Can BLM do this

[Bodfish Mike]

This pertains to Mining in Keyesville CA
Keyesville: Recreational Mining
Here's what BLM is proposing to do.
here is the Quote from them.

"Permits will be required for recreational prospecting taking place outside mining claims in order to make sure prospectors understand the laws and only work in specified recreational mining areas. Those owning mining claims will need to provide fifteen day notice to the BLM prior to mining on private claims in Keyesville."

Well I'm ok with the permit on the recreational mining areas and think they can do that but the fifteen day notice to the BLM prior to mining on private claims I have a problem with. Note there is a GPAA Claim Involved here and other private claims plus some un-claimed areas.
So do you think BLM can inpose this on us casual use Miners.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[Goldwasher]

This kind of spreading of misinformation and biased opinion is what allows agencies to scare and intimidate.
If the law says the agencies aren't supposed to run rough shod over the acts they must be pretty powerful. Breaking up pretty much the only thing remotely organized in the small scale community ( clubs) is not the answer.
I know enough various members of different ones and I seek out my own info plus the first time I panned was 30 years ago so I never joined.
as a large oginazation I don't like gpaa. But I also know that they have great individual chapters. The goldhounds..GREAT I know many members.I have yet to hear one member complain about being ripped off. I have witnessed a great many work their butt off for FREEEEEEEEE to do as much as they can to spread info call people get people to get involved. EVERYTHING takes money...yet the main 5hings I hear is calls for involvement and if so membership... so people can actually see what it's like. And get more involved if they want.

I have never seen guilt tripping, or hard sell tactics to get people to join...no arm twisting. Or promises of vast riches even.
If the majority of prospectors don't feel that way let them say so. If it comes out that people have been tricked for the last 30 plus years by clubs. I want to see the revolt as well.
BUT, you want to cut out a lot of people and it seems you base it on their mal intent. I apologize if you don't mean it that way.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Goldwasher]

What if someone felt different and want mining law changed to where you couldn't actually dig unless you did have a claim? A set prospecting period and bond for production and reclamation?

Be careful what you wish for

 

[winners58]

back to the OP, it should be pointed out to those doing the Keyesville SRMA that using the wording "notice" should be changed as its confusing
The Bakersfield RMP uses the word "notification" and 43 CFR 3809.31 uses the word "contact"
since there is no way panning and sluicing can be construed as more than prospecting let alone casual mining it shouldn't be a problem, sometime in January
the claim owner would tell them the claim will be used for panning and sluicing at varies times throughout that year,
you don't want to tell them your going to have a group outing or bring in girl scouts on an educational trip
because you don't want to go beyond the scope of whats allowed under the mining laws.

Map about 8 placer claims that this affects

on the recreational prospecting areas in the Bakersfield RMP page 101 it says
>"Manage areas Withdrawn from the General Mining Law to accommodate the collection
of non-renewable resources under 46 CFR 8365.1-5(c) for sale to commercial dealers
through the establishment of a permit system for such collection. All public lands users
wishing to collect non-renewable resources, such as mineral specimens (e.g., Gold),
would be required to complete the permit process."<
so much for the term recreational, doesn't seem right if the withdrawal was for recreational mining purposes.

My two cents...
I operate my suction dredge in areas that are withdrawn, wild & scenic rivers that are withdrawn specifically to create a recreational mining corridor,
state lands that are managed by ODOT and other areas that allow river access, private land and also navigable rivers, none are under the mining laws
I do have as much rights as other users, it doesn't have to be recreational it is just "uses" there are existing uses, beneficial uses...
they might not fall under the mining laws but there are administrative CFR's, rivers and harbors act, interstate commerce act, various state statutes,
easements, land owner permission, county lease's and where the state owns the river, the Public Trust Doctrine, unless an area is conserved for a specific reason,
I have a public right to use the resources. sometimes when you are talking to someone especially LEO's its just easier to say recreational.

