Closed area on Ark.? Options

[traddoerr]

I was just talking to a gentleman about the Ark. river North of Beuna vista and they said that is has been closed by the BLM for any prospecting from the GPAA claims down to jump rock, has any one else heard this as well, I haven't had the chance to call the local office yet to confirm. I have fished spots along that stretch but was going to try a little prospecting there this year as well.

[russau]

the Arkansa group claims are closed to dredgeing only. this has happened to big club claims.you can still pan/highbank there but check the local ranger staion and make sure!Blake Horman of the GPAA spoke his peice on the GPAA site about it. smaller claim owners on the Arkansa River arent affected by this new rule. so far!

[ducksnbucks]

Hello all,I WILL BE IN THIS AREA ALL NEXT WEEK AND WILL POST IF I FIND ANYTHING OUT ABOUT THIS,AS I PLAN ON TALKING WITH BLM/FORESTRY.I DID HEAR ON ANOTHER FORUM ABOUT FOREST SERVICE WRITING TICKETS AT ELEPHANT ROCK FOR PROSPECTING.NOT SURE WHY BUT WILL CHECK WHEN I GET THERE... STEVE

[traddoerr]

just read today on hookedongold site that this area is closed, so maybe it's true, still haven't had a return call yet.

[CP]

Unfortunately some sites may have unverified rumors posted as "new rules or laws".........Lets see if we can sort some of this confusion out once again for everyone reading.
The Arkansas river headwater recreational area is a specially designated rec area administered by the BLM. The area that is in question is the GPAA group claims, those are now closed to dredging.......although it is not a new rule from BLM. The new restriction comes from the claim owners themselves.

FS will not be the ones writing out citations on BLM lands....that would be BLM officers.
If there was in fact a new rule that closed the entire area to all prospecting then there are law requirements for how to do that through the BLM's official procedures......ie there will/must be a notice posted both in that office (Royal Gorge) and it must also be posted on site in the field.
According to the law as written the district ranger would have the authority to implement additional rules but I just checked the BLM's site last night and couldn't find anything that said anything about the area being completely closed to prospecting. The BLM site also has the newest placer permit forms uploaded just two months ago. I would think if they did close it all the form would be gone from the site.
Check the office and the field sites for postings to verify.

Also, I believe Elephant rock is a private claim owned by one of our members here, if you don't have permission to be there then don't dig on private claims.

Good luck out there everyone and hopefully this helps straighten out some of the confusion.

CP

[traddoerr]

Hlleo All,
I just got off the phone with the BLM for the Ark. district, the BLM is NOT! closed to prospecting only what CP mentioned above about the GPAA claims, BUT! the NF has closed any and all prospecting on the NF property from the GPAA claims down to elephant rock not jump rock, this was a decision out of the Leadville district, no one at BLM has been given a reason as to why. I have phone message into the district manager(FS) to contact me back as I also heard it was to be closed to all camping as well and may have other restrictions.

This area had been with drawn from mineral rights due to the possiblity of a dam being built at elephant rock but has not been finalized as of yet.
Could this give the FS the right to close rec-prospecting on NF lands if it has been withdrawn from mineral rights? I'll post what news I get when I get it.

[traddoerr]

I have talked with John Morrey/Megan ? of the FS district of leadville and, They did confirm that they have closed any and all prospecting on a 40acre section of land that borders the Ark. river between GPAA claims and elephant rock.

There reason for this is the abuse of the area by two groups, miners/rafters. Mr. Morrey told me that there is a fine line between recreational panning and a miner, were the recreationalist is doing it as a hobby/personal and a miner for profit, he said it is to complicated to seperate the two so they decided to close it all together, also between the prospectors and the rafters staying to long on the NF area it has created issues between users and degrading the area. And with this area being withdrawn it gave them the authority to close it to prospectiong and will be posting signs for this area very soon, and letting people know that they can't camp longer than the 14 days in the 40acre area.

He also mentioned that they will be talking to the BLM about the area adjasent to this spot being closed as well , but the BLM told me that they wouldn't consider closing any areas to prospecting (yet?).

Now I know it is only 40acres but will this set a standard for other withdrawn areas with-in the NF systems by other departments of the FS, hope not.

I hope no one misunderstands what I'm doing other than letting every one know of these changes and possiblity's as I would of hated to have planned a trip to that spot to find out it was no longer useable for certain things, and hope this doesn't lead to other possible closures, I hate getting info by hear say. Guess I'll just keep fishing there as the fishing can be great there! and pan/prospect on the BLM else were.

[Woody]

Thanks for passing this information along traddoerr. I myself have not panned/dredged on the Arkansas since the 90s but I’m sure someone out there can really benefit from this information. To me that’s what makes this site special, People networking together and sharing information that might assist another person. Far too often a person recognizes worth in terms of Monatery amount and misses the real value in life. City minded folks mostly I guess.” If it does not have a dead president attached to it then it is not worth much to them. “Any way, Thanks for the leg work, Woody.

[swizz]

There reason for this is the abuse of the area by two groups, miners/rafters. Mr. Morrey told me that there is a fine line between recreational panning and a miner, where the recreationalist is doing it as a hobby/personal and a miner for profit, he said it is to complicated to separate the two so they decided to close it all together,

traddoer, thanks for the info and pardon me while I vent

I'm not familiar with this area but Mr Morrey's statement is very disturbing, especially coming from a USFS office. "... too complicated to separate the two so they decided to close it all together" ?????
How convenient. He can't distinguish between recreational and small scale mining first of all (he states "too complicated"), secondly he contends that miners in general are abusing the area and rather than having NFS employees DO THEIR JOB and manage areas properly.. just "close it all together", thirdly he conveniently lumps recreational/professional rafters (do they know the difference?) into the "abuse" category (so miners won't feel singled-out?) but do you think that the area will be subsequently closed to rafting? Hell no, they don't regulate rafting or water passage. He doesn't even have a dog in that fight.
This sounds like a royal fleecing and one lazy, misinformed SOB that works for the USFS.
As taxpayers these people are on OUR payroll and we deserve better than that.

[swizz]

He also mentioned that they will be talking to the BLM about the area adjacent to this spot being closed as well , but the BLM told me that they wouldn't consider closing any areas to prospecting (yet?).

This also sticks in my craw. So Mr Morrey thought he'd share that tidbit with you as well.
I guess it must be in his job description to lobby other government agencies for closures targeting specific land users.
I reckon I need to read the King's Forest Service Manual again but it kinda sounds like Mr Morrey may have a small vendetta against the prospector.... and succeeding!

[traddoerr]

Swizz, I agree with you, I believe that they could have come up with a better solution than what they did, and the BLM thinks so as well.
I even mentioned that maybe they could of come up with some sort of fee for the area alone but it sounded like they hadn't put much thought to it.

As I listened to the recording I made of our conversation Mr. John Morrey also commented that some of the locals that live right next this area had complained a bit as well (noise from dredge motors, digging up the banks, and digging around roots out of live trees, rafters partying to wee hours of the night), I think this go's to show that a few bad apples can ruin it for us all, and as I mentioned before what kind of effect will this have on other areas in the NF, it seems like any time CA. comes up with some bogas law a few more ignorants start to think the same and pass the same.

As I mentioned, I really hope this isn't a trend thats going to get out of hand by the USFS.

I'll step down off my soup box now as well.

