ColoradoProspector   CP Club Membership Info.

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Trouble near Boulder, Jeepers trying to claim private road
59er
post Jun 4 2006, 10:05 PM
Post #1


Diggin' In!
**

Group: Members
Posts: 19
Joined: 22-April 05
Member No.: 246



Heads up: the Denver metro area Jeep clubs are attempting to claim that another private mining road is public for their joy rides and other entertainment. The miner that owns it has been experiencing vandalism and closed it to the vandals. Recent article in the Times-Call:

http://www.longmontfyi.com/Local-Story.asp?id=7779

Here is a forum where the off-road clubs are debating whether or not to respect the owner's right to close his property:

http://colorado4x4.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=65365

This is happening alot in the front range where new uses are clashing with traditional uses.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
Goldshark
post Jan 3 2022, 10:30 PM
Post #2


Diggin' In!
**

Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 3-January 22
Member No.: 225,633



When patented mining claims transfer from public to private ownership, they are granted with reservations. These reservations usually state what does , and does not come with the transfer. One of the biggest is the one stating that each State shall have the ability to dictate the rules pertaining to it's conduct. The rules as applied from the State, in this instance Colorado, can be found in the Colorado Revised Statutes, section 34, titled MINERALS. Under CRS 34-48-104, it states "Every miner has the right of way across any and all claims, for the purpose of hauling Quartz". This was adopted by law after a case based in Leadville. If this was not a law, a mining claim staked perpendicular to a valley length, would effectively give that claim owner complete control over the entire valley access. In mining law, you do not need to pay to cross ANY patented or unpatented claim, if it pertains to mining. Can you imagine what would happen if during the war, everybody was involved in court cases, hampering our ability to mine for any metal, because some claim owner said that you can't cross his property. They definitely do not know the laws.
If you want access to a residence, that is a whole different process, usually involving a surveyed easement. The reason for a right of way vs an easement, is that a right of way can be moved, an easement is a surveyed designated alignment, which cannot be relocated, unless a lot of work is done to change it. An ROW can simply be moved a little or a lot, but cannot be denied, This is so that if mineral is found under the existing ROW, it can be mined in a way as to not incur a huge burden on the claim owner, and still provide access to other mines. I know of one instance where a belligerent claim owner is doing everything in his power to contest the ROW. Mainly because the ground beyond is very good, and his simple greed is causing a huge rift amongst him and the property owners beyond. It is really sad that some people are never content with a very good life, just wanting more, more, more. Anyway, it is people like that, that made our legislature conjure laws to combat his kind.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
- 59er   Trouble near Boulder   Jun 4 2006, 10:05 PM
- - ColoradoProspector   Well after reading through the article and some of...   Jun 8 2006, 07:44 AM
- - 59er   CP, the problem is that the FS does not own the ri...   Jun 8 2006, 11:48 PM
- - ColoradoProspector   Thanks for posting this info 59er and I'm stil...   Jun 10 2006, 09:45 AM
- - 59er   Hey CP, thanks for keeping an open mind. I think ...   Jun 11 2006, 08:12 AM
- - Coalbunny   I think Dan is right, so far. Before any decision...   Jun 14 2006, 09:38 PM
- - plp.001   The laws on rights of wqy can be found in the 1866...   Jun 15 2006, 07:48 AM
- - plp.001   Of course if that ingress egress interferes with a...   Jun 15 2006, 07:52 AM
- - 59er   Jerry, Not any road built between 1866 and 1976 i...   Jun 15 2006, 08:59 PM
- - plp.001   59er You don't have to prove thaqt the road w...   Jun 15 2006, 11:21 PM
- - Coalbunny   Also depends on the deals the claim owners had in ...   Jun 15 2006, 11:37 PM
- - 59er   Jerry, I think you are misreading RS 2477. It say...   Jun 16 2006, 09:49 PM
- - 59er   Coalbunny. I think this sorta thing happened all ...   Jun 16 2006, 09:58 PM
- - 59er   I did a little research. A couple weeks ago a jud...   Jun 17 2006, 08:14 AM
- - plp.001   59er The courts have found both ways for and agai...   Jun 17 2006, 09:14 AM
- - Coalbunny   Exactly 59er. They should have had it documented ...   Jun 18 2006, 05:31 AM
- - plp.001   I know that San Bernardino County and several othe...   Jun 18 2006, 07:25 AM
- - 59er   I'd be interested in knowing if any of these a...   Jun 21 2006, 07:17 PM
- - wheasonjr   Hi 59er On many patented properties for mining...   Jul 12 2006, 10:56 AM
- - russau   my x-father-in-law had two acres of property(2 sid...   Jul 13 2006, 04:54 AM
- - plp.001   Russ and all RS 2477 Rights of way do not have to...   Jul 13 2006, 09:14 AM
- - 59er   I don't think that this is an RS 2477 right of...   Jul 13 2006, 09:54 PM
- - 59er   Looks like this is a done deal. I guess there was...   Aug 2 2006, 08:37 PM
- - Gotgold   I joined the forum this morning, this topic regard...   Aug 15 2006, 04:15 AM
- - rehab   if the man owns the property (as in patented minin...   Aug 15 2006, 12:23 PM
- - rehab   with the 59er story, I think the guy would have to...   Aug 15 2006, 12:31 PM
- - Goldshark   When patented mining claims transfer from public t...   Jan 3 2022, 10:30 PM


Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 12th May 2024 - 09:09 AM