Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Modern Day Miner Mar 25 2014, 11:35 AM

I was wondering about access to a certain claim. There is a closed forest service road that goes through private property. Do I have a right to use this road/trail to access my claims.
Or is this something that would require me getting private property owners permission to go through his land to get to my claims?

Thanks
MDM

Posted by: swizz Mar 25 2014, 12:12 PM

Hi Chad,
Yes, you have rights to use a Forest Service Road for access to your claim. If the USFS road goes through private property then stay on the road when you are using it.
If the road is gated with a lock... you'll need to contact the regional USFS office. You can either obtain a key for their lock... or they will let you daisy chain one of your own locks to it.
You don't need property owner's permission if you are not stepping on their property. FS roads are not private property.

Posted by: Modern Day Miner Mar 25 2014, 01:33 PM

Hey Chris

What if the road is closed and has been for some time.

Posted by: Crusty Mar 25 2014, 03:28 PM

I am assuming by "closed" you don't mean a locked gate, since you're still asking after the above suggestion. Is it no longer an active road?

Posted by: swizz Mar 25 2014, 04:09 PM

It shouldn't matter as long as it is a US Forest Road. A number of Forest and BLM Roads have been "closed" in recent years for various reasons. "Closed" normally pertains to vehicular access for recreational vehicular travel. Your activities are not recreational, you are mining, huge difference. On my claims the BLM had "closed" and gated a couple of their roads prior to my claim ownership. I visited the regional BLM office and the next day had my own locks daisy-chained to the gates as per my mining rights and they were very cooperative. Forest roads fall into the same category in terms mining rights.

Posted by: Modern Day Miner Mar 25 2014, 04:49 PM

I did talk with the local forest service office. They said that I could drive as far as I could on the road and that I would have to hike the rest of the way in. They said that the road in question really isn't a road anymore. So we will have to see how far I can get. I don't think it will be that long of a hike.

Thanks for the input Chris.

Posted by: swizz Mar 26 2014, 04:09 AM

Sounds like they're feeding you a load of bs to me... and possibly pandering to the property owner who likely wants nobody on that "closed" road. That FS road still belongs to We The People unless the Dept Of Interior sold it. Use it. If that property owner wanted to own the FS road that runs through his property he'd have to purchase it from We The People. His property value would likely increase if that deal went through.... and he knows it. He bought land with a FS road going through it and knew damn well when the land was purchased. Maybe he got a better deal because of this. Probably tickled that they closed it to recreational travel/use. Mining rights and claim ownership rights trump FS road closures. They cannot legally deny you FS road vehicular access to your claims if that FS road truly exists. That is your road, bring it back to life. Gated or not, it's your right to use and maintain strictly for mining purposes.
My gated "closed" roads were also impassible due to trees they had felled across it and many blow-downs that they hadn't cleared over the years (on purpose, I'm sure).
A couple of days with the chainsaw and dragging trees with the Jeep is all it took. Now those gated "closed" roads are open to me ( + mining personnel) with my locks on the gate and maintained by me strictly for mining and exploration purposes. If you wanna throw in the towel and walk, go ahead... I have equipment and time is very valuable to me. I strongly suggest that you exercise your rights and quit asking them questions. They are not bound by law to educate you of your mining rights, quite the opposite in my experience. It is not illegal for them to withhold information from you regarding your rights... it's your responsibility know your rights. If they were testing you as a new claim owner I think you may have failed the first pop quiz (a quiz that you incited ). By asking them questions regarding your basic mining rights, you are exposing your lack of knowledge to them thus making you pretty easy prey for FS misinformation. Don't be that guy... do all of your homework before the test, be prepared for anything in the legal arena. FS employees work for We The People and they aren't police officers. They are public servants (surface resource babysitters) who work for you the law abiding citizen, tax payer, and most importantly in this case - mining claim owner. When I went into the BLM office regarding the road closures on my claims... I didn't have any questions for them other than "when can you schedule your personnel to meet me at the gate to install my lock?". They knew better than to tell me gibberish like "well, it's not really a road anymore".... it was obvious that I knew my rights and was gonna clear that road. Next day I had my lock on the gate with the chainsaw a buzzin. They didn't question my rights and made it very clear to me that I was not to use the road for recreational purposes (I already knew that ). Done deal.
You are the boss, take charge. I guarantee you that I know my mining rights BETTER than over 90% of the average FS employees. I thank the CP Club very much for this.
Never ask the FS or BLM anything pertaining to your mining rights. They are the last people I would ever ask. Absolutely know your rights before conversing with either entity.
.... or walk back and forth to your claim(s) and continue to let them bully you, they'd love to see that, even if it's a short distance. Walking is great exercise too, right? Maybe you just carry a pan, bucket, shovel.... and don't mind being wrongly told what to do. Maybe it's such a short walk you don't mind giving an inch to them this time, figuratively they're gonna want a mile though.... it'll come down the road. Eventually they'll have you pole-vaulting to your claim. They are so friendly too, friendliest Shark in the ocean, some try to "establish a good relationship with them". Do that and you won't even notice that your leg is bit off until you're bleeding to death. Since you've been asking them questions regarding your most basic of rights, I reckon they smell blood. Be prepared, be very prepared.

Posted by: russau Mar 26 2014, 05:56 AM

Very good post Swizz!! dig deeper into ALL the info you need!as Swizz said," know your rights" and have a copy with you! i keep all my records/permits/laws for different states in my trailer with me as back up! also check on the rules of "right away" RS**77 (i went blank here) even streams were a road at one time! make sure this is a FS posted road and not just a easement for the FS given to them by the owner.Id also talk to the property owner to sway him into a favorable mode! i think Swizz nailed it! just make sure and know your rights inside out! the FS/BLM/and some DNRs love to bully you into thinking "their way"! thats when you knowing the laws applies big time! if anyone quotes a law, and you have a copy of it, ask them to show you in the written law exactly where it says that! they back down quickly when they see that you know your rights. AND keep all of your paper work very neat and in order. city/county/state this also slows their comments down when they see you have a good grasp on the laws/rights!and like Swizz said, "its our land,not theirs!" this isnt Federal land or BLM land its our land and they work for us! and you are NOT a "recreational anything"! you own a claim, so your a small scale miner under the 1866/1872 mining laws! you have Conressionaly given rights! dont let anyone violate your/our rights! do your research for your protection! and when its all said and done, let us know how you made out in this! GOOD LUCK!

Posted by: swizz Mar 26 2014, 07:14 AM

"Small Scale Miner" is not a legal definition.... another subtle bastardization of the true miner. You are either a "Miner" or not. Just as the term "recreational" is being used by officials to skirt the 1872 Mining Laws... the same will happen with 'small scale'. No problem referring to yourself as a small scale miner to friends and family but don't use that term legally or when conversing with Governmental entities or it could bite ya in the arse.
For legal purposes and benefit of mining rights protection we are Miners, period.

Posted by: swizz Mar 26 2014, 07:42 AM

... as far as contacting the property owner.
Personally, I would not do that for a number of reasons.
I would arm myself with full knowledge of my rights (done) and if he wants to contact me that's fine, I'd be as friendly as it gets. No reason for me to open that potential can of worms. I'm there to mine, not try to win the heart of some disgruntled property owner. I don't care how good of cookies ya bake... he ain't likely gonna shine bright to that road being cleared and used. I'd do everything in my power to maintain a good relationship but mining is mining, facts are facts, and laws are laws. This would all go into consideration BEFORE staking a claim of that nature. Access is very important.

Posted by: swizz Mar 26 2014, 07:56 AM

Should be enough info here for you Chad to make some choices/decisions regarding that road.
That's about as far as I feel like going on this topic in general forums.
I'm glad to help more in the Protected Forum if anyone's interested.

Posted by: Crusty Mar 26 2014, 09:35 AM

Some great info! Glad you're on "our" side! ;)

Posted by: Modern Day Miner Mar 26 2014, 11:54 AM

I don't even know how to pole vault.

Posted by: swizz Mar 26 2014, 06:45 PM

How is that possible? You should have this skill in your tool bag.
I was forced to learn it in HS Gym Class. Quite likely for mining purposes I suspect, lots of Copper and Iron Ore mines where I grew up.

Posted by: ColoradoProspector Mar 27 2014, 07:01 AM

Great information Chris and I'd agree, this discussion could continue on with more details in the club members protected section for anyone interested.

Posted by: moontan Mar 30 2014, 04:45 PM

Thanks Swizz. As a newbie, I was just given solid advice. I am amazed and impressed with the vastness of this site. The information to gather is priceless. I shall continue!

Tim

Posted by: jhidek Apr 11 2016, 05:44 PM

OK, so I hate to be the one that brings up an old post, but now I'm running onto the same with one of my claims. My claim on Mt Buckhorn has been nothing but hassle with claimjumpers and vandals, but the biggest problem I'm having right now is getting access to the locked gates on High Drive. High dr was closed to motorized RECREATIONAL traffic, and if I have to park at the bottom and haul all my equipment in on my back every time not only does it take time, but I am also disabled (spinal injury, with multiple reconstructions). Each gate has multiple locks daisy chained belonging to city of CO Springs and USFS. High Drive is also known as Forest Development Road (FDR) 380. I have visited multiple offices and left multiple messages with different departments to no avail. Somehow got passed off on a transfer to the GIS office who actually told me "unofficially, I'd just cut a link and add your lock on too. Access is your right as a valid claimholder". Anyone have any ideas? Back in AZ this was no problem, the USFS office met me at the gate to unlock it and let me add mine in to the loop

Posted by: swizz Apr 11 2016, 07:44 PM

The FS is required to allow you vehicular access by law for mining purposes. Mining only, no recreation.
My claims are on BLM managed lands (fortunately) and there is a locked gate within my claim boundaries. I visited my regional BLM HQ and told them that I require access for mining purposes and they immediately complied. They scheduled to meet me there and allowed me to add my own lock.... which I dog-tagged with my CMC numbers. No problem.
I'm not sure why you're getting the runaround from the FS. Make sure that you are inquiring at the specific "regional" FS Office that is responsible for the region of your particular claim(s).

Posted by: jhidek Apr 11 2016, 08:08 PM

Thats exactly what I did in AZ and everything was great. I went to the one here in the Springs on Weber and spoke with Jeff and they pushed me to the county, who pushed me to FS, then to Assessor when I said I just came from FS. My claim is like 10 miles from the FS office too

Posted by: Clay Diggins Apr 11 2016, 11:35 PM

You have your answer. It's called self help in the law and it's perfectly legal as long as you 1. Have the Right and 2. Don't breach the peace.


self-help definition

n. 1) obtaining relief or enforcing one's rights without resorting to legal action, such as repossessing a car when payments have not been made, retrieving borrowed or stolen goods, demanding and receiving payment, or abating a nuisance (such as digging a ditch to divert flooding from another's property). Self-help is legal as long as it does not "break the public peace" or violate some other law (although brief trespass is common).




As Davy Crockett said 'Remember these words when I am dead. First be sure you're right, then go ahead.'

Posted by: swizz Apr 14 2016, 10:07 AM

Here is my suggestion. Go to the FS office that is responsible for management in that region. Do not ask them any questions... instead, "inform them" that you will be adding a lock to that particular gate for mining purposes, zero recreation... strictly mining. If they offer to send a forester or laborer to meet you there and unlock the gate to add your lock, that's great. If not, "inform them" that you will be using a bolt cutter to breach their chain and daisy chain your lock. Put a dog tag on your lock with your CMC numbers. Done deal.
This access is well within your mining RIGHTS.

Posted by: jhidek Apr 29 2016, 09:51 AM

So what I'm up against now, is City of Colorado Springs that has control of High Dr and they are the ones who shut it down under the "authority" of parks and rec. The parks and rec manager says they will NOT give access to the road through the gate and to walk like everyone else (I'm disabled...). Scott Abbott is the parks and rec manager, he does not care that multiple laws grant me the RIGHT to access as it does not fall under recreational use and if I breach their chain to add my own lock they will prosecute for destruction of park property. If my vehicles are seen on the closed road they will be impounded, and I will be fined and prosecuted.

Posted by: Coalbunny Apr 30 2016, 02:38 AM

Hmmm. Who owns the land your claims are on? Who owns the right of way the road is on? What does the USFS say?
This would be a very entertaining legal battle, if it happened to someone that had the resources to fight the city of CS.

Posted by: swizz Apr 30 2016, 06:49 AM

My advice was based on the premise that the access road in question was on NFS managed (publicly owned) land. Maybe I misunderstood earlier in the thread. You are stating that it is on private property (City Of Colorado Springs). That is an entirely different scenario. To my knowledge they (private property owners) are not bound by law to grant you vehicular access via a road within their property. You stated that the road is designated as FDR which means that it is likely owned by USFS and designated for USFS purposes (forest development). I'm not sure that the USFS is bound by law to grant you use of their road as it crosses private property. Since the FDR road is situated on private property I don't know that you would be guaranteed 'easement' of vehicular travel. USFS may have some kind of deal arranged with the City for limited use of that road, who knows? This should have been strongly considered prior to staking (or acquiring) the mining claim in question. Dan may have to chine in on this one. Is your claim surrounded by private property? If not, there may be an alternative route on public owned land that could be improved for your purposes.

