I'm contemplating a new piece of equipment to move material faster at my claim. The claim is a 20 acre individual placer (unpatented) location claim (on BLM)
This is the type of equipment I am considering: Towable Ride-On Trencher
The one I linked is on sale for $3K... they were recently offering an additional 20% off that for a total of $2400 (+$89 shipping) but now it's backordered (of course)... anyway, something like that (even used) for under $3K would help my operation tremendously and costs about as much as a good banker, dredge, or other typical small-scale production mining equip. I could easily tow this puppy with my Jeep and navigate my 4X4 access road... as well as my mining terrain. I'd love to get a larger scale backhoe but cannot afford that yet and my Jeep is limited on towing capacity. Something this size would suit my needs for now if I could swing it.


My question is: Can I put equip like this into operation at my mine without any further legal protocol (ei undisclosed monetary bond or NOI to BLM or other) if my surface disturbance remains under 1600SF?
Dan and I discussed this a little bit while prospecting a week or so ago and from what I recall of that discussion, I think I'm good-to-go if I pick one up, tow it out there, and start digging. Correct?
If I find one this inexpensive again I just might get it.

Thanks in advance.

Hand carried prospecting equipment needs no special authorization, but I don't think the "Towable Ride-On Trencher" would fall into that hand carried equipment category. Nice try though. Im sure CP will come in later and explain more to you.
Don't give up hope on using it though, after all....you are a claim owner!

Sweet trencher, that baby would move some dirt for you.

Shucks, I hope that's not the case but I think you're right.
That means if I also have a trommel or small wash plant mounted on a trailer it is also not hand-carried.
Reclamation bond?
What if I hire Paul Bunyan to carry these things?

I would definitely put in a NOI and hope they dont mess with ya too bad. Just be happy that your not on FS land as they would make your life hell if you wanted to bring in mechanized equipment. Whenever using mechanized equipment and especially something like a backhoe as you mentioned your gonna need a P.O.O
realnice

Hey Swizz - That trencher looks like a pretty user friendly piece of equipment. I've been working a claim recently that has a limited amount of water and have been thinking about getting a gas engine post hole auger to drill some test holes. Once you find a good test hole, switch to the suction dredge or highbanker to work that area. I also have a hand auger used for ice fishing - don't think I'd want to crank too much time on that on dirt, but maybe 1 gas auger would work for both dirt and ice. Have you tried an auger or does anyone have input?

Hi Rich,
I can give you input on the gas auger, as this was my first inclination.
I was strongly advised against it by a guy who owned a fencing business. Not enough power and the auger will frequently hang up on rocks which will beat the crap out of you and the equipment. I then looked into core-bore possibilities but deem that too costly and not really super-effective on a small scale.
I highly recommend #2 shovel.
I believe that I will eventually go though the appropriate steps to bring in mechanized equipment. I still need another year or two of sampling to personally and financially justify this leap. When I do it, I'll likely bring in a full-size hoe. I recently saw one on East Colfax for a reasonable price (pun intended)

Thanks for the input!
If I'm not mistaken... NOI is almost like laying down and "asking" for permission, which is not my preferred method of approach.
POO is more or less "telling" them what I'm about to do, which IS my preferred method of approach. The feds do not "own" the land, they manage it's resources. We pay them with tax dollars to manage the resources of OUR public lands... they work for you, me, Larry, Curly, and Moe. The land's resources (for my purposes) will be disturbed no more than 1600 square feet within my claim boundaries, which is defined as acceptable.
If I decide to mechanize during the course of my allowed disturbance... they can "read all about it" in my POO and proceed to contact me if they wish. I'll never "ask" them if I can do anything... balderdash I say!

Yep Swizz that's right, if you want the officials to decide whether or not your activities will create a "significant surface resource disturbance" then file an NOI......I recommend against that as the miners/claim owner should be the one who determines how and when that actual threshold is crossed (there is a definition for the term in quotes) and that's exactly the right attitude to have Swizz, you never ask them, it's much better to know the limits/thresholds and state so to the officials. Otherwise the officiald will many times (most) tell you their personal opinions rather than the facts of the law.
If changes are needed (in their eyes) to mitigate some "adverse conditions" that might arise from your operations, they can "request" you make changes to your POO....but they must approve them!

Great advice, skip filing NOI's and when the thresholds will be crossed like (using mechanized earth moving equipment such as bull dozers or back hoes).....file the POO and dig in!!
When that time does come Swizz, I'll be happy to give some tips on writing up the POO as well. Hopefully that's very soon too, heck I might have to spend the summer up there with ya' if you have some yellar gettin yard irons! Wouldn't want ya' to get over worked!

