If you have a claim on BLM land, read this.
http://www.blm.gov/ca/st/en/info/newsroom/...er/WO_1001.html

A couple observations:
Where they intend to permanently close and financial impose, this is not outreach.

A21 Speak:
" The BLM’s multiple-use mission is to sustain the health and productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations. "

Contrary to law:
" but if they do, they will become responsible for maintaining the mine in a “safe and secure” condition. They must also fully comply with federal surface management regulations and accept financial responsibility for site maintenance, protection of public health and the environment, and final site reclamation. "

"MAY"..."permanent closure" or restricting access is contrary to law:
" Abandoned mine hazards on active mining claims that are not required for current exploration may be candidates for permanent closure."

To any and all claim owners .........
DO NOT EVER ACCEPT ANY DISTURBANCE THAT WAS NOT YOURS AND OR EXSISTED PRIOR TO YOUR CLAIM!!The BLM can not hold you financially responsible for any work you did not do.....in fact it is their responsibility by law to deal with any "abandoned" workings and if you "accept" any old digs, building etc as yours then in fact from that point on you are the responsible party by your own acceptance of it through the courts eyes.
DO NOT FALL FOR THIS PLOY!! It's a lure to try to get your work to include what they (BLM) are in fact responsible to deal with.

"on or near your claim"???!!!! ............ They would even like to tag your claim with digs/workings that have been abandoned in the past and are not even on your claims but they might be close???!!!

Don't let the scare tatic suck you in......old digs abandoned prior to your claims exsistence (in your name) are not your responsiblity unless you accept it.

Stand your ground miners and keep on diggin'!!


CP

Dear CP:

Great advice!

I was sent letters from Washington DC recently that demand that I be held responsible for the old abandoned workings on a claim if I don't let BLM "reclaim" the site. We'll see how that all works out eventually but as I've stated before...you don't have rights if you aren't willing to protect them...

ASTROBLEME

I agree Astrobleme, good post.

And further thinking this out as a claim owner...... If the BLM wants to demand that you let them on your claim to fill any digs period. Just abruptly decline and out right refuse it. Those digs could hold valuable information for your future work and they should be left as is unless you'd like the workings filled in.

IMHO and according to FS past attempts here in Colorado on claims which failed trying to do the same thing by luring claim owners to accept exsisting digs as part of their cumlative disturbances.

CP

How can they state this:
"If a claimant’s mining activity requires an abandoned mine feature to remain open on the active claim, casual use will have been exceeded as a result, and mining activity on the claim must then be authorized by the BLM."
Very loose use and interpretation of the terms "remain open", "mining activity", "abandoned", and "casual use" in this one statement alone.
...disturbing

Here's a link that shows the form letter I recieved under the new BLM policy. I'll bet I'm not the only Colorado mine claimant that has gotten these notices.

http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm...10-211_att1.pdf

Why can't the Feds lease the claim back to cover any disturbance that they want to perform? Why can't I require the Feds to post a bond for their "work" on my claim?

Just my thoughts at this early stage in the process and if/when these questions get answered, I'll pass along the response.

ASTROBLEME

Good thought Astrobleme, and if there are exsisting abandoned work that is dangerous prior to any ones claim filing then why wasn't it already reclaimed (by the BLM or the delegated authority-DMRS in Colorado) with the bond that should have been put up by the previous claim owner(s) that did the work?

Also, since the title of this thread says "mining claim on BLM land", I thought it important to point out that this letter will go to ALL CLAIM OWNERS and that will be claim owners on BLM lands and FS lands. All mining claims fall under the same law no matter which departmental authority is trying to regulate it and the BLM is the ONLY MIINING AUTHORITY by law!

It will be very interesting to see what answers you get to your questions Astrobleme. I'll look forward to hearing about that as it progresses.

CP

Best way to handle this is to document, before staking the claim, EVERYTHING that is on the claim. After staking it, do it again. Walk the claim and take note of anything "out of the oirdinary" for that claim. hen you document it, use a camera (preferably a digital camera and then have the settings to include a date/time stamp on the photos).

That goes for staked claims, purchased claims, and leased claims. In regards to leased claims if there are workings there that the claim owner wants you to relciam, and you cannot readily prove were not yours, you can be in for a heck of a hassle.

FWIW.