Extent of Federal Authority upon the miner.

[Bejay]

This is relevant to anyone entering the public lands open to mineral entry.........looking for and or discovering "locatable minerals"....subject to the mining laws of the United States.

1st it is wise to learn what these mean!

The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) is the codification of the general and permanent rules and regulations by the executive departments and agencies of the federal government of the United States. These get published in the Federal Register.

US Codes: The United States Code is a consolidation and codification by subject matter of the general and permanent laws of the United States. It is prepared by the Office of the Law Revision Counsel of the United States House of Representatives. It gets published in the Federal Register. (known to be the "record").

The Federal Register, abbreviated FR or sometimes Fed. Reg., is the official journal of the federal government of the United States that contains government agency rules, proposed rules, and public notices.[1] It is published daily, except on federal holidays. The final rules promulgated by a federal agency and published in the Federal Register are ultimately reorganized by topic or subject matter and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), which is updated annually.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So CFR's have to follow the LAWS In Many cases the agencies assigned to administer the Laws per the CFR's get confused and get completely off track.

So that is why the miner must understand that the USFS and the BLM must adhere to the CFR's correctly. Lately, more often than not, the agencies run amuck.

Much confusion results from the failure of such agencies to truly understand FLPMA (Federal Land Policy Management Act) and the 1955 Multiple Use Act. Acts are law ....CFR's are published agency rules adopted from the law.

One must be able to understand how this fits together like a big jig saw puzzle. Regional agencies often get it completely messed up. They read one part but fail to see the whole picture. Kinda like picking up a piece of the sky in a jig saw puzzle and because it is blue saying it is the water.

So miners MUST learn when an agency has authority and then learn when the agency authority does not exist....because the agency authorities often really get it wrong.

BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY REMEMBER WHEN YOU ARE OUT LOOKING FOR THE GOLD YOU ARE A MINER/PROPSECTOR....PLAIN AND SIMPLE! When challenged while out in the field always ask politely: "by what authority are you acting...and by what authority are you demanding this or that". They will quote you a CFR. Then you can look into it later if you want and decide if the agent is correct or not. If not you can find the correct CFR application or even show them within the Acts (laws) that you are not subject to their request. Letters and docs always leave a paper trail...better than he said she said.
Even if you were to lose the argument/discussion. Providing expert knowledge of such matters makes an agent realize you are not some push over. Of course always maintain your cool. No need to escalate the situation at the moment. Best to let both you and the agent give more thought/strategy to the issue at hand.

This has worked effectively for me and other miners as well.

But as you have seen me post: Cut and Paste & Copy docs are a real handy thing to have on hand in a briefcase or portfolio...or even your lap top or "I" Pad etc.

I'll post FLPMA and Multiple use Act understanding info later on this thread if interest is maintained here. One must understand the Mining Laws as well. But that is pretty easy stuff if one is guided through it correctly. It has already been done on another mining law forum.....and probably Land Matters as well.


Bejay

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A History of Mining on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska - Grab it through Amazon!

[Clay Diggins]

exclusive right
What else is there to say?

Just this:

Exclusive right to possession and enjoyment of the surface so long as they comply with the laws of the United States, and with State, territorial, and local regulations not in conflict with the laws of the United States governing their possessory title.

Governing their possessory title.

Your possessory (only) title is subject to being governed by the laws of the United States, and the State, territorial, and local regulations.

The WHOLE law matters. Picking out the words you like doesn't make the rest of the law go away.

How many here have included the 1960 Placer Claim Millsite Act in their documents? The 1955 Mining Claims Rights Restoration Act? Both of those gave miners additional new rights. The reality is the Mining Acts protect miner's rights to the deposits they discover. That has never changed. In some cases like the Mining Acts above that right has been expanded.

The United States is one of the biggest mining countries on earth. The rights miners have to their discoveries here are far beyond what most countries have. Learn what those rights are.

The WHOLE law matters. Until you see the law as a whole instead of some good parts you quote and some bad parts you don't believe in miners will continue to lose legal battles.

Educate yourself and prosper!

Heavy Pans

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Treasure of Victoria Peak - Grab it through Amazon!

