This dataset contains mining claim cases with the case disposition (status) of anything other than closed from US Bureau of Land Management's, BLM, Mineral and Land Record System(MLRS). The BLM only requires that mining claims be identified down to the affected quarter section(s)—as such, that is what the MLRS research map and public reports will reflect, most commonly. Claim boundaries, as staked and monumented, are found in the accepted Notice/Certificate of Location as part of the official case file, managed by the BLM State Office having jurisdiction over the claim.The geometries are created in multiple ways but are primarily derived from Legal Land Descriptions (LLD) for the case and geocoded (mapped) using the Public Land Survey System (PLSS) derived from the most accurate survey data available through BLM Cadastral Survey workforce. Geospatial representations might be missing for some cases that can not be geocoded using the MLRS algorithm. Each case is given a data quality score based on how well it mapped. These can be lumped into seven groups to provide a simplified way to understand the scores. Group 1: Direct PLSS Match. Scores “0”, “1”, “2”, “3” should all have a match to the PLSS data. There are slight differences, but the primary expectation is that these match the PLSS. Group 2: Calculated PLSS Match. Scores “4”, “4.1”, “5”, “6”, “7” and “8” were generated through a process of creating the geometry that is not a direct capture from the PLSS. They represent a best guess based on the underlining PLSS Group 3 – Mapped to Section. Score of “8.1”, “8.2”, “8.3”, “9” and “10” are mapped to the Section for various reasons (refer to log information in data quality field). Group 4- Combination of mapped and unmapped areas. Score of 15 represents a case that has some portions that would map and others that do not. Group 5 – No NLSDB Geometry, Only Attributes. Scores “11”, “12”, “20”, “21” and “22” do not have a match to the PLSS and no geometry is in the NLSDB, and only attributes exist in the data. Group 6 – Mapped to County. Scores of “25” map to the County. Group 7 – Improved Geometry. Scores of “100” are cases that have had their geometry edited by BLM staff using ArcGIS Pro or MLRS bulk upload tool.

This data set depicts the non-surveyed boundaries of active (recorded or interim) and closed federal mining claims within the State of Alaska. Each mining claim is represented as an individual region, identified by the casefile serial number which can be linked to background data via the ALIS (Alaska Land Information System). Mining claim boundaries were identified in location notices from the original casefiles. They were plotted on maps based on rough sketches, claimant maps or physical descriptions.

This dataset contains mining claim cases with the case disposition (status) of closed from US Bureau of Land Management's, BLM, Mineral and Land Record System(MLRS). The BLM only requires that mining claims be identified down to the affected quarter section(s)—as such, that is what the MLRS research map and public reports will reflect, most commonly. Claim boundaries, as staked and monumented, are found in the accepted Notice/Certificate of Location as part of the official case file, managed by the BLM State Office having jurisdiction over the claim. The geometries are created in multiple ways but are primarily derived from Legal Land Descriptions (LLD) for the case and geocoded (mapped) using the Public Land Survey System (PLSS) derived from the most accurate survey data available through BLM Cadastral Survey workforce. Geospatial representations might be missing for some cases that can not be geocoded using the MLRS algorithm. Each case is given a data quality score based on how well it mapped. These can be lumped into seven groups to provide a simplified way to understand the scores.Group 1: Direct PLSS Match. Scores “0”, “1”, “2”, “3” should all have a match to the PLSS data. There are slight differences, but the primary expectation is that these match the PLSS. Group 2: Calculated PLSS Match. Scores “4”, “4.1”, “5”, “6”, “7” and “8” were generated through a process of creating the geometry that is not a direct capture from the PLSS. They represent a best guess based on the underlining PLSS Group 3 – Mapped to Section. Score of “8.1”, “8.2”, “8.3”, “9” and “10” are mapped to the Section for various reasons (refer to log information in data quality field). Group 4- Combination of mapped and unmapped areas. Score of 15 represents a case that has some portions that would map and others that do not. Group 5 – No NLSDB Geometry, Only Attributes. Scores “11”, “12”, “20”, “21” and “22” do not have a match to the PLSS and no geometry is in the NLSDB, and only attributes exist in the data. Group 6 – Mapped to County. Scores of “25” map to the County. Group 7 – Improved Geometry. Scores of “100” are cases that have had their geometry edited by BLM staff using ArcGIS Pro or MLRS bulk upload tool.

This data set depicts the non-surveyed boundaries of active (recorded or interim) and closed federal mining claims within the State of Alaska. Each mining claim is represented as an individual region, identified by the casefile serial number which can be linked to background data via the ALIS (Alaska Land Information System). Mining claim boundaries were identified in location notices from the original casefiles. They were plotted on maps based on rough sketches, claimant maps or physical descriptions.

This data was pulled from the BLM's MLRS database for each state using the case code (380910,380913,380911). The data was joined with the calculated centroid for each section in the states presented. Some sections did not have the proper designation or a point for plotting and in those instances the developer made every attempt to make a point in the logical place.For each state the first division of the PLSS for each state was obtained from either: a local government agency, the BLM Navigator, or from the USGS. Data was pulled in November of 2021. A snapshot of mining claims listings in each state from the BLM’s MLRS online database (Date Specified on Mining Claims Map) For each state, the projection of the PLSS layer is the projection that was used to create the claim points. From the PLSS first division for each state, the centroid was calculated using the calculate geometry function in ArcMap. A SectionID field was added to generate unique values. These unique values consist of the Meridian, Township, Range, and Section identifiers formatted to match the MTRS field when pulling the mining claims listings. Fields where concatenated together to generate the Section ID. Mining claims with a status of Active, Pending, Submitted, and Filed claims were queried from the Bureau of Land Management’s MLRS online database using the PUB MC Serial Number Index under the Public Mining Claims Reports. The claims data was joined with the SectionID data to assign an easting and a northing, based on the MTRS description for the given claim from the MLRS database. A “claim point listings” feature class was generated using the coordinates from the centroid of the section it is listed to be within. Some plans or notices did not plot. plans or notices that did not plot were visually inspected by and modifications were made if possible, to display the plans or notices. The reason for plans or notices not plotting was due to protracted blocks and the absence of a first division polygon. The section numbers for protracted blocks are greater than 36, so in areas where claims were present on protracted blocks, the section numbers were reassigned the section number of which the general public would refer to it as (1-36 only). For any states where the first division was not available for a Township, section centroid points were made with the INFERRED PLSS description assigned to the points. Understand that assumptions were made during this process. Polygons were not made for missing sections.

Shapefile Format –This data set consists of active mining claim records extracted from BLM’s LR2000 database. These records contain case attributes as well as legal land descriptions for each parcel of land involved in the individual cases. Shapefiles are created by matching LR2000 land descriptions against the smallest feature possible in the GIS representation of the Public Land Survey System (PLSS) https://navigator.blm.gov/data?keyword=plss&fs_publicRegion=Colorado. When a direct match is found, the corresponding polygon in PLSS is used as a template to create a new feature in the output shapefile. The new feature is not a representation of the mining claim boundaries. Multiple mining claims may be located within the same area. The resulting GIS dataset has been projected to NAD83/UTM13N and dissolved on case-level attributes.

