Archive for mining, mining law, prospector, mining claim, 1865, 1866, 1872, legal, illegal, government, policy, administrative, mineral, grant, right, forest, service, BLM, DEQ, wild, scenic, hobby, gold, placer, hard, rock, hardrock, dredging, highbanking
  Forum Index -> General


Here is a question?  Perhaps it may be a loop hole?  Does anyone know? Thanks

If a government agency is not allowed to enforce other agencies rules or regulations, i.e. USFS CANNOT ENFORCE BLM or state agencies rules and regs AND VICE VERSA WHEN IT COMES TO MINING; can USFS enforce Idaho fish and game's rules and regs and vice versa, when it comes to mining?  

Although, we know USFS has NO authority to control any type of mining per se regarding minerals; when it comes to the fish and game, there are no mining codes or regulations that we know about as of yet.  

However, fish and game has listed the BULLTROUT fish as endangered in certain creeks, streams, tributaries and rivers, CAN THE USFS use that to shut down your mining operation; or would the fish and game have to be the one to cite a prospector?

what this all comes back to is that the department of water resources have regulations for mining like the "opening season" for mining is June 15 to three months from this date for the purpose of the spawn of the BULLTROUT and salmon.  They allow 9 months for the fish to spawn.  

Now any angler knows that it doesn't take 9 months to spawn.... however, because the USFS AND THE IDWR HAS no authority to regulate mining over the 1866 mining act, can they still USE this excuse/angle to "authorize" shutting down prospecting or mining because of the fish?

I would think that it would have to be the Fish and Game only because they are the one to regulate, protect and maintain the wildlife.  Would this be collusion between these two agencies?

Please let me know if I am misunderstanding this.  However, this is an interesting question and perhaps loophole! Smile

In my experience, USFS won't try to enforce the administrative policies of other agencies, but they will notify the other agency, join forces and proceed to beat the living hell out of the miner in a concerted effort.

Then this would be collusion! That is illegal correct?

This type of collusion would constitute a Conspiracy to Deprive Rights Under Color of Law, reference 18 USC 241 and 18 USC 242, both of which are felonies.

You might also look at Idaho's Admissions Act.

Oregon, as one example, when it became a state, was to adhere to some interesting terms as a result of statehood.

One (Section 2), specifically limited the authority over any waterways inside the state, with the exception of navigable rivers which where to be free and open public highways. (Hence, when ODEQ sells their permits, they violate the Admissions Act knowing damn well that their agents are enforcing these fee based permits on navigable rivers).

Another provision (Section 4), specifically FORBIDS the State of Oregon from interfering with any "rules created by Congress" relating to the disposal of land. That's important, because it means that Oregon not only has ZERO AUTHORITY over this mining law, but to be more specific, its agents are forbidden from interfering with Mineral Estate Grantees and their property.

In Oregon, any assertion of authority by an agent of the state over the locatable Mineral Estate, as well as the waters inside the state, constitutes a provable fraudulent representation and abuse of authority and jurisdiction (hence, reference 18 USC 242).

So its been a while since I posted, provided is a copy of Idaho Admission act sect 13 dated 3 July 1890 (side note Wyoming admission act has the exact exemption dated 10 July 1890):

SEC. 13. That all mineral lands shall be exempted from the grants mineral lands by this act . But if sections sixteen and thirty-six, or any subdivis-ion, or portion of any smallest subdivision thereof in any township shall be found by the Department of the Interior to be mineral lands, the said State is hereby authorized and empowered to select,
subdivisions, an equal quantity of othe runappropriated lands in said State, in lieu thereof, for the use and . the benefit of the common schools of said State. Forum Index -> General
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum