ColoradoProspector   CP Club Membership Info.

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

New rules for hunting meteorites
Woody
post Oct 15 2012, 08:16 AM
Post #1


Rock Bar!
****

Group: Members
Posts: 637
Joined: 5-April 11
From: All of Colorado
Member No.: 15,615




Looks like the Feds are stepping up and placing restrictions on collecting meteorites. I recognize the interest and benefit science might have but the way I interpret this means more regulations placed on our public lands and activities. This might be a bit of a rant on my part but I hate all these rules and regulations on our public lands. I am reminded about the last time I was in the California N.F. I wanted to spend a couple of days in the back country camping. I found out that I needed a permit in order to even have a campfire. Here is another extreme, I was in Germany a few years ago and got an annual fishing license. It cost about 100$. However, if you actually wanted to use it you had to go down to the county court house before the last business day, and pay an additional cost for each and every day you planned on fishing. It was about 10$ extra per day.

This kind of suggest the same thing, you can’t go out hunting meteorites unless you buy a permit.



http://www.foxnews.com/science/2012/10/15/...intcmp=features


--------------------
Proud CP Lifetime Member
(currently working hard in the procurement department)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
Gene Kooper
post Aug 17 2016, 04:07 PM
Post #2


Shovel Buster!
***

Group: Members
Posts: 100
Joined: 24-May 15
Member No.: 120,476



QUOTE (Clay Diggins @ Aug 17 2016, 02:33 PM) *
I'm not just speculating here. One of the foremost mining engineers and mining lawyers in American history proved, claimed, mined and received mineral patents totaling 640 acres to a meteorite deposit. Daniel Moureau Barringer mined tons of nickle rich iron as well as very rare Moissanite from his placer claims on Coon Butte. Today the official name is Berringer Crater but it's better known as simply Meteor Crater.

Yes, as EMac stated, 640 acres were patented to the Standard Iron Co in 1903. I attached a copy of the patent below.

[attachment=9913:CDI_93182.PDF]
As an additional wrinkle to this discussion, please note that the four claims that were patented are the Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn Placers. As you say Daniel Moreau Barringer was a mining attorney who with John Stokes Adams wrote the mining treatise, "The Law of Mines and Mining in the United States" (1st vol. 1897; reprinted in 1900 and 2nd supplemental vol. 1911). Here is the Google Book download link to Volume 1. Interesting to say the least that Barringer decided to claim the "deposit" with four placer claims. Below is a link to the plat that shows four open cuts (discoveries for the four placer locations) and three tunnels. Also, another oddity for EMac: Please note that although the four placers are each 160-acre association placers a mineral survey was required because the public lands survey had not been extended to this area yet. All four placer claims are tied to United States Location Monument No. 1806. Something odd happened early on in the public lands surveys in this area because there is a half Range (Meteor Crater is presently located in Secs. 13 and 24, T. 19 N., R 12½ E. of the Gila - Salt River Principal Meridian).

Mineral Sur. No. 1806 - Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn Placers

QUOTE (Clay Diggins @ Aug 17 2016, 02:33 PM) *
Obviously it is possible to claim, mine and receive patent to land where sufficient concentrated meteorite metal deposits are found. Simple collecting of scattered meteorite material does not amount to a valuable mineral deposit under the law so it is regulated just like rock or specimen collecting.

