The ability to have a working knowledge of land surveying and property boundaries can be very useful to any landowner and all land development professionals. As with similar technical subjects many people outside the land surveying profession believe they know some rules about boundaries, when in fact most of the rules of thumb and commonly held beliefs are totally incorrect or at least misunderstood.

Those of us who work with property boundaries on a daily basis can tell innumerable stories of unpleasant situations that have arisen because of misunderstandings related to poor information or understanding of the subject. Neighbors have ended up hating neighbors over boundary problems that probably never would have arisen had they understood the underlying principles that govern the location of property lines.

Usually the land surveyor ends up as the messenger, and although in an adversarial situation where one or the other of the parties to the disagreement is paying the surveyor, that surveyor is almost always totally neutral as to the position of a particular boundary. So don’t shoot the messenger. Although it may seem like a non sequitur, land surveyors don’t really care where boundaries are located. More correctly, they don’t care where they are with respect to the landowners’ expectations. If a line doesn’t fit an existing fence or runs through someone’s house, that fact by itself is not particularly important. The real issue that concerns the surveyor is whether or not the lines that get reproduced on the ground accurately reflect the legal descriptions that are being surveyed. Of course, to the landowner(s), the location of the line, especially in respect to site improvements, is of the utmost importance.

What we feel is important for clients to understand is the mission and duty of the land surveyor. The primary role of the land surveyor in determining boundaries is to interpret the deed descriptions and produce a representation of those descriptions on the ground. The surveyor’s experience, education, and judgment are all involved in making those determinations and for those reasons, all states require a licensure to perform land surveys. The requirements for a licensure are usually several years of professional level responsible experience, recommendations by peers, and the passing of a very difficult exam. Licensure in one state is usually not transferable to another state without an examination on the laws relating to property boundaries in the state for which the licensure is requested.

The land surveyor does not have the ability to alter boundaries based on landowners’ expectations, or determine issues of unwritten title. Those are legal matters, and again, the land surveyor is the expert messenger that provides the data necessary to factually analyze the boundaries in question and allow the legal system to make determinations of disputed claims.

Surveying is an exact science
There are a variety of myths about land surveying. One predominant myth is that surveying is an exact science or that there is only one proper place for a surveyor’s stake.

Land surveying is plagued by a number of factors that unfortunately make this impossible. This is much to the chagrin of the professional who tries to explain it to clients, or more often an effected third party who doesn’t understand why two surveyors’ stakes aren’t in identical positions, or why a new survey stake doesn’t match an old survey stake, or most commonly the individual’s expectations.

It is quite possible for two competent surveyors to survey the same identical piece of property, using the same theory, and using identical equipment, and come up with different positions for the corners. In fact, it would be extremely unlikely that they would ever agree exactly. This is true more for large parcels of land than for city lots, but in degree only. This is not to say that the surveyor is incapable of properly surveying any tract of land. It is important, however, to understand that because of a number of factors, two surveys shouldn’t be expected to be precisely the same.

For one thing, all surveyors are not alike. It should be understood that just like any other profession, there are good surveyors and bad surveyors, and the full gamut in between. Some use a high standard of care and some work carelessly. Some are experienced and some are less experienced. Some are familiar with the specific area and some are not. In addition, surveying is often judgmental in nature. In most instances, like land development projects, each survey is unique and has its own problems. A survey requires individual judgment to interpret legal descriptions and their intentions, consider evidence of past surveys and monumentation, and translate all that into a modern, reliable survey. Just like one doctor may say “leave it in” and the next may say “take it out,” the surveyor is often faced with paradoxical questions that have no definite answer, but must be dealt with using experience and good judgment to complete a survey. This leads to differing locations for property lines and boundaries.

If cadastral (boundary) surveying was more akin to engineering disciplines, the problems would be fewer. Engineers (not to be confused with land surveyors) generally solve the problems by resorting to mathematical analysis. They can go look up a formula to determine the load bearing capacity of a beam, for instance. While the land surveyor must be very adroit mathematically, most situations do not lend themselves to fixed rules. In almost every boundary problem, the surveyor must usually make a judgment call.

