Lost Password :: Posting Pictures :: Who's Online :: Stats :: Memberlist :: Top Posters :: Search
:: :: Proof of Labor no longer going to be accepted by BLM?
Unsubscribe From Newsletter



Welcome, Register :: Log In Welcome to our newest member, Agent67.
Users active in this forum:
Users active in this thread: Guest

1 people online in the last 1 minutes - 0 members, 0 anon and 1 guests. (Most ever was 29 at 13:36:32 Sat Aug 3 2002)

Pages: [ 1 ]

[ Notify of replies made to this post ][ Print ][ Send To Friend ] [ Watch ] [ < ] [ Add Reply ] [ > ]

Mineral_Estate_Grantee
16:02:18 Tue
Oct 22 2013

Offline
494 posts
Reply
Proof of Labor no longer going to be accepted by BLM?

It has come to the attention of members Jefferson Mining District that BLM may be devising ways it will no longer be required to accept one's "Small Miner Waiver" (Proof of Labor) to keep one's filing(s) current as per BLM records, instead, will require full payment.

This IBLA decision is being used in an attempt to justifie forfeiture of a Mineral Estate of 10 or fewer where Proof of Labor was submitted.

http://www.oha.doi.gov/IBLA/Ibladecisions/184IBLA/184IBLA007%20CHRISTIAN%20F.%20MURER%206-5-2013.pdf


  
geowizard
17:36:24 Tue
Oct 22 2013

Offline
posts
Reply
Re: Proof of Labor no longer going to be accepted by BLM?




Reply
Proof of Labor no longer going to be accepted by BLM? ( 16:02:18 Tue Oct 22 2013 )
Interact Reply Quote Report To Mod Last Posts Ignore User Global Ignore Whisper


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"It has come to the attention of members Jefferson Mining District that BLM may be devising ways it will no longer be required to accept one's "Small Miner Waiver" (Proof of Labor) to keep one's filing(s) current as per BLM records, instead, will require full payment.

This IBLA decision is being used in an attempt to justifie forfeiture of a Mineral Estate of 10 or fewer where Proof of Labor was submitted.

http://www.oha.doi.gov/IBLA/Ibladecisions/184IBLA/184IBLA007%20CHRISTIAN%20F.%20MURER%206-5-2013.pdf

End quote

What? :confused:

This decision has nothing to do with the small miners waiver.

The case relates to the issue of paying the maintenance fee (that everyone in the business knows about) for each 20 acre division of a mining claim in advance each assessment year.

So, given a 160 acre mining claim, the maintenance fee is $140 x 8 = $1120. x 49 association placers = $54,880. :confused:

The small miner waiver is for claimants having 10 or less mining claims.

- Geowizard
[2 edits; Last edit by geowizard at 17:42:02 Tue Oct 22 2013]

  
Mineral_Estate_Grantee
18:26:19 Tue
Oct 22 2013

Offline
494 posts
Reply
Re: Proof of Labor no longer going to be accepted by BLM?

Foot note 4: Payment of the claim maintenance fee is in lieu of the assessment work requirements
of the Mining Law of 1872, ...

In the matter brought to JMD, where the Mineral Estate Grantees had met and filed the essessment work requirements, BLM still demanded full payment of maintenance fee and when payment was not submitted, BLM by it's records, showed the property as forfeited.

  
geowizard
00:11:38 Wed
Oct 23 2013

Offline
posts
Reply
Re: Proof of Labor no longer going to be accepted by BLM?

Filing an affidavit of Labor for assessment work is separate from the maintenance fee. Assessment work is filed in the form of and Affidavit of Labor for the current year thru September 1st. The Maintenance fee is prepayment for the next year. Two distinctly different requirements and not related to each other. They are "mutually exclusive"!

Maintenance fees have nothing to do with the mining Law of 1872.

- Geowizard

  
chickenminer
04:07:18 Wed
Oct 23 2013

Offline
364 posts

Reply
Re: Proof of Labor no longer going to be accepted by BLM?

Quote: Mineral_Estate_Grantee at 18:26:19 Tue Oct 22 2013

Foot note 4: Payment of the claim maintenance fee is in lieu of the assessment work requirements
of the Mining Law of 1872, ...

In the matter brought to JMD, where the Mineral Estate Grantees had met and filed the essessment work requirements, BLM still demanded full payment of maintenance fee and when payment was not submitted, BLM by it's records, showed the property as forfeited.


MEG... did these folks own more than 10 claims ?
When I pay my claim maintenance fee to BLM, I am not required by them to file annual labor .
Since I own more than 10 federal claims, I am required to pay the Maintenance fee. BLM doesn't care whether I do annual labor or file annual labor forms.

Concerning the IBLA decision, it seems to me the folks did not make full payment. Yes, BLM changed the way the fee was calculated. These folks were given 30 days to remit the balance. Sounds like they chose not to.



