This is a situation happening more and more in PLSSia. It is probably running rampant elsewhere. The use of SHINY COORDINATES over the real world.
Current situation is a case of a tract being severed from a quarter section. All four corners of that quarter have been established or found previously by the firm doing the current survey. You can bet each corner has a SHINY COORDINATE assigned to it, based on prior work. In fact, each time you use one of those corners you are to file a new Land Survey Reference Report with the State and county.
Current filed survey severing this tract indicates at each of the four section corners as follows: Not located on this survey.
My thought is that you can't be certain you are on the true line between any two of these corners unless you have recovered and shot them in during your current project. Preferably by line of sight, but, at least, by doing all the GPS work at nearly the same time. Not a year ago or whenever. This probably allows them to claim they do not need to file new corner records as they didn't actually find them again.
Opinions please.
Current filed survey severing this tract indicates at each of the four section corners as follows: Not located on this survey.
It is there for all to see, now what else was noted about getting onto the previous survey base with confidence? Can't imagine anyone making that statement without some justification.
jud
> In fact, each time you use one of those corners you are to file a new Land Survey Reference Report with the State and county.
>
You have got to be kidding??? So, if there are 145 surveys that tie to a section corner, there are expected to be 145 "Land Survey Reference Reports" on file? HUH??? Oh my!!!
As to your point of using corners that a person has previously located and has a record of its position, this is common and accepted practice. If a section corner is in the middle of a busy intersection, there is no reason, law, or purpose for that person to physically measure to that corner for each and every survey performed that may use that corner. I'm sure we can come up with at least a 100 "but what if's", but if one is using professional procedures and JUDGEMENT, he should not be forced to physically visit and measure every corner every time it is used.
Brian
"You have got to be kidding??? So, if there are 145 surveys that tie to a section corner, there are expected to be 145 "Land Survey Reference Reports" on file? HUH??? Oh my!!!"
Read from the Minimum Standards: PERPETUATION
1. Ties to government corners must be filed for record as provided by KSA 1987 Supp.
58-2001, et seq. and shall indicate whether the tie measurements are horizontal or slope.
To quote 58-2011: With special attention to paragraph (d)
58-2011.?Report of survey, filing; filing of reports relating to altered or destroyed markers; reproduction of survey records; fees; land survey fee fund created. (a) Whenever a survey originates from a United States public land survey corner or any related accessory, the land surveyor shall file a reference report for each corner or accessory with the secretary of the state historical society and with the county surveyor for the county or counties in which the survey corner exists. If there is no county surveyor of such county, such reference report shall be filed with the county engineer. If there is no county engineer, such report shall be filed in the office of the county road department. Reports filed with the secretary of the state historical society may be filed and retrieved using electronic technologies if authorized by the secretary. Such report shall be filed within 30 days of the date the references are made. At the time of filing such report with the secretary of the state historical society, the land surveyor shall pay a filing fee in an amount fixed by rules and regulations of the secretary of the state historical society. Fees charged for filing and retrieval of such reports may be billed and paid periodically.
(b)?Any person engaged in an activity in which a United States public land survey corner or any related accessory is likely to be altered, removed, damaged or destroyed, shall have a person qualified to practice land surveying establish such reference points as necessary for the restoration, reestablishment or replacement of the corner or accessory. The land surveyor shall file a reference report with the secretary of the state historical society and with the county surveyor for the county or counties in which the survey corner exists. Such report shall be filed within 30 days of the date the references are made. At the time of filing such report with the secretary of the state historical society, the land surveyor shall pay a filing fee in an amount fixed by rules and regulations of the secretary of the state historical society.
(c)?Upon completion of the activity likely to alter, remove, damage or destroy the public land survey corner or related accessory, the land surveyor shall review the survey corner and its accessories. If the survey corner or any accessory has been altered, removed, damaged or destroyed, the land surveyor shall replace the corner or accessory with a survey monument and file a restoration report with the secretary of the state historical society and the county surveyor in the county or counties in which it existed. If the survey corner and accessories are not damaged during the activity, a restoration report so stating shall be filed with the secretary of the state historical society and county surveyor's office. Such report shall be filed within 30 days after the activity is completed. At the time of filing such report with the office of the secretary of the state historical society the land surveyor shall pay a filing fee in an amount fixed by rules and regulations of the secretary of the state historical society.
(d)?Failure to comply with the filing requirements of this section shall be grounds for the suspension or revocation of the land surveyor's license.
GISTASTIC!
Let's all take one big step away from the cartographers.
