Archive for americanmininglawforum.myfastforum.org 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
 


       americanmininglawforum.myfastforum.org Forum Index -> THE CLASSROOM
beebarjay

Mining Rights: A comprehensive overview

http://archive.org/stream/miningr...ningrightsonpu00morriala_djvu.txt
Wallrat

That's a great find. I can't tell you how happy I am to see this site up again. For miners, this is simply the most important site on the Internet. While PLP may be working for us, here we learn to work for ourselves.
beebarjay

Often we rely on others to do our bidding for us.  Granted there are people skilled to do so,  but it is nice to know that when we rely on others they are doing so as we see fit.  Knowledge is a helpful tool when we do need others help.   It has been my observation over the past few years that often times those we rely on simply shoot themselves in the foot and fail to hit the target.  When this happens we often see that the higher courts simply reject the willingness to hear a case.  The wording of the brief before a court can lack the required argument wording.    

Keeping this forum alive requires knowledgeable instructors to conduct the classroom.  That said we simply lost individuals to conduct the classes.

This comprehensive review of applicable mining law(s) helps us further expand our knowledge.

Since this is in the CLASSROOM portion of the forum I will post a question that deserves some attention.

Here is the question:

Much of the language regarding the past court cases/decisions cited in the overview above pertains to Lode Claims.  With that in mind would/could one use  such decisions to validate placer claim issues?

We know that the mining Acts convey "law" language that brings the two type of claims together as one (except for location standards).  In other words the rights of miners, whether they are lode or placer miners remains the same for either one.      

If in fact the lode/placer decisions carry the same merit (where deemed applicable) we can afford use of such cases to support either lode or placer issues....such as "Trespass".

This is worthy of further understanding....found in the overview!

"Open to Location and Patent."

"R. S. Sec. 2329. Claims usually called "placers," including all forms
of deposit, excepting veins of quartz, or other rock in place, shall be
subject to entry and patent, under like circumstances and conditions, and
upon similar proceedings, as are provided for vein or lode claims; but
where the lands have been previously surveyed by the United States, the
entry in its exterior limits shall conform to the legal subdivisions of the
public lands. Sec. 12, July 9,. 1870."



Bejay
Abram

Its basically something which works particularly. The thing is to have the awareness which is required for us the most and at the same time because it does occur with the appropriate terms the concept has to be understood.

       americanmininglawforum.myfastforum.org Forum Index -> THE CLASSROOM
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum
Home|Home|Home|Home|HomeHome|Home|Home|Home|Home