WOULD YOU ASK THE GOVERNMENT FOR PERMISSION TO DIG ON YOUR OWN CLAIM

[Silveraith]

Perhaps this has been hashed out before but here's the question : Would you ask permission from the government to dig with heavy equipment on a mining claim you legally own & pay fees & taxes on? I say hell no. As long as you are not doing something illegal like destroying creeks or ruining the environment why would you ask them for permission? If I had a claim I would do what I wanted on it & if anyone told me different I'd show them off the claim in no uncertain way. I'd tell them to mind their own business & leave me alone. I sure as hell wouldn't waste my time with a spade shovel if I had the resources to run equipment unless I was just in it for a hobby which is fine. No disrespect to those that just want to have a little fun as a hobby but screw that as far as I'm concerned. I'd want to rip it up & have some real fun. Why would I crawl to the government begging them for permission to mine my claim? This is America. It could take a month or more to dig down to bedrock depending on your ground & you'd kill yourself doing it. I would get an excavator & be down there in 10 minutes. That's what will get you the gold.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Family Maps of Hinds County, Mississippi, Deluxe Edition - Grab it through Amazon!

[Johnnybravo300]

The surface disturbance level is left up to the miner and it's his call. Sometimes it's not an issue at all. Its vague for that reason.
Its the miners call when it gets to that point.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Silveraith]

Yes, I agree. It's left to the miner to decide. Written right in the rules & vague as hell.

 

[Johnnybravo300]

I've never run into any forestry workers while I was mining or prospecting that I can recall.
Other than having to remove gates and "trail closed" signs a few times for access it's never been a problem. I really hate it when they try to close trails for no reason and I'm out there to prospect.
My wife and I got locked INSIDE the gates once and I was kind of irritated about that but we just disassembled it the same as always. Super easy and takes minutes.
The hinges come apart with a crescent but shooting the lock can be considered vandalism I've been told.

 

[Silveraith]

I see.

 

[IMAUDIGGER]

It's not true unless the poster meant not completing their annual claim maintenance.

Heavy Pans

Thanks for some fresh air. I was running short.

 

[Goldwasher]

Your not gonna go to jail for not asking BLM if you can use a backhoe.

Your not gonna go to jail when BLM finds out you used a backhoe.

You can't lose your claim for not adhering to a regulation.

 

[IMAUDIGGER]

Your not gonna go to jail for not asking BLM if you can use a backhoe.

Your not gonna go to jail when BLM finds out you used a backhoe.

You can't lose your claim for not adhering to a regulation.

Does that apply to USFS as well?
Also does it matter if you used an excavator instead of a backhoe?

 

[winners58]

you can use small farm equipment on a claim to some extent, if its small and reclaimed as you go.
not to say the agencies might ask for a NOI, and some areas are more aggressive.
larger operations you need a mining plan and most likely a bond, this is the cost of doing business.
the main issue is a mining claimant owns the sub-surface, the surface is administered under other regulations.
Its not the mining they will go after you for it's damaging public lands.
this poor guy went to jail, fined, bankrupted, he could have just worked out of his ponds and waited for his PoO to be approved,
but brought in machinery to maintain the roads which he could do, but decided to do some mining and got caught.
Clifford Tracy mining up Sucker creek in SW Oregon
https://www.oregonlive.com/environment/2010/06/up_sucker_creek_in_southwest_o.html


unnecessary or undue degradation of public lands.
Undue and unnecessary degradation is not the act of mining, but is defined as:
conditions, activities, or practices that: fail to comply with one or more of the following: the performance standards in §3809.420, the terms and conditions of an approved plan of operations, and Federal and state laws related to environmental protection and protection of cultural resources; and, are not “reasonably incident” to prospecting, mining, or processing operations (43 CFR 3809.5; 3809.415).

 

[DizzyDigger]

Your not gonna go to jail for not asking BLM if you can use a backhoe.
Your not gonna go to jail when BLM finds out you used a backhoe.
You can't lose your claim for not adhering to a regulation.

3 strikes and I'm out...

Still, it sounded good at the time.

Bedrock here on the river is about 70'. This area is designated as
"Wild and Scenic" (and it truly is), but I wonder if they'd care if
I drove and excavator down on my beach, and proceeded to dig
a 70' hole in my backyard?

 

[Silveraith]

LOL.

 

[Goldwasher]

Does that apply to USFS as well?
Also does it matter if you used an excavator instead of a backhoe?

Yep and nope.

