Jump to content
Nugget Shooter Forums

clay

Nugget Shooter Members
  • Content Count

    570
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

Everything posted by clay

  1. clay

    Holbrook Finds

    Actually the area on the east side of Sun Valley road is State trust land. The owner on the west side of the road is a woman in Phoenix. BNSF owns the tracks, access road and a lot of nearby property. Property there is pretty cheap but you would actually have to contact the owner to see if they would sell - or give you permission to hunt their private property.
  2. clay

    100 year old artifacts?

    It's obvious you are not only not a lawyer you don't have a clue how the American government administration works. That's OK because I'm going to educate you a little right here. You may have spoken to a BLM field office person and they may have discussed policy with you. All that seems possible and even plausible. So far so good no reason to doubt any of that. I'm calling made up BS on your part about your claim that that a BLM agent ever said "If there is trouble they will arrest for resisting and for removing artifacts from federal land under 36.CFR.261.9." Here's the thing Bob - you made up that part. Straight up bro. You see 36.CFR.261.9 is a Forest Service rule. It has nothing to do with the BLM. The BLM and the Forest Service aren't even in the same part of the government. The BLM is a bureau of the Interior Department and the Forest Service is an agency of the Agriculture department. No BLM employee could ever ticket you for a violation of a Forest Service rule. You would be hard pressed to even find a BLM employee that knows what 36.CFR.261.9 is. More stuff you probably should read. A BLM person claiming they would ticket you for 36.CFR.261.9 would be the same if you called your local New Mexico sheriff and they claimed they could write you a ticket for violating a law in New York. Ain't gonna happen - ever. You are a smart guy. I like your stories and humor. Why a nice guy like yourself would charge into a discussion like this armed with nothing but your opinion is a puzzlement to me. Now you are starting to look like a guy that would rather win an argument than know the truth. I hate to think of you that way Bob. How about we start over here with some facts and leave the BS behind? I'm willing to clean the slate if you are.
  3. clay

    100 year old artifacts?

    36.CFR.261.9 is not a law.
  4. clay

    100 year old artifacts?

    Maybe you posted the wrong link Bob? There are no laws even mentioned on that linked page. As for the handout you posted before I have copies of all three of the Congressional Acts listed at the bottom. I've been studying and using those laws for nearly 40 years so I'm pretty familiar with them. I've already linked to and quoted the only one regarding arrowheads - the Antiquities Act. That Act clearly states that arrowheads found on the surface are open to collection without permit, fee or fine. Nowhere have I ever written that digging for arrowheads was allowed - just arrowheads found on the surface as clearly stated in the law. You can read all three of those listed laws for yourself. You can search Google and get a bunch of greenie handouts declaring just about everything is illegal but you need to read the actual laws if you want the facts. I have an extensive library that I am scanning and making available in the Land Matters Library. That might be a good place to start your study if you really want to verify what I have written here and elsewhere. If you don't find what you are looking for there just let me know and I will give you a link to the law and work on getting a copy in the library. I would encourage everyone to read the actual laws about public lands. We use them, we prospect them and we travel across them. I am of the opinion we should know what the law actually allows us to do on our lands. Relying on handouts or web pages that kinda sorta hint there might be a law is the result of 40 years of city hippies working in the federal agencies trying to save the public lands from country hicks. They have failed in reaching their goal of preserving the public lands for weekend picnics with their urban friends. Country folks still hunt, mine, fish, drive, chop wood, spit and pee on "their" precious nature preserves. This generational failure has made them bitter and truth be told most of them have adopted the "ends justify the means" attitude towards the public they obviously hate. If they obfuscate and lie they believe it's OK because they are now the mid level agency management wonks that get to publish insipid baby blue cartoons to threaten the public should they step on their dreams again. It's not legal to dig up native settlements on public lands or bodies of any race anywhere. It's illegal to pollute public rivers, lakes and streams or burn public forests. It is still illegal to steal stuff that belongs to other people or any government. The laws really haven't changed much in our lifetime but the public perception of what the law is have changed quite a bit. Ultimately that is my point. If you don't know what the actual law governing your activities is it is no longer safe to assume your public servants will help you understand. They aren't legally responsible, they aren't well informed and they aren't looking out for your best interests. Personally I would prefer to stick to a discussion of the law. That is where the rubber meets the road. Somehow any discussion of what the law actually says or what it means ends up turning into a contest to see who has the cutest pink or blue bunny on their cartoon handout. I get that, the law is boring and makes people's heads hurt. Of course the alternative to learning the actual law is more colorful and misleading cartoons. Here is probably the easiest resource for looking up Federal laws like the list of three found on your cartoon handout. Cornell University They provide all of the U.S. Code (Federal law) - you can just browse through if you have a few years to kill until your beer gets cold or you can use the search function.That's usually where I link people to that show an interest in a particular subject because it has links to all the changes through time to each law. In my opinion the only way we are ever going to be able to shake off our ignorance about our rights on the public lands is to get educated. I'm willing to help with that goal but I'm not the kind to chase another dog's tail. If you want to present some laws that back up your beliefs about those handouts I'm more than willing to be educated. If you just want me to disprove every silly or misleading statement you find on the interwebs I just don't have the time or inclination.
  5. clay