I own mining claims, I guess by definition I would be a small-scale miner but really still just a prospector, I call myself an Independent miner.

 

[MadMarshall]

GW
who are you trying to convince? You made your point? is it your wish for me to renounce my thoughts and opinions? Or you just trying to sway others?
You already stated that I am the only one who thinks this... So if that's the case why keep up the dialogue? If its to sway my opinion? let me save you the trouble and the time.
But if not... do what you got to do......
I think I have made my thoughts and opinions clear.. What more do you wish me to concede? That's these mining clubs are Gods gifts to the small scale mining community?
Ill be more then happy to state my opinions on these Recreational clubs and Advocacy Groups again..

support PLP don't support GPAA or support this or that guy maybe AMRA instead or what about Righttomine or maybe not them just the WMA Maybe just MMAC...
SUPPORT ONE SUPPORT ALL. it really doesn't matter..! But anyway the more groups the likely more donations will be sent in.. That's just one of my opinions...
Me personally I rather just stay as far away as I can from all of them..

 

[Goldwasher]

I don't expect you to change your view Victor. I am just trying to understand where your coming from. I'm not Even pleading my own case. Just related opinions. And my observations of clubs as it weighs against yours. I'm sorry if my questions bothered you. I'll ask no more.

 

[Goldwasher]

This pertains to Mining in Keyesville CA
Keyesville: Recreational Mining
Here's what BLM is proposing to do.
here is the Quote from them.

"Permits will be required for recreational prospecting taking place outside mining claims in order to make sure prospectors understand the laws and only work in specified recreational mining areas. Those owning mining claims will need to provide fifteen day notice to the BLM prior to mining on private claims in Keyesville."

Well I'm ok with the permit on the recreational mining areas and think they can do that but the fifteen day notice to the BLM prior to mining on private claims I have a problem with. Note there is a GPAA Claim Involved here and other private claims plus some un-claimed areas.
So do you think BLM can inpose this on us casual use Miners.

What's the word from gpaa members there ? Does anyone give the "notice" ? Have members been harassed over it?

 

[KevinInColorado]

I don't think we really have much GPAA participation here GW. I suppose they are all on the GPAA forum.

 

[mikep691]

While I take no sides in this will of words, GW, please explain how a club claim conforms to the mining laws? Explain how a member can , or club can be developing a mineral resource? Neither keeps records, neither can prove the worth of the property, neither can perfect. Please explain how a club provided claim is not there purely for the recreation of it's members? By just paying the annual fees, doesn't mean there is a valuable mineral resource. It just means they can let their members destroy the land and not be penalized. Clubs never restore the property as described by LAW. They just let it go, still looking like a war zone.

I see Victor's point as far as club claims go, and as a Mineral Estate Grantee you should understand that as well.

BLM is attempting to put price the small miner out of exsistance. Rather than urguing about what is recreational or not, you should be trying to prevent BLM from doing away with the small miner waiver. Can you afford a hike in annual fees and have to pay per 20 acres? That $700 a year puts me out of my claim.

Put your money where you feel it best suits your needs. After all it IS your money. But soon it won't matter.

 

[Goldwasher]

While I take no sides in this will of words, GW, please explain how a club claim conforms to the mining laws? Explain how a member can , or club can be developing a mineral resource? Neither keeps records, neither can prove the worth of the property, neither can perfect. Please explain how a club provided claim is not there purely for the recreation of it's members? By just paying the annual fees, doesn't mean there is a valuable mineral resource. It just means they can let their members destroy the land and not be penalized. Clubs never restore the property as described by LAW. They just let it go, still looking like a war zone.

I see Victor's point as far as club claims go, and as a Mineral Estate Grantee you should understand that as well.

BLM is attempting to put price the small miner out of exsistance. Rather than urguing about what is recreational or not, you should be trying to prevent BLM from doing away with the small miner waiver. Can you afford a hike in annual fees and have to pay per 20 acres? That $700 a year puts me out of my claim.

Put your money where you feel it best suits your needs. After all it IS your money. But soon it won't matter.

Only the owner of the claim has to stick to a plan AND they don't have to stick to a plan at that!!!! There is nothing in the acts that defines who is NOT developing the mineral resource. It only describes who can maintain the EXCLUSIVE RIGHT if they choose to.
You are allowed to lease your claim on YOUR terms. There is no definition of activity or technique that invalidates the legal status. I myself believe it is silly to not use your waiver and perform actual development work. Our development work for one claim could pay for several if it worked that way. However, Joe from Minnesota with forty acres in Oregon he visits three weeks straight in August...and pays 4500.00 for an ounce of gold dredged still legally has a claim! Those companies that have large holdings yet market value and regulations creat a threshold that affects when you can run. When the value drops they don't lose their holdings.
I am not a member of a club. I don't donate to clubs. People have the right to if they want. Clubs are lawfully allowed to do what they do and provide access as they do.
I do know many club members and have been invited to numerous claims over the years. In my experience especially in the desert. Club claims are cleaner and actually have more consistant gold than the open areas.I've also driven across square miles of holdings that have crap all over them from non mining public land users. I'll be on a club claim I was invited to later this month. I'm betting it is a beautiful spot as the club that holds it has great members. I also disagree I know members that keep records and help owners of the club claim keep records. There are some very smart and productive club members out there who work with members at being better producers. It's also not fair or accurate to describe club claims as war zones.
It is true that there are claims with very little or essentially no valuable resource. You can find tem on ebay pretty easily. I don't worry about the waiver being taken away. I also don't want a single part of the acts changed. I already do put my money where it best suits my needs. I don't pay annual fees I put in my work. Blm isn't pricing anyone out of anything.

 

[mikep691]

This is from the BLM proposal for this year.. Sorry for the quality, I took it with my cel phone off my desktop monitor.

 

[Clay Diggins]

Only the owner of the claim has to stick to a plan AND they don't have to stick to a plan at that!!!! There is nothing in the acts that defines who is NOT developing the mineral resource. It only describes who can maintain the EXCLUSIVE RIGHT if they choose to.
You are allowed to lease your claim on YOUR terms. There is no definition of activity or technique that invalidates the legal status. I myself believe it is silly to not use your waiver and perform actual development work. Our development work for one claim could pay for several if it worked that way. However, Joe from Minnesota with forty acres in Oregon he visits three weeks straight in August...and pays 4500.00 for an ounce of gold dredged still legally has a claim! Those companies that have large holdings yet market value and regulations creat a threshold that affects when you can run. When the value drops they don't lose their holdings.
I am not a member of a club. I don't donate to clubs. People have the right to if they want. Clubs are lawfully allowed to do what they do and provide access as they do.
I do know many club members and have been invited to numerous claims over the years. In my experience especially in the desert. Club claims are cleaner and actually have more consistant gold than the open areas.I've also driven across square miles of holdings that have crap all over them from non mining public land users. I'll be on a club claim I was invited to later this month. I'm betting it is a beautiful spot as the club that holds it has great members. I also disagree I know members that keep records and help owners of the club claim keep records. There are some very smart and productive club members out there who work with members at being better producers. It's also not fair or accurate to describe club claims as war zones.
It is true that there are claims with very little or essentially no valuable resource. You can find tem on ebay pretty easily. I don't worry about the waiver being taken away. I also don't want a single part of the acts changed. I already do put my money where it best suits my needs. I don't pay annual fees I put in my work. Blm isn't pricing anyone out of anything.

Well said!

Heavy Pans

 

[fowledup]

A recreational miner is an individual who doesn't keep what they find or seek to profit from it. They practice catch and release prospecting/mining. When they detect, pan, or sluice some gold they take a nice picture of it and promptly return the gold from whence it came. Personally I don't know any recreational prospectors nor have I ever met one.

Club claim. Why is it any different than a golf course? California has plenty of open land one could golf on if they choose. But lets say I own a piece of land and have geared it towards golfing, I take care of the paper work, taxes, maintenance, etc. in return I charge you a small fee to cover the cost and access my land. The beauty of it is you don't have to do a thing. just show up and start hacking away. The reality is the other land around me is terrible for golfing and has access issues because it's mostly private. Along with this the government has a problem with golfing and folks who own golf courses. So me wanting to be proactive and do what I can to preserve my golf course and golfing I go to court, do research and lobby or advocate for the preservation of golfing. In turn people who golf appreciate that, mostly because it takes them off the hook of getting involved themselves and in return throw a few bucks my way for travel reimbursement, or news letter printing, or legal services, etc.

Campgrounds are kinda like club claims as well. There are plenty of places one could camp if allowed, problem is your not allowed. So you join a club or pay the government for the limited use.

Take someplace like the North Fork of the Yuba, if you don't have a claim or belong to a club you can't "recreate", prospect, or mine, without committing Mineral Trespass. Even the river front along the campgrounds is claimed. But for $40 you can have access to 5 or 6 excellent claims and dig all you want.

 

[fowledup]

I believe some have a utopian idea that they or anyone should be able to mine or prospect wherever they please. If you think it's messed up now think that notion thru a bit and see what you come up with. The beauty of our system (as messed up as it is) is we are all on an equal playing field. You, I, or the largest mining corporation all have the same opportunity and chance to claim ground. With some homework, groundwork, and luck I can claim my very own piece of ground to work, and for the meantime my right to posess it and the protections that are in place to keep another from taking it or the minerals in it are in tact.

 

[mikep691]

Only the owner of the claim has to stick to a plan AND they don't have to stick to a plan at that!!!! There is nothing in the acts that defines who is NOT developing the mineral resource. It only describes who can maintain the EXCLUSIVE RIGHT if they choose to.
You are allowed to lease your claim on YOUR terms. There is no definition of activity or technique that invalidates the legal status. I myself believe it is silly to not use your waiver and perform actual development work. Our development work for one claim could pay for several if it worked that way. However, Joe from Minnesota with forty acres in Oregon he visits three weeks straight in August...and pays 4500.00 for an ounce of gold dredged still legally has a claim! Those companies that have large holdings yet market value and regulations creat a threshold that affects when you can run. When the value drops they don't lose their holdings.
I am not a member of a club. I don't donate to clubs. People have the right to if they want. Clubs are lawfully allowed to do what they do and provide access as they do.
I do know many club members and have been invited to numerous claims over the years. In my experience especially in the desert. Club claims are cleaner and actually have more consistant gold than the open areas.I've also driven across square miles of holdings that have crap all over them from non mining public land users. I'll be on a club claim I was invited to later this month. I'm betting it is a beautiful spot as the club that holds it has great members. I also disagree I know members that keep records and help owners of the club claim keep records. There are some very smart and productive club members out there who work with members at being better producers. It's also not fair or accurate to describe club claims as war zones.
It is true that there are claims with very little or essentially no valuable resource. You can find tem on ebay pretty easily. I don't worry about the waiver being taken away. I also don't want a single part of the acts changed. I already do put my money where it best suits my needs. I don't pay annual fees I put in my work. Blm isn't pricing anyone out of anything.

Obviously, the clubs where you are are nothing like in Northern California. I was a GPAA member for one year. That's all it took. The condition of claims, most of which were worthless, were left in such disrepair, looking like an exploded mine field. So you do the maintenance, as I do, but you just pay the annual BLM fees rather than using your small miner waiver. I'd have to say you have money to burn. I believe the point of the small miner waiver was intended to stimulate small scale mining, by giving us this fee waiver. Last year the fee per 20 acres was $155, this year, it will be more. The waiver does not exempt you from doing your annual maintenance, or filing your labor assessment, it just lets you not have to pay $155 per 20 acres held. Granted there are some really good ground that produces enough of a valuable mineral that this fee can easily be paid for by the full time miner, but they are few and far between. Most of us small scale miners can't afford to devote full time to mining, as much as we'd like to. The waiver helps us to keep our holdings where otherwise it could be one year and done.

