Desertphile
Full Member
- Feb 17, 2013
- 146
- 42
- Primary Interest:
- Prospecting
BLM - LR2000 is unreliable; county clerk's office is
My associates and I had planned on filing a claim on 40 acres of desert at a site where the BLM's database shows all previous claims were abandoned and have been for 14 years. Yet the "boots on the ground" survey showed a valid location, with monument and notice and corner markers. The County Recorder's Clerk's office shows that the grantor of the mineral claim has filed the "small miner's waiver" forms, but the BLM's database shows the claims were abandoned and the status as "Closed." Looks like the grantor has filed papers with the county but not the BLM, or the BLM's database is over 1,014 days out of date.
Argh!
This is a problem because the county's database is not searchable by PLSS section: it is searchable by grantor's name, but since the BLM's database is not updated, it doesn't show valid grantor data. It means the LR2000 system is not as useful as it "should" be, since its records do not match county records.
I am disappointed.
My associates and I had planned on filing a claim on 40 acres of desert at a site where the BLM's database shows all previous claims were abandoned and have been for 14 years. Yet the "boots on the ground" survey showed a valid location, with monument and notice and corner markers. The County Recorder's Clerk's office shows that the grantor of the mineral claim has filed the "small miner's waiver" forms, but the BLM's database shows the claims were abandoned and the status as "Closed." Looks like the grantor has filed papers with the county but not the BLM, or the BLM's database is over 1,014 days out of date.
Argh!
This is a problem because the county's database is not searchable by PLSS section: it is searchable by grantor's name, but since the BLM's database is not updated, it doesn't show valid grantor data. It means the LR2000 system is not as useful as it "should" be, since its records do not match county records.
I am disappointed.