"closed" placier claims - open?

[G-bone]

Hello all!
I'm ready to use my new xmas gifts (panning gear)
I want to take the boys and due a little local panning/sluicing.

But my biggest fear is treading on an existing claim.
I downloaded "Gold maps on line" for California.
It shows Active Placer Claims as well as closed Placer claims.

SO my questions is, if a Placer claims is listed as "closed" and is within the National Forest or BLM, does that mean it is open for free panning?
When labeled "closed" does that mean it is no longer a claim and re-open land basically?

I'll do some searchin on BLM site for the answer as well, but just so impatient that I'm hoping to find an answer here

I will be looking into local clubs as well as I get deeper into this new hobby.
but so much in our local mountains to explore on our own as well.
But I just want to do it fairly.

Thanks all.

G

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[Prospector70]

Nice!

That is one of my fears as well when I'm out prospecting in the mountains here in Colorado. If you are looking to learn the best stop would be your local prospecting store. They can tell you public places nearby where you can find some gold. It's in their best interest as further equipment will surely be necessary after the fever has set in.
Keep us up to date! Seems like you are well on your way now, great that the boys will be joining you, its great to see family doing stuff together outside.

Great luck to you!
P70

(And keep posting! Shoot some pics of the creek or river and the gold of course )

 

[Maitland]

Closed claims are just that, whether the owner(s) forgot to send in their paperwork or they let it go intentionally, that land is available to for anyone else to file a claim on assuming a new (active) claim wasn't filed on the same ground in the time since the previous one was closed. Yes, if there isn't an active claim on it, then it's basically open to anyone for prospecting. The only exception (that I can think of) would be if the area if closed to prospecting (for revegetation, erosion control, etc.)

 

[Clay Diggins]

Often claims that have a "CLOSED" case status in the BLM database were made over the top of an existing valid claim or on areas not open to claim. That database is often months behind the reality on the ground. It is only one tool in determining areas open to prospecting. Relying on closed claims to tell you where you can prospect is the wrong way to go about determining land status.

I would suggest prospecting beginners or prospectors new to an area begin with their local prospecting shop or a local prospecting club. Learning how to determine land status can be a difficult and lengthy learning curve. Your time might be better spent learning the ropes, and the open prospecting locations, from those already familiar with your area of interest. Then you can move on to learning the other aspects of prospecting, including land status.

Heavy Pans

 

[Desertphile]

The BLM's database isn't accurate, and, as one already pointed out above, the time frame on the database lags. The best way to know if an area is still claimed is to look for monuments and markers at the site: they trump paper work. The monument must be readily visible, and the notice must state, clearly, what area the claim includes. If there are no proper location markers, the area is open to claiming by anyone even if someone else has filed the paper work and paid the yearly tax / fees. The paper work could be flawless, and the database could be instantaneously updated, but if the claim is not properly located (point of discovery monument, claim notice at the monument, and, if a lode claim, also corner markers, all well-maintained) then any previous claim is invalid.

 

[Clay Diggins]

The monument must be readily visible, and the notice must state, clearly, what area the claim includes. If there are no proper location markers, the area is open to claiming by anyone even if someone else has filed the paper work and paid the yearly tax / fees. The paper work could be flawless, and the database could be instantaneously updated, but if the claim is not properly located (point of discovery monument, claim notice at the monument, and, if a lode claim, also corner markers, all well-maintained) then any previous claim is invalid.

This is simply not true Desertphile. There is no requirement that monuments or stakes be maintained continuously nor are other prospectors free to consider a current claim invalid for lack of markers.

The original poster who asked this question is in California. In California a locator is not required to ever stake or mark their claim if it is located by aliquot part. As most placer claims are located by aliquot part in California most placer claims have no physical markers on the ground yet their claims are just as valid as those with many markers.

Please respect your fellow miners locations. Only a court of law can declare a claim invalid for cause. It has never been up to prospectors to judge the validity of others claims.

Heavy Pans

 

[pacog]

This is simply not true Desertphile. There is no requirement that monuments or stakes be maintained continuously nor are other prospectors free to consider a current claim invalid for lack of markers.

The original poster who asked this question is in California. In California a locator is not required to ever stake or mark their claim if it is located by aliquot part. As most placer claims are located by aliquot part in California most placer claims have no physical markers on the ground yet their claims are just as valid as those with many markers.

Please respect your fellow miners locations. Only a court of law can declare a claim invalid for cause. It has never been up to prospectors to judge the validity of others claims.

Heavy Pans

Clay what about California public resource code 3900-3924? We don't have to mind or follow them at all Seems to me this would be the only way to really make a claim valid and easy to identify on the ground. So I am a bit confused when you say claims don't have to be marked. The codes say different?

 

[Maitland]

Not to go off-subject, but I always wondered about maintaining monuments and stakes... how about the notice of discovery and the general signs showing the claim's name and owner(s)? Those don't invalidate a claim either if not posted, or is that up to each BLM area office?

