What Does This Note Mean?

It just shows why the public shouldn't waste their money on surveying.

I think it means the surveyor is mentally constrained by mathmatics but he knows that pin-cushioning is a bad thing so he neglects his professional duty by not making a real decision. I have seen the same thing and the distances keep getting greater, even into multiple feet. Where is the owner to place his fence when confronted by this type of information?

> > FOUND 5/8" REBAR AND CAP LS xxxxx 0.45 NORTH AND 0.21 WEST OF CALC. 1/16 CORNER
>
> I'm seeing notes like this, more and more; and the more I see them, the more confused I get.
>
>
>

• >
• Are you claiming that you are a better measurer than the LS before you, and that his marker is off by less than half a foot; and your calculated position is the true 1/16th corner?
  >
• Or, is this just a simple way of showing measured versus record and that the found marker is the true 1/16th corner?
  >

>
> How do you show measured versus record on your surveys?
>
> What would you hold for the true 1/16th corner?
>
> [sarcasm]Should I change the location, based on my superior measurments; and claim that as the true 1/16th corner?
>
> [/sarcasm]
>
> Dougie

My reading of this is that he is calling the monument off. Maybe there is a reason for this? But I usually don't call anything off unless I'm explaining the reason why I'm rejecting the monument.

I show record and measured like this typically:

N44°00'00"E (N45°00'E) 100.25' (100')

Without further explanation it means the map is inadequate. There absolutely are reasons to reject monuments. Math isn't one of them IMO.
Perhaps there was a corner record and map by the surveyor whose number was on the cap showing it in the calc position. My guess is probably not. Did you call the Surveyor who wrote the note to ask?

This topic has been beat to death here, and will never go away. The people that put notes like that need to join up here and learn a thing or three.

Me, I just show it as Measured vs Record. No biggy if the bearings don't match. That corner belongs to 4 properties, not just his clients. Hopefully he didn't set another one.

But notes like that always confuse everybody. Even those of us who think we know what we're doing.

in OHIO in 1797 ...

the "CONNECTICUT" Western Reserve was survey(at least started).

Having surveyed 120 miles west of Pennsylvania, the southwest corner was established ... marked ... identified ... monumented.

A few years later another surveyor ... a FEDERAL surveyor, in the state of OHIO, surveyed the same 120 miles and fount the first surveyor off a little more than a mile and so ... he CHANGED the southwest corner of the reserve to what it is today.

I guess anyone can do anything they want until a court gets involved.

BTW, the second, FEDERAL surveyor was also over his 120 miles by about a mile ... I'm sure he didn't know how awful and bad his measurements were when he threw the first surveyor's marked corner out ... which actually missed by over 2 miles).

I can't imagine a modern day surveyor moving the corner again.

A few years before I was licensed, I worked for an outfit in your area and that was their standard method of calling to found monuments.

I've heard arguments from a couple of surveyors that noting the difference that way (and with brg & dist per deed) is showing acceptance of the monument by indicating the small differences. The problem with that is that a person reading that map needs to have knowledge of the relative accuracies of both the survey in which the monument was set and that reflected by th emap with the N by E offset info, and also know the comfort level of the surveyor of the later map to know at what magnitude that notation signifies rejection rather than acceptance. In short, that sounded like a BS explanation of acceptance to me.

To me, and I think to most reading such a notation, the surveyor is saying that the true corner is not at the found monument but at the location 0.45' N by 0.21' West of the monument. It's a virtual pincusion that leaves the landowner confused. "Is my corner at the steel thingy or is it a few inches away?"

The note means that the surveyor, no, make that measurer, can measure within a hundredth of a foot, but don't have a clue where the corner is. The super-duper ones can measure within a thousandth, and still don't know where the corner goes.

There absolutely are reasons to reject monuments. Math isn't one of them
I'm gonna have a Tee Shirt made with that on it!

Probably won't work for picking up chicks, though:-(
I'll have to rely on my mullett.

Seriously, good thoughts, bio guy.

Don

I imagine the pickup line goes like this:

Psst! Hey Baby, how would you like to share a case of Hoptimum and reject some monuments based on math with me?

Oh yeah, Baby

I Iove it when you reject monuments.
It makes me, you know, receptive to your advances.

This sort of thing is interesting and mostly unknown to me as we don't get pincushions here.

However, what if the measurer came first and the quality surveyor came along second. A lot of people seem to be down on the second guy but what if he did a better job than the first?

Not trying to stir the pot, just genuinely interested.

The pin set by the first surveyor must be impeached for reason to be rejected. The criteria for me is straightforward. The most important thing in my mind is to remember that correct is an identity, not a distance. If I find evidence to impeach a monument I will reject it. If no such evidence exists my calculations yield...

Bionicman,

What is the identity that makes a monument correct?

What is evidence to impeach a monument?

Stephen

> Bionicman,
>
> What is the identity that makes a monument correct?
>
> What is evidence to impeach a monument?
>
> Stephen

The basic question is "what makes a monument controlling?"

The answer is found in the law, not on your data collector or computer screen.

[sarcasm]The record is correct and what you find on the ground is always wrong[/sarcasm]

[sarcasm]You missed it by this much[/sarcasm]

[sarcasm]Close, but no cupie doll[/sarcasm]

[sarcasm]It is only right if I say it is right[/sarcasm]

B-)

:good:

:good:

The old explanation often included that there was a difference between a "corner" and a "monument". The "corner" was a mathematical position and the monument was an actual physical mark. Somehow they are saying that the found the "monument" within so much distance to the mathematical position.

My own thoughts are that if I am accepting the found monument as adequately marking the property corner in my professional opinion, I show it as the "corner" and my difference in measured vs. record to that actual corner.

A monument is the physical realization of the corner. There can be a corner without a monument but if the object near the corner is "off" then it isn't a monument.