Federally managed public land VRS. state managed public land
Welcome guest, is this your first visit?
Member
Discoveries
 
Results 1 to 12 of 12
Like Tree22Likes
  • 2 Post By russau
  • 1 Post By Hoser John
  • 2 Post By KevinInColorado
  • 3 Post By goldenIrishman
  • 2 Post By goldenIrishman
  • 4 Post By Clay Diggins
  • 4 Post By Clay Diggins
  • 1 Post By russau
  • 1 Post By russau
  • 1 Post By Hoser John
  • 1 Post By goldenIrishman

Thread: Federally managed public land VRS. state managed public land

« Prev Thread | Next Thread »
  1. #1
    us
    retired bumb and part time Hobo

    May 2005
    St. Louis, missouri
    6,080
    4809 times

    Federally managed public land VRS. state managed public land

    Ive been hearing from several people (off line) about a push to have our gubermint relinquish all public lands over to the states that land is in. I don't know of anything in particular about it except some people are trying to reach out to these socalled " Representatives" of ours to get a bill going pertaining to this. Has anyone else heard about this? After all , our Constitution has it written in there that the gubermint will own NO land . Maybe my wording our use of words might not be exactly correct , BUT you get the point. If this does take place , how would this effect the 1866 / 1872 mining laws and our rights (whats left of them) and what new state laws would be dreamed up by the wacoenviromentalists acting like they are really a peoples "representative" What would happen to the press legacy lands? water rights that were given to the people way back when? and the list goes on! I think this would pretty much stop the 1872/1866 mining law and the wacoenviromentalists would jump for joy! Darned if you do and darned if you don't!
    Hoser John and Nitric like this.

  2. #2
    us
    Mar 2003
    Redding,Calif.
    5,854
    6705 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting
    They are supposed to be our "stewards" of the public lands but not so anymore in my eyes due to lack od due process/closures/restrictions/etc etc etc...When you look at all the bans on dredging and all forms of mining by the states that does NOT sound safe for miners...John
    jere64ca likes this.

  3. #3
    us
    Author of a book about finding gold in Colorado

    Jan 2012
    Summit County, Colorado
    Grizzly Goldtrap Explorer & Motherlode, Gold Cube with Banker on top, Bazooka Goldtrap sluices, Angus Mackirk Expedition, Gold-n-Sand Xtream Hand pump
    6,944
    11086 times
    Prospecting
    The 1866/72 laws only apply to federally managed public lands. So... If the ownership didn't change (just the administration) it might be ok but if ownership changed, we'd be screwed.
    Goldwasher and russau like this.

  4. #4
    us
    This isn't a hobby! It's hard work!

    Feb 2013
    Golden Valley Arid-Zona
    Fisher / Gold Bug AND the MK-VII eyeballs
    3,465
    6158 times
    Prospecting/Mining and protecting our rights to do so.
    Neither States nor Feds own the lands. They belong to "We the People".

    Given that, Maybe it would be a good thing for the states to take management over on them, then again maybe it wouldn't. Saying the current "Management Plan" is a travesty would be a massive understatement at the very least. Each year the wildfires get worse, public access is cut off and the Forest Circus keeps growing fatter with Eco-nazis that want to take our access away.

    Mother Nature had a plan that had been developed over millions of years that worked very well. The native Americans knew this and worked with that plan for thousands of years and did pretty well. Well then the Europeans showed up and of course they had a "Better Plan". Didn't work out too well for the native peoples or the land.......
    et1955, russau and Nitric like this.
    http://www.mylandmatters.org/
    The one stop place for mining matters on public lands!

    "Those that make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable" John F. Kennedy

    When I joined the Army I took an oath to protect this country from enemies both foreign and domestic. To the best of my knowledge I've never been relieved of that oath and will continue to follow it to the best of my ability.

  5. #5
    us
    retired bumb and part time Hobo

    May 2005
    St. Louis, missouri
    6,080
    4809 times
    Yep GI that's why I posted this as "Federally managed" lands. And I agree with your post .

  6. #6
    us
    This isn't a hobby! It's hard work!