 

[goldenIrishman]

Clay brings up a good point in that California DOES NOT REQUIRE claims to be marked. Arizona on the other hand DOES require that claims be marked. Different states mean different rules. You should ALWAYS take the time to check what the laws of your state are and to preform your due diligence.

One thing I've been thinking on lately is this: If you're mining on federal land, why are the states allowed to say if you need to mark your claim (or not)? While I always mark my claim(s) here in Arizona as required, I'd do so even if it wasn't. I consider it a courtesy to other miners so they know where my boundaries are and can avoid prospecting within them. Of course that's only if they're honest. Claim markers are like locks, they're only going to keep honest people honest.

 

[goldenIrishman]

Not to go off-subject, but I always wondered about maintaining monuments and stakes... how about the notice of discovery and the general signs showing the claim's name and owner(s)? Those don't invalidate a claim either if not posted, or is that up to each BLM area office?

I for one always keep the "Notice of Discovery" where it can be seen and accessed by others for the simple reason it has my contact info and a map of my claim boundaries. I do them up as a word file so I can replace them as needed. People forget to return them to the container, or they get wet or ruined in other ways so they need replacement.

Different states each have their own requirements when it comes to stakes, markers and monuments. I don't think the BLM cares if it is marked or not. They have the description of the boundaries in their files and their field guys can read a map. If the BLM allowed each sector office to make up their own rules it would be mass confusion! ( oh wait.... It already is!)

 

[Clay Diggins]

Clay what about California public resource code 3900-3924? We don't have to mind or follow them at all Seems to me this would be the only way to really make a claim valid and easy to identify on the ground. So I am a bit confused when you say claims don't have to be marked. The codes say different?

It's all there in the California public resource code pacog. It only applies to placer claims made by aliquot part.

Where the United States survey has been extended over the land embraced in the location, the claim may be taken by legal subdivisions and no other reference than those of the survey shall be required, and the boundaries of a claim so located and described need not be staked or monumented. The description by legal subdivisions shall be deemed the equivalent of marking.

Heavy Pans

 

[Clay Diggins]

Not to go off-subject, but I always wondered about maintaining monuments and stakes... how about the notice of discovery and the general signs showing the claim's name and owner(s)? Those don't invalidate a claim either if not posted, or is that up to each BLM area office?

Federal mineral claim laws are the same throughout the United States. The BLM has no direct authority over the manner in which a claim is located. The BLM is entitled to an informational filing and fees since 1976, and that is all. The BLM does not enforce the Mining Acts, that is the duty of the courts.

The States and/or the mining districts, set the standards for locating claims within their jurisdiction. They do so within the limits set by federal laws governing locations. You can find the law determining who gets to decide what when it comes to locations in Section 5 of the 1872 Mining Act.

Heavy Pans

 

[pacog]

It's all there in the California public resource code pacog. It only applies to placer claims made by aliquot part.



Heavy Pans

Clay so parts a & b of 3902 don't have and merit? Why even include them in the code if the last paragraph negates them? Stuff like this makes things very confusing. Thanks for your help

 

[winners58]

"Gold maps online" only goes down to the sector thats 640 acre's and should only be used to give a general idea of where the gold is.
in BLM's LR2000 if you do a Geo search for a sector there might be 20 or so claims closed and will show dates back 10 or 15 years.
"Gold maps online" good to use to find the area you’d like to look in then look for open areas, campgrounds, recreational mining corridors,
have good maps BLM Map Guide. find some old timers to go with, Join a Prospecting club.

 

[Clay Diggins]

Clay so parts a & b of 3902 don't have and merit? Why even include them in the code if the last paragraph negates them? Stuff like this makes things very confusing. Thanks for your help

Of course they have merit pacog. Not all placer claims can be located by aliquot part. Those earlier sections give standards for locations not located by regular public survey (aliquot part). More than 1/2 of California has never been surveyed, there are a lot of placer claims made in California by metes and bounds. In all of those circumstances the locator can not take advantage of the placer no stake and monument exception. That is where the prior parts of 3902 come in - to set location standards for those many placer claims that don't qualify for the exception.

I would caution that the California location laws are not the only consideration. The federal laws regarding location still need to be observed.

Just remember that only a court can declare a claim invalid due to improper location procedure. Courts have traditionally been very lenient in allowing miners wide latitude in interpreting location laws. The miners intent is the critical factor in court. If they expressed a valid intent to make a claim they probably succeeded by traditional law standards. You would be hard pressed to find a court that would invalidate a claim because of markers.

If you feel a claim is invalid for any reason you have a way to challenge it under the Mining Acts. Make an adverse claim over the top of the claim you are challenging. Serve a suit challenging the validity of the senior locator within 30 days. If the court agrees with you it's your claim.

If you lose the suit you will need to pay the expenses of the person you claimed over and sued. If you don't bring a lawsuit challenging the claim within 30 days your adverse claim is automatically void.

I hope that clears things up?