[russau]

just get ready to see this start all over the country!

[Coalbunny]

His name is John Morresey. Though my spilin' sux, the pronunciation is correct.

[CP]

The FS has been out of control for many decades and out of bounds for their delegated authority in many many ways. Unfortunately every year another area (ranger) thinks he/she can set some bogus rules to restrict prospecting.
This year here in Colorado there have been decisions made also that have backed the FS down on mining claims. These will change (are changing) over 35 years of FS authority abuses. Too bad so many past miners/claim owners let this type of abuse continue so long and it was one hell of an uphill battle to get there for the miners too.

Do not get off your soapbox folks, it's YOUR land!!

Don't let it happen across the country, it's YOUR land!!

Dig into this info folks, find out the truth and then pass it on so everyone can know, and never believe for one second that any club or special interest organization/group will "do it for you" ........either in court or the field. IT'S YOUR LAND! KNOW YOUR RIGHTS AND HOW TO ENACT UPON THEM!!!!

Is this FS land even really in the actual "recreational headwater area"? If not then those rules can not apply.
Is this FS land actually withdrawn from "mineral entry" or is it withdrawn from "entry"? .....ie homesteading

Thanks for the kind compliment too Woody, that's what it's all about here at the Colorado Prospector website and club, together we are a larger voice and as a group we can understand/interpret these laws as written, not just what the local officials feel like saying.
Keep us all posted as the details become available folks, thanks for all your efforts.

CP

[Coalbunny]

Dan, I met with Morrisey (sp?) earlier. And worse just went worse. Incoming private mail bro.

[traddoerr]

Coalbunny, not to be nosey but does the worse getting worse have anything to do with BLM? or just the USFS? couple of us was planning on a trip this weekend up in that area.

[swizz]

Dan, I met with Morrisey (sp?) earlier. And worse just went worse.

What? You can't just leave us hangin' like that.

[Denise]

Dan, I met with Morrisey (sp?) earlier. And worse just went worse. Incoming private mail bro.

The only way it can get worse is if we all allow it too!
Hopefully Carl will come in here, and add the information he has. The best way to deal with these problems is to talk it out, and find the facts to work with.

Lots of questions in this thread still unanswered!

[traddoerr]

I wish I had more for every one, but I had to be tactful just to get out of them what I had, was suprised that I got him to mention about trying to work with BLM on closeing "mining" on the BLM adjasent to this area.

I'm new to the prospecting and all (enjoying it alot) but have been an avid fisherman in this area for 20+yrs and in the past had ran into use issues with the area departments.

My personal opinion I got from the conversation with John/Meigan, is that some recreational activities are acceptible and some aren't, due to impact(?) and general opinion.

I do NOT! agree with the decisions they made (and let them know that in a nice way), and hope that we maybe able to turn this around, but I'm getting the impression from them that they are firm on their decision, I hope not. I agree with Mrs. CP there is alot of unanswered questions on this issue.

If there is anything else I can do please let me know, as I happen to have a little time on my hands right now but not sure for how long.

Dennis

[swizz]

If there is anything else I can do please let me know, as I happen to have a little time on my hands right now but not sure for how long.

This is my situation as well... business is about to pick up again.
I'd like to hear the facts and legalities regarding this closure. Maybe they have a legitimate reason, or.....
Hard to know without viewing their documentation, which should be public. Maybe a COC or something of that nature? I've never been to the Ark.. so I remain in the dark.

[swizz]

Is this area designated as "special use", or "recreational"?
Also.... where is PLP on this?
Is this closure too small or insignificant for them to help with or address?
or... maybe the USFS is well within their rights to close the area and intervention would be futile?

(just thought I'd add even more questions to the fray )

[Hanael]

Just an opportunity to profess my ignorance but who/what is PLP...

[swizz]

"Public Lands for the People": PLP
They appear to be a well-respected and well-intentioned organization. It's very likely that they are spread a little thin right now with all of the recent attacks on land access and new land use regulations throughout the country.

add..
IMHO... it is best to learn, defend, and act upon the laws yourself. These are often statutory rights and essential knowledge. If I run into a problem on MY claim, my first move sure as hell won't be to contact an outside organization to act on my behalf. It is MY responsibility to uphold my rights. Knowledge is power... an old cliche but VERY true. I am in no way 100% up to speed on mining laws but getting there and asking questions when I need help. This site has been a fantastic resource.
Know your rights.

Sorry for the derail.
Back to the Ark closure - Carl, where are you??

[Denise]

Do not get off your soapbox folks, it's YOUR land!!

Don't let it happen across the country, it's YOUR land!!

Dig into this info folks, find out the truth and then pass it on so everyone can know, and never believe for one second that any club or special interest organization/group will "do it for you" ........either in court or the field. IT'S YOUR LAND! KNOW YOUR RIGHTS AND HOW TO ENACT UPON THEM!!!!

Dan says it all right there! Having the knowledge for ourselves is the best path.
Just check my signature.....

add..
IMHO... it is best to learn, defend, and act upon the laws yourself. These are often statutory rights and essential knowledge. If I run into a problem on MY claim, my first move sure as hell won't be to contact an outside organization to act on my behalf. It is MY responsibility to uphold my rights. Knowledge is power... an old cliche but VERY true. I am in no way 100% up to speed on mining laws but getting there and asking questions when I need help. This site has been a fantastic resource.
Know your rights.

Very well said Chris!!

[russau]

Is this area designated as "special use", or "recreational"?
Also.... where is PLP on this?
Is this closure too small or insignificant for them to help with or address?
or... maybe the USFS is well within their rights to close the area and intervention would be futile?

(just thought I'd add even more questions to the fray )

Swizz go ask them for yourself. www.PLP2.org or www.PLP1.org

[swizz]

Swizz go ask them for yourself. www.PLP2.org or www.PLP1.org

I'm not contacting anyone and am not a member of PLP. I don't know any more about the Ark situation than you do.
Some details would be nice, don't you think?
Carl dropped a bomb on this thread and then disappeared.
We still basically know nothing.
I shall remain patient until the facts are presented.

[traddoerr]

Swizz, All,
I had another talk with John Morresey this past Thursday, He said that it would be better for me to talk to Meigan who is the land and mineral specialist, So, she called me back on Friday and we had a long talk as to why they closed this small area, and her answer was the same as last time just a little more in depth this time.

They had the authority to stop the mining/rec-panning activitys because of the mineral rights withdrawl, and the reason for closing this was the complaints of the locals and the degrading of the banks from it being dug up and noise issues, and it starting to look trashey, she said that by this action (mining) they will be able to see if some or all the issues go away and if not they will have to work on further restrictions if they can, but for right now they were focusing on the mining activitys and individauls that were over staying their welcome in the 40ac area.


I asked her if there were any other areas that was planned for closeing and she said no, as they didn't have the authority because there was no other areas that were withdrawn from mineral rights in the NF of that area, asked her if there were other areas and there was NO issues would they close it and she said she couldn't answer that question.

I have looked up the laws and Goverment rights, but couldn't find anything that made sense so I talked to a legal expert at the Co. school of mines and he said he believed that they were with-in there rights to close this small area, but he would look some other things up this next week and get back to me, I will keep you posted

Carl, If you could add anything about your conversation with John to this thread that would be great.

[CP]

Thanks for posting your updates traddoerr.