Posted by: johnnybravo300 Apr 30 2016, 07:05 AM

It's not unlawful if there is no law. If there is a law then fight that. If there no law then do your thing and just deal with parks and rec when you need to have a bake sale.
Parks and rec has no authority over anything.

Posted by: Crusty Apr 30 2016, 07:34 AM

If the city owns the land, they absolutely have the legal right to restrict access; it is private property. It isn't public land and granting access to public land on the other side of their property isn't a requirement.

Posted by: swizz Apr 30 2016, 07:36 AM

johnnybravo,
There are laws that protect private property and that is what is in question. Parks & Rec has delegated authority to enforce any rules/regulations pertaining to their designated enforcement area(s). In most cases (if not all) "rules/regulations" are indeed "law" if you are engaged in activities on private property.

Posted by: jhidek Apr 30 2016, 08:05 AM

My claim is on BLM land in Pike NF, as is the majority of the road. The gate is on what was (until they closed it) a regular public traveled road. It was also a public road long before the area at their end of it becoming a city park (Bear Creek). Part of the trail across my claim was also the historic first "road" to the top of Pike's Peak.

Posted by: jhidek Apr 30 2016, 08:07 AM

And yes, the road in question IS fdr380

Posted by: Crusty Apr 30 2016, 08:21 AM

Ah, I get it now... I forgot they don't plan on re-opening High Drive after the flood damage.

Posted by: swizz Apr 30 2016, 08:26 AM

I am still thinking that you should be able to have access. If they allow (by law) the NFS management personnel vehicular access.... I believe you should also have some rights here. They may not want you to add a lock to their chain and refer to it as vandalism, which is probably correct in the eyes of the law. I would probably be back barking up the tree of the NFS and obtain a key for one of their existing locks. The NFS person that recommended you add a lock.... go back to him and explain that the City refers to this as vandalism. NFS should be required to comply.

Posted by: Crusty Apr 30 2016, 08:34 AM

I did walk most of it last year and they did do a lot of work to put it back in shape after the floods and it is definitely used by vehicles of some sort, so it would seem this would be a good angle. Agree the NFS would be more viable angle; guessing the city folks ain't gonna concede anything

Posted by: jhidek Apr 30 2016, 08:54 AM

That's kind of what I've been doing, working both angles and seeing which one works out. The section of High Dr that I'd be driving on has ZERO damage to it, it seems like all the damage is always confined to the Cheyenne Canyon park side and all the switchbacks. USFS still maintains that they have no access to it at all and they do not have a lock on it themselves, yet I've shown them pictures multiple times of the USFS stamped lock on the daisychain

Posted by: swizz Apr 30 2016, 09:04 AM

Request that a USFS person meet you at the gate. Show them the Federal padlock. Have a copy of your active mineral claim filing in hand. Demand your key.

Posted by: CP Apr 30 2016, 09:14 AM

This is a confusing situation obviously in the field. And you all are responding so quickly in this thread.......Zing!!

Ok Jhidek, let me make sure I have this straight, at first you were saying your claim was on NF but now you're saying it's on BLM lands....that makes a difference which gov dept. office you should be dealing with to start off.

This spot also involves a city park parcel? ....No matter if the "park" is state, county or city.....those parks are all factually private land deeded to those depts. and they can restrict/make rules as they see fit.

This sounds very very similar to a spot I discussed at length (concerning access via the park) with one of our club members sometime last year.... The responses posted thus far have been top notch everyone good work! Love to see cub members in here helping folks out as best they can with the info given!

If there is a "park" involved where your access point is stopped and you're parking there inside the park to hike onto FS lands.....they probably can do that based on it's private land and the FDR380 sounds like it's been named differently than other FS roads too......the word "development" added leads me to think the road was made or re-opened for the park possibly? Thus is not part of the actual FS system of roads? Just guessing on the legal stance from the parks end but I'll be that's their stance.

At this point I'd be looking at who uses the gated road you're wanting to use for vehicles......if it is only the parks dept (state, city or county....whichever) using the road then you're probably going to have to look for another access point/road. But on the other hand if it's FS (or BLM) using that gated road for any type of vehicular access, then I'd agree, you're access should be granted as a claim owner as well. As I just said though, which dept that is FS or BLM is who you should be contacting then at that point.....not the park.

