[Rockhounds] Abandoned mines: Who owns them?

[Lanny]

On Oct 27, 2007, at 1:48 PM, Tim Fisher wrote:

> ...
>> - A mine is considered abandoned if there are no identifiable owners 
>> or
>> operators for the facilities, or if the facilities have reverted to 
>> federal
>> ownership.
> Or, if the mineral rights have expired and reverted to the original 
> owner. This sounds like the USFS/BLM definition, and as they already 
> know, they don't always own the mineral rights. The structures are a 
> different beast, they default to the entity that owns the land. If the 
> structures have reverted to the land owner, but there is a current 
> claim on the mineral rights (see my answer about claiming abandoned 
> mines below) AFAIK the mine is not abandoned, but is inactive, which 
> contradicts the second part of their definition above.

Actually the quoted definition is correct. The facilities in this 
definition does not just mean any mine buildings, it also means mine 
workings (shafts, adits, etc.); and these workings belong to any claim 
owner, so "no owners or operators for the facilities" automatically 
means no mining claimant. ("Ownership" is not the right term to be used 
for minerals on unpatented mining claims. The government owns the 
minerals until the land is patented. A claimant has rights to exploit 
the minerals, but until that is done, the minerals are still owned by 
the government.)

>
>> Therefore, an abandoned mine's ownership could revert back to the 
>> Federal
>> gov't, but will it always do that?  And if so, can I then stake a 
>> claim on
>> it?
> If the feds owned the mineral rights in the first place, they get the 
> mine and structures. If you file a mineral claim on the same property, 
> you get the mineral rights. The structures and "improvements" still 
> belong to the feds.

I don't believe this is quite so clear cut. Generally the government 
only takes control of structures if it has specifically stated it has 
control. Typically this is done when it wants to remove the buildings, 
if they are old buildings and they want to preserve them as historic 
artifacts (such as in a ghost town) or if they are trying to use the 
buildings for leverage/control in an environmental issue. It would be 
rather ridiculous for the a mine to be abandoned, then relocated and 
the government to tell the new claimant that he cannot use the 
headframe, it's government property.

>
>> I know that there is a difference between patented and unpatented 
>> mines, but
>> I'm not sure what that exactly entails.  I thought that if a mine is
>> patented, then it will always be private property, but is that true?
> A patented property is just that: a private property, aka an 
> "inholding". The person who owns the mineral rights also owns the 
> land. They are not however free from the environmental permitting 
> process that unpatented claims must go through. They still have to 
> file a yearly mining plan that has to be approved by the entity that 
> patented the property in their name. I have seen veiled threats by the 
> gummint to take back patented properties, but AFAIK it has never been 
> done (and would entail one heck of a court battle under the current 
> outdated mining laws). They also still have to let the patenting 
> agency access the property anytime they feel like it. This latter has 
> been a bone of contention among certain to-remain-unnamed miners and 
> the USFS here in Oregon.
>
Mostly wrong; patented mining claims are fee simple: the federal 
government gives up all rights, just like it does with most private 
property. A patented mining claim is just like any other piece of 
property in a county, it is now subject to the county laws and 
ordinances and the state laws and ordinances and only those federal 
laws that apply to any private property.

The owner of an unpanted mining claim has to deal with the federal 
government first for mining operations, then the state or county. The 
owner of a patented mining claim only has to deal with the state and 
county governments or the federal environmental laws as they apply to 
all private land. The owners of patented mining claims do not have to 
deal with mining plans with the federal government like holders of 
unpatented claims. In fact, that is the main reason that mining 
companies like to patent mining claims--get the federal government off 
their backs and just deal with the state.

Veiled threats to take back patented properties are just that: veiled 
threats. A mining claim is patented as fee simple land, all federal 
government rights are given up. The patenting process does not require 
that the land be used for mining, there are no requirements. The 
federal government has no more rights to enter a patented mining claim 
than it has to enter any private property. The federal government is 
not going to take back patented mining claims anymore than it is going 
to take back homesteads, timber patents, railroad patents, etc. I'm 
sure all those rich people sitting in multimillion dollar homes on 
patented mining claims in Aspen, Park City, Sun Valley, etc. are going 
to be giving up their land to the feds.

Regards,

Lanny