Mining Claims Annual Filing

[Clay Diggins]

It's time again to make your annual recordings and filings to keep your mining claims for another year. We put out this notice and flyer every year to help claim owners to understand the obligations involved and guide them to the best choices for their particular situation.

Important points to remember whether you choose to pay the $155 per 20 acres or take the small miners exemption and pay $10 per claim (no matter what size).

1. Every claim must have a County Recording AND a BLM filing for each year you intend to hold the claim.
2. The Federal filing deadline is August 31.

The details are in the chart and flyer below. Just follow the arrows as you make your decisions. Download the PDFs and take your time. Please do share this information with other miners - a lot of claims are lost each year due to missed deadlines or improper paperwork.

Feel free to ask questions. This stuff can be pretty confusing.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[mu50stang]

Filed today...BLM...MAINTENANCE FEE WAIVER CERTIFICATION, AFFIDAVIT OF ANNUAL ASSESSMENT WORK-PROOF OF LABOR $10.00. Went to county recorders office...got no tax due stamp on AFFIDAVIT OF ANNUAL ASSESSMENT WORK-PROOF OF LABOR and got this recorded $18.00 Not Rocket Science....

The original post states that every year a notice of intent to hold is required to be filed regardless if you are paying the annual fee or applying for the waiver. I talked to two different people at the blm office and they told me that there is no need to file a notice of intent to hold unless its the first year of a new claim. . So I guess it isn't rocket science but I am confused on which information is correct.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[AzViper]

I am not questioning anyones knowledge but I called twice to double check and two different people told me the same thing. I asked them about the rules posted on the Arizona BLM website and they both told me the same thing. I am not trying to piss anyone off but just hoping to get more clarity on this issue. Maybe Clay can chime in when he gets a chance.

EDIT: Annual Maintenance Fees for Mining Claims - BLM Arizona Here are the Arizona claim requirements.

I don't know how many times I have to say this - the BLM is not your friend, the BLM is not your lawyer, the BLM does not make laws, the BLM is not legally responsible for giving you misinformation that costs you money or causes you to lose your claim. Relying on the BLM for information is a bad idea. Please ignore the "advice" on the BLM site. Many many people have lost their claims relying on BLM for information.

Heavy Pans

Being the weekend "Clay" have a hard time saying Clay as I know what his real name is but whatever he will swing by when he has the time, but his quote above says it all.

 

[Clay Diggins]

You can call me Barry if you want AzViper - it's not a secret.

The BLM is only concerned with their end of things. They are an executive agency that takes their orders from the Secretary of the Department of the interior. They don't work for you they work for the Secretary. They are not your lawyer and they are not responsible for giving you incorrect information. There are many people in the BLM that would like to see all of you lose your mining claims. Put 2 and 2 together and move away from the phone - in this case it's not your friend.

So where would we look to see just what the legal requirements to keep our claims are? The law determines what those requirements are - not the BLM and not some guy named "Clay" on an internet forum.

So what is the law? Well we could start with the 1872 Mining Act that is current law as passed by Congress. Congress is the only government entity that can pass laws. You can read all about that HERE.

I know some of you are going to look at all those words written in the mining law and think "who can understand this nonsense but a lawyer?" You can and should try to understand all those mining laws if you want to keep your claims over time but I do understand I've been there myself. It wasn't easy learning all this stuff. Of course moving yards of hardpack in a day isn't easy either so I'm sure in time you can come to understand the mining laws. It's as much a part of being a successful miner as learning to pan.

Now I understand you want a clear answer to your questions now and leave the brain twisting gobbeldygook for later. Luckily we have an organization in our government that has the job of interpreting those laws when there is a real question as to their meaning. That would be the courts. The top court in the land and the ultimate decider of just exactly what those laws mean is the Supreme Court. Once they tell you what the law means there is no getting around that definition short of the Congress changing the law.

