Mineral Survey Procedures Guide, 1980

by Unknown

Departures from the Normal Procedure

5–16 Cancellation of Surveys: A patented mineral survey may never be cancelled. An unpatented mineral survey may be cancelled only after the claim has been declared null and void or relinquished by the claimant; then it need not be cancelled until it is necessary to do so to accommodate an entry or administrative action. It can be cancelled only by the officer of the Bureau of Land Management authorized to approve mineral surveys.

In the past, claims could be declared null and void only after a successful contest had been brought against the claim. After October 21, 1979, claims must be recorded with the Bureau of Land Management within 90 days of the location date or they will automatically be deemed to have been abandoned and void.

The procedure is as follows: When the Chief, Branch of Cadastral Surveys of the State Office is notified that a claim has been declared null and void, a notation to that effect should be made on the plat of survey (or if the plat is in the archives, it may be made on the card index). No further action is necessary at this time; the survey is not cancelled.

Cancellation becomes necessary if an entry or administrative action, including a survey or resurvey, involves the land embraced in the mineral survey. Current Form 3860–4, Approval of Mineral Survey, may be used to cancel the survey and to notify the Director of the Bureau of Land Management and any other interested parties substituting the word “cancelled” or “cancellation” for approval or it may be by memorandum.

Should a supplemental plat be required to lot the area embraced in the survey, a certified set of the field notes of the survey and the mineral survey plat should accompany the plat to Washington, as they do not have the field notes of unpatented mineral surveys. The field notes of the cancelled survey becomes the basis for the new lot designation. The Director’s memoranda of July 14, 1958 and November 17, 1960, cover the subject.

5–17 Unapproved Survey: Occasionally an order for survey will be cancelled and it is not known how far the mineral surveyor has proceeded with the field work and what corners have been set and marked. In no case should the corners be removed as they still serve as corners of the location which may be perfectly valid. The survey number should not be re-used inasmuch as it will serve to identify the corners on the ground.

5–18 Additional Notes and Certificate on Plat: In the past, additional notes were sometimes prepared from the existing record along with amendment to the plat in red ink and accompanying certificate when there was an omission of a conflict with an agricultural or other patent, a pending entry or an adverse claim.

For example: A survey was approved without showing the conflict with a legal subdivision that had been included in a preemption homestead. The subdivision was protracted on the mineral survey plat from the township survey, based on the section corner tie given in the mineral survey, intersections given with the boundaries of the subdivision, and an area of conflict calculated. All plats were recalled for the amendment. The additional notes were written, in triplicate, by the cadastral surveyor, to show only the lines of the mineral survey involved in the conflict, giving the intersections. The area statement was rewritten to the extent necessary to show the area of conflict.

The same procedure was followed if an adverse claim was to be excluded on the basis of the description in its location certificate. Red ink was used on the plats to distinguish the amendment, but black ink was used if the certificate specifically stated the extent of the amendment.

Most offices now resolve the above situations solely through a memorandum process.

5–19 Amended Surveys and Amended Plats: This is occasioned by an error in the original survey that is not discovered until after the survey is approved, or for the same reasons listed in 5–18 above, where the amendment cannot be made from the existing record and additional field work is required. The claimant may also request an amended survey. The claimant bears the cost. Example: In Survey No. 19202A-Am. Colorado, the wrong claim was included in the survey. The correct claim was included in the amended survey which covered the same ground.

5–20 A new survey is required if the claim boundaries are changed by amendment after the original survey is approved. Section 10–62, page 226 of the Manual of Surveying Instructions states: “An amended survey must be made in strict conformity with, or be embraced within the lines of the original survey.” A new survey is also required where the claim has been abandoned and relocated by another.

5–21 Expenditure of $500 After the Survey is Approved: Supplemental notes based on a supplemental order for survey, either to the original mineral surveyor or another mineral surveyor, must be submitted and attached to the original field notes. The supplemental notes must contain a full description of all improvements. If the additional expenditure applies only to one claim of a group, only the expenditures of that claim need to be recited. Current Form 3860–8, Certificate of Expenditures, must be executed and attached to the claimant’s copy of the notes for filing with the patent application.

5–22 If patent is applied for long after the survey was approved, a statement from the Chief, Branch of Cadastral Survey, will be required by the Branch of Land and Minerals to the effect that the plat correctly shows all conflicts, or listing the later surveys with which a conflict exists.

If later surveys did not exclude the survey in question, the plat will be returned by the Branch of Land and Minerals for amendment, and amended notes will have to be written. If the applicant is not the same as the claimant shown at the time of the survey, he is entitled to use the survey provided he can show a chain of title. If he does not have the necessary plats and notes, the Branch of Cadastral Survey will supply him with the necessary copies. The claimant bears all costs.

5–23 Occasions have arisen where a claim or survey excluded from the patent is later abandoned. A supplemental application for patent may be made for the excluded ground. The procedure to be followed is the same as given in 5–22 above. Copies of the plats, including those for posting and the notes must be furnished the applicant.

5–24 Patent Applied for in Two Parts: When only a part of the claims of a survey are applied for and patented, and later application for patent is made for the remaining claims, a copy of the plat, or if the plat is in more than one sheet, the sheets showing the claim, must be posted, and a copy, together with a transcript of that portion of the field notes pertaining to the claims, filed with the Branch of Lands and Minerals at the time the supplemental application for patent is made. If not all sheets of the plat are used, be sure that the ones used show all ties and pertinent information.

