Custer weekly chronicle. [volume] (Custer City, S.D.) 1890-1931, 1909-05-29
MINERAL RIGHTS vs.. FORESTRY.
Department Gives Important Opinions In
Answer to Questions.


! list of questions relative to conflicting
rights and authority. To get authorita-
tive reply the questions were sent to Sem
ator Gamble with request that he take it
up with the forestry department. He
promptly submitted the matter to Chief
Forester Pinchot, asking that full reply
be made in writing. This was given
him, and he has returned the questions
and replies.
Following are the questions PROFOUND.
ed by our correspondent:
/. Have local forest rangers In the
Black Hills the right to grant privileges
Of cutting dead timber on a claim own
er's property, who does his work, and
has affidavit for same done, without the
consent of the claim owner.
2. Can claim owner secure the pri-
vilege of cutting dead timber on his
ground, on which he is doing his work,
and dispose of it7
8. Is there no law requiring forest
rangers to notify claim owners that
they have granted privilege to outside
parties to cut and dispose of timber, es-
pecially when parties live outside Of
South DakotaP
| 4. When trespassers have been mott
fed to desist, is there any penalty or
what recourse has owner?
| 5. Is there any penalty for dismant-
ling mine before the time has expired
for relocation to be nader
The forestry department replied as
follows:
Hon. r. J. GAMBLE,
| United States Senate.
My DEAR SENAToR:-
With reference to the questions sub
mitted by subscriber to the editor of
the Deadwood Daily Telegram, and by
him referred to you:
l. The authority of forest officers as
to the cutting of dead timber in the
Black Hills National Forest is, until
July l, 1910, the same as in any other
national forest. After that date timber
cannot be exported from the State of
South Dakota without further legisla-
ton by congress (Act of May %, 1908,
35 Stat, 259). With respect to the sale
of timber on mining claims by the for
est service, it is obvious that such tim.
ber may be sold to the claimant if he de-
sires TO purchase it, or it may be sold to
stranger with the claimants consent, |
because be alone has right to object to
the sale, and by purchasing or by con-
senting he valves his objections. This
answers the second question submitted
to you.
2. To return to the first question
The Act of June 4, 1897 go Stat 36) reg
ulating the administration of National
Forests, provides:
"Nor shall anything herein prohibit
any person from entering upon such for
est reservations for all proper and law
ful purposes, including that of prospect |
ing, locating and developing the mineral
resources thereof: Provided, That such
persons comply with the rules and regu-
IaIiOho SONCilbS QUILL lOiC5b ICooINdN
tons"
From this it follows that the holder
of valid mining claim in a national
forest has the same right with respect to
the timber on his claim as he would
have if his claim were on unreserved
public land, except as that right may be
restricted by regulations made under the
authority of the Act last cited for the
protection Of the forest from destruction
(page S5). The answer to question No.
depends on Regulation 81 (Use Book
of 1908, page 69), which reads as fol-
lows:
"The forester may, with as little ex-
pense to the government as possible,
dispose of any timber upon the national
forests, by sale or otherwise, when such
disposal is actually necessary to pro-
tect the forest from ravages or destruc-
ton"
Under this regulation any actual men
ace to the forests from insect-infested or
bloCooCu lthiOCi may bO ICuIONtu Ill SUCH
manner and under such conditions as
seem best to the Forester. For this pur-
pose he may sell or give the timber to
the claimant or to stranger on condi-
ton that 1t be promptly and completely
removed. II neither of these methods
is available, the Forester could have the
timber cut and burned at government
expense. The authority of the forest
service is to sell dead and insected-in-
tested timber on unprotected mining
claims without the consent and against
the will of the claimant in order to pro-
tect the surrounding National Forests,
was sustained by the United States cir
cult court for South Dakota in the case
of Lewis vs. Garlock, january 7, 1909,
unreported).
This is an extraordinary power, anal
ogous to the powers of quarantine in
matters affecting the public health, and
should be used only in emergencies like
those above suggested Forest officers
are instructed to obtain the consent oi
claimants, if possible, and to indemnify
the holders of valid claims whose tim
ber is sold to others either by the free
use of an equivalent amount of timber
for the development of the claims from
which all timber has thus been sold, OF
by payment to them of the proceeds o.
the sale.
3. The instructions to forest officers
last above mentioned necessarily NEAR
: that all reasonable efforts shall be taker
Ito notify claimants in order that thei