I was just talking to a gentleman about the Ark. river North of Beuna vista and they said that is has been closed by the BLM for any prospecting from the GPAA claims down to jump rock, has any one else heard this as well, I haven't had the chance to call the local office yet to confirm. I have fished spots along that stretch but was going to try a little prospecting there this year as well.

the Arkansa group claims are closed to dredgeing only. this has happened to big club claims.you can still pan/highbank there but check the local ranger staion and make sure!Blake Horman of the GPAA spoke his peice on the GPAA site about it. smaller claim owners on the Arkansa River arent affected by this new rule. so far!

Hello all,I WILL BE IN THIS AREA ALL NEXT WEEK AND WILL POST IF I FIND ANYTHING OUT ABOUT THIS,AS I PLAN ON TALKING WITH BLM/FORESTRY.I DID HEAR ON ANOTHER FORUM ABOUT FOREST SERVICE WRITING TICKETS AT ELEPHANT ROCK FOR PROSPECTING.NOT SURE WHY BUT WILL CHECK WHEN I GET THERE... STEVE

just read today on hookedongold site that this area is closed, so maybe it's true, still haven't had a return call yet.

Unfortunately some sites may have unverified rumors posted as "new rules or laws".........Lets see if we can sort some of this confusion out once again for everyone reading.
The Arkansas river headwater recreational area is a specially designated rec area administered by the BLM. The area that is in question is the GPAA group claims, those are now closed to dredging.......although it is not a new rule from BLM. The new restriction comes from the claim owners themselves.

FS will not be the ones writing out citations on BLM lands....that would be BLM officers.
If there was in fact a new rule that closed the entire area to all prospecting then there are law requirements for how to do that through the BLM's official procedures......ie there will/must be a notice posted both in that office (Royal Gorge) and it must also be posted on site in the field.
According to the law as written the district ranger would have the authority to implement additional rules but I just checked the BLM's site last night and couldn't find anything that said anything about the area being completely closed to prospecting. The BLM site also has the newest placer permit forms uploaded just two months ago. I would think if they did close it all the form would be gone from the site.
Check the office and the field sites for postings to verify.

Also, I believe Elephant rock is a private claim owned by one of our members here, if you don't have permission to be there then don't dig on private claims.

Good luck out there everyone and hopefully this helps straighten out some of the confusion.

CP

Hlleo All,
I just got off the phone with the BLM for the Ark. district, the BLM is NOT! closed to prospecting only what CP mentioned above about the GPAA claims, BUT! the NF has closed any and all prospecting on the NF property from the GPAA claims down to elephant rock not jump rock, this was a decision out of the Leadville district, no one at BLM has been given a reason as to why. I have phone message into the district manager(FS) to contact me back as I also heard it was to be closed to all camping as well and may have other restrictions.

This area had been with drawn from mineral rights due to the possiblity of a dam being built at elephant rock but has not been finalized as of yet.
Could this give the FS the right to close rec-prospecting on NF lands if it has been withdrawn from mineral rights? I'll post what news I get when I get it.

I have talked with John Morrey/Megan ? of the FS district of leadville and, They did confirm that they have closed any and all prospecting on a 40acre section of land that borders the Ark. river between GPAA claims and elephant rock.

There reason for this is the abuse of the area by two groups, miners/rafters. Mr. Morrey told me that there is a fine line between recreational panning and a miner, were the recreationalist is doing it as a hobby/personal and a miner for profit, he said it is to complicated to seperate the two so they decided to close it all together, also between the prospectors and the rafters staying to long on the NF area it has created issues between users and degrading the area. And with this area being withdrawn it gave them the authority to close it to prospectiong and will be posting signs for this area very soon, and letting people know that they can't camp longer than the 14 days in the 40acre area.

He also mentioned that they will be talking to the BLM about the area adjasent to this spot being closed as well , but the BLM told me that they wouldn't consider closing any areas to prospecting (yet?).

Now I know it is only 40acres but will this set a standard for other withdrawn areas with-in the NF systems by other departments of the FS, hope not.

I hope no one misunderstands what I'm doing other than letting every one know of these changes and possiblity's as I would of hated to have planned a trip to that spot to find out it was no longer useable for certain things, and hope this doesn't lead to other possible closures, I hate getting info by hear say. Guess I'll just keep fishing there as the fishing can be great there! and pan/prospect on the BLM else were.

