What is "Discovery"

[Bejay]

The concept of making a valuable mineral discovery is often confusing. Finding gold, and locating a claim will secure your mineral interest; considered to be "possessory interest" securing it from others, but it does not defend it as a "valid discovery" against the interests of the United States. To prove a "valid discovery" a miner would have to "prove up" on the claim and do a "marketability test" that meets the "prudent man concept". So in simple terms: finding some gold and laying claim to it does not constitute a "valid discovery", but merely reserves your location for your own prospecting and exploration.

The US Supreme Court has had many rulings that dictate that "Staking a Mining Claim" is simply a step in a process; and is part of the prospect, locate, explore, discover, mine/patent process. Such court decisions play a very important role in the fight to secure the rights of miners to "mine"..... when the issue of "takings" is used as the argument to support miners rights to mine.

Supreme Court Cases to study are:
Cameron v. United States and.............. C.A. Davis et al., Appellants, v. Neal Nelson, State Director, Bureau of Land Management.

Bejay

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Assembler]

A "Discovery" and "Discoveries" can mark a 'point', "Both ends points" of a "Lode line" as well as the number of lines that mark a "Mineral deposit". The course and length of the "Lode line" or presumed course of the vein should be marked upon the plat and specifically described in the field notes.
"End lines" is a different topic line.
Field notes and other reports must be typewritten in black-record ink (today laser toner) and upon the proper blanks (cloth, plastic, paper and 'digital file' depending on the use) which will be furnished with the order for survey or upon application. No interlineations or erasures are permissible, and no abbreviations or symbols may be used excepting.....(some section and specimen field note exceptions).......prepare and file a preliminary plat on cloth, drawn on a scale......."Specimen plat".......

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[MadMarshall]

I agree, but as far as an individual or even the state, a mining claim has to be considered a valid claim with a valid discovery
until proven otherwise and only the United States can do that and only after due process.

a location is made in "good faith" that you will be diligently working to perfect your claim.

I agree with bejay, plain language in the wording can be tricky.
it's because it also has to include the intent of the legislation as a whole.

I do not dispute that one has to view all mining claims as Valid ...
Mining Districts once was an important role and one that held miners accountable and one that had the authority to validate claims and challenge claims and also make decisions in regards to claims and their status.
Don't confuse Mining Districts of today as those of past.. Mining Districts today are a joke and bein tried for use other then their true intent...

 

[Assembler]

I do not dispute that one has to view all mining claims as Valid ...
Mining Districts once was an important role and one that held miners accountable and one that had the authority to validate claims and challenge claims and also make decisions in regards to claims and their status.
Don't confuse Mining Districts of today as those of past.. Mining Districts today are a joke and bein tried for use other then their true intent...

True to the point and thank you for pointing out.
The "Mineral entry" is still there within the boundaries of a "Recognized Mining District" is now just a thread left of 'Mining history'. With little to no funding from Congress. Very hard and expensive today to do much.

 

[winners58]

back to the OP
I've looked at lots of areas where I could find a speck or two but the ones I have located and filed a claim on
I was able to sample consistent colors and felt it was good enough to warrant further exploration or development.
So now is that a discovery even though I'm not at the point of proving validity?

 

[Assembler]

"Affiant"

back to the OP
I've looked at lots of areas where I could find a speck or two but the ones I have located and filed a claim on
I was able to sample consistent colors and felt it was good enough to warrant further exploration or development.
So now is that a discovery even though I'm not at the point of proving validity?

If a "Surveyor" from time to time is a "Affiant / deponent"as well as the "Flag man / woman" etc. is also, depending on there actions. It would also be a very good idea for one to make a written or printed declaration or statement of facts, made voluntarily, and confirmed by the oath or affirmation of the party making it, known also as a Affidavit. Good idea to have a "Notary public seal" the document as this is "Recorded in a book" by title. This is a common practice and custom in most "Mining Districts" as well.

Two things to consider, one is a preliminary issue along with a determination of some substantial right, the other thing is to serve to invoke the judicial power. Will not talk about this on this open forum.

 

[Goldwasher]

Congress doesn't and never funded mining districts.

You can have claims and the process without them.

There is recourse for a miner to challenge validity of a claim in court.

I guess you have to ask why would you.

