Conspiracy To Keep Gold In The Ground....?

[Cal Kellogg]

Hello Everyone...

I live in Foresthill, Ca. and I'm really beginning to scratch my head....I live in the heart of Gold Rush country and I love prospecting, but there is clearly a war on prospectors. The over reach of the ASRA is well documented on these pages and I've run across folks that have had problems with Forest Service people out in the Tahoe and Eldorado National Forests....

With restrictions on digging, even scrapping dirt out of a tiny crack and wide spread restrictions on metal detecting it is becoming clear to me that the government at local, state and federal levels is heavily invested in keeping the gold in the ground and is very concerned about the possibility of the public finding something that they can turn a profit on. Why?

Even prior to the ASRA imposing their latest hands and pans rule, they were very clear that if you found gold legally in the ASRA that you couldn't sell it ?? Like they would ever know right?

While Federal and State official are clearly anti sluicing and panning, it seems like metal detectors are especially hated....Again scratching my head....What could be less invasive than a guy walking around at the speed of cold motor oil, scrapping 3 inch deep holes in the woods....?

The ASRA is a prefect example of what I'm talking about....They encourage mountain biking and motorcycling....Both sports create massive erosion. They encourage rafting, which results in much trash deposited in the river (and clearly someone is turning a profit by exploiting the river). Heck they even allow Placer County to operate a police shooting range in the ASRA that they must lease out to other LEO organizations because at times I've seen upwards of 100 people shooting at the range, far more people than the Placer Co. Sheriff's office employs...Hundreds of shooters, maybe thousands annually....Tens of thousands of lead slugs going into the environment, yet I'm the bad guy with my sore back, bad knee and Gold Bug 2....?

Is there an anti prospecting conspiracy and if so why? Why is the government soooooo invested in keeping the gold in the ground....?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Assembler]

I read something a few years ago that said you could take a single rock/day, up to 250lbs/year, without a permit. As I recall it was a BLM rule. But rules change, and I have no idea what they are now, nor do I care.
Jim

The idea you point out here is referred as "Right of common" (Profit a prendre). A right exercised by one man in the soil of another, accompanied with participation in the profits of the soil thereof. A right (Peoples rights) to take a part of the soil or produce of the land.
Thanks for pointing this out Jim in Idaho.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[winners58]

The idea you point out here is referred as "Right of common" (Profit a prendre). A right exercised by one man in the soil of another, accompanied with participation in the profits of the soil thereof. A right (Peoples rights) to take a part of the soil or produce of the land.
Thanks for pointing this out Jim in Idaho.

Jim is referring to rock collecting on public lands, You are describing an "easement" as used in some other countrys, not the same, or even related.

 

[Assembler]

Jim is referring to rock collecting on public lands, You are describing an "easement" as used in some other countrys, not the same, or even related.

Is the "Rock collecting on public lands" a "particular and peculiar benefit or advantage enjoyed by a person, company, or class, beyond the common advantages of other citizens"?
Is the "Easement" referred above, a type of a "Privilege"?
Is the "Rock collecting on public lands" a form of "Administration"?


What if the "Rocks collected" have some values within them.
Could a "Prudent man" be inclined to proceed to make a "Discovery"?
Can a "Discovery point" be any part of a "Mineral deposit"?
Can "Unappropriated lands / lands belonging to the United States and which are subject to sale or other disposal under general laws" be included thereof a "Mineral deposit", if so how?
Does "Congress have any records of disposal of these lands"?

Good point about "Right of common" having a origin before the "Founding of this Nation".

 

[Goldwasher]

Because it doesn't belong to you. Read the laws you can collect for personal use.

There is a reason for the claim process.

I am well aware that people sell gold that they don't have actual claim to. Never said that it didn't happen.

It is however in fact unlawful. to develop a mineral resource on public lands with out the right to the resource.

Digging something out of the ground and selling it on the public market is developing the resource.


Mining law covers valuable minerals. There is no where in the mining law that says you can go take everyone's property without claim and make money off of it.

You can in some instances do so with a commercial collection permit.

But, the legal way is to locate a claim.


Just because you didn't know that's how it worked...it doesn't mean it doesn't work that way.


If the blm finds out you are collecting for commercial gain you can get in a heap of trouble. Be it crystals or gold.

 

[Goldwasher]

Different state BLM offices have slightly different rules it is usually 250 + 1 pound per year and you can't even barter with what you find.

