Laserfiche WebLink
1990. when Mr. Congdon came back to the mine in May of 2005 he came back to <br /> begin working the mine and producing minerals. He did not come back to make a <br /> "discovery." Therefore the doctrine of pedis possessio does not apply and the White <br /> Banks Claims were open for relocation by the Skinner's. <br /> RESUMPTION OF WORK ON THE WHITE BANKS CLAIMS <br /> Defendants argue that once Mr. Congdon returned on May 1, 2005 to work the <br /> White Banks claims, the claims were no longer open for relocation and therefore Mr. <br /> Skinner's relocation efforts on June 1 and Minex's efforts in August of 2005 were <br /> invalid. <br /> Defendants rely on case law from 1893 and 1904 to support their argument. <br /> Defendants rely on Oscamp v. Crystal River Min. Co., 58 F. 2936 (8t' Cir. 1893) and <br /> Field v. Tanner, 75 P. 916 (Colo. 1904). These cases were decided prior to the <br /> enactment of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA). Section <br /> 314(b) of the FLPMA now provides that an affidavit of assessment work must be filed <br /> prior to December 31 of each year. Section 314(c) goes on to state that failure to <br /> comply "shall be deemed conclusively to constitute an abandonment of the mining claim <br /> by the owner." See also, 43 U. S. C. § 1744(c). In United States v. Locke, 471 U. S. <br /> 84, 97 (1985). the Supreme Court held that" [a)Ithough § 314(c) is couched in terms of <br /> a conclusive presumption of "abandonment", there can be little doubt that Congress <br /> intended § 314(c) to cause a forfeiture of all claims for which the filing requirements of§ <br /> 314(a) and (b) had not been met." There is nothing in the FLPMA that provides that if a <br /> claimant resumes work the claims are not open for relocation. 43 C.F.R. § 3836.15 also <br /> provides that if "you fail to perform the assessment work as required by this part, your <br /> 20 <br />