imaudigger, post: 380296, member: 7286 wrote: I took the initial post as inferring that it would be more economical to hire grunts to cut line rather than pay a survey crew.
I took it to mean that hiring some day hire immigrants to whack line would be more cost effective.
I was taught that all things being equal, you should attempt to stay on line. Now sometimes it's way easier to hop off line for a while then come back. The advantage of staying on line is that you have the ability to pick up any evidence that might be there, old uncalled for wood stakes, old fence posts, old barbed wire laying on the ground, old cuts in brush, trees, etc.
Remembering back to 1983å± after we had been using a Topcon GTS2 for a few months, a local surveyor's story showed up in the local paper claiming to have been the first one around NE Texas that had a new instrument that eliminated the need to cut brush in order to survey.
That story went viral and it took a long time to reveal the false claims.............
In my part of PLSSia many of our quarter section lines and other aliquot lines are lined with large tree rows. To cut that line would take large chain saws and heavy equipment. Plus, many of the landowners, including the client, would be extremely upset.
O.K., Let me rephrase what I said. I get misunderstood a lot. There are surveys and there are surveys. Sometimes all that is needed is to connect all the property corners together as when all the corners are well established & beyond doubt. Then there are surveys where you are looking for any trace of a property line or of occupation & often there is little evidence of either. Monumentation is often sparse, conflicting or nonexistent in such cases. That is further frustrated if the deed description & or the plats don't fit the evidence of occupation. It is left up to the Professional surveyor to determine what he needs to locate & how he locates it is irrelevant as long as he does so. Many times there is no guaranteed solution as there is just not enough evidence to be 100% positive. I have put disclaimers on plats stating that numerous times. I assume everybody already knows all that so don't be insulted. I'm just explaining where I am coming from. If you can accomplish that without cutting line, great. That would be a real trick around here. You can't beat GPS with a stick if you have good sky & can get good data. The type of surveying I do mostly, rarely meets those requirements. I do use GPS in some capacity on every boundary I survey.
Using machinery is great where you can do it, but I would be careful that the operator doesn't clear the corner markers or the extrinsic evidence that may be crucial in a difficult survey. It is great if you have somebody you can trust to send in the field that will recognize & evaluate evidence of occupation & other extrinsic evidence. I am not so fortunate. I like to see it myself & I find a lot of evidence a less experienced person might miss.
I have put disclaimers on plats stating that numerous times
FWIW, No amount of disclaimers will lessen your liability and adhering to the BOR expectations of what they declare a proper survey.
I've found it best to tell the client the fact that most of the time it will cost him less money for him to provide whatever is necessary to clear very grown over land. I am usually talking about land that is 5yrs or more after clearcut of timber. Dynamic forest was a term timber companies used to describe properties "where a rabbit couldn't go".
GEOMETRIC, post: 380658, member: 8346 wrote: machinery is great where you can do it, but I would be careful that the operator doesn't clear the corner markers
Good luck with that. It would be easier teaching an elephant to play chess than explain the importance of corners to an machinery operator. 😉
FL/GA PLS., post: 321017, member: 379 wrote: Quote from a previous post:
ÛÏAs Paul brought up a lot of surveyors will regard you as a lesser specimen due to the fact that you are not out there chopping 2 or 3k feet of line everyday.Û
Question is why would a survey crew cut line? ItÛªs economically unfeasible.
If one had to find a blazed line set by the original surveyor through heavy forestation how else would one find it?
FL/GA PLS., post: 380299, member: 379 wrote: It was. If I can save a client money I will. It gives the client a satisfactory feeling that I am looking out for his/her financial interests. And that has led to lifelong clients.
This is fine until the "grunts" wander off line and cut things on the adjoining property...
Back in the early 90's, we would have to chop a line so we could see through the trees. In my part of the world, we have mesquite and cedar that grow about head high in a few years, then slow down their growth it seems like. So even if you ran the line a couple of years before for the neighbor, you would still have to clear it again. GPS made seeing down a whole line usually unnecessary, we are limited to chopping out corners, or fence PIs, Old Corners, etc. Except when someone needs a line staked, such as selling part of a ranch. Say down a section line.... Murphy's law says the mesquite trees will grow thickest along the line, and setting poles up you still can't see from one to the next without thinning trees. Thats when I try to get permission to drive a bobcat down the line, have the GPS dome on the back, and clean a line. No worry bout knocking out old blazes, or hacks, they didn't do that in my little piece of heaven. And if I'm driving the bobcat, I know when to stop before I knock out the corner monument!
