How do we resolve Forest Service Boundary & private property line problems?

[sylviafnp]

In 2003 we purchased a home including 31+/- acres with Forest Service (FS) land to our north.  In 2008 we told that northern boundary line was further south by 90+ feet (abt. 3 acres), in favor of the FS, based on updated surveys This land included our well, barn, sheds, electric pole and a northern fence. Well was built in 1990s. We approached the FS about purchase or land swap or deed but were told we had to prove age of fence line dated back to the 1920s prior to being considered for swap or purchase. We only find physical evidence of a fence back to the 1940s but locals say the property line has been the same line since the late 1800s. We have submitted requests for purchase based on the Small Tracts Act via phone and in writing but local FS reps say “the rules of the Small Tracts Act no longer apply and purchase will probably be impossible”  Now FS says we must remove small electric pole, well and sheds or pay use fee.
FS has never used the 3 acres in question for anything ever. Prior owners have run livestock and logged on the strip of property in question for many years without harassment from the FS and were never assessed a use fee.  Does the Small Tracts Act apply to us and if so, how do we bypass the local foresters and make a request for purchase?   There was no attempt to send our request to the ‘attorneys’ because the regional forestry supervisor said our request was not in the public interest. Does anyone have any ideas for us?

[Brad_bb]

Find a good lawyer.

[Magicman]

Welcome sylviafnp, to the Forestry Forum.   

Ditto Brad_bb suggestion.

[WH_Conley]

Might remind your Congressman that he will running for re-election too.

[Ron Scott]

Where are you located? What NF and Ranger District are you dealing with? Is this case a result of a recent survey of the NF land and do you have a survey of your property? The Small Tracts Act should be a possible resolution.

[sylviafnp]

Thanks for the replies.  We live in Mark Twain National Forest. Similar problems have been nagging our  neighbors in Shannon County for years. Many neighbors have the same problem of being off by 90-100 feet. One half of a lady's house sat on FS land and I hear it was an ugly scene.  As late as the 80s I hear that some of the older folks pulled out guns and chased FS personel away.
 Our 1970s  NW section marker that was placed  by finding one of the old original markers, is 70 ft north from more recent FS marker. I submitted the survey notes with our request but I doubt that anyone has even read it. All of the paperwork I sent sat on the Supervisors file cabinet for 3 months before she sent it on to the FS surveryor. He only sent us a letter saying he agreed with the modern survey, that was found via GPS and sent us a permit ap for our well.

Senator Kit Bond over in the Branson area passed a bill so the folks could get their land back, but that  bill only applied to Stone and Taney counties I think.  We have a neighbor who says they bought 3 acres and were told it would be about $2500. They have not been sent the bill and are still waiting on paperwork. Their problem was due to a similar problems but when we called the FS surveyor he denied that this ever happped  and said they were only granted access to finish building their church. He also said that there were new rules and that the Small Tract Act no longer applied. I can't find any new rules online. We have contacted Congresswoman Jo Ann Emerson but her aide says ' so far it doesn't look to good'.
Very frustrating. We are thinking about moving!

[Rocky_Ranger]

That's what I'm seeing here too, Ron, I'd stir the pot a little and elevate this to DC.  A Congressional would find some answers pretty quick.....  I've never heard of a Forest not willing to work with landowners in a boundary survey dispute, unless it was negligence....

[Black_Bear]

How about consulting with a registered professional land surveyor?    

my $0.02

 

[Woodwalker]

When you purchased the land, did you have a survey and use a title service? If so, contact the title company. Contact a lawyer either way.

[TonyZ]

At the time of your purchase were you represented by a lawyer? Did you have a survey done then? Did a mortgagor require a survey and is paper work available? Did you buy title insurance?

If so, I would enlist these professionals as a start to see where you stand. With proper professional help you may be able to resolve this amicably, but if you were not represented at the time of purchase, I'm at a loss.

[sylviafnp]

Well this is MO so no to the survey before purchase and no to the attorney at the time. The title insurance has a clause that it will not cover boundary disputes. I think they must have seen this before!  I will put more pressure on Ms. Emerson. They made them cooperate in Branson so maybe it could happen here. We had it surveyed later but the surveyor only agreed with the FS boundary lines and told us "good luck"  He never mentioned that the old markers were 70-90 ft off from the modern surveys. I found this out later by getting old survey notes and talking to locals. They went so far as to tell me the FS had even been caught destoying one of the original markers!  These ol hillbillies around here have real bad feeling towards the Feds due to the FS and other land disputes with the Park Service. I can't blame them really after what we have seen.  Thanks for your thoughts, I will keep checking back.

[Rocky_Ranger]

I've seen this several times, all across the country.  Best advice for anyone dealing in land purchases is buyer beware.  However, if the survey was done or proven to be in error then the Small Tracts Act does apply.

[Jasperfield]

In response to your post/question, I'm not sure how the boundary problem will be solved.

However, as a Professional Surveyor licensed to practice in NC, and upon federal and state boundaries, I have extensive experience in applicable legal, professional, and practical areas.

During the early part of the last decade I received a certified letter from the USDA, Forest Service, effectively stating:

Henceforth; All Forest Service boundaries shall run with existing marked & painted lines; regardless of the result of a recent survey.

In other words, the letter received by all licensed surveyors (in the U.S.) plainly said that: (and I'm paraphraseing, here)...The position of federal boundaries, subtended by corners found, unfound, or determined obliterated, would favor the government's opinion as to the true position of the line.

Well, when I read the letter I just couldn't believe it. But, that is the position as it exists in the U.S. today.

