ColoradoProspector   CP Club Membership Info.

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Reply to this topicStart new topic
Placer Claim Shape
post Apr 10 2015, 06:07 PM
Post #1

Diggin' In!

Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 5-December 14
From: Altona, CO
Member No.: 118,664

Does a placer claim need to follow the square or rectangular shapes as subdivided by aliquot parts (eg. NW1/4, NE1/4, SW1/4) of a section? Or can you define an irregular boundary? Streams don't follow straight lines and I don't want to claim extra acres to cover it's meandering path.

Earth Ex
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Clay Diggins
post Apr 10 2015, 09:51 PM
Post #2

Shovel Buster!

Group: Members
Posts: 83
Joined: 23-September 14
Member No.: 118,169

This is all clearly covered in Section 10 the 1872 Mining Act EarthEx.

Sec. 10
all placer mining-claims hereafter located shall conform as near as practicable with the United States system of public land surveys and the rectangular subdivisions of such surveys, and no such location shall include more than twenty acres for each individual claimant, but where such claims cannot be conformed to legal subdivisions, survey and plat shall be made as on unsurveyed lands

If there is no survey or if you can not conform to the existing survey you will need to resort to metes and bounds.

There is public policy in place that says that claims should be as compact and regular as possible. BLM regulations discourage the use of anything but aliquot parts. Basic physics tells you that the bulk of the placer deposit is rarely actually in the water.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

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: 21st April 2018 - 01:44 AM