    Feb 2013
    Golden Valley Arid-Zona
    Fisher / Gold Bug AND the MK-VII eyeballs
    3,465
    6158 times
    Prospecting/Mining and protecting our rights to do so.
    I've been giving this some more thought Russ and I've come to the conclusion that they HAVE to be managed by the feds for one simple reason. Let's say for the sake of discussion that you have a section of public land here in Arizona. Even though it's here in the middle of the desert, it still belongs to the people of New York, or Maine etc etc etc. If you turn it over to the individual states, you know that they're going to go and get all possessive and start handing down rules of some sort that will exclude non Arizona residents from having access to it without some form of payment. Why WE all know that wouldn't be fair, we also know that is how the governmental mind set works a lot of the time.......
    et1955 and russau like this.
    http://www.mylandmatters.org/
    The one stop place for mining matters on public lands!

    "Those that make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable" John F. Kennedy

    When I joined the Army I took an oath to protect this country from enemies both foreign and domestic. To the best of my knowledge I've never been relieved of that oath and will continue to follow it to the best of my ability.

  7. #7
    Charter Member
    us
    Nov 2010
    The Great Southwest
    3,849
    11338 times
    Prospecting
    The states taking over Public Lands is a non issue. Each of the Public Land States were required to swear they would never do that before they were granted Statehood.

    Here's the prohibition in Arizona:
    Arizona Constitution
    Article 20 Ordinance
    Section 4
    The people inhabiting this state do agree and declare that they forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated and ungranted public lands lying within the boundaries thereof
    Here it is in Nevada:
    Nevada Constitution
    [Preliminary Action]
    Ordinance
    3
    That the people inhabiting said territory do agree and declare, that they forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within said territory, and that the same shall be and remain at the sole and entire disposition of the United States
    You will find something very similar in the other western Public Land States.

    Heavy Pans

  8. #8
    Charter Member
    us
    Nov 2010
    The Great Southwest
    3,849
    11338 times
    Prospecting
    Quote Originally Posted by KevinInColorado View Post
    The 1866/72 laws only apply to federally managed public lands. So... If the ownership didn't change (just the administration) it might be ok but if ownership changed, we'd be screwed.
    The Feds do try to make limited management contracts with the States sometimes. Those management agreements are not necessarily just for public lands.

    The issue of mineral rights on the public lands does not change with the management agency but with the mineral land status. Land Status is first of all a function of Congress with one exception. The Secretary of the Interior is designated by Congress to control land status and the BLM is the agency who must make those changes. Although the BLM is also a land manager they are the only land management agency who actually implements mineral land status. The land management agency is not a factor in whether the lands are open to location.

    In the non public land eastern states the federal interests in the "forests" and parks are generally limited to lease or limited surface right purchases. In that case or in the case of western states acquired (purchased or swapped) lands there are no rights under the multiple mining acts. Management of those lands don't have to consider mining rights so those State contracts can be pretty well understood just by reading the contract.

    In the western Public Land States where there is land open to location things get a little messy. A good example is the Auburn State Recreation Area on the American River in California. Much of the land within that management contract boundary is public land open to location. The right to locate on those lands is only restricted by a minor power withdrawal for a dam that will never be built. As such the claim locator only needs to notify the BLM of the land status and wait 30 days before beginning mining. The BLM should, and usually does, approve the claim if there are no active power projects planned or being proposed in Congress.

    Locating a claim should be easy peasy in the ASRA area because there is no way there will ever be a dam proposed or built on the fault underlying the dam site. BLM still wants to pretend that a dam is still in planning and voids each new claim location.

    Of course the refusal to process claims in the ASRA there does not close the area to prospecting or exploration. The 25 year management contract with the State Parks makes it clear that minerals, prospecting and exploring are not to be managed by the State Parks. Still there are those on this forum and others that are trying to negotiate prospecting privileges and regulations with the California State Parks when in fact the right to prospect those areas are controlled by the 1866/1872 and all the Mining Acts - not the Sate Parks.