The belief that the person who has the claim isn't going to develop it as well as you would?

Over a paperwork filing issue?

Just because you don't think its right that someone filed a location notice on ground that has no gold? If that's the reason Why care?

For the sake of the integrity of mining law?

You know what else isn't supported by mining law..or BLM or forest service regs.

Commercial collection. If you don't have a claim you can not go onto public land and remove valuable minerals for anything other than personal collection.

Only up to certain amounts a year even. You are not allowed to sell them or barter for gain.

So, any gold dug, sniped, creviced or beeped on land that isn't your claim or that is not recovered from a lease.
(permission to dig on another's claim is a lease regardless of time permitted)

Hence the reason for locating mining claims.

We didn't put up a location monument or record until we had found gold in several places in the area.

It comes out of the ground and is sold to customers.

No person can come along and challenge our locations...well , they can but, they won't get far.

The Government could change the land status and if we can't prove that there is actually gold there, that We can't bring it to market...and that there isn't more in the ground that is worth digging out the Gov. can invalidate.

I'm not really worried about either of those scenarios

It is not right or lawful for someone to go into an area that is claimable...remove all the minerals they can without filing and turning around and selling it. That's why the law is the way it is. If you don't have a claim the minerals in the ground still belong to the public.

You are supposed to show your intent on the ground and via recorded docs that you want the possession of the mineral deposit for the sake of further exploration and development.

Getting to deep into digging and foregoing the legal side is not right. Your basically stealing from the public. Even if you only clean out a dozen cracks.In a quiet river canyon.

Per mining law if you turn around and sell those minerals to earn your keep....you are smacking the intent of the mining law right in the face.

Imagine how it would be if mineral extraction and possession of minerals in the ground and the ability to take them and sell them was first come first served??

My opinion. Do it all right per the law. Worry about the ground under your feet and those you dig with.

The rest just like a certain poster on these threads lately is just chatter. Assembling a bunch of words together. It doesn't actually change the situation on the ground.

If you are going to sing the praises of mining law and invoke it to chastise others.....well, make sure your following all of it as well.

 

[Bejay]

One must not get confused about the difference in terms. Finding a few flakes of gold is not making a "valid discovery" and thus we get confused pertaining to the real meaning of the term "discovery". Finding a few flakes of gold warrant a "Location", and then "filing" per Law. At that point your claim allows you sole interest in the minerals and keeps others away from prospecting/exploring/mining your claim. At that point it is gives the locator "possessory interest". So the real meaning of the term "discovery" boils down to the classification of a "valid discovery". This term is a whole different can of worms. A "valid discovery" is where the "prudent man concept" enters the game. So "location" can be merely finding a few flakes/colors of gold. That does not constituent "Discovery". The location and initial findings are merely enough to keep others from gaining an interest in your claim....and allows you "the locator" the right to explore and prospect the claim. The "valid discovery" is a process of proving the gold in your pan meets the "prudent man concept" which in turn can lead to a patent capability. The term "pedis possession" brings forth issues that have substantial merit.

I can elaborate on that issue later...have to go for now.

Bejay

 

[Assembler]

The "Issues of conflicts" comes to mind. Any forms of "Proofs and Affidavits" can help with this.

 

[Bejay]

Well I sat here and did a whole lot of further explanation only to have the info not make it to the post. My computer would not allow me to save it either...as it just makes the written info a messy jargon of garbly gook....I am done for now. Really burst my bubble and this kind of stuff gets old on this fourm

Bejay

 

[winners58]

thanks Bejay for bringing up the topic, gives me an opportunity to look at things again.
I keep detailed records of what I find and where, Oregon is making it hard on dredgers
looking at building some off-stream equipment, give me a reason to start digging holes.

 

[Bejay]

The right of possession; the right of pedis possessio even has limits. That right is given the miner who has a valid mineral claim, upon finding some initial mineral and filing the legal claim. While it allows for no fraudulent intrusion upon his claim there are instance upon which that possession can be absolved. If the miner fails to actively pursue a diligent search for mineral, or has relaxed his possession to be merely incidental, the claim can be taken by another....(considered as the 3rd party) Another can enter the claim peaceably; and not fraudulently or clandestinely and make a mineral discovery and location. The new location, when made, is thus valid and would have to be respected accordingly.
I believe we can often see how this is a tool utilized by big mining companies to actually remove miners from their claims; in order for the big mining companies to make the incidental miners simply go away. But that last statement is just an observation of possibility.

