Using a Mining Claim to shut off FS Access?

[MTHunter1321]

I ran into a unique and unfortunate situation last week trying to elk hunt. I went to a spot that I haven’t been to in a couple years and was surprised to all of sudden see both sides of the Forest Service road I was on Posted with No Trespassing signs for a 4 mile stretch. I pulled over and looked at OnX and saw that there was a 4 mile stretch of creek/road that showed as private. The total is only 79 acres, give or take, that takes up 4 miles of the forest service road with forest service on both sides of the road. There’s some disbursed camp sights along the road that are now posted, along with a Forest Service Trailhead that is a 7 mile trail that I was planning on going up. Unsure, I kept driving until I got to the end of the property and see a trailer and dirt work being done behind a locked gate on another spur rd off the main road. I pull of the main road to turn around and here comes the landowner telling me that I’m on private land since I’m off the forest service road. I apologized and said I was just turning around and didn’t realize that there’s been a change in the area. Long story short, he says he bought the land last year and the only easement the FS has is for the road going through it and it doesn’t cover more than about a foot on ground on either side of the road. I asked him about the FS trailhead he says “Nope, it’s closed” even though by my estimate he owns maybe 20 ft from the road to where the FS boundary is. Where you would park at the trailhead is clearly FS. I expressed my disappointment, as calmly as I could, to see an out of stater come in and essentially close down thousands of acres of FS over a matter of a few feet off a FS road.
I looked up the old listing and his property was listed at roughly $150K and is specifically a Mining Claim. Which in my mind would give him the right to mine the creek that runs through his property. Assuming he paid $150K and essentially gets to control FS access for a 4 mile stretch and shut it down, making the FS land which is thousands of acres essentially only his to access is a travesty.
Does anyone know what options are out there to either validate or challenge him or where to even begin??

 

[2rocky]

I'd really be curious what the local FS office had to say.

 

[Deleted member 18333]

You may want to check with the MT DEQ. If it is in fact an active mining claim, he should have a permit filed with the DEQ. This will have maps with his permit boundary. I too would find it odd that he would be allowed to block off an established TH. Best of luck in your search.

 

[Southern Elk]

If it’s a patented mining claim, he owns the land too. That sounds like what’s going on. I would call the forest service and see what the road situation is.

 

[Hunting Wife]

You in the Belts by chance? We’ve lost access to trails/roads in a similar manner over the years up there.

I would check with the FS, but good chance he’s legit re: the surface access. Especially if OnX is showing it as a private parcel. But you could check with FS to make sure he’s not taking liberties at that boundary/trailhead.

Another thought..I’d check that road easement. At least where I work, it would be out of the norm for a road easement to be that narrow.

 

[Jwill]

Sounds like it would be a good use of $150k in LWCF funds...

 

[MTHunter1321]

You in the Belts by chance? We’ve lost access to trails/roads in a similar manner over the years up there.

I would check with the FS, but good chance he’s legit re: the surface access. Especially if OnX is showing it as a private parcel. But you could check with FS to make sure he’s not taking liberties at that boundary/trailhead.

Another thought..I’d check that road easement. At least where I work, it would be out of the norm for a road easement to be that narrow.

Yes, east side of Canyon Ferry Lake

 

[MTHunter1321]

Sounds like it would be a good use of $150k in LWCF funds...

WOULD have been a good use. He didn’t give off any impression he was looking to sell

 

[Nunyacreek]

I’ve known that was private for years, but I’d heard that it was sold. A patented mining claim is a mining claim in history only, once a patent is issued (as it appears to have been done many many years ago in this case) it is fee title ground, private property.
The interesting part of this is the trailhead you mention, by my measuring it is about 40’ from the road edge to the NF where the trailhead is. There are a few possibilities as I see it:
1. The FS road easement may be wide enough to touch NF. Have to look at his deed or the recorded easement to discern that.
2. there could be a recorded easement to the trailhead. Ditto on research. 3. there could be a claim of prescriptive public easement to the trailhead. Notice I said claim, not an easement. Until it is litigated or quiet - titled there is only a claim. Either the FS or the public (not sure who would have standing) could sue to gain access. Seems like a stretch waiting for the FS to do this, though I could be wrong. In that case PLWAA or some group like that would likely do it. I am interested in his issue.

