Panning on National Conservation Area lands?

[KevinInColorado]

I know I can use non-mechanical means of prospecting on Federal Wilderness Area lands but cannot file a claim. Is this also true on National Conservation Area land?

Here's a clip from the BLM website regarding the rules at one NCA in Colorado:
What types of use are NOT allowed in the Gunnison Gorge NCA?
Subject to valid existing rights, the NCA is "withdrawn from all forms of entry, appropriation or disposal under the public land laws; from location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; and from disposition under all laws relating to mineral and geothermal leasing, and all amendments thereto." This means that, except where they currently exist, the following uses/activities are not allowed within the NCA:
-Location, exploration, development and patent of mining claims
-Sand and gravel extraction activities
-Oil and gas or geothermal leasing, exploration and development
-Sale or lease of public lands for any purpose

...they are good at telling us what we CAN'T do but not so good at saying what we can do!

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Treasure of Victoria Peak - Grab it through Amazon!

[Kenmitch]

Did you see this?

How does NCA designation impact mining?

NCAs are not open to new mining. However, where a valid claim had been identified before designation, those minerals may be mined so long as such mining does not cause unnecessary or undue degradation.

Found here. https://www.blm.gov/nm/st/en/prog/b...ervation/faq_national_conservation.print.html

Above is for New Mexico it looks like.

I'd imagine with your MANY MORE YEARS of experience on the subject you probably google fu'd it and have seen anything I'd find.

https://www.blm.gov/co/st/en/BLM_Programs/recreation/Recreation_Activities/rock_collecting_and.html

Rock collecting and gold panning are generally permitted on public lands, except for certain designated areas, such as wilderness areas, Wilderness Study Areas, developed special management areas or recreation sites. Precious and semi-precious gems can be collected in reasonable quantities without a permit, as long as the activity is for personal use and not commercial purposes.

Various other regulations also apply. For additional information, contact the local BLM Field Office for the area you are planning to visit.

 

[winners58]

Good luck getting an straight answer from the government, I always get the answer you have to follow the law but we cant give legal advice.
if you're looking for CFR's there are none, National Conservation Area's are created by legislation, the enabling legislation establishes the management scheme.
so basically you would have to look at the map and the resource management plan, use's are broken into sections of environmental concern.(FLPMA)
park sections no panning or metal detecting but other area's should be open under rock hounding rules (recreation personal use)

look under each management unit/zone for what area's might be considered sensitive maybe? (ACEC maps starting on page 147)
https://www.blm.gov/style/medialib/...l.Par.70287.File.dat/GGNCA-RODRMP-Nov2004.pdf

main page and map's; https://www.blm.gov/co/st/en/nca/ggnca.html

 

[russau]

In my state of Misery I asked and talked to a Ranger of the Conservation Area that I wanted to film a news segment in and the Ranger in-charge of that area was thrilled to have it done and he asked if he could invite other Rangers to it.BUT he said that he needed to talk to his boss and his boss said he needed to talk to "the man" in charge of this part of the state........WEEEELLL you guessed it! The man said that he NEVER wants to get this started as long as hes alive! The Ranger told me , "he's old and will be retiring soon . Well that's been about 10 years ago and he still is up-n-round! The weird thing about it is that I wasn't going to be in the water OR use ANY of "their" stream material and I was going to remove any thing that I brought there! I invited that Ranger to one of our clubs outings in Mexico Misery , and I would drive and buy lunch for him..........BUT he never replied! AND you can thank slick willy and ole babbleing bruce babbit for ALL of these problems we are having! Hoser has the PERFECT answer for this jerk!

 

[Jim in Idaho]

My understanding is that it's illegal to remove anything from a Conservation area. I think National Landmarks are the same.
Jim

 

[KevinInColorado]

From a post above:
"Rock collecting and gold panning are generally permitted on public lands, except for certain designated areas, such as wilderness areas, Wilderness Study Areas, developed special management areas or recreation sites."
Although on a govt site, it's a lie. The Wilderness Act explicitly allows non mechanical prospecting.

I appreciate the point about enabling legislation for each NCA being separate and unique. Means I have to check each separately.

Thanks all.

 

[Clay Diggins]

It depends on the NCA Kevin. There will be a withdrawal order and that will tell you the extent of the withdrawal. The typical mineral withdrawal will say

withdrawn from location, entry, and patent under the mining laws

That means exactly what it says in land status speak:
location = mining claims
entry = application for patent
patent = fee grant ("Title") to the land under the mining acts

When it is written that way there is no restriction on prospecting itself.

I've read quite a few of the thousands of withdrawal orders and that is the usual language with some small variation. Rarely is prospecting included in a withdrawal order but it does happen sometimes. You need to look up and read the original.

