bearing basis? It certainly can be. What you New Hampshirites seem to be having such a hard time with is the idea that it's possible to describe the shape and location of a tract in such a way that the same can be maintained as a stable thing, not subject to constant rearrangement with the arrival of each new compass or can of paint.
Kent ??
Kent, "Evidence and Procedures for Boundary Location" by Don Wilson is a good read. Might help you understand a metes and bound state.
Kent ??
> > I suppose you can save a lot of time (and walking) by just locating the corners with GPS and skipping all the evidence in between, but somehow I think our clients would feel cheated if we surveyed that way.
>
> What makes you think you can't locate all the necessary evidence to determine the boundaries using an independently reproducible bearing basis? It certainly can be. What you New Hampshirites seem to be having such a hard time with is the idea that it's possible to describe the shape and location of a tract in such a way that the same can be maintained as a stable thing, not subject to constant rearrangement with the arrival of each new compass or can of paint.
Kent, I see nothing wrong with using an independent bearing base. The question here is whether it is necessary. Your opinion appears to be that it is always necessary and those who don't use it are negligent.
Kent ??
> "Evidence and Procedures for Boundary Location" by Don Wilson is a good read. Might help you understand a metes and bound state.
LOL. Texas is a metes and bounds state. I understand making surveys to locate and to create metes and bounds descriptions quite well. New Hampshire would be more beeps-and-founds descriptions. :>
Kent ??
Tough to argue with with the best in the business. 🙂
Kent ??
> I see nothing wrong with using an independent bearing base. The question here is whether it is necessary. Your opinion appears to be that it is always necessary and those who don't use it are negligent.
I think a fairer statement would be that not using an independently reproducible bearing basis when land is subdivided is such a poor choice that the burden falls upon the practitioner to come up with some convincing explanation of why he or she chose that.
just one good reason
> >
>
> I think a fairer statement would be that not using an independently reproducible bearing basis when land is subdivided is such a poor choice that the burden falls upon the practitioner to come up with some convincing explanation of why he or she chose that.
to agree with the bearing base of the parent tract.
