Removed to Avoid Confusion

[rpost]

I have seen several maps throughout the years where a surveyor has found a no record monument (or piece of metal that may or may not be a monument) near where a calculated property corner is located. Upon setting the property corner the map shows a tie to the found monument and states "removed to avoid confusion".


On one hand, I can appreciate the gesture. It prevents a homeowner from building his fence to the wrong monument and provides a record of the monument and tie to its original location should a different surveyor come along and want to accept its location.

On the other hand it may be construed as destroying evidence (although the evidence is memorialized by the new survey) and may be considered incompetent practice.

What are your thoughts on this?

[land butcher]

I think removing ANY monument is bad practice. By removing a monument you don't like you are saying "my survey is better than yours". No one is that good and since the tie is not part of a loop the info could be wrong, typo, bad msmt, etc.

[E_Page]

IMO, there is no blanket rule to cover this type of situation, but I would advise, if there is any question as to whether another competent surveyor might consider the point to be of some evidenciary value, leave it in place.

The question really needs to be answered on a case-by-case basis and depends on the full set of circumstances.

If you know that the monument had been inappropriately moved from it's original location, I see no reason preventing you from removing it - generally. I had a situation a few years ago where I knew a substantial and clearly marked monument had been moved from its original location and carefully placed at a new location a bit over 25' away. I also knew that there was litigation looming just beyond the horizon (mostly other matters not directly involving boundary), so I chose to leave it in place but thoroughly explain the matter in notes on my RS. I also remonumented the correct location with an equally substantial monument.

I have removed and remonumented many positions where I had found the original monument disturbed and damaged.

When I worked on the East Coast, I don't know if it was just the shaky firm I worked a short period for, or if it was fairly common practice, they rarely marked their monuments with cap or tag, and routinely pulled monuments that were not where they figured the corner should be. The also rarely filed a map.

That treatment of found monuments seems to be closer to what your question was about than the first scenario I related. In this case, the latest surveyor finds a marker of some kind, is unsure of its pedigree since ha doesn't possess a record showing who set it or how it got there, finds that it does not fall at his pre-calculated corner position, decides that he doesn't want to do any further investigation as to the point's origin, and so jumps to the point where his decision is "pull or pincushion".

Under that general set of circumstances, it would be beyond poor practice to remove the monument. I would consider it to be either incompetence, or negligence along with the intent required to show violation of Penal Code §605.

It would be poor practice to set a new monument without first making a reasonably thorough investigation into the origin of the found object. Who set it? How and why did they set it here? Was it set to mark the corner, is it some kind of offset, or is it totally unrelated to the boundary? If it was set to mark the corner, did the surveyor reasonably conform to the measurement and methodology standards that existed at the time the survey was performed? Are present and/or past landowners aware of the point's existence and did any rely on it for the placement of improvements or otherwise exhibit acceptance of it as marking the corner? If the point is not reflected on a RS found during normal research, is it possible that it appears on a mis-filed RS, PM, CR, or other record document? Have you checked sources of unfiled records to see if you can find some record of it's original placement? Have you asked the landowners if they are aware of any previous corner markers, and were they able to provide any useful info?

If after making a reasonable inquiries, double checking standard sources of record maps & documents, and looking into non-standard sources (other govt agencies as well as asking around about private records), you are convinced that you have a monument at some location that is not and cannot be the corner, then ask the question "pull or pincushion". But don't just ask yourself. Ask the affected landowners. Explain to each what you've found and how you arrived at your conclusions and then ask if they would like you to remove the errant iron to avoid confusion. If any object, leave it in place. If all agree, pull it.

If you pull it, document its location as you described in the OP, but also provide a complete description of what you found. What diameter was it? Inside or outside diameter? How long? How deep in the ground? Any partial markings? Was it galvanized? Did you find any accessories (e.g. tie nail on a PP)? Were there any other permanent objects in the immediate vicinity (e.g. was it at or near a back of walk, fence, bldg, etc.)? Is there any other descriptive info that might help someone later match it to a point from some obscure record yet to be found? Note it all. You do that, and even if you have pulled the old monument, you have preserved its position and description - you've preserved the whole point.

So, it depends...

