BLM Interrogates Mojave Underground

[Mike]

On May 13th, 2009, Ray Kelsey, Outdoor Recreation Planner for the Utah BLM Salt Lake Field Office, contacted Mojave Underground Inc. regarding it’s involvement on BLM Lands. A certified letter was also sent from Glenn A Carpenter. In these letters, Mojave Underground was labeled as being a hazard to public safety, causing resource impacts, violating private property rights, and bypassing federal requirements for organizing activities on ‘public’ land as a commercial entity. A series of specific questions were asked in a very interrogative manner.

Mr Kelsey’s original letter to Mojave Underground can be viewed here.

In response, Mojave Underground replied informing Mr. Kelsey and Mr. Carpenter that our activities and involvements do not fall on public lands, that most are on private land. We discussed our safety program informing them that we are not putting the public at risk. We answered his questions, verifying that we are not a ‘for profit’ organization, and how we believe we fall outside the range of the Special Recreation Permit.

A copy of Mojave Underground’s response can be viewed here.

After over a month of not hearing anything back from the BLM, Mr. Kelsey responded with the following:

Mr. Capps,

Thank you for taking the time to respond to BLM’s questions regarding your organization’s activities and to explain your views regarding abandoned mine exploration and reclamation. The information you provided has been forwarded to BLM management for further action and follow-up as necessary.

Ray Kelsey
Outdoor Recreation Planner
BLM Salt Lake Field Office
2370 South 2300 West
Salt Lake City, UT 84119
Office: 801-977-4333
Fax: 801-977-4397

We are still awaiting further information from the BLM Management, and will keep everybody posted here and on adoptamine.org.

[Troy]

With current economic conditions limiting taxpayer resources, it is obvious that individuals such as Mr. Kelsey will go out of their way to justify their "government jobs" however possible. I can just imagine Mr. Kelsey proudly displaying his memorandum to his superiors within "the bureau" as he explains how this "research" on Mojave Underground took untold sums of his time to produce thereby saving millions of dollars and hundreds of lives. One would think that he could at least spell "Mojave" correctly. Proper grammar is obviously not a requirement to be "Outdoor Recreation Planner".

Kudos to Supernerd for "catching" us!!

[Mark1955]

LOL!!! Mohave... His secretary didn't even catch it nor did his spell check... What kinda people are they hiring over there anyway. For crying out loud... I demand at least proper spelling for my tax dollars.

[ExpUt]

Interesting. Corey & GRE got a very similar inquiry from the BLM.

Regarding SRP's and non-profits not needing them. Do you have any links or information on that?? I've been behind several SRP processes, both on behalf of non-profits. Additionally I worked on behalf of the U4WDA on the new RMP documents including their alternatives for SRP restriction when 6 of Utah's BLM districts revised their management plans. Some call for even a family reunion of a specified size to get an SRP, Scout groups, church groups, etc. I'm still in Aussie right now but I have an SRP handbook that I could review when I get home, it might shed some light on the non-profit deal. If in fact there is a loophole excluding them from permits it would be a huge asset to many organized groups in general.

Even if your end destination is not on public lands, the fact you travel public lands to get there such as the Pony Express Trail could put you in the que for a permit. Each district is enforcing things to their liking it seems and with a new RMP due for the SLC/West Desert office things could get far worse?

Very interested to hear the outcome of this. This situation is synonimys with situations happening in the motorize recreation world, where non-profit 'clubs' are planning events online just to find out they need a permit ahead of time. A permit that can take 180 days and hundreds of more dollars to fulfill. I've been studying the SRP stipulations for several of Utah's BLM districts for some of my personal business persuits, in all honesty they are pretty easy to work with and can be cheap under the right circumstances. However at the end of the day they have the choice to grant them or not and I fear in the case of mine exploration or related activities, unless you get insurance (something we have to do for 4x4 trips) then you are SOL. For example that trip we saw you guys in the Swell at the ZCMI mine, that was a permitted trip I lead for a group. We started the permit process in December/January for a spring trip.

Keep us posted Mike and keep up the good work!!!

