OregonGoldHunters
Greenie
Thanks to enviro-wackos, the greedy Forest Service and our POS president, Mining and maybe even soon to be xls mining and rockhounding may by smacked up the side of the head with a hammer. This is very upsettings. We need to keep a good eye on this and make sure they dont take ALL of our rights away from us.
A letter from the president from Public Lands for the People.
For those individuals, and most particularly, some
prospecting and metal detecting clubs, and or
associations, that like to refer to themselves as
recreational, PLP would like to let you know that it may not be in your best interest toclassify any type
of activity that you do on a mining claim, asanything other than mining or prospecting under the
mining law (such as recreational mining) for the following reasons.
At the Bottom of Pg 31: of the U.S. Forest Service
new and final Federal Register Notice, now in place
for enforcement is the following entry regarding
what the FS believes to be a description of small
scale mining activities.
"One thing which often is unique insofar
as functions, work, or activities are
proposed by individuals, members of mining
clubs, or mining clubs themselves whose
interest in locatable mineral operations
is primarily recreational, is that they
far exceed the scope of the United States
mining laws. Such functions, work, or
activities that are not authorized by the
United States mining laws include
educational seminars, treasure hunts, and
use of mining claims as sites for hunting
camps or summer homes. Accordingly, a
major impetus for this rulemaking
culminating in the final rule being
adopted is to prohibit operations
conducted under the color of the mining
laws that clearly are not within the scope
of bona fide operations consistent with
the United States mining laws. Thus, the
final rule being adopted by this
rulemaking applies to every person or
entity conducting or proposing to conduct
locatable mineral operations on Forest
Service lands under the United States
mining laws."
PLP has been attempting to prevent the use of the
word recreational mining for 15 years, only to have
it fall on the deaf ears of some. Recently we are
assisting a man in Montana for getting cited under
36 CFR 261 (c) Selling or offering for sale any
merchandise or conducting any kind of work
activity or service unless authorized by Federal law,
regulation, or special-use authorization.
In this case the Montana man was giving a seminar
to a couple of people on how to pan, sluice and use
a rocker box and was cited for it. We suggest that
those who want to categorize anything other than
mining, when on a mining claim that the FS is looking to cite
criminally for activities that they determine are not mining
related or incidental to mining. PLP would also like to mention
that we feel the Mining Law of 1866 and 1872 is not a special
use authorization nor discretionary, therefore we feel that 36
CFR 261 does not apply to mining. However until this has been
brought before a court for adjudication, the Forest Service will
most likely be looking for reasons to cite miners under 36 CFR
261 for activities that they deem not mining related or
incidentally related to mining.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also this bill was introduced on Jan 27th 2009
This bill will stop me from taking my kids to the river with 1 single pan and enjoying the history of the US. It is rediculous and by far NOT WHAT THE COUNTRY NEEDS TO WORRY ABOUT AT THIS TIME.
http://www.plp2.org/forum/showthread.php?p=856#post856
A letter from the president from Public Lands for the People.
For those individuals, and most particularly, some
prospecting and metal detecting clubs, and or
associations, that like to refer to themselves as
recreational, PLP would like to let you know that it may not be in your best interest toclassify any type
of activity that you do on a mining claim, asanything other than mining or prospecting under the
mining law (such as recreational mining) for the following reasons.
At the Bottom of Pg 31: of the U.S. Forest Service
new and final Federal Register Notice, now in place
for enforcement is the following entry regarding
what the FS believes to be a description of small
scale mining activities.
"One thing which often is unique insofar
as functions, work, or activities are
proposed by individuals, members of mining
clubs, or mining clubs themselves whose
interest in locatable mineral operations
is primarily recreational, is that they
far exceed the scope of the United States
mining laws. Such functions, work, or
activities that are not authorized by the
United States mining laws include
educational seminars, treasure hunts, and
use of mining claims as sites for hunting
camps or summer homes. Accordingly, a
major impetus for this rulemaking
culminating in the final rule being
adopted is to prohibit operations
conducted under the color of the mining
laws that clearly are not within the scope
of bona fide operations consistent with
the United States mining laws. Thus, the
final rule being adopted by this
rulemaking applies to every person or
entity conducting or proposing to conduct
locatable mineral operations on Forest
Service lands under the United States
mining laws."
PLP has been attempting to prevent the use of the
word recreational mining for 15 years, only to have
it fall on the deaf ears of some. Recently we are
assisting a man in Montana for getting cited under
36 CFR 261 (c) Selling or offering for sale any
merchandise or conducting any kind of work
activity or service unless authorized by Federal law,
regulation, or special-use authorization.
In this case the Montana man was giving a seminar
to a couple of people on how to pan, sluice and use
a rocker box and was cited for it. We suggest that
those who want to categorize anything other than
mining, when on a mining claim that the FS is looking to cite
criminally for activities that they determine are not mining
related or incidental to mining. PLP would also like to mention
that we feel the Mining Law of 1866 and 1872 is not a special
use authorization nor discretionary, therefore we feel that 36
CFR 261 does not apply to mining. However until this has been
brought before a court for adjudication, the Forest Service will
most likely be looking for reasons to cite miners under 36 CFR
261 for activities that they deem not mining related or
incidentally related to mining.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also this bill was introduced on Jan 27th 2009
This bill will stop me from taking my kids to the river with 1 single pan and enjoying the history of the US. It is rediculous and by far NOT WHAT THE COUNTRY NEEDS TO WORRY ABOUT AT THIS TIME.
http://www.plp2.org/forum/showthread.php?p=856#post856