[rpost]

Land Butcher, my survey is better than yours.... just kidding. For discussion purposes, let's say I'm not one of those surveyors tossing out monuments over insignificant measurements . Let's say the potential monument is off 2 feet on a 100 foot line and any half sober surveyor in the last 100 years could have done better. Let's say it's also no record with no tag or markings.

Now it is up 0.2 in the dirt and my pipe is flush. The contractor will be on site to build the fence in a week or two. I am absolutely positive that this piece of rebar is trash. If I show it on my Record of Survey very clearly with a full description and tie, should I leave it and hope the fence gets built to the correct monument or should I pull it and insure my client doesn't have to pay to move the fence?

ANY monument?

Evan, let's assume all research has been done, and we have a no record unmarked rebar.

[TIB]

10 years ago grandpa needs something sturdy to hold up his garage sale sign, finds a metal (rod/pin/rebar) in his garage and drives it into ground near the road at the edge of his property. He finds out that a sturdy bar is hard to remove so he uses hack saw at ground level instead.
After exhausting every possible source of records as part of thorough research Mr. Surveyor finds nothing. (Grandpa died) Now it's a monument on the ROS of the "competent" surveyor. Good for him.

Mr. Post, if it's a monument, then leave it be.
If it's scrap metal, get it the heck oughtta your way
TIB

[TIB]

It sounds to me as though rpost is absolutely saying "my survey is better than yours". It probably is. Too bad he doesn't know who to tell.
I dunno about rpost, but when I encounter a crappy survey, I aint got no problem saying "my survey is better". Even I can do better than 2 feet At least rpost measured it and put on ROS. The only measurement I would have made after yanking it would be how far I could throw it. Evan would research it for a week or two. Everyone is different. The public dont wanna hear all the mumbo jumbo explanations and silly details,. Public is interested only in "mr. surveyor, where is my property corner? is that it? Which one is it?

[land butcher]

Let's say the potential monument is off 2 feet on a 100 foot line

2 feet. On line? reference marker?

If you set a pipe and tag and normally a marker lath along with a copy of your work to the land owner it shouldn't be a problem.

My neighbor decided to have a block wall installed along our side PL, he hires low bid only and is a CE. I tied out the rear corner and set a nail and tag in the back wall behind built about 1 ft onto the back adjoiners prop. Years ago I had set cnails at 8ft intervals 1.5 o/s to pl when I replaced the original wood fence with another wood fence. All this along with the front IP were shown to the contractor and explained thru his interpreter. I checked his string lines 2x before block was started.
Wall is finished and I expect to set a lead and tag in the top of the wall ~1ft from the back end. WRONG. The contractor, for reasons only known to him put the whole block width on my property at the back, tapering to cl wall on pl at the front of our houses. He removed my tag from the back wall thinking I would not find the hole in the conc and marking pen circle. Additionally he trenched out the 1.5ft o/s nails and the wall has a 24inch wide footing, 6in on my side 18 in under my neighbors dwy and then asked for extra money due to extra concrete. Where does he find these guys.

[rpost]

Not on line just random at a 45ish. Here's my point, I showed it on my map with a tie and description. I also added a note stating that I removed it to avoid confusion. I submitted the Record of Survey. The County is telling me that removing the monument is punishable by the Board. Luckily I have not actually pulled it yet. I am trying to decide whether or not to stick to my guns and pull it or leave it in place. I believe that the general public would benefit from its removal but do not want to get in trouble.

So.... . Pin cushion or yank it? Oh yeah... I found a record pipe 2 feet away and held it. I didn't set my own. The prior survey didn't find the pin and would have tossed it anyways.

I have been told by others that I should not have shown it on my survey and just pulled it. That is not how I intend to operate. I would like to do the right thing and show it but "remove to avoid confusion".

[D Ryan]

Ryan,

It sounds like you did lots of things right here. Now you're faced with a decision triggered by someone else's observations, and probably feel pushed against a wall, needing to decide whether to "stick to your guns". Hopefully you can take the personal aspect out of it, and step back and consider your decision in light of the good comments you've received. The lousiest of which was pull it and don't mention it. I hope these weren't licensed surveyors, or even aspiring surveyors offering this advice.