As usual it ends up being an enforcement issue.

There are a lot of people who don't care or don't know.

Its public lands. if you do not have legal right it belongs to everyone so you can't make money off of it. It's pretty simple.

Not an overreach it has been that way for a long time now.

https://geology.com/minerals/legal-aspects-of-rock-collecting/

 

[Jim in Idaho]

Well, at one point it was unlawful to help slaves escape. The laws aren't always written to help the people. In fact, they're usually written to help only the people who write them. That's why the rich are getting richer. One thing I've noticed in my 69 years is that people generally won't obey immoral laws. If the laws don't make sense, people don't obey them. A good example was Prohibition. Another was the 55mph speed limit. Good laws don't need much enforcement because people understand the necessity, and willingly do the right thing.
Jim

 

[Assembler]

Where the "Lands disposed of by Congress"? Is there any "Records thereof"? Can "Congress" 'un-dispose' the "Disposal of Lands"?
Thank you for the answers.

 

[Jim in Idaho]

Here are two more valid counterpoints. The first is that the original mining laws were written by the miners themselves. The laws weren't written to protect the resources
FOR the general public. They were written to protect the claimant FROM the general public. They didn't want just anybody to jump on their claim and remove resources that the claimant (by their hard work) had located. The laws of our country were always written that way. Look at water law, for example. In almost all cases the law says "first in use owns the rights to the water." The general public has no rights to the water.
The second is the idea that removing items for PERSONAL USE somehow suggests that that personal use excludes sale of the item makes no sense. If my personal use includes trading that item for another item, or currency, why shoudn't I be able to do that? Unless the law specifically states that sale is forbidden, sale of the item is lawful. Unless the law specifically excludes sale, I'd be very surprised if you'd find a judge anywhere, except in the most liberal states, that would find you guilty of some crime for simply selling a small hunk of gold, or a pretty rock.
Jim

 

[oneguy]

The first is that the original mining laws were written by the miners themselves.
Jim

I believe they were written by some smart men in congress (unlike todays idiots) who had the mindset of encouraging exploration, expansion, developing resources, and creating jobs and wealth to further benefit a growing US. True capitalism maybe... the way it should be?? Unfortunately things have changed..........jmo

 

[Assembler]

Here are two more valid counterpoints. The first is that the original mining laws were written by the miners themselves. The laws weren't written to protect the resources
FOR the general public. They were written to protect the claimant FROM the general public. They didn't want just anybody to jump on their claim and remove resources that the claimant (by their hard work) had located. The laws of our country were always written that way. Look at water law, for example. In almost all cases the law says "first in use owns the rights to the water." The general public has no rights to the water.
The second is the idea that removing items for PERSONAL USE somehow suggests that that personal use excludes sale of the item makes no sense. If my personal use includes trading that item for another item, or currency, why shoudn't I be able to do that? Unless the law specifically states that sale is forbidden, sale of the item is lawful. Unless the law specifically excludes sale, I'd be very surprised if you'd find a judge anywhere, except in the most liberal states, that would find you guilty of some crime for simply selling a small hunk of gold, or a pretty rock.
Jim

Some good points you point out Jim in Idaho. Yes the idea that "Location covers the workings of the prior locators" shall be minimized was a very big concern and was often "Governed by the Miners".
In Mining Law the basis is the "Right to locate a Mining claim" upon the "Public domain", where as the "Discovery" means the "Finding of mineralized rock in place". The finding of values within rocks is a type of "Discovery" with a very long history. The fact is "Mineral in Character" is not the same as "Mineralized rock in place" as this can be shown by the "Mining claim" itself.
Others out there can expand on this.

 

[Assembler]

I believe they were written by some smart men in congress (unlike todays idiots) who had the mindset of encouraging exploration, expansion, developing resources, and creating jobs and wealth to further benefit a growing US. True capitalism maybe... the way it should be?? Unfortunately things have changed..........jmo

Excellent points and this one could not point out any better. Thank you for posting oneguy.
Maybe what has 'Changed' is the less bringing into view by uncovering, to lay bare, to reveal to knowledge, to free from secrecy or ignorance, or to make known in general.

