This is a puzzle involving the PLSS but also applies to other surveying decisions worldwide.?ÿ Here is the scenario:
?ÿ
1865---Government contractor creates the boundaries of Section 14.?ÿ The eight points marked are all a wooden stake set in a dirt mound formed by excavating four pits in the cardinal directions around the stake. (All original monuments were wiped out by county road construction or other means in the 1800's.)
1941-- A surveyor working for the state DOT uses some unstated method to set an iron bar at the west quarter corner of Section 14.
1960--A different surveyor conducting a private survey uses some unstated method to set an iron bar at the southwest quarter of Section 14.
1878--(following opening of county roads) The County Surveyor conducts a survey of Section 14 and sets stones at the northwest corner, west quarter corner, southwest corner and at the west quarter-quarter corners of both the northwest and southwest quarters.?ÿ Thus, there are now five stones along that one mile being the west line of Section 14.
Today-- Your project is to lay out a simple rectangular tract in the southwest quarter of Section 14. Your tract will fall between the west quarter corner and the quarter-quarter corner.
Key facts:?ÿ The bar set in 1941 and the stone set in 1978 MIGHT still exist under nine feet of fill and asphalt for the current State highway.?ÿ A surveyor in 1969 set a bolt where he thought the 1941 bar was set based on physical evidence of culverts built for the highway.?ÿ The bolt was torn out by later highway work.?ÿ In 2010 a contracted surveyor preparing for further improvement of the highway resets a bar where he believes it is supposed to be becoming the current opinion as to the location of the west quarter corner of Section 14
Also, the bar at the southwest corner set in 1960 still exists and appears to be undisturbed.
Also, the 2010 surveyor excavates and discovers the stone set in 1878 at the west quarter-quarter corner of?ÿ the southwest quarter of Section 14 at a depth of three feet.?ÿ A bar is set directly above the center of the stone with the top of bar being one foot below the surface.
You recover the 2010 bar at the west quarter corner.?ÿ You recover the 1960 bar at the southwest corner.?ÿ You also diligently dig down one foot and find the 2010 bar said to be set above the 1878 stone set at the quarter-quarter corner.
Options:
A-- Your determination of the west section line is a straight line connecting the bar at the west quarter corner to the bar at the southwest corner.
B-- Your determination of the west section line is a straight line connecting the bar at the west quarter corner to the bar at the quarter-quarter corner then kinks to connect with the southwest corner.
The problem:?ÿ The quarter-quarter bar above stone is 1.73 feet west and 2.03 feet south of the midpoint of a the straight line connecting the west quarter corner to the southwest quarter.
Option A or Option B???????????
?ÿ
B, little doubt in my mind. ?ÿI know it??s not perfect split or a straight line but so what. ?ÿIf I read it right the quarter quarter corner was set in 1960. ?ÿDid that meet the standards of 1960? ?ÿI would say yes.
Your example is pretty common in my area, western Illinois. ?ÿThere is stuff out there, none of it really based on the post in the sound mounds directly. ?ÿI see to many surveyors think they have to hold a straight line in the half mile. In your case, as is most the cases I run into, the quarter quarter corner is no better or worse than the quality of the section corner or quarter corner.
You've described pretty much what we all find in areas of the PLSS where original monuments were frail and bearing trees or other accessories were non-existent.?ÿ
Were it all still under federal sovereignty there is a book that has some contradictory suggestions for how to proceed.?ÿ But in Kansas, it probably isn't all still gov't. land.?ÿ So I guess you just have to perform the survey by carefully weighing owners' rights, your intimate knowledge of the local cadaster and attempt to find some harmony with what's out there and the specific original notes.
I don't know about KS, but in OK the burden of proof is the responsibility of the surveyor that challenges your survey.?ÿ AN example:?ÿ In reality I probably wouldn't dig up 9' of sub-grade looking for something that may or may not be there.?ÿ I would be forced to place that corner at a location I determined with the best of my ability.?ÿ A dependent resurvey of a section all under private ownership is far more complex that just a chapter in the Manual.
Should anybody care to dig, let them.?ÿ If they found something I would be the first to say, "Gee, I was wrong".
?ÿ
PS - I haven't always been of this sentiment, but occupation and the rights of the travelling public have a great deal of hierarchy above a cook-book "half-way and on line" quarter corner location.?ÿ I've heard you say "that's the one place the corner wasn't located".?ÿ ?ÿAnd I wholeheartedly feel the same way.?ÿ ?ÿ
Option B unless there has been local reliance on a straight line boundary and I would be introducing disharmony into well established development by honoring the 1/16th corner.
There is no significant reliance to date on the long dormant stone.
B probably.?ÿ A "straight line" doesn't have to be mathematically/scientifically straight....................
?ÿ
According to the Manual, B.
The Virgin Islands isnt PLSS, Recording or a State, but the issue is common. A line say 500 feet long will have rebars set 1960 to 1985 that are up to 5 feet off line. That was as good as many surveyors were although others were far better. If holding the rebars makes a gore, I'll show a gore. If holding them creates an overlap, I might show a bent line or I might show the overlap. It depends.?ÿ ?ÿ ?ÿ ?ÿ ?ÿ ?ÿ ?ÿ ?ÿ ?ÿ ?ÿ There's a line here that's a mile long over very tough terrain and vegetation. One lousy surveyor set pipes along it that were within a few feet. Next lousy surveyor started at one end, turned a bad angle from the first lousy surveyors map and started up the line missing the pipes by 5, 10, 20, 30 feet. So he set his own pipes and created new parcels to "correct" the previous survey. What a mess!
B. Monuments over measurement when the monuments are relied upon in good faith by landowners OR represent a good faith effort by a prior surveyor to subdivide correctly. In this case there is a record of who the surveyors were and at least some reocord of their methodology, which isn't all that common in my area. Either way 1'x2' is pretty good for late 19th century tech, so I'd say it's clearly a good faith effort. What amazes me about those that feel differently is that there is apparently no error in the section corner or the 1/4 corner. Their pedigree is just as dubious, why do we hold them but not the 1/16? Most in my area would "paper pin vision" it (call out a falling to the "true" or "computed" corner). They never however say if it's the corner or not, and don't set another monument (usually). Drives me nuts. I've actually been working on a paper called "Is it the corner or isn't it?" talking about that issue.?ÿ
We had a fellow working this area for awhile who HAD TO come up with a different answer than any surveyor he was following.?ÿ It cost him a bundle in one case.?ÿ I had a job for a fellow who had a pain in the rear neighbor.?ÿ I was very careful and followed the work of a surveyor from the 1880's.?ÿ Turns out the neighbor didn't like the results of my survey so he hired this other fellow to DO IT RIGHT.?ÿ Sure enough, the other fellow ignored the work of the 1880's surveyor (and me) and decided a quarter corner was on line and exactly at the midpoint of a line connecting two monuments set in the past 30 years for work in adjoining sections.?ÿ This resulted in the pain in the rear neighbor losing about eight feet of ground over nearly a half mile beyond the line I had marked.?ÿ The surveyor never received a payment.?ÿ He took it to court and got a judgement but never saw a penny.?ÿ His bill was well over $3500 twenty years ago.
@holy-cow so he accepted the section corners but not the 1/4? At that point why not go to the initial point and work your way in from there? Here that's only 1 state away, but in some places it might be 3-4 states away. Obviously I'm stretching it to prove a point and I know I'm preaching to the choir, but in my mind the logic is the same. God forbid we agree with the guy that did it before. Especially if the neighbors have lived in harmony for 140 years.
