americanmininglawforum.myfastforum.org Forum Index 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
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   Join! (free) Join! (free)
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Classroom # 1 - Homework Assignment #1
Page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    americanmininglawforum.myfastforum.org Forum Index -> THE CLASSROOM
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Please Register and Login to this forum to stop seeing this advertising.






Posted:     Post subject:

Back to top
1866



Joined: 02 Jan 2012
Posts: 102
Location: Jefferson Mining District

PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 3:52 pm    Post subject:  Reply with quote

lastchancelarry wrote:
1. Where is the grant in the Mining Law?

The grant is located in the 1866 act,  CHAP;CCLXII An act granting the right of way to ditch and canal owners over the public lands, and for other purposes
Be it enacted by the senate and House of Re……….That the mineral lands of the public domain, both surveyed and unsurveyed, are hereby declared to be free and open to exploration and occupation by all citizens of the US, and those………And in regard to whose possession there is no controversy or opposing claim, it shall and may be lawful for said claimant or association of claimants to file in the local land office a diagram of the same, so extended laterally or otherwise as to conform to the local laws, customs, and rules of miners, and to enter such tract and receive a patent therefore, granting such mine, together with the right to follow such vein or lode with its dips, angles, and variations to any depth………
I think  we are granted the right to search for minerals freely and then able to claim those minerals when they were located, therefore receiving a grant to mine the land for minerals as we see fit..

2. Who is eligible to be a grantee

All citizens of the US as well as those that declare to become US citizens.

3. What rights are granted by the Mining Law?
The right to search for minerals, occupy and possess under the law of possession the land that contains the minerals and receive a patent for such lands.
4. How are these granted rights enacted by a potential mineral estate grantee?
By searching, locating and filing a claim for tsaid minerals

5. Did the Act of 1872 eliminate the rights contained in the two previous acts? If so, why? If not, why not? No they did not.

All claims and patents issued under act 1866 shall convey the rights and privileges of the 1872 act as well as those still pending under the 1866 act.
Sections 1,2,3 and 6 were repealed, but such appeal shall not affect existing rights. And were replaced with sections six and seven of the 1872 act.
The act of 1870 shall remain in full force except for the proceedings to obtain a patent, which were amended in the 1872 act
Disclaimer..this was done quickly and I gotta go to work. hammer me and Ill be humbled tonight
Larry



Good, Larry.

Well done on #1 and #2.

#3 is not incorrect, but there is more to it than that. What you missed is that the 1866 granted right of way, later reaffirmed in the Act of 1872 as ingress and egress. Also, use of the water is also granted. In addition, as spelled out in Belk v. Meagher, in addition to the right to explore, lay claim to and occupy the minerals lands, a "right to mine" is also implied.

#4. is best summed up by the fact that the grant is merely self-initiating. I would not go as far as to say that a claim must be filed, but in fact, the mere intent to eventually do so, enacts your rights.

#5. VERY well done. You have specifically identified how the three acts differed, what changed and rightly identified that the ONLY thing that changed between 1870 and 1872 was a refinement of the patent process. In fact, when you study the commentary on what took place, the ONLY intent of Congress when they passed the Act of 1872 was to not only reaffirm what was granted earlier, but to protect the government (and ultimately the people) from fraudulent entries that had been made for some purpose other than for mining.

In fact, the big beef of Congress was that they were aware of far too many instances of people locating and patenting mineral lands for the sole purpose of building whorehouses and saloons in close vicinity to thew mines.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
beebarjay



Joined: 30 Dec 2011
Posts: 230
Location: Central Oregon Coast & Az

PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 9:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

To 1866....reference BLM filings.

I can not disagree with your aasessment of the filings with BLM.  I have had a go round with BLM in a similar situation.  Interestingly though the BLM said there was an appeal process via The Secretary of the Dept of Int.  I began the appeal process only to find out that my claims were listed as abandoned and open for others to file on them; while the appeal was being considered. The appeal process was to take 6 months.  You have no disagreement with me on the issue of BLM.  I was attempting to bring a perspective //observation for consideration.....as the Acts make no mention of requiring any action with the BLM.

I will get back to reading the discussion and see where I am at.   I believe we just got PM's stating we are going to attempt to find where, in the Acts, States get any authority.  But off the top of my head States authority comes into consideration on other land(s) issues, and the Acts make only a  reference to the States Authority on "Public Domain".   If one considers Public Domain (Patent). vs the Patent on an object; that has been invented by an individual, the State has no place in the Patent Authority given the Patent on the object.  But this is just an observation prior to giving adequate study into the matter of a States Authority regarding miniing activity under the Mineral Estate Grant.  Forgive the thinking out loud....I will investigate further.

I must add.  Congress Grants Recognized Tribes/Native Americans certain rights, one of which is the restoration of their soverign reservational lands.  Some of the activities these soverin nations engage in are subject to State input.....conditions.  With this in mind I will study the acts to see if Congressional language in the acts gives States any authority over the Federal Public Domain.  

bejay
_________________
Proud of my generation and never to old to learn
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
1866



Joined: 02 Jan 2012
Posts: 102
Location: Jefferson Mining District

PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 10:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What you're referencing is the next homework (new thread).

Two quick points:

Don't confuse the Public Domain with a patent. Public Domain is a designation of land, a patent is a form of title (in fact, the highest form of title).

Also, I think I would avoid the term "Federal Public Domain". Like the term "Federal Land" or "BLM Land" or "USFS Land", it implies a jurisdiction that arises from ownership, when what we are really looking at is a Trust (a term people should really look up in Bouvier's and Black's, because it will BLOW YOUR MIND)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
beebarjay



Joined: 30 Dec 2011
Posts: 230
Location: Central Oregon Coast & Az

PostPosted: Sun Jan 15, 2012 6:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Correct, I understand the difference between the two Public Domain vs Patent.  A poor use of words on my part. But once the Miner enters the public domain and performs the act of dscovery/possession/occupation/mining his deed is held in trust via Congress and he may choose to undertake the patent application for title....(correct?)

