Kent, it's an honor to be mentioned on your original post! We had lots of guys in NH that kind of overkill everything too. You know, they topo an entire 5 acre lot for a septic system or survey the entire survey the entire 100 acres when the client only wants to cut out 2 acres. They are mostly out of business now.
In all seriousness; if money was no object, independently reproducible bearings are wonderful. But when they do not benefit the client, requiring them is just another unfunded mandate.
Just curious?
If you think I'm saying that I don't report any bearings on a plat I've explained myself poorly. Yes, I show on my plats that the east line of the SE1/4 intersects the south line at 88-50-10 or whatever the internal angle is. However, I am saying that...
... in my neck of the woods the twelve half-miles that are supposed to be straight in a township, N-S or E-W, have a deflection of 30' at one 1' at the next 1 degree at the next.
The patents were rarely any bigger than a 160. Fast forward 150yrs there's roads on most of the section lines. Any survey that's been done before 1995 assumed a N-S-E-W bearing in relation to one of those section lines, and in the event of a missing section corner there's almost always enough evidence to set it without proportionate measurement, let alone trying to use bearings from the original survey.
There are a few townships round here with 2800' half miles that the original surveyor recorded as 40 CH. I don't think I'm putting much stock in his compass reading. Anything else is better evidence.
Maybe in your portion of the PLSS it's useful, but not mine.
EDIT- Except maybe someday along the correction line. A fair to midland job was done there
Steve
Just curious?
Got lots of distortion out here, still need to know your bearing basis and how it relates to true. I can't imagine doing a sectional survey without knowing where true north points. Guess it's how I was trained back in the seventies. Everything on state plane or solar. It's easy to do so might as well do it.
Just curious?
I think you are further west than I am. Original Plats don't ever show a bearing. Just the correction for magnetic. Soooo, they always thought the line was N00-00-00E or S00-00-00W.
Twas the low bidder ya know!
Steve
Just curious?
I think you will find that if you survey on a known basis it will make a big difference over time for you. I was trained to way back and I've never regretted the time put into it. You don't need GPS or fancy equipment just need to see the sun or tie into control that you set out. Makes a big difference and in the PLSS you are retracing true north surveys even if they aren't all that accurate.
Just curious?
Now I am confused. Eight hours of drawing or a couple of totties has gotten the better of me.
If the 1850 surveyor used his equipment judiciously or the equipment was better I could see reaping a benefit, however, when the deflection at the half mile is often a half degree or more how is it of benefit?
BTW my surveys are almost entirely GPS, it would not be much trouble for me to use true north.
Steve
Just curious?
Don't you realize that a surveyor will be retracing YOU 100 years from now?
Land Surveyors seem to be so short sighted and too big a hurry.
Just curious?
Yes I do, and that is the one argument that carries weight with me. The first time some guy using GPS to plant his corn (that guy being my client) asks me why he doens't line up with my plat's bearings, I will for sure change my ways. 'Til then, I am short sighted and I know it.
Steve
Just curious?
We are living in the 21st century.
Orienting surveys to north seems to be a simple service we should provide.
Just curious?
I'm not saying to survey in true north. Just that the bearings can be reproduced and related to true north. If you are using GPS then why not. It's as easy to do as not to do with GPS.
> In all seriousness; if money was no object, independently reproducible bearings are wonderful. But when they do not benefit the client, requiring them is just another unfunded mandate.
I'll bite. How much does 20 minutes of field time cost your client? Is it in the range of $30 to $60?
Considering the percentage of “Land Surveyors” that haven't seen a Calibration Baseline in years (decades or EVER), and/or those who drop their RTK Base Station on a random “corner,” push the FUGARWE Button, and then “CALIBRATE” to several other “corners,” (goat stakes, loose rubble, Schonstedt anomalies, etc.) and start “surveying,” it doesn't appear to me that “they” are very concerned about DISTANCES either!
Edit: Oh yeah...and GCDB Coordinates...
So...NO “basis of bearings,” and NO “basis of distances” (in the objective scientific sense) either...
We've come a long way baby...NOT!
:'(
Loyal
> ...push the FUGARWE Button...
Thank you fer naming the blue button on my 2500. Let it be written, let it be said.
Steve
Just curious?
> We are living in the 21st century.
>
> Orienting surveys to north seems to be a simple service we should provide.
Absolutely right. On the deep-thinking level, how much of a thrill will it be to sit in the witness chair and admit that you actually have no freaking idea which way North really is, that you just cooked up some bearings essentially because you were afraid your client, his attorney, his lender, or his title insurer would get mad if you actually reported that a line that various parties had supposed to run North doesn't actually?
Just curious?
> I think it would be great for a fella to write a first person about say, a solar class at Corbin; could be quite educational for those who do not see how quick and effective that can be.
Nothing against the NGS, but why would a person want to turn making routine solar observations for azimuth into some type of exercise that you have to go to freaking Maryland to learn to do properly? Solar observations are very well described in the surveying literature. They are very routine work. It doesn't take a rocket scientist or a highly trained geodesist to make a decent solar observation.
True enough. Unfortunately, what I've seen this lead to is the jobs going to those who will not do ANY topo for the onsite sewage (scan a usgs topo and call it good), and will not do enough to properly cut out the 2 acres (use an old fence or pipe without any checks that turns out to be a pasture fence). This puts out of business those who do know how to perform the necessary work, as well as those who would make a career out of a simple task. Good for me when the attorneys call to fix it, but not so good for the public or the profession.
If the idea is to do as little as possible and charge accordingly, there will always be someone who will do less and charge less, and not get the job done.
Just curious?
Most of the lawyers around here would not know how to phrase the question in the first place.
I would rather compare known bearings to the work I follow. It is just easier than trying to rotate each and every deed & plat to try and get everything to fit.
I have been following this discussion with some interest. I am from Tasmania and since 2005 here, every survey that goes to the titles office has had to be on grid north datum and coordinated. We have to calculate an uncertainty figure for the coordinates that mostly depends on the quality of the coordinate datum. We are slowly inching towards a coordinated cadastre.
The evidence on the ground is still obviously the basis of boundary definition. The immense time savings for us as we complete jobs is to be able to calculate coordinates of reference marks in the office and within a very short time on site we are setting out marks, digging them up and recording accurate positions on them to start the boundary definition calculations.
Even if we have only one survey near our job that is coordinated, we can often quickly draft up the surround surveys and use the one coordinated survey to approximately coordinate the older surveys and make it so ridiculously easy to find reference marks.
I find it amazing that in less than 10 years, the coordinated surveys that are slowly but surely dotting their way across the state help us so much. The benefits to local and state government of an increasingly accurate cadastre cannot be understated.
The comments about using the fact that clients expect one of their boundaries to be either east west or north south as a good reason to rotate your survey to what is in this day and age an arbitrary datum are strange. Apart from local knowledge you don't let your client tell you where the boundaries lie on the ground (that's our job to tell them that and why they are paying us) so why would you let them define your survey datum for you?
> The evidence on the ground is still obviously the basis of boundary definition. The immense time savings for us as we complete jobs is to be able to calculate coordinates of reference marks in the office and within a very short time on site we are setting out marks, digging them up and recording accurate positions on them to start the boundary definition calculations.
Exactly so.
> Even if we have only one survey near our job that is coordinated, we can often quickly draft up the surround surveys and use the one coordinated survey to approximately coordinate the older surveys and make it so ridiculously easy to find reference marks.
Yes, it's a huge benefit, particularly in rural surveying, to be able to navigate to boundary markers.