patented mining claim question

[605dano]

I have a patented hard rock claim that was filed on the same day as patented placer claim. The original hard rock claim overlapped part of the original placer claim , but when it came to issuing the deeds the placer claim took precedent because it was filed first. My question is who owns the subsurface mineral rights on the placer claim even though the placer claim has the deed?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Bodfish Mike]

I don't think patented claim's are allowed anymore.
https://www.blm.gov/nv/st/en/prog/more_programs/geographic_sciences/mineral_surveyor_program/patenting_a_claim.html

Correct me if I'm wrong.
Mike

 

[605dano]

This all happened over a 100 years ago. I'm wondering if a hard rock claim is staked over a placer claim does the placer have the surface rights and the hard rock the sub surface rights? And if so what happens when the placer claim files for patent? Does the hard rock claim still have subsurface mineral rights?

 

[kcm]

You can still buy a claim that is legally patented, but Congress stopped issuing patents many years ago. Therefore, a patented claim is worth lots of $$ - providing it's still worth anything!

As for your question, a placer claim is ONLY for the loose, placer material on that claim. A hard rock claim is ONLY for the minerals that are bound within the rock. You can choose to file a hard rock claim over the remainder of the placer claim, if you wished, but you would have to work something out with the current claim holder as to access. However, anything that is hard rock and within the boundary of your claim is yours. If you have to access your hard rock through the portion that overlaps, then again, you must work things out with the placer holder.


EDIT: Btw, if it sounds like I know what I'm talking about, I don't!! Clay Diggins or one of the other more knowledgeable people can better answer your question, although I "believe" my post is correct.

 

[Goldwasher]

You own private property that was once public domain, was located for mineral resource development, perfected and applied for patent and granted.
That secured the mineral rights and surface rights, surface rights can/could have been sold while the original owner retained mineral rights.
that's what you own, the rights within the parcel for the use of the surface and maybe because it was a lode claim the sub- surface rights. Your deed will tell you. They do not carry over into the adjacent parcel.
What is going on within that parcel depends on whats goin on in that parcel. The term "patended mining claim" is misleading THESE DAYS, there are a great many houses sitting on yards that left the public domain into private holding via the mining law and patent.
The irony ,its not really a mining claim anymore. It's your land. To do with what you will within those local and state laws allowances. no longer under the federal protection of the mining acts. Funny how that works.

I might have been loose on some of my description Clay will sweep up the crumbs if I left any.

 

[605dano]

I totally understand the private land issue and my land is mine to do with as I wish as is the adjacent parcel. My question is who holds the subsurface mineral rights where the old claims overlap.

 

[Goldwasher]

the old claims don't overlap anymore per the parcel created by the patent. Thats why they are different patents and parcels now. You need to ditch the word "claim" now that it's patented. Your deed will tell you if you have the mineral rights. The deed for the adjacent parcel that once "was" a placer claim will say if that owner has those mineral rights.
You don't own a mining claim you own land. It is that simple. There is no longer an overlap and that historical overlap is history.

 

[kcm]

As I said (and from my understanding of things), it depends on what rights you speak of. Your neighbor has a valid (according to you) claim for all of the placer material, whereas you have a valid claim to all of the hard rock material. Placer isn't found only on the surface. It may be that some amount of overburden must be removed in order to access the good placer material. ...Is this what you're asking?

If that is, and if you're wondering if your neighbor has the authority to dig the placer (non-hard rock) material from the overlap of the claim, I'd have to say "absolutely", SO LONG AS it does not hamper your operations.

If this is what you're asking, then the other guys can give you a better answer, I'm sure.


...Of course, I "could" be wrong!

 

[winners58]

The burden of proof is on the lode claimant located within the prior placer claim to
establish by clear and convincing testimony that a valuable lode deposit was known to exist at
the date of patent. McConaghy v. Doyl, 75 P 419, 32 Colo 92, 97 (1903).
Furthermore, all presumptions favor the validity of a placer patent.
After the issuance of a placer patent, the Interior Department cannot assume that a known lode
existed within the limits of said placer at the date of the application.
the time to challenge any rights to the sub-surface is long past

 

[Goldwasher]

and they are two patents turned into private property a hundred years ago according to the poster. They are not mining claims. The only thing that matters is the mineral rights and who owns them. It will be on the deed. There is no argument or hope here. Neither owner has any right to do anything outside of those parcels regardless if they were originally placer or lode or who filed first. The patenting process set that all in stone when the GLO issued the patent.

if you had filed a patent on a placer lode and no one had the sub surface rights you could then technically mine the sub surface deposit if it existed. Within local and state law.

if you filed a lode claim and then patented you could then mine any placer deposits within the parcel within local and state law. As well as work your subsurface lode.

if the patent was filed and the adjacent parcel was still public domain, You would have to locate a lode claim for subsurface or a placer claim for placer to gain the rights to the deposit adjacent.

