Major Utah crystal cave listed on eBay. HELP!!

[TooeleCherokee]

Has anyone called GRE to see what kind of deals can be made regarding the crystal ball mine/cave?

You and your other aliases are quite a piece of work. After stirring everything up, you still want to know what us cavers are willing to spend on your "mining claim".

A deal does not always include monetary value, Though I would assume GRE would like to come out whole in regards to the issue and not in the hole.

Cory Shuman, does not know how to identify minerals

So GRE can't identify minirals... or you can't.. that doesn't really matter. what is the end result that is wanted? the claim to be stripped from GRE and thrown out and the Cave to go back to being ignored by the caving community until something else comes up? the Caving Community to own the claim and control the cave? what come up with some solutions that will correct the problem as you see it and work towards that instead of just deflecting the issue with remarks about who is posting what. Currently the BLM are the ones that allowed something that you don't like why don't you go after them instead of GRE as they are the ones that screwed up from your point of view GRE seems to be just following the law (precedent is everything).



Keep deflecting and being paranoid batrotter it isn't getting to the solution to the problem (please note 3 distinct writing styles and in the end does it really matter who is who look at content and just go from there)

[Anonymous_Coward]

To Andy Armstrong, who accuses me of hiding behind anonymous screen names, I noticed that you listed your location as "inside the beehive." Does this mean you are a fellow Utahn? As for your apology for confusing me with anyone else, apology accepted. As for your confusion when dealing with people who you say "hide behind screen names," I wasn't hiding at all. Here I am. I went to work this morning and hadn't the time to populate my profile. Your assumption that I was hiding was woefully incorrect. Your invitation to talk in the open is accepted. Anytime, anywhere. Your assumption I wasn't willing to talk in the open is similarly misplaced. Besides, anyone can google "thelivingwest" and get a bunch of hits, all leading to me. Scott McCrea [thanks Scott] figured it out without too much trouble. As for your standing by the rest of your post, I'll have to drill down and find it and comment further.

Hi Russ, and welcome to the forums. Batrotter's comments aside, cavers and non-cavers are welcome here. You will find other mine explorationists on this forum as well. I am also pleased to see that you are revealing your real name. It adds credibility to your posts.

Thanks for forgiving me the identity mix-up. I had been following the ksl comments and had been deceived by the many "trolls" on there. It really seemed like Corey was inventing supporters and I had you pegged as one of his alter-egos. The rest of my earlier post was directed at him, so you may disregard it or reply in his defense, it's your call.

Yes, as of the last 9 months, I am a fellow Utahn. I would be happy to talk mines or caves or actually go caving with you anytime. I think you will find me civil and reasonable most of the time. (When I am not accusing people of being someone else )

[Caverdale]

This is my last post. Originally my concern was the listing of Crystal Ball Cave for sale. That has been removed. The thread has degenerated into a pissing contest about closing mines. I do want to make to replies to two posts but I will not reply further to comments to them, which each of the posters are welcome to do.

To thelivingwest. The DGOM ([Utah] Division of Oil, Gas, and Mining for the uninitiated) advertised the hearing on the North Tintic mine closures several times in the Legal Notices section of both Salt Lake City papers, and I'm told in the Provo paper (where the meeting was held), which I don't read. This was well in advance of the meeting. In addition there were articles about it in both papers and brief reports on KSL-TV and KUTV. (Don't know about other stations.) State law requires public notices. As a lawyer, I'm surprised you didn't know that.

To TooeleCherokee. I can tell quartz from calcite. Scratch your "quartz" with a knife. If it scratches easily, it ain't quartz. Look at the claim notice. It clearly indicates that it is a LODE claim. Look at the auction text below the photos at the quote from the BLM paper about filing claims.
“To constitute a valid discovery upon a lode claim, three elements are necessary: 1. There must be a vein or lode of quartz or other rock-in-place, 2. The quartz or other rock-in-place must carry gold or some other valuable mineral deposit, 3. The two preceding elements, when taken together, must be such that as to warrant a prudent man in the expenditure of his time and money in the effort to develop a valuable mine.”
Everywhere in the auction text, Shuman claims the presence of quartz but shows a photo of calcite labeled as "quartz". The other site he mentions with quartz is the entrance. I helped chip out the rock for the gate frame. Nothing but calcite. No quartz. Without the quartz, the BLM would rule the claim as invalid, but that is up to them. I pity the poor sucker that bids on the claim expecting to find gold-bearing quartz. My main concern with the validity of the claims is that the maps clearly show they cover both entrances of the cave.

And a final note: I am personally against most mine closures myself. But the DGOM employees have no choice but to do the work the laws require for their employment . Why are you constantly ragging at them? What other choices do they have? Not doing the job they were hired to do would get them fired, and their children would starve and have to wear rags. It would seem to me that you should be talking to the people that passed the laws. Your anger is misplaced.