Good job diggin' in for the facts everyone.
Very glad to hear that it's not concerning/closing the entire district as that would be way out of their authority.
So it's a 40 acre piece in the district that is withdrawn from mineral entry. Yes they do have the authority legally to close that off then if the withdrawl is real and it's within the "congressionally declared rec area". If one or both of those two things are not in fact true then they do not have authority to close even that small 40 acre piece.

Sad to say it sounds like from what we are all hearing is that poor prospecting habbits/field techniques and a general lack of respect for the lands status and the laws caused this issue and closure.

Once again proves that how we act as an independent prospectors in the field can and does make a difference, even at the "recreational" level.......poor wording (recreational) but one that will be recognized by many readers.
Recreation is not a right nor a resource and has nothing to do with bonafide prospecting and mining.

[swizz]

Thanks CP, that helps clarify things.
I had a feeling that this might be a designated "special use" or "recreational use" area and quite possibly within their rights to administer a recreational closure. It's unfortunate that "recreational" prospecting seems to have been singled out but possibly justifiable if what they say is true.
... as not to risk another derailment of this thread, I'll just add that I agree with you regarding the implications and negative repercussions of "recreational" labeled prospecting.
Recreational prospectors do not share the same rights as miners.

[traddoerr]

Thanks CP, The expert from the Colorado school of mines has confirmed that the forest services has the right to close this area and does have the right to close any area in the NF that has been withdrawn from mineral rights as they see fit.

Not trying to beat a dead horse here, but, One of the things that was said by both John and Meigan was that it is to difficult to serperate what is a rec-panner and a miner because they said that even a rec-panner would more than likely sell the gold they find instead of keeping it for personal use, this is more than likely true.

And John stated that he doesn't consider a rec-panner some one who uses anything other than a gold pan, guess that makes sence. And as mentioned in the other posts that the ones abusing the area made it look bad for the rest, thus closing any mining activities all together in this little area.

Their opinion also made me think as to how I concider my self as well (rec-panner?), WELL, I guess I can call my self a part time greenhorn-prospector (for now, as I have jumped into this with both feet), as I will only be out once in awhile PROSPECTING and if by some chance I happen to find the mother load , I would then look into filing a claim, and only then could I call myself a miner, just my opinion. But I do see were the term "recreational" could do more harm than good for the mining community, thus I will never use the term recreational in the same sentance as mining/prospecting.

I want to thank every one who chimed in on the subject.

[leonard]

Thanks CP, The expert from the Colorado school of mines has confirmed that the forest services has the right to close this area and does have the right to close any area in the NF that has been withdrawn from mineral rights as they see fit.

Not trying to beat a dead horse here, but, One of the things that was said by both John and Meigan was that it is to difficult to serperate what is a rec-panner and a miner because they said that even a rec-panner would more than likely sell the gold they find instead of keeping it for personal use, this is more than likely true.

And John stated that he doesn't consider a rec-panner some one who uses anything other than a gold pan, guess that makes sence. And as mentioned in the other posts that the ones abusing the area made it look bad for the rest, thus closing any mining activities all together in this little area.

Their opinion also made me think as to how I concider my self as well (rec-panner?), WELL, I guess I can call my self a part time greenhorn-prospector (for now, as I have jumped into this with both feet), as I will only be out once in awhile PROSPECTING and if by some chance I happen to find the mother load , I would then look into filing a claim, and only then could I call myself a miner, just my opinion. But I do see were the term "recreational" could do more harm than good for the mining community, thus I will never use the term recreational in the same sentance as mining/prospecting.

I want to thank every one who chimed in on the subject.

I've been prospecting for a lot of years. I've never considered myself a "recreational prospector" When I'm out there I'm serious about it and if I would happen to strike the mother lode, I'd still consider myself a prospector.

Around Labor Day, we may open our claims on the arkansas for a few days. They are better than the one you've been talking about anyway. We filed on 40 acres above Elephant Rock quite a few years ago. We didn't get it because of the withdrawl and we didn't follow up and amend the filing because we got the claim we wanted anyway.

Leonard

[Coalbunny]

Ok, my piece.

Jon told me that recreational prospecting is illegal. Not just down there along the Arkansas north of Puny Veesta, but all throughout the San Isabel District. IOW no where, according to him, can I pan just for giggles. Or sluice. Or dredge. It's for commercial projects only. I asked him how is this enforced and he said it's very difficult because there are no real guidelines. But he did point the finger at the BLM, however.

Later on I'll provide some better details on that. I will say that Jon knows that I study sediments and stream mechanics. And according to him, I can't.

I am led to believe that I could face getting arrested.


Which means I'll do it anyway.

[leonard]

Ok, my piece.

Jon told me that recreational prospecting is illegal. Not just down there along the Arkansas north of Puny Veesta, but all throughout the San Isabel District. IOW no where, according to him, can I pan just for giggles. Or sluice. Or dredge. It's for commercial projects only. I asked him how is this enforced and he said it's very difficult because there are no real guidelines. But he did point the finger at the BLM, however.

Later on I'll provide some better details on that. I will say that Jon knows that I study sediments and stream mechanics. And according to him, I can't.

I am led to believe that I could face getting arrested.


Which means I'll do it anyway.

I'm a commercial project looking for the location of my next commercial project. I will pan, sluice, highbank, and dredge in the preliminary stages of locating my next commercial venture. I will be searching on unclaimed locations open to mineral entry.

Leonard

[traddoerr]

Carl, Thanks for the info. I to had gotton the same response from John in our first conversation, but when I asked him were I could find this law he said it was a policy of his district, I said he was taking a big chance of getting his personal in trouble.

I found out today that ANY federal goverment emlpoyee that abusses the law or infractures it can be charged with a Felony! what this means is if you are out doing what you have the legal right to do and you are harrased and or they force upon you, they are commiting a crime, and you may call the local authoritys to press charges or have them possibly arrested, this advise came from a legal expert that works for the goverment and said it is in the USC, I'm currently looking this one up.

John/Meigan also mentioned that they didn't approve of the way the BLM was allowing mining activitys on areas that was closed to mineral claims, but there is nothing they can do about it.

This legal expert also mentioned that it might be a good idea if issues keep coming up to contact our local reps and complain or file complaints with the head of USFS on the individual.

All and all I believe that the term "recreational" should not be used any more with association to prospecting/mining/gold panning, this may help keep any more confussion from accuring in the future, Lesson I have now learned. So I am just going to go out and enjoy prospecting.

[swizz]

All and all I believe that the term "recreational" should not be used any more with association to prospecting/mining/gold panning, this may help keep any more confusion from occurring in the future, Lesson I have now learned. So I am just going to go out and enjoy prospecting.

This statement puts you WAY ahead of the game.
It's definitely refreshing to hear someone interested in learning about our rights, laws, and 'digging-in' to the world of prospecting properly. Too many new prospectors tend to try and hit the ground running with a shovel, without the proper information or guidance. Running with that new shovel can result in stumbling... often legally harming one's self and/or others.
We all appreciate your approach. Stay on the information track and you won't be disappointed.

[traddoerr]

Thanks SWIZZ, When ever I get interested in something I always research it as much as possible.

Leonard, thanks also for your comments, I hope you'll keep every one posted on if/when you open your claim, that would be a great experience for myself and family.

