USFS and BLM agency visits

[Bejay]

On a different thread the question was asked: How many miners have had visits by an agency person(s) who wanted to bring forth some agency authority.......Say a visit by a USFS or BLM agent.

I have, and it was pre-emoted by a USFS District Rangers letter....and that Dist Ranger came with 4 of his staff and the Hired hand Sheriff who was funded/employed by the USFS.

Also:

Last year I met and talked to a Douglas County Oregon Sheriff (a nice guy) who was employed by the BLM. He was putting up emergency road closure signs for the BLM.... (Douglas Complex forest fire). He even explained to me he was acting on behalf of as an employee of the BLM. He told me personally he does not harass miners.

The reason for this post/thread will be to see how many miners have actually had "out in the field" visits/confrontations/etc. with agency personnel.....And we may be able to clarify some of the issues miners are being asked to deal with.

A prospector/miner has a lot of potential issues to deal with.


Bejay

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[jog]

Wow Bejay.

The whole story is remarkable in how draconian and heavy-handed the forest service, legal system, and environmentalists have behaved toward the entire Emily Camp issue. I had no idea things were that severe or ridiculous.

I wonder how many zealous environmentalists drive cars? How many have a computer? How many have their homes heated by a furnace? How many of their homes are powered by electricity? Where do they think the metals come from that allow them such conveniences? It boggles my mind that zealots can appear to be so narrow-minded and naive, and yet be so hypocritical by partaking of and enjoying fully the very things (whose existence derives from mining!!) they purport to despise.

All the best,

Lanny

Lanny
I feel the same way, I think they look at as It's ok for everyone in this country to have the conveniences and modern technology as long as what it takes to get those doesn't come from where they live or from this country. One of two things will have to happen, either there is a big scam for power & wealth & there part of it or they want to go back to the stone age. I don't think it's the stone age.
Just my thought on this.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Lanny in AB]

Lanny
I feel the same way, I think they look at as It's ok for everyone in this country to have the conveniences and modern technology as long as what it takes to get those doesn't come from where they live or from this country. One of two things will have to happen, either there is a big scam for power & wealth & there part of it or they want to go back to the stone age. I don't think it's the stone age.
Just my thought on this.

I'm sure they have no intentions or desire of going back to the stone age, but they purport to have no concept of where the things they enjoy come from either.

It's a form of purposeful ignorant bliss accompanied by a lot of sound and fury directed against anyone that dares to stand up to them, or heaven forbid, actually oppose them or their agenda, whatever their true agenda might actually be.

All the best,

Lanny

 

[Bejay]

I am not sure anything ever went to court. I believe it was all done in the USFS Hearings process. As was stated: a mediator for the USFS attempted to negotiate between the "greenies" and the claim/property owner. But it exemplifies the need to know all the rules/regs/policies/laws. Note RS 2477 is not 1906 but rather 1976.

You have to love the County issue though. The USFS District Ranger came on to my claim and told me my "shitter" was not an approved outhouse and that the County sanitarian had to approve all outhouses. But I had "no house/structure" ( I offered a legal description of said outhouse), and "no hole in the ground". I had a 5 gal bucket sitting between a notched out log and a toilet seat affixed above the bucket. And I disposed of the insertions properly. I have had numerous allegations brought before me by the Dist Ranger and his staff. Needless to say good communication skills enable a miner to convey evidence countering such allegations. And knowledge is crucial. After the big confrontation (the local hired deputy sheriff accompanied the Dist Ranger) I have never had any other visits or letters....and the sheriff has not come to visit anymore either. Don't get me wrong though....this was before my education by Clay/Barry/? and MEG...and all the classroom work on the americanmininglawforum. I made some critical mistakes in my initial confrontations with the USFS. I did a POO per a request to help the USFS stay out of court per a "greenie" challenge.......and I believed the USFS was my overseer.....WRONG! ! ! So on one of my claims I have a contract with the USFS now. Other claims I have will never submit a POO. A POO goes with the claimant and the specific claim said POO is for.