    100 year old artifacts?

    I said nothing Bob. All those words were from the law itself. In the real world the BLM and Forest LEOs are subject to the same laws we are. If there is no law to cite an individual can not be cited. What would they write on the ticket? Each ticket has to cite the law that was broken. The thing here is I've heard these same tales of fear and drama for years. Several times I've become concerned enough to investigate and talk to the LEOs who have supposedly cited people for the things you believe they can ticket, arrest, confiscate and fine for. Never have any of these stories proven to be true. If you have any real evidence that any Federal agency has successfully prosecuted someone for picking up arrowheads or digging trash please feel free to share here. Due to prior experience I will not be holding my breath for that event. When you have the time I would love to tell you true and verifiable stories about the LEO and archie reactions when I've questioned them about these many bogus claims. No tickets, no arrests and no confiscations but plenty of laughter at the thought someone would believe they would waste their time writing tickets for trash. Each individual has to make their own decision as to what to believe. Some of them believe in magic underwear or flying carpets. Others believe they should live in fear of being caught digging trash. That's all cool with me bro. It's a big wide world of enchantment and I'm far from understanding all of it.
  6. They serve food??? I thought it was a division of Waste Management from the smell!
  7. clay

    100 year old artifacts?

    Yeah the not digging bodies thing is kind of important. Mining itself is exempt - not mining equipment. You can mine and not worry about being cited for digging up old stuff. This applies to all federal lands, not just BLM land. Direct from the Antiquities Act: Arizona State lands are open if you get a permit for what you want to dig. Not cheap and not quick but it is possible. I know quite a few people mining State lands. "Significant historical value" is never mentioned in the law. Archaeological resources are. The Antiquities Act doesn't even mention history. Just because something is old doesn't mean it's of archaeological interest. As for arrowheads - that's specifically addressed twice in the Antiquities Act - first under the Prohibited acts and criminal penalties section: And then again in the Civil penalties section of the law. There are quite a few laws relating to fossils but the Antiquities Act is only concerned with human artifacts. There are no laws concerning meteorites in federal or state law. Just read the law. It's real clear in there. Relying on handouts or phone calls will leave you with a lot of misinformation. Government agents are not legally responsible for giving you incorrect information. As the BLM warning states on all their approved information. NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY BLM FOR USE OF THE DATA FOR PURPOSES NOT INTENDED BY BLM Which leaves the big question - if you don't know what their intention is why would you rely on the data?
  8. clay

    Hillside fine gold

    Patented claims don't have markers or signs. They are no longer mining claims they are private property - like your back yard. The county can't help you but if you check the Master Title Plat and Land Matters Land Status maps you will see it's not open to prospecting, claiming or exploration. You can see the actual boundaries by pulling the survey from the General Land Office. Since it's private property it's pretty important you know where the boundary line is.
  9. clay

    100 year old artifacts?