Thanks for passing this information along traddoerr. I myself have not panned/dredged on the Arkansas since the 90s but I’m sure someone out there can really benefit from this information. To me that’s what makes this site special, People networking together and sharing information that might assist another person. Far too often a person recognizes worth in terms of Monatery amount and misses the real value in life. City minded folks mostly I guess.” If it does not have a dead president attached to it then it is not worth much to them. “Any way, Thanks for the leg work, Woody.

traddoer, thanks for the info and pardon me while I vent

I'm not familiar with this area but Mr Morrey's statement is very disturbing, especially coming from a USFS office. "... too complicated to separate the two so they decided to close it all together" ?????
How convenient. He can't distinguish between recreational and small scale mining first of all (he states "too complicated"), secondly he contends that miners in general are abusing the area and rather than having NFS employees DO THEIR JOB and manage areas properly.. just "close it all together", thirdly he conveniently lumps recreational/professional rafters (do they know the difference?) into the "abuse" category (so miners won't feel singled-out?) but do you think that the area will be subsequently closed to rafting? Hell no, they don't regulate rafting or water passage. He doesn't even have a dog in that fight.
This sounds like a royal fleecing and one lazy, misinformed SOB that works for the USFS.
As taxpayers these people are on OUR payroll and we deserve better than that.

This also sticks in my craw. So Mr Morrey thought he'd share that tidbit with you as well.
I guess it must be in his job description to lobby other government agencies for closures targeting specific land users.
I reckon I need to read the King's Forest Service Manual again but it kinda sounds like Mr Morrey may have a small vendetta against the prospector.... and succeeding!

Swizz, I agree with you, I believe that they could have come up with a better solution than what they did, and the BLM thinks so as well.
I even mentioned that maybe they could of come up with some sort of fee for the area alone but it sounded like they hadn't put much thought to it.

As I listened to the recording I made of our conversation Mr. John Morrey also commented that some of the locals that live right next this area had complained a bit as well (noise from dredge motors, digging up the banks, and digging around roots out of live trees, rafters partying to wee hours of the night), I think this go's to show that a few bad apples can ruin it for us all, and as I mentioned before what kind of effect will this have on other areas in the NF, it seems like any time CA. comes up with some bogas law a few more ignorants start to think the same and pass the same.

As I mentioned, I really hope this isn't a trend thats going to get out of hand by the USFS.

I'll step down off my soup box now as well.

just get ready to see this start all over the country!

His name is John Morresey. Though my spilin' sux, the pronunciation is correct.

The FS has been out of control for many decades and out of bounds for their delegated authority in many many ways. Unfortunately every year another area (ranger) thinks he/she can set some bogus rules to restrict prospecting.
This year here in Colorado there have been decisions made also that have backed the FS down on mining claims. These will change (are changing) over 35 years of FS authority abuses. Too bad so many past miners/claim owners let this type of abuse continue so long and it was one hell of an uphill battle to get there for the miners too.

Do not get off your soapbox folks, it's YOUR land!!

Don't let it happen across the country, it's YOUR land!!

Dig into this info folks, find out the truth and then pass it on so everyone can know, and never believe for one second that any club or special interest organization/group will "do it for you" ........either in court or the field. IT'S YOUR LAND! KNOW YOUR RIGHTS AND HOW TO ENACT UPON THEM!!!!

Is this FS land even really in the actual "recreational headwater area"? If not then those rules can not apply.
Is this FS land actually withdrawn from "mineral entry" or is it withdrawn from "entry"? .....ie homesteading

Thanks for the kind compliment too Woody, that's what it's all about here at the Colorado Prospector website and club, together we are a larger voice and as a group we can understand/interpret these laws as written, not just what the local officials feel like saying.
Keep us all posted as the details become available folks, thanks for all your efforts.

CP

Dan, I met with Morrisey (sp?) earlier. And worse just went worse. Incoming private mail bro.

Coalbunny, not to be nosey but does the worse getting worse have anything to do with BLM? or just the USFS? couple of us was planning on a trip this weekend up in that area.

What? You can't just leave us hangin' like that.

The only way it can get worse is if we all allow it too!
Hopefully Carl will come in here, and add the information he has. The best way to deal with these problems is to talk it out, and find the facts to work with.

Lots of questions in this thread still unanswered!

I wish I had more for every one, but I had to be tactful just to get out of them what I had, was suprised that I got him to mention about trying to work with BLM on closeing "mining" on the BLM adjasent to this area.

