I think you may be running into this situation - if someone asks the board to interpret the rule and take a position on it, they are likely to go with the strictest meaning.Mike Mueller wrote: Fri Apr 22, 2022 8:22 am I am aware of the Boards position that a physical monument at the ends of all lines being staked is their standard for facile. I just think that it is too strict because I think most surveyors would set their line stakes on the same line in my example above, and thus there is no alternate position trigger, no material discrepancy IE no triggers for a RoS.
It is like asking a police office if it is legal to spit on a sidewalk. In a large number of places it is illegal to spit on the sidewalk - so a police officer in that jurisdiction will tell you - yes it is illegal to spit on the sidewalk. They are not going to elaborate on when and why and how they are actually going to apply this law.
In practice this position is seldom enforced, and common sense is applied. Cops don't run around watching who is spitting on the sidewalk and issuing tickets. The law gets used in very extreme cases only, for example in cases of nuisance abatement. Common sense and consideration of circumstances gets applied. In this case, lawmakers decided to leave it up to the competent surveyors to decide what is facile. Board is likely to only interpret it in cases of reported problems, in which case the entirety of evidence is considered.
A competent surveyor should not need the board to hold their hand in deciding where and how to set sufficient monuments, there are too many different situations. This is why we call ourselves professionals - in part because we are supposed to have the ability to evaluate situations and solve problems. This also means that some things will fall in the gray area of different opinions. The world is not black and white, surveying is not black an white, let's not over constrain it and over simplify it because few people have a bruised ego over differing opinions.