Caverdale out.

[thelivingwest]

To thelivingwest. The DGOM ([Utah] Division of Oil, Gas, and Mining for the uninitiated) advertised
the hearing on the North Tintic mine closures several times in the Legal Notices section of both
Salt Lake City papers, and I'm told in the Provo paper (where the meeting was held),
which I don't read. This was well in advance of the meeting. In addition there were
articles about it in both papers and brief reports on KSL-TV and KUTV. (Don't know about
other stations.) State law requires public notices. As a lawyer, I'm surprised you didn't know that.

The "hearing" to which CaverDale refers is nothing of the sort. It is a public meeting to solict
one way feedback from the public as to their "concerns." No video or audio recording is made of
the meeting, so it is helpful to think of these as "Open Houses."
In fact, that is what DOGM calls them: http://www.ogm.utah.gov/amr/press.htm
They offer these open houses to comply with federal mandates to [appear to] involve the public, they do not
take anything of substance from the public at these Open Houses and change their plans.
Dale, we were there at the North Tinic WEST meeting, and it was there that they refused us post-meeting access
to the files necessary to understand what they were proposing to close.

As a lawyer, I know this, and you might not , but I have been given severely redacted versions of the
cultural resource surveys for the Star Project. And absolutely nothing on the North Tintic EAST closures that you were
advised on, because the Open House on THAT closure hasn't yet been held. DOGM at best has been slow to work with us on closure recommendations.

How did YOU and your group get advance notice of the EAST closures, when we are told they are secret, proprietary, and/or exempt from FOIA requests?

How did you get promises/assurances/money pledged to protect your access? We would like that kind of pull.
Would the SL grotto be willing to share the info and coordination strategies they received from DOGM with our mine exploration group?
Or are we going to forever work separately and apart from each other in our efforts to secure open access to underground resources?

Dale, thank you for the dialogue and the points you raise regarding valid verus invalid mining claims. And thanks for being against the wholesale closure of mines. I once applied for a job with the UT-DOGM, so I am aware they have a job to do and mouths to feed. We have met with John Baza, Dana Dean, and are working to identify and help them move away from wholesale backfilling toward a balanced and selective gating with keys of the access resources we feel need to be preserved.

[wyandottecaver]

A question for miner types.

Would calcite or the spar in the cave and surrounding rock be considered a "valuable mineral" ? And if some type of "valuable mineral" were shown to exist on these claims would that be sufficient to allow physical modification of the cave passages? Lets say I decided that polished calcite counter tops would be all the rage (I'd want one!) and I owned these claims containing calcite veins and crystalline rock deposits...could I mine it? I noticed the BLM lost a court case regarding "decorative" building stones........

Also, what about the exploration tunnel route? Could you claim to be "exploring" and thus use the claim to control access to the subsurface and/or dig your own entrance that bisected the cave?

Russ, much the same happens everywhere. Its not what you know but who you know. I don't think anyone faults most BLM employees anymore than most USFWS people regarding WNS though certainly there is always someone who you really wish would retire. That doesnt relieve the AGENCY of bearing the burden of its collective actions. In this case, the BLM clearly was not following the law even over a FCRA cave.

[thelivingwest]

Wow, dusting off the cobwebs from the mining law portion of my brain....

1. Common varieties are non-locatable. [Building stone for example, in spite of the lost BLM case, are generally non-locatable] A good example is limestone. Day in Day Out, its treated as a common variety...BUT
pharmaceutical grade limestone deposits, and ultra pure limestone deposits, are locatable.

2. Calcite, generally is NOT locatable. How about Iceland Spar? [TV rock] Yes, probably locatable. Big slabs of calcite to polish up as countertops? A gray area. One theory is that this would be labeled a common variety, as the polish is what makes it valuable, not the mineral itself. If attractive enough, and gemmy or laced with agate, it might then be considered gem materal, and locatable.

3. Tunnels. Tunnels [new adits] are actually claimed as such, [a tunnel claim] and are not lode claims. Would require after filing a detailed Notice and Plan of Operations, submitted to BLM/USFS, etc., but yes, I suppose the law allows someone to declare his/her intention to drive a tunnel from A to B and the law allows for such a person to the mineral rights to locatable minerals discovered on either side of the tunnel. Whether the claim controls the cave resource is debatable. One would hope the BLM denies a notice of operation that would bisect a cave if the bisection would harm cave resources.Or tolerate a mining activity that bisects a cave if it would help increase access to the cave to the interested researchers and/or public.

I think the wise staking of tunnel site claims might be an effective tool to manage cave resoures from active mining. They can be held and issued to anyone who wants to deal with the paperwork involved.

4. Tunnels as in underground exploration tunnels that do not reach the surface [I think the technical term is winze or raise] would be considered exploration activites, subject most likely to a plan of operation and financial bond requirement of the claimant to cover any damages to resources .

No, I don't think that the discovery of minor mineralization would justify the physical modification of cave resources, especially if already assesed as significant under FCRPA. However, let's say you found the Lost Dutchman's Gold in the next Carlsbad Caverns...if a valid mining claim existed before a finding of cave signifcance was made, you'd have the BLM in the position of trying to balance the competing interests-- Cave protection versus exploitation of the mineral resource [gold]. BLM could require them to dig the long way around such mineralization to protect cave resources.

BTW, believe it or not, I still have friends working for the BLM, and they sometimes still admit to knowing me

[Squirrel Girl]

2. Calcite, generally is NOT locatable. How about Iceland Spar? [TV rock] Yes, probably locatable. Big slabs of calcite to polish up as countertops? A gray area. One theory is that this would be labeled a common variety, as the polish is what makes it valuable, not the mineral itself. If attractive enough, and gemmy or laced with agate, it might then be considered gem materal, and locatable.

TV rock is ulexite, not calcite (Iceland Spar). Calcite would make a really poor choice for a countertop. It's way too soft and soluble. Travertine is sometimes available for decorator stone, but it's not recommended for countertops (at least not in kitchens).

[caverdan]

2. Calcite, generally is NOT locatable. How about Iceland Spar? [TV rock] Yes, probably locatable. Big slabs of calcite to polish up as countertops? A gray area. One theory is that this would be labeled a common variety, as the polish is what makes it valuable, not the mineral itself. If attractive enough, and gemmy or laced with agate, it might then be considered gem materal, and locatable.

TV rock is ulexite, not calcite (Iceland Spar). Calcite would make a really poor choice for a countertop. It's way too soft and soluble. Travertine is sometimes available for decorator stone, but it's not recommended for countertops (at least not in kitchens).

Travertine is commonly used as a trim material for tile and stone countertops. It's easy to cut and bullnose with hand tools......unlike granite. They put a filler materal in it, to fill the voids and then polish it flat before cutting it to shape. They generally don't use it as the top material as it chips and cracks easily when things are dropped on it. It is also used as baseboard for tile floors. With the current trend toward ceramic and stone flooring and countertops, the demand for travertine is strong.

[graveleye]

This thread is clearly a work of trolls.

That sure is the truth. I don't even really understand what is going on here except that it is not pretty.
However, I do not see any evidence of misrepresentation by creating aliases since they all appear to have come from different IP addresses.

That being said, I advise folks to keep the trolling down, calm down, and please please do not consider misrepresenting yourself through the use of an alias.

[caverdan]

Why don't we use money from the save the caves fund and buy the cave in question?

[Caverdale]

Why don't we use money from the save the caves fund and buy the cave in question?

Because of numerous complaints, presumably by cavers and the BLM, the auction was changed to be two claims for the surface over of the cave, but with the cave removed as part of the auction. However, he states in the revision that the claim holder will have full control over access to the cave. Our resident geologist with the National Forest Service is well-versed in mining claims says this is fraudulent because an unpatented mining claim does not give exclusive rights to the surface area.

See the new auction at:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi ... 0326741294

[wyandottecaver]

From what I have read online it is true you couldn't restrict access to the surface for things like hiking and hunting.... but since the cave is sub-surface and lies below two mining claims maybe

*edit* it also just occured to me that the Bates controlled access to the cave with their claim......

[Gold_Rush_Expedinc]

I dont want to start another flame war here, Im just posting information.
Once you have a mining claim, you can file a notice of operations with the BLM, this is as simple as putting your name, address, contact info on a piece of paper and then put that you plan to use the site for casual use. This is less than 1000 tons of rock moved. Way more than some do in a lifetime. However, once this is filed, you can fence off your area and claim site. This is to prevent public access. If you have shovels, or other equipement that you leave on site they could be stolen if the general public had access. Also, if you uncover a rich gold vien or something, allowing the general public to view this could have serious impact on your claim and encourage theft of your mineral deposit.
So in a nutshell, file the NOO, and fence the entire site. No Trespassing. Anyone else comes on the site and according to a few old precedents, you have the right to put some rock salt in their hindquarters.

[wyandottecaver]

GRE.. does the BLM have to accept your notice of operations or can they deny it?

[Gold_Rush_Expedinc]

It isnt something that they don't accept. Its sent either via certified mail, or delivered and stamped as recieved. This isnt any option for the BLM at this point, they have accepted the mining claim as valid and now are only recieving more information from the claimant as to use. What they can do with this information is determine a reclamation bond, if you are doing more than casual use. If you do more than casual use it usually goes to the DOGM, who determines a bond amount, and you have to pay that before you can begin mining. This is again, only in the case where more than 1000 tons of rock will be disturbed.