I'm new to the prospecting and all (enjoying it alot) but have been an avid fisherman in this area for 20+yrs and in the past had ran into use issues with the area departments.

My personal opinion I got from the conversation with John/Meigan, is that some recreational activities are acceptible and some aren't, due to impact(?) and general opinion.

I do NOT! agree with the decisions they made (and let them know that in a nice way), and hope that we maybe able to turn this around, but I'm getting the impression from them that they are firm on their decision, I hope not. I agree with Mrs. CP there is alot of unanswered questions on this issue.

If there is anything else I can do please let me know, as I happen to have a little time on my hands right now but not sure for how long.

Dennis

This is my situation as well... business is about to pick up again.
I'd like to hear the facts and legalities regarding this closure. Maybe they have a legitimate reason, or.....
Hard to know without viewing their documentation, which should be public. Maybe a COC or something of that nature? I've never been to the Ark.. so I remain in the dark.

Is this area designated as "special use", or "recreational"?
Also.... where is PLP on this?
Is this closure too small or insignificant for them to help with or address?
or... maybe the USFS is well within their rights to close the area and intervention would be futile?

(just thought I'd add even more questions to the fray )

Just an opportunity to profess my ignorance but who/what is PLP...

"Public Lands for the People": PLP
They appear to be a well-respected and well-intentioned organization. It's very likely that they are spread a little thin right now with all of the recent attacks on land access and new land use regulations throughout the country.

add..
IMHO... it is best to learn, defend, and act upon the laws yourself. These are often statutory rights and essential knowledge. If I run into a problem on MY claim, my first move sure as hell won't be to contact an outside organization to act on my behalf. It is MY responsibility to uphold my rights. Knowledge is power... an old cliche but VERY true. I am in no way 100% up to speed on mining laws but getting there and asking questions when I need help. This site has been a fantastic resource.
Know your rights.

Sorry for the derail.
Back to the Ark closure - Carl, where are you??

Dan says it all right there! Having the knowledge for ourselves is the best path.
Just check my signature.....


Very well said Chris!!

Swizz go ask them for yourself. www.PLP2.org or www.PLP1.org

I'm not contacting anyone and am not a member of PLP. I don't know any more about the Ark situation than you do.
Some details would be nice, don't you think?
Carl dropped a bomb on this thread and then disappeared.
We still basically know nothing.
I shall remain patient until the facts are presented.

Swizz, All,
I had another talk with John Morresey this past Thursday, He said that it would be better for me to talk to Meigan who is the land and mineral specialist, So, she called me back on Friday and we had a long talk as to why they closed this small area, and her answer was the same as last time just a little more in depth this time.

They had the authority to stop the mining/rec-panning activitys because of the mineral rights withdrawl, and the reason for closing this was the complaints of the locals and the degrading of the banks from it being dug up and noise issues, and it starting to look trashey, she said that by this action (mining) they will be able to see if some or all the issues go away and if not they will have to work on further restrictions if they can, but for right now they were focusing on the mining activitys and individauls that were over staying their welcome in the 40ac area.


I asked her if there were any other areas that was planned for closeing and she said no, as they didn't have the authority because there was no other areas that were withdrawn from mineral rights in the NF of that area, asked her if there were other areas and there was NO issues would they close it and she said she couldn't answer that question.

I have looked up the laws and Goverment rights, but couldn't find anything that made sense so I talked to a legal expert at the Co. school of mines and he said he believed that they were with-in there rights to close this small area, but he would look some other things up this next week and get back to me, I will keep you posted

Carl, If you could add anything about your conversation with John to this thread that would be great.

Thanks for posting your updates traddoerr.

Good job diggin' in for the facts everyone.
Very glad to hear that it's not concerning/closing the entire district as that would be way out of their authority.
So it's a 40 acre piece in the district that is withdrawn from mineral entry. Yes they do have the authority legally to close that off then if the withdrawl is real and it's within the "congressionally declared rec area". If one or both of those two things are not in fact true then they do not have authority to close even that small 40 acre piece.

Sad to say it sounds like from what we are all hearing is that poor prospecting habbits/field techniques and a general lack of respect for the lands status and the laws caused this issue and closure.

Once again proves that how we act as an independent prospectors in the field can and does make a difference, even at the "recreational" level.......poor wording (recreational) but one that will be recognized by many readers.
Recreation is not a right nor a resource and has nothing to do with bonafide prospecting and mining.

