Search the Community

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

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

Good mornin' y'all- I have done several hours of solid research this morning about lode staking and I have not found conclusive answers to theae two questions yet. These questions are only for the initial time you actually discover the lode area and place the monument on the diacovery, before sending in any paperwork/filing forms/fees, etc. If you have any experience with these specific areas of lode claim staking here in CA, I would very, very much appreciate any advice, experience, and or details you have to share. Thank you very much for your time, experience, and your help. 1. Does the discovery monument need to have a written/filled-out notice of discovery paper/sign attached to the actual monument or posted anywhere around it on day-1, or, does it simply just have to be a bare monument with no posted notice/wtitten sign? 2. If a written/filled-out notice of discovery paper/sign is required on the center monument at the initial staking of said Lode claim, do I need to list my personal address of residence with my full name posted on the sign? I'd like to maintain whatever privacy I am allowed to keep while also following all of the related rules/regulations/laws. I do not have a separate business set up that I could put on the sign either. Thanks again and have a rockin' day! Kevin

Hi Guys I've started this post to inform members and non member detectorists that the NQMA (North Queensland Miners Association) is lobbying the Queensland Mines department to change access laws to EPM's (exploration tenements) The proposed change would ban detecting and prospecting on exploration tenements without the consent of the tenement holder. This would effectively ban metal detecting in any gold field as they are mostly covered by exploration tenements. Whats worse is that more than half of the members of the NQMA are detectorists or hobby prospectors. And they are using the money from their yearly fee's to lobby for this change. This change is the brain child of James Said the current president of the organization. I urge members and non members to contact the NQMA and voice your concern about the changes they are lobbying for. To contact the NQMA please email info@nqma.com.au, please reference the best contact below in your email. President – James Said Vice President – Graham Byrne Secretary – Lyn Byrne Treasurer – Michele Mobbs Native Title Officer – Paul Crossland Publicity Officer – James Said Feel free to spread the word Regards Dale

Alaska raised the annual state mining claim rental rates substantially in August, as people who got the billing know. The state website fact sheet still shows the old rates however and people who did not get the billing may be in for a unpleasant surprise. http://dnr.alaska.gov/mlw/hottopics/pdf/new-rental-rates-for-mining-claims.pdf NEW RENTAL RATES FOR MINING CLAIMS, LEASEHOLD LOCATIONS, PROSPECTING SITES, AND LEASES On August 1st, the Office of the Lt. Governor approved a change to 11 AAC 86, setting forth new rental rates for mining claims, prospecting sites, and mining leases for the 2020 mining year that begins on September 1, 2019. These increases to mining rental rates were conducted in accordance with State of Alaska Law AS 38.05.211, which requires an adjustment to the rental rates based on the change on the Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index (CPI) for Alaska every 10 years to account for the change in the cost of living over the 10 year period between adjustments. The last adjustment was completed in 2009. Table 1 list the new rental rates for different types, sizes, and ages of mining claims and leasehold locations. The rental requirement for prospecting sites is a one-time payment of $305.00 to be paid at the time the prospecting site is recorded. Prospecting sites are good for 2 years and may not be renewed. Below are Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ). Question? - How are the new rental rates calculated? Answer. - In 1989, the State of Alaska Legislature set the rental rates for mining claims, leasehold locations, and mining leases. In addition, the legislature directed the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to adjust the rental rates every 10 years based on a change in the CPI for Alaska using the following simple formula in which the denominator is the CPI for the first half of 1989 as determined by the Federal Government Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the nominator is the CPI for the first half of the year in which the adjustment was made. The formula resulted a correction factor. The correction factor is multiplied by the rental rates set in 1989 to produce the new rental rates. Question? - Why is the rental rate for Quarter Section mining claims not exactly 4 times the rate for the Quarter-Quarter Section mining claim? Answer. – The Legislature required DNR to round off the rental rate to the nearest $5.00. For example; the calculated rental rate for a 40 acre claim of less than 5 years is $41.27 and when rounded to the nearest $5.00 is $40.00. Multiplying $41.27 by 4 results in the actual rental rate for a 160 acre claim to be $165.08 and rounding off to the nearest $5.00 is $165.00. Question? – I have already paid my claim rental for the coming year at the previous year rate. Will I automatically lose my claim because I didn’t pay the total amount due for this year? Answer – No. By regulation, if it is determined that a miner fails to make a full payment for rent on a mining claim, DNR is required to notify the miner of the deficient payment by certified mail. The miner is then required to make full payment on or before December 2nd or 30 days after the receipt of the letter, whichever is later. Any additional questions not addressed above will be answered by contacting DNR representative Lora Eddy at (907) 269-8628 or Kristen Shake at (907) 269-8652, or by email at kristen.shake@alaska.gov.