[russau]

there are some people that just keep saying that they are "recreational" even when you tell them the facts about it! STUBERN IS AS STUBERN DOES! sometimes theres just no help for these kind of people!

All and all I believe that the term "recreational" should not be used any more with association to prospecting/mining/gold panning, this may help keep any more confussion from accuring in the future, Lesson I have now learned. So I am just going to go out and enjoy prospecting.

[leonard]

Thanks SWIZZ, When ever I get interested in something I always research it as much as possible.

Leonard, thanks also for your comments, I hope you'll keep every one posted on if/when you open your claim, that would be a great experience for myself and family.

I should be there around Labor Day. I'll post when the actual dates are available. We have a great camping area on our claim so it makes for a good camping time.

Leonard

[traddoerr]

I'll keep an eye open for the post.

[OklaPony]

Ok, my piece.

Jon told me that recreational prospecting is illegal. Not just down there along the Arkansas north of Puny Veesta, but all throughout the San Isabel District. IOW no where, according to him, can I pan just for giggles. Or sluice. Or dredge. It's for commercial projects only. I asked him how is this enforced and he said it's very difficult because there are no real guidelines. But he did point the finger at the BLM, however.

Later on I'll provide some better details on that. I will say that Jon knows that I study sediments and stream mechanics. And according to him, I can't.

I am led to believe that I could face getting arrested.


Which means I'll do it anyway.

Wow, this is a very interesting thread. It looks like I'm going to be able to make a high country trip this year and, while the bulk of my time will be spent fishing, I was planning on using a half-day or two washing off rocks just in case I happen to stumble on to a good spot. I suppose I'll have to be careful where I take my pan, huh?

[traddoerr]

Oklapony, as long as the area is not with drawn from mineral rights and there are no claims by all means pan, sluice what ever ya want just don't say the fraze "recreational" with anything that has to do with prospecting/mining, they can't do anything then.

And report any one who harrasses you to the local sheriff's dept. Got to keep the pressure on them to let them know that they aren't completely in charge. Best of luck on finding some color and big fish !

[ASTROBLEME]

Perhaps the phrase "casual use exploration activities" is what folks should use...(i.e., activities that cause no more than a minimal disturbance to the surface resources and do not involve the use of mechanized earth-moving equipment, explosives, the construction of access roads, drill pads, or the use of toxic or hazardous materials).

ASTROBLEME

[Coalbunny]

Welllllll....... Actually guys, "recreational" is just a slang term for something that has literally been happening for centuries.

Very rarely will you find someone that makes their sole income, or even the majority of it, from prospecting. Yeah they are out there, but they are rare.

Even in the 1800's when Leadville wasn't even born yet, the Tabor's came to Oro and set up a store. Horace Tabor made his fortune off of mining, yet he himself rarely did anything more than grubstake or buy claims. Many people were in the same spot- there is a certain amount of entertainment in prospecting, but generally not enough to warrant doing it as a full time job. Thus they were cowboys, ranchers, farmers, doctors, lawyers, Ladies of the Evening, store owners, barkeeps, piano players, sheriffs and bank robbers. Almost everyone back then, and now, has a formal mode of occupation.

So when the government says they ban recreational prospecting, they are banning us in reenacting our heritage, our lineage, the work of our forefathers.

Me, I am engaged in studies that require me to pan. I find gold, yes, but it has been documented for decades through the USFS and BLM as well as WYGS and a few colleges that my studies pertain to sediments and the actions that create their depositional structure. So not finding gold doesn't break my heart. Finding gold, yeah I like it. Big wow. And I have warned rangers in the past do not interfere with my studies. That actually drags in a myriad of state and federal laws, and I have gone to the mat before on those, and won. I won then and I'll win again.

[OklaPony]

Oklapony, as long as the area is not with drawn from mineral rights and there are no claims by all means pan, sluice what ever ya want just don't say the fraze "recreational" with anything that has to do with prospecting/mining, they can't do anything then.

And report any one who harrasses you to the local sheriff's dept. Got to keep the pressure on them to let them know that they aren't completely in charge. Best of luck on finding some color and big fish !

Well, I'm at least fairly confident in the fishing department since I've got a good track record and am fortunate enough to have fantastic water available in which to dip my flies. My dirt washing skills, however, are not quite so refined. That, coupled with the slow pace that us visiting flatlanders should maintain in order to preserve our health, means I definitely won't be moving any mountains but I do have a couple of areas in mind that may well provide the opportunity for both endeavors.

Welllllll....... Actually guys, "recreational" is just a slang term for something that has literally been happening for centuries.

Very rarely will you find someone that makes their sole income, or even the majority of it, from prospecting. Yeah they are out there, but they are rare.

Even in the 1800's when Leadville wasn't even born yet, the Tabor's came to Oro and set up a store. Horace Tabor made his fortune off of mining, yet he himself rarely did anything more than grubstake or buy claims. Many people were in the same spot- there is a certain amount of entertainment in prospecting, but generally not enough to warrant doing it as a full time job. Thus they were cowboys, ranchers, farmers, doctors, lawyers, Ladies of the Evening, store owners, barkeeps, piano players, sheriffs and bank robbers. Almost everyone back then, and now, has a formal mode of occupation.

So when the government says they ban recreational prospecting, they are banning us in reenacting our heritage, our lineage, the work of our forefathers.

Me, I am engaged in studies that require me to pan. I find gold, yes, but it has been documented for decades through the USFS and BLM as well as WYGS and a few colleges that my studies pertain to sediments and the actions that create their depositional structure. So not finding gold doesn't break my heart. Finding gold, yeah I like it. Big wow. And I have warned rangers in the past do not interfere with my studies. That actually drags in a myriad of state and federal laws, and I have gone to the mat before on those, and won. I won then and I'll win again.

Interesting field of study you got there, CB. Is this connected with environmental impact and/or water quality studies, perhaps? Or just simply the physics of what settles where and why it does so?

[Coalbunny]

EIS, no. Water quality, no. Hydrophysics, somewhat. I am merely fascinated by stream mechanics. Not just how stuff settles, but the transport and dissemination of various sediments.

[russau]

Carl ask Jon to show these words of wit in writing otherwise he dont know sqwat and he needs to keep his unknowing mouth shut before he gets int otrouble!!

[CP]

I totally agree with the recreational term not being used unless one wishes to be treated as a recreationalist.

It's also very important that we as citizens also know what the FS delegated authority is and what that pertains to.
"Surface resources" (what are those......do you know?) and "occupancy" are what is delegated by congress to the FS ..........regulating mining has been specifically withheld from their delegated authority at every level including 36cfr.

Good luck on all your prospecting everyone, your knowledge is power! DIG IN!!!

[russau]

when a gubermint employee trys to bully a American citizen off public land or tries to bully him into beleiveing his warped wacoenviromental veiws, it just burns me! then they needtobe reported and set straight!

[OklaPony]

EIS, no. Water quality, no. Hydrophysics, somewhat. I am merely fascinated by stream mechanics. Not just how stuff settles, but the transport and dissemination of various sediments.

I see. Perhaps I can bring a bucket full of Arkansas river sediment from OK up to the high country with me and you can compare its contents to the sediment found in the headwaters, lol.

[Denise]

It's also very important that we as citizens also know what the FS delegated authority is and what that pertains to.
"Surface resources" (what are those......do you know?) and "occupancy" are what is delegated by congress to the FS ..........regulating mining has been specifically withheld from their delegated authority at every level including 36cfr.

