[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: The Fight for Truth, Justice & the American Way, in Monahans!

Hello Steve and all,

MeteorHntr@aol.com wrote:
> Thanks for the further clarification and those real good points.  Above, you
> mentioned looking for natural material found on public property and I would
> guess fossils would be about as close to something being natural without the
> threat of someone claiming they "lost it" as Indian tribes might in artifacts.
> But there is also gold and other minerals!  That is Texas, what about oil and
> natural gas?

That's a good point, Steve, fossils and very early (Ice Age) artifacts
would probably be the best place to look for precedent cases.
> 
> We have all been told that the Mining Law of 1872 does not include meteorites
> becuase they are not "locatable minerals."  A week or so ago, I talked a
> little about that I felt that meteorite ARE VERY LOCATABLE!  If you see one
> fall you go pick it up!  You go to the Imilac, Holbrook, Odessa, Gold Basin
> and Canyon Diablo sites and meteorites are easy to "locate."   Should that be
> approached in arguement, or since a judge already ruled on that, should we
> stay away from it?

You will probably have to look at the Mining Law of 1872 and any
subsequent revisions to find the legal definition of a "locatable
mineral." A doubt it means locate as in find, and searching an area with
a magnet or metal detector probably doesn't fit the criteria or there
wouldn't be an issue. On the other hand, it may and no one has made the
argument.
> 
> But this is really different.  If this went to court, could this in fact
> establish specific precedence for meteorites falls?  I think this does need to
> happen.  Also, if this would go to court, is it proper to argue that it is
> important not just for the Monahans case, but all the good that will come out
> of the ruling for OTHER meteorite falls in the future, if the judge sides with
> the boys?  And show all the bad that will occur (like what has been occurring
> over the years), if he would rule that the city owns it?
 
As someone pointed out earlier, I would be very careful about trying to
make this a precedent setting test case. There are factions out there
waiting for someone to try and you might find yourself up against the
feds on behalf of the Smithsonian plus the academic community. My call
is that we would find access to public lands for fossils, meteorites,
etc. become even more restrictive.

> On a separate issue, if the rock was found on private land, yet also in the
> easement, can the city still confiscate the meteorite?  It is my impression
> that the City of Monahans thinks that they can.  I suppose we have to look
> into that too.
 
Well, I'm not a lawyer, I just play one on the Internet :-) but to my
knowledge an easement only grants access to the property for a specific
use or uses. In the case of a city it is probably for anything the city
wants to do in the public interest, but it would have to be a very
convincing argument to make that include ownership of found items.
Another definition that would have to be checked and the use in Monahans
reviewed.

> Any suggestions?

Well, something you mentioned in your previous post snuck up on me last
night and gave me a thought. You mentioned that the people of Monahans
were strongly in favor of the kids keeping the meteorite or getting a
reward. I don't know how they do things in Texas, but back here a good
old New England town meeting resolves a lot of local issues. If it turns
out the meteorite was found on city property, it belongs to the people
of Monahans, not the mayor or the council. If you think you have public
sentiment and the votes on your side you might try bringing it before
the council for public discussion and  voting. If the people own it they
can do what they want with it. Hopefully you wouldn't have to go through
the hassle of a referendum.

One other thought, if the kids do gain ownership, I hope they understand
the scientific (and political) significance of what they have. They may
each want to keep a small slice if they decide to sell or some may want
a large slice as their share. Don't forget to tell them to hold out for
the best offer. They may also want to hold out for a while and let us
all drool a little more.  :-)

Gene
References: