California Surveyors Forums

Yes I haven't forgotten my post on this original subject. Just don't understand why you are posting references from years ago where, unlike my previous one, others had issues with Lucas or another person responding to Lucas?

My post was about the subject survey, not how one or other side were "trade magazine pundits". Was that to just support your recent article? If so, why is it so important for you to show disagreements with Lucas? And why should you be listened to instead of someone else who writes their opinion?

Lucas like several other of these trade magazine pundits has been totally trashing specific Land Surveyors, the Societies that represent them and Land Surveying as a profession for years now yet they have been shown repeatedly over time to have been either completely wrong, mistaken or never comprehended the matters they wrote "opinions" on in the first place. As a matter of fact they are damaging this profession just like this type of behavior has damaged our society in general over the last decade or so. They have been able to do this by preying on the ignorant and fostering hate and fear. Why keep listening to these hot air artists? Lucas is one of many in our profession whose "opinions" we can do without. If you missed the point of this article then I urge you to go back and read it and read the information in the links provided in it.

I don't see Lucas as totally trashing the surveys and surveyors, as much as he is supporting his point about the disparity between differing approaches to retracements. I would recommend not staying stuck on his hyperbole, but understand that he is speaking from the realm of appellate decisions. As such, he is imparting pragmatic advice about likely outcomes of very sticky cases, and suggestions about how to avoid your clients from becoming parties.
Or, don't pay attention to him - your choice.

I probably agree more with Lucas then not and he does express some negatives about surveyors in general and I guess, I do too.

It seems to me that the main thrust of his arguments is that some surveyors actually will never bend a senior line through existing junior corners. This is the basic tenet of some that insist the research has to go back to the senior line and run it exactly on the ground and all junior corners that are not exactly on this line, should be ignored or pin cushioned.

Why not comment on my example of junior corners on senior lines.

The other issue of course is the blatant misuse of section subdivision line evidence, whereas the only evidence used is the original protracted PLSS center lines. This rationale is similar to the absolute disregard of junior corners that are not exactly on the senior line.

Why not argue the rationale, rather then berate those who attempt to make surveyors think?

dewardkb wrote:Lucas like several other of these trade magazine pundits has been totally trashing specific Land Surveyors, the Societies that represent them and Land Surveying as a profession for years now yet they have been shown repeatedly over time to have been either completely wrong, mistaken or never comprehended the matters they wrote "opinions" on in the first place. As a matter of fact they are damaging this profession just like this type of behavior has damaged our society in general over the last decade or so. They have been able to do this by preying on the ignorant and fostering hate and fear. Why keep listening to these hot air artists? Lucas is one of many in our profession whose "opinions" we can do without. If you missed the point of this article then I urge you to go back and read it and read the information in the links provided in it.

Oh, I believe I get your point. You don't believe that Lucas provides opinions that rise to the appropriate level of principles/practice and you have concerns that land surveyors are simply listening to his advice because of his standing as an author and presenter. Lucas is paid to opine on controversial subject matter and/or to at least make everyday subject matter controversial. That is what attracts the readers or at least that is what Lucas and the publishers of POB think attracts the readers (my opinion, I haven't actually asked them).

I, on the other hand, believe that for the most part land surveyors are a wise bunch. It is not only in their nature to read/listen/discuss other perspectives, it is their responsibility to consider other perspectives when sifting through the evidence necessary to issue their best determination. Just because people take the time to read Lucas doesn't necessarily mean they are going to listen to it any more than if they took the time to read your posts, articles, etc. I believe it is also in their nature, after considering all other available and pertinent perspectives, to make their own decision irrespective of what some nationally-published author believes.

I suggest you consider that as being why others are either posting or responding to Lucas's opinions. Not because they are blindly following his advice. Not because they think he is steering people wrong or damaging the profession. Not because you are openly calling him out. But because the prudent land surveyor is doing their job by reading/hearing his, yours, and other opinions prior to simply making their own professional opinion. Sometimes, one cannot be sure of their actions until they are faced with the wrong ones first. If you missed the point on what I'm saying, then I urge you to go back and read some of the comments in this thread (some that just appeared this morning in fact) and ones in the links that you provided. Land surveyors are rarely just one burro in a long line of burros only focusing at the rear end in front of them.

