Pub. 12 2017 Issue 1

www.ucls.org 22 Issue 1 2017 / UCLS Foresights SALT LAKE STORE 612 Confluence Ave Murray UT 84123 (801)262-0066 Sales, Service Supplies and Rental www.rmtlaser.com (801)262-0066 Rocky Mountain Transit has been serving Utah and Nevada for over 25 years. We are a full line Topcon Machine Control and Survey Dealer. We also proudly represent products from Spectra Precision, Leica, Seco, PLS, Aervoe and many more. From flagging and paint to Machine Control and 3D Laser Scanning, our Professional Sales staff has you covered! Congress considered this obligation when crafting the Alaska Statehood Act. Sec. 6 (g) of the Act outlined the minimum size re - quirements for state selections and mandated that the Secretary of the Interior survey the exterior boundaries of the selection without interior subdivision.1 The historic documents provided to the committee indicate that im - mediately after statehood in 1959, the survey requirements for state selected land were a subject of vigorous dispute between the BLM and the State of Alaska. In 1960, the BLM sur - veyed and platted the boundaries of seven state selections comprising all or portions of Townships 23 and 24 North, Ranges 4, 5 and 6 West, Seward Meridian as part of Group 100, Alaska. The State of Alaska protested the sur- vey and patent as a violation of Section 6(g) of the Alaska Statehood Act. As recently as the 2012 memorandum of understanding (MOU) between BLM and DNR, the BLM stated “Regardless of the platting method it uses, the BLM agrees to monu - ment the boundaries of lands it conveys to the State. Monuments will be placed on an aver- age of every two miles along the perimeter of the selection and at angle points.” The historic documents are clear as to the surveying and monumentation methods to be used for state-selected lands: “… in units of full townships and monumentation at an average of two miles around the perimeter.” This practice did not arise fromMOUs with the State, but fromHouse Report 551 in 1963. BLM has stated that “... a cadastral sur - vey completed using DPPS methods meets the Federal Government’s survey obliga- tions for SOA selected lands under the Alaska Statehood Act.” In fact, the DPPS proposal before us looks very much like the methods and practice that led Alaska to protest plats prepared by BLM in 1960. BLM proposes to use DPPS methods to survey and plat as much as 20 million acres of the State’s remaining entitlement. The committee considered the implications of DPPS methods on commonly accepted survey and boundary law principles and on the institutions that will enforce these principles: state courts. Coordinates as Monuments It is important to note the legal definition of “corner” in relationship to “monument”. A corner is a point on the surface of the earth. In the current discussion, a corner refers to a subdivision point within the PLSS. A mon - ument refers to the physical evidence of a corner’s location. Courts of competent jurisdiction have generally held that in order for a conveyance to be valid it must contain sufficient cer - tainty of location. Surveying technology has outpaced the court’s acceptance of meth- odology that is at odds with the currently established priority of evidence. Courts have long recognized the current ranking, which places monuments, natural and artificial, at the top. Coordinates are often ranked near the bottom. DPPS would fundamentally change this ranking. Survey for Conveyance of State Lands Originally Platted by DPPS Methods Once the DPPS plat is recorded and the lands are conveyed to the State of Alaska, sur- veys are performed under the authority of the State of Alaska. Current State of Alaska statutes and regulations related to survey methods are appropriate where monuments exist, at a