California Professional Land Surveyor
Examination with Practice Questions And
Correct Ans
1. A retracement surveyor discovers that a 1905 patent describes the south line of a
section as 'along the south boundary of the Rancho San Pedro.' The rancho boundary
is a confirmed Mexican land grant line that does not coincide with the PLSS section
line. Which principle governs the retracement of the patent's south line?
A. The PLSS section line prevails because the patent conveys by aliquot parts.
B. The rancho boundary controls because a senior right (Mexican grant) prevails over the
subsequent PLSS survey.
C. The line is resolved by proportionate measurement between the nearest identified
corners.
D. The patent is void for ambiguity and requires a court decree to establish the line.
Answer: B. The rancho boundary controls because a senior right (Mexican grant)
prevails over the subsequent PLSS survey.
Rationale: Under California boundary law, a confirmed Mexican land grant is a senior
right that controls over later PLSS surveys; the patent's call to the rancho boundary makes
that line the true boundary. Proportionate measurement applies only when corners are lost
or obliterated, not when a senior boundary exists. The patent is not void; the call to the
rancho resolves the ambiguity.
Page 1 of 78
,2. In a least-squares adjustment of a level network, the a posteriori variance factor is
2.35. What does this indicate about the stochastic model, and what is the appropriate
action?
A. The observations are too precise; the weights should be increased.
B. The variance factor is acceptable because it is less than 3.0; no action is needed.
C. The stochastic model is likely too optimistic; the standard errors of observations
should be re-evaluated or the weights reduced.
D. The network has gross errors; all observations must be discarded.
Answer: C. The stochastic model is likely too optimistic; the standard errors of
observations should be re-evaluated or the weights reduced.
Rationale: A posteriori variance factor >1 suggests the assumed standard errors are too
small (weights too high), indicating an overly optimistic stochastic model. The correct
action is to review observation standard errors and possibly reweight. A value of 2.35 is
not acceptable as a final adjustment without investigation, and discarding all observations
is unwarranted.
Page 2 of 78
,3. A property owner along a navigable river claims title to land that has accreted on
the opposite bank due to a gradual shift in the thalweg. Under California law, which
statement is correct regarding the boundary between the two riparian owners?
A. The boundary remains fixed at the original survey line; accretion belongs to the state.
B. The boundary moves with the thalweg, and the accreted land belongs to the opposite
bank owner.
C. The boundary moves with the thalweg, and the accreted land belongs to the owner on
whose side it formed.
D. Accretion on the opposite bank does not change the boundary; the original line
controls.
Answer: C. The boundary moves with the thalweg, and the accreted land belongs to
the owner on whose side it formed.
Rationale: Under California water boundary law, gradual accretion vests title in the
riparian owner on whose side the accretion occurs, and the boundary follows the thalweg.
The opposite bank owner does not gain title to land that forms on the other side. The state
only owns the bed of navigable waters, not the accreted upland.
4. A subdivision map is submitted under the Subdivision Map Act. The local agency
conditions approval on dedication of an on-site improvement that is not roughly
proportional to the project's impacts. Which legal standard applies to evaluate the
condition's validity?
A. The condition is valid if it bears a reasonable relationship to the public health, safety,
and welfare.
B. The condition must satisfy the Nollan/Dolan rough proportionality test for exactions.
C. The condition is valid if the subdivider consented to it in the tentative map
application.
D. The condition is valid if it is authorized by the local coastal plan.
Answer: B. The condition must satisfy the Nollan/Dolan rough proportionality test for
exactions.
Rationale: Under Nollan v. California Coastal Commission and Dolan v. City of Tigard,
exactions must have an essential nexus and be roughly proportional to the project's
impacts. Consent or general welfare alone is insufficient. The Subdivision Map Act
incorporates these constitutional limitations.
Page 3 of 78
, 5. A surveyor uses static GNSS to establish control in a remote area of California. The
baseline vector from a CORS station 45 km away is processed, and the derived
ellipsoid height difference is -12.345 m. To convert to NAVD88 orthometric height,
which additional information is required?
A. The geoid undulation at both stations from a geoid model such as GEOID18.
B. The deflection of the vertical at the roving station.
C. The ellipsoid height of the CORS station only.
D. The orthometric height of the CORS station only.
Answer: A. The geoid undulation at both stations from a geoid model such as
GEOID18.
Rationale: The relationship between ellipsoid height (h), orthometric height (H), and geoid
undulation (N) is h = H + N. To convert ellipsoid height differences to orthometric height
differences, geoid undulations at both stations are needed. Deflection of the vertical affects
astronomic observations, not GNSS height conversion. Knowing only one station's height is
insufficient.
6. In a boundary retracement, a surveyor finds a monument at a fence corner that is
not called for in the deed but has been in place for over 50 years and is relied upon by
both property owners. Under California law, what is the status of this monument?
A. It is an uncalled-for monument and has no legal weight.
B. It may be evidence of a boundary by acquiescence or agreed boundary, potentially
controlling the line.
C. It is irrelevant unless it is a PLSS corner.
D. It must be removed and replaced with a called-for monument.
Answer: B. It may be evidence of a boundary by acquiescence or agreed boundary,
potentially controlling the line.
Rationale: Long-standing monuments relied upon by adjacent owners can establish a
boundary by acquiescence or agreed boundary, which may control over deed calls.
Uncalled-for monuments are not automatically without weight; they can be evidence of the
true boundary. Removal would be improper without legal authority.
