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

[amethystguy]

This is almost a nail biting thread. Can't wait to hear what happens. It's sort of like a movie. Evil park ranger tries to shut down and hamper poor and downtrodden ammy scepter miner. Govt. vs. average american!!! I am glad you posted yesterday or I may have missed this thread. Lots of good info provided. Are the crystals found in vugs? Are they gas bubble vugs or are they interconnected by veins? Please keep us filled in as I have to know what happens.

[swizz]

It's sort of like a movie. Evil park ranger tries to shut down...

Yes!
I propose that we start a Bikini Car Wash to raise funds to save the mine!
[queue 70s hit song "Car Wash"/]
I'm IN

[CP]

Yes!
I propose that we start a Bikini Car Wash to raise funds to save the mine!
[queue 70s hit song "Car Wash"/]
I'm IN

Reading this I pictured Swizz, Coalbunny, Leonard in Binkinis......thanks alot for that image!!
Well there would definately be some honkin' goin' on but who knows if anyone would have the guts to stop for the wash job.
I'm gonna have to look at the sun or something to burn that pic out of me head now........

One bit of advice realnice.......take someone with you as witness and hopefully armed with a video camera to record the meeting/events of the day. I've known several claim owners to do this and it definately helps to record the convo's and the bs should there happen to be any.......
Good luck with the field meet up.
I'll be posting up a story about another claim owners recent field meetings with officials soon too that will be along these same lines but longer periods (years) with quite an interesting outcome......everyone keep your eyes open for that thread to show up soon, I think you'll all find the results interesting as well.

CP

[swizz]

I pictured Swizz, Coalbunny, Leonard in Binkinis......
CP

NOOOOOOOOOO!!
That's the wrong movie. OMG

[Denise]

Haha! I about spit my drink on the computer after I read what you and Dan wrote Swizz!

Good luck realnice, and keep us informed on how things are going for you.

[realnice]

Haha! Bikini Car wash!....

I assume I would need permission from the D.R's( both of them )and those present to video tape or record our conversation. I think the law differs from state to state. It also may be kinda of annoying for both parties with a camera in our faces. I do have a video camera tho. What about an audio recorder in my pocket?? I'll for sure bring a witness. I could write down the results of our conversation at the end and get signatures on the agreement. I'm guessing they'll want it in my POO anyways. If they have a change of heart I can always re-instate my appeal and do it the hard way

realnice

[leonard]

Haha! I about spit my drink on the computer after I read what you and Dan wrote Swizz!

Good luck realnice, and keep us informed on how things are going for you.

I'd bet that anyone that is completely blind would find me quite attractive in a bikini!

Leonard

[swizz]

I'm going to stick with my classic one-piece bathing suit cuz chicks dig it.

[realnice]

Ok y'all. Here's a little stuff for you to chew on. I have a meeting here in town on the 30th where we will conference call with a mining geologist from Washington(the state).This is the same man who was impressed by my appeal. Here is the letter the FS sent me last week. The letter reads as an "answer to my question" and says that they can answer "all of my many questions at our meeting". I didnt ask any questions in my appeal I think they are trying to posture and show that they did some research......a year later!

Anyways, at our meeting I will be interested in their "answers to my questions" from my appeal. I will be more interested in what we will want to accomplish at our in-field meeting. Now that they want to be on my ass I am going to request a few things like building a fence around my immediate area of operations which I'm pretty sure is within my rights. I should be able to use timbers from the site to build it as well. Any suggestions? I really want to come to a conclusion about work area size and this will be an important topic as well.

[CP]

Interesting letter for sure.
I'd say the ranger needs to study up alot more as he still doesn't understand he has no authority over mining. Be very careful and don't let them over step their delegated authority of only surface resources. That only falls into timber or agriculture.....mining is not in one of those catagories of their authoirty no matter how many times they try to say it is.....mining is not under their depts regulation. (scope of cfr he quoted states it)

There are more details that will be posted for the other claim owners ordeals with the FS but after lengthy discussions with that claim owner (CP club member), we've decided it would be best to post those details in the protected area of the forums where all the club members can use/learn from them, but still keep the undesirables (enviro nuts etc) reading the forums from taking advantage of those details.
They are that deciding and overpowering yes!.......very worth while knowing but yet too sensitive to let fly out in the open forum area.
For anyone reading who wishes to know about those details (who wouldn't?), check the club members protected section of the forums.....you'll be blown away! Not a club member yet? Now is a great time to join up and find out the truth, your rights, and how to enact upon them!

Realnice, I'll be sending you a pm to discuss a bit more in detail for your situation.

CP

[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

[realnice]

Ok, so sorry for being away for a while. Life just gets so busy.

So we had our office meeting and on June 28th we had a field meeting with the District ranger, hydrologist, geologist, botanist, cultural resource specialists, etc and all the rest of the clowns that they could stuff into one forest service vehicle. I laid out my plans for buck fencing. We agreed upon a pit size of about 75 by 40 ft. Little things like where my tailing go and what not. They were really interested in depth and I told them that if I knew just how deep and where the deposit was I would be a rich man as I would be psychic! lol! But what I said is that I have the right to explore as deep as I need.They are still going to require a bond which will be about 2,000 bucks($200) which is what they determined a long time ago.
Anyways. Now that I'm bonded I'm going to work a little by hand this year and hopefully get my bond adjusted to get a backhoe in next summer. My partner has also abandoned the claim so It's all me now...even though he has been MIA through all this. I also sold my other claim and am looking into a nice gemmy Smokey spot!:)

They are still taking their sweet ass time since the field meeting and I need them to speed things up. This whole thing is over a year old now.geeeeez!
Another interesting side note is that some friends of mine filed a claim last fall and turned in a POO. The forest service said that there was no need and now they can basically dig wherever and "significantly disturb" the forest:)hah!...whatever.

realnice

[Coalbunny]

If I were in your shoes, I would get all your ducks in a row showing the USFS has no authority, that you are the claim holder, and then go above his head and file a 5 USC Sec. 701-706 demand. Then he'll have to explain to his bosses why he's stepping out of line.

I am also antagonistic as well.

[realnice]

Ok, going in for another meeting today in a few hours. Ive been so busy the past few months. Got a great new job surveying mining claims down south. Real mining claims...like 300 stakes on the whole side of a mountain. Fun job.
Anyways, I haven't had time to prepare but Im going in saying that I need a provision for mechanized equipment if I am going to furnish a 2,000 dollar bond. Otherwise I think that there should be no bond. To make things a little worse for me, the expert Tom Abbay has retired and he was a huge help for me. I requested the presence of another specialist for this meeting so we will see what they conjure up. I think they also need to take responsibility for screwing my operation up. The season is almost done which will make 2 whole seasons of no acess.
I'll let you all know how it goes.

realnice

[OkieJon]

Realnice,Any updates?