 

[Assembler]

Well, at one point it was unlawful to help slaves escape. The laws aren't always written to help the people. In fact, they're usually written to help only the people who write them. That's why the rich are getting richer. One thing I've noticed in my 69 years is that people generally won't obey immoral laws. If the laws don't make sense, people don't obey them. A good example was Prohibition. Another was the 55mph speed limit. Good laws don't need much enforcement because people understand the necessity, and willingly do the right thing.
Jim

Yes this was more common in the days of a "Jury action". What was before adoption of "Federal Rules of Civil Procedure" was an "Action at Law" also known as a "Jury action". Today there is "Grand jury, petit jury, common jury, special jury, cororer's jury, sheriff's jury".
Thanks for pointing this out Jim in Idaho.

 

[Assembler]

I read something a few years ago that said you could take a single rock/day, up to 250lbs/year, without a permit. As I recall it was a BLM rule. But rules change, and I have no idea what they are now, nor do I care.
Jim

Is appears that the "State of Idaho" is "Managing by direction or regulation" in regards to the "Rock collecting on Public Lands".

 

[Goldwasher]

Here are two more valid counterpoints. The first is that the original mining laws were written by the miners themselves. The laws weren't written to protect the resources
FOR the general public. They were written to protect the claimant FROM the general public. They didn't want just anybody to jump on their claim and remove resources that the claimant (by their hard work) had located. The laws of our country were always written that way. Look at water law, for example. In almost all cases the law says "first in use owns the rights to the water." The general public has no rights to the water.
The second is the idea that removing items for PERSONAL USE somehow suggests that that personal use excludes sale of the item makes no sense. If my personal use includes trading that item for another item, or currency, why shoudn't I be able to do that? Unless the law specifically states that sale is forbidden, sale of the item is lawful. Unless the law specifically excludes sale, I'd be very surprised if you'd find a judge anywhere, except in the most liberal states, that would find you guilty of some crime for simply selling a small hunk of gold, or a pretty rock.
Jim

Mining law was written by Congress.

It allowed "miners" to keep some of their traditions.

Yes, it was influence by those traditions.

What it really did was create fairness and prevent "miners" and "districts" from excluding.


The law does specifically say you can't sale unless you do certain things.

It always has since it's been law.


Most items from public lands are regulated the same way.

personal and commercial
.
It isn't a hard jump from one to the other. It is spelled out pretty clearly.

People who are serious about it tend to not have an issue with it.

 

[Assembler]

"Location covers the workings of the prior locators" shall be minimized was a very common concern of miners of any "Open Mineral entry area / Districts".

 

[Goldfinger450]

What I Mine IS MINE, Work smart, work hard, Be careful and enjoy yourself, Do Not let asshats from the Dot Gov. agency's get away with being AHOLES to you as they have too much power out there in the field and some could flat out use a Good Beating. That is if Nice does Not work. Always have a plan.....

 

[Assembler]

What I Mine IS MINE, Work smart, work hard, Be careful and enjoy yourself, Do Not let asshats from the Dot Gov. agency's get away with being AHOLES to you as they have too much power out there in the field and some could flat out use a Good Beating. That is if Nice does Not work. Always have a plan.....

Yes working smart and hard is always a good idea. Having some background can help with the misinformed and even bull headed people as part of a plan.

 

[calnatv]

Are you the Cal Kellogg who is the editor to the Fish Sniffer magazine? And your managing editor is Dan Bacher ? Who by the way was (is) a strong advocate to shut down gold dredging?

 

[Jim in Idaho]

Mining law was written by Congress.

It allowed "miners" to keep some of their traditions.

Yes, it was influence by those traditions.

What it really did was create fairness and prevent "miners" and "districts" from excluding.


The law does specifically say you can't sale unless you do certain things.

It always has since it's been law.


Most items from public lands are regulated the same way.

personal and commercial
.
It isn't a hard jump from one to the other. It is spelled out pretty clearly.

People who are serious about it tend to not have an issue with it.

Yeah, I'm pretty serious, and I don't have an issue with it. I just ignore it.
Jim

 

[Cal Kellogg]

Hey Calnatv...Yep I'm one of the owners of the Fish Sniffer Magazine... In my view every man is responsible for his own views. Dan has his views and I have mine. I am pro prospecting, pro dredging and pro liberty in the broad view. I've done a little writing about prospecting in the past and I also interviewed the head guy at the ASRA a while ago. One of the subjects we talked about was the Hands and Pans rules, but I got nowhere with him.....I've been prospecting for most of my life...I started going with my parents at a very young age....About the same time that I caught my first trout!