IDAHO GOLD PROSPECTORS

ASSOCIATION

March 2006

Web address: www.idahogoldprospectors.org

Meetings

Borah High School (in the rear) 6001 Cassia St., Boise, Idaho

2^nd Tuesday of every month (except December) – 7 p.m.

Our club has access to approximately 15 claims in Southwest Idaho, ranging from Atlanta to Fairfield, and the Boise Basin area to Silver City. Anyone who is a member in good standing is able to utilize these claims and keep any gold they find.

Miss Lucy Grimes Creek MOU Hannah 1 Dream Flap Jack Mac Paymaster Golden Rule China Wine Cup Silver City/Creek Claims

PRESIDENT: CLAIMS:

CHUCK KNAPP RON MACKELPRANG 208-345-9360

208-888-3651 CO-CHAIR ROB ROBINSON, JAMES

chuckdelores@yahoo.com SIMMONS, ERIC WEBB

VICE PRESIDENT: NEWSLETTER:

TAMI PALIN WARREN & NANCY JINDRICH

TLPALIN@YAHOO.COM 208-343-5179

GENA CAMERON

SECRETARY: gecko140@cableone.net

TIFFANY LEIB

208-433-9978 LEGISTLATIVE:

tiffanyleib@aol.com AL MALMSTROM, RODNEY POE,

RON MACKELPRANG, AL PALIN

TREASURER:

JESSE LEIB ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP DUES

208-433-9978 Individual $20.00 Couples $25.00 jesseleib@aol.com Families $30.00

MEMBERSHIP:

ROB ROBISON

208-703-0822

PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE:

Hello fellow prospectors,

Well another month has gone by and it feels like several. I want to get out and find some gold.

I would like to thank everyone that extended condolences and attended services for Joann Simmons last month. My sympathy goes out to James and his children. They have been great members.

I haven’t been up to Idaho City yet but hope to before the next meeting. We are going to have lots of water this year and I am getting excited about getting out there and get that gold.

Warren got our water permit so when the snow is gone we will be ready.

See you at the meeting.

May the bottom of your pan turn yellow.

Chuck Knapp, President

Phone 888-3651

E-mail chuckdelores@yahoo.com

IGPA MINUTES 2/14/06

President Chuck Knapp called the meeting to order. He welcomed members and guests. He announced that James Simmons’ wife had passed away Monday afternoon. The club approved spending up to $100 for a flower spray for her funeral.

Ron Mackelprang discussed the proposed changes to the IGPA constitution. The committee will meet again soon and finalize the proposed changes. A final draft will be available by the April meeting to submit to the membership.

Al Malmstrom asked if anyone knew about a new regulation that requires a plan of operation on claims.

Jesse gave the treasurer’s report: $5107.95 in the checking account, $625.00 for the Miss Lucy bond, $50.00 in petty cash, for a total of $5782.95.

On May 6-7 there will be a GPAA meeting and show in Spokane that will also have a conference regarding ways to pursue legal actions regarding prospecting.

The raffles were held. Stanley (sorry, I didn’t get your last name) won the president’s drawing and will bring the refreshments for the March meeting. Diane Jensen donated the following prizes for the raffle: Candy thermometer, lunch rollup bags, tent pegs, oil spout, camera strap, and a duffel bag. The 50/50 drawing was held, the prize was $26.

The meeting was adjourned.

Respectfully submitted,

Tami Palin, acting secretary.

VICE PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE:

Hi everyone.  Thank you to all of you who attended Joann Simmons' funeral (James' wife).  He truly appreciated it, and he wanted me to be sure to let everyone know how much he was thankful for the club's outpouring of love and support for his recent very great loss. 

Tami Palin, Vice President

ICMJ's Prospecting & Mining Journal, 7/05

Forest Service Final Rule

When is a Notice or Plan Required?

June 6, 2005, the Forest Service published a final Rule regarding section 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 228 (36 CRF 228) titled, "Clarification as to When a Notice of Intent to Operated and/or Plan of Operation is Needed for Locatable Mineral Operations on National Forest System Lands."

Background

In our July 03 issue we reported on the case of Public Lands for the People members Lex & Waggener ("PL) Members Win Occupancy Case -- Appeals Continue")" They were cited for occupying their mining claim for more than 14 days in CA's Klamath Nat'l Forest, and subsequently convicted. They appealed.