Keithwill wrote:Why not argue the rationale, rather then berate those who attempt to make surveyors think?

Well put

Deward's post #51 above, is about as far off as it gets!

Sorry, but Lucas makes more sense.

Ric7308 wrote:Oh, I believe I get your point. You don't believe that Lucas provides opinions that rise to the appropriate level of principles/practice and you have concerns that land surveyors are simply listening to his advice because of his standing as an author and presenter. Lucas is paid to opine on controversial subject matter and/or to at least make everyday subject matter controversial. That is what attracts the readers or at least that is what Lucas and the publishers of POB think attracts the readers (my opinion, I haven't actually asked them).

I, on the other hand, believe that for the most part land surveyors are a wise bunch. It is not only in their nature to read/listen/discuss other perspectives, it is their responsibility to consider other perspectives when sifting through the evidence necessary to issue their best determination. Just because people take the time to read Lucas doesn't necessarily mean they are going to listen to it any more than if they took the time to read your posts, articles, etc. I believe it is also in their nature, after considering all other available and pertinent perspectives, to make their own decision irrespective of what some nationally-published author believes.

I suggest you consider that as being why others are either posting or responding to Lucas's opinions. Not because they are blindly following his advice. Not because they think he is steering people wrong or damaging the profession. Not because you are openly calling him out. But because the prudent land surveyor is doing their job by reading/hearing his, yours, and other opinions prior to simply making their own professional opinion. Sometimes, one cannot be sure of their actions until they are faced with the wrong ones first. If you missed the point on what I'm saying, then I urge you to go back and read some of the comments in this thread (some that just appeared this morning in fact) and ones in the links that you provided. Land surveyors are rarely just one burro in a long line of burros only focusing at the rear end in front of them.

I broke my computer, where is the Like button :-(

well put Ric

Anybody want to argue about the "bogus theory" as stated by Robillard and Bouman in their book.

That theory is.......you have to and can only use the protracted sec. center lines as your sole evidence in establishing the boundaries within the section.

The court case in Florida...Rivers v Lozeau is a perfect example and also a case in Arizona where the Congress wrote and passed a law to change the boundaries within the sec. to match a BLM/FS interior subdivision survey that used the "bogus theory".

I have heard testimony that this "bogus theory" is to be used rather then the Manual of Surveying Instructions.

I have also heard from surveyors that should know better that private surveyors cannot determine boundaries within a section between Federal land and Private land.

The term "bogus theory" is mine.

If I am wrong about this, you can easily point it out.

Applauding Mr. DEWARDKB and Mr. Keithwill. Mr. Lucas brought up some great points to the extreme, even laughable, be careful of the Coolaid. Look at my license number, and look at a post I brought up a few years ago:

http://clsaforum.californiasurveyors.or ... jeff+lucas

Mr. DEWARDKB is a bit crass, and Mr. KEITHWILL is a bit stubbornly persistent.

Thanks.

I think Mr. Keithwill you bring up an excellent point, that needs to be taken further.

In land surveying, there are always exceptions to the rule. Period.

And I battle with this junior monument on senior line issue nearly daily.

When I call a junior monument off line is when I find senior evidence so support the location of that line. Period. An inadequately supported and documented junior monument on a senior line may yield. And an inadequately supported and un-documented junior monument on a senior line may hold.

Go figure.

What separates the hounds from the pups is those who attack that very issue with the confidence of understanding the Rules of Evidence and the Priority of Calls.

Every circumstance deserves a unique critique in light of the issues at hand.

"...by preying on the ignorant and fostering hate and fear."

Wow! Have you ever stopped to read your own postings? Rarely have I seen so much vitriol (and a good dose of jealousy - Lucas has a bigger audience for good reason) packed into an article or a post as one authored by you, Mr. Bowles.



Ric, Excellent post (#54).

#5
09-05-2007, 07:17 PM
E_Page
Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: El Dorado County
Posts: 2,123
Thanks Eric. This is the first posting of the maps that I have seen for this case.

Were you also able to find the Hughey RS? Also, are you able to easily obtain a copy of the ruling for Ventura County Superior Court No. SC039143? It would be good to see what the lower court actually considered and what they wrote.

We know from the Appeals ruling and from the CLSA brief that he used S-10 as an original monument. What else did he use? was that the ONLY original evidence he used? If so, on what basis did he reject the points used or set per the previous RSs?

Hopefully his RS answers those questions.

The Surveyor's Note on 45 RS 67 is interesting. It indicates good intentions and starts out on solid doctrine, but then suggests that South Bay dismissed the possibility that original monumentation existed and so they didn't look (maybe I'm reading too much into that note).

By a quick scan of their survey, the rejection of so many monuments found within the blocks surveyed seems to belie the statement about harmonizing. It seems they held only the County line as monumented and then arbitrarily held one found monument within the subdivision to anchor the N-S lines to, and deciding to hold the record right angle at the County line.

They may have had good reason to do what they did, but in the few minutes that I've looked at this map, I continue to find items that, lacking clarification, I have issue with.

A reading of the Appeals case gives the impression that it is a fairly clear cut case of one surveyor holding tight to the existing harmony while the other rejected all of the interior monuments in favor of very limited monumentation from outside the subdivision, upsetting all established harmony.

Looking over the maps you provided. This case is anything but clear. Anyone having offered off the cuff opinions, or opinions based upon the Appeals ruling alone will likely have to modify their previous position to some extent or other.
__________________
Evan Page, PLS
Last edited by E_Page : 09-05-2007 at 07:57 PM.

#6
09-05-2007, 08:35 PM
Gromatici
Registered User

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 423
Later
I'll try to get a hold of that stuff, but it might take awhile. I think the Hughey survey was not recorded (which was cited by the courts as a reason why they gave it no weight and the CLSA Amicus rebutted that logic). I would love to see the survey, but i don't think it's of record, but I'll try.

What I want to know is if Lucas has these maps? His criticism of CLSA, in light of my review of the maps, seems very unprofessional. At the very least there is some credit to be given to their Amicus Brief base on the research of the mapping. Several of those maps simply came off the county line and slammed in pipes at the record distance. I would have at least attempted to find a tie to another exterior boundary as a check. Even checking for other interior monuments (not of record) would have been better than nothing at all.
__________________
Eric J Ackerman
Gromatici Land Surveying
http://www.gromatici.com
info@gromatici.com
Last edited by Gromatici : 09-05-2007 at 08:40 PM. Reason: added thoughts.

http://clsaforum.californiasurveyors.or ... php?t=1945

Are there any land surveyors here that actually believe and willing to state that they cannot determine boundaries within a PLSS section, between Federal and Private land?

I don't believe it, but have heard it said!

What's with reposting posts from 2007?

http://landsurveyorsunited.com/profiles/blogs/chain-1

Lucas wrote articles completely misreading, misinterpreting and misunderstanding a number of Court cases, Rivers v Lozeau being one of them.

As demonstrated above, there are some who rather than read it and research it themselves to form their own conclusions rely on Lucas for their opinions.

Rivers and Lozeau had nothing to do with what Lucas said it did and his article reviewing that case was completely wrong. This is not a difference of opinion and I challenge anyone to actually read the case, research it and arrive at the same conclusions that Lucas did.

He was completely and totally wrong about that case because he never bothered to look at it other than to skim through it in order to write his article. Anyone who actually looks at this would know that, just like the "Jousting at Windmills" article he wrote, completely wrong and devoid of facts.

dewardkb,

It appears that what any of the rest of us say doesn't warrant reading by you. And that you are attempting to gain credibility (and maybe readership) on a platform of just trying everything you can to opine on why Lucas is wrong with everything he states.

As demonstrated above, there are some who rather than read it and research it themselves to form their own conclusions rely on Lucas for their opinions.

I don't believe anyone on this thread has responded with anything remotely close to this observation of yours. If you are referring to the quotes you are providing from years ago, obviously no one here is as interested in those as you are. I don't believe I read a quote from anyone that they would simply "...rely on Lucas for their opinions." Some may consider it, but no one said they would rely upon it blindly. Of course, no said they would rely upon your opinions either, but you may be reading that into our responses also.