To add to your reply, the patent was issued in 1903. Standard Iron Co. did not have to catagorize the mineral deposit as coming from a meteor or that it was economic. They only had to meet the minimum requirement of having made $500 in mining improvements to obtain the patent. As an aside: The minimum of $500 in mining improvements was usually included in the approved survey's field notes and certified by the U.S. Dep. Mineral Surveyor in the old days. For cases where the $500 had not been met at the time of the survey, a separate affidavit of improvements made by the surveyor and a certificate of expenditures certified by the Surveyor General were included in the patent application.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
- Woody   New rules for hunting meteorites   Oct 15 2012, 08:16 AM
- - ColoradoProspector   Thanks for posting up that article Woody, that...   Oct 16 2012, 08:43 AM
- - russau   Dan just to clarify what you commented on, there i...   Oct 17 2012, 05:41 AM
- - ASTROBLEME   Everyone, This matter concerns me greatly, so I...   Oct 23 2012, 11:36 AM
- - swizz   Great letter Johnny. The response however seems to...   Oct 25 2012, 08:40 AM
- - EMac   Keep in mind this lady was a paleontologist who wa...   Aug 16 2016, 10:37 AM
|- - Gene Kooper   QUOTE (EMac @ Aug 16 2016, 11:37 AM) Keep...   Aug 16 2016, 09:50 PM
- - Gene Kooper   I must admit that I am baffled at some of the 2012...   Aug 16 2016, 05:53 PM
|- - Clay Diggins   QUOTE (Gene Kooper @ Aug 16 2016, 05:53 P...   Aug 17 2016, 11:33 PM
|- - EMac   QUOTE (Gene Kooper @ Aug 16 2016, 06:53 P...   Sep 7 2016, 10:40 AM
- - EMac   I'm still reading through the previous literat...   Aug 16 2016, 10:56 PM
- - Gene Kooper   QUOTE The federal law governing locatable minerals...   Aug 17 2016, 12:10 PM
|- - EMac   Gene - I have a knee-jerk opinion, but I'm s...   Aug 17 2016, 01:44 PM
- - Clay Diggins   That non-binding BLM policy Instruction Memorandum...   Aug 17 2016, 01:33 PM
- - EMac   QUOTE (Clay Diggins @ Aug 17 2016, 02:33 ...   Aug 17 2016, 03:25 PM
|- - Clay Diggins   QUOTE (EMac @ Aug 17 2016, 03:25 PM) Good...   Aug 17 2016, 05:18 PM
- - Gene Kooper   QUOTE (Clay Diggins @ Aug 17 2016, 02:33 ...   Aug 17 2016, 04:07 PM
- - Gene Kooper   EMac, Thanks for the links to the court cases. I...   Aug 17 2016, 04:24 PM
- - Clay Diggins   It is a simple fact that the mining law only makes...   Aug 17 2016, 05:32 PM
- - Gene Kooper   IMO your view that there is a simple distinction b...   Aug 17 2016, 07:12 PM
|- - Clay Diggins   QUOTE (Gene Kooper @ Aug 17 2016, 07:12 P...   Aug 17 2016, 08:18 PM
|- - Gene Kooper   QUOTE (Clay Diggins @ Aug 17 2016, 09:18 ...   Aug 18 2016, 05:09 PM
- - EMac   QUOTE You seem to imply that Barringer met resista...   Aug 18 2016, 10:26 AM
- - EMac   QUOTE I think you must have missed the point about...   Aug 18 2016, 11:05 AM
|- - Clay Diggins   QUOTE (EMac @ Aug 18 2016, 11:05 AM) Do y...   Sep 26 2016, 11:53 PM
- - Gene Kooper   QUOTE (Clay Diggins @ Aug 18 2016, 12:33 ...   Aug 18 2016, 04:57 PM
- - EMac   Where are you seeing the $1300 per ton figure...   Sep 27 2016, 11:00 AM
|- - Clay Diggins   QUOTE (EMac @ Sep 27 2016, 11:00 AM) Wher...   Sep 27 2016, 08:51 PM
- - Gene Kooper   Clay, I don't know the basis for your declara...   Oct 1 2016, 09:24 PM
|- - Clay Diggins   QUOTE (Gene Kooper @ Oct 1 2016, 09:24 PM...   Oct 2 2016, 12:21 PM
|- - Gene Kooper   QUOTE (Clay Diggins @ Oct 2 2016, 01:21 P...   Oct 6 2016, 10:48 PM
|- - Clay Diggins   Thanks for sharing your opinion Gene. I see it a...   Oct 7 2016, 02:34 AM
- - EMac   Clay - I'm trying to follow the comments and l...   Oct 7 2016, 10:10 AM
- - Gene Kooper   Clay, I must say that I am surprised by your unwi...   Oct 22 2016, 12:22 AM
- - Clay Diggins   I've let this lie here in hopes that eventuall...   Feb 4 2018, 01:33 PM


Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 1st May 2025 - 01:41 PM