So has the Supreme Court answered the question as to whether you need to make an annual public record and a BLM informational filing? Yes they have - many many times. Here is an excerpt from one of their decisions about just what is being discussed here:

Section 314 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA) establishes a federal recording system that is designed to rid federal lands of stale mining claims and to provide federal land managers with up-to-date information that allows them to make informed land management decisions. Section 314(b) requires that mining claims located prior to FLPMA's enactment be initially recorded with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) within three years of the enactment, and § 314(a) requires that the claimant, in the year of initial recording and "prior to December 31" of every year after that, file with state officials and the BLM a notice of intention to hold a claim, an affidavit of assessment work performed on the claim, or a detailed reporting form. Section 314(c) provides that failure to comply with either of these requirements "shall be deemed conclusively to constitute an abandonment" of the claim.

Well that's pretty clear isn't it? This case is particularly interesting because these folks lost their claim by relying on BLM information about filing requirements. This case was decided in 1985. Once you read the case and understand what happened ask yourself why the BLM would continue to tell people the deadline for annual notices is December 31?

Here's the case United States v. Locke.

Read that and please stop relying on the BLM to give you legal advice.

Educate yourself and prosper!

Heavy Pans

 

[Hefty1]

Pay the 2015 "Maintenance Fee" of $155 per claim, mill site, and/or tunnel site, on or before September 1, 2014.

Placer claims over 20 acres must pay an additional $155 per 20 acres or portion thereof.


OR

​

File a 2015 Maintenance Fee Payment Waiver Certification, BLM Form 3830­-2, (commonly referred to as the Small Miner's Waiver) on or before September 1, 2014. There is no charge for filing a Small Miner's Waiver.

AND

​

If you file the 2015 Small Miner's Waiver (due on or before September 1, 2014), you are certifying you will perform assessment on your mining claim in the "2015" assessment year and you will be required to do the following on or before December 30, 2015:
​

• For all PLACER and LODE MINING CLAIMS listed on the Waiver, you must file an Affidavit of Assessment Work, which shows the assessment work performed in 2015.
• For MILL SITES or TUNNEL SITES listed on the Waiver, you must file a Notice of Intent to Hold for the assessment year 2015;

​

If it is the first year you are filing a waiver,

you must file a Notice of Intent to Hold on or before the December 30 immediately following the filing of your waiver.

EX. File the waiver for the 2015 assessment year on or before September 1, 2014, and file a Notice of Intent to Hold on or before December 30, 2014,

and then file your Affidavit of Labor for the 2015 assessment year on or before December 30, 2015.

All 3 of these can be filed now.


And of course the fees.

 

[Clay Diggins]

What happened to the chart and flyer referenced here?

They are PDF format Kevin. If you can't read them it's probably because you don't have a PDF reader installed on your computer.

Let me know if it's a different problem and I'll put up a link to a copy on my server.

Heavy Pans

 

[Hefty1]

So Clay...Barry...Even the Notice of Intent to Hold (Placer claim) should be filed every year?

 

[Clay Diggins]

Does the Notice of Intent to hold form need to be sent to the BLM first and stamped before it is sent to the County Recorder? I looked on the county recorders website and it looks like some claims have them stamped and some don't. If someone knows the correct procedure for this part please post it. Thanks.

The BLM is only an informational filing mu50stang. Their case files do not constitute a legal record so their stamp means nothing outside of the BLM.

The proper place to make a public record in the State is your County Recorder. Make your record of your Intent to Hold your mining claim(s) with the County Recorder. It's a good idea to put on your Intent to Hold why you are recording it (some States require a reason). You might want to include a reason like "I paid my maintenance fee this year" or "It's the first year of my small miners exemption".

You will probably also want to include your claim names, BLM case #, TRS, and the County book and page of the original Location Notice.

I never wrote that "you must record a Notice of Intent to Hold every year". Please reread my original post. Sometimes the proper notice might be an "Affidavit of Labor Performed" or a notice that you have received a waiver from assessment because you can't get access to your claim. Those decisions need to be made depending on your circumstances.

It's important to understand that the BLM filings are not attestable in a court of law. They can not be certified and there is no person or process in the BLM to give testimony in a court case about the authenticity of their files. They are just pieces of paper as far as the court is concerned.

The county recorder, on the other hand, provides you with certified copies of your public record that are considered verifiable evidence in a court of law. If the certified copy is questioned in court the elected Recorder themselves can be brought to court to testify to the authenticity of your records.

To answer your question. There is no "proper procedure." You should be aware though that the Arizona BLM State office is pulling a lot of BS this year to try to close mining claims on technicalities. It generally best to make your public record before bringing a copy to the BLM.

As I originally wrote you need to RECORD with the County Recorder and FILE with the BLM each year. If you have only paid your fee online it might be a good decision to follow the Supreme Courts advice and make sure both the BLM and the County get their paperwork as well as the fees.

None of this is legal advice. Educate yourself as to the legal requirements to keep your claim and do what is needed. I can give you the resources to understand those requirements but I can't advise you on whether, or how, you should follow them.

Heavy Pans

 

[Hefty1]

I never wrote that "you must record a Notice of Intent to Hold every year". Please reread my original post. Sometimes the proper notice might be an "Affidavit of Labor Performed" or a notice that you have received a waiver from assessment because you can't get access to your claim. Those decisions need to be made depending on your circumstances.


Thank you.

 

[Hefty1]

On my "Affidavit of Labor Performed" I write in that this notice serves as "Notice of Intent to Hold"

 

[Clay Diggins]

On my "Affidavit of Labor Performed" I write in that this notice serves as "Notice of Intent to Hold"

A wise choice in my opinion Hefty.

Heavy Pans

 

[M.E.G.]

You can call me Barry if you want AzViper - it's not a secret.

The BLM is only concerned with their end of things. They are an executive agency that takes their orders from the Secretary of the Department of the interior. They don't work for you they work for the Secretary. They are not your lawyer and they are not responsible for giving you incorrect information. There are many people in the BLM that would like to see all of you lose your mining claims. Put 2 and 2 together and move away from the phone - in this case it's not your friend

One can read USDOI (BLM)/USFS disclaimer on The Myth page: The Myth

 

[dredgeman]

In filing our paperwork every year

We always write intent to hold on the affidavit of labor. The agencies up until recently didn't have an intent to hold paper even though it may be required. The claims that we have had since 75 have always required the notice with the county. Then when blm started the data keeping an affidavit was required with the small miners waiver. The Notice was never waived. Then came the fees.

An incremental tightening of claim ownership to make it not worth while

 

[dredgeman]

BLM and the Forest Agencies are not required to give accurate information. Many of the Rangers are not trained by competent people in mining law. Some of the interpretations are way off and they are not responsible.

Research Research Research the actual mining laws to protect yourself

 

[Clay Diggins]

The BLM has only one approved government form for mining. That is the free to file "MAINTENANCE FEE WAIVER CERTIFICATION" Form 3830-2.

Every other "form" offered to miners by the BLM are not official or approved. They are made up BS created by the same know-nothings answering your questions incorrectly.

In Arizona, among the other legal requirements to make a valid location, is the requirement that a map be made and recorded of the location. By law that map must have a compass indicating North on it. The BLM for many years has given away "free" bogus forms that don't have a compass on the map page.

Minor detail right? Yet it's the duty of the claim locator to make sure their documents meet the legal requirements for a valid claim. Has anyone lost their claims because they didn't have the required compass on their location map? I honestly don't know of a single person that has. But if it ever comes up as a cause to void claims you can bet the BLM will be leading the charge.

There are many, many more examples of deficient "forms" being offered by the BLM.

Please be aware that under Federal law no agency can require you to use or fill out a form that does not have a current OMB number printed on the front and three legal notices attached.

1. The The Privacy Act notice.
2. The Paperwork Reduction Act notice.
3. The Burden Hours Statement.

There will also be a notice that says this:
You do not have to respond to this or any other Federal agency-sponsored information collection unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

There is only one OMB approved form for miners. All other documents should be generated by yourself. Relying on "free" forms or information from the BLM can be hazardous to your prospecting and mining rights.

These people are not your friends. They are not looking out for your best interests. Please be wary of ANY "free" help the BLM offers you.

Heavy Pans

 

[M.E.G.]

