Jump to content
Nugget Shooter Forums

BLM Claim Terminology Question???


Recommended Posts

Yo, All...I noticed today that one of our favorite claim hawkers suddenly has some of his claims showing no 2008 registration and the term, "unacceptable waiver" added on the info on Geocommunicator. I think this is very interesting because, until recently these claims did show 2008. Can anyone tell me what "unacceptable waiver" means??? Thanks, Unc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It means he tried to waiver the annual claim fees with "improvements" and someone denied him!!!

AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

:laught16: :laught16: :laught16: :laught16: :laught16: :laught16: :laught16: :laught16: :laught16: :laught16:

Hope they bring this sucker down. :coffeetime:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It means there could have been any of several things

wrong with the forms submitted . Also all he has to do

is refile the claims the next day to hold them.

Like most BLM terms it is used in a broad form and can

cover several reasons for voiding a claim.

The only thing that can keep him from refiling is if the

BLM suspects fraud,or the land status won't allow claims.

Also the BLM has to note any transaction,and could have

sent a request for an amended waiver form. Next time the

records may show he got it right.

If he didn't ,then in 6 months lr2000 will show the claims

closed and the reason why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Sawmill, the claims are 160 acre association claims, originally filed by only one individual. Then they were transferred to one different person with 8 people signing off on the transfer of interest, even tho' those 8 people are not shown as owners with the BLM or the county recorder. The individual the 8 transfered it to have had them also transfer 10 total claims to that name, which would keep it under the "small miner" definition. There are many such individuals who end up with 10 claims, all transferred by the generally same group of 8. :hmmmmmm: Interesting! Someone on one of the forums commented that BLM has a new legal person checking out such things. Perhaps that person is doing their job? :whoopie: .... Cheers, Unc

PS...By the way, they can't refile cause someone already filed on them... :laught16::laught16:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uncle Ron

I hope the new filers get to keep the claims.

I watched the exact same deal with some claims.

Really thought the guy was finished,but like I said

in a few weeks everything was all fine and dandy.

The BLM approved his new papers,and changed the

action notice on his paper work to read approved,

and shows the claims in good standing and valid.

The same person at the BLM also handled these.

I don't approve of what this guy is doing or support

his activity in any way. All I am trying to do is tell you

a few things to look out for.

Until the BLM declares those claims void,he still owns

them. Unacceptable waiver does not mean null and void.

All I can say is I wish you good luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here in So. Cal. someone with an Asian name since roughly December '07 has filed well over 100 hardrock claims in and around the old Dale District, in several cases right on top of pre-existing claims (both hardrock and placer). No proper postings have been made -- just what appear to be preliminary staking (no discovery posts, no claim papers). There also is emerging evidence of transfers from this individual to an amorphous "alphabet" company name. 29 Prospector has taken some photo evidence and has been researching and tracking this activity and may have more details to share in due time. Assuming that these filings are invalid, and with gold values climbing towards the sky, what a wonderful opportunity to scam -- especially overseas investors who know little to nothing about American mining laws. And what a bunch of headaches this may bring to the valid claim holders. It will be interesting to see whether small miner exemptions are claimed on these recently filed claims or whether proper maintenance fees are tendered by September 1st. I worry that comparable activity, if happening on sufficient scale up and down the whole length and breadth of BLM territory, will create sufficient chaos to give Congress an excuse to jump in and screw everything up for all the rest of us who have been following (and respecting) the rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I worry that comparable activity, if happening on sufficient scale up and down the whole length and breadth of BLM territory, will create sufficient chaos to give Congress an excuse to jump in and screw everything up for all the rest of us who have been following (and respecting) the rules.

I think you are 100% right about this!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A little more research today shows that one of the people that the general group of 8 transfers claims to has received 80 claims in the past 3-4 years, and apparently still "owns" (read, has parked for the claim hawker) many more than the 10 max allowed under the small miner waiver...Another hit the 10 mark, then changed one letter in the spelling of his last name (from y to i ) to handle still more transactions...There are quite a few others to receive multiple claims by Quitclaim...I also found many more 160 acre claims "located" by only one person, and identified on the location notice as the sole owner, but transferred to one of the "claim parking lots" by 8 of the general regular bunch of names...One common thread to the many tens of thousands of acres of claims is that the Quitclaims all go to the same address, currently a PO box in Wickenburg, but previously in Gilbert, rather than to the person supposedly benefiting from the Quitclaim... Also found that the leader(s) of the general 8 group keep close tabs on the claims they sell and if a mark fails to keep the claim they've bought up, the Group of 8 refiles real fast.... I do agree strongly that these people are going to cause everyone else real problems if someone doesn't bring some federal authority in on it...Otherwise, I wouldn't give a squiggly about it....One thing that puzzles me about all this is that it is so obvious, why doesn't someone in the the BLM office in Phoenix raise an eybrow???...Maybe they are starting to, huh?....Cheers, Unc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since the new adjudicator was brought in they are looking at each and every claim for its legality. Several files I try to look at are un-available since they are in adjudification (on his desk) while being reviewed for validity. All of ours have been looked at by him, so why not all others. :laught16: I applaud them for spending the time to do this and are happy to offer "input" on certain claimants and their unusual tactics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...