    Since many of the people concerned with this issue prospect in Arizona it might be useful to read the Arizona State laws regarding Antiquities. Arizona was one of the first States to make their own laws regarding Antiquities back in 1927. Since the Arizona law was modeled after the unconstitutional Federal Antiquities Act Arizona's first try at a law was also declared void. Arizona, like the feds, eventually got around to passing a workable Antiquities and Historic property law. Here's the part of the law about antiquities: Much like the Federal Antiquities Act arrowheads, coins and bottles are excluded from regulation. Notice that Arizona, and all other states, are limited to controlling antiquities on "lands owned or controlled by this state or any agency of this state". Not private or federal lands. So what about historic artifacts? Arizona only protects Historic properties of State agencies and even then only those properties under the "ownership or control" of the agency. Not private or federal lands. Basically in Arizona, if you don't dig up a native settlement on State lands or mess with an agency building, you are free to dig where you want on private land or on federal lands where there is no archaeological site. Don't dig up dead people, native sites or state land and you are good to go. This is true of most states with slight, but important, variations. More notes on the federal Antiquities Act : The potential for a fine for digging an archaeological resource is directly related to the value of the rusty can you are digging. That's just part of the reason there are virtually no successful prosecutions for tampering with archaeological resources. Old dirty stuff isn't worth trying to fine someone over. Old dirty stuff you dig up while mining is exempt from the act. Fossils, rocks and meteorites are not protected under the Federal Antiquities Act, only past evidence of human life. That's why it's called the Archeological Protection Act and not the "whatever we want it to apply to protection act". If others can contribute actual state laws regarding archaeologic and historic protections we might be able to calm some of the unfounded fears about finding old stuff in the ground. The law is almost always less restrictive than what people have been led to believe. It would be nice if prospectors could base their knowledge on actual facts rather than rumors about confiscation and arrest. Then maybe we can get back to digging.
  10. clay

    100 year old artifacts?

    No Bob, my "mission" was to correct misinformation about the law. I do that a lot. Sadly it is part of my real life job. My job is getting easier because miners and mining companies are becoming more educated about their rights and responsibilities. In part that is because of my very public efforts to educate and inform miners and land users. I'm sorry if you feel singled out, that's certainly not the case as you would know if you read my writings over the last 10 or so years on this and other forums. I can assure you others here have been educated in your absence. I'm sure there are more than a few people on this forum and elsewhere who have had their knowledge brought up to date by my posts and links about the facts. It was misinformation about the law on a public forum was what prompted me to respond - not the fact that it was you that posted the misinformation. I get it that you don't care about the law. I'm actually pretty much aware of what you are putting out as your philosophy. I didn't respond to your opinions about the law but I did correct the misinformation you posted. That matters to some of us more than your opinion does. I'm sorry if that's offensive to you but learning the facts seem to affect some people that way. In the meantime please continue to share your opinions - although I may not personally always agree with your opinions I do find them entertaining.
  11. clay

    100 year old artifacts?

    That's not the federal law Bob. That's the 1906 Antiquities Act that was declared unconstitutional and void by the Court in United States v. Diaz (1974). Interestingly Diaz' arrest in 1973 was the first time since 1906 that anyone was prosecuted under the 1906 Act. The Diaz prosecution resulted in the Act being overturned. Diaz won after admitting taking seven ceremonial masks from a cave on tribal lands then displaying those masks in his shop window in Scottsdale. Eventually Congress got around to writing a new Antiquities Act in 1979. You can read the real Antiquities Act HERE.
  12. clay

    100 year old artifacts?