Heavy Pans

 

[Hoser John]

Back to basics 101- all claims start,are maintained annually and ended at the local county recorders office and tax assessors office also. Best place to hit is the tax office as easiest to find all current activity between the 2. BLM records are horrendous as exampled this May by BOTH the BLM/FS as the TRPP is trying to steal all the property in a 43 mile stretch from trinity dam to Helena on the Trinity. My claims there for 23 contiguous filing years yet according to them not there. I proved it up with all 23 years of filings and shut them up asap,idjets. Also you have 90 days to file with the BLM to prove up your claim prior to final expensive filing with them. Areas are being reclassified daily as not claimable in accordance to all the vegetable soup titled programs and takings are occuring rapidly under reclaimation and ENERGY projects now take also. Slow and easy wins the race BUT heads up as soon as you file there will be claimjumpers backfiling on the claim by weeks to steal your claim. Backdate all filings as takes about 5 days to be recorded in the records and that kills the chance of thieves taking your latest greatest dream. John

 

[Clay Diggins]

Please don't backfile. Backfiling is illegal and will void your claim when it is discovered. Committing mineral fraud by backfiling will get the attention of the Attorney General in this state. If you offer shares in your mining venture the SEC will also take a great interest in your activities. Personal experience speaking here - you don't want to lose a good claim by taking shortcuts. Good claims are hard to come by.

Please respect your fellow miners. The proper way to establish an absolute location date is to take along a witness that has no involvement in the claims, have that witness take pictures of each stake and monument when they are set with the locators next to it and a recognizable background. When the claim is completely staked have the witness sign a statement as to the date and the actions they witnessed that day.

When Hoser or one of his backfiling friends come along the Judge will look at the pictures and the testimony of the witness and throw the backfilers claims out. This is how mining companies handle the problem and it's how we advise locators in our business. Don't commit a fraud - do it right. Backfiling is lazy, disrespectful and illegal.

Heavy Pans

 

[azblackbird]

Please respect your fellow miners. The proper way to establish an absolute location date is to take along a witness that has no involvement in the claims, have that witness take pictures of each stake and monument when they are set with the locators next to it and a recognizable background. When the claim is completely staked have the witness sign a statement as to the date and the actions they witnessed that day.

Ditto... I'd even go a step further and spend a few dollars on a professional surveyor who can attest to your claim staking, thus leaving no doubt and can help document the start of a good paper trail.

 

[Desertphile]

This is simply not true Desertphile. There is no requirement that monuments or stakes be maintained continuously nor are other prospectors free to consider a current claim invalid for lack of markers.

The original poster who asked this question is in California. In California a locator is not required to ever stake or mark their claim if it is located by aliquot part. As most placer claims are located by aliquot part in California most placer claims have no physical markers on the ground yet their claims are just as valid as those with many markers.

Please respect your fellow miners locations. Only a court of law can declare a claim invalid for cause. It has never been up to prospectors to judge the validity of others claims.

Heavy Pans

I am only familiar with the laws in California, since that is where my placer and lode claims are. I vividly recall the requirement for a point-of-discovery monument, required by the BLM. Let me look at my two handbooks on the subject.

Okay, I am at this very moment staring right at the requirement listed on page 44, PLACER MINING CLAIMS AND NOTICES. "Where the land has been surveyed, one location monument and one location notice is required." If I recall correctly, this was a rider along with California Senate Bill 84, passed in year 1991.

Placer claims in California are required by law to have a notice placed at or in a monument, describing the area claimed.

 

[Desertphile]

Clay what about California public resource code 3900-3924? We don't have to mind or follow them at all Seems to me this would be the only way to really make a claim valid and easy to identify on the ground. So I am a bit confused when you say claims don't have to be marked. The codes say different?

California placer claims require a point-of-discovery monument, with a notice at or near the monument, and it must be "readily visible" and "well maintained." Not complying with that requirement invalidates the claim. I do not know why someone (above) said otherwise: my BLM handbook on the subject states what I wrote.

Also, my copy of "Prospecting Locating and Valuing Mines: A Practical Treatise for the Use of Prospectors, Investors and Mining Men Generally: with an Account of the Principal Minerals and Country Rocks, Ore Deposits, Locations and Patents, the Early Development of Mines, Earthly Mineral Products, Coal, Gold Gravels and Gravel Mining, Measurement of Water, and Artesian Wells" states the same thing I did, and what the BLM's handbook states, and the laws regarding monument and corner markers (for lodes) are still in effect. Some additional laws regarding lode claims in California were added in year 1991. That handbook states that location markers on the ground, when placed correctly, trump paperwork if the paper work is flawed--- monument and corner markers take precedent over what has been filed with the county.

Plus prima facie it stands to reason that the ground must be marked.

I have several placer claims in California, and several lode claims. I have visited, literally, hundreds of placer claim. Not all active ones are properly located, but the ones that are properly located all have point-of-discovery monuments with claim notices.