CHAPTER VI
Resurveys

6–1 Restoration of Lost Corners: There is no hard and fast rule for establishing missing corners of mining claims. The method should be selected that will give the best results, bearing in mind that end lines should remain substantially parallel. Ordinarily, the mineral surveyor should not remonument a restored corner; at least, it should not be done without the full knowledge and approval of the owner. A cadastral surveyor may remonument a corner if it is necessary to delineate the boundary between public and private land. As with all lost corners, the corner of a mineral survey should be reestablished from the best available evidence and in such a configuration that will place the lines as nearly as possible to their original position. The ties to bearing trees and objects should be used first. In fact, if such accessories are present the corner is not lost.

Second in order of preference is the use of short ties to or from adjoining surveys. A word of caution in using other mineral survey ties: In Colorado, and presumably in other states, there was a period where the short ties to conflicting surveys were calculated through the section corner tie. Such calculated ties should not be used. This period is not exactly known, but it ran approximately from 1898 to April 28, 1904. If a report of other surveys was contained in the field notes, the ties were not calculated. At the end of this period, it can be determined if calculations were used. It is not so easy to distinguish between the methods of survey at the beginning of the period since it was not customary to report on other surveys. In any event, the short tie should not be used unless the corner tied to (or from) is recovered. If no corners can be found, the section corner tie may be used, but it is the tie of last resort. In such cases, all lines are shown as approved.

In Figure 7, several conditions are illustrated. In situation A, only one corner is recovered, no other corners or accessories can be found nor are there any short ties available. In the absence of further collateral evidence, the three missing corners must be reestablished at record bearings and distances from the recovered Corner No. 1.

In situation B, Corners Nos. 1 and 2 can be recovered. Lines 4–1 and 2–3 should be shown at the record distance, regardless of the length of line 1–2. The bearings of lines 4–1 and 2–3 may be the record bearing or at the same variation from the record as line 1–2. If this was a rectangular claim, then the bearing of the missing lines probably should be at right angles to line 1–2, unless this would give a distorted relationship between the claim and the workings on it, particularly the discovery. Line 3–4 should be shown parallel and of equal length to line 1–2.

In situation C, Corners Nos. 1 and 4 are recovered. Line 2–3 should be shown parallel and of equal length to line 4–1, if the record was such. Lines 1–2 and 3–4 should be shown at the record distance, and at the record bearing or with the same variance found for line 4–1.

In situation D two corners are again recovered, but they are opposite corners, Nos. 1 and 3. Missing Corner Nos. 2 and 4 can be restored by using the Grant Boundary method. See Section 5–44 of the Manual of Surveying Instructions. They can also be shown at the record bearing and distance from Cors. Nos. 1 and 3, using either the end lines or side lines, with the resulting missing lines being the bearing and distance required to close. The method selected should restore the lines in the best relative position to the workings.

In situation E, three corners, 1, 2 and 4, are recovered. Line 2–3 is shown parallel and of equal length to line 4–1. Line 3–4 is shown parallel and of equal length to Line 1–2.

FIG. 7

In restoring corners of irregular claims, such as metes and bounds placers, the broken boundary (non-riparian) or the Grant Boundary method should be used. It may also be applied to lode claims if the above methods do not give adequate results.

In reestablishing corners of a block of claims, the rules of proportionate measurement may be applied. In Figure 8, missing Corner No. 2 of claims E, F, G and H can be restored by double proportion. Missing Corner No. 1 of claims A and B may also be restored by double proportion; since there is no corner beyond this corner, the record distance from Corner No. 2 would have to be used in this direction. Corner No. 1 might also be established at the record bearing and distance from Corner No. 2, or lines 1–2 of claims A and B could be made parallel and of equal length to line 3–4 of claim A. Since missing Corner No. 3 of claims B and D is on an end line, single proportionate measurement might be considered. See the Manual of Surveying Instructions for proportionate methods, pp. 134–136.

6–2 Township Resurveys with Mineral Surveys: Prior to field work, all unpatented mineral surveys embracing claims that have been declared null and void should be cancelled, leaving only valid existing claims and patents to be segregated. Restoration of missing corners should only be made where they are necessary to control the boundaries between private and public land, including the boundaries between public land and unpatented valid mineral surveys. Segregation surveys of unsurveyed mining claims may be requested to accommodate administrative actions. If possible, the owners of the mining claims should be advised of the resurvey and given an opportunity to express their opinions as to the position of missing corners.

6–3 Mineral Segregation Surveys: Sections 7–39 to 7–44 inclusive, of the Manual of Surveying Instructions adequately covers this subject. Segregation surveys are not undertaken unless there is a need for them arising from administrative action involving the adjoining land. Very often it will be necessary to make the survey within the boundaries as they are marked on the ground due to inaccuracies in the location survey. The early township surveys in California often segregated unsurveyed mining claims showing them on the township plats without supporting field notes. Resurveys of such segregations may be required based on the evidence found in the field.

6–4 Supplemental Plats: When supplemental plats are required segregating mineral surveys, all such surveys must be segregated. Again, it is desirable that mineral surveys embracing invalid claims be cancelled. The need to lot a cancelled mineral survey will also require a supplemental plat.

6–5 Correcting Errors in Patented Mineral Surveys: As a general rule, the record of a patented mineral survey should not be changed or amended. When such errors are discovered, a pencil notation on the index card and/or on the field notes may be appropriate. Reported errors generally stand on their own merit and are contained in the field notes of the reporting survey.

FIG. 8