Some in Oregon are attempting to set an administrative record by filing this, or similar, example:

Text Deleted By Poster

I'll have to agree with Clay in his following reply, that, for most, it's best to keep it simple. What I had posted here was an example of a similar filing that has been filed with the BLM (for a number of years) after many, many hours, days, months, years of studying the Mining Law, court cases, statutes etc. It may seem it far exceeded the requirements to maintain exclusive possession of a valid uncommon mineral deposit property/claim, but with my, and others, experiencing the continued assault by agencies, such as the BLM/Forest Service, it was found necessary to do the extra and make this an administrative record covering their criminal actions.

As Clay explained earlier: (Paraphrasing) If you expect to maintain possession of your mining claims, your going to be required to do your home work. There are those looking to dispossess you of your property(ies).

 

[Clay Diggins]

Interesting MEG

So what is a "Work Purchase Compliance Certification"? I understand the writer's reinterpretation of the words involved in the concept and I don't disagree with the intended purpose but what is the advantage to renaming what has become a well known legal way of making a record?

In my experience County Recorders are creatures of habit. They like to have a big title at the top so they know how you want your record filed. They have a place for Affidavits and inside that place is another place for the subset of Affidavit of Work performed (placer, lode). Without a hole to put a "Work Purchase Compliance Certification" in this is going to put most public record keepers in a tizzy.

I always advise developing good relationships with your County Recorder. They are one of the two elected employees that work for the people, the other being the Sheriff. Consider the power involved in that statement before you start a quarrel with your County Recorder.

When these miners convert a Notice of Intent to Hold into a "Notice of Intent To File" the actual intent may be a bit confusing to a court. Intending to File is kind of like saying "well... I was going to". I suspect legally it would be as intelligible as Mandarin Chinese to a judge.

Add in the fact that making an Affidavit (a written sworn statement of fact made under oath) while asserting statements that the affiant may not have personal knowledge of can poison the believability of the known facts stated in the sworn Affidavit. A suspect or weak affidavit is of no benefit to the miner's claim of right.

I can see where as an administrative record for the BLM's files only may be acceptable as far as it goes but as a requirement for public record under the Mining Act it is woefully deficient. It doesn't name the claims involved, where those claims can be found, where and when the original Location was made a public record (usually county book and page). In short it doesn't appear to meet the requirement in the Mineral Grant conditions that:

"All records of mining-claims hereafter made shall contain the name or names of the locators, the date of the location, and such a description of the claim or claims located by reference to some natural object or permanent monument as will identify the claim."

It does not make a positive statement of fact based on personal knowledge declaring:

"not less than one hundred dollars' worth of labor"

was performed on each claim. That's another requirement of the Mining Act.

I would like to point out that the legal basis for a record made by affidavit does not allow for unnecessary language or legal arguments. Statements of information and belief are allowed in affidavits but the affiant must state the source of the their information and the grounds for the affiant's belief in the accuracy of such information right in the affidavit. This affidavit does neither.

Now you know I'm being devil's advocate with this MEG. As I wrote - I'm in favor of the concepts expressed here. I am however leery of unclear or wordy statements of fact. Doing the right thing poorly seldom produces the best results.

To my eyes this "Work Purchase Compliance Certification" is out of place in a sworn affidavit. In my experience affidavits should be clear, simple and to the point. If the oath taker isn't prepared to back up every word with verifiable facts he probably shouldn't be swearing to them. KISS really is the rule of the day when making affidavits.

Just one man's opinion MEG. I'd like to hear your take on this.

Heavy Pans

 

[mu50stang]

Thanks for all the information. Would these be the correct steps in filing the right paperwork.

1. Pay annual fee
2. File notice of intent to hold with blm
3. File notice of intent to hold with county

Also if in the past a notice of intent to hold was not filed does that mean the claim is invalid and a person should start over with a new location filing.

 

[M.E.G.]

Edited last posting

 

[MinerFortyNiner1952]

The assessment form I have has a section at the end to have the form notarized. Don't remember this on any past forms.

Is this now a requirement?

 

[SLNugget]

The assessment form I have has a section at the end to have the form notarized. Don't remember this on any past forms.

Is this now a requirement?

Sorry I listed the incorrect form before.

I do not THINK the BLM requires it to be notarized, but you should check on that. my County Recorder stated if there was a place for the form to be notarized it would have to be notarized before it could be recorded at the county.