I always lean toward preserving anything that may be a survey monument, leaving it to others to decide its merits. You just never know the history of it (there may be a map or sketch out there somewhere atht may turn up at some point, maybe in an attic and shows it as a witness corner based on other old evidence now gone...just one scenario, there are many others).

Dave Ryan,
Humboldt County

[pls7809]

I don't think this is as black and white as the county surveyor is making it out to be. 8764(a) mentions "removed" monuments shall be shown. Unless there is some other opinion from the Board or Attorney General that I don't know about.

I don't think I would do it myself, but I believe the law allows for it. Dave Ryan said it well, IMO.


8764. Record of survey - technical requirement
The record of survey shall show the applicable provisions of the following consistent with the purpose of the survey:
(a) All monuments found, set, reset, replaced, or removed, describing their kind, size, and location, and giving other data relating thereto.

[rpost]

Thanks for all of the input guys. The personal part that Dave Ryan mentioned makes good sense. I have been getting irritated lately with multiple jurisdictions providing procedural plan check comments without citing proper references. "You can't do this" should only be added in red on one of my maps if there is a reference attached. Then I have to resubmit with a proper reference showing that I can and should "do this" which delays going mylars and causes me to waist time, hence the personal part. It's almost like the assumption is that I didn't do all of my research prior to submitting. Maybe I need to add a note to my survey stating that my procedure can be backed up please provide cited reference with all redlines! I guess it just makes me mad. I suppose my fuse is a bit short as of late.

If anyone else has more input please chime in. Right now it's looking like I may be able to remove it, but most folks wouldn't. This is why we so often find two pipes when searching for one corner. I really prefer to find one. It makes it easier to decide which one to hold!

[Ric7308]

Ask yourself:

Is the Land Surveyor responsible for determining what is a monument?

Is the Land Surveyor responsible for documenting evidence related to whether anyone believes it is a monument?

Is it important for the Land Surveyor to preserve the "monument" or to preserve the location of the "monument"? There is a difference.

The law includes the word "remove" or "removed", whichever the case may be, but limits that action to "monuments". Seems to me that the Land Surveyor needs to weigh all pertinent evidence to determine first whether the physical object has been relied on in regards to purposes of your survey and whether it can be deemed a "monument" before acting further.

Have you asked the land owner(s) what they think the physical object is? Or what it represents to them? It's purpose may only be confusing to others if the others have not been appropriately briefed on the matter, by you or the previous surveyor. Is it normal for you to "walk the boundaries" with your client (and in some cases the neighboring land owner) pointing out your findings?

It is not a black or white decision which is one reason why professional judgment is important.

[rpost]

Rick,

Thank you for chiming in. I did walk the site with the client a couple of years ago when the initial survey was performed. Unfortunately, there was a substantial error in the deed and the chain of title for this project. It took 2 years to resolve since the title company was not in a hurry.

I do not remember if I pointed out the monument. I do know the following:

1. The neighbor is not relying on it. He hired the surveyor who set the pipe that I am holding. The corner lies under some cypress trees and the pin I found has most likely been hidden for years. the previous surveyor made no mention of it.

2. My client has not relied on it. He had recently purchased the property when I located the boundaries.

[TIB]

rpost & dave ryan, ric7308 is right. Your primary decision needs to be " IS IT A MONUMENT? (in your opinion). Not all pieces of metal in the dirt are monuments. If you decide that "no, I do not consider it to be a monument" then there are no decisions needed regarding ROS and yanking it. There are no rules regarding scrap metal, only monuments If is is not a monument to you, then the "lousy" advise from other surveyor about yanking it and pulling it might actually be good advise.
Ryan suggests that advise is not worthy of even an even an aspiring surveyor, let alone a PLS, I suggest that it may be from a savvy LS with sound advise. I'm sure you'll never kiss $ tell. If it is not a monument, then if you wanna yank it, then yank it. If it is not a monument, then showing it on your ROS would lead to only more confusion. Ryan suggests showing it and "leave it's merits to others".
HUH? What/who others? There are no "others"
John Q. Public aint real sure if that metal thing in the corner of his yard has anything to do with his property so he hires Mr. PLS for official and professional survey for determination instead of non licensed surveyor wannabe. When done JQP asks PLS about the metal thing that is still in the corner of yard with bright lath next to it. Mr. Super PLS replies "I dunno, I'm gonna leave its merits to others, let somebody else decide, but I did locate it and show it on ROS, FD metal thing"
This cannot be a good answer to John Q Public. He has a fancy official map from high cost PLS, but still don't know about the metal thing.
The public pays for and expects your decisions as an expert, so decide

If monument then show it and leave it
If not monument, then erase it and yank it
in both cases, heck yes, stick to your guns, always

If monument: show it and leave
If noit

[rpost]

Does this change anything?

