http://www.goldprospectors.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=21651&OB=DESC
After the Hage Case and several
other cases involving the USFS and the abuses of Land Owners and
Miners Rights, here is another case showing the intentional
destruction of property and possibly historical structures.
Scott
Southern Oregon Miner Defeats United States Forest Service in
Court
1/14/11
In a recent decision issued on November 9th, 2011, United States
District Judge Ann Aiken ruled that the United States Forest
Service, and particularly Cottage Grove District Ranger Deborah
Schmidt, violated the constitutional rights of 83 year old
Oregon miner, James Edgar.
Edgar, of Eugene, Oregon, alleged that the United States Forest
Service and especially District Ranger Deborah Schmidt, had
violated his rights when Schmidt ordered USFS Law Enforcement to
impound structures on his mining claim in November of 2008 and
declared them to be "government property". Climaxing nearly
fifteen years of conflict with the United States Forest Service,
in early June of 2009, agents of USFS dismantled the structures
on Edgar's mineral property with a backhoe and then destroyed
the remnants by use of fire. The Bone of Contention between
Schmidt and Edgar lied in Edgar's unwillingness to post what he
believed was an unfair bond. On November 25th, 2009, Edgar filed
suit against the United States, as well as District Ranger
Deborah Schmidt.
USFS maintained that the "plaintiff had no legitimate
property interest in his structures after they became property
of the government through the impoundment process, and therefore
the destruction of the structures did not interfere with
plaintiff's right to control them".
However, Judge Aiken ruled that Edgar had "a clearly
established, protectable property interest in his mining
structures (and added that) Schmidt and the Forest
Service had no authority to impound and assert government
ownership over plaintiff's mining structures for the purpose of
destroying them."
She also added that "Schmidt and the Forest Service offer no
explanation why (the) plaintiff was not given an
opportunity to administratively or judicially contest the
impoundment or destruction of his property".
In the meantime, Schmidt argued that the recent cases involving
Brunskill, Moore and especially Clifford Tracy proved that
Edgar's failure to post a bond created a forfeiture or
abandonment of his property, to which Judge Aiken responded that
"The decisions ... do not hold or even suggest that the
defendants forfeited or abandoned their property interests in
their mining structures, nor did the courts imply that the
Forest Service could remove the structures." and then added
that "In fact, by filing suit against the defendants in each
case, the Forest Service recognized the property interests at
stake".
District Ranger Deborah Schmidt alleged that she had no direct
involvement in the destruction of Edgar's buildings and
requested qualified immunity. However, Judge Aiken said that "Schmidt
is the District Ranger and, based on the current record before
the court, referred the removal of plaintiff's structures to law
enforcement. At minimum, Schmidt's decisions triggered the
impoundment and demolition of plaintiff's structures. Further,
in March 2009, Schmidt informed plaintiff that the Forest
Service was "moving forward with reclamation," and in April
2009, Schmidt again informed plaintiff that the impoundment and
reclamation process would go forward and that she would not
interfere with that process. Schmidt is also listed as the
"Accountable Property Manager" on the report describing the plan
to dismantle and dispose of plaintiff's property. Therefore, I
reject Schmidt's contention that she had no involvement in the
destruction of plaintiff's mining structures."
Schmidt's request for immunity was denied and Aiken ruled that
in fact, she had a direct hand in the violation of Edgar's due
process rights, which are protected by the Fifth and Fourteenth
Amendments.
Our hat is off to Mr. Edgar for fighting for his mining rights,
which are the rights of all.
Read the Case
|