---
Dick Hammond - Chicken, Alaska
Chicken / Stonehouse Creek Mining
Chickenminer.com
 
 
Mineral_Estate_Grantee
14:15:08 Wed
Oct 23 2013

Offline
494 posts
Reply
Re: Proof of Labor no longer going to be accepted by BLM?

Quote: chickenminer at 04:07:18 Wed Oct 23 2013 [/quote

MEG... did these folks own more than 10 claims ?


No. The matter at hand is Murer case now being used against Mineral Estate Grantees that have 10 or fewer "claims", met and filed the assessment work requirements, but BLM still demanding full payment of maintenance fee and when payment was not submitted, BLM by it's records, showed the property as forfeited.

[1 edits; Last edit by Mineral_Estate_Grantee at 14:16:27 Wed Oct 23 2013]

  
geowizard
15:51:01 Wed
Oct 23 2013

Offline
posts
Reply
Re: Proof of Labor no longer going to be accepted by BLM?


Here's a reference from BLM:

http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/nv/minerals/mining.Par.72748.File.dat/Mining.Law.Requirements.on.Fed.Lands.Oct2010.Rev.pdf

The mining law requires both.

Affidavit of Labor is a separate requirement that is an annual requirement and must be filed at BLM and county. Although there is confusion on the county filing, it is prudent to do the county filing.

Payment of the maintenance fee is not a substitute for performance of Annual Labor. The maintenance fee is a separate fee and was added when FLPMA was implemented.

But, the issue here is that the maintenance fee was not paid in full. The new regulation is that the fee applies to 20 acre parcels. A 160 acre parcel contains eight (8) 20 acre "parcels". Prior to the new regulation, the fee was applied "per claim". An association placer had an unfair advantage in that a claimant might have an association placer that covers 160 acres and paid the same maintenance fee as another claimant paid on a 20 acre parcel.

I don't agree with the added cost of maintenance fees for association placers - but it's the law. I dropped all of my association placers because it is too expensive to pay $140 for each 20 acre portion.

Historically, mining claimants have controlled large amounts of land with association placers. Eight people get together and claim quarter section (160 acres) claims. 40 claims cover 10 square miles.

The cost of holding mining claims has gone up. BLM is dealing the cards and the price of playing poker has gone up!

- Geowizard

  
Rod_Seiad
16:25:02 Wed
Oct 23 2013

Offline
1 posts
Reply
Re: Proof of Labor no longer going to be accepted by BLM?

Speculators are the cause of this problem. "Small miners" need to be exempted. Association claims have kept family miners off from acceptable claims for too long.

I like this adjustment which potentially will aid the miners access to many more fine claims. They can be mined, instead of kept out of circulation by greedy paper-pushers.

  
chickenminer
20:31:45 Wed
Oct 23 2013

Offline
364 posts

Reply
Re: Proof of Labor no longer going to be accepted by BLM?

Geo...
My point is when I pay my Maintenance Fee, I do not have to file annual labor forms with BLM and pay an additional $10 per claim fee.
If you file a Waiver, then you have to submit Annual labor forms to BLM and pay the fee.
This is according to BLM Eastern Interior Field Office.

Yes, law still requires recording annual labor forms.

From the Murer case;
"Payment of the claim maintenance fee is in lieu of the assessment work requirements
of the Mining Law of 1872, 30 U.S.C. 28-28e (2006), and the related filing
requirements
(emphasis mine) of section 314(a) of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of
1976 (FLPMA), 43 U.S.C. 1744(a) (2006), for the upcoming assessment year that
begins on Sept. 1 of the year payment is due. 30 U.S.C. 28f(a) and (b) (2006); see
43 C.F.R. 3834.11(a)."
[1 edits; Last edit by chickenminer at 20:45:51 Wed Oct 23 2013]



---
Dick Hammond - Chicken, Alaska
Chicken / Stonehouse Creek Mining
Chickenminer.com
 
 
chickenminer
20:55:53 Wed
Oct 23 2013

Offline
364 posts

Reply
Re: Proof of Labor no longer going to be accepted by BLM?

MEG..
I still can not see how the Murer decision can be used against Waiver filers.
Could you please explain how JMD expects BLM to use this decision in that manor.

Can you cite any instances where the Murer decision HAS been used to 'null and void' a Waiver filers claims because of lack of Maintenance fee payment ?

Just trying to understand what exactly is happening.



---
Dick Hammond - Chicken, Alaska
Chicken / Stonehouse Creek Mining
Chickenminer.com
 
 
dickb
05:19:50 Thu
Oct 24 2013

Offline
102 posts
Reply
Re: Proof of Labor no longer going to be accepted by BLM?

As an aside, If BLM is charging you to pay assessment fees on your claims, I would think that the argument could be made that road access to your claim cannot be denied by arbitrary road closures. It seems that they want it all ways to suit themselves and the claim holders have no access rights. Otherwise, just what are the fees for?

JMHO :confused:

Dickb

  
Mineral_Estate_Grantee
02:31:34 Fri
Oct 25 2013

Offline
494 posts
Reply
Re: Proof of Labor no longer going to be accepted by BLM?

Let me try this: The Mineral Estate (of 10 or fewer "claims") the Murer decision BLM is attempting to justifie a forfeiture (by it's records) on is a valid valuable uncommon mineral deposit property, which has been yearly worked from the time of a discovery a number of years back. It just so happens to be in an area being sought after by enviro groups (and the like) for withdraw so The Kalmiopsis Wilderness can be expanded through to the next ridge and beyond. The battle with the above mentioned, and agencies, to work this property unobstructed has been going on for years.

Relevant facts:
a) 1 existing and continuing associated Claim.
b) So-called "maintenance fee" "Payment" was timely made on that associated claim under protest of the fees lawful imposition and to the exclusion of the affidavit of assessment work purchase, i.e., Proof of Labor.
c) A Notice of Intent to Hold was also filed against the BLM's obstructions.
d) Concurrently, a notice that the work purchase assessment work affidavit was to be filed, which subsequently was timely filed.
Note:
1) There is no case to refer to because there is no due process available to the BLM for self-operative compliance met.
2) In the above matter, the BLM appealed its own decision, but there is no lawful decision to appeal from.
3) The BLM is asserting the Murer case as authority to steal a grantee's claim despite law to the contrary.
4) This post was not for analysis but as a Warning of what is coming as the law becomes a nullity for failure to challenge the oppression upon us.


  
LipCa
05:08:03 Fri
Oct 25 2013

Offline
649 posts
Reply
Re: Proof of Labor no longer going to be accepted by BLM?

From Geowizard's link:

"The maintenance fee is in
lieu of performance of assessment work."

  
geowizard
14:55:22 Fri
Oct 25 2013

Offline
posts
Reply
Re: Proof of Labor no longer going to be accepted by BLM?


LipCa is correct!

But... The "payment in lieu of assessment work" is not the issue. The BLM requires payment of $140 for each 20 acre parcel in ALL cases where the claimant has more than 10 mining claims. "Assessment work in lieu of payment" is not an option.

The "small miner waiver" only applies to mining claimants that hold 10 or less mining claims. The MEG claimant had 49 claims.

Thanks, LipCa!

- Geowizard

  
Rod_Seiad
15:36:46 Fri
Oct 25 2013

Offline
1 posts
Reply
Re: Proof of Labor no longer going to be accepted by BLM?

"It just so happens to be in an area being sought after by enviro groups (and the like) for withdraw so The Kalmiopsis Wilderness can be expanded through to the next ridge and beyond. The battle with the above mentioned, and agencies, to work this property unobstructed has been going on for years."---MEG


That presents a horse of a different color.

Enviromania 101...
When the rules don't suit your agenda, buy new improved rules.

Mining concerns south of Latitude 42 are in jeopardy of being priced out of business. Judges are encouraging manipulation of mining case law. Truth rarely stays on the negotiating table. The "save the planet from miners" people vastly outnumber(votes) miners and have access to unlimited taxpayer funds(grants and legal fees).




  
geowizard
19:48:09 Fri
Oct 25 2013

Offline
posts
Reply
Re: Proof of Labor no longer going to be accepted by BLM?

MEG,

So, the Kalmiopsis Wilderness Area is in SW Oregon and this case in Nevada are related?

http://www.nwmapsco.com/Osbornes_2006/Chetco_Basin/Maps/Kalmiopsis_Location.jpg

The case you have cited has no relation to The Kalmiopsis Wilderness Area. It looks like an open and shut case of the claimants(s) having not paid the appropriate maintenance fees as required of everyone that has more than 10 mining claims.

There is no new precedent set in the case you have cited. I imagine hundreds of cases were lodged just like it and settled in the same way when the claimant appealed.

You haven't explained what the real issue is. :confused:

- geowizard

  
Mineral_Estate_Grantee
16:46:48 Fri
Nov 1 2013

Offline
494 posts
Reply
Re: Proof of Labor no longer going to be accepted by BLM?

There is much to be discussed (this topic included) this evening (Friday 11/1/2013) at South West Oregon Mining Association. The meeting is held at Josephine County Planning Office, Grants Pass, Oregon, 3rd and C streets: Far left of the building as you go down C street. The meeting starts around 6:30 PM.

  

Pages: [ 1 ]

[ Notify of replies made to this post ][ Print ][ Send To Friend ] [ Watch ] [ < ] [ Add Reply ] [ > ]

 Total Members: 11956

  • Can start a new thread. (Everyone)
  • Can't start a new poll. (Mods & Admins)
  • Can add a reply. (Everyone)
  • Can't edit your posts.(Everyone Registered)
  • Register :: Log In :: Administrators

    The time is now 23:15:48 Wed Dec 8 2021

    Powered By BbBoard V1.4.2
    © 2001-2007 BbBoy.net
    :: :: Proof of Labor no longer going to be accepted by BLM?

    [Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]

    [Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]