Mining Claims Within The National Forests (6e24531c-dd77-477a-9e93-f690fd2d94d3)

Discussion of the paper of E: D. Gardner, presented at the Salt Lake meeting, August, 1914, and printed in Bulletin No. 91, July, 1914, pp. 1467 to 1471. H. V. WINCHELL, Minneapolis, Minn.-There are two questions I should like to ask: First, does the Department still adhere to the decision made in the East Tintic case? Second, does the Department require placer ground to he of such value that, in the opinion of the Forest Service employees, it will pay to work, before admitting the location to be valid? T. C. HOYT,* Ogden, Utah.-With reference to the first question: the Department does not hold to that decision, as it was reconsidered by the Secretary Of the Interior, and the Department is governed by the decision of the Secretary Of the Interior, on those points always. The Department of Agriculture makes no decision as to what constitutes a sufficient discovery. The mineral examiners simply report their findings and Opinions. These are transmitted to the chief of the field division of the General Land Office, who in turn transmits the reports to the Commissioner Of the General Land Office, who decides whether the report raises an issue requiring a hearing. If a hearing is ordered, expert testimony is given on the question of the discovery, as well as the evidence of practical people who operate in the vicinity of the claim in question. As to the extent of placer values considered sufficient to justify a location, my answer will need a little amplification. I couldn't answer it directly for the reason that sometimes people resort to placer claim location as a means of acquiring land for Other purposes than placer mining, which makes it absolutely necessary that the government give close attention to the question of whether good faith has been shown, as it is the evidences of good faith that largely determine whether a report adverse to a claim shall be made. That is a difficult point to cover sometimes. For instance, in the region I have recently visited there are some 17 miles of a valley, from ¼ to ¾ mile in width, all covered by placer locations. It is valuable stock-grazing land, and is stocked at the present time. It also contains a stand of timber, and is on the watershed of an important stream-important from the fact that it furnishes the water supply to government storage reservoirs, and to pending reclamation and Carey Act projects. In this case the placer claims will not be disturbed as mere locations. They will simply remain there, and there will be no action with reference to them until the claimant asks for patent or, before patent, begins to denude that watershed and remove that timber. Then the government would direct that the mineral experts go on to the ground, examine it, prospect it, and submit their report, with a view to seeing if