How Many Mining Claims Are There?

[Clay Diggins]

I made this chart to provide a basis for discussion of some other comparative charts I'll be posting soon. Just to be clear this chart does not include Alaska or the few claims that have not been posted to the LR2000 yet. Data is from November 15, 2015.

 

This chart was a little awkward to make because of the elephant in the room. See if you can spot it. First one to spot it gets a free eBay claim (doc fees and shipping not included).

Hint: It's blue.

 

 

 

[jasong]

Not surprising for anyone who has done any prospecting in NV. Still a bit stunning to see in graph form.

 

This is what I'm talking about by corporate abuse of mining claims in the other thread though. Fundamentally they aren't any different than the paper staking on ebay, except many magnitudes greater in quantity, yet I've never once see anyone raise a voice against it other than myself since I've been frequenting prospecting forums and I cannot understand why.

[nvchris]

What id like to see, and I don't thinks its possible is the amount of ground thats leased from the big blanket claimants both private property and BLM public lands.

 

I lease several areas, its damn near imposable to keep prospectors from not knowing its leased. My signs just get shot, removed or ignored.

 

 

Thanks Clay!

[Steve Herschbach]

Perhaps because the people of Nevada in general are happy to have the jobs and tax base provided by the big mining companies?

[nvchris]

Mining works for Nevada

 

 

What takes me over a year to get approved in CA, takes 2 months in Nevada!!

[jasong]

 

Perhaps because the people of Nevada in general are happy to have the jobs and tax base provided by the big mining companies?

 

These are separate issues though. Unless you mean to say these jobs and tax revenues depend on blanket paper staking?

[Steve Herschbach]

Actually there are good reasons why large companies need large acreages. They are making huge expenditures to find deposits that need to last decades in some cases, and depending on gold prices lower grade deposits surrounding core deposits may be found and exploited at much later dates. And frankly, they also do it to help protect themselves from people looking to take advantage of them by staking ground nearby and then holding it for ransom. Chris Ralph can better explain the details but they do not hold ground and pay huge holding fees just to frustrate you and I.

[jasong]

But that doesn't explain why they claims hundreds of square miles of land with no mineral character, nor does it make paper staking any better just because a large corporation is doing it and not a small time ebay scammer. Nor does it give them any kind of legal or moral justification to skirt claim requirements that we, the citizens that grant them our minerals must comply with ourselves. It doesn't give them a right to stake claims without even knowing if there is anything on it worth claiming. A BLM with proper funding would devalidate the vast majority of those types of claims.

 

They also don't pay huge holding fees. $200 per claim is literally nothing to them. It's an entire claim for less than 1/5th of a single ounce of gold for companies which produces millions of ounces of gold. It adds up in bulk to people like us who don't see the world in terms of dollars signs punctuating numbers with more than 5 or 6 zeros, but it's still a pittance to them. Personally I think maintenennce fees should be increased at least 5-fold, maybe then the BLM would find the funding they need and stop answering every question I ever pose to them with "great in theory but we don't have the funding to enforce that".

 

I understand your argument Steve, I do. I grew up and worked in a state just as reliant on minerals as NV, if not more because we don't have any place like Reno or Las Vegas. I lived the bust and I worked the boom. I also rode the next bust right down to rock bottom. I understand how it works. And it's commodity price that drives mining action, they don't rely on paper staking as a cornerstone of their business and there is no reason they shouldn't be held to the exact same requirements by law that we as non-corporate entity citizens are held to.

[jasong]

 

Actually there are good reasons why large companies need large acreages.  

 

And frankly, they also do it to help protect themselves from people looking to take advantage of them by staking ground nearby and then holding it for ransom. 

 

Also regarding these two points in particular: I need 1 million bucks, but I'm not going to go rob a bank to get it. What they need and what they are legally entitled to do are two different things and just because they think they might need something doesn't entitle them to acquire it through invalid methods.

 

On point 2, the irony is that they are doing that exact thing to other miners who would seek to mine land on their own. They blanket claim and then ransom our own public minerals back to us at a premium via leasing. It's like taking a low interest loan from someone and then giving them no other option than to borrow their own money back at 10x the rate. Except I believe the way they acquire those loans are invalid, so it's more like the mafia strongarming cheap money from a guy then giving him no option but to borrow his own money back at a 10x the rate.

[Steve Herschbach]

Well I am not defending the majors Jason. I guess I do not worry about them much because they are not going to approach me with crazy hair, wild eyes, and a shotgun, and threaten to kill me for being on their ground. I take great care to stay off ground under claim by small miners but if I wander across a corner of Newmont ground I seriously doubt the folks at corporate will get their shorts in a bunch over it.