I'm very happy for your ability to not need the waiver. My claim might produce enough to absorb this fee if I didn't have to work 60 hours a week just to make ends meet. If only I could work my claim 40 hours a week and say I could pay the bills. It just ain't that easy for 90% of us out there. I guess after all, if you want your little slice, you have to pay for it.

 

[Goldwasher]

Obviously, the clubs where you are are nothing like in Northern California. I was a GPAA member for one year. That's all it took. The condition of claims, most of which were worthless, were left in such disrepair, looking like an exploded mine field. So you do the maintenance, as I do, but you just pay the annual BLM fees rather than using your small miner waiver. I'd have to say you have money to burn. I believe the point of the small miner waiver was intended to stimulate small scale mining, by giving us this fee waiver. Last year the fee per 20 acres was $155, this year, it will be more. The waiver does not exempt you from doing your annual maintenance, or filing your labor assessment, it just lets you not have to pay $155 per 20 acres held. Granted there are some really good ground that produces enough of a valuable mineral that this fee can easily be paid for by the full time miner, but they are few and far between. Most of us small scale miners can't afford to devote full time to mining, as much as we'd like to. The waiver helps us to keep our holdings where otherwise it could be one year and done.

I'm very happy for your ability to not need the waiver. My claim might produce enough to absorb this fee if I didn't have to work 60 hours a week just to make ends meet. If only I could work my claim 40 hours a week and say I could pay the bills. It just ain't that easy for 90% of us out there. I guess after all, if you want your little slice, you have to pay for it.

You didn't read what I wrote did you?

WE FILE A WAIVER AND TURN IN OUR ASSESMENT WORK

PAYING MAINTENANCE FEES ARE SILLY WHEN YOU HAVE A GOOD CLAIM YOU WORK OFTEN

THE SMALL MINERS WAIVER IS NOT GOING ANYWHERE

 

[mikep691]

Apparently, you didn't read what I showed from BLM. If you can say it's not, versus what they are attempting to do, explain how it's "NOT GOING ANYWHERE"?

Here's the link to BLM's proposal:

https://www.doi.gov/…/appr…/2016/highlights/upload/BH007.pdf

 

[mikep691]

" I myself believe it is silly to not use your waiver and perform actual development work" This is what you wrote. The annual fee to BLM is NOT a maintenance fee, first and foremost. It gives you the right to continue to hold. If it Was a Maintenance fee, why are we paying it August not in December?

I don't see anything in this statement remotely close to what you just posted: " I don't pay annual fees I put in my work. Blm isn't pricing anyone out of anything."

Read the .pdf

 

[Hefty1]

https://www.doi.gov/…/appr…/2016/highlights/upload/BH007.pdf

LINK DOESNT WORK?

 

[G.I.B.]

Write up a short form letter.

Dear BLM, Here is your 15 day notice.

Regards.

Send it via email on the 1st of the month and the 15th. Put it on auto delivery for twice a month, every month.

Your covered.

 

[Goldwasher]

" I myself believe it is silly to not use your waiver and perform actual development work" This is what you wrote. The annual fee to BLM is NOT a maintenance fee, first and foremost. It gives you the right to continue to hold. If it Was a Maintenance fee, why are we paying it August not in December?

I don't see anything in this statement remotely close to what you just posted: " I don't pay annual fees I put in my work. Blm isn't pricing anyone out of anything."

Read the .pdf

I pay blm 10 dollars a year?......what exactly am I priced out of?