Effectively what all this herein above written means is this: Regardless of whatever your attorney determines, notwithstanding a successful costitutional (or U.S.Administrative Code) challenge, the boundary will be wherever the government determines, be it the true position or not.

[Ron Wenrich]

One of the problems of applying new technology to old methods.  GPS is more accurate than compass and pace.  Why don't surveyors run from the old established corners instead of trying to impress with their technological advances against older methods?  Those old corners are how the property has been sold over the ages, not the newly established ones.  The new corners only confuse matters.

The Feds may claim that property lines are correct, but can they defend that at the county courthouse? 

[SwampDonkey]

I've seen new GPS surveys land several feet into a field off old line fence row that was there from day one with cedar rail. I've also seen Joe landowner attempts to be surveyor with line trees spotted from both ends off corners and not meet in the middle, and a few double lined properties (one blue line one orange).

The limited surveys I have dealt with on my personal property is deeds where drawn up by lawyer and surveyor descriptions and title to the land was "quieted", so it's the final deal.

From what you have mentioned about your survey and how the deed was written up, I think the judgement could go either way. But, I'm in no way an expert in such matters.

[BaldBob]

Unless the rules have changed in the last few years, The Manual of Public Land Survey ( the Bible for property line survey in the U.S. - published by the US Dept of the Interior) states that the originally established corner locations from the Public Land Survey stand , even in the presence of more recent surveys using more precise and accurate equipment.  This holds true even if the original survey (in 1800's - under US Gov. contract) was fraudulently  conducted.  Even if the actual original corner markers cannot be found, adequate evidence - including sworn testimony of uninterested parties - to the exact location of the original Public Land Survey Corners can trump locations established more recently.
Though this rule may not help if your property lines are not based on the corners established in the original Public Land Survey ( primarily section and quarter corners) its worth checking out.

[Ron Scott]

Ditto! to what BaldBob said. The original survey usually prevails if it has been established. Also, surveyors have been known to make mistakes with their new high tech surveying equipment. I've seen this happen on a client's property and the surveyor had to redo the survey at no charge. There definitely seems to be more problems such as yours after a new survey has been done.

You may also need to escalate the problem beyond the Forest Surveyor, District Ranger, and the Forest Supervisor if they are not being responsive to your concerns and information provided. You then need to contract your congress person to help resolve your landline problem with the Forest Service.

[Bobus2003]

At a Ranch I work at, their is a 11 acre piece of Timber/Meadow that should be Forest service but is Fenced for use by the Ranch.. We Hay it every year, run cattle and even logged it 2 years ago.. The Ranch owner called the talked to the FS about it and she was told they have bigger problems than 11 acres, its been that way since 1920 something and its not gonna be changed.

[SwampDonkey]

Around these parts the public forest is all blazed and painted red and kept up by the forest licenses as part of their agreement. Even if you lease a camp lot, the lines have to be marked by the lease holder (land surveyor work) and maintained, as they check camp lots for other things as well, like a capped flu on the camp. I can go deep in the woods and the crown lands and Industrial Freehold are all marked to. I often mark thinning up to the blazed trees on the limits of the crown land. Some of their paper maps are off a bit because they aren't using distortion free photos like DNR produces. But if their block delineation is near a crown line I know it will be hitting it and sure enough find the spots. Amazing what some fellows can interpret from a photos, especially if they are fresh and part of the perimeter blew down. No, I don't think that extra 4 ha is thinnable, not by my saw anyway. Then other places have clear residual islands, not a mark on the map or a heads up on their part. They do just about nothing as far as I can tell, but sit in a chair and draw lines.

[Ron Scott]

Bobus,

That doesn't sound like the USFS that i know. Is that on the Black hills NF?

[Bobus2003]

Bobus,

That doesn't sound like the USFS that i know. Is that on the Black hills NF?

Yes it is.. I think it will get changed pretty soon since the ranch is goin into her kids hands and they are talking of selling it off.. USFS will claim their ground then and in a hurry 

[Ron Scott]

They need to talk to Craig Babzien, the Forest supervisor of the Black Hills National Forest. I hear that he is good to work with.

[chain]

You may have a neighbor to testify in your favor and witness your lines and corners. There is such a title as 'adverse possession' whereof you or others may have used and maintained a certain property in question and may be awarded full title.

We may be faced with this AP soon as a neighbor had pushed down our property fence without notifying us of the activilty yet, now, this property is up for sale the realtor showing our property as part of the sale. I dread things like this and really disturbs my confidence in the system...I PAY MY TAXES..a darn more than the neighbor has ever paid!

This is an ongoing problem, there are three properties for sale that join us on this very day. Not many new neighbors have manners and respect property lines; I miss the old folks, the original families whose ancestors worked and settled the country they,  for the most part,  were good, honest citizens...they're nearly all gone, sad.

[SwampDonkey]

It's not allowed here in NB.

Land Titles Act of New Brunswick

17(1)After the title to land has been registered under this Act,

(a)no right, title or interest adverse to or in derogation of the title of the registered owner or his right to possession shall be acquired by the possession of another; and

(b)no right to the access and use of light or any easement, right or profit à prendre shall be acquired in or in respect of the land by any person by prescription,
and any such rights acquired by any person prior to the date on which the title was first registered under this Act shall not be enforceable as against a registered owner if the existence of the right is not shown in the title register.

[Ron Scott]

The federal government doesn't recognize adverse possession. That's why the USFS isn't too rushed to resolve the land issue. They will eventually.