It seems to me that unless it comes to everyone’s attention the status quo will prevail. Anybody mind me posting the specific location so that we know if any group or individual is working on this or there is some interest in bringing it forward? This is in Broadwater County.

 

[diamond hitch]

Sometimes the easment was retained in the patenting process. Records are kept at the State BLM office. Also the age of the road matters if in place prior to statehood and no abandoned by the county or state it may be a 2477 road. Look at the 30 min series USGS quads. Then it will take some digging at the courthouse to follow that. Don't expect the FS to do anything. Their goal is to abandon their trail system and all responsibilities. I really think we should abandon our pay obligations to them.

once you get into the prescrptive easement issues then it is a legal issue with associated money, time and lawyers.

What drainage? I know most of the deposits and some of their history.

 

[texwest44]

Yeah, so I think I know exactly where you're talking about, because I was in precisely the same situation last year going up that road over in the Belts (I live in Helena). I was like, wtf what is this random fencing and gate? I can't get to the trailhead!

Destroying that bottom area, and blocking access to a ton of FS land for a few hundred thousand in gold placer. Oi.

Private land owners effectively getting to own and control public land in MT is a tale as old as public land. It's really the only beef I have with the culture around here: treating land owners like kings of little fiefdoms, who are above the written law and us non-land owning commoners.

It's making consider buying some random parcel of USFS inholding that has a road running through it. I could gate it off, wreck the road, and have all that forest to myself, and it would take YEARS of bullshitting for them to come in and make me take it down. And then I could just put it up again in, like, a day, and I'd be back in business! Has anyone ever had to pay serious fines or face jail time for gating off public land roads?

If only it weren't for my pesky conscience and sense of ethics.....

 

[TheTone]

I don’t think it’s the same situation but I’ve ran into similar things. One was a family I knew that filed a mining claim just to have a camping spot all to themselves under the guise they were mining. Another was an area in east Idaho where I hiked in a gated FS road to discover a large fenced area well signed No Treapassing and mining claim. I looked for that area yesterday and it’s clearly FS owned and not an actual inholding

 

[Cav1]

Not specific to this particular situation, but past experience tells me that how the Forest Service handles road closures by new owners of private inholdings depends a great deal on the district ranger at the time. All too often, the CYA careerist types will just pass the buck..."We will let the county handle the road access issue"...bury their heads in the sand, and let another public access just quietly slip away. District rangers willing to risk their careers to fight for public access have become an increasingly rare and endangered species and need the full support of the public.

 

[MTHunter1321]

Yeah, so I think I know exactly where you're talking about, because I was in precisely the same situation last year going up that road over in the Belts (I live in Helena). I was like, wtf what is this random fencing and gate? I can't get to the trailhead!

Destroying that bottom area, and blocking access to a ton of FS land for a few hundred thousand in gold placer. Oi.

Private land owners effectively getting to own and control public land in MT is a tale as old as public land. It's really the only beef I have with the culture around here: treating land owners like kings of little fiefdoms, who are above the written law and us non-land owning commoners.

It's making consider buying some random parcel of USFS inholding that has a road running through it. I could gate it off, wreck the road, and have all that forest to myself, and it would take YEARS of bullshitting for them to come in and make me take it down. And then I could just put it up again in, like, a day, and I'd be back in business! Has anyone ever had to pay serious fines or face jail time for gating off public land roads?

IMO this guy has no intention of mining it. He’s building a cabin where his land opens up a bit. He hasn’t gated off the public road (yet) but it won’t surprise me if in 12 months there’s a fence running the road and then blocking off access to the posted NF trailhead. I tried doing some research yesterday via Broadwater County but their imaged data only goes back to 1995 so I’m assuming whatever easement there is for the road was established well before that. I’ve emailed the FS regarding the easement and status of the road and am waiting their response.

