IBLA Archive

Below are a list of the IBLA cases from prior months. Select one to review it.

IBLA Listing

IBLA TitleDate PublishedPartial Synopsis
Hasenyager 176 IBLA 2525/8/2017In this decision the Board clarifies the scope of the Longview Fibre Co.
Howard Vagneur, 159 IBLA 27211/1/2013This decision has some good information about what constitutes “substantial evidence” and what should be included in the survey record.
Rubicon Properties Inc., Et Al., A-3074810/1/2013This decision concerns an official survey completed 40 years before the protest and an even older local survey.
J. M. Beard, 52 L.D. 4519/1/2013This 1928 Land Decision identifies several basic principles of a dependent resurvey and what rights must be protected: A dependent resurvey consists of a retracement and reestablishment of the lines of the original survey in their true original positions, according to the best available evidence of the positions of the original corners.
Ramona & Boyd Lawson, 159 IBLA 1848/1/2013In this decision “equity and justice” seems to be the final determining factors.
Northern Pacific Railway Company v. United States7/1/2013This is a U.
Perry Robert, 87 IBLA 3806/1/201343 U.
Lorna L. Boykin, Reynold L. Allgood, 130 IBLA 3015/1/2013The dispute here involves allotted lands within the boundaries of the Nez Perce Indian Reservation.
Mable Farlow, 30 IBLA 320 and 39 IBLA 154/1/2013This is a color of title case that came about because the 1882 survey contained a blunder in the meanders of the Deschutes River between original government lots 5 and 6.
Peter Paul Groth, 99 IBLA 1043/1/2013This case deals with the restoration of the corner of section 26, 27 34 and 35 where the evidence demonstrates that the original surveyor’s ties to the south and east township boundaries were “fictitious”.
U.S. Supreme Court U.S. v. MORRISON, 240 U.S. 192 (1916)2/1/2013This case is cited in Sections 9-12 and 9-38 of the 2009 Manual of Surveying Instructions and contains a good discussion of: 1) when Public Land is considered officially surveyed; 2) what authority Congress has to dispose of or reserve lands within school sections prior to the sections being defined by survey; and 3) when title to state school land has vested.
The Signal Companies Inc., A-310201/1/2013This decision has some good information about what constitutes a hiatus in the Public Land Survey System.
Theodore J. Vickman 132 IBLA 31712/1/2012This is another case involving bona fide rights.
Cragin v Powell, 128 U.S. 69111/1/2012This is a U.
Timothy Bottoms, 150 IBLA 20010/1/2012A 1994 BLM investigation concluded that the original surveys of the township (except for the survey of the Rancho Milpitas) were most probably fraudulent.
Quinton Douglas 166 IBLA 2579/1/2012BLM found that changes in the main channel of the Yakima River were the result of avulsion thereby fixing the boundary of the Yakama Indian Reservation and placing an island claimed by Mr.
Mark Einsele 147 IBLA 18/1/2012Bob Dahl talked about Federal Authority surveys in course 3 of the CFedS training.
The Coast Indian Community, 3 IBLA 2857/1/2012A portion of the boundary of the Ressighini (Resighini) Rancheria is at issue in this case.
J. M. Jones Lumber Company et. al., A-307616/1/2012This case involves an island which was once public land owned by the United States.
Salt Wells Live Stock Co., A-263675/1/2012This case provides principles for evaluating long accepted resurveys where charges of “gross error” or fraud” have been put forth.
Madison v. Basart A-236914/1/2012This case involves accretion to the north bank of the Missouri River in North Dakota.
Linn and Treciafaye Blancett 178 IBLA 2723/1/2012This case centers on the ¼ section corner of section 15 and 22 reestablished by proportionate measurement by BLM in 1969.
State of Wyoming, 015 IBLA 1942/1/2012Upon admission to the Union sections sixteen and thirty-six in every township were granted to the State of Wyoming.
Elmer Lowe 80 IBLA 1011/5/2012This case reinforces the principle that a survey of public lands creates and does not merely identify the boundaries of sections of land.
