Senate bill would require DNR to notify landowners before surveys that could change boundaries

Senate Bill 5170, discussed Jan. 16 in the Senate Agriculture, Water, Natural Resources & Parks Committee, would change procedures for boundary‑line work conducted by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) on public lands by adding notice and opportunity for review and public comment before DNR conducts a land survey intended to establish or relocate section corners, markers or boundary lines.

Staff explained the bill clarifies two current dispute‑resolution paths — voluntary agreement filed by affected landowners or court action by a landowner — and would require DNR to notify affected landowners and provide an opportunity to present historical evidence and comment before surveying. The measure would also make clear deeds of record may be used to resolve boundary disputes and require DNR to comply with notice and comment requirements before initiating suit to resolve a dispute.

Sponsor Senator Shelley Short said the bill responds to private‑landowner concerns that survey work and resulting adjustments can have cascading effects on multiple parcels and that earlier outreach could reduce disputes. “When these landowners initially brought this to me … I felt like I wasn't getting the necessary information to really better understand,” Short said.

Testimony from Stevens County officials and affected landowners supported the bill as a way to improve communications and reduce costly disputes. Former county commissioner Wes McCart and Stevens County Assessor Rick Johnson described recurring problems when monument relocations or survey changes affected records and parcels, and urged including county offices in notifications.

DNR staff noted they manage the Public Land Survey Office as a records repository and that the department does not universally survey the entire state; DNR said it already sends letters, posts door hangers and knocks on doors when it does conduct proprietary surveys on trust or aquatic lands. DNR cautioned that the bill’s requirement to notify “affected landowners” prior to surveying may be impractical because affected owners are often not known until the survey identifies where monuments or lines are located.

Public testimony concluded and the committee adjourned the hearing without a vote on the measure during the Jan. 16 session.