Bejay

 

[Bejay]

Then one must consider "sine qua non" (that which is absolutely necessary for 3rd party intrusion). while the finding some gold in your pan and filing a claim allows the miner (2nd position party) his initial claim, and has shown to have limits, that which may be considered to be a premature location based upon the recordation and certificates of notices of location; ambiguity exists casting a cloud upon the title of the United States:.....the first position holder of the lands....in such a way; because the law must now contemplate that true "discovery" must coincide with the physical location of the claim.

Very interesting information...that I had to learn.

SO SORRY FOR THE DOUBLE POSTING...MY COMPUTER IS ALL OVER THE MAP DOING ?

Bejay

 

[Bejay]

SO THE BOTTOM LINE IS: A MINER MUST ACTIVLEY PURSUE MAKING A TRUE DISCOVERY. A MINING CLAIM IS PART OF THE PROSPECT - LOCATE - EXPLORE - DISCOVER -MINE/PATENT PROCESS. THE INITIAL CLAIM STAKING IS NOT THE END RESULT, BUT RATHER A WAY OF SECURING THE MINERALS AGAINST OTHER PROSPECTORS SO THE MINER CAN COMPLETE THE REQUIRED STEPS TO ESTABLISH A VALID VALUABLE MINERAL DISCOVERY.

POSSESSION AND MINING ARE A REQUIREMENT. This brings forth some very interesting issues pertaining to some of the anti mining legislation by the States. I believe this is separate from the "work requirement" (affidavit of work) we must also perform.

Bejay

 

[Bejay]

So this brings forth an issue pertaining to "club" claims. In my opinion the "club" claim issue brings forth an unwanted cloud of uncertainty regarding the true "Discovery Issue" and even further brings forth issues that have cast an unwanted regulatory intrusion by both State and Federal Govs. In Calif the initial anti dredging position was adopted based on "recreational mining". Those miners who answered a state wide survey identifying themselves as "recreational miners". This term "recreational" adaptation by miners and exasperated by club claims was the storm cloud that allowed the courts and political entities to establish the "stoppage" of dredging.

If we accept that true discovery is based on the info and court cases I cited, then one can now see the real importance of maintaining the intent to reach the patent process of "prudent man".

There are two sides to this "I have a claim" issue coin. Are claim holders actually striving to find marketable gold or simply have a "place to go to find some gold in the pan".

Having had my first initial claim since many many far back years ago; I can say that after 50 years from the initial "I found some gold in my pan" to actually exploring and prospecting...making further discoveries, I may be on the road to achieving/meeting the prudent man concept. But that is made almost impossible by State legislation taking my right to mine away.

So one may even simply start out with some gold in the pan, and not find sufficient gold to warrant "quitting their mainstay job"....one must realize that the potential exists, if the miner has intent to prospect and find more; the "prudent man concept" may be awaiting those who desire to reach that goal.


Bejay

 

[Golden_Crab]

This question arises; and I have been one to mis-interpret this issue. Does one need to find some gold to establish a valuable mineral claim? Can a locator simply locate without finding gold first? This issue is one that confronts the mining community often. Can a corporation/person/individual/US Citizen/or person wanting to become one, locate a valuable mineral claim before they actually find some valuable mineral? It is often been misunderstood that it is necessary to locate a valuable mineral before one stakes a claim. That however is not true. The discovery validates the claim and makes it lawful, but the failure to make the discovery does not prevent one from locating a claim. The courts have handled that misunderstanding often and one can get a better understanding by reading the C.A. Davis case I mentioned earlier. I always thought one had to find the gold first and then locate. Often I see miners locate then make their find....or simply rely on the fact the claim has been productive in the past and then prospect and explore to find the gold.

Bejay

I'm quite certain the context of the law when it was written was people would claim what they were actively working or in sequence. These days it's more smoke and mirrors since there's not nearly the same competition for open ground (yet ever more difficult to mine today than it was then).

 

[delnorter]

Thank you for your efforts Bejay. Do you happen to have any more information about the state wide survey of identifying recreational miners? I don't recall being asked this question.

