Source: http://slideplayer.com/slide/3893101/
Timestamp: 2017-09-20 13:29:52
Document Index: 175127494

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 389', 'art 3', 'art 3', '§ 752', '§ 2396', '§ 235', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 176', '§ 176', '§ 2115', '§ 772', '§ 6', '§ 772', '§ 5', '§ 5', '§ 5', '§ 6', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 772', 'arth 7']

The Manual of Surveying Instructions and the Modern Cadastre - ppt download
Published byIsaac Quick Modified over 2 years ago
Presentation on theme: "The Manual of Surveying Instructions and the Modern Cadastre"— Presentation transcript:
1 The Manual of Surveying Instructions and the Modern Cadastre
Presented by: Dominica Van Koten, BLM Chief Cadastral Surveyor Eastern States Office, Springfield, VA and Bob Dahl, BLM Cadastral Surveyor Division of Lands, Realty & Cadastral Survey Washington, DC Minnesota Society of Professional Surveyors 2009 Winter Workshop Minneapolis, MN December 11, 2009 Write down individual’s expectations on attending this presentation. November 16, 2009
2 Cadastre – Cadastral – Cadastral Survey
Agenda Cadastre – Cadastral – Cadastral Survey What is the Manual of Surveying Instructions? Why is the Manual relevant to Private, County, and State Surveyors in Minnesota? Very briefly: Cadastre – An official register of the quantity, value, location, and ownership of real estate used in apportioning taxes. Cadastral – Of or relating to a cadastre; showing or recording property boundaries, subdivision lines, buildings, and related details. Cadastral Survey – Creates (or reestablishes), marks, and defines boundaries of tracts of land, all subject to approval of the Director, Bureau of Land Management. Today we will discuss; "What is the Manual?" “What has been the role of the Manual?“ "How has the BLM developed the 2009 edition of the Manual?" "What role has the surveying and other interested communities played in the development of the 2009 edition of the Manual?" This presentation is centered around how the Manual is relevant to and affects the work of private, county, and state surveyors of Minnesota. We will discuss State statutes, and State case law; Federal statutes, Federal administrative law, Federal case law, and Federal policy, with reference to the Manual and Manual Supplements.
3 How is the Manual different from the 1973 edition?
Agenda How is the Manual different from the 1973 edition? How is the Manual the same as the 1973 edition? Certified Federal Surveyor (CFedS) Program Overview, Update, and Future Goals Also, how the Manual is different from the 1973 edition will be presented. And, how is the Manual the same as the 1973 edition. The Certified Federal Surveyor (CFedS) Program overview, update, and future goals.
4 Manual of Surveying Instructions? (Manual)
What is the Manual of Surveying Instructions? (Manual) Whom/What is affected? The Manual has implications to: Federal Authority (Official) Surveys; State Authority (Local) Surveys; Administrative Surveys; Registered Professional Land Surveyors; Cadastral Surveyors; Landowners; Legal Profession; Title Industry; Energy Industry; Others. There are three types of surveys: 1) Federal authority; 2) State authority; and 3) no authority. The Manual can be characterized as a collection of general instructions: A) Chasing the law. B) Stating the “law” (the rules). There is one set of foot steps to follow and two to follow and leave: (1) the original surveyor, (2) computational and (3) the legal. Currently there are 238 BLM surveyors and 50,000 Registered surveyors; most of the country has, is, and will always be surveyed by private and other non-Federal surveyors. The intended audience of the Manual is the Federal authority surveyor including: (1) The field surveyor; (2) The special instructions writer; (3) The survey reviewer; (4) The draftsperson; and (5) The Cadastral Chief. By State legislative, State administrative rules, State attorney general opinions, and/or State judicial action the intended audience can be anyone practicing land surveying in the State. Who is affected by the Manual? And how are they affected by the Manual? The Manual is part of a Covenant between the Federal Government and its citizens. Rule of Last Common Grantor - Within the Public Land Survey System (PLSS) states, every parcel boundary line that can trace its origin to a Federal patent or equivalent must be surveyed by the procedures and principles defined in the Manual. Every parcel of Federal interest lands in all 50 states may be surveyed based on Manual procedures and principles. Every parcel boundary that can trace its origin to a private contract must be surveyed by the procedures and principles defined by State law. Many States have incorporated the Manual by statute, regulation, &/or case law into their boundary location elements of intent, control, and law.
5 Relevant to the Private, County, and State Surveyor in Minnesota?
Why is the Manual Relevant to the Private, County, and State Surveyor in Minnesota? Why is the Manual relevant to the Private, County, and State Surveyor in Minnesota? The Manual is the survey rules for locating the corners and boundary lines of: Lands with public domain status, including Indian trust lands and Indian restricted fee lands, i.e., Federal lands that have never gone to patent; and Federal acquired lands and non-Federal lands, described by a Federal patent or based upon a Federal patent description. Typically the Manual is the rules for locating the corners and boundary lines of the described lands. There are two rules to survey by: (1) Federal and (2) State, i.e., source of law. There are two origins of land descriptions: (1) Federal and (2) non-Federal (private) Description example: “east-half” “west-half” – Source of Law - a) Federal; or b) State? Bona fide – Federal authority surveyors must work with “the where” first and just “the who” or “the what” as they pertain to the first. Role of Interior Board of Land Appeals; Delegation of Authority; Rule changes are prospective in application and generally are not applied retrospectively; and 8 three ring binders of Instruction Memorandums and Information Bulletins. Self Study – Read IBLA decisions.
6 In restoring lost or obliterated government corners
MINNESOTA STATUTES Chapter 389 County Surveyor Section 04 Rules for Surveys Minn. Stat. § In subdividing townships, sections, or parts of sections, established by the United States survey Minnesota Statutes; Counties, County Officers, Regional Authorities Chapter 389 County Surveyor Section 04 Rules for Surveys – Enacted in 1858; last amended in 1986. In all surveys the basis for the courses must be defined. In subdividing townships, sections, or parts of sections, as established by the United States survey thereof, and in restoring lost or obliterated government corners, the county surveyor shall follow the rules established by or pursuant to acts of Congress, and all such surveys shall be made in strict conformity to the original survey made by the United States. In restoring lost or obliterated government corners
7 MINNESOTA STATUTES Chapter 389 County Surveyor Section 04 Rules for Surveys Minn. Stat. § 389.04
The county surveyor shall follow the rules established by or pursuant to acts of Congress And all such surveys shall be made in strict conformity to the original survey made by the United States Minnesota Statutes; Counties, County Officers, Regional Authorities Chapter 389 County Surveyor Section 04 Rules for Surveys – Enacted in 1858; last amended in 1986. In subdividing townships, sections, or parts of sections, as established by the United States survey thereof, and in restoring lost or obliterated government corners, the county surveyor shall follow the rules established by or pursuant to acts of Congress, and all such surveys shall be made in strict conformity to the original survey made by the United States. How does the county surveyor learn what are the rules established by or pursuant to acts of Congress, and whether a survey is made in strict conformity to the original survey made by the United States? How does the Minnesota Court learn if a county surveyor’s survey does follow the rules established by or pursuant to acts of Congress, and is made in strict conformity to the original survey made by the United States?
8 Section 3505 Education and Experience
MINNESOTA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE Board of Architecture, Engineering, Land Surveying, Landscape Architecture, Geoscience, and Interior Design Chapter 1800 Licensing and Operation Section 3505 Education and Experience Minn. R Subpart 3 For admission to the PLS examination, a minimum of 160 hours of field experience, including section subdivision, boundary surveys, and government corner restoration Minnesota Administrative Code; Board of Architecture, Engineering, Land Surveying, Landscape Architecture, Geoscience, and Interior Design Chapter 1800 Licensing and Operation Section Education and Experience. Subpart 3. To qualify for admission to the professional land surveying examination, the applicant shall present evidence of meeting the educational and qualifying experience in item A or B. A. & B. – a minimum of 160 hours of field experience in each of four or more of the following: section subdivision, boundary surveys, land title surveys, government corner restoration, geodetic surveys, staking subdivisions, and common interest communities totaling 3,120 hours or more; Minnesota State Attorneys General’s Opinions – Searched only back to mid-1990s.
9 SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA Lawler v. Counties of Rice and Goodhue,
It is the established rule that the true corner of a government subdivision is where the United States surveyor established it, whether this location is right or wrong Supreme Court of Minnesota. Lawler v. Counties of Rice and Goodhue and Another, 147 Minn. 236, 238 (1920) “And it is established rule that the true corner of a government subdivision is where the United States surveyor established it, whether this location is right or wrong. Beardsley v. Crane, 52 Minn. 537.” “In the public land surveys the corners of government subdivisions are where the government surveyors correctly or mistakenly place them; and errors in their location cannot be corrected by the courts. Chan v. Brandt, 45 Minn. 93; Beardsley v. Crane, 52 Minn. 537; Beltz v. Mathiowitz, 72 Minn If their location can be determined, they control.” The Court used the term “competent evidence” in the evaluation of existent, obliterated, or lost corners. Why did the Court say the original corner controls? – The Act of 1805, i.e., 43 USC 752. And errors in their location cannot be corrected by the courts
10 SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA Cogan v. Cook, 22 Minn. 137 (1875)
When a deed designates the land conveyed as one of the United States survey subdivisions, the presumption is that the parties intended that the tract conveyed shall be ascertained in the same manner as it is ascertained in the governmental surveys Supreme Court of Minnesota Cogan v. Cook, 22 Minn. 137, 142 (1875) “When a deed designates the land conveyed as one or more of the sub-divisions known in the United States surveys, as if it be designated as a particular section, or half-section, quarter-section, or half-quarter, or quarter-quarter-section, the presumption is that the parties intended that the tract conveyed shall be ascertained in the same manner as the designated sub-division is ascertained in the governmental surveys.” Intent.
11 SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA Grandt v. Pokegama, 163 Minn. 368 (1925)
For the method to reestablish a lost corner, if the survey was to be governed by the United States survey, it is necessary to resort to the government rules in the Manual of Surveying Instructions Supreme Court of Minnesota. Grandt v. Pokegama, 163 Minn. 368 (1925) “The trial court properly concluded that, if this line is to be located by a survey, it is necessary to resort to the government rules applicable to finding a lost corner. This is a lost corner. Section 360, Advance Sheets Manual of Instructions for the Survey of the Public Lands of the United States (1919). The method of reestablishing a corner is governed by the rules of the general land office.” Page 369. “We are of the opinion that the trial court should have followed this method [double proportionate measurement] if he was to be governed by the [United States] survey.” Page 370.
12 SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA Lunz v. Sandmeier, 172 Minn. 338 (1927)
The center of section is the intersection of straight lines from the quarter corners 43 United States Code §§ 752 & 753 Supreme Court of Minnesota Lunz v. Sandmeier, 172 Minn. 338, 339 (1827) “1. The government does not establish the center of sections. The center is the intersection of a straight line from the quarter corner at the north to the quarter corner at the south with a straight line from the quarter corner at the east to the quarter corner at the west. R. S. §§ 2396 [43 USC 752], 2397 [43 USC 753]; Beardsley v. Crane, 52 Minn ” Two local center ¼ section corners.
13 Minnesota Land Surveyors Association
Public Land Survey in Minnesota State statutes state that the section subdivision methods follow the rules of the Federal Government Subdivision by survey of descriptions which are Federal in origin must follow Federal method down to the smallest size sold Public Land Survey in Minnesota Prepared by Jesse E. Fant, Department of Civil Engineering – University of Minnesota, in cooperation with Minnesota Land Surveyors Association (February 1970) Page 3. The Minnesota statutes state that the section subdivision methods in Minnesota follow the rules for subdivision of the Federal government. Page 9. For descriptions which are Federal patents Minnesota follow the Federal method. Page 24. “The subdivision by survey of federal lands must follow federal regulations down to the smallest size sold.” Page 25. For patentee descriptions which are subject to Federal statutes: “The rules for subdividing the section into two halves, four quarters, eight half-quarters or sixteen quarter-quarters were established by the Federal Government when the statutes for the sale of such parcels become law. The patentee (or others later) who obtained title to part of the legal subdivision of a section is entitled to the exact ground area that his description fits on the record township plat as defined by the monuments on the ground.” Common Grantor
14 Minnesota Land Surveyors Association
Public Land Survey in Minnesota For patentee descriptions which are subject to Federal statutes: “The rules for subdividing the section into two halves, four quarters, eight half-quarters or sixteen quarter-quarters were established by the Federal Government when the statutes for the sale of such parcels become law.” Public Land Survey in Minnesota Prepared by Jesse E. Fant, Department of Civil Engineering – University of Minnesota, in cooperation with Minnesota Land Surveyors Association (February 1970) Page 3. The Minnesota statutes state that the section subdivision methods in Minnesota follow the rules for subdivision of the Federal government. Page 9. For descriptions which are Federal patents Minnesota follow the Federal method. Page 24. “The subdivision by survey of federal lands must follow federal regulations down to the smallest size sold.” Page 25. For patentee descriptions which are subject to Federal statutes: “The rules for subdividing the section into two halves, four quarters, eight half-quarters or sixteen quarter-quarters were established by the Federal Government when the statutes for the sale of such parcels become law. The patentee (or others later) who obtained title to part of the legal subdivision of a section is entitled to the exact ground area that his description fits on the record township plat as defined by the monuments on the ground.” Common Grantor
15 Minnesota Land Surveyors Association
Public Land Survey in Minnesota “The patentee (or others later) who obtained title to part of the legal subdivision of a section is entitled to the exact ground area that his description fits on the record township plat as defined by the monuments on the ground.” Public Land Survey in Minnesota Prepared by Jesse E. Fant, Department of Civil Engineering – University of Minnesota, in cooperation with Minnesota Land Surveyors Association (February 1970) Page 3. The Minnesota statutes state that the section subdivision methods in Minnesota follow the rules for subdivision of the Federal government. Page 9. For descriptions which are Federal patents Minnesota follow the Federal method. Page 24. “The subdivision by survey of federal lands must follow federal regulations down to the smallest size sold.” Page 25. For patentee descriptions which are subject to Federal statutes: “The rules for subdividing the section into two halves, four quarters, eight half-quarters or sixteen quarter-quarters were established by the Federal Government when the statutes for the sale of such parcels become law. The patentee (or others later) who obtained title to part of the legal subdivision of a section is entitled to the exact ground area that his description fits on the record township plat as defined by the monuments on the ground.” Common Grantor
16 SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA
Chan v. Brandt, 45 Minn. 93 (1890) All subdivisional lines of a section must be run in accordance with the acts of Congress and rules of the Land Department Boundaries, as established by the government surveyors and returned to and accepted by the government are (1) unchangeable and (2) control the description of lands patented Supreme Court of Minnesota. Chan v. Brandt, 45 Minn. 93 (1890) “In accordance with the acts of congress and rules of the land department, all subdivisional lines of a section must be straight lines running from the proper corner in one exterior line to the proper corner in the opposite exterior line of the section as established in the original survey.” Page 94. “The boundaries, as established by the government surveyors and returned to and accepted by the government, are unchangeable, and control the description of lands patented.” Page 94.