Has anyone come across a good quitclaim deed for transferring ownership of mining claims? This would be for California. Tons of forms on internet but was wondering if anyone found a specific one that worked great. Thanks.

Join Jeff on the adventure of taking the Annual Assessment paperwork in to the Sacramento BLM office.

I wanted to share what threatens in Poland for using the detector. For your passion in Poland, you can go to prison for 8 years ?. You can have the landowner's permission, you can have permission from the government, and you still have eight years of danger. Legally, you can detect only on the beaches. Appreciate that you can practice your hobby.

This post is for the newbies that are still confuse after hours of hours of research to where you CAN, CAN’T or/and MAY metal detect. I’ve seen so many posts in this forum with great finds. Without getting in the discussion of specific places, such as State Parks, County Parks, State Forest, DNR, etc. Where do you guys metal detect, do not tell me everyone is hunting ONLY in Private Land! I think people should share their experience, I’m not talking about telling the location of your jackpot, I’m talking about where are YOU hunting, most important what kind of LAND it is. To clarify, I’m just trying to resist to the fact the LAWS, REGULATIONS, RANGERS, OTHER PEOPLE are just making this lovely Hobby harder every day. Finally, before you criticize my thoughts remember when you started this hobby and compare to where this hobby is taking us now. Just like when they say it does not hurt to ask, have you ever ASKED permission to metal detect in a City park?

Josh Bohmker is a friend of mine and his name is at the top of a lawsuit against the State of Oregon. I wanted to let you guys know what's going on with this and how you can help. Back story - in 2016 Oregon banned motorized mining on many public lands, basically taking away the main gold reclamation methods that have been in use since 1872. This is similar to the California ban, though until recently Oregon has been much more pro-mining. The big issue with this is that it gives away the decision making of how we use public lands to a select group of interested state parties without federal oversight. You can read more about this lawsuit here: http://galicemining.x10.mx/main.html The Supreme Court has refused to even look at this case, and because of this there is a short window to drum up support for the cause. If you would like the SCOTUS to look at this case, please write the President and let him know. https://www.whitehouse.gov/get-involved/write-or-call/ I'm not big on politics but since this one hits a little close to home it is important to me, and may be important to some of you guys as well. A letter, call, or email to the President doesn't take much effort but if we get enough it will help.

Hey all, While reading up on and watching YT vids on the current tech, product performance reviews and such, learning the lingo, narrowing down what I would want to do with a unit and narrowing down possible equipment if I were to jump into this hobby, until now, after reading some others posts from here and around the world, it never dawned on me to consider what kind of bureaucratic BS, restrictions, laws and such that metal detecting is susceptible to in the US. Gaining permission from private property owners is a no brainer, but other than that....................? Do you have to register them or are we required to purchase a yearly permit to use them? Can we transport them across state lines without being concerned about each states reciprocity? What about being in possession and use of a dectector while lawfully carrying a firearm? May sound like crazy questions, but that's the country we live in and it's only getting worse. Any resources on laws and regs you can share?

I know of a great location spot for relic hunting. The only problem is that it's on federal land. I think it's also part of a federal national park or recreation area. However, the location used to belong to my spouse's grandmother and was the place of her birth and childhood. About 50 years ago, the land was taken through imminent domain. Due to this family connection, is there a legal process or procedure that would allow me to metal detect there? And if so, would there be special rules concerning any finds? Any advice would be appreciated.

