FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO JUST DON"T "GET IT"

jog

Bronze Member
Nov 28, 2008
1,364
682
Tillamook Oregon
Detector(s) used
Whites MXT / GMT
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
This is for all those people who don't think this is important, so maybe this will help you understand.......:BangHead:

MINING UNDER THE 1872 MINING LAW
AND
RECREATIONAL MINING
IN OREGON
Prepared by Tom Kitchar, April. 8, 2014
A growing problem for individual prospectors and miners in Oregon today is the seemingly total misunderstanding by regulatory agencies, the general public, and even many within the mining community of the differences between mining pursuant to the U.S. Mining Law and so-called “recreational mining”. This misunderstanding has led to more and more regulation and restrictions on mining and in some cases to actual prohibitions. For the purposes of this report: “Mining” means: prospecting, exploration, and actual mining along with all uses reasonably incident to mining on lands owned by the United States that are open to Location & Entry under the U.S. General Mining Act(s) of 1866, 1870, and 1872,[1] on mining claims, and private property. “Recreational mining” means: prospecting, exploration and mining on lands closed to Location and Entry under the U.S. Mining Law on federal lands withdrawn from mineral entry, or on state and county owned lands – with the permission of the owner. Note that all mining (including prospecting) on lands of the United States open to mining under the Mining Law is performed as a Congressionally granted statutory right to all citizens (and others) which cannot be taken or prohibited; whereas any mining or prospecting on state or county owned lands is performed with the express permission of the land owner as an allowed activity or privilege which can be regulated to the point of a prohibition similar to other recreational activities such as hunting or fishing. Under the U.S. Mining Law, there is no such thing as “recreational mining”. On lands open to Location & Entry under the Mining Law, any and all locatable mineral extraction activities are “mining”. As far as the rights of miners are concerned, it makes no difference what-so-ever if the miner is having fun or working under miserable conditions 18 hrs./day, getting rich or starving, or operating large excavators and bulldozers or just simply panning for gold.[2] On these lands, mining is mining. It is only under Oregon statutes that “recreational mining” exists. Under ORS 517.120(4): "Recreational mining" means mining in a manner that is consistent with a hobby or casual use, including use on public lands set aside or withdrawn from mineral entry for the purpose of recreational mining, or using pans, sluices, rocker boxes, other nonmotorized equipment and dredges with motors of 16 horsepower or less and a suction nozzle of four inches or less in diameter. (emphasis added) By definition, “recreational mining” cannot occur on lands of the United States open to mining under the Mining Law - as any such activities are neither a hobby nor casual use – they are “mining” (and as such are performed and protected by authorization granted by Congress). BACKGROUND NOTES: Presented here to help understand the difference between “mining” and “recreational mining”; as considering them as the same is akin to mixing apples and oranges: Yes, both are mining (as apples & oranges are both fruit), but one form is a Congressionally granted statutory right while the other has no rights attached and is performed at the whim of the land owner. A. The Congress of the United States, as authorized by the Constitution, has the “exclusive” [SUP][SUP][3][/SUP][/SUP] power “…to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States;” (Article IV).
B. According to the U.S. Mining Law:

“… the mineral lands of the public domain, both surveyed and unsurveyed, are hereby declared to be free and open to exploration and occupation by all citizens of the United States, and those who have declared their intention to become citizens, subject to such regulations as may be prescribed by law, and subject also to the local custom or rules of miners in the several mining districts, so far as the same may not be in conflict with the laws of the United States.” (H.B. 365, 39TH CONGRESS, IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, JULY 19, 1866, Sec. 1). (emphasis added)
C. “Locators' rights of possession and enjoyment”: According to 30 USC, Chpt. 2, Sec. 26:
“… so long as they comply with the laws of the United States, and with State, territorial, and local regulations not in conflict with the laws of the United States governing their possessory title …shall have the exclusive right [SUP][SUP][4][/SUP][/SUP] of possession and enjoyment of all the surface included within the lines of their locations…” (emphasis and footnote added)
Note that on mining claims located after the effective date of the 1955 Multiple Use Act are subject, when a patent has not yet issued, to a right in the United States to manage surface resources and allow others to use surface resources, though these uses: “…shall be such as not to endanger or materially interfere with prospecting, mining or processing operations or uses reasonably incident thereto. (30 U.S.C. 612(b)). (emphasis added)

