Alabama national forest question
Last Post 02 Jan 2018 08:45 PM by Richard Peebles. 5 Replies.
Printer Friendly
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
Sort:
PrevPrev NextNext
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Author Messages
Richard PeeblesUser is Offline
Greenhorn
Greenhorn
Posts:5



--
30 Dec 2017 06:33 PM
    Hello everyone,

    From what I have read panning is permitted in the Talladega National Forest, but prospectors cannot use a dredge, highbanker, or a sluice.

    So my question is, what if you own property that is located in the National forest.

    Does anyone know if a property owner of land inside Talladega National Forest can use a dredge, highbanker, or a sluice on that property?

    Thanks for any info on this.


    ARTHUR WAUGHUser is Offline
    Buzzard
    Buzzard
    Posts:613



    --
    31 Dec 2017 02:43 PM

    I'm not that familiar with anything east of the big river, but the first question would be who holds the mineral rights to the property in question?

     

    If the landowner, then in all probability they would fall under state laws and regulations.  USFS would have no jurisdiction over private property, unless the feds still have the mineral rights.  The big issue would be water quality as it enters federal ground, but as long as it meets state standards as it leaves the private ground it should be alright.

    Need to check with USFS and the state/county to cover all the bases as to mineral ownership and laws/regs pertaining to mining/prospecting.

     

    Good luck, here's hoping you are able to find something worthwhile.

    OHV/Recreation Representative, John Day/Snake Resource Advisory Council, BLM--- President, Wolfpack 4x4's, Region 5, Pacific Northwest 4 Wheel Drive Association--- Member- Mid Valley Prospectors, Brownsville, OR chapter GPAA, Willamette Valley Miners, Bohemia Mine Owners Association
    Richard PeeblesUser is Offline
    Greenhorn
    Greenhorn
    Posts:5



    --
    01 Jan 2018 06:48 PM
    Thanks for the reply, I reached out to the district ranger to see what they say.
    WALTER EASONUser is Offline
    Buzzard
    Buzzard
    Posts:517



    --
    02 Jan 2018 09:31 AM
    The forest back there are covered with split estates as in Forest Service may own surface and individual may own minerals or two different individuals may own - one surface and one the mineral. Many persons assume that when they purchase a property that they own both and a typical title search does not check for mineral ownership only surface ownership. So be sure that the owner knows the difference. I know of places even in California where people have purchased years ago a house or built a house on property, some next to rivers, that they may not realize they do not own the mineral rights. Some cases the mineral rights were reserved by the Federal Government and their property is subject to claim under the 1872 mining act. There is a surprise in the waiting for a homeowner!
    If you notice an error in the Online Mining Guide or with claim information please add in the updated information into the online mining guide to inform other members. Thank You Walter H. Eason
    ARTHUR WAUGHUser is Offline
    Buzzard
    Buzzard
    Posts:613



    --
    02 Jan 2018 11:06 AM

    Do your research into what laws are applicable in your situation.  It is not unheard of for District Rangers and Forest Supervisors, and even the LEO's and field staff to have different interpretations of what laws and regs say.

     

    Split estates are not uncommon, even out west.  I have a claim that 1/2 is all federal and the other half is timber company surface rights, but the feds have the mineral rights.

    OHV/Recreation Representative, John Day/Snake Resource Advisory Council, BLM--- President, Wolfpack 4x4's, Region 5, Pacific Northwest 4 Wheel Drive Association--- Member- Mid Valley Prospectors, Brownsville, OR chapter GPAA, Willamette Valley Miners, Bohemia Mine Owners Association
    Richard PeeblesUser is Offline
    Greenhorn
    Greenhorn
    Posts:5



    --
    02 Jan 2018 08:45 PM
    Thank you gentleman, I will definitely inquire as to who has surface and mineral rights.







    No response from the district ranger yet, good point on the varying opinion on the law.  I will have to reach out to several sources, see how they compare.
    You are not authorized to post a reply.