Does anyone know what the details are of the expansions of Death Valley and Joshua Tree National Parks contained in the new bill just passed in Congress? I could not find any details where the expansions are shown.

Not quite sure where to put this Steve. It will probably have some interest for western prospectors and the eastern hunters are going to find it really useful. You decide if it needs to be moved and I'll go with it. Land Matters has begun a new section on their website for new projects in development. The most recent new project is Forest Ownership. This new map tracks Forest Boundaries as well as both surface and subsurface (mineral) ownership on the National Forest System. "Forest Ownership" may sound funny since the common assumption is that all National Forest lands are created equal and are owned by the federal government. Unfortunately it's not really that simple. Land status within the forests varies greatly depending on several factors. We hope by developing this map set individual areas of the forests can be better understood by those who live near, use and research the United States forest reserves. These maps should help you understand why some areas of forest are off limits, why you see houses and farms within a National Forest and who owns the mineral rights in any particular area of a forest. In particular visitors to the eastern states forests can discover why they don't have the free use rights western forest users do. This map is going to be an eye opener for those who believe that all National Forests are the same. Many of the eastern forests are not owned or controlled by the federal government. Often when the U.S. has purchased some rights to surface use the minerals and timber are still owned in whole or in part by private individuals or corporations. When you go to the New Projects Page be sure and click on the "Forest Ownership" tab in the center of the page and read the background I've written for these new map layers. That background can really help you understand what you are seeing on these maps. The purpose of introducing these new projects while they are still in development is to get user feedback. You can have a direct influence on how these maps are developed and used as well as helping Land Matters define which projects should receive priority in their development. Please leave any comments you may have and if a particular project seems worthwhile consider supporting that project to help it along. Here is the link to the New Projects Page. Just click on the "Forest Ownership" tab then choose the Forest Ownership map link on the right to open the new project map in a new tab. Barry