State of Montana, 11 IBLA 312/2/2011The State of Montana claimed the bed of a small meandered lake in the eastern part of the State, because the lake is navigable.
Steambarge11/1/2011This case involves the reestablishment of original corners where blunders in the original survey leave many unanswered questions and several possible solutions.
Delzell10/4/2011This case discusses evidence evaluation and the difference between an obliterated corner and a lost corner.
Vetsch9/6/2011This case involves the north boundary of the Yakima Indian Reservation in Washington State.
Hillstrom3/23/2011This case involves certain county road survey records discovered nearly 10 years after the BLM survey was approved.
William Hugh & Mary Brindley2/4/2009This case involves a township corner accepted and remonumented by BLM as control to reestablish a lost corner of federal land.
Stoddard Jacobsen, 85 IBLA 335 and 97 IBLA 18211/6/2008This case deals with the evaluation and documentation of evidence and the proper standard of evidence to be applied when declaring a corner existent.
Mr. and Mrs. John Koopmans 70 IBLA 7510/1/2008This case includes the Statement of Reasons provided by the appellants and the reply by BLM which gives some insight into the type of information the Board must review in making their decisions.
ALFRED STEINHAUER, 1 IBLA 1679/3/2008This is another case giving direction for the evaluation of fence lines as evidence of the original survey.
JOHN D. WAYNE, d/b/a BASIN SURVEYING, INC., 161 IBLA 1408/1/2008This case demonstrates that an appellant must be both “party to the case” and have a legally cognizable interest that is “adversely affected” by BLM’s decision in order to have standing to pursue an appeal to the Board and BLM’s placement of a control line is not binding either on the affected private landowners or, in the event of a dispute between such landowners, on a court of competent jurisdiction.
State of New Mexico. L.D. 51, 409 (1926)7/1/2008This case demonstrates that in the disposal of the public lands the official surveys are to govern and that such sections or subdivision of sections shall be held and considered as containing the exact quantity shown on the plat.
William D. Brown 137 IBLA 316/1/2008This case discusses; the evaluation of existing local corners; the proper use of topographic calls and fences to determine an original corner point; and the protection of bone fide rights.
Landslide Report5/1/2008This month we do not have an IBLA case, instead we have an interesting paper written by C.
Watson H. Brown, 20 LD 3153/31/2008This case demonstrates the purpose of meander lines and the importance of the field note record in determining the area officially surveyed and returned on the original plat.
30 IBLA 95 Frank Lujan1/27/2008The 1970 dependent resurvey by BLM accepted a stone with “apparent but illegible” marks as the ¼ sec.
14 IBLA 2291/7/2008William L.
State of Oregon Office of State Forester11/29/2007This case demonstrates that the prescribed methods for proportionate measurement will be used to reestablish lost corners unless there is the required supporting collateral evidence to justify an exception.
50 L.D. 40210/29/2007This decision demonstrates that the government cannot hold a local surveyor to a higher standard than that required for the official public land surveys.
SUNRISE DEVELOPMENT CO., ATOM ORE URANIUM CO, A-280269/28/2007This decision demonstrates the importance of the exact words used by a witness in providing testimony relative to the position of an original corner.
58 IBLA 528/3/2007This case helps define that fine line between an obliterated corner and a lost corner.
LONGVIEW FIBRE CO.,135 IBLA 1706/21/2007Longview Fibre Co.
Tussio, 37 IBLA 1355/25/2007The position of the ¼ section corner of section 5 and 8 and the ¼ section corner of section 8 and 17 as determined in the 1972 BLM dependent resurvey was challenged by Mr.
DAVID VIERS,143_IBLA_2094/26/2007The Bureau of Land Management’s placement of the corner of sections 23, 24, 25 and 26, T.
Estate of Joseph Baumann, 43 IBIA 1273/1/2007Appellant then appears to make two alternative arguments, in the event Decedent’s estate inventory is deemed correct.