Nate The Surveyor, post: 345811, member: 291 wrote: ......
....
Keep learning.
A surveyor keeps learning.
N
Unfortunately, I'm at the age that I also keep forgetting. So I've doubled my efforts to keep learning, just to try and hold even with what I've been forgetting.
Seb, post: 345760, member: 7509 wrote: I find this amusing in a sad sort of way that you have to rely on a working knowledge of steel mills to establish the age of a survey mark.
How surveyors can advocate for such a system is beyond me.
Why not? We have publications about the manufacture dates of the myriad types of barbed wire, and surveyors have often referred to them to judge the approximate age of fencing found in the field.
While knowing about rebar imports certainly goes beyond the normal standard of care, any evidence that sheds light on the question of the validity of a monument is legitimate evidence. In this case, Kent's ability to think outside of the normal avenues of inquiry for a boundary survey appears to have unearthed (sorry for the pun - sort of) very useful evidence that would also appear to definitively answer the question.
This thread is worth saving in the "things left to check after you've checked everything you can think of" file.
Naught really... When you are looking for an old one, and find the Patina, intact, well, it gets real easy..... Twarnt an old one!
Kent can be a bit harsh, but he has an itch for reality. I like that.
N
This looks tasty!
Now that you've removed it and then apparently put it back, is it yours and did you cap it?