D. Property rights: Under both federal and state laws, unpatented mining claims are considered real property in the highest sense: 30 USC 26.94 - Unpatented mining claims are "property" in the highest sense of such term, which may be bought, sold and conveyed and will pass by decent. ORS 517.080 Mining claims as realty. All mining claims, whether quartz or placer, are real estate. The owner of the possessory right thereto has a legal estate therein within the meaning of ORS 105.005. [SUP][SUP][5][/SUP][/SUP]
E. Congressional Intent:

The Congress declares that it is the continuing policy of the Federal Government in the national interest to foster and encourage private enterprise in (1) the development of economically sound and stable domestic mining, minerals, metal and mineral reclamation industries, (2) the orderly and economic development of domestic mineral resources, reserves, and reclamation of metals and minerals to help assure satisfaction of industrial, security and environmental needs... (Mining and Minerals Policy Act of 1970) (emphasis added)
F. Summary: As can be seen in the above: 1. Those mining under the U.S. Mining Law enjoy very real specific rights, to property and the right to mine that property. Even the federal government land management agencies are barred from endangering or materially interfering with such mining. Any and all regulation must be reasonable and necessary to protect specific concerns; and cannot be prohibitive in nature; whereas 2. Those “recreating” on lands closed to the mining law do not enjoy these rights but instead are a mere social guest of the landowner who is free to allow, restrict or even prohibit the activities.

Prepared by

Tom Kitchar
President, Waldo Mining District
P.O. Box 1574
Cave Junction, OR 97523


[1] The true nature of ‘‘public lands.’’ ‘‘Public Lands’’ are ‘‘lands open to sale or other dispositions under general laws, lands to which no claim or rights of others have attached.’’ The United States Supreme Court has stated: ‘‘It is well settled that all land to which any claim or rights of others has attached does not fall within the designation of public lands.’’ FLPMA defines ‘‘public lands’’ to mean ‘‘any land and interest in land owned by the United States within the several states and administered by the Secretary of the Interior through the Bureau of Land Management.’’ (From the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—Extensions of Remarks, October 23, 2000, Determination of Land Ownership within Federal Forest Reserves CHAIRMAN’S FINAL REPORT CONCERNING THE NOVEMBER 13 SUBCOMMITTEE ON FORESTS AND FOREST HEALTH HEARING IN ELKO, NEVADA


[2] …panning for gold is quintessentially a mining operation.” (UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA, MISSOULA DIVISION, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. STEVE A. HICKS, JAN 0 9 2009)
1 of 3
[3] Exclusive. Appertaining to the subject alone, not including, admitting, or pertaining to any others. Sole. Shutting out; debarring from interference or participation; vested in one person alone. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 5[SUP]th[/SUP] Edition, 1979) (emphasis added)
[4] Exclusive right. An exclusive right is one which only the grantee thereof can exercise, and from which
all others are prohibited or shut out. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 5[SUP]th[/SUP] Edition, 1979) (emphasis added)

2 of 3
[5] ORS 105.005 Right of action; recovery; damages. (1) Any person who has a legal estate in real property and a present right to the possession of the property, may recover possession of the property, with damages for withholding possession, by an action at law. The action shall be commenced against the person in the actual possession of the property at the time, or if the property is not in the actual possession of anyone, then against the person acting as the owner of the property…
3 of 3

 

Last edited:
Upvote 0
Clay & others,
I believe I can honestly say that Clay has probably been mining "WAY" longer than I have, I have only been mining for around 6 years now. When it comes to finding gold and locating mining claims I am self taught. I consider myself a fast learner and enjoy what I do very much. When I read through all the threads on this forum I get very frustrated after reading all the negative crap that is said with a "LOT" of poor attitudes. Then there are the ones that are "FULL" of information and are very wise and willing to help with great attitudes. I will be the first to say that I am very green when it comes to the mining laws and all those words as some have spoke of. I have a hard time dealing with the fact that there are "SO" many well informed & brite miners out there in this country but when we look at what is going on in regards to mining it is very upsetting that all these people are not working together. Cal, has there issues, Or, has there's, then Idaho, Wash, it seems like everyone is for the same thing but nobody is working together. What I would like to see is people like Clay or Bejay or anyone else who is really good at understanding these laws getting together with other groups or people in different states and discussing the mining law as this thread is doing so we can get everyone on the same page. This is just my thoughts on the subject, it's not like it's difficult to get in touch with people now days with all the wireless gizzmoes we have. "Ok" I'm done ranting and I "REALLY" hope that this thread stays on track & really brings out the best in people. "GREAT INFO" so far, keep it up.
 

Last edited:
Well Jog I can certainly understand your concerns. I share those as well. But let me say that it takes a lot of cooperative effort to unite people with different ideas as to how to proceed. I was hoping the anti issue would have received a successful challenge. I was even hoping to put together a coalition team to present a challenge....but it appears there are people with differing views.

I believe Clay brings forth the reason such challenges fail. It appears the mining community has not hit the nail on the head yet. But; having a big hammer and a tray of nails can lead to building a strong challenge against those who want to see us go away. The "greenies" have been at it for a long time. It is said that this is all part of the pendulum concept....and the pendulum is swinging back to common sense and peer review science as we speak.

But that is not to say we can not quit attempting to gain support through knowledge. It has been called the picket fence concept......you build a picket fence one picket at a time. Again the "greenies" have been utilizing this concept for a long time now. So knowledge and sharing of information can build a strong fence.....one picket at a time. I think you are one of the pickets, and there are going to be many others. Learn and get knowledge of mining law/rules/regs/policies/etc....... Realize it takes time to train an army.

But I would love to see the States put back in their place, but the "R" word and the willingness of miners to accept the designation is destroying many challenges. Are you a miner? Do you want to make a big find? Do you attempt to do so? Miners have been trying to hit the big time for a long time. It actually built the Western United States and began the greatest influx of people into the west....and the Yukon!

I'll keep trying to find the answers...and I am hopeful we can hit the nail on the head and drive it home. I am a miner. I have structured my small scale mining activity to be a business...so I don't see how I can say I do it for "R". Have I hit the big time yet?....No. But I am a miner...and I intend to learn all necessary to carry on my trade. I can eat jack rabbits and beans, but somewhere out there is that "glory hole"....and it is waiting for me to locate it. Being a miner requires a lot of learning....fieled work and extensive varied knowledge. Mining law/rules/regs/policies/etc is almost mandatory today.

Knowing mining law does not make one a good strategic court individual. Being a good court individual does not make one a good mining law advocate.....so that leaves me in a learning mode as an individual....as I am not an attorney and I am still learning mining law/rules/regs/etc and WORDS mean everything. It catches one off guard constantly. Do you want someone to solve your problem for you or are you going to be one who helps to solve it? I think you will try to join the team and help form an army of challengers.



Bejay
 

Last edited:
Clay & others,
I believe I can honestly say that Clay has probably been mining "WAY" longer than I have, I have only been mining for around 6 years now. When it comes to finding gold and locating mining claims I am self taught. I consider myself a fast learner and enjoy what I do very much. When I read through all the threads on this forum I get very frustrated after reading all the negative crap that is said with a "LOT" of poor attitudes. Then there are the ones that are "FULL" of information and are very wise and willing to help with great attitudes. I will be the first to say that I am very green when it comes to the mining laws and all those words as some have spoke of. I have a hard time dealing with the fact that there are "SO" many well informed & brite miners out there in this country but when we look at what is going on in regards to mining it is very upsetting that all these people are not working together. Cal, has there issues, Or, has there's, then Idaho, Wash, it seems like everyone is for the same thing but nobody is working together. What I would like to see is people like Clay or Bejay or anyone else who is really good at understanding these laws getting together with other groups or people in different states and discussing the mining law as this thread is doing so we can get everyone on the same page. This is just my thoughts on the subject, it's not like it's difficult to get in touch with people now days with all the wireless gizzmoes we have. "Ok" I'm done ranting and I "REALLY" hope that this thread stays on track & really brings out the best in people. "GREAT INFO" so far, keep it up.