Rest assured... once I get that yard iron, I'll have the seat all warmed-up for ya.

.,.....I would say you are mistaken or maybe a bit dramatic. Filing a NOI is for if you are unsure if you need to submit a P.O.O and you specifically mentioned it in your original question.

- I would argue this to be wrong. Sure there is the 1600 sq ft threshold but Significant disturbance is a site sensitive term and unfortunately the the officials are the ones who will make that determination and if you decide to make the call on your own than you should expect to bear responsibility when they cite you. It sounds like you already knew the answer to your question. You can write whatever you want into your plan but you are in no sense just "telling" them what you are going to do. You will have to agree with the agencies changes and if they are wrong it is your responsibility to know your rights and have them correct their mistakes. Just this week I have had to get the FS to change their "decision document"(required changes/mods) in my P.O.O because of things I did not like and would not agree to....twice. Fortunately you are on BLM land and they have a reputation for being more facilitating with miners.

I have been the victim of this with the FS especially concerning levels of disturbance and could not agree more.

Go ahead and write out your plan and go through the process of getting it approved.
Also,just a personal 2 cents if I may...and I think this is important. Being a miner who knows his/her rights concerning mining is very important and exersizing them is just as important. Taking a standoffish "I'm gong to do whatever I want" attitude is not going to make things easier , just the opposite. The people who are making the decisions affecting YOUR claim are just that, people and are by no means perfect as many of us know. You by no means have to "lay down" and let them tell you what to do. Taking a cooperative approach and communicating clearly can really help you get what you want and HAVE THE RIGHT TO.
Best Regards
realnice

Hi Realnice,

Not really anything to "argue" about as it's just simply an obvious difference in opinion between your interpretation of the FS's delegated authority and what mine and many others views are here.
I know for a fact the FS has no authority to regulate location claims, through many many hours reading of the laws/codes, regs that support them, the handbooks the officials must use to have their jobs, and years and years of experiences in the field on claims (mine and many others) where FS authority was defined and the FS officials have been told they do not have the authority by other agencies who do have the "delegated authority" on mining claims.
The FS officials were not only told they could not regulate/prohibit miners activities, but in fact were told their (FS) restrictions were causing safety issues for the miners! The other agency has told the FS they will not impose these restrictions on claim owners any longer!

Filing a mining claim to begin with states (IMHO) that you in fact WILL BE MAKING A SIGNIFICANT DISTURBANCE! Other wise how would the miner extract the deposit?! In fact that is also part of your right to mine....making a disturbance! As is reclamation...part of the POO.
It's the miners job to know when, how and where they will be extracting the minerals so it goes without saying that it must also be the miner who decides/should know when the specific thresholds for filing either an NOI or POO are crossed.
There are rare occasions where an NOI will suffice for the activities such as traversing drilling equipment across NF lands off road.....this may "create a road" to some degree temporarily needing the NOI approval but that is a special situation.
Either way it's got to be the claim owner making the decisions for the claim....not the officials. IT'S NOT THEIR CLAIM!!

Please don't take it the wrong way, your efforts to work with the officials are commendable. It's just too bad the FS officials don't know their job duties or the law they should......and they still get paid with our tax dollars! The law states they will foster and encourage mining as well as to work with each miner rather than against......Are they?
If you ever find that you decide the FS does not in fact have delegated authority to regulate your mining claim activity in this way then your courses of action as well as willingness to work with the FS may change dramatically.

There are just so many things that point this out it's impossible to link or quote them all in one spot or thread. I remember digging out a bunch for start off point when you started the "how to tell when my disturbance becomes significant" thread......but that was just the tip of the iceberg so to speak.
Once you dig into some of the rest the list grows quickly

Inter-agencies agreements - How FS deals with BLM concerning mining claims....... Why? Because the BLM is the only mining authority.

Laws about not having duplicate regulation from two agencies for the same activities........Why? Not to waste resources and to ensure only the "delegated" agency is the one to regulate.

FSM and FSH both state the FS employees who deal with mining claimants must know and abide by....yep 43cfr's! For all mining claim decisions. (and they MUST pass the POO or NOI onto BLM!) And they MUST APPROVE them (POO's), they (FS) may only "request" changes to minimize adverse conditions that WILL occur.

No one is saying that anyone should be "Taking a standoffish I'm gong to do whatever I want attitude" at all....it's more along the lines of just as you said, know your rights as a claim owner and don't let them tell you what you're going to do....it's not their claim.
The FS officials will play on words often though.........significant disturbances CAN BE site specific but they are not always and in fact it's quite rare that any specific site is sensitive to anything under 1600 sq ft disturbance.

