MD Land Surveyor common mistakes
MD Land Surveyor · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Treating a recorded bearing and distance as the legal boundary instead of first establishing what the original survey actually monumented and called for.
Candidates study deed reading as a math exercise and default to 'record wins,' forgetting the hierarchy of evidence (natural monuments, artificial monuments, courses and distances, area) that governs retracement.
What to do instead
Before computing anything, list every call in the deed and rank it by evidentiary weight; then test whether the found monuments are original, undisturbed, or re-set. Practice by writing a one-paragraph 'evidence hierarchy' memo for ten sample descriptions.
Accepting a found monument as controlling without documenting its origin, condition, and relationship to the record description.
Field time is limited and a pin near the computed position looks convincing; candidates skip the research step that distinguishes an original corner from a later-set or neighbor-set one.
What to do instead
Build a habit of a written monument evaluation for each corner: who set it, when, by what authority, evidence of disturbance, and ties to references. If origin cannot be established, treat it as an uncorroborated witness and say so in the record.
Reporting an area computed from coordinates as the deed area without reconciling the closure and the description's calls.
Software outputs area instantly, and candidates assume the coordinate figure is authoritative rather than a derived quantity dependent on the boundary interpretation chosen.
What to do instead
Always state the basis of the area (which lines, which interpretation, what closure) and show the record-versus-measured comparison. When area and calls conflict, resolve per the hierarchy of evidence and explain the resolution in the surveyor's narrative.
Closing a traverse by adjusting all misclosure into every line and bearing rather than first checking for a blunder or a systematic error.
Adjustment routines are one button in the software, and candidates want a clean closure; distributing error blindly hides gross errors and produces confident but wrong coordinates.
What to do instead
Compute the misclosure and its precision, then inspect the pattern: a single large vector suggests a blunder (transposed digits, wrong backsight), a consistent direction suggests instrument or refraction error. Only apply a compass or transit adjustment after blunders are excluded, and document the method used.
Mixing angular units or coordinate conventions mid-calculation, such as entering bearings as decimal degrees when the instrument or record is in degrees-minutes-seconds.
Calculators, spreadsheets, and data collectors each handle DMS differently, and candidates convert mentally under time pressure.
What to do instead
Pick one convention per project and convert explicitly with a written step. Sanity-check every azimuth by back-azimuth (differing by 180 degrees) and every bearing by quadrant sketch before using it downstream.
Ignoring curvature and refraction, or scale and projection factors, on work where they exceed the required accuracy.
Candidates memorize that curvature correction exists but never compute when it becomes significant, so they either always apply it or never do.
What to do instead
Know the thresholds: curvature and refraction grow with the square of distance, so short sight lines tolerate omission while long ones do not. Similarly, compare ground distances to grid distances using the combined factor before reporting coordinates in a projected system, and state which distance you are reporting.
Confusing the minimum standards for a boundary survey with those for a location or topographic survey, and omitting required monumentation or record content.
Candidates learn standards as a list to memorize rather than as a checklist tied to survey type, so requirements get applied to the wrong product.
What to do instead
Build a one-page matrix of Maryland survey types against required elements: research, monumentation, ties, closure, plat content, signature and seal, and filing. Rehearse it until you can state, for a given scenario, exactly which items are mandatory.
Answering licensure and professional-responsibility questions from general ethics intuition rather than Maryland's specific statutes and board regulations.
The law questions look like common sense, so candidates skip the rule text and lose points on specifics such as responsible charge, firm registration, or mandatory reporting.
What to do instead
Study the actual statutory and regulatory language for competency, responsible charge, seals and signatures, continuing education, and discipline. For each rule, write the precise trigger and the precise obligation, then test yourself with scenario questions.
Skipping the research and records-retention obligations that attach to a survey, treating them as optional good practice.
Field and drafting tasks feel like the real work, and candidates underestimate how much of the exam tests documentation, deed and plat research, and retention of evidence.
What to do instead
Treat research and documentation as graded deliverables: know what must be researched, what must appear on the plat and in the file, and how long records must be kept. Practice writing a file memo that would let another surveyor retrace your steps without calling you.
Managing exam time by grinding on a single computation instead of marking it and moving on.
Computational items are seductive because progress feels close, and candidates burn minutes that later, easier questions needed.
What to do instead
Do a first pass answering everything you can in under a minute, flag the rest, then return with remaining time. Practice full-length timed sets so you learn your personal per-question budget and can abandon a stuck calculation without anxiety.