This data was pulled from the BLM's MLRS database for each state using the case code (380910,380913,380911). The data was joined with the calculated centroid for each section in the states presented. Some sections did not have the proper designation or a point for plotting and in those instances the developer made every attempt to make a point in the logical place.For each state the first division of the PLSS for each state was obtained from either: a local government agency, the BLM Navigator, or from the USGS. Data was pulled in November of 2021. A snapshot of mining claims listings in each state from the BLM’s MLRS online database (Date Specified on Mining Claims Map) For each state, the projection of the PLSS layer is the projection that was used to create the claim points. From the PLSS first division for each state, the centroid was calculated using the calculate geometry function in ArcMap. A SectionID field was added to generate unique values. These unique values consist of the Meridian, Township, Range, and Section identifiers formatted to match the MTRS field when pulling the mining claims listings. Fields where concatenated together to generate the Section ID. Mining claims with a status of Active, Pending, Submitted, and Filed claims were queried from the Bureau of Land Management’s MLRS online database using the PUB MC Serial Number Index under the Public Mining Claims Reports. The claims data was joined with the SectionID data to assign an easting and a northing, based on the MTRS description for the given claim from the MLRS database. A “claim point listings” feature class was generated using the coordinates from the centroid of the section it is listed to be within. Some plans or notices did not plot. plans or notices that did not plot were visually inspected by and modifications were made if possible, to display the plans or notices. The reason for plans or notices not plotting was due to protracted blocks and the absence of a first division polygon. The section numbers for protracted blocks are greater than 36, so in areas where claims were present on protracted blocks, the section numbers were reassigned the section number of which the general public would refer to it as (1-36 only). For any states where the first division was not available for a Township, section centroid points were made with the INFERRED PLSS description assigned to the points. Understand that assumptions were made during this process. Polygons were not made for missing sections.

The polygon (vector) shapefiles represent Public Land Survey System (PLSS) sections, or 1-square mile areas of land, with information about Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land and mineral use authorizations for mining claims. The land areas specified by BLM authorizations vary in size and orientation, and may cross one or more PLSS section boundaries. For spatial consistency, the information was aggregated to the square mile PLSS section boundary. The original source data from BLM Cases Recordation database (LR2000) were specific to the day they were generated (March 6, 2016) and subsequent data pulls will likely be different.

This data set depicts the non-surveyed boundaries of active (recorded or interim) federal mining claims within the State of Alaska. Each mining claim is represented as an individual region, identified by the casefile serial number which can be linked to background data via the ALIS (Alaska Land Information System). Mining claim boundaries were identified in location notices from the original casefiles. They were plotted on maps based on rough sketches, claimant maps or physical descriptions.

This data was pulled from the BLM's MLRS database for each state using the case code (380910,380913,380911). The data was joined with the calculated centroid for each section in the states presented. Some sections did not have the proper designation or a point for plotting and in those instances the developer made every attempt to make a point in the logical place.For each state the first division of the PLSS for each state was obtained from either: a local government agency, the BLM Navigator, or from the USGS. Data was pulled in November of 2021. A snapshot of mining claims listings in each state from the BLM’s MLRS online database (Date Specified on Mining Claims Map) For each state, the projection of the PLSS layer is the projection that was used to create the claim points. From the PLSS first division for each state, the centroid was calculated using the calculate geometry function in ArcMap. A SectionID field was added to generate unique values. These unique values consist of the Meridian, Township, Range, and Section identifiers formatted to match the MTRS field when pulling the mining claims listings. Fields where concatenated together to generate the Section ID. Mining claims with a status of Active, Pending, Submitted, and Filed claims were queried from the Bureau of Land Management’s MLRS online database using the PUB MC Serial Number Index under the Public Mining Claims Reports. The claims data was joined with the SectionID data to assign an easting and a northing, based on the MTRS description for the given claim from the MLRS database. A “claim point listings” feature class was generated using the coordinates from the centroid of the section it is listed to be within. Some plans or notices did not plot. plans or notices that did not plot were visually inspected by and modifications were made if possible, to display the plans or notices. The reason for plans or notices not plotting was due to protracted blocks and the absence of a first division polygon. The section numbers for protracted blocks are greater than 36, so in areas where claims were present on protracted blocks, the section numbers were reassigned the section number of which the general public would refer to it as (1-36 only). For any states where the first division was not available for a Township, section centroid points were made with the INFERRED PLSS description assigned to the points. Understand that assumptions were made during this process. Polygons were not made for missing sections.