We get that you have strong opinions on land surveying, we get that you strive to do your job well and that you provide the best you can for your clients. We get that you have 30+ years of experience surveying in Texas. All that is great. What we don't get is why you think you should be listened to in the same way that you believe everyone is listening to Lucas? Your credentials aren't any better or worse than Lucas's. Why do you have this insanely strong desire to prove him so wrong? What captured your attention during the early part of your career before Lucas was writing for POB?

From my standpoint, you are simply making "paper" arguments and trying to cherry pick a number of quotes to support your position.

Why don't you take a look back in your own files and think about describing a recent survey that you did and the interesting aspects that you encountered in resolving the situation? Once you have that, then sit back and consider whether a discussion of that would benefit the land surveying community in California or that the discussion with the California community would benefit your position. If you think so, post it. That way we all have something tangible to read, consider, think about, "form our own conclusions on", etc. Otherwise if you continue to just post like you are, your credibility will just take a downhill slide.

Good post Ric!

Deward, the Rivers case that you mentioned is the most abominable court case that I have ever read.

If you really want to convince others of your opinion about the case, please provide/post the field notes for the resurveyed west 1/4 sec. cor. and most importantly, the field notes of the east-west center line of the section.

It will clearly show the effects of the Robillard/Bouman "bogus theory" where only the protracted center line is used for evidence in the subdivision of the section, and clearly shows the ignoring of existing subd. of sec. cor. monuments.

Your opinion of this case clearly shows your survey rationale and you could explain it here with the above facts on the court case.

The argument does not get any clearer than what is shown in the Rivers case.

"Gain credibility"? "Your credibility will just take a downhill slide"!

Your not even reading what I wrote much less what anyone else has written.

Good luck to you folks, I tried. If you have a license here in Texas please survey the way Lucas and some of these other hot air artists advocate down here where I am, that helps me weed you out through litigation or Board sanction. I have been quite successful so far doing that and your continued cooperation would be helpful to this end.

To quote your own authority " We are not trained in the law or licensed to do so. This is way beyond any standard of care and reaches into areas of incompetence. Unless he is also a practicing attorney, advising clients on their rights in property is malpractice."

https://cases.justia.com/texas/fourteen ... 1382457096

Deward,

It would be much easier to review your court decision if we could at least see some plats/maps or whatever.

Again, post your arguments along with a plat of the Rivers case, so we can easily determine your rationale.

I certainly do not intend to do any surveying in Texas, but from posts from others in Texas, I do not think they are in total agreement with your practices. Just a hunch.

dewardkb wrote:"Gain credibility"? "Your credibility will just take a downhill slide"!

Your not even reading what I wrote much less what anyone else has written.

Good luck to you folks, I tried. If you have a license here in Texas please survey the way Lucas and some of these other hot air artists advocate down here where I am, that helps me weed you out through litigation or Board sanction. I have been quite successful so far doing that and your continued cooperation would be helpful to this end.

To quote your own authority " We are not trained in the law or licensed to do so. This is way beyond any standard of care and reaches into areas of incompetence. Unless he is also a practicing attorney, advising clients on their rights in property is malpractice."

https://cases.justia.com/texas/fourteen ... 1382457096

I'm not sure why you are thinking that we are blindly following Lucas or that we need you to try and set us straight? I'm not sure why you feel a need to "weed us out" or to "weed out your fellow surveyors in Texas".

I'm sure that several are appreciate of you wanting to help out but again, all you're giving us to consider is nothing more than what Lucas gives us. Land surveyors will make their best determination based on the available information. Just keeping it real Deward.

I don't know about others, but I can read and understand a court case a lot better, if I can see the surveys/plats that are being debated.

The above cited court case would be an excellent example of what I state.

I may be getting a little slow at understanding stuff, but I need help on understanding Deward's court case?

And these rules help me how?

Didn't find any plats of your court case there.

Gee whiz!

I was expecting to be able to see some maps/plats/sketches or something this morning which would give some meaning to the court case mentioned by Deward!

Or maybe something to show the effects of the "bogus theory" in the Rivers court case?

Expecting too much!

Ya'll can come to your own conclusions!