 

[texwest44]

IMO this guy has no intention of mining it. He’s building a cabin where his land opens up a bit. He hasn’t gated off the public road (yet) but it won’t surprise me if in 12 months there’s a fence running the road and then blocking off access to the posted NF trailhead. I tried doing some research yesterday via Broadwater County but their imaged data only goes back to 1995 so I’m assuming whatever easement there is for the road was established well before that. I’ve emailed the FS regarding the easement and status of the road and am waiting their response.

That very well could be the case; I'd almost rather it be the case. We still get screwed but at the least the land isn't destroyed.

 

[diamond hitch]

Real mining claims have no surface ownership since 1955 with PL 167. Surface occupancy is only allowed if approved by the FS plan of operations - not the DEQ.

There are a few isolated claims that were issued valid existing rights where the claims had proven reserves at that time. I only know of a few in western Montana. You can only mine after filing a plan and getting it approved and posting a reclamation bond that guarentees reclamation. You have no surface rights to block egress. However you can control egress under the Mine Safety and Health Admin. There you need to have proper training to enter but only in an operating mine.
Most operating plans preclude operations after October 15 th without prior approval.

I know a bunch of you hate mining but get over it.

 

[rogerthat]

Real mining claims have no surface ownership since 1955 with PL 167. Surface occupancy is only allowed if approved by the FS plan of operations - not the DEQ.

There are a few isolated claims that were issued valid existing rights where the claims had proven reserves at that time. I only know of a few in western Montana. You can only mine after filing a plan and getting it approved and posting a reclamation bond that guarentees reclamation. You have no surface rights to block egress. However you can control egress under the Mine Safety and Health Admin. There you need to have proper training to enter but only in an operating mine.
Most operating plans preclude operations after October 15 th without prior approval.

I know a bunch of you hate mining but get over it.

This is a patented mining claim which means surface is private land. Honestly once that happens mining has nothing to do with it.

 

[rogerthat]

IMO this guy has no intention of mining it. He’s building a cabin where his land opens up a bit. He hasn’t gated off the public road (yet) but it won’t surprise me if in 12 months there’s a fence running the road and then blocking off access to the posted NF trailhead. I tried doing some research yesterday via Broadwater County but their imaged data only goes back to 1995 so I’m assuming whatever easement there is for the road was established well before that. I’ve emailed the FS regarding the easement and status of the road and am waiting their response.

I wouldn't wait around for the Forest Service to email you back. You might be waiting a while. Call the office where the forest ranger resides for this office and speak to someone. Find out what they know about this in the local office. It may be something that someone else has called on before or they may be as surprised as you are. If there is a formal easement across that private it should be pretty easy for the Forest service to get involved. Maybe just send out an LEO to talk to the landowner however if there is not...I wouldn't expect much from the forest service...cause you will be looking at prescriptive easements and access and it will really depend on the forest ranger to push this which can be a career land mine for those guys.

 

[diamond hitch]

Exactly!! Ceasur Hernandez, a classic environut in the Trout Creek area, built a house on Nat. Forest land under the mining claim bluff. It was non- mineral in charactor and it still took the FS something like 9 years and a lot money to make him and the house go away.

 

[307Fflam]

Yeah, so I think I know exactly where you're talking about, because I was in precisely the same situation last year going up that road over in the Belts (I live in Helena). I was like, wtf what is this random fencing and gate? I can't get to the trailhead!

Destroying that bottom area, and blocking access to a ton of FS land for a few hundred thousand in gold placer. Oi.

Private land owners effectively getting to own and control public land in MT is a tale as old as public land. It's really the only beef I have with the culture around here: treating land owners like kings of little fiefdoms, who are above the written law and us non-land owning commoners.

It's making consider buying some random parcel of USFS inholding that has a road running through it. I could gate it off, wreck the road, and have all that forest to myself, and it would take YEARS of bullshitting for them to come in and make me take it down. And then I could just put it up again in, like, a day, and I'd be back in business! Has anyone ever had to pay serious fines or face jail time for gating off public land roads?

If only it weren't for my pesky conscience and sense of ethics.....

Same thing in involved with public land in Wyoming. And even worse, they usually never even utilize the land they cut off from the public and in my experience, 9/10 won’t grant permission to cross their private parcel to get to the public land.