    It's perfectly legal to hunt for, and keep, arrowheads found on the surface. Mining is exempt from the Antiquities Act and so are coins, bullets and common trash. It's all right there in the actual law. As the chief archie for the BLM and Forest in southern Arizona told me, to prosecute anyone he would have to show up in court and testify that what you dug up was more than 100 years old AND that it was an archaeological resource. He said other than digging up native graves or native settlements he wasn't about to put his rep on the line for old nails or junk from a ghost town. If you aren't a pot hunter or grave robber you have nothing to worry about. Stay away from digging in designated historic sites, graves and marked archaeology sites and you will be fine - except in California where, from what I understand, a shovel permit now requires a 10 week waiting period.
  13. clay

    New Guy

    Welcome new guy. You might want to look over the Land Matters MetBul known meteorite falls and craters map. There are a lot more falls than the ones you mentioned, even a few in Florida. You can even check out the land status so you don't end up hunting private land without permission.
  14. I'm guessing the stash from the imaginary train robbery is in the Monzano Mountains. Is there any limit on the number of guesses? Are we allowed to search underwater?
  15. Looks more like Manzano gold than Hillsboro Bob. You wouldn't be pulling my leg would you? I'm wondering how many "treasure" seekers are going to drown in Colorado or get arrested in Yosemite looking for that "loot"? This could be a big boost for us natural selection aficionados!
  16. If you leave behind the thought that it's an edged weapon it's small size and shape are more reminiscent of a wood wedge, finish debarker or a flat rock wedge. Looking at it that way includes a logical explanation why the narrow end suffered more damage. Or it could be an antique Hatch mince pie server.
  17. clay

    Yavapai County Assessor's Map

    Chris I've seen you post that you have to pay for copies from Maricopa County before. I don't have that problem. I use the Maricopa County Recorder's website often and I get free unofficial copies of the recordings by just clicking on the pages number just above the notice "View Unofficial Documents by clicking the number above." You can search by claim name as well as claimant name. After selecting document code "MINING CLAIM AND/OR LOCATION" in the dropdown just start typing the claim name in the "Business Name" field. As you type the claim name a dropdown list will appear with all the potential name matches. Pick your claim from the list or keep typing the full name in and click the search button. If you are looking for assessment work documents or Intent to Hold you will have to look under different document codes. You can also leave the document code blank and get all the docs for a single claim or name. Just remember that claim names go in the "Business Name" field. You can search by Township, Range, Section in "Business Name" too. Just type in something like T2N R2E SEC 17 and you will get all the records classified to that Section. This isn't as reliable as the Yavapai site because it relies on the person recording the doc to get the format right. Instead of the above T2N R2E SEC 17 you will find different results with TOWNSHIP 2 NORTH RANGE 2 EAST SECTION 17.
  18. clay

    Yavapai County Assessor's Map

    The assessors map doesn't show any mining claims. The Yavapai assessor qualifies some platted areas as "claims" so the minerals are accounted for in the valuation. Those are not actual mining claims but sometimes they are private mineral patents. The assessor maps can be helpful but they don't show actual property boundaries, they only show taxable property. Mining claims are not taxable property so they are never on the map.
  19. clay

    The Great Nugget Scam

    The nugget story was an elaborate hoax that was promoting the sale of the mining property that was just being put up for sale. The hoax and it's perpetrators were much more involved than just the sale of a nugget. Read the story at ICMJ. It's probably just a coincidence that Holabird is a geologist that also sells mining property and record sized nuggets found on those properties.
  20. Why do you think it's a hatchet, besides the general shape?
  21. clay