If the adjacent property is private the fact that you land was once a mining claim gives you no in on how to access the mineral rights on that land.

the original question as posed has been answered. If the O.P.s hope is something about his patented private property gives him rights to his neighbors property in anyway then stop hoping because thankfully for property owners in this great nation. that's just not how this works.

And again stop calling them "mining claims" because they are no longer "mining claims". They are private parcels that may contain minerals and depending on where you live you might actually be able to mine them.

Read winners post as it explains it as well.

It appears Clay is proud that some of us amateurs do know what we are talking about

 

[Hoser John]

Just hit the local Recorder and Tax office for your county to assure that all taxes, liens, right and privledges are recorded properly and on time. Just like any property, tax must be paid. Deeded mineral rights, even though land sold , is a HUGE thing-also water and timber rights. Know the whole package then procede. Congratulations.......almost...lots of luck-John

 

[Goldwasher]

As I said (and from my understanding of things), it depends on what rights you speak of. Your neighbor has a valid (according to you) claim for all of the placer material, whereas you have a valid claim to all of the hard rock material. Placer isn't found only on the surface. It may be that some amount of overburden must be removed in order to access the good placer material. ...Is this what you're asking?

If that is, and if you're wondering if your neighbor has the authority to dig the placer (non-hard rock) material from the overlap of the claim, I'd have to say "absolutely", SO LONG AS it does not hamper your operations.

If this is what you're asking, then the other guys can give you a better answer, I'm sure.


...Of course, I "could" be wrong!

You are. What you describe is called trespassing! If the owner of the patent next to the o.P. tries to dig anything on his neighbors land he is stealing!

 

[Goldwasher]

This all happened over a 100 years ago. I'm wondering if a hard rock claim is staked over a placer claim does the placer have the surface rights and the hard rock the sub surface rights? And if so what happens when the placer claim files for patent? Does the hard rock claim still have subsurface mineral rights?

I just saw that you own both. If you have the deeds it will say if you have mineral rights period. The original claim status is irrelevant. Your deed will say if you have deeded mineral rights. If so you can work how you wish above and below within the local and state laws.
I thought you only owned the parcel that had been a lode claim.

 

[605dano]

I don't own both parcels. There is a lode on mine. I believe it continues under adjacent property. I was wondering if I could follow it [the lode] underground through adjacent property. The original staker must of thought that also as to stake over placer claim. If patenting cancels lode claims mineral rights that's what I wanted to know.

 

[Goldwasher]

I totally understand the private land issue and my land is mine to do with as I wish as is the adjacent parcel. My question is who holds the subsurface mineral rights where the old claims overlap.

" my land is mine to do with as I wish, AS IS THE ADJACENT PARCEL"...the last part made me think you were saying the adjacent was yours sorry.

when the parcel boundaries were set that's where the mineral rights ended. If they are deeded to you they are yours. The rights in the adjacent belong to that owner.

The original claims and overlap were adjusted when the parcels left the public domain.

Everything I have said remains. if the subsurface rights carried into the adjacent land the the adjacent land would be part of the patent. It isn't.

The original claimants had to prove their discovery and what they claimed rights to.

The lines on the parcel map show how that all worked out. Your deed will show if the mineral rights were retained once that patent was sold or any other time it changed hands.

It is way more likely that you don't even have those rights even though you bought land that was once a lode claim that was perfected and patented.

Furthermore there is pretty much no chance anything happened that would allow you or anyone to have access to the mineral rights under an adjacent property.

Unless you find the owner, work out a deal or purchase them.

Wondering what happened a hundred years ago won't change the ownership status now.

What matters is what your deed says and it will have no info on the land next to yours.

 

[winners58]

from the OP it sounds like speculation, since its now private property you cant create new rights.
as GW pointed out you are limited to the boundary's of your deed, are you working the mine?
if you have an adit and are following a valuable vein or mineralized ore body that continues under another property
then you would want to consult with a geologist and a mining attorney to see if you have extralateral rights, that costs $,
is there a vested interest or are you a new owner, has the mine been worked off and on continuously?
is it worth it? is it a proven valuable deposit with reserves? was it shut down because it was played out?
search for old mining records and maps, find the original patents Search - BLM GLO Records
then you have to search the county records and deed transfers all the way up the chain of ownership
sometimes you can find a map with a side view of the various workings and tunnels of the ledges and veins of the area.
It's always good to know the previous mining history of your property.

from a previous post of Clay Diggins
wording included in every lode patent;

They:
shall have the exclusive right of possession and enjoyment of all the surface included within the lines of their locations, and of all veins, lodes, and ledges throughout their entire depth, the top or apex of which lies inside of such surface-lines extended downward vertically, although such veins, lodes, or ledges may so far depart from a perpendicular in their course downward as to extend outside the vertical side-lines of said surface locations: Provided, That their right of possession to such outside parts of said veins or ledges shall be confined to such portions thereof as lie between vertical planes drawn downward as aforesaid, through the endlines of their locations. so continued in their own direction that such planes will intersect such exterior parts of said veins or ledges: And provided further, That nothing in this section shall authorize the locator or possessor of a vein or lode which extends in its downward course beyond the vertical lines of his claim to enter upon the surface of a claim owned or possessed by another.

