Glitch with MLRS closed mining claims

winners58

Bronze Member
Apr 4, 2013
1,721
4,034
Oregon
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
check your claims, MLRS has closed some mining clams that didn't update the $ due date when a small miners waver was filed.
reply from BLM
>MLRS completed a process to close out all claims that didn't have the date changed to 9/1/2022. Unfortunately a lot of the claims were inadvertently closed when they shouldn't have been. We are working to figure out which ones those are and correct them, yours being one of them. It will be changed back to active soon. Please let me know if you don't see that change by the end of the day.
 
Upvote 4
OP
winners58

winners58

Bronze Member
Apr 4, 2013
1,721
4,034
Oregon
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #41
By legally closed by the county, I should have said "quit claim deed" recorded by the claim owner. That is when the county recognizes that a claim is closed at the county level.
or by submitting a relinquishment, in some cases they will still tax you until you do,
even though people let them go by not filing.
 
Last edited:

Clay Diggins

Silver Member
Nov 14, 2010
4,166
12,388
The Great Southwest
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
What you don't understand is the BLM DOESN'T TALK TO THE COUNTY. All they do is record filings. They have no main map that shows where the filings are, they take your money and record it in a book or online and move on to the next person to take their money. I have had - on several occasions- the BLM Staff tell people to go file on my claims because they are open......but my claims are NOT OPEN to be claimed. I take great pride in offering several versions of my maps for them to view so there is NO QUESTION where my claims are. What makes them think my claims are open to the point that they tell people to go file on them? If they had access to the County records, they could have "looked them up" and seen all my County Filing Paperwork was in order..... but they didn't because they DON'T have access to the County Records. The County and the BLM each record a variation of what could possibly be or not be a claim- totally independent of each other. Whoever thought this system up is insane. It's no wonder it is as screwed up as it is.
Rick the BLM does have access to the County Records just like everyone else in the world. The County Recorder keeps the official public record. The fact that the BLM doesn't check those public records is because the FLPMA relieved them of their legal duty to do so.

The BLM does not keep records. They keep a case file with all your informational claim filings (not records) and the BLM's actions related to the case file. The filings you submit to the BLM, in all cases related to your claim's authenticity, are required to be exact copies of your public claims records as recorded at the County. If they are not identical the claimant is at fault - not the BLM.

The BLM does not close claims they close claim case files. Thanks to the FLPMA when the BLM closes a claim case file they no longer have to consider the claimant's mineral rights when planning or carrying out land actions.

There is a long history as to how we got in this situation. Back in the 2018 - 2019 time period I wrote a piece giving an historical overview and brief explanation of how we got here. Our own Kevin in Colorado was kind enough to repost that on his website for posterity. It's will probably help answer some of your questions. You can read that explanation here:
http://findinggoldincolorado.com/blm-mining/

Educate Yourself and Prosper! :thumbsup:

Heavy Pans
 
Last edited:

Rail Dawg

Sr. Member
Oct 11, 2015
484
876
Northern Nevada
Detector(s) used
MineLab GPZ 7000
Garrett ATX Pro
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
Rick the BLM does have access to the County Records just like everyone else in the world. The County Recorder keeps the official public record. The fact that the BLM doesn't check those public records is because the FLPMA relieved them of their legal duty to do so.

The BLM does not keep records. They keep a case file with all your informational claim filings (not records) and the BLM's actions related to the case file. The filings you submit to the BLM, in all cases related to your claim's authenticity, are required to be exact copies of your public claims records as recorded at the County. If they are not identical the claimant is at fault - not the BLM.

The BLM does not close claims they close claim case files. Thanks to the FLPMA when the BLM closes a claim case file they no longer have to con

There is a long history as to how we got in this situation. Back in the 2018 - 2019 time period I wrote a piece giving an historical overview and brief explanation of how we got here. Our own Kevin in Colorado was kind enough to repost that on his website for posterity. It's will probably help answer some of your questions. You can read that explanation here:
http://findinggoldincolorado.com/blm-mining/

Educate Yourself and Prosper! :thumbsup:

Heavy Pans

Great article Clay! Always learning from you.

Chuck
 

Minerrick1

Greenie
Apr 28, 2020
19
42
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
Rick the BLM does have access to the County Records just like everyone else in the world. The County Recorder keeps the official public record. The fact that the BLM doesn't check those public records is because the FLPMA relieved them of their legal duty to do so.

The BLM does not keep records. They keep a case file with all your informational claim filings (not records) and the BLM's actions related to the case file. The filings you submit to the BLM, in all cases related to your claim's authenticity, are required to be exact copies of your public claims records as recorded at the County. If they are not identical the claimant is at fault - not the BLM.

