Jump to content

Recommended Posts


I know of at least one guy who has successfully beeped some very nice gold within that area. Its good news to hear and as the new BLM appointee said " The proposal to withdraw 10 million acres to prevent potential mineral development was a complete overreach".

I have a copy of a BLM report on the study used to justify the withdrawal and even in a report generated by Obama era BLM appointees, the data shows that roughly 90% of the 10 million areas had little or no potential as Sage Grouse nesting ground. Before that they had concluded that the Sage Grouse did not qualify for protection as an endangered species.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the map I made Mitchel. It originally had the withdrawn area (6 States) but the BLM took down the data stream when it got some attention on the Hill a few months ago. The claims that were affected are still on that map - Land Matters created that claims map by hand.

There were 6,997 ACTIVE Mining Claims in the withdrawal area. Nevada was the most affected with 5,872 Mining Claims.

I contacted the BLM when they proposed the withdrawal asking for the data files to create the map. More than two years later and I still haven't had a response. That's why we had to rely on their data stream to display the withdrawn area. We try to host all our map data on the Land Matters servers but the government isn't always good at sharing the things they are required by law to share. Go figure. :huh:

Click on the Link at the top of the map to see the report Land Matters made on the effect on mining claims from the withdrawal.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info Clay, I am always glad to see lands coming back to us.....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still a few smaller mineral closures enacted by fiat in the last days of the Obama administration. I hope they will ultimately meet the same fate as this one.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

    • By ratled
      We have several things in the hopper in light of the SG brief in the Rinehart case. One of the things that you can do is this from Dave Mack. It worked well for us in the 3rd Court of Appeals and is worth a try here. At least the cost is low

      ratled
      http://bb.bbboy.net/thenew49ers-viewthread?forum=2&thread=1562
    • By klunker
       I got a call at my business the other day. A miner was desperate to get some reclamation work done. I thought I had this guy pegged as another miner that made a mess on public land and now he is being told he has to clean it up. I was wrong. I ask his where the work was  and what needed to be done. When he told me I told him this could cost several thousand dollars. He said he well understood the cost involved but the U.S.F.S. was going to keep his bond in addition to charging him for them to do the work which was several times more expensive than what I told him my work might cost. The work was to construct erosion control in his access road, remove a section of the road, and block off the road from future access. This didn't sound right and I told him I needed to see his Plan of Operation. He drove 100+ miles to bring me a copy of his plan. It was for occupancy for more than 14 days and to construct and maintain an out house- nothing more. The bond amount was extraordinarily excessive. I called the U.S.F.S. minerals officer to try to get a better understanding of the situation. She said that she considered the road as part of the reclamation. I replied "maybe it was but it wasn't part of the plan". She didn't care and if he didn't do as told he would be charged for the costs of the U.S.F.S doing the work. Somehow I managed to hold my smart@$$ mouth and my temper and politely said I believed the historic public road was protected by statute and she was acting outside of their own minerals administration guidelines, that if I could be shown a regulation, forest rule or any thing the claim owner signed or initialed that obligated him to eliminate his own claim access or something that gave her the authority to make these demands, I would immediately load up equipment and do the work otherwise I would need a better explanation from District Forest Ranger and Forest Supervisor.
       The claim owner received a call soon thereafter and was told he did not have to do the road work.
      The claim owner nearly spent thousands of dollars needlessly. So if any of you own a claim, please take the time to familiarize yourselves with regulations that apply to you AND regulations that apply to the regulators. Claim owners have more rights regarding their claims than what most realize.
      Please-no anti government rants if you reply. Thanks.
      Klunker 
       
    • By wombat
      I would like to ask a question (and I hope this question does not turn political) What is the opinion or  thoughts of most of you boys on the other side of the world about unfilled detector holes left by others. Here in Australia we are have a big problem with unfilled detector holes to the extent that some of our goldfields could be shut down because of it. Is it a problem over there and how do you guys combat it. Please guys just general comments as I don't want this to get heated and removed as I know it can be a touchy subject.
      Wombat  
    • By Ridge Runner
      I made a call to BLM in Canon City Colorado to see what it took to dredge on  the Arkansas River. In years past the permit was free but then it cost to get the same permit.
      I talk with this Lady at BLM and told her what I wanted. I told her that is was a member to GPAA and Gold Prospectors of Colorado. The first thing she told me I could get a dredging permit from the GPOC and that is because they have a bond covering the members. When she said that I knew that is why the club charge extra for dredging.  Now at the same time she said that GPAA hadn't done the same so I couldn't get a permit to dredge on GPAA claims.
      They do have a Public access called point bar I can get a permit for 25 dollars and it's good for two years.( I think that's right )
      I've dredge for a long time over the years on the Arkansas River and even wrote story that ran in GPAA  mag. years back about it. I've also been working on a dredge that can collect that fine gold and get it all. I say all because of test I've done here at home. Oh well!
      Right now I checking into the club on the west side of Colorado to see what they have to offer.
       Just like to hear from someone on here that does dredge in Colorado. I know it is other clubs in Colorado and that's another thing I'd like to know more about each.
      I'll take any and all help I can get.
      Chuck
    • By Clay Diggins
      Land Matters has posted an explanation and map of the proposed BLM Vulture Mountains Rec Area lease in Arizona. The lease would involve withdrawing the area from claim location.
      This is a popular and productive gold prospecting area just Northwest of Phoenix Arizona. It's adjacent to the active Vulture Mine one of the oldest and most productive gold mines in Arizona. There are a lot of claims there at present. If you have claims in the area or just enjoy prospecting the Vulture region this might be a good time to let the BLM know your thoughts on their proposal. Comments need to be submitted by December 23, 2016.
      You can see the withdrawal proposal and interactive map on the News and Views front page.
      This is part of Land Matters ongoing effort to track and map all proposed mineral withdrawals. This is a very ambitious project but one that several Land Matters users have requested. If you know of any current withdrawal proposals that you would like to see featured please contact Land Matters at support@mylandmatters.org.
    • By nvchris
      Can anyone guide me on removing a non paying/performing signer from a placer claim?
      This person will not return calls, emails or execute a quit claim mailed to them.
      Thanks for any help!
      Chris
       
×