California Surveyors Forums

Anyone have any thoughts on the attached?

Moderator note: This file has been removed while the Policy & Procedures Committee reviews forum rule #3.

What a waste of time and paper? But, "were set to enable the adjoining land owner's to judge the approximate position of their lands"-----REALLY?

I interpret this map, as a GIS Based Idea.
Let me explain;
The technology was not good at that time. I am guessing that the owner / buyer / seller, wanted to have a "rough idea" of the locations of the boundary, and made it clear they did not want to pay for an actual survey, since it was probably going to be 5x the amount of costs. (sound familiar?)

So Mr. Shuttleworth had the idea, on helping out his client, and do something, in his eyes, for "Planning Purposes Only". He probably explained this to the client, and everyone understood, moving forward. He probably met with the County Surveyor, and explained the situation. The County Surveyor, in agreement with Mr. Shuttleworth did not want anyone relying on this work, for boundary purposes, and probably tried talking him out of it.
But Mr. Shuttleworth was getting pressured, and probably already promised the client he could do this, with this idea.
I assume he figured the best way to inform the future surveyors on this site, that his work was not valid. He was trying to warn us, that they are not to be used for boundary purposes. He is flashing his high-beams, trying to get our attention. He was trying to get the information out to the masses, and figured this was the best avenue in doing so.

(I think you have to take the era into consideration. They didn't have the luxury of opening a NAD83 / Google Image, indicating Boundary Lines within 10'-20', and sending it off to the realtor / engineer / architects etc.)

I would like to think after a few complaints later, and the advanced technology cruising along...that he probably would not have done too many of these.

Obviously this is completely assumed on my part. I am trying to give the benefit of the doubt, and think of a plausible idea that could have happened. This idea seems plausible. Not that I agree with it, or disagree.....but merely my assumed observation.

As we all know, no matter how many notes you put on the survey, no matter what you show, indicate, set etc, the general public has no idea what it means. Anyone without the proper LS training, would consider this as a True Boundary Survey of their property, and would all build to that line. Hence the worry of maps like this, or any other that are not a true Boundary Analysis. Beware!! (At least he recorded it, and didn't keep it private).

(My 2 cents)

Justin S. Pallamary

Justin, regarding your comment "The technology was not good at that time"; measurement technology was actually pretty good then. Perhaps GPS and Scanning technology was not used, but some of the Kern or Wild instruments I used, together with some of the HP distance EDM's, measured, in my opinion, equal to, or better than what we have today.
Regarding your thought on "Mr. Shuttleworth was getting pressured, and probably already promised the client he could do this"; Ethically, and contractually, it was the same then as it is now. As a professional, if he was pressured, it was his own doing. You have heard that saying "Don't make promises you can't keep"? If it had been me, in that era, as it is now, money is never the object. If the client doesn't like what I present, take it down the road and find someone else.
No disrespect, but, food for thought for one who surveyed in this era and, in this jurisdiction.
Mike Walters PLS 5528