Monday, August 20, 2012

ERATA......

First I want to discuss the Witness Corner Post.  I know what the manual says and for the government boys on government land that is fine.  HOWEVER, the manual does not stricly apply to lands in private ownership so I reserve the right to disagree about not re-establishing a witness corner and then re-establishing the true point. (see previous post).  I did not specify private versus government land; but since land surveyors under state authority have no jurisdiction on wholly government land I assumed it was inferred.

Let me explain the my stance on witness corners....

First - the original surveyor set a witness corner because the true point could not be set for whatever reason. So the true point NEVER existed in FACT.  it was merely a calculated position.
Second - to properly follow the footsteps of the original surveyor you would have to determine the position of the witness corner and then determine to true point.  Why?  because that is what the original survey did and that is what the land owners would have had to do.
Third - this is especially true if the line(s) have "heavy" bearings (or diverge from cardinal by a significant sum) then the proportioning with out the WC will vary drastically from the proportioning with the WC.

Therefore I would not completely disregard the WC if it was missing unless I had a good reason to do so.


Moving on.....

Out on a job the other day I had the opportunity to find an original corner tree.  it had been cut down but the blazes had been pitched over and preserved in the sand.  The tree was established in 1875.  It was witnessed by a dependent resurvey in 1937 and had bearing trees created in 1972.  There is a lot going on here.  It was a neat find and I have been dying to talk about it.



Anyway back to work...

And for the boys in the south...... VIVA LA SALSA.

2 comments:

  1. I agree that you would be negligent to reestablish the corner without first locating the witness corner, noting topo calls and all relationships (all this ON THE GROUND). Then you can step back and make an informed decision. Good one, Dan. Keep em coming.

    How about a picture or two when you find those trees (that's one of those tall, green thingees you gents have up north, right?)

    J.O. Teague (Salsa Boy)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Not to be contrary, or maybe just to be contrary, I disagree with both of you.

    While it is true that in the given scenario the missing corner has never existed in fact, it has and does exist in law. It exists precisely were it is shown on the plat and will continue to exist there until a monument is set to mark the corner position in fact.

    Proportionate measurement is always the solution of last resort. Once it was decided that the witness corner was lost, its usefulness was also lost. Reestablishing the position of the witness corner by proportionate measurement under the guise of "following in the footsteps" is wrong. Deciding to accept proportionate measure as the solution is to acknowledge that retracement is not possible. Proportion the "lost" corner and set a new witness with its own accessories.

    If your solution and reasoning showed up on plat, I would still disagree but I would not challenge it.

    R L (Larry) Lawrence Jr

    ReplyDelete