As I was reading and interpriting the Acts the issue of holding in "Trust" hit me hard as I have familiarity with Native American Trust lands.  I will look up the word as you suggest.  In the Native American Trust lands the issue of soverignty can be revoked at any time by Congressional authority.  I am not sure if there is any correlation between a miners deed/title being held (correct?) vs that of Native Americans.

Now all this became an issue for me as I was reading the Acts and reference was constantly being made to "Patent".  Then I was made aware that the Patent process has been put on an emergency stay (renewed every 2 years) since 1994.  The issue of Patent and Mineral Estate Grant seem to be extremely related.

So returning later after looking up TRUST in the Bovier Dictionary it seems obvious to me that the miner enters the public domain, upon his immediate actions of undertaking mining a valuable mineral deposite,......and once conditions per the 1872 mining Law are met his title is held in trust.  Basically he has offered payment to the government for said boundary claim.  Then after further development of the valuable mineral deposite/improvements he can request his title to said property be handed him......
bejay
_________________
Proud of my generation and never to old to learn
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
1866



Joined: 02 Jan 2012
Posts: 102
Location: Jefferson Mining District

PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 8:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Even though there was an emergency stay placed on patents by the Clinton administration, doesn't mean it was lawful.

In fact, there are currently several miners in the process of receiving their patents. These guys have been fighting for them for YEARS.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
lastchancelarry



Joined: 30 Dec 2011
Posts: 158
Location: hood river, ore

PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2012 10:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

A few questions concerning homework #1

Is A "quit claim" a filing that the previous owner of the claim is done?
"In the meantime, the completed quit claim went to the main BLM office."
Used to transfer the claim from previous owner to new owner? Or just waht it says...the person who signed the claim over to you and your partner is done and then you two file anew claim?

Originally asked by gold river:
WHO enforces the mining law? . . . I understand that the BLM plays no role in claim law and their only role is to record the claim as filed. it is not their role to challenge anything. Challenges go into civil or criminal courts and a judge or jury decides mining law issues . . . but this is only what I have been taught. I have had, or put in over 50 claims and have never been challanged or contacted by anyone for any reason.

How much leverage does blm,usfs etc have concerning:
1866Act;
and those who have declared their intention to become citizens, subject to such regulations as may be prescribed by law, and subject also to the local customs or rules of miners in the several mining districts, so far as the same may not be in conflict with the laws of the United States.
Does this mean that if you stick with the original grant and do not file a poo noi, get a permit etc, any new laws do not apply?
does the above underlined statement open the door for new agencies to enact laws governing mining?
_________________
keep it simple stupid
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
1866



Joined: 02 Jan 2012
Posts: 102
Location: Jefferson Mining District

PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2012 8:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

To answer your questions -

1. A quit claim is simply a conveyance of title and the surrender of the existing owner's rights to the new owner.

2. Technically, the enforcement powers of the Mining Law were intended to lie with the miners in the mining districts who established their own courts under varying systems, namely the Folk-moot style, the Alcalde style and the Justice of the Peace style. As time went on, as the miners established other local forms of government (namely the counties), the court (and sometimes recording) duties were passed on to the counties, even though the miners left little in the way of actual legislation conveying any actual authority.

In 1909, USFS levelled the first challenge against the last of the functioning districts when they charged that the miners of Liberty, Washington in the Swank District had no district. Gradually, the power of the districts was gradually usurped amd eroded by BLM and especially by USFS.

Actual lawful enforcement of the Mining Law remains in a sort of limbo, largely with the agencies claiming an authority that they lawfully do not have. USFS has ZERO authority, while BLM's is very, very limited. Strangely enough, while BLM purports to have an authority and to have replaced the districts, they will not get involved in the actual functions of the districts.

From a purely lawful standpoint, lawful authority still lies with the districts, very few of which still exist.

3. The policies of the agencies do not apply for a number of reasons. The first obvious reason that they do not apply lies in the distinction between Public Land vs. Public Domain. Agency management authority is specifically limited to the Public Lands (lands subject to disposal), while the miner's property is located upon the Public Domain (lands in which a private property interest exists, but in which supreme title is still held in trust). These are not the same thing and the administrative policies of the agencies don't extend to the Public Domain.

Another reason the agency's policies don't apply lies in the fact that a law/rule/regulation/policy that infringes a property right conveyed by way of a public grant, is NOT lawful. Once again, read Fletcher v. Peck.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ruarto



Joined: 09 May 2012
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Fri May 11, 2012 9:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

In your message of instructions (Homework) you said :
Here are your study materials:
PDF downloads of 1866 Act & 1872 Act

http://www.minerdiggins.com/Ripple/Library/MiningLaw1872.pdf

However I could not find the 1866 act there,  but it is of course on the JMD site.    What is there that is quite interesting and a bit relevant is the Homestead act of 1862.    

Im looking for references regarding Patenting of mining or other properties,  and of being able to live on your claim.    Many of us have been run off or told to pay a $200 deposit to stay more than 2 weeks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
lastchancelarry



Joined: 30 Dec 2011
Posts: 158
Location: hood river, ore

PostPosted: Sat May 12, 2012 10:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

try here check out this info and the grants are at the end that can be copied and pasted and edited..
we highly suggest you start at the beginning and go through the homework..this is set up to learn in bits and pieces and the order is thought out by the instructors..


_________________
keep it simple stupid
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    americanmininglawforum.myfastforum.org Forum Index -> THE CLASSROOM All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Page 5 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Card File  Gallery  Forum Archive
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum