I possess some land owned from 1971 and some from 1995, on the original location of 2 patents (1925 and 1937) that are now surrounded by California wilderness on a state highway. The resurvey in the 1970's enabled some descendants, etc to sell their portions at the new locations and some at the old. BLM claims 320 acres of the 560 because the they are presumed to be now in 'wilderness' at the original patent location. One of the homesteads I own blocks BLM to the 320 acres unless they take another route over wilderness land. The two patents meshed physically like two pieces on a puzzle but parcels on the new survey cover the old preventing the consolidation of the patents in the original location. Can the 220 acres at both old and new locations owned by me exert any influence over 320 acres? Does the easement to the 320 acres through the homestead enable the homestead owner to use the 320 acres? The 320 0f 560 acre original patent was for livestock production.
If it matters, there are no residents on the 1925 patents new location. There are 4 resident on the 1925 patents original location. There are 2 residents on the original location of the 1937 patent, one of which has been there for 40 years and this is the patent that is contiguous with the 320 acre parcel claimed by BLM.

Jak+99: