CA BLM laziness causing confusion and possible over filing?

[Asmbandits]

Last year, on September 9th I re filed a claim I had purchased due to some issues found on the original filling that was done before I purchased this claim. I wanted to make sure my claim is legit so I did not pay my maintenance fee and let the claim become invalid, then re staked and filled a few days later. I went to the county and blm office the same day, filled with no issues, returned to my discovery monument and added paperwork as should. All has been good except when I run a report it still shows my old claim info even though it also says blm last updated this on 6-15-2017. Reports also show a new claim in the vicinity filled in December of this year. I believe the area to already be fully claimed so Im not sure where this new claim is but I believe it has a good chance of possibly being over filled on mine or my neighbors claims.

If the blm is making available the incorrect info, leading people to to see claim info that shows issues with validity which leads them to file over someones claim, wouldn't this be and issue? Wouldn't you think the BLM would be somewhat held accountable for not keeping proper record, or not properly relaying this info to the public?

Im sick of trying to do the right thing and everything else fighting me with this. Its going on a year soon that blm is reporting out the wrong info this should not be acceptable for the very reason that one would run these reports to find real time land status.

In reality Im not worried about the validity of my claim as I have the paperwork filled and stamped by blm and county and know my claim is valid but the blm is basically telling everyone its not and this is can lead to over filing. You would think in court it would be an argument that the blm causes or influences these over filings by posting invalid info.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[Clay Diggins]

The BLM is forbidden by Federal Mining Law from determining whether a mining claim is valid. Claim validity is a civil matter between two or more claimants and can only be determined by a court of law. The BLM is entitled to an annual informational notice and fee and even that requirement has only been required since 1980.

It's up to the claimant to enforce their right of possession against other prospectors or locators. The BLM can not, and will not, be a party to your dispute.

1865 Mining Act:

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.

So possess your mining claim and enforce your possession in the civil courts of record or lose your claim to those who will possess it. That's the way it's been for thousands of years. The BLM is only a 71 year old agency and has only had a minor role in tracking mining claim files for 37 of those years. No part of their role involves determining if a claim is valid against other locators. You are lucky, I know of several areas where mining claims are 5 deep in overclaims.

The public lands with valuable minerals are free and open to your possession but all the Federal agencies are barred from helping you maintain that possession. "Free" is only the beginning of the grant. It's up to you to maintain your mineral right including your right to possession.

Freedom isn't free nor is it easy but the alternative is to turn over this last bit of freedom to a government agency that is known for sloppy work and slow responses. Please don't wish that on your fellow miners. Practice a bit of self reliance and responsibility for your claim of right and help keep mining free.

Heavy Pans

 

[winners58]

been that way for a long time, my understanding is a mining claim is self-initiated with a record being created with the county recorder
BLM is just a repository to hold the records created. if you want real time of the record you have to spend hours and hours at the county clerks.
you'd think it would be easy as typing in the TRS, not all the records show up, a transfer of interest, multiple records filed on one page, entered wrong.
sometimes you have to cross reference dates, last names, locations, affidavits of assessment, NOI to hold, mining claim deeds, etc...
if you filed your small miners waver on the original claim but didn't file the maintenance fee by Dec. 30th it was still valid till at least then.
as long as you are not adding acreage maybe you could have just modified the original filing.

I think with BLM "data entry", if you mail something in they seem to post it within a few weeks,
if someone doesn't file something... well, you know!...

 

[Asmbandits]

I agree with you both and understand the way it actually works and who is accountable for what, I guess Im trying to say that it should hold some substance in my opinion if the reason you continue to have validity issues is due to the fact the blm is falsely sending folks your way with a green light. If they really don't hold any value to validity then why must one file with them to be valid? I believe if I file with the county only and not the blm, my claim is void due to this correct? Then why do they get to wipe there hands free for creating a mess of things?