You nailed it on that question Dan! Knowing that answer will explain alot for people, and help them understand better I think.
I know the answer, but Im curious to know who else does know, or who wants to know that answer.
Knowledge is power!

[Coalbunny]

I see. Perhaps I can bring a bucket full of Arkansas river sediment from OK up to the high country with me and you can compare its contents to the sediment found in the headwaters, lol.

Sure, just contact me in advance, IOW before you leave. I'm moving a bunch of stuff around my place, here to there and there to here and everything in the middle, so right now it's a mess and the tools I prefer using are boxed up.

[19000mike]

So how much of the Ark is closed to dredging? I am not extremely familiar with the area but I have been to Elephant rock and GPAA claims as well as Point bar area. My family wife and 2 kids 13 and 14 and I like to dredge but we only get to CO twice a year. I have not researched the club areas much but I would like to stay off the Ark even though I enjoy it. Any time any way we can fight the SOB bureacrats I am in! I was born in CO and hope to retire in CO as well. If anyone can help guide me to some fair dredgable property please let me know.

Thanks CP and all others for the help and time you have given to us all.
I better stop writing cause I am getting pi$$ed off more by the minute

Mike

[russau]

its the Arkansa group claim(GPAA) . club claims are the problem i think.

[traddoerr]

Hello All,
Once again I have some more info for you all ( a friend of mine that is a lobbyist/legal consultant, wont give his name as he wants to keep low key from what he calls the enemy).

Russ, I don't know if the GPAA claims/club are an issue but I just got word that the area FS manager is upset that BLM doesn't manage it's lands the same as the USFS, and I hear there starting to raise a little stink about it to the higher ups to put pressure on the BLM,but the BLM managers aren't budging,GOOD FOR THEM! .

From what I understand, that the land managment plan for the public lands (FS,BLM) is going to make some big changes, it started 5yrs ago and this year they really upped the pace, the FS has closed HUNDREDS! of roads/trails and hundreds more to be closed, for vehical/public use in Colorado alone, there not designated as wilderness areas but are going to be managed as wilderness (primitive areas), and WITH SOME NEW RULES! and the FS has full authority to do so and backed by our officals and new laws/rules passed by Congress, this may not affect many of the lower water systems but if you go into the high country this could affect you, BUT! the plan does have some of the lower elevation areas in the plan.

You can look this managment plan up on the USFS site/BLM site. so some of these changes are going to effect many users/recreationalists. hunting/fishing/camping/hiking,ect, and mining.

I found out that an area I hunt and am going to prospect in has been designated as a primitive area this year, so this means that camping now has to be in designated camp grounds (fee areas maybe) and now instead of a 3mile hike it's going to be 7miles, from what I understand some new rules for suface use will be inforced as well, NO! new roads/trails can be made for ANY reason is one of the new laws.

If you go to some of the hunting web sites (bowsite.com) there is allot of upset people as there hunting access areas are being closed off and the areas where we camp are being changed. There is a CFR (or use to be) that says one can camp any were in the FS system as long as they are no more than 100' from a main road and they are not causing significant surface damage and no designated camping is inforced, this rule is to be managed by the district manager, wilderness areas are a little different as for camping, but with the new rules/laws it gives the district manager more power, so we'll see what happens.

I'll pass on more info as my friend gives us more, it seems to me our countries activists are getting more & more power to get what they want done,and at the tax payers expence!

[CP]

Hi Mike, you're very welcome and good luck on the prospecting adventures when you do get to come out to Colorado. I'll send you a pm with some club area suggestions too.
Russ is right about that clubs claims, they've been closed to dredging by that club. I don't know if other clubs who have claims in that area have also thown their rights to the wind as well. But from what I've been reading there have been other clubs paying bonds to the wrong depts for activities that any one could undertake without even filing a claim. That's not the only area in Colorado this kind of terrible precedence is being set by those groups who are just filing papers without any regards to learning what the law actually states first.

As for the "new rules and plans"...........RULES AND PLANS DO NOT MAKE LAWS FOLKS!
Wilderness areas do not prohibit prospecting or mining, it states so in the law!
Wilderness areas/roadless areas can not restrict claim owners acess and I've even shown the CP club members how you act upon your rights to access and prospect even within roadless areas.......with vehicles and without a claim there yet.
Mining/prospecting is your right, access is your right.....hunting is not a right.
Remember folks act accordingly out there, it's your right to do so!

Camping (dispersed) is allowed up to 300 feet from any marked roadway, however, in the roadless areas they can restrict camping (recreation) as traddoerr stated.

After reading this thread, would you like to find out more facts about your rights to prospect for minerals? Not a club member yet?
Why not check it out? It may be just what you've been looking for all this time.
ColoradoProspector club membership helps keep this site open for all to use as a resource and help better understand where and how to proceed when prospecting.

CP

[19000mike]

Hi all,
We miners will no doubt go head to head with theese folk at some time soon. Some of Our good friends in Indiana faced some charges for dredging in navigable waterway a couple years back and with good advice and a long fight actually changed the policy in the state. I think as long as Ken Salazar is involved he will feed off the eco-nut jobs and pad his pockets. I know there are better places to go but the Arkansas has always put some color in the pan. I do look forward to your pm and sure do hope to dredge somewhere in the state.
Thanks CP and all the others that help us rookies! Maybe I can someday find a claim like swizz did.
Thanks,
19000mike

[traddoerr]

Thanks CP for your input, I will join as a member as soon as we get a handle on finances (changing carriers).

You are absolutley right about the laws and that you can prospect/mine in wilderness/primitive areas, what my assosiate is saying is that there are new LAWS (not rules or regs) pertaining to use on the public lands that are being designated as primitive/wilderness, these laws were passed along with the US budget, and it pertains to disturbance by use of the public/buisness.

They claim that many of the current roads in use were not put there by the USFS and there for are being closed under the roadless act/managment plan, this hurts every one accross the board from recreationalists/live stock ranching/other industries that relyed on this access and motorized use.

I also know what your saying in the current laws saying about being able to use motor vehicals to access mining claims, ect., but what he was telling me is that motorized use is about to change in these areas until you have an actual claim in place, and he stated that miners/fire wood Co./live stock ranchers and others that rely on some motorized use to aid them is going to be impossible to get approved.

To answer the ? what is the true managment powers of the USFS, it is surface managment, timber/agriculture use/roads & trails, any other surface disturbance that may accure, that is why one has to get a plans of operation filed with them, and then approvel, correct? And the term/law of roadless areas he said means just that, NO new roads/trails. He is trying to get more info this month and lititure that has everything in black and white.

I also asked him what if I want to use a dredger in this area to prospect, he said as it reads, no motors can be used in wilderness/primitive areas with out first getting POO approved, and good luck getting that he said. Now I'm not trying to upset any one or stir the pot sort of say, but, I'm starting to get pi$$ed off about all these new laws, and who backs them.

To give you all a little bit about myself, I have been part of a watch dog group sence 1994, we have lobbyists that we work with and legal consultants, we keep an eye/ear out for any and all outdoor activiteys and small buisnes's, anything that comes along that we feel needs more involvement we try to help, when the CDOW did its first five year season structure for biggame hunting, they (CDOW, Kim Burgess) came to us to get more people involved, Don't think that the USFS only picks on the miners/prospectors (but they may be the smallest group), we have fought battles with them in lots of areas of use, and won most. But with so many liberals in office its getting tougher by the year. As I mentioned when he gets back to me I will post what info I get, my opinion is every one will have to work together to keep what we have now and try to gain back some.