Jog…I understand your frustration…that is why i/we stress to make copies of the laws and different situations that happen out there in the real world…so that you can refer to them when needed. I have a novel filled folder I keep with me now. Not that I remember all that is in there. Have to review now and then. There are so many of these rules and regs, that need to be deciphered. As to who has the authority or not. Just as confusing to these USFS and BLM employees that try to enforce them. Legislators don’t care what laws they make up…they figure people will follow them till it is brought to court and then let the judges figure it out. Or if we find a loop whole…they (legislators) fill the gap.

Let me tell all…I knew nothing of what to do when my situation raised it ugly head.
I was advised by a lot of informative people on which way to proceede…all good but I had to figure out which way was best for me. I was on the phone for many, many hours
With some very intelligent people that knows this stuff, Hal Anthony from Behind the Woodshed, Kerby Jackson, chairman of Jefferson Mining District at the time. Even James Buchal, Attorney for the Brandon case.
BUT! The way I proceeded was sort of determined by the responses of the USFS and the lack of responses from the county sheriff. And the no response at all from the county DAs office.
Let me tell ya the responses from these agencies can send you in many different directions and they know it.
May 1[SUP]st[/SUP] will hopefully lead us in a good direction.
 

wow this is great thread, thank you all
 

Clay Diggins and Bejay,

Both of you are so welcome to these forums. The knowledge the both of you have and willingness to share in regards to our mining laws cannot be replaced. All members need to be grateful that you both share your insight of these laws that governs our ability to mine on an individual level. Thank you :thumbsup:
 

Thanks for the kind words.
I am a newbie....Clay is the expert. Probably the most valuable mining law advocate I have the privilege of knowing. I aspire to gain his knowledge and will NEVER achieve his stature regarding the mining law(s), USC, CFR's, court cases, agency regs, relevant Acts, and court proceedings. How he can remember it verbatim is beyond my wildest dreams.

All I can say is thank God for computers and file storage.

I know I will keep posting relevant mining law information and Clay will correct me when I am wrong. If you think mining law is interesting you ought to discuss it with Clay while enjoying each others company.....as you will not be allowed to use a word improperly. And I am thankful for his corrective nature.

Bejay
 

Bejay,

I can only agree with you on your feeling about Clays computer like mind! He is a wonder and the one that got me into learning the laws as well. Without his help, Robi and I would most likely still be wondering around the Greaterville area looking for an area to claim. He did a LOT to help us remove that "R" word from our vocabulary. Granted we're still testing and gearing up but thanks to Clay we're in a good area now. If I was younger, (dare I say it?) I'd go back to school for mining law. That could be a heck of a combination! A mining lawyer that is an actual miner!

You are also to be commended for your willingness to help get that picket fence built. I'm more than willing to be one of the pickets, but feel that the picket fence we build should in time be replaced with one made from bricks! I went and signed up for the mining law forum you posted on the first page and it looks to be a great resource. I haven't had time to dig into it as much as it deserves yet but will very soon.

JOG: I feel ya here man. It can be frustrating seeing everyone running in different directions when they all want the same thing. Those of us that see the problem can only keep the faith and keep trying to get everyone on the same page of the play book. It's not going to be an easy thing to get done because we all know how hard headed we miners can be at times, but it will get done. I've been seeing more cooperation between outdoor groups in some areas and if we can keep that going, the "Greenies" will learn that the people are not going to roll over for them much longer. The government may still roll over but the people that THEY work for are tired of footing the bill for the Green Movement.
 

Bejay, it is to bad we need lawyer speak to understand mining laws, As a majority of the citizens of this country wouldn't be able to understand either, but that is the nature of life in itself, nothing worth fighting for is ever easy. If the Bundy's, one family can get enough citizens to help drive off the BLM, why can't we miners do the same so we can dredge? Laws are one thing but stopping dredging is a land grab by the feds for NO reason. K.I.S.S.
 

Bejay, it is to bad we need lawyer speak to understand mining laws, As a majority of the citizens of this country wouldn't be able to understand either, but that is the nature of life in itself, nothing worth fighting for is ever easy. If the Bundy's, one family can get enough citizens to help drive off the BLM, why can't we miners do the same so we can dredge? Laws are one thing but stopping dredging is a land grab by the feds for NO reason. K.I.S.S.

Well we elect a lot of lawyers to Congress and they write the laws. Then we as citizens sit back and think these bright elected lawyers will see that their laws are carried out correctly...and this is done by way of USC (Codes) after being published in the Federal Register as such. But then an agency is assigned to carry out the law and forms CFR's (which are not law, but rather regulatory policies). One would hope that these would be looked at again by the Congress who wrote the laws is the first place. But that is not the case....an executively appointed individual is assigned the task of overseeing the agency assigned the task of implementing and enforcing the laws assigned their agency.

Then of course we have to try to figure it all out. Not an easy task to say the least. Then of course if and when we think we have it figured out we would have to know how to proceed through the court system if we challenged a error. Now of course this is all at the Federal level. We now have States intruding on the Feds. The most obvious is the marijuana and illegal alien issues of States vs Feds.

So the title of this thread was : "For those of you who just don't get it!"

Maybe we can proceed to get it if we discuss the mining law issues more.

Bejay
 

Love this thread!
Three cheers for Clay, Bejay, Hefty and all the other knowable people posting here!
:thumbsup::notworthy::hello2: If I ever get the privilege of meeting any of you, I'll buy the first few rounds!
 

Bejay
I honestly believe I am part of that picket fence and I AM GOING to do my PART. Great info as usual, keep it coming.

Hefty1
Thanks for the advise, I have been working on a file for nearly three years now and it is close to 1 1/2" thick, it goes everywhere I go and all the good stuff is highlighted so I can find it fast.

Clay
I would really like to try and get you together with a guy I met here awhile back from Oregon who is part of the Jefferson Mining District and has also been working with the mining law a lot. From what I have read here from you and speaking with this other guy I honestly believe you two would really have a lot in common, I have not ran it past him but if your up to it send me a PM and I will try & make it happen. Only If you are up to it? I just think that people like you and him with this GREAT TALENT need to get together. Just my two cents...

Great posts from everybody...THANKS.
 

Last edited:
[h=1]Index of /im/directives/fsm/5300[/h]
blank.gif
NameLast modifiedSizeDescription

back.gif
Parent Directory -
folder.gif
5300/31-Jan-2008 13:25 -
text.gif
5300_contents.txt28-Mar-2013 11:06 1.3K
unknown.gif
5300_zero_code.doc28-Mar-2013 11:06 243K
unknown.gif
5310.doc28-Mar-2013 11:06 112K
unknown.gif
5320.doc28-Mar-2013 11:06 135K
unknown.gif
5330.doc28-Mar-2013 11:06 145K
unknown.gif
5340.doc28-Mar-2013 11:06 98K
unknown.gif
5350.doc28-Mar-2013 11:06 191K
text.gif
5360.txt28-Mar-2013 11:06 13K
text.gif
5360_contents.txt28-Mar-2013 11:06 2.0K
unknown.gif
wo_5370.doc28-Aug-2013 08:09 427K
unknown.gif
wo_5380.doc28-Mar-2013 11:06 277K

 

After spending a good portion of the day yesterday reading through the mining law forum site that Bejay posted earlier in the thread, I have to say that it should be required reading for every miner out there! It seems to have been rather inactive lately and many of the cases discussed in various threads do not talk about the final outcome. Still, it is a site well worth resurrecting and seeing updated. There is a ton of good information there including direct copies of mining laws. Many of them have sub text that translates it from legalese to plain English for those that don't speak "Lawyer". I also found many of the case files to be a very interesting read. These are a great way to get insight into how the courts work in these types of cases and are also a good way to learn from the mistakes of others so we don't repeat those mistakes.

I realize that may people don't want to take the time to wade through all of the legal mumbo-jumbo, but I really feel that it is important for every miner to do so! The more you can learn now about the laws and how they are supposed to be applied, the better off you will be in the long run. When that LEO comes up to you and tries to site you for something that he perceives as you breaking some law or regulation is not the time to bone-up on mining laws folks! That's like closing the barn door after the horse has already escaped!