EHE, PAUL CHRISTOPHER (See also Accusation 681-A)
Land Surveyor L 5280
Citation 5065-L
Final: July 29, 2004
Action: Order of Abatement, $250 fine
The Board investigated allegations that Paul Christopher Ehe of Running Springs, California, violated Business and Professions Code section 8780(b) in that he was negligent in removing a monument he found while surveying a property. The standard of practice is to leave the monument in place, identify it on the survey map, and show its position and relationship has been determined to be the correct location. Ehe was ordered to practice land surveying within the standard of practice for the profession and to pay a fine of $250. The administrative fine has been paid. In accordance with Section 125.9(d) of the Business and Professions Code, payment of an administrative fine does not constitute admission of any violation(s) charged but represents a satisfactory resolution of the matter.

[Steve Martin]

For what it is worth,

I've seen another recorded Record of Survey in San Diego County where the Surveyor removed a monument he was showing off "to avoid confusion"

[E_Page]

One of Ric's points was that we are tasked with identifying the corner. If you are quite satisfied that the untagged iron is not at the corner and you are unable to find any reference for it, I see no reason why you would not be able to remove it as long as you have the concurrence of both affected landowners in doing so.

The fact that you even considered at some point during your survey that it might be a survey monument is enough to still consider that it might have been set as a survey monument for which a record may one day turn up. Contrary to TIB's poor advice, your having preserved it's position by ties on your map is the right thing to do. Another of our primary responsibilities is to preserve evidence, which means showing all of the evidence on your map whether it supports or contradicts your conclusions.

Not having given consideration to evidence is negligent. Since you located it, it sounds like you did give it some consideration and ruled it out after analyzing its lack of history and its lack of harmony with other evidence that you found.

Destroying evidence contrary to your conclusions (pulling and tossing), and then suppressing the fact that it ever existed (removing it from the immediate vicinity by either taking it away or tossing it as far as you could, and then not showing its position on your map) is both unethical and illegal.

Destroying evidence that is contrary to your conclusions, even if it appears to be poor evidence could easily be characterized as malicious destruction as described in Penal Code §605.

Removing the iron after a diligent search for information on it and finding no information connecting it to the corner, but still carefully documenting its description and position is far from malicious and therefore cannot be a violation of PC §605.

Whether or not removing it comports with acceptable survey practice depends upon the efforts you actually put in to discovering some history on it. If that search only went as far as the Recorder's Office and the County Surveyor's Office, then you have probably met the minimum and can safely reject its position as long as you have plenty of other evidence to support the position of the iron you accepted (it sounds like neither are a monument of the original survey), but I would not advise pulling the monument.

If you have exhausted all reasonable sources of information - meaning that if a record exists, it is probably only on a map or in field notes in someone's attic or otherwise not currently discoverable by you - and you have the agreement of th eaffected landowners, then removing the iron but describing it and noting its precise position relative to your survey points is acceptable practice. If it wasn't acceptable to remove monuments under any conditions, there would be no reference to "removed" monuments in the PLSA, except in the context of prohibited practices.

I don't know the details of Mr. Ehe's case. Perhaps he did not thoroughly investigate the monument before removing it. Or perhaps he did not adequately document it after doing so.

The enforcement public summary of that action makes it seem as if there is no circumstance in which one could remove a monument. Ric's statements above, and a reasonable reading of the law both suggest that there are circumstances in which it is acceptable. Since Ric is the guy who signs off on the citations and formal accusations resulting from practices determined to be in violation, his interpretation here should carry some weight on the matter.