[russau]

well if that troubles you the this ought to get your craw really good! http://www.capwiz.com/cfbf/issues/alert/?a...556&type=CU this ought right land grap/abuse of power will eleminate all dredgeing in the USA if it goes unchallendged! its really messing with the farmers and ranchers but it definatly includes miners aswell. this site offers either a email or letter response but it is in a form letter. use it to make youe own letter in your own words to make a difference! they are accepting comments untill July1 so you need to hurry and send yours in if you want to help! this isnt just a west coast thing! its in EVERYONES backyard right now!do your part in challendgeing this or we could be facing the same problem that the california dredgers have right now!

[traddoerr]

russau, done! I had talked to a profesor from the Colorado school of mines awhile back and he said that he felt that small scale mining is going to be a thing of the past if we dont educate the younger generation how important it is and it's cultural value as well, he thinks allot of this is because of all the groups that have now put a big effort/money into the younger generation and influancing them while there in school.

[russau]

AHMEN TO THAT!!!!!

[CP]

Thanks everyone for posting up in here and you are all very welcome. That's what the Colorado Prospector website is all about "EDUCATION" and that's for everyone who wants to have more knowledge in the field.
Very glad to hear that you will be joining the club ranks soon too Traddoerr, we'll all be looking forward to you and your families future club participation.

Boy has this thread gotten beefy with tangents and information, again good job digging in ya'll!
Lets take a look at some of the basics in the wording though before we start jumping through all the hoops presented by government officials.

Motors and wilderness areas...........I can clearly see where the wording disallows (by law) the use of "motorized vehicles" but how did hand carried type equipment get lumped into the no motorized prohibited things. A combo unit or dredge that small or chainsaw for that matter are not motorized vehicles, so why would we assume that they are prohibited, or even worse yet, believe it because the ranger we talked to said that?

Russ mentioned the CWA 404/NPDES permits that are supposedly daming dredging across the country............Here's another fine example of wording missed that would actually take dredging right out of that catagory I think.
CWA 404 permits have to do with "introduced pollutants".........What pollutant is "introduced" by dredging with hand carried equipment?
I think we all know there is no introduced pollutant so why in the world would any miner/dredger even want to apply for a permit to stop pollutants introduced if there were no pollutants introduced to start with. Just how would the water dept (CDF&G, DEQ whatever) approve such an application? By filing for the permit you've just stated you are in fact introducing "some pollutant", now they want to find it and stop it......DON'T APPLY FOR THE STUPID FRICKEN THING, JUST GET TO WORK WITHIN YOUR RIGHTS! See if they want to push you into court and prove you had "introduced a pollutant" to the judge.....I'm betting they won't be able to prove SH!T!
TSS or suspended turbidity from one dredge can in no way match mother nature so the current ploy of pollutant "stir up" won't fly either and if it did fly in court then you should have had a better lawyer!!

Has anyone figured out the "sureface resorce" question yet?
Traddoerr said......

To answer the ? what is the true managment powers of the USFS, it is surface managment, timber/agriculture use/roads & trails, any other surface disturbance that may accure, that is why one has to get a plans of operation filed with them, and then approvel, correct? And the term/law of roadless areas he said means just that, NO new roads/trails. He is trying to get more info this month and lititure that has everything in black and white.

This is very close......The FS is a "surface management agency" and their authority is over two catagories only and those are "surface resources" (the questions posed earlier), and the second being "occupancy". They have no sole discretion on roads closed or used for, although they sure can have influence on outcomes, especially when public doesn't get involved locally.
Any surface disturbances..........no not at all in fact the wording says "significant surface resource disturbance" in the law, this is why I've posed the questions about basic wording. And they are only allowed to mitigate the disturbance......not stop it by prohibiting activities across the board!

So we are still looking for the actual "surface resource" answer of the FS's two delegated authorities to manange surface use with.
By the way is mining considered a surface use?
Does the FS regulate mining or sub surface activities?
What is the "surface" considered to be?

I could go on and on but I digress for now........

It's about the basics folks, ain't no point in changing the laws to suit stupid......no offense intended to anyone reading just a point. We have to learn what there is in the law and use it first before we can ever effectively put change to them.
If your(OUR) activities as prospectors/miners don't fall into those catagories then why would we as individual allow the officials (who work for us-tax dollars) to regulate us in the field beyond their authourities delegated by law? IT'S UP TO YOU, IT'S YOUR RIGHT!!

Although much in the stupid politics world does flow west to east, the abuse of power by government officials is certainly not new and not starting in California this year. These abuses probably started about when the depts started or shortly after and some poor precendences set take decades to unravel, just like what has been and is still currently being unraveled here in Colorado concerning the FS and it's abuses dealing with mining claims for the last 4 decades!
That hype about it's all coming to your state soon does make for good fund raising efforts I guess...... Doesn't do any good to send them money though if they use it in an attempt to "change/fix" laws they do not yet understand as written. IMHO

Clearly they do not as demonstrated in several states by several clubs/groups including some here in Colorado unfortunately. These clubs/groups are continually misleading their followers into thinking recreations are rights, they are not. Or that "education" comes in a pretty magazine/dvd box set and a pan.........where's the "education" come into play?
Whilst they continually comprise (work with the officials as they like to call it) and toss their rights as claim owners to the wind (no motors used on our "tourist claim") What the hell is a tourist claim?!!! Oh bright move there using the word tourist in association with claim ownership!!
No dredging on our claims so and so club says, BLM wants us to file a POO for aggregated disturbances (gee I wonder why?)......
So it's just...........oooops no worries I guess, what's one more bad precendence gonna' do???? Or 2 or 3 ..........well there ya' have it. It's a chain reaction and yep can go coast to coast folks.
STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES.....Is that how that saying goes? And are we the people so intimdated by a uniform we can't see this in the BS called "official plans and rules". They work for us and the law says how they do that job, not their personal take on things!

Pay attention everyone........it's a never ending battle and we will hand this country down to our youngsters ...... Yours and mine, lets give them something our forefathers would be proud of! A government kept in check by the only thing that ever has.......IT'S PEOPLE!!!

Dig in, pass it on and like mentioned above.....EDUCATE EM' ALL!

CP

[traddoerr]

Thanks CP & Mrs CP, were looking forward to some of the CP outings (if work allows the time).

We are trying to get all the lititure for the new laws and managment plans that were passed by Congress along with the budget bill. The road closures that are taking place have to do with the new roadless managment plan, and has given the USFS full authority to close these roads/trails, this affects allot of people and we want to have all our facts before we go head long into this (sence this is law now it may be to late) but we want to make sure the USFS isn't closing roads that aren't part of the plan, I'm letting people know were I can, as some of the changes/closures have already accured, this might be what John in the Ark. area ment when he said that there is going to be some big managment changes but wouldn't be specific, we'll see about that, always been abit of a rebel but try not to get into to much trouble .

After talking to BLM today they still have no changes in any of the areas that are open for prospecting and many other areas and didnt seem to care what the FS is doing, but did have some approved primitive areas to work on.