If you have comments on these proposed revisions, the deadline is June 4. It’s very important that we hear from many of you on this important issue. NOTICE OF PROPOSED CHANGES ON MINING IN THE REGULATIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES BRIEF DESCRIPTION The Department of Natural Resources proposes to change regulations on mining rights, addressing claim location, conflicting rights, annual labor, and penalties and eligibilities to cure abandonments. The Department of Natural Resources proposes to change regulations on mining. The Department of Natural Resources proposes to adopt regulation changes in Title 11 of the Alaska Administrative Code, dealing with mining, including the following: (1) 11 AAC 86.215 is proposed to be amended to address requirements for mining locations on state-owned land. (2) 11 AAC 86.216 is proposed to be added to address overlapping and conflicting mining locations on state-owned lands. (3) 11 AAC 86.220 is proposed to be amended to address annual labor, recording and amending affidavits of annual labor, essential facts required for affidavits of annual labor, and cash payments made instead of performing annual labor. (4) 11 AAC 86.224 is proposed to be added to address penalties and eligibility to cure an abandonment of a claim or location under AS 38.05.265. (5) 11 AAC 86.541 is proposed to be amended to address conditions for termination of a tide or submerged land mining lease and to address default cures in lease contracts. (6) 11 AAC 86.590 is proposed to be added to provide definitions. You may comment on the proposed regulation changes, including the potential costs to private persons of complying with the proposed changes, by submitting written comments to the Department of Natural Resources, 550 W. 7th Avenue, Suite 1070, Anchorage, AK 99501-3579 or by e-mail to dnr.mining.regulation@alaska.gov or by fax to 907-269-8904. The comments must be received by the department no later than 5:00 p.m. on Monday, June 4, 2018. You may submit written questions relevant to the proposed action to: Joseph Joyner, Department of Natural Resources, 550 W 7th Ave., Suite 1070, Anchorage, Alaska 99501-3579 Fax: (907) 269-8904, E-Mail: dnr.mining.regulation@alaska.gov. The questions must be received at least 10 days before the end of the public comment period. The Department of Natural Resources will aggregate its response to substantially similar questions and make the questions and responses available on the Alaska Online Public Notice System https://aws.state.ak.us/OnlinePublicNotices/Login.aspx and agency website at http://www.dnr.state.ak.us/mlw/hottopics. If you are a person with a disability who needs a special accommodation in order to participate in this process, please contact Joseph Joyner at 907-269-8511 no later than May 25, 2018, to ensure that any necessary accommodations can be provided. For more information, a copy of the proposed regulation changes, or if you have any questions regarding the proposed regulations, go to http://www.dnr.state.ak.us/mlw/hottopics, or write to the Department of Natural Resources, Attention Joseph Joyner, 550 W. 7th Avenue, Suite 1070, Anchorage, Alaska 99501-3579; or call 907-269-8511. After the public comment period ends, the Department of Natural Resources will either adopt these or other provisions dealing with the same subject, without further notice, or decide to take no action on them. The language of the final regulations may be different from that of the proposed regulations. YOU SHOULD COMMENT DURING THE TIME ALLOWED IF YOUR INTERESTS COULD BE AFFECTED. Statutory authority: AS 27.05.010; AS 38.05.020; AS 38.05.185; AS 38.05.195; AS 38.05.205; AS 38.05.210; AS 38.05.211; AS 38.05.242; AS 38.05.250; AS 38.05.255; AS 38.05.265; AS 38.05.300 Statutes being implemented, interpreted, or made specific: AS 27.05.010; AS 38.05.020; AS 38.05.185; AS 38.05.195; AS 38.05.205; AS 38.05.210; AS 38.05.211; AS 38.05.242; AS 38.05.250; AS 38.05.255; AS 38.05.265; AS 38.05.300 Fiscal information: The proposed regulation changes are not expected to require an increased appropriation. The proposed regulations provide for user fees for certain elective services or elective uses of state-owned facilities, but do not establish mandatory permitting or compliance requirements that impose costs on a private person, other state agencies, or municipalities. Date: May 3, 2018 ________________________________ Andrew T. Mack Commissioner, Department of Natural Resources ADDITIONAL REGULATION NOTICE INFORMATION (AS 44.62.190(d))1 1. Adopting agency: Department of Natural Resources 2. General subject of regulation: Mining 3. Citation of regulation (may be grouped): 11 AAC 86.201, 11 AAC 86.215, 11 AAC 86.216, 11 AAC 86.220, 11 AAC 86.224, 11 AAC 86.541, 11 AAC 86.590 4. Department of Law file number, if any: 5. Reason for the proposed action: ( ) Compliance with federal law or action (identify): ( ) Compliance with new or changed state statute ( ) Compliance with federal or state court decision (identify): ( X ) Development of program standards ( X ) Other (identify): Mining Rights 6. Appropriation/Allocation: Resource Development / Claims, Permits, and Leases 7. Estimated annual cost to comply with the proposed action to: A private person: None Another state agency: None A municipality: None 8. Cost of implementation to the state agency and available funding (in thousands of dollars): Initial Year Subsequent FY 19 Years Operating Cost $ 0 $ 0 Capital Cost $ 0 $ 0 1002 Federal receipts $ 0 $ 0 1003 General fund match $ 0 $ 0 1004 General fund $ 0 $ 0 1005 General fund/ program $ 0 $ 0 Other (identify) $ 0 $ 0 9. The name of the contact person for the regulation: Name: Joseph Joyner Title: Natural Resource Manager Address: DNR, DMLW, 550 W. 7th Ave. Ste. 1070, Anch., AK 99501-3579 Telephone: 907-269-8511 E-mail address: joe.joyner@alaska.gov 10. The origin of the proposed action: __X__ Staff of state agency _____ Federal government _____ General public _____ Petition for regulation change _____ Other (identify): 11. Date: May 3, 2018 Prepared by: Name: Joe Joyner Title: Natural Resource Manager Telephone: 907-269-8511