[Bejay]

You bring forth questions per your answers Clay. In the US we mine all sorts of things. Mining and mining laws relevant to mineral locations are quite diverse. That said, with extreme agreement, I would most certainly agree that miners MUST learn what their rights are. Different kinds of miners, different kinds of claims, and different types of land. All is extremely relevant and WORDS are of utmost understanding. For many years now I have watched and participated in the discussion and conveyance of all the rules/regs/laws/policies etc.

We see a constant attack upon the MEG......Yet all we have to rely upon is the use/structure/meaning of the words. Now if this holds true we see that the complexity of such "word use" is something that can not be determined on a forum such as this. We can always pick and choose what "this or that" we want to use to support a position. Not much different than the method the BLM and USFS employ in their methodology.

In the end we are confronted with one simple task: "Does the argument, based on the interpretation/agreed intent, achieve the positive desired outcome". This can be achieved in many ways! For example it can be achieved by way of adjudication. It can be achieved by way of protest. It can be achieved by compromise where two parties agree to disagree, yet there exists a willingness to come together for the benefit of all parties.

So where does one begin? As pointed out earlier: I like Simple, yet effective. To what extent must a single miner learn and know the rules/laws/policies/regs/court rulings etc etc etc. MEG Miners want to mine. They don't want to be constantly under attack. Wishful thinking nowadays.....as the attacks are endless. I attempted to end this discussion earlier....as it is really impossible to get to the "bottom line" on these forums.

Yet it was on one of these forums that I began to learn. It led me to the Mining law forum. And even here now. But these thread type discussions are really not going anywhere for me now. What I want, and am seeking, is an answer as to how to secure my right to extract the gold from my claim(s) without undue degradation of my rights. How I convince others of my right to do so is diverse.....because of the "words". If people can not agree on the explicit meaning of the words, and how they are put together, then everything else is of little use...IMHO.

You just gotta love how the Secretary and others like to use words don't you!

Bejay

 

[Clay Diggins]

The only "mining claims" that can be made in the United States are those claims for discovered valuable minerals under the 1872 Mining Act. The other types of mining on Federal Lands are lease and sale minerals. Neither of those classes of mining are known as "mining claims" or "locations" in the law.

You can leave the term "mining claim" or even "claim" off your list of confusing multiple use terms. If the words "mining claim" are used in the law the subject is locations made under the 1872 Mining Act grant.

See it just got simpler.

Heavy Pans

 

[Hefty1]

How many here have included the 1960 Placer Claim Millsite Act in their documents? The 1955 Mining Claims Rights Restoration Act?

Nope...not needed.

 

[Hefty1]

without undue degradation of my rights: Now that's funny Bejay....Ask Congress...they know....LOLOLOL

 

[Clay Diggins]

How many here have included the 1960 Placer Claim Millsite Act in their documents? The 1955 Mining Claims Rights Restoration Act?

Nope...not needed.

You may not need them Hefty but other miners are grateful for the rights granted there.

The 1955 Mining Claims Rights Restoration Act grants the right to prospect and locate claims on powersite withdrawals. Think - most of the rivers in California were opened to location with this law.

Isn't your claim on a Powersite withdrawal?

The 1960 Placer Claim Millsite Act gave the right to locate a millsite for a placer claim. Previous to 1960 only lode claims could have a millsite area to process and store ore.

Please think of other miners. You might need these rights someday. If we don't respect rights we don't need at the moment they could be lost to the miners who do need those rights.

Heavy Pans

 

[Clay Diggins]

I thought the title was held in trust FOR the miner until patent was issued.

Bejay

The title is held in trust for the people until the grant is complete and patent has passed to the locator. The paramount title is always held by the United States - the locator is only granted a possessory right against other locators.

That no possessory action between individuals in any of the courts of the United States for the recovery of any mining title, or for damages to any such title, shall be affected by the fact that the paramount title to the land on which such mines are, is in the United States, but each case shall be adjudged by the law of possession.

It should be obvious that claims locators often do not complete the work needed to perfect a claim. Should the locator abandon a claim, perfected or not, the possessory title passes back to the public. The title to the land was always held by the public through it's representative - the Congress

The land was never included in the possessory title. Only when patent is issued does the land become the miners exclusive property. Until then his property is limited to possession and enjoyment of the surface and to all veins, lodes, and ledges throughout their entire depth. Possession and enjoyment are not land - they are use rights.