Brian
) Whenever a survey originates from a United States public land survey corner or any related accessory, the land surveyor shall file a reference report for each corner or accessory with the secretary of the state historical society and with the county surveyor for the county or counties in which the survey corner exists.
What does the survey record state, is it based on direct ties to the GLO or is it based on previous work that was based on ties to the GLO. I see nothing in your statute that disallows basing a survey on previous work.
jud
Brian
I see why they say "not located this survey". They don't want to file a report with the state historcial society, and county surveyor every time they tie a section corner.
Brian
I usually don't often use the statement "common sense" when referring to Idaho's codes pertaining to surveying, but here is some common sense language your state may want to consider to prevent the obvious waste of resources, both private and public.
55-1604. Filing requirements. A professional land surveyor shall complete, sign, and file with the county clerk and recorder of the county where the corner is situated, a written record of the establishment or restoration of a corner. This record shall be known as a "corner record" and such a filing shall be made for every public land survey corner and accessory to such corner which is established, reestablished, monumented, remonumented, restored, rehabilitated, perpetuated or used as control in any survey. The survey information shall be filed within ninety (90) days after the survey is completed, unless the corner and its accessories are substantially as described in an existing corner record filed in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.
In lieu of filing as heretofore provided, corner records may be recorded by photographic
process in those counties which have such facilities. [55-1604, added 1967, ch. 215, sec. 4, p.
647; am. 1972, ch. 162, sec. 1, p. 363; am. 1993, ch. 206, sec. 4, p. 565.]
Please note
There is no indication that this specific tract has been surveyed previously. Each of the key section corners could have been involved with surveys of nearby tracts, but not the parent tract. Their locations may have been determined, one, five, ten and fifteen years ago.
In Florida...
I agree with Brian,
No, you don't have to do it again.
177.507?Certification of corners.—
(1)?Every surveyor and mapper not under contract to the department for the execution of this act who, in any survey or resurvey made under his or her direction, identifies, recovers, reestablishes, remonuments, restores, or uses as control a public land survey corner or corner accessory must, within 90 days after completion of the survey, file with the department a certified corner record for each such corner or corner accessory, unless the corner or its accessories are substantially as described in a previously filed corner record.
"As to your point of using corners that a person has previously located and has a record of its position, this is common and accepted practice."
I certainly hope that is not true! You understand that when you use someone else's work you accept full liability for their errors?! You're willing to do that?
If a section corner is in the middle of a busy intersection, there is no reason, law, or purpose for that person to physically measure to that corner for each and every survey performed that may use that corner. I'm sure we can come up with at least a 100 "but what if's", but if one is using professional procedures and JUDGEMENT, he should not be forced to physically visit and measure every corner every time it is used."
Really? You are in for a BIG surprise when you tell this to the judge, assuming the opposing attorney hasn't ripped you to shreds first!
If you learned these practices from a mentor you need to turn him in to your Board immediately...
Over 650 views but few comments
It's a simple question.
Is this practice acceptable? Yes or No
I shoot the corners each time I go out. That's only good practice.
I suspect some other do too, but maybe I'm naive.
Jim
> "As to your point of using corners that a person has previously located and has a record of its position, this is common and accepted practice."
>
> I certainly hope that is not true! You understand that when you use someone else's work you accept full liability for their errors?! You're willing to do that?
>
In no way was I referring to accepting the work of another, I never even alluded to it. Please put that straw man back in the barn. Where is it unethical or illegal for ME to accept MY OWN WORK???
> If a section corner is in the middle of a busy intersection, there is no reason, law, or purpose for that person to physically measure to that corner for each and every survey performed that may use that corner. I'm sure we can come up with at least a 100 "but what if's", but if one is using professional procedures and JUDGEMENT, he should not be forced to physically visit and measure every corner every time it is used."
>
> Really? You are in for a BIG surprise when you tell this to the judge, assuming the opposing attorney hasn't ripped you to shreds first!
>
Since when is my work performed by me not relevant and acceptable evidence??? If my work performed by me isn't relevant and acceptable, who's work is? Please enlighten us to any cited authority that says I cannot depend upon, and a court cannot accept MY work performed by me?
> If you learned these practices from a mentor you need to turn him in to your Board immediately...
I never advocated the "practices" you are accusing me of, in fact, your unfounded accusations are very offensive. You should know better, at least I expected better from you.
I'll give an example of work I've done. Keep in mind Illinois has a monument record act, you only have to file a new one if the old monument record isn't valid, such as ties being destroyed.
Say I've broken down a 1/4 section before, maybe even a couple of times. We look at the 1/4 section and section corners and make sure they are good and haven't been distrubed, but don't always shoot them again. Maybe we tie into an old traverse and just take off and do new work. Jeff Lucas says it best "HOW MANY TIMES DO YOU NEED TO BREAK DOWN A 1/4 SECTION."
Sorry Brian!
Brian:
My apologies - I misread your post. I thought you said "another person", which changed my perception of things entirely!
Sorry!
Jim
By code we have to, unless your within a recorded subdivision (mostly city/town) in my opinion. Others round here do differ, but I play it safe:
5. The plat shall show that the survey is tied to a physically
monumented land line which is identified by two United States public
land survey system corners, or by two physically monumented corners
of a recorded subdivision.
One thing is for sure, If you want the next surveyor to 'follow in your foot steps' its good to leave as many recognizable foot prints as possible. IMO one of the best foot prints is to dig up the corner verifying the location and type of monument.
Don't get me wrong, if I'm using the same control as last time,last time was less than a a month or two ago, and nothings been recorded to the contrary, then I'm going to proceed without my shovel, ok, jack hammer today
As for the corner cert., we don't have to file one every time only when one or more of the following conditions exist:
a. There is no certificate for the corner on file with the recorder of the county in which the corner is located.
b. The surveyor in responsible charge of the land surveying accepts a corner position which differs from that shown in the public records of the county in which the corner is located.
c. The corner monument is replaced or modified in any way.
d. The reference ties in an existing public record are incorrect or missing.
Strictly an opinion, as asked for.
It would not be legal, in my opinion, to show any ties to corners your survey is dependent on, without verifying the corners. Using 'not located' means, not looked for or verified. Verify does not mean a new survey.
I would list a corner as , such and such, filed in 1996 by PLS 579 and field verified this date. Using the reference sheet to verify the corner and it's swing ties, coordinates and what other means might be listed on the corner reference sheet. It take minimal work. A corner could have been disturbed or destroyed. I would only file a new CCR if I had to reset the corner or add more ties to the corner. Basically, anything that would have changed on the CCR since it's filing.
Not located seems a bit like 'found signal' on a plat.
Over 650 views but few comments
> It's a simple question.
I don't think it is as simple of a question as you state. From your post, we do not know any of the details of how the shiny coordinates you are referring to were established or tied together. Without all of that knowledge, it is necessary to fill in with some assumptions. From what you have posted I take it that the company in question may have surveyed the surrounding section corners, then used that data to establish an interior corner. I am assuming that they have tied everything together very well and are not using just published data.
> Is this practice acceptable? Yes or No
Yes and No.
Yes if I have ran the control around and know where everything is and how well it ties together. This would be no different than using my control points to reestablish a point that was destroyed. Adding the caveat that I would look for any additional evidence that might affect the location of the interior point.
I have often returned to a larger tract I had previously surveyed to create a new division line. Once I get back on my control network and check that it is right, there is no need to survey the whole farm again. When I show a direct tie to an exterior monument, I do go back and verify that it is in place and unmoved.
No if they are pulling other people's reported coordinates off of records and assuming the other people did the work adequately. Then calc'ing points to set.
Over 650 views but few comments
>My thought is that you can't be certain you are on the true line between any two of these corners unless you have recovered and shot them in during your current project. Preferably by line of sight, but, at least, by doing all the GPS work at nearly the same time. Not a year ago or whenever. This probably allows them to claim they do not need to file new corner records as they didn't actually find them again.
>
>Opinions please.
> It's a simple question.
>
> Is this practice acceptable? Yes or No
Mr.Cow,
Maybe some are afraid to confess.
I am going with YES, and often do. I have 50 years of records here and I am not going to bust the same section every time I work in it, if I have good closure already. I will visit the Government corners to make sure nothing has changed and check into enough control points or property corners to know that I am on my old control.
Example, to make sure I understand you.
1995 - busted section and created a parcel in the NE/NE.
2013 - client wants me to stake NW/NW/NW. The North line is flat open road, so I get on my old control there. Shot the NW and N1/4 corners and all is good. Set the NE property corner, I did as you wanted here and re-shot the controlling corners. But then I go set the SW property corner that is through the woods and hills using my W1/4 corner from the 1995 survey ("shinny coordinates") and DO NOT re-shot the W1/4 corner. If the property corner does not fit some existing fence occupation or such, then I may go to the W1/4 corner, but most often not. I will look up all the Government corners on the states re-monumentaion web site to make sure everyone is still using the same ones from 1995, but why charge my client to traverse the extra 2000 feet when I already know where it is? This will double the field time on this job.