Always ask by what authority; of any agency request. Basically "show me the beef". And do so in an offering of kindness...although it can be tough at times.
When you know they want you gone, and they want power over ALL your actions; you know they hate to be diminished. The proof is in the pudding...and a portfolio of law and even their own rules applied correctly can play a significant role.

I just had a miner just communicate to me that his USFS LEO came and told him he could not put any poles in the ground because of the antiquities issues. It never ends. Miners dig holes....that is what they do. Prior to that the USFS contended poles in the ground meant a permanent structure....and they hate permanent structures. As one can see from the video the USFS can be very creative and justifiable towards their agenda.

Oh...and by the way......if you want to read the "greenie" side of the story have at it. http://kalmiopsiswild.org/emily-camp-kalmiopsis-inholding-for-sale/


Bejay

 

[Clay Diggins]

RS 2477 (Revised Statutes of 1875) is taken directly from Section 8 of the Mining Act of 1866.

SEC. 8. And be it further enacted, That the right of way for the construction of highways over public lands, not reserved for public uses, is hereby granted.

The Revised Statutes were the predecessor of the U.S Codes (USC) and like the USC were just a restatement of the already enacted laws.

The wording and the intent remained the same until Section 8 (RS2477) was repealed in 1976 in the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA). At that time all existing public ways were grandfathered as a right of way forever. No new public rights of way can be created by the simple act of public use since 1976 but all previous public ways still have the effect of law and cannot be closed to the people.

As I've written several times, the Mining Acts contained several important grants not directly related to mining. The only grant that survived the mass repeal of all public grants in 1976 was the mineral estate grant.

 

[timberjack]

This thread is like taking a college course,,,very informative! My question,,how does the usfs justify locking the gates on public lands and restricting access to any areas, especially those areas affected by the endangered species act?..i dont want this thread to get off course so ill move this question if others think it would be better addressed ealsewhere.

 

[Bejay]

As seen in the Emily Camp series.....the USFS can be very creative. But give thought to this. The USFS comes up with lots of reasons for their actions. The ESA is just one of many. BUT they tend to justify by doing an in house EA cost effective (Environmental Assessment). Without challenge (and the "greenies" always challenge in court) the USFS can get away with an EA. But in most cases in order to close an existing GRANDFATHERED public way the USFS would be ordered to do a full scale (extremely costly...time consuming) EIS.....Environmental Impact Statement. The EIS requires/demands that ALL have a say about the closure. (thanks Clay/Barry/? for the earlier discussion/lesson). Tell the USFS sorry for the OUCH!......but it requires a challenge that always ends up costing the USFS even the court costs and attorney fees.....OUCH again!

Pay attention to the Behind the Woodshed presentation regarding Baker County Oregon!

Bejay

 

[AzViper]

As seen in the Emily Camp series.....the USFS can be very creative. But give thought to this. The USFS comes up with lots of reasons for their actions. The ESA is just one of many. BUT they tend to justify by doing an in house EA cost effective (Environmental Assessment). Without challenge (and the "greenies" always challenge in court) the USFS can get away with an EA. But in most cases in order to close an existing GRANDFATHERED public way the USFS would be ordered to do a full scale (extremely costly...time consuming) EIS.....Environmental Impact Statement. The EIS requires/demands that ALL have a say about the closure. (thanks Clay/Barry/? for the earlier discussion/lesson). Tell the USFS sorry for the OUCH!......but it requires a challenge that always ends up costing the USFS even the court costs and attorney fees.....OUCH again!

Pay attention to the Behind the Woodshed presentation regarding Baker County Oregon!

Bejay

So what has become of Emily Camp? I watched the entire 12 part series and did a little research of Rutan. From what I just read Emily Camp is up for sale again or has been sold. Rutan is more into land investment than involve in gold mining. He was offering shares of Emily Camp.