    New guy with a question

    It's Biotite Mica or Muscovite Mica
  22. For those still interested in the subject I'm thinking a bit of history would be helpful in understanding one of the two main reasons I am so sure this could not be a 500 year old wheel lock pistol part. The material the part is made of is not iron or steel. It looks like brass. If it were a 500 year old iron part found in the ground it would have rust. I think all detectorists that have worked desert land know this would happen even in the driest environment. The dig site area is much wetter than the deserts here in the southwest. If you can agree to that simple fact we can move on to what it might be composed of. The basic appearance appears to be corroded brass, It has the slight green patina of copper and the white spalling of zinc. But that is an impossibility for a 500 year old pistol lock screw. Not just because I have never seen a 500 year old brass pistol lock screw but because it's pretty easy to establish there never were any. Most people assume that it went something like this - Bronze age, Brass age, Iron age, Steel age. But the fact is any early brass was a mistake that couldn't be reproduced. Brass couldn't be made on a large scale commercial level before the 18th century. 1738 to be exact. That's due to the fact that unlike the copper and tin used to make bronze the zinc needed to make brass doesn't occur in a free form in nature and ordinary smelting results in zinc vapor, no zinc metal and dead smelter operators. Before that time the few bits of brass that had been produced were used in early clocks and clockwork type parts. It was popular for small plaques and ornamental bits - rich guy stuff. Probably it's main use outside of the rich guy showing off market, was was as pin material in weaving mills. A screw made of brass during that time would not have been used for a large clamp due to the fact that the low zinc content made a very soft brass that would bend or deflect in hard use. Remember this particular screw is used to clamp a sharp rock in a flat steel anvil so it could be slammed with force against a rotating steel wheel. If the rock moves the pistol doesn't fire. Unlike a flintlock the stone being clamped was pyrite, not flint. A brass screw would have been about as useful as a copper screw 500 years ago. Even modern composition brass screws are not used with coarse threads for clamping. The brass will stretch and eventually twist off when enough pressure is applied. Those dates and facts just don't jive with a 500 year old brass gun part. I'm hearing the protests already so I'm going to supply all the doubters with a reference that will save me a whole bunch of typing with my one stiff old typing finger. From the Copper Industry's own education association. Brief Early History of Brass So that leaves us with the possibility of a bronze replacement screw. My finger is tired and it's late anybody else want to explain the absurdity of a bronze coarse threaded screw for clamping?
  23. Rondel daggers eventually came to be carried by merchants and common folk all the war up to professional knights. They were originally designed to slip between the plates of a knights armor. There are three pictures of daggers in your post. I imagine the first one might have been a quality dagger at one time although the blade is suspiciously short and thick for a rondel. The second one appears to be more modern and fairly useless and the third one is so rusted and eroded it couldn't have come out of the same hole as the magic volkswagen spigot handle. I can't see the scale on the bottom one but if it's more than 20 inches long it should be pretty easy to find the maker and time period. Obviously you have found some source of information on this find that isn't included in the TV websites linked to or at the Museum website. Bob seems to think they have published and been peer reviewed. Care to share your sources?
  24. Thanks for removing the offensive turd and chest beating stuff from your post. I will do the same with my reply. Uh Oh! too late to edit, I guess you win.
  25. No it doesn't. You won't find a single dog screw with a "handle" on the end. The top of the screw was used as the thumb hold when cocking the wheel spring. In later periods the cock handle was incorporated into the anvil extension but we are talking 500 years ago not 350 or 400 years - right? If there was a handle or extension on the screw 50% of the time pulling on it would result in the flint falling out of the anvil dog. Before the Bob's brain explodes in joy over questioning the knowledge of his fellow posters I probably should reveal some of my own credentials. I have personally handled more archebuses, matchlocks, wheel locks and flintlocks than all the pictures you will ever find on the internet. I worked with Jemison for almost three years at what was, at the time, considered the best arms and armory house in the world. During that time I handled thousands of antique pistols, rifles, cannon, and hand weapons. Virtually every single piece I worked with would involve a lesson in the parts, function and history from Jemison. I might just know stuff without making it up. Further on to period wheel locks. 500 years ago a wheel lock pistol was like a Maserati. Only royalty could afford them, they were individually made to order, they included a lot of exotic new technology and they would break or misfire with ease and regularly. They were essentially jewelry for really rich guys who felt more macho with a sword and a pistol. They were almost all made in Germany as expensive beautiful art. Now explain to me how royalty ended up in Northwestern Colorado with a broken Maserati "repaired" with a Volkswagon part that would fail 50% of the time? Anything even remotely plausible would be acceptable as a hypotheses for the folks at the new Museum in Grand Junction.
×