17 SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA
Chan v. Brandt, 45 Minn. 93 (1890) Mistakes in the government surveys cannot be corrected by the State or Federal judicial department State statutes are inoperative when they come in conflict with the rules established by Congress for subdividing sections Supreme Court of Minnesota. Chan v. Brandt, 45 Minn. 93 (1890) “And it is well settled that mistakes in the surveys cannot be corrected by the judicial department of the government. Cragin v. Powell, 128 U.S. 691.” Page 94. “It is very clear, as remarked by the court in Haydel v. Dufresne, 58 U.S. 23, that “great confusion and much litigation would ensue if judicial tribunals, state and federal, were permitted to interfere and overthrow the public surveys.”” Page 94. “The state statute (Gen. St. 1878, c. 8 § 235) is inoperative when it comes in conflict with the rules established by the acts of congress for subdividing sections.” Page 95.
18 SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA
Chan v. Brandt, 45 Minn. 93 (1890) Lines established in conformity with the government survey will control And The rights of parties who purchase according to the government survey cannot be affected by the act of the legislature Supreme Court of Minnesota. Chan v. Brandt, 45 Minn. 93 (1890) “And when lines can be run and established in conformity with the government survey, as ascertained by fixed monuments, corners, and distances, they will control, and the rights of parties who purchase according to the government survey cannot be affected by the act of the legislature. Neff v. Paddock, 26 Wis. 546.” Page 95.
19 UNITED STATES CODE Title 43 Public Lands § 2
The Secretary of the Interior or such officer as he may designate (BLM) shall perform all executive duties appertaining to the surveying and sale of the public lands of the United States Now lets talk about the Federal governance regime (administration, management, organization and system) for survey rules. United States Code Title 43 Public Lands § 2. Duties concerning public lands The Secretary of the Interior or such officer as he may designate shall perform all executive duties appertaining to the surveying and sale of the public lands of the United States, or in anywise respecting such public lands, and, also, such as relate to private claims of land, and the issuing of patents for all grants of land under the authority of the Government. R.S. § Derived from Acts of April 25, 1812, 2 Stat. 716; July 4, 1836, 5 Stat. 107; June 6, 1874, 18 Stat. 62; February 18, 1875, 18 Stat. 317. This statute got the Secretary of War and the Secretary of State out of the surveys of the public lands created the Commissioner of the General Land Office (later the Secretary of the Interior and the Director of the BLM) and put the Commissioner in charge. Why was the Manual created? Where does the Manual of Surveying Instructions come from? Who created the Manual?
20 Other Federal Laws – Containing Survey Rules –
The Federal Survey Rules Title 43 U.S.C. §§ , 772, 773, 1737(c) 43 USC – The rules for survey; enacted in 1796, 1805, 1820 and 1832. The General Resurvey Act of March 3, 1909 (43 U.S.C. 772; 35 Stat. 845; as amended by the Act of June 25, 1910, 36 Stat. 884; and by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of October 21, 1976, 90 Stat. 2743, 2792): The Secretary of the Interior may cause to be made, resurveys of public lands and of privately owned lands: Provided, That no such resurvey shall be so executed as to impair the bona fide rights or claims of any claimant, entryman, or owner of lands affected by such resurvey. The Act of September 21, 1918 (43 U.S.C. 773; 40 Stat. 965) as amended, authorizing the Secretary to resurvey privately owned lands. 43 U.S.C. 1737(c) authorizing the Secretary of the Interior to accept contributions for cadastral surveying performed on federally controlled or intermingled lands (Public Lands Administration Act of 1960). Why was the Manual created? Where does the instructions come from? Who created the Manual?