Dave Rutan:

Hey All (prospectors, miners, land rights advocates),


This message may be used entirely or any of its parts to distribute electronically or publish to your distribution lists or newsletters. This fundraiser will raise $150,000 for mining Clubs/Associations or Property Rights groups through its donations. Any Club or Association could also use a 'Share' in the property as a fundraising Prize in any raffle. $500 of each purchase is a donation or you could keep any amount raised over $1500...

Here are the details.. "Emily Camp" in SW Oregon is now structured as an Oregon Limited Liability Company and there are 300 EXCLUSIVE shares being offered and sold for $2000 each. The LLC is buying 50 percent interest for the 300 shares and has First Right of Refusal to buy the remaining 50 percent. The Shares have full voting rights and include interest in the mining property, the cabins, and all equipment to mine its gold and recreate on the property as joint owners. $500 of each sale is a donation, and if it’s made to a 501 (c3) Club/Association (for example Public Lands for the People, or Eastern Oregon Mining Association) it would also be a tax write-off for very good causes...

What is Emily Camp?


It’s that severely remote PATENTED gold mine in SW Oregon that has got lots of attention in the last 5 years. It’s the only remaining Private in-holding in the Kalmiopsis Wilderness that was developed, to the surprise of opponents, using a helicopter shortly after the Biscuit Fire burned all its timber. It was thought to be inaccessible and the owners gave up. The US Forest Service has asked me 4 times if I would sell it. Many environmental groups have also asked me. It is no doubt a "Crown Jewel" and I enjoy poking at them with my rights to use, develop and mine it! Now the game shall get even more interesting.


The news is about Emily Camp, LLC, a business structure I have worked on with attorneys for over a year to promote an individual ownership in this very unique property and to enjoy it for its gold and other benefits. You may get a real laugh as well from this story since the US Forest Service can do nothing to stop it. It’s a chance for 300 people to own something the Forest Service or other opponents can no longer control or have a voice in.


Prior to the Biscuit Fire of 2002, Carl Alleman owned the claims prior and thru the 1980's. He patented the 60 acres in 1988 just in time before the Department of Interior placed a moratorium on mineral patents. Great job Carl! The land stretches approx. 3/4 mile down the Little Chetco River in the Heart of the Kalmiopsis Wilderness and consists of approx. 140,000 bank cubic yards of alluvial gold placer gravels proven to be economical to mine by the US Forest Service during its own mineral exam. The access, at the time, was difficult. The old road constructed in the 1940's travels nearly 10 miles through the wild mountains and is nothing but dirt and rock. In the 1990's, Carl lost his access to the US Forest Service new blockage of the road and sued them over the access, however liberal judges worked against him and he gave up. The USFS then played appraisal games with Carl by attempting several times to devalue his property with their own internal appraisers. They did so by valuing the minerals as merely "recreational mining" in nature despite their own mineral exams proved otherwise. (See YouTube.com (http://youtube.com/)video series "Emily Camp Odyssey" for the complete story). I then bought the property after the fire with the intention of never using the road, thus avoiding the US Forest Service jurisdiction altogether.


Development after the Fire. After 2 weeks and 26 airlifts, four cabins were built onsite. The USFS was surprised since they thought Carl had been defeated and the property would remain vacant and inaccessible. Fortunately, the fire had killed the trees to the point that cutting some down was allowed be needed 'safety' to build the helicopter pad. This was the only benefit of the fire but a good one. This would have been challenging prior to the fire without a permit and of course every greenie in the State would fight issuance of a permit to fall live timber there and likely tie it up in court for years with bogus "pink salamander" stories. Now that access is no problem, there is nothing the USFS could control.

Fast forward to today after several years of enjoyment...