The BLM does not close claims they close claim case files. Thanks to the FLPMA when the BLM closes a claim case file they no longer have to consider the claimant's mineral rights when planning or carrying out land actions.

There is a long history as to how we got in this situation. Back in the 2018 - 2019 time period I wrote a piece giving an historical overview and brief explanation of how we got here. Our own Kevin in Colorado was kind enough to repost that on his website for posterity. It's will probably help answer some of your questions. You can read that explanation here:
http://findinggoldincolorado.com/blm-mining/

Educate Yourself and Prosper! :thumbsup:

Heavy Pans
Thanks Clay, I will review the article.
 

Assembler

Bronze Member
May 10, 2017
2,057
756
Middle Oregon
Detector(s) used
Whites, Fisher, Garrett, and Falcon.
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
There are at least 5 criteria for a "Contract" to be valid.
The first that almost every one knows about is seal affixed to a writing is primary evidence of a consideration.
What are some of the other criteria?



What is the difference between "PUBLIC" and private matters?

To who does rules apply and to who does it not have any effect?

If "Congress" now intends to not dispose of the different "Lands" how does this effect any type of contract that is connected to any "Lands"?

What roll does the surveys play out in this today?

This will get some to look a little deeper here and others do not want to know.
Good luck in your researching.
 

Assembler

Bronze Member
May 10, 2017
2,057
756
Middle Oregon
Detector(s) used
Whites, Fisher, Garrett, and Falcon.
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
"Construct": To put together constituent parts of something in their proper place and order.

This term is also "Defined" in the Oregon code anyone know what it is?

The term "Contract" is also "Defined" in the Oregon code anyone know what it is?
 

WildernessAU

Jr. Member
Dec 25, 2009
61
123
Omg....some of the replies.

Thanks for the original post. The new Mlrs is buggy. I don't find it easy to use and many claims that were filed 1+ years ago are simply marked as "filed" and not current or valid. They also do not show up on the map which can cause overfilling and other issues.
 

Assembler

Bronze Member
May 10, 2017
2,057
756
Middle Oregon
Detector(s) used
Whites, Fisher, Garrett, and Falcon.
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
Omg....some of the replies.

Thanks for the original post. The new Mlrs is buggy. I don't find it easy to use and many claims that were filed 1+ years ago are simply marked as "filed" and not current or valid. They also do not show up on the map which can cause overfilling and other issues.
There is a time frame to iron these issues (like up to 10 years). You will find that this will not effect the "County records" unless the "Claim" itself has issues.

The courts have no problem finding this out sometimes in just a few minutes and if there is defects the outcome may not be good.

Some replies here may never be looked at or better yet answered. This forum has a history of this going on. This could be why a lot of people have stopped posting. Do you think and no wonder.
 

Assembler

Bronze Member
May 10, 2017
2,057
756
Middle Oregon
Detector(s) used
Whites, Fisher, Garrett, and Falcon.
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
Rick the BLM does have access to the County Records just like everyone else in the world. The County Recorder keeps the official public record. The fact that the BLM doesn't check those public records is because the FLPMA relieved them of their legal duty to do so.

The BLM does not keep records. They keep a case file with all your informational claim filings (not records) and the BLM's actions related to the case file. The filings you submit to the BLM, in all cases related to your claim's authenticity, are required to be exact copies of your public claims records as recorded at the County. If they are not identical the claimant is at fault - not the BLM.

The BLM does not close claims they close claim case files. Thanks to the FLPMA when the BLM closes a claim case file they no longer have to consider the claimant's mineral rights when planning or carrying out land actions.

There is a long history as to how we got in this situation. Back in the 2018 - 2019 time period I wrote a piece giving an historical overview and brief explanation of how we got here. Our own Kevin in Colorado was kind enough to repost that on his website for posterity. It's will probably help answer some of your questions. You can read that explanation here:
http://findinggoldincolorado.com/blm-mining/

Educate Yourself and Prosper! :thumbsup:

Heavy Pans
The BLM does not close claims they close claim case files. Thanks to the FLPMA when the BLM closes a claim case file they no longer have to consider the claimant's mineral rights when planning or carrying out land actions.


Care to point out specifically where this is found and to who does this apply?
 

Assembler

Bronze Member
May 10, 2017
2,057
756
Middle Oregon
Detector(s) used
Whites, Fisher, Garrett, and Falcon.
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
Yep almost all of the different courts have no problems looking this stuff up usually withing minutes. Remember many "Court clerks" have the ability to dig this information up even before the "Judge" looks at the case.
 