As for motorized equipment, one cannot use it in a wilderness area with out having approval/permit (and I believe on claims only), Our group all got tickets 7yrs ago for having a generator in hunting camp, went to court and it (law) was defined as any mechinized equipment, we lost and paid our heafty fine of $48.00+ court costs. I will find the USC,CRS that states this. This is why I asked our legal consultant about a dredger being used in the wilderness/primitive area and he said NO, not with out an approved POO or approved claim, as always I need to find out more for myself, just stubbern that way.

CP, I greatly appreciate your input and wisdom, and hope to gain some more knowledge from this site and hope that I/we can be of help as well.

[ASTROBLEME]

Mrs. CP and CP,

Your effort to educate is making a difference. I see it in the posts and responses here in your forum.

Keep up the good work!

ASTROBLEME

[CP]

Thank you Astrobleme, I appreciate you stopping in this thread to say that.

Traddoerr, you are very welcome and thank you for posting your input as well. As a group we can reflect on our personal take to what the laws read and collectively come out with a great perception on the reality of the laws written rather than a misguided opinion gotten from a uniform or someone who "thought they knew".

I had a much different experience concerning a roadless area I wanted to access just last year. I can't get into too much detail but for the sake of comparison......I had no claim in this area nor did I have access to one in the area. I just wanted to check it out a bit but there was a locked gate for the roadless crapola.
So, I stopped in the FS office and after a short discussion and a phone call to the head ranger who happened to be on the road at the time. I left with a key to the gate and a note (no permit or POO), for the weekend to take my 6,200 lb suburban loaded with highbanker combo and even was told I should take along a chainsaw because the road will be over grown as it's been closed for several years already into that roadless area.
The note was in case I happened to encounter a field officer while accessing or on the roadless area.

I posted that for comparision so anyone reading can see what a difference rights make vs recreations. I did not present myself as any type of recreationalist what so ever. I told them exactly what my intentions were and what I intended to use while doing it including the motorized. Not one word was said about the motors in that roadless area.
I'm sure I could go back to the same office and repeat it as well this year. There was a bit of hesitation when we first began the conversation and then a hard swallow because they realized I knew my rights and was acting within my rights, not something they can argue about.

CP

[traddoerr]

CP, thanks for that info.
Here is what we have for the facts, the roadless areas are areas that curently have no roads and they are to be managed that way (and all of this is still in the works of planning and public input) meaning that they(USFS) will try to keep from any new roads from being built, but, what roads are in that were never designated as a USFS road (old mining rds, logging rds,ect.) will be closed and reclaimed, not sure if this could effect the mining laws until it probably gets challenged by some one wanting to put a road in for a claim in one of these areas.

As for the new primitive areas these are areas that have been in the works (managment plan) sence old slickwillies era in office but some are just now going into effect, but in no way are exempt from the mining laws as far as we can read.

So in reality nothing has changed for the laws of mining/prospecting, but does make a difference for those of us who hunt/fish in these areas, should make the hunting better.

What I did find after a few phone call is that a few of the FS agents were not fully versed in the new plans and some even thought that they were one in the same and they are not, guess we will have to trian them on this as well.

So here is a question for you all, the USC for archological artifacts it says 100yrs and older and the CFR says 50yrs and older (USFS follows this rule), so which would you follow? and why?

[OklaPony]

Sure, just contact me in advance, IOW before you leave. I'm moving a bunch of stuff around my place, here to there and there to here and everything in the middle, so right now it's a mess and the tools I prefer using are boxed up.

Well, my plan to bring you a bucket of Arkansas mud from OK didn't ummmm... pan out, so to speak. My plans got changed a bit over the last couple of weeks and didn't allow me a trip towards Tulsa as I'd earlier expected. We'll be knocking around Leadville pretty much all of next week, I'm going to try to go to Vic's one morning, maybe two... be pleased to make your acquaintance if things work out that way.

[Coalbunny]

I would love to meet you as well OklaPony.

[OklaPony]

I would love to meet you as well OklaPony.

Well, unless you're coming to OK sometime soon we'll have to make it happen next year. I'm back home sweating it out in the heat. Leadville was a fantastic way to cool down for a bit and I'm certainly making plans to return again in 2012.

[noob]

From Leadville down is considered the Arkansas Headwaters Recreational Area (ARHA). It is jointly managed by the State of Colorado and the federal departments. The departments that have a stake in what goes on there are: Colorado State Parks, BLM, US Forest Service, CDOW & Bureau of Reclamation. The point of all of that is keep in mind that when you are talking to the BLM, or USFS, the do not exclusively decide what goes on there on that particular parcel that falls under their direct jurisdiction.

They chat amongst themselves to set policy. Behind closed doors. And their #1 focus is for that river is Commercial Rafting. 200,000+ people a year go down that river, from Granite to below Salida, in 3 short months which brings ALOT of money into town and county coffers via sales tax revenue. In addition to the pull of private rafting companies and other town merchants that benefit from the tourist dollars, you have city councils and county treasurers that are concerned baout what the BLM or USFS allows or disallows.

Businesses, towns and Chaffee County all make lots of money off of the rafting industry. To them fisherman are a sidenote and a prospector nothing more than a nuisance. Follow the money if you want to know their priorities and your future rights on that river and why your current rights are disappearing.

I'll give you an example. Every spring you can go to the Chaffee County Fairgrounds and find an invite only meeting occurring. The attendees are Colorado State Parks, BLM, USFS and all of the outfitters that have permits to commercially run the Ark. The last one I was at 3 years ago while still in the industry had a discussion about how to eliminate that pesky public from driving to a particular camp site below Salida and 'taking spots away' from the commercial companies. The discussion was intiated by the owner of WAR (Wilderness Aware Rafting in Johnson Village). He was complaining about some of his overnight trips having problems finding a camping spot at a particular location because there was road access to this public camping area and that pesky public had the audacity to actually think they had every much of a right to camp there when he felt it should be limited to only swell fellows like himself who are making money using that camp site.

What should have been said by the CSP, BLM, etc., was 'tough cookies dude, that is a public area and mom and pop and a couple kids have just as much right to accesss and use that Public Land as you, a guy making money off of using that public land, do.'

But, alas, nothing of the sort was said. I was appalled. Here I am in a closed door meeting between businesses and government, complete with a couple rangers packing heat, standing by the doors in the back of a room deciding the use of public lands and what select members of the public should be allowed to use it and how to enforce that. When did that Iron Curtain jump across the Atlantic? Just one example and I pointed out that specific company owner because he is a greedy scoundrel in my book, fellow rafter or not. So if you go commercial rafting, don't give WAR any of your hard earned money as he thinks that river is there for him to make money off of, not for anyone else to use for any other reason.

Point of all of that is to know that when you are dealing with any specific agency regarding prospecting on the Ark, there first and foremost concern as far as what is allowed and not allowed is the commercial rafting industry and I gaurantee you that the BLM and the USFS consult with eachother and CSP when deciding policy for anything that happens in the AHRA.

You can bet your bottom dollar there is more behind the reasoning of their decisions than they will every admit to you, and, of course, money is at the heart of it. The other point is that the Ark was one of three rivers I worked. Clear Creek was another. When I started, 10,000-15,000 people a year commercially rafted it. I beleive the number last year was over 50,000. Not very many commercial trips float too far below 119 due to Black Rock and Rigor Mortis rapids, but that will eventually change and when you all start seeing rafts going down below tunnels 1 & 2, get ready to lose prospecting access. I don't have much faith in Jeffco Open Space anyway. Merely a matter of time before prospecting is, as Wheatridge states, no longer congruent with Jeffco's use plan.