21 UNITED STATES CODE Title 25 Indians § 176
Whenever it becomes necessary to survey any Indian lands, the same shall be surveyed under the direction and control of the BLM And as nearly as may be in conformity to the rules and regulations under which other public lands are surveyed United States Code Title 25 Indians § 176. Survey of reservations Whenever it becomes necessary to survey any Indian or other reservations, or any lands, the same shall be surveyed under the direction and control of the Bureau of Land Management, and as nearly as may be in conformity to the rules and regulations under which other public lands are surveyed. Codifications R.S. § 2115 was from Act of April 8, 1864, 13 Stat. 41. This got the Secretary of War and the Secretary of State out of the surveys of Indian lands and put the surveys within the Department of the Interior, under the direction and control of one official, the Commissioner of the General Land Office and his successor, the Director, Bureau of Land Management.
22 INTERIOR BOARD OF LAND APPEALS Howard Vagneur, 159 IBLA 272 (2003)
1) BLM is authorized to resurvey the corners and lines of government surveys 2) BLM Survey Manual defines a resurvey Interior Board of Land Appeals – Howard Vagneur, 159 IBLA 272 (2003) [1] Pursuant to the Act of March 3, 1909, as amended, 43 U.S.C. § 772 (2000), BLM, as the delegate of the Secretary of the Interior, is authorized to resurvey the public lands in order to reestablish the corners and thus the lines established by earlier official surveys. John W. Yeargan, 126 IBLA at A dependent resurvey is designed to retrace and reestablish the lines of the original survey, marking the boundaries of the legal subdivisions of the public lands, in their "true original positions." Survey Manual, § 6-4, at 145; see John W. Yeargan, 126 IBLA at 362. It therefore places the lines in the same position on the earth's surface that they have occupied since the date of the original survey, thus protecting the bona fide rights of private landowners and their successors-in-interest, whose property boundaries are tied to the original lines, even when the original survey may have been poorly or erroneously executed. United States v. Doyle, 468 F.2d 633, 636 (10th Cir. 1972); see 43 U.S.C. § 772 (2000); Sweeten v. U.S. Department of Agriculture, 684 F.2d 679, 682 (10th Cir. 1982); Adams v. United States, 687 F. Supp. 1479, (D. Nev. 1988, aff'd in part, rev'd, vacated, and remanded in part on other grounds, 3 F.3d 1254 (9th Cir. 1993); John W. Yeargan, 126 IBLA at , 370. 3) Manual defines “existent” “obliterated” and “lost” corners
23 INTERIOR BOARD OF LAND APPEALS Howard Vagneur, 159 IBLA 272 (2003)
4) Manual provides guidance to surveyors on how to base a resurvey on the “best available evidence” 5) BLM Official Surveys are presumed regular Interior Board of Land Appeals – Howard Vagneur, 159 IBLA 272 (2003) [1] We have long recognized that original lines are to be reestablished under a dependent resurvey by recovering or restoring the original corners by any of three methods, in descending order of importance. John W. Yeargan, 126 IBLA at 363. First, an "existent" or "found" corner can be recovered by finding evidence of the monument and/or its accessories. Survey Manual, § 5-5, at 130. Second, an "obliterated" corner, where there are no remaining traces of the monument or its accessories, can be recovered where the corner's location has been perpetuated or where other acceptable evidence establishes its location. Survey Manual, § 5-9, at 130. Third, where a corner cannot be considered existent or obliterated based on substantial evidence regarding its location, it will be regarded as a "lost corner" to be restored by reference to one or more interdependent corners by the method of proportionate measurement. Survey Manual, §§ 5-20 and 5-21, at 133; James O. Steambarge, 116 IBLA 185, 191 (1990) When a dependent resurvey is performed 100 years or more after the original survey, the location of original corners must be based on the "best evidence available of the positions of the original corners" at the time of the resurvey. Survey Manual, § 6-4, at 145; see J.M. Beard (On Rehearing), 52 I.D. 451, 453 (1928). An appellant who challenges a BLM dependent resurvey prior to the official filing of the resurvey plat bears the burden on appeal of establishing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the resurvey is not an accurate retracement and reestablishment of the lines of the original survey. John W. Yeargan, 126 IBLA at 363. 6) An accurate retracement and reestablishment of the lines of the original survey
24 United States Supreme Court
It is settled law that the United States may survey what it owns and thereby establish and reestablish boundaries, but what the government does in this regard is for its own information and cannot affect the rights of owners on the other side of an existing boundary. United States v. State Investment Co., 264 U.S. 206, 212 (1924), citing Lane v. Darlington, 249 U.S. 331, 333 (1919). United States Supreme Court It is settled law that the United States may survey what it owns and thereby establish and reestablish boundaries, but what the government does in this regard is for its own information and cannot affect the rights of owners on the other side of an existing boundary. United States v. State Investment Co., 264 U.S. 206, 212 (1924), citing Lane v. Darlington, 249 U.S. 331, 333 (1919). The principle here is – Where there is not an existing boundary of another’s interest, the government can mark its land, plat its land, describe its land, convey its land, by its own rules. However, it cannot affect the rights of the owners on the other side of an existing boundary. Is this principle applicable to the State of Minnesota? Q. – If you believe yes, where would you go to determine how this principle has been invoked? A. - The State governance regime of State statutes, regulations, and case law for survey rules. What would be the alternative if the State did not develop their own governance regime for survey rules? (CHASING THE LAW? OR MAKING THE LAW?) The usage of the Federal governance regime; there is ONE set of survey rules. The Resurvey Acts of 1909 and 1918 as amended: The Secretary of the Interior may cause to be made, resurveys of public lands and of privately owned lands: Provided, That no such resurvey shall be so executed as to impair the bona fide rights or claims of any claimant, entryman, or owner of lands affected by such resurvey. 43 U.S.C. 772; Act of March 3, 1909, 35 Stat. 845; as amended by the Act of June 25, 1910, 36 Stat. 884; and by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of October 21, 1976, 90 Stat. 2743, 2792. 43 U.S.C. 773; Act of September 21, 1918, 40 Stat. 965. 43 U.S.C. 1737(c); FLPMA, 90 Stat. 2743, 2766; 43 U.S.C. 1364(a); (Formerly The Public Land Administrative Act of July 14, 1960; 74 Stat. 506; and repealed by FLPMA).