Goldwasher

Gold Member
May 26, 2009
6,021
13,068
Sailor Flat, Ca.
🥇 Banner finds
1
Detector(s) used
SDC2300, Gold Bug 2 Burlap, fish oil, .35 gallons of water per minute.
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
Hey mods...why would you let a troublemakers ban expire:icon_scratch:
 
Last edited:

Assembler

Bronze Member
May 10, 2017
2,057
756
Middle Oregon
Detector(s) used
Whites, Fisher, Garrett, and Falcon.
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
Hey mods...why would you let a troiblemakers ban expire:icon_scratch:
You may want to check up on the facts before posting something like this.

Trying to point out something that is not there is not a wise idea. Just saying.
 

Goldwasher

Gold Member
May 26, 2009
6,021
13,068
Sailor Flat, Ca.
🥇 Banner finds
1
Detector(s) used
SDC2300, Gold Bug 2 Burlap, fish oil, .35 gallons of water per minute.
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
banned or not the last three years not having your spam cans everywhere has been nice
 

Assembler

Bronze Member
May 10, 2017
2,057
756
Middle Oregon
Detector(s) used
Whites, Fisher, Garrett, and Falcon.
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
update; my claim has been changed back to "active" in MLRS but has not changed in "Reports" (SRP)
Yet,,, like the LR2000, data is entered then is applied the next morning.
I see it closed a lot of claims that should have been closed several years ago, I guess that will help with the backlog.
if your claim is affected contact the State office but many only have one person answering phones and emails
I also put in a MLRS help desk ticket, each one has to be changed back manually,
you can research your claims, also a link on this page to put in a help desk ticket here;
This has no effect on the affidavit claim that is sitting in the "County records".

So what is the point if this type of posting is changed?

Is there not a big time frame for (State) BLM to correct the online postings?
 

Assembler

Bronze Member
May 10, 2017
2,057
756
Middle Oregon
Detector(s) used
Whites, Fisher, Garrett, and Falcon.
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
I don't think the County goes back and forth on "active" and not. If the "claim" is abandoned that is different.
 

Johnnybravo300

Bronze Member
Jan 3, 2016
2,269
2,723
South of Gunnison, Gold Basin
Detector(s) used
F2
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
I wonder if this is happening in Colorado too.
Myself and my claim neighbor had a claim jumper file 40 acres over both of us last May and he demanded that the guy he hired to stake the claim swore it was open.
He kept saying "according to the blm there are no active claims here."
He also said he had 20 something claims as if that means something so i mentioned that he might want to double check his status there or if hes claim jumping someone else.
I kept trying to educate him sbout how research is properly done but he was so mad he wouldnt listen and just called the Sheriff.
In the end he left with the Sheriff and i continued mining all day.
It was an interesting morning to say the least.
 

Assembler

Bronze Member
May 10, 2017
2,057
756
Middle Oregon
Detector(s) used
Whites, Fisher, Garrett, and Falcon.
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
I wonder if this is happening in Colorado too.
Myself and my claim neighbor had a claim jumper file 40 acres over both of us last May and he demanded that the guy he hired to stake the claim swore it was open.
He kept saying "according to the blm there are no active claims here."
He also said he had 20 something claims as if that means something so i mentioned that he might want to double check his status there or if hes claim jumping someone else.
I kept trying to educate him sbout how research is properly done but he was so mad he wouldnt listen and just called the Sheriff.
In the end he left with the Sheriff and i continued mining all day.
It was an interesting morning to say the least.
I think you are not alone on this. I think you will even find a few suits / cases of this going on as well.
 

Assembler

Bronze Member
May 10, 2017
2,057
756
Middle Oregon
Detector(s) used
Whites, Fisher, Garrett, and Falcon.
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
Just exactly how is the BLM saying it is not "Active" or is "Open"?
 

Clay Diggins

Silver Member
Nov 14, 2010
4,166
12,388
The Great Southwest
Primary Interest:
Prospecting
I wonder if this is happening in Colorado too.
Myself and my claim neighbor had a claim jumper file 40 acres over both of us last May and he demanded that the guy he hired to stake the claim swore it was open.
He kept saying "according to the blm there are no active claims here."
He also said he had 20 something claims as if that means something so i mentioned that he might want to double check his status there or if hes claim jumping someone else.
I kept trying to educate him sbout how research is properly done but he was so mad he wouldnt listen and just called the Sheriff.
In the end he left with the Sheriff and i continued mining all day.
It was an interesting morning to say the least.
This is a much bigger problem than most realize. It's not just Small Miners. So far it looks like a problem in all the lower 48 mining states (Alaska uses a different system). I'll have more details as I get my databases updated with the current MLRS data. Hopefully this weekend I'll have some accurate figures for how deep this goes.

In the meantime I STRONGLY suggest mining claim owners determine their claim case file status with the BLM.

Heavy Pans
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Top