Page 4 of 78
Examination with Practice Questions And
Correct Ans
1. A retracement surveyor discovers that a 1905 patent describes the south line of a
section as 'along the south boundary of the Rancho San Pedro.' The rancho boundary
is a confirmed Mexican land grant line that does not coincide with the PLSS section
line. Which principle governs the retracement of the patent's south line?
A. The PLSS section line prevails because the patent conveys by aliquot parts.
B. The rancho boundary controls because a senior right (Mexican grant) prevails over the
subsequent PLSS survey.
C. The line is resolved by proportionate measurement between the nearest identified
corners.
D. The patent is void for ambiguity and requires a court decree to establish the line.
Answer: B. The rancho boundary controls because a senior right (Mexican grant)
prevails over the subsequent PLSS survey.
Rationale: Under California boundary law, a confirmed Mexican land grant is a senior
right that controls over later PLSS surveys; the patent's call to the rancho boundary makes
that line the true boundary. Proportionate measurement applies only when corners are lost
or obliterated, not when a senior boundary exists. The patent is not void; the call to the
rancho resolves the ambiguity.
Page 1 of 78
,2. In a least-squares adjustment of a level network, the a posteriori variance factor is
2.35. What does this indicate about the stochastic model, and what is the appropriate
action?
A. The observations are too precise; the weights should be increased.
B. The variance factor is acceptable because it is less than 3.0; no action is needed.
C. The stochastic model is likely too optimistic; the standard errors of observations
should be re-evaluated or the weights reduced.
D. The network has gross errors; all observations must be discarded.
Answer: C. The stochastic model is likely too optimistic; the standard errors of
observations should be re-evaluated or the weights reduced.
Rationale: A posteriori variance factor >1 suggests the assumed standard errors are too
small (weights too high), indicating an overly optimistic stochastic model. The correct
action is to review observation standard errors and possibly reweight. A value of 2.35 is
not acceptable as a final adjustment without investigation, and discarding all observations
is unwarranted.
Page 2 of 78
,3. A property owner along a navigable river claims title to land that has accreted on
the opposite bank due to a gradual shift in the thalweg. Under California law, which
statement is correct regarding the boundary between the two riparian owners?
A. The boundary remains fixed at the original survey line; accretion belongs to the state.
B. The boundary moves with the thalweg, and the accreted land belongs to the opposite
bank owner.
C. The boundary moves with the thalweg, and the accreted land belongs to the owner on
whose side it formed.
D. Accretion on the opposite bank does not change the boundary; the original line
controls.
Answer: C. The boundary moves with the thalweg, and the accreted land belongs to
the owner on whose side it formed.
Rationale: Under California water boundary law, gradual accretion vests title in the
riparian owner on whose side the accretion occurs, and the boundary follows the thalweg.
The opposite bank owner does not gain title to land that forms on the other side. The state
only owns the bed of navigable waters, not the accreted upland.
4. A subdivision map is submitted under the Subdivision Map Act. The local agency
conditions approval on dedication of an on-site improvement that is not roughly
proportional to the project's impacts. Which legal standard applies to evaluate the
condition's validity?
A. The condition is valid if it bears a reasonable relationship to the public health, safety,
and welfare.
B. The condition must satisfy the Nollan/Dolan rough proportionality test for exactions.
C. The condition is valid if the subdivider consented to it in the tentative map
application.
D. The condition is valid if it is authorized by the local coastal plan.
Answer: B. The condition must satisfy the Nollan/Dolan rough proportionality test for
exactions.
Rationale: Under Nollan v. California Coastal Commission and Dolan v. City of Tigard,
exactions must have an essential nexus and be roughly proportional to the project's
impacts. Consent or general welfare alone is insufficient. The Subdivision Map Act
incorporates these constitutional limitations.
Page 3 of 78
, 5. A surveyor uses static GNSS to establish control in a remote area of California. The
baseline vector from a CORS station 45 km away is processed, and the derived
ellipsoid height difference is -12.345 m. To convert to NAVD88 orthometric height,
which additional information is required?
A. The geoid undulation at both stations from a geoid model such as GEOID18.
B. The deflection of the vertical at the roving station.
C. The ellipsoid height of the CORS station only.
D. The orthometric height of the CORS station only.
Answer: A. The geoid undulation at both stations from a geoid model such as
GEOID18.
Rationale: The relationship between ellipsoid height (h), orthometric height (H), and geoid
undulation (N) is h = H + N. To convert ellipsoid height differences to orthometric height
differences, geoid undulations at both stations are needed. Deflection of the vertical affects
astronomic observations, not GNSS height conversion. Knowing only one station's height is
insufficient.
6. In a boundary retracement, a surveyor finds a monument at a fence corner that is
not called for in the deed but has been in place for over 50 years and is relied upon by
both property owners. Under California law, what is the status of this monument?
A. It is an uncalled-for monument and has no legal weight.
B. It may be evidence of a boundary by acquiescence or agreed boundary, potentially
controlling the line.
C. It is irrelevant unless it is a PLSS corner.
D. It must be removed and replaced with a called-for monument.
Answer: B. It may be evidence of a boundary by acquiescence or agreed boundary,
potentially controlling the line.
Rationale: Long-standing monuments relied upon by adjacent owners can establish a
boundary by acquiescence or agreed boundary, which may control over deed calls.
Uncalled-for monuments are not automatically without weight; they can be evidence of the
true boundary. Removal would be improper without legal authority.
Page 4 of 78