I see in Colorado you have three NCAs. You will find the text of the withdrawal within the Congressional Acts that created them.
For the Gunnison Gorge NCA Public Law 106-76
For the Dominguez-Escalante NCA Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 Public Law 111–11 (PDF)
For the McInnis Canyons (formerly Colorado Canyons) NCA Public Law 106-353

A quick check of those laws show that prospecting is not spelled out in any of the withdrawals. Being that they are NCAs the Secretary of the Interior is allowed to make management orders about land use. I doubt the Interior Secretary has specifically restricted prospecting but knowing how the local chotas in the Gunnison like to make up their own rules to suit themselves it might be a good idea to check the Federal Register to see if their boss did such a thing. The law does not permit local land managers to make up their own rules but try explaining that to a guy in a poorly made green suit with an iron on "badge".

There are 16 National Conservation Areas. All of them are in 7 western states. Each was enacted by Congress. Each are governed by the law Congress wrote creating them. Each law is similiar but different so there is no general law affecting all NCAs.

Although there may be other "Conservation" areas they are not federal NCAs and they were not created by Congress. Being as there are no public lands or NCAs in Missouri you are probably dealing with a State or County organization there Russ. Short of getting the law changed or a two by four judiciously applied you are pretty much SOL east of the Mississippi.

On the issue of prospecting and withdrawals. The Congress has consistently supported the idea that even in areas closed to mining claims there is still a need to investigate the extent and type of mineralization by prospecting. Congress specifically allowed prospecting in the Wilderness Act and even in many areas that are protected by various designations it is still permitted to prospect. The whole tone of most land laws incorporates an abiding respect of mineral ownership by the people.

There is a principle of law that states "Nulla poena sine lege" which is Latin for "no penalty without a law". It's the job of the badge telling you something isn't legal to pony up with a law that states it isn't legal - they need to be able to point to the law that allows them to act. Without a written law to back them up they have nothing they can charge you with that will stick. Writing "I don't like this guy" on the ticket always results in a win for the miner. I deal with land management agencies a lot and in most cases when they are pressed for their legal authority to do something they come up with zippity do-dah. The wise prospector will find out what the law is before they prospect so they won't be caught out with nothing but "I read it on the internet" which is the civilian equivalent of the land manager's "cause I said so".

In real life the land manager probably doesn't have a clue that they can't just make stuff up or just rely on their own interpretation of something they think they read. You see the idea that they can promoted everywhere - even on this forum. The law of the land is that the law, and the enforcement of the law, is uniform everywhere. Local land managers don't get to make up their own version of the law. This is the essence of "due process" that you hear so much about but never were told what it means. When someone tells me "we do it different here" I know and smell BS.

Rarely is it wise to challenge an aggressive low paid idiot with a gun. Life experience will explain that sometimes it's necessary to do so. I remember an encounter I had a few years ago where several federal morons with guns and iron on badges were threatening to shoot my livestock. Eventually I was able to explain to them the mathematics and probable outcome since they were outgunned and out of line - the local Sheriff was a great help in conveying the reality of their situation. They did back down and move on but without the very real threat of grievous bodily harm they didn't really care that they were out of line and out of their jurisdiction. They felt macho bluster and threats would rule the day as it had before for them. I distinctly remember the stupidest of them constantly loudly repeating "I'm a federal agent and I can shoot anyone I want" as if repeating nonsense would make it a fact. Choose your battles wisely and remember that being right and jailed or dead is a pitiful version of "victory".

Prospect wisely and prospect well.

Heavy Pans

 

[KevinInColorado]

Barry, you are just amazing as ever. Thanks so much! I hadn't found those three laws but I did find the BLM mgmt plans. One specifically allows non-mechanized prospecting since it was an already popular activity, the others didn't mention it that I could find...even though one of them has a decent area to dig and some grandfathered in existing claims too!

As you say there's lots of cynics out there spouting negatives ...even on this thread

I'm writing a book "Finding Gold in Colorado" about both historical sites/sights and unclaimable places to prospect...so folks can get out and enjoy Colorado while appreciating the reason it was created. As part of this, I want to get my facts right!!!

 

[Johnnybravo300]

I don't live far from there Kevin. If you're planning a trip there and you want some company let me know. I've wondered about that area too.

 

[Jim in Idaho]

This is what 8 of the 10 I found, including Gunnison Gorge, have in the regs.
"All lands withdrawn from all forms of mineral entry, appropriation or disposal under the public land laws; from location, entry and patent under the mining laws: and from disposition under all laws pertaining to mineral and geothermal leasing."

Does that mean you can't prospect...I have no idea, but that "no appropriation" thing bothers me. That means you can't remove minerals IMHO.
Here's the PDF I used: http://www.publiclandsranching.org/htmlres/pdf/kerrsalvo_ncas_satans_spawn.pdf
Jim

 

[Clay Diggins]

To break it down Jim.

"mineral entry, appropriation or disposal"
Refers to the sale or lease of non locatable minerals like sand, gravel, building stone etc. In other words the salable minerals that were exempted from mining claims in the 1922 and 1955 mining acts. These minerals are normally only available by outright sale or appropriation (taking) for use by another who has a right to use them without payment. Government entities often appropriate sand or aggregate from the public lands to build highways or dams. Otherwise a sale price is arranged.

"location, entry and patent under the mining laws"
Refers to locatable minerals as already explained in my previous post. The valuable minerals open to location under the 1872 Mining Act.

