Search the Community

If you have permission to prospect on private land in NV, does a claim need to be filed for mineral rights by the owner? Just curious. Does anyone have experience with this?

If you are maintaining your mining claim under a small miner's waiver you should be aware that the required Form (3830-02) due August 31 is not yet available. Here is a link the official BLM version of the form on their website. As you can see it expired this past April. https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/3830-002_0.pdf The BLM is required to renew official forms every three years or the form becomes invalid. (Privacy Act, Paperwork Reduction Act) The currently available 3830-02 Form expired in April of this year. The BLM did put in a request for extension in March of this year but the paperwork never moved forward. In the last week or so the 3830-02 form has been removed from the approval process. It appears it is no longer on the list of BLM forms. Here are the current results from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) the agency in charge of approving the form. https://omb.report/search.php?terms=1004-0114 That is where you will see if the required 3830-02 form has been approved. It will be at the very bottom of the list. At present it isn't even listed as a valid form. Some mining claims have been closed for submitting out of date forms. Technically the form has no value to the user or the BLM until the OMB approves the extension. This is a tricky situation. The California BLM put a modified 3830-02 in their mining claims packet this year. You wouldn't get one of those unless you requested it. Even though the form hasn't been approved they pasted a "2024" over the top of the "2023" on the expired form. They didn't change the approval date so it's obviously bogus. Some state offices have been suggesting owners just cross out the "2023" and write in "2024". I would not suggest doing that, I won't get into the details here but as you can imagine forgery of federal documents to receive a benefit is frowned upon. Here's what you need to watch out for with these forms. There is a block of type on the upper left corner and another on the upper right that together show that the form is current and valid. Here's an clipped example I made up of the top of the form with the critical numbers in red. If the dates don't reflect the three year extension period (2023 - 2026) it's bogus. If the form hasn't been approved by the OMB yet it doesn't matter if the numbers match it's bogus. I've discussed this problem with quite a few worried miners and the only real advice I can give is be prepared to pay the fee??? There may some political and there are certainly some social aspects of the BLM's failure to produce this required form. Please let's respect our host's wishes and keep any discussion about this on the practical and informative side. No politics please. Barry

Hi All, I'm a new potential prospector in Northern California. I'd like to do some prospecting in streams in the El Dorado National Forest. The El Dorado County folks seem fairly reasonable in terms of encouraging recreational gold panning in the National Forest and in the County in general, but I'd rather sluice than pan. So, I'd appreciate an evaluation of my intended methods, and their legality under current California laws and regulations: 1) Recover sand and small gravel from creekbeds using a hand auger like the ones AMS makes (see below); 2) Run the sand and small gravel through a sluice placed in the creek, like the sluice below; 3) After sluicing in the creek, rinse the sluice mat contents into a bucket and take the bucket home. So, in your opinion, is there anything illegal about my process? Would my methods require a permit? Thank you for your time! I appreciate any and all answers. Jim_Alaska, I hope you will respond. -Cord

I just had a freind contact me about permitting in northern California. He applied for a Plan of Operation on a claim back in early Spring & finally got the Forest Service to have a look at his plan. They informed him his plan would not be approved because it was closer than 100 yards to a creek & he could not pump water out of a creek. They cited some bs about a change to working near creeks that took place in 2016. They told him he'd have to truck in water as well. This is quite curious to say the least because I had a crew in the same county that was mining along a creek and pumping water directly out of the creek. The same agent that told my friend he couldn't mine was fine with our operation in 2019. I intend to look into all of this and see what I can find out. I have found that some of these government agents tend to make up their own rules at times.

This is a question that keeps coming up over & over. Evidently the state of California requires a miner to apply for a permit to highbank. This requires that you file a Report of Waste Discharge with the Regional Water Board. You can't begin mining until the Regional Water Board either approves your Report of Waste Discharge or determines that a permit is not required depending on the discharge created in the particular area. The minimum fee is $1120 but could be higher depending on the threat of discharge. Also, there is no time frame on getting a permit. I know of several miners who highbank without permits with no problem. Fines can be quite high as well. Has anyone actually applied for and received one of these permits or know of anyone who has? Has anyone been shut down and fined while highbanking without a permit?

Just thought i'd start a post about mining in Australia and what it's like compared to California. As some of us know, California is not mining friendly. I've actually had people say to me "Oh no, you're not one of those people are you?" Sort of makes you feel like a second class citizen. So how is it for the miners in Ausralia?

Here is an article with some interesting information about possibly reopening a gold mine. I am not so much interested in 'this' mine as much as the author's information about other aspects of mining. How accurate is it? I think there are a few readers here with some competitive knowledge. https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2022/01/gold-mines-reopening-california/621403/

Sorry Steve if I'm posting on the wrong area of the forum, but I definitely don't know where to properly add the fact... In Italy we're living a really bad menace to our activity, due to a law modification for archaeological areas. As for the government announced in november 11th 2021, all the metal detecting activities are to be considered outlaw in the future and to immediately modify the actual law and create a professional's only authorized list. They mean any kind of professional forced to use It like Airport security, army and public security purpose. For all of the hobbyst the entire land will be forbidden😑. So I Need an international or at least an abroad regulation to translate and apply as a template to show a different conduct proposal to the Senate of Republic in Rome during an audition with dealers and archaeologists. Any link of a complete regulation can be of aid. Thanks to all of You.

MRA embarks to reduce mercury usage Alluvial miners at work on Bougainville Cedric Patjole | Loop PNG | March 8, 2020 The Mineral Resources Authority (MRA) recently launched a project to reduce the use of mercury in small scale mining operations. The Project aims to identify the extent to which mercury is used in the industry and how it is used and by whom, in a bid to mitigate health risks. On March 6th, the ‘Reducing Mercury Use in Papua New Guinea’s Alluvial and Small-Scale Gold Mining Sector’ Project was launched in Port Moresby, following a workshop with key stakeholders and project partners. The Alluvial Mining industry is one of the largest small to medium enterprise sectors in PNG that engages thousands of rural small scale miners. It is also a sector that is great health risks due to the usage of mercury. “This project is designed to get a better understanding of our alluvial sector general, and more specifically to identify the extent to which mercury is used how it is used and by whom,” said MRA Executive Manager of Regulatory Operations, Roger Gunson. “In addition, it will track the supply trial and identify the regions where it is used. The data collected relating to the sector will be entered into a database administered as part of MRA’s land-folio tenement system. “This will be able to better inform on policy development, resourcing, training and sector needs.” Gunson, said the Alluvial Mining is one of the biggest revenue earners for the country with K550 million recorded in 2019. He said this is similar to revenue generated by smaller mines such as Simberi Mine. However, the use of mercury in extracting gold poses major health risks to the miners. “Unfortunately, in many parts of PNG gold is extracted through the use of mercury. This is a danger to the health of miners, their families and communities as well as we have heard from the workshop today. “Hence, we have a paradox, we want the gold and we want to be able to seek it, but we also have a health risk that sits alongside it,” said Gunson. The project is funded by the US Department of State and implemented by Artisanal Gold Council (AGC) in conjunction with the MRA. Share this:

https://www.icmj.com/magazine/article/plp-update-4454/?fbclid=IwAR3-OTlUQ3SqYmxYpp-BeaVHxKIee0IEIzY5ZlJc2kCiMhmNLq-HFTvSYq4 This effort deserves a vote of thanks from all of us.

Good day people. Little_fellow here from northeastern Ontario. I have some property here but I don't have the mineral rights on it. I don't recall why I was under the impression that anyone wanting to look for surface gold or mineral on the ground surface was entitled to do so but upon doing some research , it seems like whoever owns the mineral rights, owns everything as far as mineral rights go, here in Ontario. Can any one tell me what my options are or do I have any options? I've never done anything like this but I think this would be interesting.

Hello, seemed like this is the best place to ask. I’ve read but do not recall what US states and countries make detecting impossible or difficult. Thank you for any information, thoughts, or personal experience.

Hey guys!! So I'm wondering if anyone knows the Oregon law or can point me to a link (I've exhausted google on this) if I can use a recirculating sluice powered by a 12v battery back at camp and bring dirt up from the river to work. I've put in phone calls down to Salem numerous times and have never received a call back. I think after reading the 700 permit rules I would need this permit if I was discharging tailings back into the river but I'm unclear if I bring the dirt up if that's still a no-no. Oregon mining laws in general are pretty frustrating to try and navigate. I really appreciate any information about this subject somebody might be able to point me to. Thanks a bunch! ~green

We should have known earlier. According to Clay at My Land Matters: Mining is exempt from lockdown Did you know mining activities have been declared an essential industry? Mining is on the US Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency's ‘Essential Critical Infrastructure Workforce’ list.

I'm strictly a detector operator, so when a friend asked me about the ins and outs of dry washing on public lands, I was at a loss. I told him that I would ask the knowledgeable folks here on the forum. Specifically, is dry washing considered casual use of the land, just as metal detecting and panning are? Is a mining claim and/or notice of intent or plan of operation required for motorized dry washers? Thanks in advance for your insights!