I am into this thread a little late, but cutting line, like any other process in surveying is necessary when it is necessary. Why double your angles on every traverse leg in a 500' route survey? Why take the average of multiple observations on control points when one observation is typically suitable for the accuracies needed for a typical ground construction project? In a way, many practices of surveyors are economically unfeasible, but are done to make us able to sleep at night. Cutting line is one of those "it depends" practices that it would vary depending on the job and what is required. There will always be brush in the way somewhere...
people want to know where the Property Lines are. if they can see between monuments, they are usually happy with that. however, now I am more a consumer than a provider... I don't really care all that much about "corners". yes, pretty and stable monuments are cool, but not much help when I want to clear the line to build fence.
when the crew is lazy and skip the line marking it kinda pisses me off.
Peter Ehlert, post: 380888, member: 60 wrote: people want to know where the Property Lines are. if they can see between monuments, they are usually happy with that. however, now I am more a consumer than a provider... I don't really care all that much about "corners". yes, pretty and stable monuments are cool, but not much help when I want to clear the line to build fence.
when the crew is lazy and skip the line marking it kinda pisses me off.
Completely agree. Two end points of a 1000' line in mountainous country is close to being worthless!
Peter Ehlert, post: 380888, member: 60 wrote: people want to know where the Property Lines are. if they can see between monuments, they are usually happy with that. however, now I am more a consumer than a provider... I don't really care all that much about "corners". yes, pretty and stable monuments are cool, but not much help when I want to clear the line to build fence.
when the crew is lazy and skip the line marking it kinda pisses me off.
A Harris, post: 380689, member: 81 wrote: I have put disclaimers on plats stating that numerous times
FWIW, No amount of disclaimers will lessen your liability and adhering to the BOR expectations of what they declare a proper survey.
I've found it best to tell the client the fact that most of the time it will cost him less money for him to provide whatever is necessary to clear very grown over land. I am usually talking about land that is 5yrs or more after clearcut of timber. Dynamic forest was a term timber companies used to describe properties "where a rabbit couldn't go".
A Harris, post: 380689, member: 81 wrote: I have put disclaimers on plats stating that numerous times
FWIW, No amount of disclaimers will lessen your liability and adhering to the BOR expectations of what they declare a proper survey.
I've found it best to tell the client the fact that most of the time it will cost him less money for him to provide whatever is necessary to clear very grown over land. I am usually talking about land that is 5yrs or more after clearcut of timber. Dynamic forest was a term timber companies used to describe properties "where a rabbit couldn't go".
A Harris, post: 380689, member: 81 wrote: I have put disclaimers on plats stating that numerous times
FWIW, No amount of disclaimers will lessen your liability and adhering to the BOR expectations of what they declare a proper survey.
I've found it best to tell the client the fact that most of the time it will cost him less money for him to provide whatever is necessary to clear very grown over land. I am usually talking about land that is 5yrs or more after clearcut of timber. Dynamic forest was a term timber companies used to describe properties "where a rabbit couldn't go".
I cut line to see through the woods and to show my client where the line is: Right down this opening here with all the flagging hanging. Follow the cut line with the flagging and you are following your boundary.
I don't enjoy it as much as I did 15 years ago but I like that it keeps me in shape. It keeps you strong.
GEOMETRIC, post: 381150, member: 8346 wrote:
Mr. Harris, I don't think you understand my comment or perhaps I did a poor job of explaining my views. I totally agree that disclaimers won't cover your a$$ for doing poor work or failing to meet minimum standards prescribed by registration boards or the law. I see a lot of surveyors using many more disclaimers than I. Doing good work is the best liability insurance but when you find discrepancies that are beyond your control to resolve, like "color of title" or disagreements between deeds, reference plats, & extrinsic evidence, I think it is prudent to put those that would rely on your survey on notice that there is a potential problem. I try to show everything that has a bearing on a property line on my plat, within reason. Remember, in our wonderful legal system which was designed by lawyers for the benefit of lawyers, you don't have to be wrong to loose nor do you have to be right to win. Lawyers lay awake at night thinking of ways to sue honest people for ridiculous reasons. Talk about disclaimers, the disclaimers required by the county for a subdivision plat can take up more room than the survey. Often, there is an entire 24"x36" sheet full of nothing but irrelevant county government notes & disclaimers. Think about it, if the county is that afraid they might get sued, doesn't that send up a red flag for surveyors? You know what you need to locate & what you should do. That is left up to your professional judgement except as specifically stated by statute. Personally, I don't destroy extrinsic evidence I think could have a bearing on the location of a property line. There is no legal requirement to cut out the property line as long as the points are included in the traverse or are located as required by GPS. BTW, I like your dinosaur crossing sign. I might have to get me one of them unless you have it copyright protected.
There is no legal requirement to cut out the property line as long as the points are included in the traverse or are located as required by GPS. BTW, I like your dinosaur crossing sign. I might have to get me one of them unless you have it copyright protected.
The legal requirement in Texas that "may" require the cutting of a boundary is that the surveyor did physically follow the boundary in search of evidence and to locate any improvements made along the boundary.
To make that journey, cutting line may be involved.
Found the sign on googled images...........