[rhartill]

Kurt, it was two separate issues that the BLM was pursuing IMHO--1. that MU was somehow a profit enterprise and 2. that their activities were/do require a SRP. You are right in that even family organizations can fall into the BLM permit requirement, even when they only traverse BLM land to hold a fam reunion on private land....to my knowledge the BLM does not exempt non profits from the permitting requirements and there are no loopholes. Mike said that the BLM was assured that MU is in fact a npo, *and* [additionally] demonstrated through his answers that MU has not conducted activities for which a SRP was needed. No linkage was implied that because MU is a npo, its exempt. MU falls outside the range of needing a SRP because it takes state highways to get to Ophir and conducts its "activities" on private land. Lastly, Mike spent some time explaining to the BLM that internet posting of mine information is not tantamount to conducting an activity on public land, and if the BLM wants to interpret it this way, their own LR-2000 and more databases like mindat.org and usgs.gov will subject their webmasters to permit requirements. What I truly fear is that the day is not too far off that the BLM starts requiring individuals to take out permits to rockhound or offroad or camp in their campsites, or to take a picture on public lands. Wait, am I too late...?

http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/wo/MINERALS__REALTY__AND_RESOURCE_PROTECTION_/lands_and_realty/filming.Par.69076.File.dat/pl-106-206.pdf

[RockRacer]

I don't know if the link to the "original letter" they sent is in the same format, but the letter that you sent back seemed very well put together and very professional. (more professional than the BLM's) I am proud to be apart of such a smart and professional group who share the same passions that I myself do. Because of the type of individuals associated with Mojave Underground, I feel safe that this hobby will have a fighting chance to survive. Thank you.

[Mike]

Thanks Tobin. We all made sure that out letter back was as professional as possible. The BLM letter is what they wrote. It was just sent by email.

And thank you for your support, Tobin. Its people like you who we depend on to validate our points when fighting for this purpose.

[Joanne]

I don't know if the link to the "original letter" they sent is in the same format, but the letter that you sent back seemed very well put together and very professional. (more professional than the BLM's) I am proud to be apart of such a smart and professional group who share the same passions that I myself do. Because of the type of individuals associated with Mojave Underground, I feel safe that this hobby will have a fighting chance to survive. Thank you.

I agree completely! It was very well crafted and I believe that the tone and content were very professional. I am very impressed. Hopefully the BLM will come to realize that the members of this organization take the hobby very seriously and are not reckless in our activities. As with all interactions with government agencies, it would be best if we are able to establish a cooperative relationship. Of course, sometimes they just won't let you.....

Joanne

[ExpUt]

Kurt, it was two separate issues that the BLM was pursuing IMHO--1. that MU was somehow a profit enterprise and 2. that their activities were/do require a SRP. You are right in that even family organizations can fall into the BLM permit requirement, even when they only traverse BLM land to hold a fam reunion on private land....to my knowledge the BLM does not exempt non profits from the permitting requirements and there are no loopholes. Mike said that the BLM was assured that MU is in fact a npo, *and* [additionally] demonstrated through his answers that MU has not conducted activities for which a SRP was needed. No linkage was implied that because MU is a npo, its exempt. MU falls outside the range of needing a SRP because it takes state highways to get to Ophir and conducts its "activities" on private land. Lastly, Mike spent some time explaining to the BLM that internet posting of mine information is not tantamount to conducting an activity on public land, and if the BLM wants to interpret it this way, their own LR-2000 and more databases like mindat.org and usgs.gov will subject their webmasters to permit requirements. What I truly fear is that the day is not too far off that the BLM starts requiring individuals to take out permits to rockhound or offroad or camp in their campsites, or to take a picture on public lands. Wait, am I too late...?

http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medial...pl-106-206.pdf

Ah, that makes complete sense. As usual MU has its 'bases covered' so to speak.

[Rustler]

The mf BLM needs to chill out, smoke a doobie, and enjoy life for a change... and then STOP DESTROYING UTAH'S MINE AND, CONCORDANTLY, UTAH'S MINNING HISTORY!!!!

[Mark1955]

Wait, am I too late...?

Well I feel the BLM has been given too much power for sure. The pernmit that rus is referring to is strictly for commercial use of said BLM land for photographic/filming purposes. The commercial movie community is quite used to this sort of thing and they have location people that take care of these sorts of things. When it comes to filming or photography for personal stuff there is no fee required. I've been questioned about this a number of times since I use pro video equipment... they think I am out filming for profit but in reality I'm not, one guy even thought I was shooting footage for some environmental group!!

Mark

[rhartill]

interesting insights Mark, on using pro equipment and being asked if you have a permit. Thankfully, you were able to explain that no permit was needed, but my nightmare is that more and more often people will be challenged when they shouldn't, and eventually, a few of us will be cited for filming/photographing without a permit...permits should only be required if the BLM REALLY needs to devote time and wages to help monitor and coordinate the "shoot." And what if I shoot some personal footage on BLM land and THEN decide to market it?

[Mark1955]

Yea, interesting aspect and thats sort of where I stand... What if I decide to use my footage in a documentary of my own making or sell it to some TV show??? Things get kinda fuzzy there and I suppose this is where they can more or less do what ever they want to... They seem to be really good at that aspect...

[one_bad_rover]

as an FYI, Ive posted up some of the recent correspondance we have had with the BLM. link is on the front page of GRE.