Thanks CP, that helps clarify things.
I had a feeling that this might be a designated "special use" or "recreational use" area and quite possibly within their rights to administer a recreational closure. It's unfortunate that "recreational" prospecting seems to have been singled out but possibly justifiable if what they say is true.
... as not to risk another derailment of this thread, I'll just add that I agree with you regarding the implications and negative repercussions of "recreational" labeled prospecting.
Recreational prospectors do not share the same rights as miners.

Thanks CP, The expert from the Colorado school of mines has confirmed that the forest services has the right to close this area and does have the right to close any area in the NF that has been withdrawn from mineral rights as they see fit.

Not trying to beat a dead horse here, but, One of the things that was said by both John and Meigan was that it is to difficult to serperate what is a rec-panner and a miner because they said that even a rec-panner would more than likely sell the gold they find instead of keeping it for personal use, this is more than likely true.

And John stated that he doesn't consider a rec-panner some one who uses anything other than a gold pan, guess that makes sence. And as mentioned in the other posts that the ones abusing the area made it look bad for the rest, thus closing any mining activities all together in this little area.

Their opinion also made me think as to how I concider my self as well (rec-panner?), WELL, I guess I can call my self a part time greenhorn-prospector (for now, as I have jumped into this with both feet), as I will only be out once in awhile PROSPECTING and if by some chance I happen to find the mother load , I would then look into filing a claim, and only then could I call myself a miner, just my opinion. But I do see were the term "recreational" could do more harm than good for the mining community, thus I will never use the term recreational in the same sentance as mining/prospecting.

I want to thank every one who chimed in on the subject.

I've been prospecting for a lot of years. I've never considered myself a "recreational prospector" When I'm out there I'm serious about it and if I would happen to strike the mother lode, I'd still consider myself a prospector.

Around Labor Day, we may open our claims on the arkansas for a few days. They are better than the one you've been talking about anyway. We filed on 40 acres above Elephant Rock quite a few years ago. We didn't get it because of the withdrawl and we didn't follow up and amend the filing because we got the claim we wanted anyway.

Leonard

Ok, my piece.

Jon told me that recreational prospecting is illegal. Not just down there along the Arkansas north of Puny Veesta, but all throughout the San Isabel District. IOW no where, according to him, can I pan just for giggles. Or sluice. Or dredge. It's for commercial projects only. I asked him how is this enforced and he said it's very difficult because there are no real guidelines. But he did point the finger at the BLM, however.

Later on I'll provide some better details on that. I will say that Jon knows that I study sediments and stream mechanics. And according to him, I can't.

I am led to believe that I could face getting arrested.


Which means I'll do it anyway.

I'm a commercial project looking for the location of my next commercial project. I will pan, sluice, highbank, and dredge in the preliminary stages of locating my next commercial venture. I will be searching on unclaimed locations open to mineral entry.

Leonard

Carl, Thanks for the info. I to had gotton the same response from John in our first conversation, but when I asked him were I could find this law he said it was a policy of his district, I said he was taking a big chance of getting his personal in trouble.

I found out today that ANY federal goverment emlpoyee that abusses the law or infractures it can be charged with a Felony! what this means is if you are out doing what you have the legal right to do and you are harrased and or they force upon you, they are commiting a crime, and you may call the local authoritys to press charges or have them possibly arrested, this advise came from a legal expert that works for the goverment and said it is in the USC, I'm currently looking this one up.

John/Meigan also mentioned that they didn't approve of the way the BLM was allowing mining activitys on areas that was closed to mineral claims, but there is nothing they can do about it.

This legal expert also mentioned that it might be a good idea if issues keep coming up to contact our local reps and complain or file complaints with the head of USFS on the individual.

All and all I believe that the term "recreational" should not be used any more with association to prospecting/mining/gold panning, this may help keep any more confussion from accuring in the future, Lesson I have now learned. So I am just going to go out and enjoy prospecting.

This statement puts you WAY ahead of the game.
It's definitely refreshing to hear someone interested in learning about our rights, laws, and 'digging-in' to the world of prospecting properly. Too many new prospectors tend to try and hit the ground running with a shovel, without the proper information or guidance. Running with that new shovel can result in stumbling... often legally harming one's self and/or others.
We all appreciate your approach. Stay on the information track and you won't be disappointed.

Thanks SWIZZ, When ever I get interested in something I always research it as much as possible.

