Scott Ellis, post: 434528, member: 7154 wrote: I have learned from this site never take legal advice from the following:
Anyone that is not licensed in the State where the question is asked,
From someone who is not registered,
From someone who was gifted their Surveyor Licensed,
That's why my answers pertaining to jurisdictions other than where I practice almost always have a lot of qualifying statements such as "The general principle is _____, but some states may have specific laws that make the general principle not applicable there."
On this subject, I'm very solid in my jurisdiction. The general principles for boundaries apply or are very similar for most jurisdictions, but for every general principle, exceptions do exist. There seems to be more exceptions when it comes to water boundaries than for most other boundary principles, and I try to account for that in my answers.
What I've learned from this site is to take any answer that seems to say that there is an answer of universal application or some set, inviolable rule, with a few grains of salt.
On the other hand, I have gained a lot of great advice and knowledge applicable to my practice in CA from many who are not licensed to practice here. If I'm unsure of, or suspicious of the correctness of an answer, I'll often do a little research to see if it checks out. Sometimes it does, sometimes it partially does, and sometimes you find that someone has posted something as if they have expertise yet really have no clue.
Paul in PA, post: 434565, member: 236 wrote: I believe Scott Ellis is also questioning my point.
Let us look at comments on "Ferry Lake" in the Manual at 7-91:
from the Attorney General of the US to the Secretary of the Interior, September 11, 1916.
"...However, in so far as concerns the land lying between the old meander lines and the waters of the lake, I entirely agree with you that it constitutes unsurveyed public land of the United States..."
confirmed by the SCOTUS January 2, 1923.
Question is why should I be reading the Manual of Surveying Instructions to PLSS surveyors?
Paul in PA
Answer: You probably shouldn't be.
Section 7-90 and 7-91 discuss an Erroneously meandered Ferry Lake. We have not stipulated that the lake was erroneously meandered in Frank Willis's case. If not erroneously meandered, then Section 7-94 Survey of Land Outside Meander Line Where No Gross Error Is Involved would likely be relevant and gives very different guidance.
eapls2708, post: 434569, member: 589 wrote: That's why my answers pertaining to jurisdictions other than where I practice almost always have a lot of qualifying statements such as "The general principle is _____, but some states may have specific laws that make the general principle not applicable there."
While Colorado is extremely rich and diverse with regard to mineral surveys, riparian surveys are rarer than hens teeth. Many years ago I asked Jim Simpson if he would be interested in giving a talk on riparian surveys in Durango, CO. His response was "why, you don't have any riparian surveys". He later admitted to there possibly being 3 in Colorado. I enjoy reading about the "foreign" concept of water boundaries from Frank, you, and others. I have Simpson's book and have read Chapter VIII of the 2009 manual for my CFedS training and continuing ed classes (including how to categorize and survey fractional sections), which btw doesn't mean that I feel the urge to quote mine the Manual about the topic.
The only things I can add to the discussion are general statements related to my knowledge and experience as a geologist (i.e. relating to fluvial geomorphology). So I can postulate about whether a stream is braided, how the bed load, suspended load, gradient, etc. will generally affect how a river will meander across the flood plain, etc.
Thanks Frank for posting another of your water boundary projects. Very interesting.