Another couple very interesting facts that help clear "authority" up.........only two things fall into "surface resources" which is what the FS is "delegated" the authority to regulate......those resources are timber (miner has first right to that on the claim) and agriculture.
Surface resources and their authority over those are only 6" deep in the soil according to the public law term BLM book.
The only other "delegated authority" FS is given by congress is "surface use" (recreational activities) and occupancy. But not mining claims occupancy....again, kinda goes without saying, you are expected to occupy the claim.....can't do any diggin' without being there! And would also be why the law states "exclusive right to all surface" as claim owner.

And the list goes on and on and on.......not that the FS will help you find any of these. Almost every FS official I've spoken too on these topics takes notes on what I'm telling them....all the while they should have already known it for their job duties....they're getting paid for it!

Like I said, your efforts are commendable Realnice and don't give up on that attitude. But in time I think you'll find that the FS officials aren't very "fostering and encouraging" when you get right down to it. Other wise they wouldn't try to throw such a child like fit every time some miner wants to dig a hole!
Duh! IT'S WHAT WE DO!!

Hopefully all goes well with the FS in the future and don't let em' push ya' around! Good luck on the digs!

Stay safe everyone and remember there's more to dig into than just the dirt.

CP

the FS was loaded up with greenies back in slick willy,al bore,and babbling bruce babbits days.i remeber the posting sent to greenie groups wanting them to apply for these jobs. now look what we have! its no wonder that these fs guys say what they do about mining.

Dan, thanks for that detailed response.... very much appreciated and helps to clarify and justify my understanding.
It would be nice to obtain or purchase a current FSM and/or FSH to reference and carry. I cannot find a copy of either.



Thank you for your comments and yes, I agree with your above statement and would like to address this point.
If this was a comment in regard to MY approach I must correct you here and now. My "attitude" or approach when dealing with my regional BLM Field Office is nothing short of 'professional' and would be exactly the same if I were interacting with the USFS. I have a very good professional relationship with my regional BLM field manager and their office has cooperated with me on every request thus far. He is well aware that I know my rights (lol, most of my rights... still learning). I ALWAYS enter their office PREPARED. I am a successful small business owner and treat my mine operations with the same level of professionalism and courtesy as I do my own business. I don't have a FS or BLM chip on my shoulder and am confident enough to dismiss their personal 'opinions' on the spot... I am prepared to rationally challenge them openly and verbally on any questionable 'opinions' they may present. In summary, I can describe my "attitude" or approach as confident and assertive... certainly not "standoffish" or aggressive.
Anyway, I apologize if you got that impression regarding my "attitude" earlier in this thread... perhaps it was my "balderdash I say!" comment? Maybe a little too "dramatic"?
Rest assured, I'm a Bobcat for detail and carry myself well... not the type to lose my cool or shoot myself in the foot. The law is the law.

Geeez. Is everyone a little sensitive around here. Replace the word "argue" with "debate" ...whatever. It was not meant in a negative sense.

ar·gue/ˈärgyo͞o/
Verb:
Give reasons or cite evidence in support of an idea, action, or theory, typically with the aim of persuading others to share one's view.
Persuade someone to do or not to do (something) by giving reasons: "I tried to argue him out of it".



To some people reading this thread It comes off that way. Just trying to help out.



Never said the F.S was "fostering and encouraging" at all in my post and I think my stance on them is just the same as yours. That should be obvious by now.


Yea your comment about "laying down....."was a "bit dramatic". Ok,Calm down. No need to defend yourself. Anyways, That rest was not meant for you personally and I'm sorry that you don't have thicker skin. For other people who are less experienced as yourself and are reading through this stuff it may be good for them and that's why I wrote that. Not to receptive to other's opinions eh? Why ask a question on here and then get all defensive about it? Not everyone visiting the site is as perfect as you are

I personally haven't had the money and resources to enter into litigation regarding my situation and cooperation was my only option as opposed to being cited.
Well, definitely had a good start with this forum and am going to stick around a little longer. I hope in the future people won't take things the wrong way and misconstrue my words.

Still haven't gotten email notifications even though I'm subscribed to the thread.?????

Thanks, I appreciate your comments.
Keep up the good work.

ps realnice.... good luck with that "litigation" and stuff
It's a darn shame things had to deteriorate to that level regarding your circumstances

Swizz, thanks for the laugh It really is a shame. If I did have the resources to take them to court I would In a blink. They need to be learned a lesson....hmmmm, $1,994 bond or lawyer,,,now I'm thinkin........

realnice