Leonard, thanks also for your comments, I hope you'll keep every one posted on if/when you open your claim, that would be a great experience for myself and family.

there are some people that just keep saying that they are "recreational" even when you tell them the facts about it! STUBERN IS AS STUBERN DOES! sometimes theres just no help for these kind of people!

I should be there around Labor Day. I'll post when the actual dates are available. We have a great camping area on our claim so it makes for a good camping time.

Leonard

I'll keep an eye open for the post.

Wow, this is a very interesting thread. It looks like I'm going to be able to make a high country trip this year and, while the bulk of my time will be spent fishing, I was planning on using a half-day or two washing off rocks just in case I happen to stumble on to a good spot. I suppose I'll have to be careful where I take my pan, huh?

Oklapony, as long as the area is not with drawn from mineral rights and there are no claims by all means pan, sluice what ever ya want just don't say the fraze "recreational" with anything that has to do with prospecting/mining, they can't do anything then.

And report any one who harrasses you to the local sheriff's dept. Got to keep the pressure on them to let them know that they aren't completely in charge. Best of luck on finding some color and big fish !

Perhaps the phrase "casual use exploration activities" is what folks should use...(i.e., activities that cause no more than a minimal disturbance to the surface resources and do not involve the use of mechanized earth-moving equipment, explosives, the construction of access roads, drill pads, or the use of toxic or hazardous materials).

ASTROBLEME

Welllllll....... Actually guys, "recreational" is just a slang term for something that has literally been happening for centuries.

Very rarely will you find someone that makes their sole income, or even the majority of it, from prospecting. Yeah they are out there, but they are rare.

Even in the 1800's when Leadville wasn't even born yet, the Tabor's came to Oro and set up a store. Horace Tabor made his fortune off of mining, yet he himself rarely did anything more than grubstake or buy claims. Many people were in the same spot- there is a certain amount of entertainment in prospecting, but generally not enough to warrant doing it as a full time job. Thus they were cowboys, ranchers, farmers, doctors, lawyers, Ladies of the Evening, store owners, barkeeps, piano players, sheriffs and bank robbers. Almost everyone back then, and now, has a formal mode of occupation.

So when the government says they ban recreational prospecting, they are banning us in reenacting our heritage, our lineage, the work of our forefathers.

Me, I am engaged in studies that require me to pan. I find gold, yes, but it has been documented for decades through the USFS and BLM as well as WYGS and a few colleges that my studies pertain to sediments and the actions that create their depositional structure. So not finding gold doesn't break my heart. Finding gold, yeah I like it. Big wow. And I have warned rangers in the past do not interfere with my studies. That actually drags in a myriad of state and federal laws, and I have gone to the mat before on those, and won. I won then and I'll win again.

Well, I'm at least fairly confident in the fishing department since I've got a good track record and am fortunate enough to have fantastic water available in which to dip my flies. My dirt washing skills, however, are not quite so refined. That, coupled with the slow pace that us visiting flatlanders should maintain in order to preserve our health, means I definitely won't be moving any mountains but I do have a couple of areas in mind that may well provide the opportunity for both endeavors.



Interesting field of study you got there, CB. Is this connected with environmental impact and/or water quality studies, perhaps? Or just simply the physics of what settles where and why it does so?

EIS, no. Water quality, no. Hydrophysics, somewhat. I am merely fascinated by stream mechanics. Not just how stuff settles, but the transport and dissemination of various sediments.

Carl ask Jon to show these words of wit in writing otherwise he dont know sqwat and he needs to keep his unknowing mouth shut before he gets int otrouble!!

I totally agree with the recreational term not being used unless one wishes to be treated as a recreationalist.

It's also very important that we as citizens also know what the FS delegated authority is and what that pertains to.
"Surface resources" (what are those......do you know?) and "occupancy" are what is delegated by congress to the FS ..........regulating mining has been specifically withheld from their delegated authority at every level including 36cfr.

Good luck on all your prospecting everyone, your knowledge is power! DIG IN!!!

when a gubermint employee trys to bully a American citizen off public land or tries to bully him into beleiveing his warped wacoenviromental veiws, it just burns me! then they needtobe reported and set straight!

I see. Perhaps I can bring a bucket full of Arkansas river sediment from OK up to the high country with me and you can compare its contents to the sediment found in the headwaters, lol.

You nailed it on that question Dan! Knowing that answer will explain alot for people, and help them understand better I think.
I know the answer, but Im curious to know who else does know, or who wants to know that answer.
Knowledge is power!