The miners won their appeal. the judge made it clear that because the operation did not involved "any earth moving equipment or tree cutting, they were under no obligation to file a notice of intent. Under Section 228.4, without a notice of intent, a Ranger would not have the opportunity to find a significant disturbance of surface resources would likely result, such that a plan of operations would be required."

"In sum, assuming that the appellants were camping incident to mining a claim, then, the Magistrate erred in concluding that they were not authorized to do so by the Mining Law of 1872," stated Judge Karlton. (USA v. Lex and Waggener, , CR-S-01-0559.)

The FS filed an appeal but subsequently withdrew that appeal.

July 9, '04, the FS published an "Interim Rule" to make filing a Notice mandatory for any surface disturbance on public lands under the care of the FS, thereby regulating miners like Lax and Waggener.

Since 1974, many miners interpreted 228.4 to mean that a Notice was not necessary unless earth moving equipment such as backhoes or bulldozers were part of the mining operation or involved cutting trees.

The Final Rules makes some welcome changes to the Interim Rule, but many in the mining community say it still goes way too far in restricting the rights of miners.

The High Points

1) The Final Rule specifically excludes a few basic prospecting methods from filing a Notice of Intent.

“...the Department is including god panning, non-motorized hand sluicing, and the use of battery operated dry washers to the exempted category of operations described in § 228.4(a)(1)(ii) of the interim rule.

Metal detecting is another example that is being added to the category of operations which § 228.4(a)(1)(ii) of the interim rule exempts from the requirement for prior submission and approval of a proposed plan of operations. However, the type of metal detecting that is permissible under 36 CFR part 228, subpart A, is metal detecting associating with locating gold or other locatable mineral deposits subject to the U.S. mining laws. This subpart does not authorize metal detecting for other purposes, such as metal detecting to located treasure trove, historic or prehistoric artifacts, lost coins, or jewelry.”

2) The Interim Rule requirements for filing a Notice or Plan were somewhat improved in the Final Rule. “If the operator reasonable concludes that the proposed operations will not cause significant disturbance of NFS resources, the operator is not required to submit a notice of intent...”

3) Another common complaint was that the Interim Rule subjected miners to restrictions greater than other users of public lands. The Final Rule also attempted to address this aspect.

“...the Department is adding...another category of operations which can be conducted without prior submission of a notice of intent... This category will include operations, which in their totality, will not cause surface resource disturbance which is substantially different than that caused by other users of the National Forest System who are not required to obtain a Forest Service special use authorization, contract, or other written authorization.”

4) No penalty provision was added to 36 CFR 228. The FS can still utilize the civil courts to go after a miner who causes a significant disturbance, which is no change to the previously existing regulations.

The Low Points

1) Currently, district rangers set the length of time for camping by public land users in the forest they supervise, and this is commonly two weeks. Beyond this time frame, public land users need permission or “special use authorization” from the district ranger to extend a stay beyond this period. Judge Karlton stated the 1872 Mining Law excluded miners like Lex and Waggener from this restriction. If the Forest Service requires authorization from other groups, then it’s likely they will try to force miners to do the same.

2) Numerous studies have shown that small-scale dredging is a “deminimus” activity, meaning it has no significant impact when operated “in season.” California completed an EIS for dredging, and the state issues a state permit with various restrictions to avoid conflicts with other public land users, fish spawning seasons and endangered or threatened species. The FS does not exclude those with state permits from the possibility of having to file a Notice. This could equate to a miner having to comply with different state and federal government requirements, even though the state has already completed an EIS to address these issues.

3) Discretionary authority given to each district ranger will remain a problem. We are all aware of district rangers who are friendly -- or unfriendly -- towards mining. The political party in control decides who will be appointed to each position of authority. It can change every fourth years, which will continue to create inconsistency and instability. A small operation could be totally acceptable in one forest, but require a Notice or possibly even a Plan in another forest based on the opinion or environmental leanings of a district ranger. The political party in control in Washington also helps to shape or reshape the opinions of district rangers.

Gold Show Dates and Locations

GPAA

May 6 & 7th

Spokane Washington
Spokane Interstate Fairgrounds
404 N Havana
Spokane, WA 99202

Fuel Freedom International

Would you like to save money on gas and give your vehicle more power? Check out my website: www.prospector.myffi.biz

then see me, or give me a call.

Chuck Knapp 888-3651