25 MANUAL The Manual of Surveying Instructions describes how cadastral surveys are made in conformance with statutory law and its judicial interpretation. (2009 Manual § 1-3.) The Director of the Bureau of Land Management has the authority to determine what lands are Federal interest lands, what lands have been surveyed, what are to be surveyed, what have been disposed of, what remains to be disposed of, and what are reserved. (2009 Manual § 1-15.) The Manual - Purpose and Scope of the Manual 2009 Manual § The Manual of Surveying Instructions describes how cadastral surveys are made in conformance with statutory law and its judicial interpretation. 2009 Manual § The Director of the Bureau of Land Management has the authority to determine what lands are Federal interest lands, what lands have been surveyed, what are to be surveyed, what have been disposed of, what remains to be disposed of, and what are reserved.
26 What percentage of Minnesota has been surveyed by the PLSS?
What percentage of Minnesota has been surveyed by the Public Land Survey System? Under Federal survey rules? Most of it by the Rectangular Survey System. 100% of the townships?
27 SUMMARY By fundamental law, upon the issuance of a patent for land by the Federal government; it is just as if the monuments, survey plat and field notes, and the laws, regulations and rules governing how to survey the land described in the patent, are attached to the face of the patent. SUMMARY By fundamental law, upon the issuance of a patent for land by the Federal government; it is just as if the monuments, survey plat and field notes, the laws, regulations, and rules governing how to survey the land described in the patent, are attached to the face of the patent. Cragin v. Powell, 128 U.S. 691 (1888). The survey rules are spelled out in the manuals, circulars, instructions and regulations issued by the General Land Office and its successor the Bureau of Land Management. If later a boundary location becomes unclear the Manual is the guidance (the rules) governing the relocation of the corners and boundaries in conformance to the controlling monuments, survey plat(s), field notes, policies, regulations and laws. The survey rules are spelled out in the manuals, circulars, instructions and regulations issued by the GLO and BLM.
28 Chapter Crosswalk 1973 Edition 2009 Manual Ch. 1 - The General Plan
Ch Methods of Survey Ch The System of….. Ch Monumentation Ch Lost or Obliterated Corners Ch Resurveys Ch Special Surveys and Instructions Ch. 8 -	Field Notes Ch. 9 -	Plats Ch Mineral Surveys Ch The General Plan Ch Methods of Survey Ch The System of….. Ch Monumentation Ch Principles of Resurveys Ch Resurveys and Evidence Ch Resurveys and Restoration Ch. 8 -	Water Boundaries Ch. 9 -	Special Instructions…….. Ch Special Surveys and Mineral Surveys 2009 Edition Chapter III – The System of Rectangular Surveys (& 1973 edition) Chapter VIII – Resurveys and Water Boundaries Chapter IX – Special Instructions, Field Notes, and Plats Chapter II – Hopefully teachers of future surveyors will teach the Public Land Survey System (PLSS) Datum to their students.
29 Change – Clarification - Addition
Areas of: Change – Clarification - Addition Water boundaries Standard of evidence Coordinates as collateral evidence Measurement technology Mineral survey resurveys Closing corners Bona fide rights & good faith location Water boundaries Standard of evidence Coordinates as collateral evidence Measurement Technology Mineral survey resurveys Closing corners Bona fide rights and good faith location The PLSS is evolving. Never before has the PLSS had 150 year old GLO surveys with over 100 years of improvements up to the boundaries; 100 years of river movement after the patent survey with 50 years of valuable improvements; 90 year old erroneous GLO resurveys.