It is up to all of us to learn just what our rights are when it comes to mining and to stand up for them. If we don't, the powers that be will continue to slowly strip away every right we have until there are none left. Taking a little time to learn the laws now can save you and your claim in the future!
 

A prospector/miner today MUST understand his/her GRANTED right to enter the public lands open to mineral entry. Beyond that the miner must know the limitations of agencies having some jurisdiction on the public land resources not necessary to mining. The prospector/miner is placed in a position of dealing with agencies and laws that can make it difficult for the miner. I really can not overemphasize the importance of WORDS when one reads all the pertinent rules/regs/policies/laws.

I'll give you a recent incident that happened with a miner out here in Az. The miner was going out on a claim and classifying down his material to take home and process. A BLM agent stopped him and said: "you can't be taking material off the claim without a permit.....you have to work it on sight. So the miner thought he could no longer do it. Not only that but the miner spread the word to many fellow miners, who spread the word to other miners.

BUT......that permit only applies to leasable minerals....not locatable minerals.

If you think about it miners have been digging and hauling material off of claims for over a hundred years; and shipped ore off to be processed.

But the BLM agent (and probably all those in the District) read the CFR that applied to leasable minerals and never understood there are two types of claims and two kinds of minerals applicable to mineral claims.

If a miner thinks the laws/codes/regs/etc are difficult to understand, give thought to the FACT that it is difficult for the gov employees to understand as well.

So a miner MUST understand how to read and utilize the very laws/codes/regs/policies/etc in order to insure the right to perform the act of mining. It is simply a "MUST DO" today. Some of it is really pretty basic.

BUT WORDS HAVE SPECIAL MEANING AND THE WORDS REMAIN CRITICAL.

And by the way........it took me only a few months to learn a vast majority of the laws/rules/regs/policies/codes/etc.

Yes the americanmininglawforum.myfastforum.org :: Index has been somewhat inactive. It takes miners willing to participate to keep the dialogue continuing. The classroom can reopen any time but there is endless classwork posted for all to read.

BUT BE ADVISED WE DO NOT GIVE LEGAL ADVICE ON THE LAW FORUM....WE MERELY POINT OUT THE LAW LANGUAGE AND HELP THOSE, WHO WANT, to UNDERSTAND WHAT IT MEANS. FROM THAT POINT IT IS UP TO THE INDIDIVUAL TO DO WITH IT WHAT THEY WANT!

Bejay
 

Last edited:
This might sound way out there...but has anyone come across a situation where they had to enlighten the USFS or BLM agents to the laws that stop them in their tracks? Or at least made them think about it?
 

LOL... Good question Hefty. I can just see one of us dragging out the good old field law kit and "Forcing" a Ranger or BLM agent To actually read the law in front of us. I hope that if it ever happens to me that I can get it on video tape because NO ONE would ever believe it if I didn't have proof!

I can picture it going something like this.....

Ranger: Well Mr Irishman I'm going to have to site you for violating section blah blah blah point blah here.

Me: Oh really? Hold on a minute here before you start writing. I want to check something. (Getting file box and going through it) Ahhh HERE it is!
According to what you just said you're going to site me for not having a sewage discharge permit. Now do you see a sewage plant of any type here on my claim? And when did the EPA turn over jurisdiction on such matters to the Forest Service?

Ranger: Well no but....That's how I was told to write it up by my boss.

Me: Hummm Sounds like your boss needs to spend some time hitting the law books before he starts giving out instructions like that to his Rangers. By writing me up for that he's leaving you, himself and the entire USFS open to looking like total fools in court. (Smile) I say court because I will be fighting this. I look upon things like this as an attempt to keep me from working my claim. ... Which I know you don't want to do because that in itself would be against the laws set down my congress in the 1800s....

Ranger: Huh... Huh... never mind..... Have a nice day.
 

Fun scene to imagine ...as he attempts to cite you for lack of sewage processing in sight on your site ;) #homonym_hell
 

Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act provides a way individuals can sue to redress violations of federally protected rights
Enforcement Act of 1871 (third act) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia,
subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights,
privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress.
.
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top