If you know of a law that states that title to the land is held in trust for the miner please share it. That would void more than 140 years of court decisions and would lead to a whole new field of mining law. I might enjoy that.

Heavy Pans

 

[Bejay]

The only "mining claims" that can be made in the United States are those claims for discovered valuable minerals under the 1872 Mining Act. The other types of mining on Federal Lands are lease and sale minerals. Neither of those classes of mining are known as "mining claims" or "locations" in the law.

You can leave the term "mining claim" or even "claim" off your list of confusing multiple use terms. If the words "mining claim" are used in the law the subject is locations made under the 1872 Mining Act grant.

See it just got simpler.

Heavy Pans

Not sure I follow this! I thought other types of claims existed. That said it can become difficult trying to separate the two when accessing CFR's and US Code.

As you know I have spent considerable time LEARNING! And yet I continually have questions....and seek answers to such. I feel like a dog chasing his tail.

Bejay

 

[Hefty1]

You may not need them Hefty but other miners are grateful for the rights granted there.

The 1955 Mining Claims Rights Restoration Act grants the right to prospect and locate claims on powersite withdrawals. Think - most of the rivers in California were opened to location with this law.

Isn't your claim on a Powersite withdrawal?

The 1960 Placer Claim Millsite Act gave the right to locate a millsite for a placer claim. Previous to 1960 only lode claims could have a millsite area to process and store ore.

Please think of other miners. You might need these rights someday. If we don't respect rights we don't need at the moment they could be lost to the miners who do need those rights.

Heavy Pans

Clay, you asked how many here had theses Acts in their docs? I replied for myself and not for all other miners. Not needed...because I know of them, but don't need to keep copies. I never said I wasn't grateful for them.
Yes my claim is on a Powersite withdrawal.
"Please think of other miners" Really? You saying that to me?

 

[goldenIrishman]

Clay,

Could you explain a bit more on the mill site for placer mines thing? The only reason I can think of (granted this IS pre-coffee mind here) that a placer miner would need to have a mill site would be if there is a lot of loose rock on his claim that contains free milling gold in it or the rocks contain some sulphide deposit type materials that had washed down into the area. Am I thinking right on this?

 

[Clay Diggins]

Millsites aren't just for milling. They are non mineral areas where stacking, storage and processing take place.

There are quite a few instances where placer miners need an area to process or store their material in.

• Did you ever wish you had a source of water nearby to process with? - millsite.
• Did you ever have to process material from a placer without enough room to turn around much less set up delivery and processing? - millsite.
• Did you ever run into a placer where best mining practice meant you couldn't process on site (steep wooded area, sensitive wetlands etc.) - millsite
• Did you ever wonder where you were going to stack your tails so you weren't covering up areas that still needed to be mined? - millsite

I'll bet you can think of more reasons.

Millsites don't have to be associated with a mining claim. You can set up a millsite and processing plant simply for the purpose of offering your services to local miners.

I know of three active millsites in Arizona specifically for placer processing. One of those is not associated with any claim. There are probably more.

Heavy Pans

 

[goldenIrishman]

ahhhh Ok. I was thinking on the lines of milling equipment. It looks like Mill Sites are something I will want to look into more closely. The areas I've been researching don't look to have much free room because of the lay of the land, so a mill site just might be the ticket. Thanks Clay!

 

[2cmorau]

my head is in full melt down
california miners have been in court how long?

 

[kayakpat]

AWESOME READ, believe it or not we have the simular situations here in Pa, The bottom line we are in the U.S.A. and they have the ultimate authority , and can pass rules and laws and change them when it does so thru the proper processes. Here we have property you can buy and be deeded, with or without mineral, gas & oil, coal , or timber, but most properties do not come with these rights and you just have surface rights, as the forfathers kept them for themselves and sold them to private interest years ago. This was all William Penns property at one time. Anyway with the boom in fracking huge gas wells and holding ponds are showing up all over, sometimes right in or near to private homes etc. So they are fighting over surface rights and oil & gas rights as it affects some peoples wells property values, and the noise, traffic, dirt , smell etc and few want a huge well next to their homes. I would think what the gas rights people vs the home owners rights fight would be similar to the surface rights vs mineral rights does. I think the courts are going to be very busy over the next few years