The intent of deed descriptions is often a matter of judgment as to the intentions of the grantor and grantee. People other than land surveyors have written many descriptions and surveyors are charged with the responsibility of locating those descriptions on the ground. The people who wrote those descriptions were not concerned with the plight of the land surveyor, and the result is that different interpretations result in differing ground positions. There are volumes of books written for the land surveyor advising him how to exercise judgment in specific instances, but any surveyor who has any amount of experience knows that there are many situations for which no rule has been set down and a judgmental determination must be made.

The standards of precision imposed upon the land surveyor are another source for conflict. These generally held standards are really not that rigorous. The courts have generally held that the land surveyor in surveying a rural acreage tract must “close” by one part in five thousand. (Expressed as 1:5000) This means that for every 5,000 feet of surveying, one foot of error is allowed. This is really rather a relaxed standard. It is however, the standard prescribed by law in some states for residential plats!

By way of example, let’s say that two surveyors survey a 40-acre parcel. That should be about a mile around the perimeter. The surveyor staking that parcel is only required to be within one foot of the starting point after surveying around the entire parcel. That one foot may be a series of small incremental errors or it may be in one spot, or it may even be a series of compensating errors, but as long as the standard is met, the prescribed standard of care has been satisfied. This means that at any one corner of the property, the two surveyors’ stakes could be as much as two feet apart, and each would have met the standard. (One foot of error for each surveyor totals two feet of difference.) This standard, although it is generally observed as being adequate, is in practice usually exceeded by competent and responsible surveyors.

Most land surveyors would expect a closing error of less than 1/2 foot in a 40-acre tract. Even so, this could lead to a one-foot difference in positioning of each corner, even though both surveyors have performed their work responsibly and professionally.

Generally, higher standards of accuracy are required for surveying in high density urban areas than in rural areas. This is as it should be, because the parcels are normally smaller, and of higher unit value, and should be located with more precision.

There are a number of reasons why measurements can’t be made with absolute certainty. Measuring equipment can be developed that measure with high precision, but even the best measurements will not be perfectly accurate. Up until recent years, the surveyor used the standard transit and steel chain. This equipment has largely been replaced by electronic measuring equipment. Whatever the equipment, the surveyor is at the mercy of the manufacturer with regard to the quality of the gear he is using.

One of the most frustrating aspects of the land surveying business is the frequent lack of research data available. The land surveyor must often trace the history of a particular parcel of property back to when it was patented. (Passed into private ownership from the government.) In doing so, many of the old records are unavailable or nonexistent. This is particularly true of surveying data. Old surveys often disclose some methodology or intent on the part of the conveying parties, and if this information is incomplete or lacking, the surveyor is working with a handicap from the outset. Only in recent years have states begun to require that property surveys be recorded with a public agency so that there is a continuum of information.

Field conditions are another reason why surveying is not totally exact. Land surveyors are generally regarded as a hardy breed, and rightfully so, for they must try to accomplish very precise work under some very unfavorable conditions. Those very conditions alter the calibration of the gear as well. Surveying a flat open field on a pleasant day with no wind or rain is certainly more likely to produce an accurate representation of the property than surveying an alligator infested swamp in a hurricane.

The results are rather predictable. To produce the same accuracy under poor conditions requires more time and expense. Surveying the Alaskan pipeline at 60 degrees below zero was a tedious task at best.

Not only does the weather affect the surveyor, but the terrain and ground cover come into play. It is much easier to make a precise survey on even ground than on broken ground. The more rugged the terrain, the more difficult it is to perform a survey with suitable precision. Likewise, it is a much more palatable task to survey a field of daisies than it is to brush through a snake infested grove of devil’s club, each plant concealing a bee’s nest. Once again the precision of the results is directly proportional to the challenge of the conditions.

One other factor is important to recognize. There are people involved in land surveying, as there are in many other businesses, and they are all subject to normal human failings. No matter how competent the surveyor, hired personnel have to provide certain information, and that information must be accurate for the survey to be correct.

Unfortunately, it is very difficult to manage quality control in the surveying business, particularly with a large staff. The competent land surveyor usually sets up a system of random redundant checks, but even so, the idiosyncrasies of human nature can thwart the best intentions of the best surveyor. SLDT