 

[Goldwasher]

you can use small farm equipment on a claim to some extent, if its small and reclaimed as you go.
not to say the agencies might ask for a NOI, and some areas are more aggressive.
larger operations you need a mining plan and most likely a bond, this is the cost of doing business.
the main issue is a mining claimant owns the sub-surface, the surface is administered under other regulations.
Its not the mining they will go after you for it's damaging public lands.
this poor guy went to jail, fined, bankrupted, he could have just worked out of his ponds and waited for his PoO to be approved,
but brought in machinery to maintain the roads which he could do, but decided to do some mining and got caught.
Clifford Tracy mining up Sucker creek in SW Oregon
https://www.oregonlive.com/environment/2010/06/up_sucker_creek_in_southwest_o.html


unnecessary or undue degradation of public lands.
Undue and unnecessary degradation is not the act of mining, but is defined as:
conditions, activities, or practices that: fail to comply with one or more of the following: the performance standards in §3809.420, the terms and conditions of an approved plan of operations, and Federal and state laws related to environmental protection and protection of cultural resources; and, are not “reasonably incident” to prospecting, mining, or processing operations (43 CFR 3809.5; 3809.415).

Good info in that write up.

It backs up what miners actually can do.

Shows how minimal feel goody do goody...can affect public perception...But, the laws really are in the miners favor.

If you keep letting them "win" in the court of opinion.

They will have us filing a plan to step out of your truck in the morning.

 

[Silveraith]

Amen Goldwasher. You rock!!

 

[Mad Machinist]

No, the BLM nor the USFS can't really do much to you. BUT,as you are engaged in the act of mining you now fall under the watch of MSHA and they CAN fine you and put you in jail. And MSHA is on the lookout for small operations now as they are broke and need the fine money to keep operating.

 

[Silveraith]

Thanks.

 

[Mad Machinist]

Thanks for the tip off on those clowns. I'll run a tidy operation. They won't bother me.

These guys ARE NOT clowns. Most of the inspectors are former miners who have seen alot of bad stuff and are trying to keep it from happening again. Most of the rules and regulations MSHA enforces are written in blood. Meaning someone either died or was seriously injured or permanently crippled thus causing a role or regulation to prevent it from happening again.

 

[Silveraith]

All I have to do is get my certification from them. Doesn't look too hard. Then if I ever start mining they can come in & inspect my operation. Right now I haven't even got a place to mine LOL.

 

[OreCart]

I have taken on the federal government in court and won, and I have taken on the government and lost. I have had the government try to bring me before the Grand Jury and it fell through, and another time it was kind of a wash...technically they won, but it was for such a small amount of money that it almost makes you laugh.

In the end it is all just part of doing business today.

Ultimately I think you would lose because you got the wrong attitude, you are confrontational in my opinion, and that is what will get you into trouble. That cannot be your first recourse and expect to get anywhere.

Yes, here where I live, the District Attorney is out of money, understaffed, and has a pile of government agencies funneling a ton of cases only through them. You can use that to your advantage, but it is in your best interest to come to a reasonable understanding first. That is because the industries I am in, and mining as well...is adverse to public opinion. That is huge, because if people complain...government agencies are going to investigate.

My standard answer for any government agency that shows, up, "I am not saying anything until I talk to my attorney." In the written word it is hard to convey tone, but I say that without raising my voice, without confrontation, just nice and quiet.

That does a lot. It says you are not being confrontational, yet not exactly just going to cower in fear either. It keeps your mouth shut so they do not have evidence against you because they are likely recording the conversation anyway. And finally it lets them know you are serious, and have a lawyer on retainer at all times. That means they are in for a tougher fight then maybe what they thought.

And one piece of advice, do not think being in the middle of nowhere will help you. You would be surprised when and where people are out and about. People like to be heard, even if they do not care what you are doing, so they complain. And most times, it is the least likely person you would think would complain, again, just because people like to be heard.

 

[OreCart]

Here is the thing; I have a right to get mad at my wife, but my right to anger stops at the bride of her nose.

What that means is, she has a right not to have a broken nose just because I am angry.

Where I live, it is all private land, and yet even with my own equipment, on my own land, while I might have the right to dig anywhere on it, I still cannot dig a drainage ditch and dump 40 acres of water run off onto my neighbor’s land. What I do on my land, is limited on how it affects someone else’s land.

It is the same thing in this case. You have a right to obtain your minerals, but that right stops when it causes the property to be overly defaced. What that means is subjective for sure, but never think that just because you have the rights to obtain minerals, that your rights are all inclusive. It does not work that way in society...

 

[OreCart]

The interesting thing about landowner rights is that it is like a bundle of aspagus, all wrapped up in an elastic band. When you own land, you get a pile of rights with that land:

Mineral rights
The right to build buildings
Water rights
Air rights
Timber Harvesting Rights

There are more, but the point is, a landowner can sell off all or one of these rights. In this case, the Federal Government is the landowner, and all they did was sell the right to their minerals to you. THAT IS IT. That is incredibly limited rights to that land, and why it is so cheap to get a claim.

People get pretty wrapped up when they get a claim and think they have rights to far more than they do. And some find out the hard way, it is very limited.