[leonard]

I just got back from 2 weeks of dredging on the Arkansas. As far as I know, only 2 people other than the ones on our claim, were dredging on the whole river and one of them was illegal as he was on the GPAA claims.

We had no problem getting permits. It simply took a letter from a private claim owner. They did follow up and call 2 of the out of state permit holders to verify a couple of things though and they did stop and check permits. They were nice about it though as I got there on a saturday and they let me dredge sunday and go get my permit on monday.

I heard a comment a few months ago "all of the arkansas is claimed up!" That may be so but a friend of mine just bought a 140 acre claim near Buena Vista for $5,000 and it looked like a great deal to me.

Leonard

[noob]

I heard a comment a few months ago "all of the arkansas is claimed up!"

I am new to all of this, but have read on a few forms that statement.

My interpretation of that comment is:

"I can't stake a claim on the Ark for $200.00 and have to buy one for $5000.00"

$5,000 sounds like a deal to me. I used to want to save up $5,000 to buy a raft of my own so I didn't have to be a commercial guide to play in the Ark. I think a claim would be a much better investment. The raft tries to kill you, whereas the claim puts a little gold, however insignificant amount, into your pan with out trying to kill you. And you still get to hang out in one of the coolest parts of Colorado, the Arkansas River Valley, and play in the river.

[noob]

As an off topic comment, I see your name on the site linked to from here for the Golden Optimist videos. I don't know if that is you, but whoever that is, I decided he is the Warren Miller of prospecting videos. Some funny things come out of that gentleman's mouth when he is holding the camera. Makes me laugh.

[noob]

Sorry to turbo post ...

If you don't mind answering leonard, on a claim such as that 140 acre one, I suspect that most of it is not in the river. Is one allowed to bring in a piece or two of heavy equipment like a backhoe or track excavator in there to move some dirt around? In addition to the retirement from commercial rafting, I retired from snowcat operating. I miss driving heavy equipment, winter and summer all over the side of a mountain. A potential to kill two birds with one claim there as far as the fun factor. Makes $5,000 sound even better.

[leonard]

As an off topic comment, I see your name on the site linked to from here for the Golden Optimist videos. I don't know if that is you, but whoever that is, I decided he is the Warren Miller of prospecting videos. Some funny things come out of that gentleman's mouth when he is holding the camera. Makes me laugh.

Thats me. I filed my first claim in Lefthand canyon about 14 years ago. It was optimistically called "Golden Optimist #1"

I've been fortunate to go to a lot of neat placves and prospected with a lot of neat people.

We call our small group of dredgers the CCC or Colorado Culture Connection. It's a long prospecting story from 2001.

Leonard

[russau]

if youve never had a chance to meet or dredge with Leonard or the CCC boys, you need to try to arrainge a chance todo so! itll be one youll never forget or want to miss again! Beleive me!!!

[Coalbunny]

Carl ask Jon to show these words of wit in writing otherwise he dont know sqwat and he needs to keep his unknowing mouth shut before he gets int otrouble!!

I have, but he just tells me to talk to Megan and even once to talk to the BLM.


To recap-

Welllllll.......

Me, I am engaged in studies that require me to pan. I find gold, yes, but it has been documented for decades through the USFS and BLM as well as WYGS and a few colleges that my studies pertain to sediments and the actions that create their depositional structure. So not finding gold doesn't break my heart. Finding gold, yeah I like it. Big wow. And I have warned rangers in the past do not interfere with my studies. That actually drags in a myriad of state and federal laws, and I have gone to the mat before on those, and won. I won then and I'll win again.

I have argued this with rangers and managers in Colorado, Utah, Oregon, California and Wyoming. I don't recall the USC that backs up what I do, and I'll have to find it very soon, but there is a federal law that prohibits the managing agency from interfering with legitimate research that has no deleterious effect on the area studied, and provides for civil damages and possibly criminal charges. At that point it falls under 5 USC, where there is a special hearing for the incident, in which they have their bosses, their bosses bosses, all the way up to Salazar if it gets bad enough.

Now Salazar is going to be a huge problem. I know him personally, we met twice, we don't like each other, and he is a bigot and a racist.
Salazar has told me himself that if it was up to him, people like me would not be allowed on public lands anywhere, making reference to his knowledge of my physical impairments, and this was before he became the Secretary of the Interior, in the days when he was a Senator and I was his constituent. Gee, what a nice way to talk to a constituent, eh?

Our last fight is still ongoing. Back when he was still US Senator I called to express my dissatisfaction with his support of an amnesty program for illegal aliens. Now keep in mind that I'm not picking at race on that issue, because people of all races, all nationalities and literally all professions can be and have been illegal aliens. UK, France, Russia, Iraq, Chile, Mexico, Canada, New Zealand- hell, I can bring up a list of countries and I guarantee you there are illegals from each one.
Well, the young man I talked with via telephone (Canon City office, IIRC)got a bit snotty about it and started bragging about how Sen Salazar will help return Colorado to it's original owners- Mexico. Really? Hmmm. The kid didn't like it when I asked him if he meant returning Colorado to the true original owners that the French & Spanish stole the lands from (which is the only proper thing to do, I feel, before giving anything to the Mexicans) such as Apache, Arapaho, Cheyenne, Pueblo, Shoshone, Ute, Comanche, Kiowa & Navajo. Thinking this young man is just being a dick, I gave Sen. Salazar a chance to come clean, so I called Sen. Salazar's DC office, only to hear the very same thing (not word for word, but the same stuff pretty much). At that point I have openly referred to Salazar as a racist, a bigot, a traitor, and those that know me can imagine there's a few other choice words that aren't proper to discuss here. I was, and still am, infuriated that Salazar would align himself with people like that if he does not support that anti-American movement and mad as hell if he does support the same agenda.

My studies have taken a huge hit. The past few times I was arrested the cops have made it a point to perform unlawful searches & seizures, and the last time they took my computer. When I got it back I found they had effectively destroyed a huge part of the work I did for the USFS along with nearly all of my research notes. The maps I did, gone. That was a double negative as they also destroyed every map and notes for a project I was doing for a BLM office (go figure) who is now mad as hell at me (no surprise). Right now, they think they have me trumped for the moment. I'm not sure, but they might (I'll explain that to you later, Dan).

[russau]

Carl to bad you didnt back up your work on a cd or a thumb drive.

[Coalbunny]

I had them backed up on CD. Sadly the CD's don't seem to do well. I can't explain it.

[hotrod]

Well as a new prospecter its stuff like this that takes all the fun out of it, its a story of to littel to late.

People need to speak out and let them hear us. (re clam your digs)

[russau]

well you dont have to worry about ole salazar anymore! i heard/read that he was stepping down for some other clown!and i just read that o got slapped by the federal courts asto his bypassing Congress and implimenting his laws. the Courts said he violated the law and violated the Constitution! and his oath of office! maybe now one of our socalled "representatives" will jump on this and have him prosicuted for this crime!

[Coalbunny]

Good! I hope so as well, and I'll even tie the knot!