Mike

 

[Goldwasher]

I don't see anywhere that prudence is based on the criteria that you have to be able to quit your job or fore sake other avenues of income.
In order for your claim to be valid.

Would seem like if there is a market and you profit off of the gold you dig, in relation to the digging of the gold you should meet the requirement.

Considering market fluctuation. If that was the narrow definition all claims would go in and out of "prudence" as the markets and overall costs change.

I don't spend more to get the gold out of the ground from our claims than I make selling it to people.

It is totally unrelated to my other forms of income and expenses.

If I decide to spend too much on a boat and mis manage my budget...it can't make my mining claim invalid.

 

[Bejay]

I would agree that "prudence" does not require one to quit another job. I would agree that "prudence" would not require one to even extract the mineral. I accept "prudence" to be the ability to prove that there is sufficient mineral available to allow a prudent man to earn a living from the harvestable capability. I would contend that to Prove Up is the concept that allows one the ability to show there is sufficient valuable mineral in the ground to warrant the ability to earn a living (or more) from the potential extraction.

Market fluctuation would enter into the process........as gold would have to remain valuable enough to meet the "prudent man concept". But the interesting part of all this is how we confuse "discovery" to simply mean "I found some gold in my pan". In reality it has more meaning.

If we accept that it has more meaning and applies to the end process of "patent" we can see that all else is a process to "prove up" on the claim. When we truly understand that "discovery" has more merit we can understand how the battle to "keep mining" is actually supported by "discovery" and "prove up". The intent to "prove up" is a process that can take time and the small miner needs to keep this "intent" on the burner. Otherwise the challenge to mine and make '"discovery" eludes us.

So on the one hand we can see how complex the "challenge to mine" becomes when in fact the anti mining issue and intrusionary Gov agencies make it impossible to achieve the prudent man concept....IMHO. It does however, IMHO, bring forth a valid argument against those who want to "stop/hinder" mining


Bejay

 

[Bejay]

Thank you for your efforts Bejay. Do you happen to have any more information about the state wide survey of identifying recreational miners? I don't recall being asked this question.

Mike

I don't. I used to follow the issue very closely. I most often felt that the battle was getting off track....especially since it avoided the "mining laws" as a defense in the very first stages of the battle. Later on it brought forth mining law. But I do recall that Calif relied on the survey to show that most miners were merely "recreational" . Even in Oregon the dredge permit was identified as a "recreational" form of mining. 4 inch and under and 25 yds and under was termed recreational on their permit form.

 

[Bejay]

I truly believe that one must understand the true meaning of the words being used. Most often the term "discovery" is confused with "finding some gold" and filing a valid mineral claim. It actually has much more meaning than that. Thus we see how the state courts make decisions contrary to our thinking. It is far more complex than simple terms we truly don't understand. The mining laws are still on the books and when the miner fails to understand all the words properly it becomes very frustrating to see our rights to mine interfered with.....because we think it is such a simple "takings" of our rights.

One must ask: Why is it that "takings" has not achieved the goal of maintaining our right to mine? If small time miners forget that "intent" plays a key role and that identifying themselves as "recreational" makes the mining laws inapplicable; we can see how our rights are being eroded.

One can see that making the statement "Discovery is not necessary to file a claim" brings forth a very complex issue as well. Discovery actually is an end result to prove up and mine/patent. Finding some gold and staking and filing a claim is a beginning process. Then of course we see claims being located without the boots on the ground "finding some gold" and jumping on the ground to then go out (up to 90 days after location notice is physically posted) and find some "gold in the pan".

Finding some gold within your location is enough to allow you to make a mining claim location that will defend the claim against subsequent prospectors and locators. But this is merely known as having a "possessory interest" in the minerals within the boundaries of your location. A valid discovery is a whole different can of worms.

Your initial "discovery" is not adequate enough to defend your claim against the interest of the United States. For a claim to have a "valid discovery" you will need to be able to prove that your unmined deposit meets the "prudent man rule" and the "marketability test".

But all this is a process based on the word "intent". How many small time miners and claim holders merely want to go "find some gold in their pan" and enjoy doing so? Nothing wrong with the enjoyment or having a claim to work on occasion. But the applicable "intent" brings forth all the merit in the world. One must accept that intent is the key and time is not as real a factor.