In my August and October columns, my most recent, we discussed a litmus test for property boundary surveys (i.e., how to know when you have gotten it right) and what the appropriate boundary law principles are and how and when they apply — at least to the extent that can be done in a short column.
Both Harold Baldwin (“Guest Column: Less Education Is Not Surveying’s Solution,” Oct. 2015) and Philip E. Adams (“Guest Column: Why Licensure Requirements Need to be Revamped,” Oct. 2015) have useful comments, but fail to hit the target in the center.
Surveyors are intimately familiar with the frequent disagreements between private landowners over a disputed boundary line. However, the disagreements most likely to make headlines are those situations where adjoining states are unable to agree on the location of their common boundaries.
I am trying to highlight an area of concern that relates every day to us as land surveyors across these United States. My intent with this article is to turn the scope to the subject of discrepancies and related mapping processes.
In my previous column, in the August issue, we went into a detailed discussion on how to know that you have rendered a well-reasoned opinion on the location of the property lines that are the subject of your survey — a litmus test, if you will.
As you may recall, one of the key elements of the test is the application of the appropriate boundary law principles.