How do you determine when your disturbance becomes significant?? Options

[realnice]

Hi all, im new to the site. Been prospecting for about 10 years here in Colorado. I hold a few mining claims and am wondering about determining significant disturbance on historically disturbed areas. An area where i have a claim has been logged and mined for a long time and the land shows it. It also has very heavy 4wd use. it is not very pristine at all. One of my claims is visible from the road so recently it has come upon scrutiny by the USFS. there is a 40 ft x 20 ft. worked area. The area is disturbed and is comprised of filled in diggs.
The 228.4 Plan of operations—notice of intent—requirements seem to fit my site as to not have to file a plan of operations, but one stipulation is...
(v) Operations, which in their totality,
will not cause surface resource disturbance
which is substantially different
than that caused by other users
of the National Forest System who are
not required to obtain a Forest Service
special use authorization, contract, or
other written authorization;

If they deem my operation to be causing significant disturbance what can they do? Arent they supposed to inform me to stop and complete a plan of operations? What are my rights here?

How do I appeal a desicion by the USFS?

[Mineral Estate G...]

The Forest Service and BLM (as well other agencies) have no authority over uncommon mineral deposit claims. Reference the Executive Summary The Mining Law: The Extent of Federal Authority Over Public Domain http://www.miningrights.org/exec.pdf The reference in the letter to NEPA as authority, even if applicable, which it isn't, has even less validty being NEPA is merely supplemental to other lawful authority. As proofed in the Executive Summary there is no lawful authority NEPA can supplement.

Always communicate in writing with any agency. The writing is the record. Oral meetings are not and mean nothing. Do not get lulled into using agency terminology. Being these relate to Common Mineral Material, CMM, claims terms such as "Operator" or "Operation" are improper and inappropriate to describe your Uncommon Mineral Property, UMP, or development thereof.

Without a fuller discussion, because all this has been pointed out before, read over the FSM 2800 to find, as regards the mineral grant there is no inherent authority in the Forest Service to apply anything. The "policy manual" can not be "violated" because it is instructions to the employees. Please find in the FSM "However, when reasonable efforts have been made to obtain compliance with the regulations and the noncompliance is unnecessarily or unreasonably causing injury, loss, or damage to surface resources, authorized officers shall take enforcement action (FSM 2817.3(5))." This shows, at least, and much more actually, there has to be probable cause based triggers, "noncompliance is unnecessarily or unreasonably", required to invoke agency intervention. Not even noncompliance triggers an intervention unless it is both unnecessary and unreasonable. Moreover, NEPA is not applicable or implicated in the first instance, if it could be applied to Uncommon Mineral Deposit, UMD, locations. Consequently, when in compliance with the mineral grant there is no unnecessary or unreasonable development, or enjoyment, of your exclusive possession.

Notice the surface management right clearly indicates reference only to Common Mineral Materials, CMM, or disposable minerals, not Uncommon Minerals, the granted minerals, UMD. Read for the exception to FS authority, that's us grantees: 2814.13 - Right To Manage and Dispose of Vegetative Surface Resources The right to manage other resources (except mineral deposits subject to location under the mining laws) and the limitations on such rights on claims validated prior to July 23, 1955, are found in FSM 2812 and 2813.

Sounds like the FS must make room for us, not the other way around. And we don't have to ask: 2814.21 - Respect Claim and Claimant's Property The Forest Service must respect claims and claimants' property by using precautions to avoid damage to claim corner markers, excavations, and other mining improvements and equipment.

Neither does this sound like FS can demand anything either. Locators of mineral deposit locations acquire rights against the United States, not so for CMM: 2813.1 - Rights of Claimants By location and entry, in compliance with the 1872 act, a claimant acquires certain rights against other citizens and against the United States (FSM 2811).

MEG