Not sure if you're a club member or not yet Jhidek, but I would highly recommend club membership for you if you're not one yet.....this is exactly the kind of things we all help each other with, and I personally spend quite a bit of time consulting with club members individually, as the topics arise during ones research, staking of claims and working them or acquiring claims and then successfully working them without being mislead by misinformation that just confuses a person when trying to deal with their individual scenarios encountered. Seems like there is always another question that comes up or concern someone in a uniform puts forth for every answer gained as you go.....but that's how it works best when you have better knowledge, find the right answer and then move ahead with confidence on your claim work! It makes the world of difference when you're treated as a claim owner by the gov. depts. as you can see by our club members responses of their own experiences.

Posted by: Crusty Apr 30 2016, 09:37 AM

High drive was created in the early 1900s; land was later donated to the city as a park.

http://evergreencemetery.blogspot.com/2011/02/real-captain-jack.html

this link makes it sound much more exciting than it really is lol
http://www.city-data.com/articles/High-Drive-Colorado-Springs-CO-Scenic.html

Posted by: Gene Kooper Apr 30 2016, 03:13 PM

Since I don't know the particulars of this area and the land status, I'll offer a couple of generic suggestions.

From your posts, your claim is located in the Pike National Forest. I suggest arranging a meeting with the USFS District Ranger in Colorado Springs to discuss your access problem(s). Some items you may wish to bring up are: has the USFS issued an order restricting access to the portion of the road on FS land; is there an agreement between the city and FS regarding motorized vehicle access past the city park's locked gate; is there another way to access your claim that avoids the city park; and what records does the FS have regarding the road, city park and other adjacent land owners, esp. access issues.

Regarding the last question, you may find those answers by talking with the PSICC (Pike and San Isabel National Forests and Cimmaron and Commanche National Grasslands) Boundary Program Manager. This position is held by a BLM Cadastral Surveyor. I don't know if the same person holds the position now, but in 2014 they were very helpful in getting the FS to recognize the encroachment of a trail head parking lot onto my client's property. Needless to say, my client was less than happy that the Forest Service's concessionaire was was collecting money from people parking on his patented claim. I can send you the old contact info via email (cekooper at gmail dot com) if you'd like to contact him.

One more idle thought....the road in question may no longer be a public road (if it ever was). The city may have gone through the process of vacating the road when they acquired or upgraded the park land, thereby eliminating access as a public roadway.

Posted by: Clay Diggins May 4 2016, 09:57 PM

I looked up the area where the park and gate is. The Master Title Plat clearly indicates the land there as private. The Patent numbers indicate the grants were early.

I suggest you study the Master Title Plat, download the patents and patent surveys noted on the MTP and determine if the public way was reserved from the grants. If so the gate can not be closed to the public.

If the public way was not reserved from the patent you may have rights under public doctrine in Colorado State or there may be a servitude or prescriptive easement from notorious and continued use. Those would be controlled by State, not Federal, law.

Before proceeding to enter any land you don't own it is your legal duty to perform a diligent search for the status of those lands. If you had been informed about that land status before posting here the advice you seek could have been tailored to your particular situation.

As it stands you have more research to do before your required due diligence is complete. Get a better grasp on the land status there and you will find informed people here to help you. Until then you should consider all our advice to be uninformed as to the facts.

I am barred from sharing my research tools here but there are several knowledgeable people here who can guide you to the resources you will need. Good Luck and...

Heavy Pans

Posted by: Crusty May 5 2016, 09:51 AM

As an extra bit of info, this road has (for awhile) been closed seasonally from oct-may (?); it has now been closed permanently after the bad floods a couple years ago.

Posted by: Woody May 6 2016, 10:12 AM

A person would have a hard time believing what that road looked like just a few short years ago after that flood. They have been working on it for the last
two years or so and have come a long way. It used to have ruts about 3 feet deep going right down the middle. I'm sure it will be opened to the public sometime
in the future, hard to guess when.

Here is another thought to ponder...

jhidek, your claim does not directly connect to that road. It only gets you closer. Does that change anything?

Have a good one, Woody

Posted by: Goldshark Jan 3 2022, 09:25 PM

I have a similar situation where I cross several patented claims on the way to my unpatented claims. There is a gate on the one patented claim. I submitted a plan of operations to the FS. They stated that I needed written permission to cross the patented property before they would approve my plan of operations. I showed them the reservations in the patent stating that in the absence of legislation from Congress, the state of Colorado shall provide for the rules and regulations for it's development. Show them the Colorado Revised Statutes pertaining to minerals, particularly 34-48-104, "Every miner has a right of way across any and all claims for the purpose of hauling quartz". The FS said I need a court order to state that this applies.I say BS, but they won't budge. It is a civil matter, but can't find a competent mining law attorney to litigate it. Any body know of a competent attorney to recommend.