California Surveyors Forums

Rare to retrace anything this old here in the Bay Area, but am trying to retrace two angle points along a rancho boundary. I have some general questions on what to expect.

1. If they do not call for a monument set at an angle point, does one assume they set redwood 4x4s, or is it possible they did not set anything (seems unlikely) and merely turned? At the lower portion of the rancho where there were inhabitants, they specify posts with initials of the confirmees, but when they went into the redwoods up along where I am, they do not mention set monuments, with the exception of a call to a "half buried rock" - which may not have been set but found. It does not specify.

2. If they call to a rock, as in my case, what types of marks would one expect to find? Cut cross?

3. Would this be the only survey by the government at that time, or would there have been preliminary surveys? I ask because they seem to reference things as if they are supposed to find them - a blazed tree, the rock. They do not get into describing things as if they are setting them. The rock is not dimensioned as I would expect. It is as if they are running a survey along specific monuments or points they are instructed to find. If so, perhaps BLM has some more information I can obtain?

4. This one I do not expect much, but the other angle point I am interested in is a "post of the U.S. Coast Survey Signal from Peases" (rancho was surveyed in 1856). This must refer to a survey done by Pease when they were doing the lighthouses. You can see both Angels island northeasterly in the SF Bay and northwesterly to Pillar Point (Pacific Ocean where the famous surf spot Mavericks is). I checked out NGS and there is a later triangulation point set in abotu 1906 possibly about 300 feet east of this location. I emailed them if they would have any information on this "Survey Signal" and did not get a response. Anyone with any ideas on this one?

I usually call the BLM and tell them I want the Rancho notes and Maps and just like when it's a boundary survey, if the Rancho is up against another Rancho I have them give me the notes and plats for that one too since it's likely that one of them is going to simply retrace the line run previously. In addition, one is senior to the other and if the original line was not retraced properly, you'll have some boundary issues to resolve. Sometimes they send me the "obsolete" notes, where there was a preliminary survey but it was later superceded. Although the obsolete survey cannot be used for your retracement, many time the subsequent survey used the initial point set or even some of the monuments, depending on circumstances.

You can also request the Township notes, (Township exteriors where ran first) if the Rancho was up against one of those. Sometimes the Government already subdivided the land and then there was a claim by a Californian and they cut out the Rancho. I've got a couple right now where the township lines are shown on the rancho, and they even tied into them because they ran the lines before the Rancho (although the Rancho is still senior in rights).

Thanks Eric. I was wondering if there was something like "obsolete" notes, which may clarify some descriptions. I will also see how close the section line is to this one where the rock is. Perhaps if the line hit the Rancho boundary, they are close to the rock and mention it.

Do you have a copy of the original Patent plat from the US government?

Also, sometimes the Rancho patents were made to conform to the USPLSS surveys even-though the Rancho represents a senior right. Often the Mexican land grants were in litigation for decades before they were confirmed by the Land Commision and then they were limited to the maximum statutory allowed area by Mexican law rather than the entire area claimed on the Diseno (map that accompained the grant).

A source of information might be Christomo Perez's book "Land grants in Alta California". He includes Book and Page numbers for the court cases where the grants were confirmed.

There is a township line running through the middle of the Rancho, so Eric, you make a great point on that as well. I am in contact with BLM about this.

Steve, all I received initially was the copy of the typed notes of the official survey and the accompanying map. Interesting reference with the court cases. I may pursue this as well. Thanks.

Steve, good info,

also, a point worth noting is the rancho's up in Alta are in the gold country. a lot of interesting political positions took place up there. In San francisco, the Ranchos were't "driven" by mining, rather Church and social politics were the engine for these grants.

Keep up the great history quest.
50% of land surveying is 90% history . . .

D. G.