Raising Capital for Mining while buying your own Share. In the summer of 2011 we filmed the documentary mentioned previously and I have steadily worked on a business structure to offer ownership in the unique camp. This is now done. At the time of this writing and just 3 weeks of promotion, there are 26 shares sold and many others coming in. I have passed several large checks to Public Lands for the People (PLP), Waldo Mining Association and others for the donation). My goal is to sell out the 300 shares and Emily Camp be visited EXCLUSIVELY by anxious and proud owners of the company that owns it for their private enjoyment. The shares are transferable and may be willed through inheritance. The visitation and management is all internal to the company and by a voted manager to handle repairs, replacements, taxes, and visitation schedule rotations. The helicopter travel and management will over time become routine through the use of a company website (accessible only by the share holders) that provides an updated list of the owners to coordinate and communicate. If we all wish to change something or make an improvement onsite, we all vote since we own it.

If interested in knowing more about how Emily Camp is and can further raise money for your organization, please contact me at 360-513-5465.

Also, see me at:
GPAA Show in Salem, Puyallup, Red Bluff, and Las Vegas!

Photos and other information can be found at www.oregongoldtrips.com and searching there for Emily Camp or the Kalmiopsis Wilderness Mining Camp.
Thank you,
Dave Rutan, managing member
Emily Camp, LLC



PS. Attached is the flyer.... and a group photo at Emily Camp. Lots more photos are located on my website at www.oregongoldtrips.com (http://www.oregongoldtrips.com/)and look for Emily Camp or the Kalmiopsis Wilderness mining camp.

As for some Q&A.
The LLC memberships are a single tier and all have the same voting rights. They are transferable between family members, otherwise the LLC has first rights to buy back, then the members themselves. Each share is for an individual and may not be owned by a couple, or a group. The dues are $25/year. I have set up a company website for communications and posting of the members contact information, and the Operating Agreement, as well as other stuff to grow over time. There of course are no disbursements and a member keeps all the gold they find. I limited the number of people onsite to 16 staying in the cabins. The LLC is buying 50 percent interest in the property and has First Right of Refusal to buy the remainder. There is a Buy/Sell Clause. Property taxes are about $410/year. The budget allows for a reserve and we can all make improvements or additions by vote. It’s a cool place and if you or anyone wants to fly in for an hour of show and tell, I have others waiting to share in the cost to do the same. It’s about $250 or so each. (This will drop in half when there is no dead air time wasted when flying people out at the same time)

Thanks again and hope to sell all 300. It will raise $150,00 for fighting for our mining rights. It sure won't make the environmentalists happy but not a damn thing they can do about it.

Dave

 

[Bejay]

As one may see Mr Rutan is not quite up to speed on his rights per the mining law(s) and mineral "patent" strength.....regarding "TREES". Sounds interesting though, and from watching the vids one can see the "dredgers" were not very skilled.

Bejay

 

[Lanny in AB]

As one may see Mr Rutan is not quite up to speed on his rights per the mining law(s) and mineral "patent" strength.....regarding "TREES". Sounds interesting though, and from watching the vids one can see the "dredgers" were not very skilled.

Bejay

I agree; however, what I liked about the dredge video was that it showed a lot of underwater footage so that people that had no concept of what dredging was about could get a limited understanding of how dredging introduces no new materials into the stream environment, whatsoever, and a bit on how the sluice clean-up works. Plus, I'm missing dredging so much, it was just great to see someone working underwater!

On the down side, they had almost no gold on their black mat, which was quite a tell about the level of knowledge and overall skill of those doing the work, especially if I'm to believe the pay on that patented ground is as good as stated. So, if the ground is great Bejay, that leaves your observation of their apparent skill level deficit.

Another point, I've never worked a hole like they did; no consistent plan evident that I could see. I like to take my holes down in quite consistent levels or layers (as much as possible), so I have a good idea of what I'm working through to know where the layers of super-heavies are, and where the best pay is coming from (so as to help me know what to watch for on the next hole just up or down from the test hole).

I'm hijacking your legal discussions though (which are excellent, by the way), so I'll vacate pronto.