"mineral and geothermal leasing"
Refers to coal, gas and oil leases. The energy minerals described in the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920. These minerals are bid upon at auction and require royalty payment to the government for each unit extracted.

This covers all three of the mineral classes Congress has set out in the law. Saleable minerals, locatable minerals and leasable minerals.

Often a mineral withdrawal only includes one or two of these classes. You will notice that prospecting is not mentioned in any of those three classes of withdrawal although it could have been if Congress wanted to.

Heavy Pans

 

[Jim in Idaho]

I'm as big a scofflaw as anybody I know. That said, I take my chances and pay the fine if and when it occurs. But Kevin was talking about a book that would suggest to others where they could go prospecting. In my mind, that's taking on a lot of responsibility for whatever happens ie. tickets, fines, etc. Kevin's a big boy, and can make his own decisions about that, but it's not a responsibility I'd want, regardless of your confidence in your definitions of what the rules mean. I'd be willing to bet no conservation area Ranger would put the same interpretation on the meaning of the words. Even if a person were correct, who would want to go to court, hire an attorney, etc., just to do a little panning. I won't ever prospect in Colorado, so have no dog in this fight...just pointing out a few things.
Jim

 

[Peyton Manning]

when I was going to S and N Dakota I looked up detecting on federal land and it was as you say
obviously parks are off limits, other than that go ahead. Tell them I said it's ok

 

[Peyton Manning]

and it even said you are allowed to take up to like 25 pounds of petrified wood!

 

[Johnnybravo300]

Yeah it should be fine with pans and sluices. Just can't stake a claim, same as wilderness.
You'd be lucky to ever see anyone imo.

 

[Clay Diggins]

There's big dogs and little dogs Jim.

If you want to be a big dog educate yourself.

Here's the mineral withdrawal law (U.S. Code › Title 16 › Chapter 28 › § 1280) for wild and scenic rivers.
It specifically forbids in Section A "all prospecting, mining operations, and other activities on mining claims...that have not heretofore been perfected" under the mining law.
It's pretty darn clear that when Congress intends to forbid prospecting under the mining law they do so without any ambiguity or mealy mouth lawyer speak.

It also specifically permits prospecting under the mineral leasing laws in Section B "Nothing contained in this subsection shall be construed to forbid prospecting or the issuance of leases, licenses, and permits under the mineral leasing laws".
Also clearly permitting prospecting under the mineral leasing laws without any ambiguity or mealy mouth lawyer speak.

Now you have actual law that shows Congress knows how to:
Permit or forbid prospecting.
and
The difference between minerals under the mining law and minerals under the leasing laws.

Both in the same section of the same law.

So unless you ignore the clear evidence that Congress can, and does, deal with prospecting in specific circumstances it would be pretty arrogant for you or a court of law to presume that Congress meant something they never wrote.

Laws are specific always. And every word they use has a clear legal definition or it has no legal force. Presuming that Congress meant prospecting when they never addressed it in the law they write is a mistake that has sunk many a land manager. Presuming that appropriation under the mineral leasing law is the same as location under the mining law will leave you (or a land manager) dancing on thin air in a court of law.

It's the same law whether you are in Colorado or Idaho or California. Your dog is already in the fight whether you choose to recognize it or not. Not knowing this stuff is much more dangerous than knowing it.

Educate yourself and prosper!

Heavy Pans

 

[Clay Diggins]

Barry, you are just amazing as ever. Thanks so much! I hadn't found those three laws but I did find the BLM mgmt plans. One specifically allows non-mechanized prospecting since it was an already popular activity, the others didn't mention it that I could find...even though one of them has a decent area to dig and some grandfathered in existing claims too!

As you say there's lots of cynics out there spouting negatives ...even on this thread

I'm writing a book "Finding Gold in Colorado" about both historical sites/sights and unclaimable places to prospect...so folks can get out and enjoy Colorado while appreciating the reason it was created. As part of this, I want to get my facts right!!!

I'm in the midst of a very large project involving Colorado Land Status Kevin. If you have any questions I'd be glad to share my research if you like.

I'm looking forward to that book. I know it will become the "bible" for prospecting Colorado.

Thanks for all your efforts and for your clear thinking Kevin. You are a valuable asset for all here.

Heavy Pans
Barry

 

[KevinInColorado]

Wow, thanks Barry! I'll be sure to reserve a copy for you!

 

[Jim in Idaho]

I take your point, Barry. And, supposedly any ambiguity in the law should be decided in favor of the defendant. Most of this stuff I don't worry about anyway. I pretty much just do what, and where, I want. I'm glad you know all this, and are in a position to share it with others. Maybe you should write a book! I'm sure it would sell very well. I've spent a few weeks in southern Nevada near a Conservation Area, but have avoided it. Maybe I'll take a closer look at the regs.
Many thanks,
Jim

 

[Johnnybravo300]

Yeah, thanks for your work Kevin. I've seen some of your writings and theyre full of great info for everyone and nicely written and very easy to follow. I'd be happy to help you out in any way like anyone else of course, and props for what your doing for our digging community and the newcomers.