 

[hvacker]

Interesting topic. My home is on land that gave mineral rights to a family in Spain hundreds of years ago.

But back to mining. What I found curious, here in New Mexico, water seems to follow a lot of mining regs.
We have senior and junior water rights. The oldest rights take priority, senior over junior. But surface water takes priority
over ground water (pumping) A senior surface right can prevent a junior right from pumping. Hard to prove but it has been litigated.

Is there a president for placer rights over tunnel mining if the placer claim was filed first (senior right)?
Guess what comes to mind, gold placer deposits had to come from an area under the surface and if the land was hard rock mined it seems it would affect the placer deposits negatively. Curious

 

[Clay Diggins]

As for your question, a placer claim is ONLY for the loose, placer material on that claim. A hard rock claim is ONLY for the minerals that are bound within the rock. You can choose to file a hard rock claim over the remainder of the placer claim, if you wished, but you would have to work something out with the current claim holder as to access. However, anything that is hard rock and within the boundary of your claim is yours. If you have to access your hard rock through the portion that overlaps, then again, you must work things out with the placer holder.


EDIT: Btw, if it sounds like I know what I'm talking about, I don't!! Clay Diggins or one of the other more knowledgeable people can better answer your question, although I "believe" my post is correct.

This is a common misunderstanding kcm. Each type of claim transfers ownership of ALL the valuable locatable minerals within their boundary. Lode claims own any placer material found on the claim and placer claims have exclusive rights to the lodes they may discover.

The difference in these two claim types (there are 4 claim types total) is that placer claims are made on the basis of a discovery of a valuable placer deposit and lode claims are made on the basis of a discovery of a valuable lode deposit. Once the claim has been located the locator is entitled to all the valuable locatable minerals found on the claim whether they be lode or placer in nature.

You can not locate a valid lode claim on the basis of the discovery of placer material and you can not locate a valid placer claim on the basis of the discovery of a lode. The type of mineral discovery determines the type of claim but the type of claim does not limit the exclusive right of the locator to all the minerals within the claim no matter whether they be placer or lode in nature.

No valid placer claim can ever be made over a valid preexisting lode claim. In some very limited circumstances a valid lode claim can (and sometimes should) be made over a valid preexisting placer claim. No uninvited prospector can prospect on either type of claim.

Once a claim has been patented all this doesn't make any difference. Patented claims become private property the day the patent is granted. They are no longer mining claims nor are they a subject of the federal mining laws discussed above.

These private properties have all the rights given in the patent document. Among those is the right to sell any portion of the property in any way the patent holder wishes. Often these private properties sell off their surface estate so developers can build houses while the patent owner retains or sells separately the subsurface mineral rights. That's why, in most cases, when you buy a house land or a farm you don't get the mineral rights.

To be very clear here - unless your deed specifically states that you are purchasing full mineral rights in a property you don't have any right to the minerals even though you "own" the house or property. If there is no sale of mineral rights spelled out in the deed you didn't buy the minerals - someone else has the rights to the minerals on and below the surface. Very few residential properties in the western states come with mineral rights.

So let's say you do have a deed with already paid for mineral rights. Then the type of mining you might be able to do is controlled by the original patent grant, the deed restrictions and local zoning laws. Those will be different for each private property. Federal mining law has nothing to do with your rights to mine patented property.

As winners already pointed out a patent granted for a lode claim usually allows you to follow the existing discovery underground outside the long sides of the patent but not outside the short ends. A patent granted for a placer claim restricts your future mining rights to the boundaries of the patent.

Virtually all (99.999%) of the private land in the western states was created by patent grants. Mining claim patents include the mineral rights. Most other patents do not. Wherever you live in the western states you will be living on patented land. Whatever land rights came with that patent grant are spelled out in detail in the patent itself.

Goldwasher and winners already made most of these points. You will find wisdom and knowledge you can rely on in those gentleman's posts.

Heavy Pans

 

[605dano]

Thanks for the info. It's been interesting. Would a patented mill claim have any special rights under the mining laws or would it just be private property?

 

[kcm]

Thanks Barry! Had that little voice telling me to keep quiet on this one, but nnnoooooo, not me! I read about how things work here as well as in Canada, not to mention reading misconceptions. My old brain cell (down to the last one now) just can't seem to keep it all straight.