Just seems like a load of bs that it can work this way, its a government agency.. What I did was normal, I talked in person at both offices and filed with no issues, I did what I did to rid the "birth" if you call it of my claim from a name synonymous with claim flipping to have a more stable foundation in my eyes. There were so many wrong doings in the initial claiming that I wanted to start fresh and the blm allowed me to pay them to do this, so I paid them for something they have not done on their end basically, which is leading people to believe falsely about the actual current land status. Seems really simple to me, I pay you to record something so people can be made aware of land status? If this is the case then is the reports system not valid reference??

 

[winners58]

FLPMA
https://www.blm.gov/or/regulations/files/FLPMA.pdf

you know more now than you did before, that's a good thing...

 

[Asmbandits]

Looks like a trip to the blm in person again is in order... I did pay a fee for them to file something, doesn't seem right that they take my money but don't hold up their end of the it, regardless of legitimacy, it just it's good business practice..

 

[jog]

Call the BLM office and ask for a copy of the claim location notice for the claim your concerned about, I do it all the time when someone files next to me so I know exactly where I stand. If their not claimed on top of yours who cares, let them sort it out.

Sent from my SM-G920V using TreasureNet.com mobile app

 

[Bejay]

Basically the trouble is not so much the BLM; but those who think the BLM is more than it is. It is simply a money collector, (filing fees and maint fees) and a file keeper of assessment work. When the claimant fails to provide that, and proper location data, the file will show that failure and convey it in their files...which are public. The public relies on the BLM when they should not.

It is a real pain in the you know what when claimants think they are the claimant for the same piece of ground/minerals. The BLM loves to accept money and let the cards fall where they may for the claimants.

Kind of like the USFS charging the public "fees" for using the public lands....when in Fact the USFS has limited authority to do so. Congress has told the USFS on numerous occasions to straighten up their act for charging unwarranted fees...but the USFS continues to do it.

Bejay

 

[Asmbandits]

Basically the trouble is not so much the BLM; but those who think the BLM is more than it is. It is simply a money collector, (filing fees and maint fees) and a file keeper of assessment work. When the claimant fails to provide that, and proper location data, the file will show that failure and convey it in their files...which are public. The public relies on the BLM when they should not.

It is a real pain in the you know what when claimants think they are the claimant for the same piece of ground/minerals. The BLM loves to accept money and let the cards fall where they may for the claimants.

Kind of like the USFS charging the public "fees" for using the public lands....when in Fact the USFS has limited authority to do so. Congress has told the USFS on numerous occasions to straighten up their act for charging unwarranted fees...but the USFS continues to do it.

Bejay

There seems to be a lot of having the cake and eating it to going on in the forums these days.

My complaint is that blm is reporting out incorrect info, im not arguing on what one should or shouldn't do with this info that is for them to decide. I paid to have something recorded correct? You are all saying recording and fee taking its all that they do, well I paid a fee and they recorded my claim yet are reporting out otherwise.. I am actually kind of puzzled as to why it seems so many have an issue or would like to have the stance that im out of line here somehow?

If you support the fact that an agency should be able to take your money and do nothing or create even more confusion and this is perfectly fine behavior that's your prerogative I guess.

 

[Asmbandits]

Also, while the blm reports may just be a step in the process of researching land status, one that holds very little relevance in the big picture according to most, its funny how some are so quick to rub it off as little relevance while at the same time are dedicated to websites pushing the same info, and in other threads noting how important checking land status via reports and county are.

 

[Bejay]

Counties keep "RECORDS" (which are public notices).....(County recorder is the land office). BLM keeps a "FILE" for it's collection of fees and assessment work. All BLM files say that BLM stuff is NOT" to be used as part of the public record and BLM holds no responsibility to the public for its' Congressional mandate of collections and work performed....it is in fact merely a file. I would think that if the BLM takes/accepts money and fails to place that in their file one would have a beef with the BLM.....and they are slow more often than not with their filing process. Anything shy of that leaves the claimant resolved to determining land status with boots on the ground and the county land office.

