Thursday, April 30, 2015

What we can learn from a case similar to the Sugar Pine Mine

Galice Creek and other tributaries to the Wild and Scenic Rogue River are no strangers to controversy over federal mining claims on BLM lands. The Sugar Pine Mine tussle is only the latest case demonstrating the need for both 1872 Mining Law reform and mineral withdrawals, in order to protect the public's interest in their lands. Spanning more than two decades is the case of the Leopold Mine. Like the Sugar Pine Mine, it's located in the North Fork of Galice Creek area on mining claims that were originally established in the 1800s.

The Leopold Mine in 2000. It was a few miles from the Rogue River.

The extreme patience of the BLM, to give the Leopold Mine claimants every chance to comply with regulations, is documented in court records, as are the due process rights accorded the claimants going all the way to the Supreme Court. This case alone should make everyone question the Sugar Pine Mine owners justification for calling in armed groups like Oath Keepers—ostensibly to protect property rights and the right to due process.

The [Leopold] mine is about 20 miles west of Grants Pass on the north fork of Galice Creek. It was established in the mid-1800s, a period when gold miners first flocked to the area ... [The BLM] originally issued a notice for the couple to vacate the land early in 1998 ... The agency on Aug. 30 rejected a plan of operation submitted by the Strubels ... "We have worked very hard to get the Strubels in compliance with those requirements, "[the BLM] said, adding that the request to have them removed was the last resort ... In addition to concerns about sanitation and resource damage, there is the problem of the occupants denying the public access to its own land, [BLM] said.
The Leopold Mine on the North Fork of Galice Creek in 2000.

To recap - the struggle over the Leopold Mine began in 1992. In 1998, after years of trying to bring the mining and Mr. and Mrs. Strubel's occupancy into compliance with the regulations, the BLM finally issued an order to vacate the mining claims. However, it wasn't until May of 2001 that the Strubels finally had to leave—and this only after exhausting their due process rights.

Jack Strubel even took the case to the Supreme Court in 2003. The Court refused the petition for rehearing. Strubel v. United States, 538 U.S. 1069 (2003).

But even the Supreme Court's refusal to hear the case was not enough. In 2006, Strubel filed a lawsuit against the United States claiming his property had been taken. He argued he was owed five hundred and fifty billion dollars in damages (we had to write it out because the claimed dollar damage seems so unreal. The Court of Federal Claims ruled against Mr. Strubel on June 10, 2009.

You can read the long history of the BLM's struggle to bring the Leopold Mine into compliance with regulations and how the claimants were provided every opportunity for due process—by the BLM and the federal courts—in Jack Strubel v. The United States, United States Court of Federal Claims, No. 06-112C, June 10 2009. 

Conveniently the owner of the Sugar Pine Mine doesn't mention the Leopold Mine case when he tells tales of fear and loathing against the BLM—arguing that his possessions would have been taken before he was accorded due process if he hadn't called in armed guards. He refers to times when BLM has burned cabins on mining claims but provides no details. He implies BLM will do this to him.

However, according when BLM served the Sugar Pine mine owner with notices of non-compliance they gave him multiple options—including the forms and instructions for how to appeal the notice. In other words, the BLM give him the forms for initiating his due process rights if he chose not to comply with the regulations.

Ironically, the Oath Keepers, far right media and others believe him the mine owner that his due process rights were taken—or its a case of willful blindness. See video interviews with Sugar Pine Mine owner, Rick Barclay, posted by the Oath Keepers on YouTube on April 18th and by Dale Mathews on April 25th.

So we urge all those involved—from federal lawmakers, to the public and the media—to take the time to read Jack Strubel v. The United States, United States Court of Federal Claims, No. 06-112C, June 10 2009. You will learn of the long patience of the BLM in dealing with cases like the Leopold and Sugar Pine Mines. Perhaps cases like these will lead to 1872 Mining Law reform.

Thanks to the Medford Mail Tribune for these articles on the Leopold Mine:

April 15, 2000 - Feds