30 Water Boundaries Chapters III and VIII
Chapter III includes concepts and case studies of original surveys and water boundaries. Chapter VIII includes concepts and case studies of resurveys and water boundaries. Navigability determinations. Submerged lands issues. Ownership of unsurveyed islands in meandered nonnavigable waters. Sections through and chapter 8. Case studies. Special Minnesota Federal statute – Minnesota Public Lands Improvement Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 1020).
31 Standard of Evidence Interior Board of Land Appeals (IBLA) has altered the evidentiary standard for proof of a corner point: “beyond reasonable doubt” replaced with “substantial evidence” (More than a scintilla, but less than a preponderance) Existent – Obliterated - Lost corner definitions use “substantial evidence” standard. 2009 Edition An existent corner is one whose original position can be identified by substantial evidence of the monument or its accessories, by reference to the description in the field notes, or located by an acceptable supplemental survey record, some physical evidence, or reliable testimony. A corner is existent (or found) if such conclusion is supported by substantial evidence. The substantial evidence standard of proof is such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. Substantial evidence is more than a scintilla of evidence but less than a preponderance of the evidence. Even though its physical evidence may have entirely disappeared, a corner must not be regarded as lost, but as obliterated, if its position can be recovered through the reliable testimony of one or more witnesses who have dependable knowledge of the original position. Later marks or records which tied to the original monument or its accessories when still present, may identify the position of an obliterated corner. Such evidence should provide a direct relationship to some identifying feature described in the original survey record. An obliterated corner is an existent corner where, at the corner’s original position, there are no remaining traces of the monument or its accessories but whose position has been perpetuated, or the point for which may be recovered, by substantial evidence from the acts or reliable testimony of the interested landowners, competent surveyors, other qualified local authorities, or witnesses, or by some acceptable record evidence. An obliterated corner position can be proven by substantial direct or collateral evidence. When both categories of evidence exist, direct evidence will be given more weight than collateral evidence. A position that depends upon the use of collateral evidence can be accepted only as duly supported, generally through proper relation to known corners, and agreement with the field notes regarding distances to natural objects, stream crossings, line trees, and off-line tree blazes, etc., or reliable testimony. Collateral evidence must include some component that relates to the position of the original survey corner, including measurement evidence, historical record, testimony, or any reasonable tie. 7-2. A lost corner is one whose original position cannot be determined by substantial evidence, either from traces of the original marks or from acceptable evidence or reliable testimony that bears upon the original position, and whose location can be restored only by reference to one or more interdependent corners. Thus, if substantial evidence of the position of the original corner exists, it is an existent or obliterated corner. This position shall be employed in preference to applying the rule that would be proper only in the case of a lost corner. In addition, once a corner is considered lost, it is the surveyor’s responsibility to assure that the restoration method and the restored position comply with the statutory protection of bona fide rights requirements delineated in 43 U.S.C. 772 and 773 and as described in this Manual.
32 Coordinates as Collateral Evidence
Repeatable coordinates may be the best available evidence for the position of an original corner; therefore it is an obliterated corner not a lost corner Advancement in Technology, enabling quick generation of precise and repeatable coordinates, has lead to many corner positions being “witnessed” by coordinates. Section 2-34. Presumably any point can be reestablished once its coordinates have been determined. However, great care must be exercised to ensure that the original coordinate pairs were produced by a process that is repeatable within a quantifiable accuracy standard. Repeatable coordinates may provide collateral evidence of a corner position; may constitute the best available evidence of a corner position; and in some cases, may constitute substantial evidence of the position of an obliterated corner. Following in the computational footsteps. Obliterated corner not a lost corner.
33 Coordinates as Collateral Evidence
“…if the first surveyor documents how he or she obtained the coordinates so the second surveyor can, within an acceptable degree of confidence, determine the same point on the earth's surface (following in the computational footsteps) within an acceptable level of certainty, then coordinates may be the best available evidence of the corner position.” Advancement in Technology, enabling quick generation of precise and repeatable coordinates, has lead to many corner positions being “witnessed” by coordinates. Section 2-34. Presumably any point can be reestablished once its coordinates have been determined. However, great care must be exercised to ensure that the original coordinate pairs were produced by a process that is repeatable within a quantifiable accuracy standard. Repeatable coordinates may provide collateral evidence of a corner position; may constitute the best available evidence of a corner position; and in some cases, may constitute substantial evidence of the position of an obliterated corner. Following in the computational footsteps. Obliterated corner not a lost corner.
34 Measurement Technology Change in Principal
The next edition is largely technology independent. How the surveyor determines the relationship between point A and point B (measurement procedures; what instrumentation is used) will be determined for each survey from the best available technology to meet the purpose of that survey. How to measure is better handled by special instructions. Chapter 2. The focus of the Manual is on “how to” determine what is point A and point B, and NOT on how to develop the spatial relationship between point A and point B.