But I will add a notation regarding claimant conflicts dealing with over-claiming. Notifying the over claiming culprit of their error is the first step prior to adjudication. That notification (challenge/demand) should be very specific and not drift off into language that dilutes its' purpose. (Say a lot by saying a little). I have been down this road and it is a process of time...not a fast outcome. Your communication via letter is a record; and even at that it needs to be at least sent via certified registered letter...but more factual via being served by a licensed individual to the culprit who has over-claimed your claim. All legal stuff to get to the final resolve per the 1872 Mining Law.

Nice to avoid all the red tape if one can simply show the culprit their error. Be sure to always have a witness when discussing the issue with the culprit. I like to do a follow up to the discussion with a letter (certified).

BLM does not record a claim...plain and simple! Once one realizes that; they can offer BLM some forgiveness and avoid barking up the wrong tree!

It is confusing because the BLM, as a land management agency; interjects mining stuff all the time...making it appear they have everything to do with mining and are the Big Dog. That is a whole other issue

Bejay

 

[Asmbandits]

Counties keep "RECORDS" (which are public notices).....(County recorder is the land office). BLM keeps a "FILE" for it's collection of fees and assessment work. All BLM files say that BLM stuff is NOT" to be used as part of the public record and BLM holds no responsibility to the public for its' Congressional mandate of collections and work performed....it is in fact merely a file. I would think that if the BLM takes/accepts money and fails to place that in their file one would have a beef with the BLM.....and they are slow more often than not with their filing process. Anything shy of that leaves the claimant resolved to determining land status with boots on the ground and the county land office.

But I will add a notation regarding claimant conflicts dealing with over-claiming. Notifying the over claiming culprit of their error is the first step prior to adjudication. That notification (challenge/demand) should be very specific and not drift off into language that dilutes its' purpose. (Say a lot by saying a little). I have been down this road and it is a process of time...not a fast outcome. Your communication via letter is a record; and even at that it needs to be at least sent via certified registered letter...but more factual via being served by a licensed individual to the culprit who has over-claimed your claim. All legal stuff to get to the final resolve per the 1872 Mining Law.

Nice to avoid all the red tape if one can simply show the culprit their error. Be sure to always have a witness when discussing the issue with the culprit. I like to do a follow up to the discussion with a letter (certified).

BLM does not record a claim...plain and simple! Once one realizes that; they can offer BLM some forgiveness and avoid barking up the wrong tree!

It is confusing because the BLM, as a land management agency; interjects mining stuff all the time...making it appear they have everything to do with mining and are the Big Dog. That is a whole other issue

Bejay

Someone like yourself may realize and understand this, but to someone new one of the first things many of us say here is to check with the blm or other sites that access blm reports, and then check with county.. My argument, again is that if the blm is reporting out incorrect info, they should be held accountable for doing so it shouldnt be acceptable practice. It would be the same as the dmv reporting that your drivers license is suspended when it inst, causing further complications and further work to correct. There should be no upset in me wanting to make sure people are not falsely lead to believe the land I have claim to is not claimed before I have to defend with boots on the ground which is a given that I will do.

 

[winners58]

I agree with you the reporting by BLM in California is piss poor lots of missing information.
maybe get certified copy's from your file at the BLM, check on claims around you while there.
here in Oregon I let a clam go by not filing the maintenance work, it just got closed last week.
one step you could have taken is file a relinquishment on the old claim,
after verifying everything was correct on your new filling.

something to read up on;
BLM manual - H — 3830-1 Administration of Mining Claims, Mill Sites, and Tunnel Sites
https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/uploads/Media_Library_BLM_Policy_H 3830_1.pdf

 

[Asmbandits]

I just decided to call the Sac BLM office and spoke to a nice gentleman who checked status of both old and new claim and made the realization that they were in fact reporting out the incorrect info. He assured me that he is going to get this matter resolved asap. I can appreciate that and his help with the issue so I will just have to keep checking to make sure this happens I guess.