But then again, I've seen some really upside down results of enforcement cases recently and a lot of inconsistency between the opinions of different Board experts that are the basis for deciding whether or not to cite a licensee. Can't draw any conclusions from the enforcement public write up of the Ehe case.

[desert turtoise]

But then again, I've seen some really upside down results of enforcement cases recently and a lot of inconsistency between the opinions of different Board experts that are the basis for deciding whether or not to cite a licensee. Can't draw any conclusions from the enforcement public write up of the Ehe case.[/QUOTE]

I know all the particular details of at least one case, and most info on others, where BOTH the PLS and local County Surveyor were in agreement that a corner record was the appropriate document to file, not a R.O.S., as nothing in section 8762 was being triggered; in particular with reference to the "previously shown" language in the section. In other words, the discrepancy had already been shown very clearly on a previous recorded map.

The state "expert" and the "Board" must have thought otherwise. A citation(s) was issued. This happened, and then at the hearing, one of the two board members stated either exactly these words or virtually similar:
"certainly the local county land surveyor is in a position to be familiar with local standards and practices...and most definitely should have input as to what a discrepancy is..."

That is a good example of inconsistency, most would agree, I think.
Guess it's called being human, folks.

[rpost]

Evan,

Thank you for the detailed response. Is it a monument? Probably, otherwise I wouldn't be making such a fuss over it. Have I researched it? You bet, at least to the extent an undocumented, unmarked pin can be researched. I am sure that it is not the property corner. So sure in fact that I am (was) considering removing it just in case someone down the road (non-surveyor) finds it instead of the 3/4" tagged pipe 2 feet away and builds a fence to it.

Just for the record, I caved and left it in place. I don't feel like holding up an already nightmare Record of Survey (2 years to correct a busted deed on a survey it did for free!) because I need to battle the opinion of the County.

I will just show the homeowner, tell them it is no good and "make sure you don't get it confused with the other one." "Oh and by the way, I wasn't allowed to remove it and still get my map through plan check. Don't you go removing it now..." Sometimes this surveying thing is just one big joke!

[John Williams, PLS]

Case by case, here's the dilemma for this week. Single family lot survey, many original tagged 1" IPs found. 1992 survey by my firm performed boundary recovery, found the 1"ip in concrete at the NE corner of lot xx confirmed throughout the block utilized for boundary, shown on filed corner record. 2001 survey across the street recovered and found same 1"ip NE lot xx confirmed good with other mons. Last week following the field notes from 1992 & 2001 found same 1"ip in concrete, vertical and up about 0.4' in a lawn area graded flat with a 1' keystone retaining wall. The 1"ip is obvious (being up 0.4' at the edge of the lawn) but it is now 8' out of position. What do you do? no fences, no occupation lines, what about the adjoiners relying on it in the future?
JW

[Dave Karoly, PLS]

I can understand the desire to eliminate corner monument noise (multiple monuments purporting to mark the same corner). Afterall, why do we set monuments? Is it just an academic exercise? I don't think so. It is considered an act of good faith for a property owner to order a survey and use the resulting monuments.

However the key thing to consider is who owns the object under consideration (whether a monument or not)? It certainly isn't owned by the Land Surveyor in the case of surveying the property of others.

The property owner can remove objects from the land that he owns, so let them do it.

[E_Page]

JW,

In your case, I would ensure that the mon wasn't moved for a completed or pending LLA before making any decisions. If there's a cap or tag on it, contact that licensee.

If there's no legitimate reason why it has been moved, or if it wasn't moved by the licensee whose number is on it, I'd consider removing it. In a similar instance, I saw that there was a fairly recent corner record filed in which the licensee showed having reset an iron in the original lot corner position. We had located it in that position shortly after he had set it. Several weeks later, we had occasion to make a check shot on it and found that it had moved 3'. We found the hole at it's previous location. a new fence had been built to the previous location. We notified the licensee who had reset it and filed the CR so that he could decide what to do with it.

Had that licensee not been available (deceased, retired, or moved from area), I would have pulled the iron, reset a new one at the location indicated on the CR, and filed a new CR indicating what I did and why, also providing a tie to the place it had been moved to on the outside chance that there was a legitimate reason to mark that point, although it had been done by illegitimately moving another surveyor's monument.