35 Mineral Survey Resurveys
Expanded instructions for mineral survey resurveys, mineral leasing surveys, and mineral segregation surveys. Incorporates much that is in the BLM publication Mineral Survey Procedures Guide. Sections through Sequential conveyances v. simultaneous conveyances. Mineral Leasing Act of 1920. General Mining Act of 1872.
36 Closing Corners Policy Clarification
For treatment of closing corners, the Manual instructs the surveyor to determine how an existing closing corner was established. In some older surveys, the policy was to establish junior corners without a careful retracement of the senior line. In these cases, a recovered junior corner not actually located on the line that in was intended should not control the line for measurement or alinement. The new junior corner will be positioned in a cardinal direction, north or south on a latitudinal line, or, east or west on a meridional line, from the original junior corner onto the line intended. These new junior corners are established after a retracement of the line. A junior corner established without a retracement of the senior line ordinarily is not used as a control corner in restoring a lost senior corner. However, where an obviously careful retracement of the senior line has been made and the field notes state clearly that new monuments were set on the line, the monuments become the best available evidence of the position of the senior line. In such a case the junior corners will exercise control for both measurement and alinement of the line to the same extent as closing corners (section 7-41). In older surveys the usual policy was to establish closing corners without a retracement of the line closed upon. The corners were established with a tie in one direction only and set at record bearing. In these cases, a recovered closing corner not actually located on the line that was closed upon will determine the direction of the closing line, but not its legal terminus. The correct position is at the true point of intersection of the two lines. Closing corners and other corners at an intersection of two lines or at the termination of one line on another are established after a retracement of the line closed upon.
37 Closing Corners Policy Clarification
A corner, no matter what it has been called in the official record, (closing corner, junior corner, crossing closing corner, intersection point, or corner of minimum control) established during an obviously careful retracement of the intersected, senior, or existing line, can be accepted in place, and may be an angle point in the intersected, senior, or existing line. A closing corner established without a retracement of the line closed upon ordinarily is not used as a control corner in restoring a lost corner of the line closed upon. However, where an obviously careful retracement of a line has been made and the field notes state clearly that new monuments were set at the true points of intersection, the monuments become the best available evidence of the position of the line. In such a case the closing corners will exercise control for both measurement and alinement of the line to the same extent as corners of a junior survey (section 7-23). If an obviously careful retracement of the two intersecting lines has been made, and the field notes state clearly that a monument (corner of minimum control, closing corner, crossing closing corner, or point of intersection) was set at the true point of intersection, the monumented corner is the best available evidence of the position of both lines. As such, the monumented corner will exercise control for both measurement and alinement of both lines . If a retracement of the intersected line indicates a closing corner purportedly set at the true point of intersection is substantially off that line, it will be moved to the intersection position and the existing monument will be dealt with as described in section 7-45.
38 Bona Fide Rights and Good Faith Location
Before we get carried away with these doctrines: A landowner's bona fide belief concerning the boundary between his land and Federal interest land is not the same as a bona fide right that must be protected in a survey under 43 U.S.C. § Although a person may have a bona fide belief, based on an understanding with a predecessor-in-interest that a fence marks a boundary, a bona fide right within the meaning of 43 U.S.C. § 772 is based on good faith reliance on evidence of the original survey. Tracy v. Rylee, 174 IBLA 239 (2008). Cases will arise where lands have been occupied in good faith, but whose boundaries as occupied disagree with the position of the legal subdivision called for in the description. A landowner’s bona fide belief concerning the boundary location is not the same as a bona fide right within the meaning of 43 U.S.C A bona fide right within the meaning of 43 U.S.C. 772 is based on good faith reliance on evidence of the original survey . Obviously, under these facts the rule of good faith as to location cannot apply. This is not a survey issue but a title issue and relief must be sought through the process of amended entry, correction of conveyance document under 43 U.S.C. 1746, quiet title action, tentative approval relinquishment, or interim conveyance reconveyance or relinquishment to cover the legal subdivisions actually earned, rather than through an alteration of the position of established lines. This is a process of adjudication rather than one of resurvey. A case of this character should be regarded as erroneous location in precisely the same manner as if the question of resurvey were not involved. The amendment of entries is a matter for adjudication by the BLM after the resurvey has been accepted and the plats officially filed.
39 BLM Survey Manual Website
Federal Land Records BLM Eastern States Office (703) Move into the resources available to keep track of the Manual and related information. Revisit expectations.
Download ppt "The Manual of Surveying Instructions and the Modern Cadastre"
Ppt on classical economics theory Ppt on online exam system in java Ppt on world population day 2011 Download ppt on pulse code modulation pcm Ppt on body language training Ppt on power system stability definition Ppt on ministry of corporate affairs govt Ppt on as 14 amalgamation process Ppt on natural and artificial satellites around earth 7 segment led display ppt on ipad