All the best, and many thanks to all on this thread that are trying to help others better understand,

Lanny

 

[Bejay]

Here is a case worthy of attention...and a win for the miner/dredger. Had to link it this way so you could follow the case.

americanmininglawforum.myfastforum.org :: Terry L. McClure Case

Take special note to how creative the USFS was. But they lost out big time.
Also take note to how the miner stuck to the citation, and never allowed the USFS to sidetrack him.

Bejay

 

[Bonaro]

Background info....

http://kalmiopsiswild.org/emily-camp-kalmiopsis-inholding-for-sale/

 

[Bejay]

Here is a case worthy of attention...and a win for the miner/dredger. Had to link it this way so you could follow the case.

americanmininglawforum.myfastforum.org :: Terry L. McClure Case

Take special note to how creative the USFS was. But they lost out big time.
Also take note to how the miner stuck to the citation, and never allowed the USFS to sidetrack him.

Bejay

This case is a WIN for the miner. This miner did not allow the USFS to intrude on his right to dredge. First: one should note that the USFS citation was specific. (but the USFS fails to really understand their own rules). Second: once the USFS realizes they missed the mark they tried to get creative. But the citation was specific. Mining of locatable minerals does not require a USFS or BLM special use permit on public lands open to mineral entry. Never does, and never has!

Bejay

 

[Hoser John]

Courts over ruled down the road under appeal in another case/court. This whole thang was a setup to begin with and cost us our rights as under Lex/Waggoner decision we were golden on the occupancy rights. Cancer on the klamath as usual. Plop a newb right by a ranger station to pzzzzm off was the game and a win by L/W turned into the worst loss ever. No yaaa FM-John

 

[Bejay]

Not sure I am following your post John. What case overturned the dredger Terry McClure?

Bejay

 

[jog]

Thanks Bejay
This all started with a road because they are ReMapping the area & were trying to tell me that my rd was a trail & I would have to file a NOI to use it. I flat out told them that I would not go there with them. I have done My research on the road and I found the guy that built the rd back in 1978 & had a good long talk with him. He is going to right a letter to me stating that the rd was built for access to his mine with all records showing that the rd was built as a Mine to Market Rd.
Now there trying to tell me that the rocks that are stacked from the 80s may be Historical yea right. I am sure I will get a visit from them when I am over there later.
Thanks for the good info above, have I added it to my folder.

Raised enough hell with BLM and got my road added to the new mapping system so now I still have access to the other half of my claim. Also did my research on when it was made & contacted the original road builder himself. Learned all sorts of interesting things that even BLM doesn't know.

 

[delnorter]

Way to go Jog. Be diligent about other aspects of your claim and the mining of it. They will be watching.

Mike

 

[jog]

As long as it's from a distance I don't care.

 

[AzViper]

Well the BLM exercised its muscle and shutdown 20 of club claims forcing the club to now re-stake and now select claims in 20 acre parcels when they use to be 160 acre. Anybody else see whats going on? $$$ what use to cost in fee's for the entire claim now cost 8 times for the same amount of land. The old claims have been around for years.

 

[Goldwasher]

Well the BLM exercised its muscle and shutdown 20 of club claims forcing the club to now re-stake and now select claims in 20 acre parcels when they use to be 160 acre. Anybody else see whats going on? $$$ what use to cost in fee's for the entire claim now cost 8 times for the same amount of land. The old claims have been around for years.

On what grounds? How do they just shutdown a claim. Did they say they weren't valid? That sucks

 

[Bejay]

The Placer claim maintenance fee structure was changed. The $140.00 placer claim maintenance fee for a single placer went to $140.00 per 20 acres of placer for claim holders who had over 10 placer claims. So clubs with large placer claim acreage were the hit the hardest. Miners who have 10 nor less claims can file a waiver prior to Sep 1st of each year and escape the new increased fee structure. But not those claim holders having over 10. All a matter of $$$$$.

The positive thing that resulted was that a huge amount of claimable land became open for reclaiming by individuals making discovery. Been there....did it.

Bejay