Hawaii Land Surveyor Exam common mistakes
Hawaii Land Surveyor Exam · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Treating the Hawaii boundary as if it were a generic metes-and-bounds problem and ignoring the shoreline as a boundary line, so boundary computations run to the water's edge without determining where the boundary actually lies.
Most mainland study material treats the water as an obvious natural monument and never requires the candidate to distinguish high-water mark, low-water mark, and the ordinary high-water mark, or to apply the Hawaii rule that the state's title to submerged lands and the upland owner's boundary are governed by specific doctrines. Candidates memorize the federal equal-footing principle but never practice applying it to a Hawaii parcel.
What to do instead
Build a one-page decision tree for shoreline boundaries: identify the water body (ocean, navigable stream, non-navigable stream, fishpond), state which line the boundary follows under Hawaii law, and note that accretion belongs to the upland owner while avulsion and artificial fill generally do not. Work several practice problems that require you to compute area both to the high-water mark and to the low-water mark and explain the difference in a written answer.
Applying the wrong set of minimum standards to a Hawaii subdivision or condominium survey, for example using a mainland state's plat requirements or ALTA standards where the Hawaii subdivision ordinance or condominium property regime rules control.
Candidates study boundary retracement heavily but skim the statutory and administrative framework, so they cannot recall which agency approves a subdivision plat, what map scale and sheet size are required, or which items must appear in the surveyor's certificate. The rules are scattered across statute, administrative rule, and county ordinance, and candidates assume one document covers everything.
What to do instead
Assemble a checklist table with columns for statute cite, rule cite, county ordinance, required map contents, approval authority, and signature block. Practice writing a complete certificate and plat legend from memory, then check it against the checklist. Drill the difference between a boundary survey map, a subdivision map, and a condominium map, since each has distinct content requirements.
Computing coordinates and areas to the nearest hundredth of a foot and reporting them as if the precision reflects accuracy, without stating the basis of bearings, the datum, or the positional uncertainty of the controlling monuments.
Candidates come from a computation culture where more decimal places feels more professional, and exam problems often supply coordinates that invite arithmetic. The underlying issue is that a boundary derived from a found pipe and a bearing tree has an uncertainty envelope far larger than 0.01 foot, and the exam tests whether the candidate understands the distinction between precision and accuracy.
What to do instead
For every practice problem, write a short accuracy statement: controlling evidence, basis of bearings, datum, and estimated positional uncertainty. Practice rounding reported values to a level consistent with the evidence, and be able to explain in writing why a computed area to 0.01 square foot from monument-derived bearings is misleading.
Ignoring the hierarchy of evidence and holding a record distance over a found original monument, or holding a later survey's bearings over an undisturbed original corner.
Candidates memorize the phrase 'monuments over distances' but freeze when the problem presents conflicting evidence: an original stone mound, a later set pipe, and a record bearing that runs to neither. The exam rewards the candidate who can articulate why the original monument controls and how to reconcile the record when it conflicts.
What to do instead
Practice a written hierarchy: original monuments, then undisturbed natural monuments, then evidence of the original survey, then later surveys, then record courses and distances, then area. For each practice scenario, write two or three sentences justifying which evidence controls and what you would do with the conflicting call, rather than just circling an answer.
Mishandling the Public Land Survey System in Hawaii by assuming a rectangular system exists statewide, or by failing to recognize that Hawaii's land system is rooted in the Great Mahele, Land Commission Awards, and Royal Patents rather than federal township and range.
Nearly all mainland study material is organized around the PLS System and section subdivision, so candidates spend hours on aliquot parts that do not apply to most Hawaii parcels and never learn to read a Land Commission Award or Royal Patent description. The exam tests whether the candidate knows which land system governs the parcel in front of them.
What to do instead
Write a summary of Hawaii land tenure history: Great Mahele, Land Commission Awards, Royal Patents, Government lands, and the Kuleana awards, with the type of description each produces. Practice interpreting an award description that references a native tenant's parcel and adjoining awards, and be able to explain why a kuleana boundary may follow a taro patch wall or a stream rather than a bearing and distance.
Failing to distinguish the different meanings of 'high-water mark' and applying a mean high water or mean lower low water line without checking which line the controlling document or statute specifies.
Tide datums are a technical subject that candidates often reduce to a single memorized definition. Hawaii's tides and the legal treatment of the shoreline create several plausible lines, and the exam will present a description that names one line while the candidate's habit is to use another.
What to do instead
Create a comparison table of shoreline lines: ordinary high water, mean high water, mean higher high water, mean lower low water, and the state's shoreline certification line, with the legal significance of each. Practice problems where the deed says one thing and the statute says another, and write out which controls and why.
Treating a condominium or horizontal property regime survey as a simple apartment boundary sketch, omitting the common elements, the vertical boundaries, and the relationship between the condominium map and the underlying land survey.
Candidates without Hawaii condominium experience underestimate the statutory detail required in a condominium map and the interaction between the fee simple land boundary and the airspace units. The exam can test both the map content and the surveyor's role in establishing unit boundaries.
What to do instead
Study a model condominium map checklist: project site boundary, building footprints, unit boundaries by floor and elevation, common elements, and the surveyor's certificate. Practice describing how you would establish a unit boundary in three dimensions and how you would tie the condominium map to the underlying parcel survey.
Skipping the mathematics of a boundary problem because the fact pattern is long, then guessing at the answer instead of setting up the closure, area, or curve computation.
The exam mixes conceptual and computational items, and long fact patterns with several courses invite the candidate to read for the 'feel' of the answer. Candidates who have not practiced a disciplined setup routine under time pressure lose points on items they could solve.
What to do instead
Adopt a fixed worksheet for every computational item: sketch, list knowns, choose the method, compute closure and area, check with an independent method such as coordinate area versus double meridian distance, and sanity-check the magnitude. Time yourself on sets of five problems to build speed without skipping the check.
Answering ethics and professional responsibility items from general business intuition rather than from the specific duties owed to the public, the client, and the board, and failing to recognize a conflict of interest or a boundary dispute that requires withdrawal.
Candidates prepare for technical content and treat ethics as common sense, so they miss items about signing and sealing work performed by others, accepting compensation contingent on a boundary outcome, or serving as an expert while retaining a stake in the result. The correct answer often requires naming the specific duty rather than choosing the most agreeable option.
What to do instead
Write out the core duties in your own words: competence, signing and sealing only work you supervised, avoiding contingent fees on boundary determinations, disclosing conflicts, and reporting unlicensed practice. For each practice scenario, identify the duty at issue, the party to whom it is owed, and the required action, and practice stating the rule rather than just selecting an option.
Ignoring the field and record research sequence and jumping straight to a computed solution without checking for adjoiner deeds, prior survey maps, or monument records that would change the answer.
Candidates treat research as background rather than as the step that determines which evidence controls. The exam rewards the candidate who recognizes that an adjoiner's deed or a recorded survey map may reveal a discrepancy that resolves the problem, and penalizes the candidate who computes from a single description in isolation.
What to do instead
Practice a research protocol: chain of title, adjoiner descriptions, recorded survey maps and monument records, and field evidence, in that order. For each practice parcel, list what you would pull and what each document could change, then write a short research memo before computing anything.