Arizona republican., 1908-11-04
RIGHTS OF PR0sPEcTORs
 AND THE FOREST SERVICE
CLIFFORD PINcHoT's REPLY TO
 DENVER POST ATTACK.
The Chief Forester Shows That It Originated From Misunderstand- ing of the Service Regulations.


 Pinchot to the Denver Post, in reply to a recent editorial criticising the service:
 Washington, Oct. 3O 1908. Editor Denver Post, Denver, Colo:
 Dear Sir:-My attention has been called to editorials in the Denver Post of October 12 to IS, discussing the alleged attitude of the forest service toward mining claims in the national forests and toward the min ing industry of Colorado. These editorials contain such grave mis- statements of the laws which govern prospecting and exploring for min erals on public lands Gncluding the national forests), of the regulations of the forest service, and of the att titude of that service toward mining development, that I deem it wise to lay a description of the actual situa- tion before you.
 Your editorial of October 12 be- gins: Here is plain speech for plain people. And it is made in honesty to the men and women of Colorado; to the shopkeeper, the trader the business man, and the wage earner It has to do with the bread and butter question; with the personal we'll being of the common citizen; with the future of the state. It is not politics. It is not philoso- phy. It sets forth no opinions. It states only stark facts, and leaves conclusions to the common sense of the reader" . Before pros pector can explore it" Oand in the national forests) he must get the consent of some one of Mir Pin chots assistant foresters. And as none of MT. Pinchot's men are prac- ticaI miners. consent to explore and prospect is more often refused than granted" The Post gives these facts to its readers with a good conscience. They are not exag- gerated They are not imaginary. They are not campaign arguments They are true"
 Again, in your editorial of October 16 you say: "Prospectors were de- nied admission to stake claims There is no exaggeration in this statement. Every word of it is emphatically true"
 The fact is that no regulation of the forest service has ever denied the right of any prospector to stake a claim where and as he chose, in any national forest in the state of Colorado or anywhere else. No pros pector has any need to ask permis- sion of anyone to stake claims in the national forests. The law of June 1, 1897. quoted on page PIG qf the last edition Of The Use Book" says: Nor shall anything herein prohibit any person from entering upon such forest reservations for all proper and lawful purposes including that of prospecting, locating and develop ing the mineral resources thereof: Provided, That such persons comply with the rules and regulations cov- ering such forest reservations No rules and regulations of the forest service have ever interfered with the right to prospect, locate and develop mineral claims. The forest service has done it's best to make the law and the regulations known by print ing them in the manual which tells how to use the national forests.
 Even if the forest service desired to prevent prospecting in the nation al forests, and it emphatically does not. it could not do so under the law. If any forest officer has ever undertaken to prevent prospecting in Colorado or elsewhere, he was hin self breaking the law and disobeying the regulations of the forest service, and no such case has ever been brought to my attention
 The fact that the forests of Colo rado are freely open to prospecting may be verified in a moment by ref erence to the statutes of the United States. The hastiest consultation of accessible authorities would have prevented any mistake. So far from the national forests of Colorado be- ing closed to prospectors, numerous mineral locations have been and will continue to be made in them. as the mining men of Colorado well know.
 Your editorial of October 13 says: "Nail these facts down hard. Fest their truths for yourself. You will find that they are true. They are vital facts, too" "The reg ulations of the forest service"-"not the laws of the United States, re- member-provide that a mining pros pector can not make a claim valid unless he can prove to the forest service that both the character of the mineral and the manner of its occurrence are such as to warrant expenditure for development and reasonable expectation of a valuable discovery"
 The fact is that the regulations of the forest service have nothing ] whatever to do with the validity of a mining claim. The validity of a mining claim is determined by laws of the United States, and decisions of the courts and of the department of the interior interpreting these laws. The law of February 1, 1905, |