    Clearly in the case of the ASRA and several other management contracts with States the federal lands and their mineral rights are being treated differently than the law allows. Public confusion over who is in charge of what allows some pretty shady stuff to go on. It's not just mining claims or prospecting either. Consider this - under federal law the public lands are open for free to the public unless a specific set of amenities are offered in a specific site. Now consider the parking and recreation fees charged by the ASRA and others on what is legally public land without the required amenities.

    There are a lot of good people in our Federal government land agencies but there are also a lot of not so good people who would like to change our access to those public lands. They have been unable to get the laws changed so they play games to confuse the public and keep them toeing the line for an agenda that has no place in public land management. It is those people who would like you to believe that land management agencies have the right to decide what lands are open to prospecting. Those same people would love you to believe they made a deal with a State to take over federal public lands and now State rules apply to those lands. That didn't happen in the law but if they can get enough people to believe it they can get what they wanted all along and never even bother going through the trouble of changing the laws they don't like. You know - like the law that says public lands are open to prospecting.

    Heavy Pans
    et1955, jere64ca, russau and 1 others like this.

  9. #9
    us
    retired bumb and part time Hobo

    May 2005
    St. Louis, missouri
    6,080
    4809 times
    Quote Originally Posted by goldenIrishman View Post
    I've been giving this some more thought Russ and I've come to the conclusion that they HAVE to be managed by the feds for one simple reason. Let's say for the sake of discussion that you have a section of public land here in Arizona. Even though it's here in the middle of the desert, it still belongs to the people of New York, or Maine etc etc etc. If you turn it over to the individual states, you know that they're going to go and get all possessive and start handing down rules of some sort that will exclude non Arizona residents from having access to it without some form of payment. Why WE all know that wouldn't be fair, we also know that is how the governmental mind set works a lot of the time.......
    GI this also was my initial thoughts of the states over reaching and comeing up with VERY CONSRICTIVE RULES that the greenies want.
    Hoser John likes this.

  10. #10
    us
    retired bumb and part time Hobo

    May 2005
    St. Louis, missouri
    6,080
    4809 times
    Again Barry to the rescue! Thanks Barry! Now I see that through this initial agreement , NO state can renege on this !
    Clay Diggins likes this.

  11. #11
    us
    Mar 2003
    Redding,Calif.
    5,854
    6705 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting
    The annihilation of mining and dredge rights in many states is just the tip of the iceburg if states were to take control. Feds are nasty enough but states definitely not my choice. BUT recent introduction of "federal segregation rights" has torn asunder many millions of acres for power production with wind and water preemption of mining rights. BUT yet again insanity prevails as in dozens of states they are tearing out dams left and right ,klamath 6-12 total??, leaving homes , farmers and miners with no water. Now who needs in place electricity producing dams and water to drink that has worked for 100s of years?? sic sic sic mess-John
    russau likes this.

  12. #12
    us
    This isn't a hobby! It's hard work!

    Feb 2013
    Golden Valley Arid-Zona
    Fisher / Gold Bug AND the MK-VII eyeballs
    3,465
    6158 times
    Prospecting/Mining and protecting our rights to do so.
    There are a lot of times I get the feeling that Clay is a reincarnated set of encyclopedias! He sees all.... he knows all!!!
    russau likes this.
    http://www.mylandmatters.org/
    The one stop place for mining matters on public lands!

    "Those that make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable" John F. Kennedy

    When I joined the Army I took an oath to protect this country from enemies both foreign and domestic. To the best of my knowledge I've never been relieved of that oath and will continue to follow it to the best of my ability.

 

 

Home | Forum | Active Topics | What's New

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Public land ?
    By tomhighland in forum Treasure Hunting Legal Issues
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Jan 17, 2016, 09:03 AM
  2. Public Land vs. Public Domain
    By M.E.G. in forum Gold Prospecting
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Apr 20, 2015, 03:13 AM
  3. Public Land Up For Grabs?
    By DizzyDigger in forum Gold Prospecting
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: Apr 07, 2015, 06:46 AM
  4. Public land that can be used for gold panning
    By Flashman33 in forum Panning For Gold
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Aug 18, 2013, 01:18 PM
  5. Replies: 14
    Last Post: Sep 10, 2012, 08:02 PM
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.3.0