|
charlene91 16:09:48 Fri Oct 5 2012 |
|
|
geowizard 02:33:58 Sat Oct 6 2012 |
Sorry about your experience! Can you provide more details? These guys may be looking for more claims to lease. Who's next? - Geowizard |
|
geowizard 16:26:34 Sat Oct 6 2012 |
Please don't abandon us on this issue! The mining community depends on reports from other miners and mining claimants that have experiences like this. Sometimes it isn't really a "scam" but an issue with the "fine print". Leases can contain "clauses" that come to the fore-front and become legal issues. It is important to bring out those issures on a forum such as this, so everyone can learn and be protected. - Geowizard |
|
charlene91 22:52:43 Sat Oct 6 2012 |
|
|
geowizard 15:23:05 Tue Oct 9 2012 |
No mining claim owner wants to be robbed. I went through a similar situation over the last three years. The clock has now ran out. The lessee will be gone this coming spring. If he is NOT gone, I will send DNR a "letter of trespass" and the Troopers will evict him. A lessee can only operate with your permission. As soon as my Lessee misbehaved, I notified Linda Books at DNR by email that I was retracting my permission for the Lessee to operate. Since your permission is required for the Lessee to operate under an APMA, his APMA becomes void when permission is retracted. Yes, he may have a lease. That is legal and binding on both parties. The lease probably doesn't have a clause that guarantees you will provide "permission to operate". If you feel compelled to do so, you should contact Linda and explain that you are "Retracting your permission to operate" on your claim(s) and state your reason for retraction. YOU are in control and all you have to do is push the button! I don't allow anyone to push me around on my claims! - Geowizard |
|
LipCa 02:21:09 Wed Oct 10 2012 |
|
|
geowizard 15:54:47 Wed Oct 10 2012 |
The information applies to any mining claimant that has a lessee. If you are a mining claimant with an operating lease and a lessee, you may elect at your discretion to retract your permission to operate. This avoids legal tangles with the "lease". The lease gives the lessee the right to a lease. The lessor (claim owner) may at his or her discretion elect to retract permission for cause. One of the best "causes" is the cause where the lessee is not disclosing the gold production from the mine. Gold production must at all times be able to be monitored or audited or verified by the claim owner. There is a long list of other issues. If you are "threatened or intimidated" by the lessee, that is cause for retraction of permission. - Geowizard |
|
charlene91 13:59:43 Thu Oct 11 2012 |
|
|
LipCa 14:48:40 Thu Oct 11 2012 |
|
|
geowizard 16:26:08 Thu Oct 11 2012 |
I remain with Charlene on this one. It looks to me like a conflict of interest between recreational mining and commercial mining. Mining partners sometimes disagree on the objective. Partnerships can have a conflict when one or the other decides that a different course or direction in the mining should take place. That has always been a problem with "mining partners". Dig here? No, Dig there! I want to lease the mine, and No, we're not leasing the mine! Our president has through the Department of Labor, given MSHA a greater enforcement role. Through the process of "inspection" and the mining company's failure to "comply", a revenue source is realized for a cash strapped government. Si? MSHA has come down hard on recreational mining activities on "commercial" mining properties. Are recreational miners subject to regulation under MSHA? YES, if... IF recreational mining can be construed as being related to or a part of the commercial mining activity in any way, then... the "activity" COULD be construed by an MSHA inspector as being subject to MSHA regulation. The "GOOD OLD DAYS" are GONE! THIS is the problem with mining and many other businesses today, in the USA. And Charlene, unfortunately, is right. - Geowizard |
|
charlene91 23:38:45 Thu Oct 11 2012 |
|
|
geowizard 02:44:04 Fri Oct 12 2012 |
An MSHA trainer doesn't have any more authority than anyone else. They have authority to provide training. If they abuse their authority as a trainer to intimidate or destroy personal property, then the MSHA office should be notified of the abuse. Destruction of personal property is a crime. In Alaska, you can take the people responsible for damages to small claims court. A judge will hear your case and could award repayment for the damages. - Geowizard |
|
Jim_Alaska 03:25:04 Fri Oct 12 2012 |
So, small scale mines and miners don't fall under MSHA. |
|
geowizard 14:54:51 Fri Oct 12 2012 |
That's right. This apparently is a "commercial" mining operation. MSHA has defined a commercial mining operation as any mining operation that sells gold or any other metal/mineral or sand and gravel commodity onto the open market. I can provide a reference to that if you need more information. Again, it's my opinion that MSHA wants get more control of ALL mining activities. The regulatory compliance side of mining has become the reason many mining companies are not able to operate and/or unable to obtain financial backing. - Geowizard |
|
Nanooktoo 17:41:56 Fri Oct 12 2012 |
Ray |
|
geowizard 19:50:06 Fri Oct 12 2012 |
The issue is destruction of personal property. You may "own a mining claim". The surface is owned by the State of Alaska. If a mining claimant has an issue with a cabin or other fixtures, that is a matter between the State of Alaska and the owner of that cabin. Example: I have mining claims that have a privately owned cabin within the boundaries of the claims. I don't own the cabin because I own the claims. Therefore, if I take any action to destroy the cabin for any reason, the owner may collect damages for the destruction of their cabin. Destruction of private property is a crime. Charlene has every right to obtain a judgement for destruction of private property including the contents of the cabin. MSHA trainers do not have authority to condem a cabin as unsafe or unfit. Many cabins in Alaska may not meet code or professional building standards. I may not agree with the house-keeping standards of another person, how-ever, that person has a right to establish their own requirement of what constitutes "good house-keeping". - Geowizard |
|
geowizard 20:10:23 Fri Oct 12 2012 |
"There are two sides to each story. Charlene has not given the reason he had a falling out the the MT boys. I as claim owner am satisfied with the MT people. Ray " Ray, I didn't actually serve in Vietnam. However, I am classified as a Vietnam-Era Veteran. Charlene fought along side of other Americans in a conflict which we did not choose. Many of those Americans died in the process of protecting your freedom. Many Vietnam Vets returned with a mental disorder worse than having died, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). I am not a practicing Psychologist. You don't have to have a degree in Psychology to know and understand that many of our brothers and sisters may have a recognizable psychological disorder. One disorder is called Gender Identity Disorder. You need to learn about these things and understand that in the world around us, there are human beings that have disorders that they are not able to control and they must live with every day. - Geowizard |
|
charlene91 15:27:16 Sat Oct 13 2012 |
|