Group 1: Direct PLSS Match. Scores “0”, “1”, “2”, “3” should all have a match to the PLSS data. There are slight differences, but the primary expectation is that these match the PLSS. Group 2: Calculated PLSS Match. Scores “4”, “4.1”, “5”, “6”, “7” and “8” were generated through a process of creating the geometry that is not a direct capture from the PLSS. They represent a best guess based on the underlining PLSS

This data set depicts the non-surveyed boundaries of active (recorded or interim) federal mining claims within the State of Alaska. Each mining claim is represented as an individual region, identified by the casefile serial number which can be linked to background data via the ALIS (Alaska Land Information System). Mining claim boundaries were identified in location notices from the original casefiles. They were plotted on maps based on rough sketches, claimant maps or physical descriptions.

MINSTIP_POLY: This dataset applies to BLM-administered lands containing valuable minerals and categorized in the U.S Code of Federal Regulations or by official U.S. Department of Interior policy as Open, Closed, or Restricted to mining or leasing. And it further labels restrictions, if any, by type (e.g., seasonal, no surface occupancy, etc.). Restrictions are formalized by use of “Mineral Stipulations” as determined through the Land Use Planning Process and defined in the resultant Resource Management Plan (RMP). In addition, informal BLM email communication between Tim Barnes (OR 936.2) and Jim Perry (WO 310), dated August 9, 2013, concluded, by reference to WO IM No. 2012-044, “BLM National Greater Sage-Grouse Land Use Planning Strategy”, that RMPs developed after 2013 should also apply mineral stipulations to split estate lands (BLM subsurface jurisdiction but non-BLM surface). The three categories of minerals covered under Minerals Stipulations are: Locatable, generally the metallic and industrial minerals (subject to the General Mining Law of 1872, as amended); Leasable, generally fluid minerals (oil and gas and geothermal resources) and certain other minerals (subject to the various Mineral Leasing Acts); and Salable, generally sand and gravel (subject to mineral materials disposed of under the Materials Act of 1947, as amended). For locatable minerals, the stipulation choices for an area might be “Withdrawn” if it is withdrawn from mineral entry or “OpenWSA” if the area is open to mining claim location subject to Wilderness Study Area (WSA) Non-impairment criteria or “Open”. The stipulations choices for salable minerals are “Open” (available for mineral materials), “OpenCSU” if the area is open but with (Conditional Surface Use) special seasonal or other stipulations such as buffer zones around sage-grouse leks or archeological sites, or “Closed” (not available for mineral materials). The stipulation choices for leasable minerals are “NoLease” if the area is withdrawn or otherwise not available for leasing, “OpenCSU” if the area is open but with (Conditional Surface Use) special seasonal or other stipulations such as buffer zones around sage-grouse leks or archaeological sites, “OpenNSO” if the area is open but with No Surface Occupancy allowed or simply “Open” with standard stipulations. For a complete description of this data consult the Mineral Stipulations Areas Spatial Data Standard. http://www.blm.gov/or/datamanagement/index.php

In 2015, approximately 10 million acres of Federal lands across six western states were proposed for withdrawal from mineral entry by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in order to conserve habitat critical for the greater sage-grouse. As a result, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) launched the Sagebrush Mineral-Resource Assessment (SaMiRA) project in late-2015 to provide BLM with an assessment of the locatable minerals and an evaluation of the leaseable and saleable minerals within the proposed withdrawal areas. BLM provided Legacy Rehost 2000 System (LR2000) spatial data to the USGS on March 6, 2016 to help identify areas containing mineral leases and claims. The LR2000 system reports BLM land and mineral-use authorizations for oil, gas, and geothermal leasing, rights-of-ways, coal and other mineral development, land and mineral title, mining claims, withdrawals, classifications, and more on federal lands or on federal mineral estate. The spatial data provided here generalize the detailed LR2000 information and related boundaries (for example, small mine claim boundaries) to a larger Public Land Survey System (PLSS) section boundary. The tabular data are summarized by PLSS section and by BLM “serial numbers” (cases). The GIS data consist of polygon vector files whose boundaries are either the PLSS square-mile sections or the PLSS sections grouped by “serial number” to potentially larger areas. The shapefiles present coal, geothermal energy, mineral materials, mining claims, non-energy solid minerals, oil and gas, and plans of operations and notices information and can be used in a geographic information system (GIS) to show the general distribution and density of these BLM land authorizations. These datasets were used in the analysis of locatable, leasable, and salable minerals for the SaMiRA mineral-resource assessment.

In 2015, approximately 10 million acres of Federal lands across six western states were proposed for withdrawal from mineral entry by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in order to conserve habitat critical for the greater sage-grouse. As a result, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) launched the Sagebrush Mineral-Resource Assessment (SaMiRA) project in late-2015 to provide BLM with an assessment of the locatable minerals and an evaluation of the leaseable and saleable minerals within the proposed withdrawal areas. BLM provided Legacy Rehost 2000 System (LR2000) spatial data to the USGS on March 6, 2016 to help identify areas containing mineral leases and claims. The LR2000 system reports BLM land and mineral-use authorizations for oil, gas, and geothermal leasing, rights-of-ways, coal and other mineral development, land and mineral title, mining claims, withdrawals, classifications, and more on federal lands or on federal mineral estate. The spatial data provided here generalize the detailed LR2000 information and related boundaries (for example, small mine claim boundaries) to a larger Public Land Survey System (PLSS) section boundary. The tabular data are summarized by PLSS section and by BLM “serial numbers” (cases). The GIS data consist of polygon vector files whose boundaries are either the PLSS square-mile sections or the PLSS sections grouped by “serial number” to potentially larger areas. The shapefiles present coal, geothermal energy, mineral materials, mining claims, non-energy solid minerals, oil and gas, and plans of operations and notices information and can be used in a geographic information system (GIS) to show the general distribution and density of these BLM land authorizations. These datasets were used in the analysis of locatable, leasable, and salable minerals for the SaMiRA mineral-resource assessment.

Operators interested in developing a CCUS project will need to have an understanding of land ownership in the vicinity of their project. This layer represents active and closed federal mining claims, which is one component of land ownership and may help in evaluating potential implications to the project.This data set depicts the non-surveyed boundaries of active (recorded or interim) federal mining claims within the State of Alaska. Each mining claim is represented as an individual region, identified by the casefile serial number which can be linked to background data via the ALIS (Alaska Land Information System). Mining claim boundaries were identified in location notices from the original casefiles. They were plotted on maps based on rough sketches, claimant maps or physical descriptions. The mining claim boundaries were transferred (when applicable) by use of a zoom-transfer scope and light table from claimant maps or estimated from land descriptions onto 1:63,360 quadrangle maps. Claims were then digitized into BLM, Alaska standards.

This data set depicts the non-surveyed boundaries of active (recorded or interim) federal mining claims within the State of Alaska. Each mining claim is represented as an individual region, identified by the casefile serial number which can be linked to background data via the ALIS (Alaska Land Information System). Mining claim boundaries were identified in location notices from the original casefiles. They were plotted on maps based on rough sketches, claimant maps or physical descriptions.

MINSTIP_POLY: This dataset applies to BLM-administered lands containing valuable minerals and categorized in the U.S Code of Federal Regulations or by official U.S. Department of Interior policy as Open, Closed, or Restricted to mining or leasing. And it further labels restrictions, if any, by type (e.g., seasonal, no surface occupancy, etc.). Restrictions are formalized by use of “Mineral Stipulations” as determined through the Land Use Planning Process and defined in the resultant Resource Management Plan (RMP). In addition, informal BLM email communication between Tim Barnes (OR 936.2) and Jim Perry (WO 310), dated August 9, 2013, concluded, by reference to WO IM No. 2012-044, “BLM National Greater Sage-Grouse Land Use Planning Strategy”, that RMPs developed after 2013 should also apply mineral stipulations to split estate lands (BLM subsurface jurisdiction but non-BLM surface). The three categories of minerals covered under Minerals Stipulations are: Locatable, generally the metallic and industrial minerals (subject to the General Mining Law of 1872, as amended); Leasable, generally fluid minerals (oil and gas and geothermal resources) and certain other minerals (subject to the various Mineral Leasing Acts); and Salable, generally sand and gravel (subject to mineral materials disposed of under the Materials Act of 1947, as amended). For locatable minerals, the stipulation choices for an area might be “Withdrawn” if it is withdrawn from mineral entry or “OpenWSA” if the area is open to mining claim location subject to Wilderness Study Area (WSA) Non-impairment criteria or “Open”. The stipulations choices for salable minerals are “Open” (available for mineral materials), “OpenCSU” if the area is open but with (Conditional Surface Use) special seasonal or other stipulations such as buffer zones around sage-grouse leks or archeological sites, or “Closed” (not available for mineral materials). The stipulation choices for leasable minerals are “NoLease” if the area is withdrawn or otherwise not available for leasing, “OpenCSU” if the area is open but with (Conditional Surface Use) special seasonal or other stipulations such as buffer zones around sage-grouse leks or archaeological sites, “OpenNSO” if the area is open but with No Surface Occupancy allowed or simply “Open” with standard stipulations. For a complete description of this data consult the Mineral Stipulations Areas Spatial Data Standard. http://www.blm.gov/or/datamanagement/index.php

This data was pulled from the BLM's MLRS database for each state using the case code (380910,380913,380911). The data was joined with the calculated centroid for each section in the states presented. Some sections did not have the proper designation or a point for plotting and in those instances the developer made every attempt to make a point in the logical place.For each state the first division of the PLSS for each state was obtained from either: a local government agency, the BLM Navigator, or from the USGS. Data was pulled in November of 2021. A snapshot of mining claims listings in each state from the BLM’s MLRS online database (Date Specified on Mining Claims Map) For each state, the projection of the PLSS layer is the projection that was used to create the claim points. From the PLSS first division for each state, the centroid was calculated using the calculate geometry function in ArcMap. A SectionID field was added to generate unique values. These unique values consist of the Meridian, Township, Range, and Section identifiers formatted to match the MTRS field when pulling the mining claims listings. Fields where concatenated together to generate the Section ID. Mining claims with a status of Active, Pending, Submitted, and Filed claims were queried from the Bureau of Land Management’s MLRS online database using the PUB MC Serial Number Index under the Public Mining Claims Reports. The claims data was joined with the SectionID data to assign an easting and a northing, based on the MTRS description for the given claim from the MLRS database. A “claim point listings” feature class was generated using the coordinates from the centroid of the section it is listed to be within. Some plans or notices did not plot. plans or notices that did not plot were visually inspected by and modifications were made if possible, to display the plans or notices. The reason for plans or notices not plotting was due to protracted blocks and the absence of a first division polygon. The section numbers for protracted blocks are greater than 36, so in areas where claims were present on protracted blocks, the section numbers were reassigned the section number of which the general public would refer to it as (1-36 only). For any states where the first division was not available for a Township, section centroid points were made with the INFERRED PLSS description assigned to the points. Understand that assumptions were made during this process. Polygons were not made for missing sections.

"The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) of the United States Department of the Interior, as the manager of mineral resources on public domain lands, is charged with the responsibility of determining the validity of mining claims located under the General Mining Law of 1872. One of the bases for determining the validity of a claim is that the mineral values must be of such potential value that an ordinary prudent person would be justified in further expending his time and resources with the reasonable expectation of developing a profitable mine (paraphrase of the ""Prudent man Rule""). Certain oil shale and marketable by-products from occurrences in Colorado, Wyoming, and Utah are mineral deposits under the jurisdiction of the ELM. In order to test the validity of claims on the basis of the ""Prudent Man Rule"" it is necessary to develop the capital and operating cost for mining and processing the minerals fro n the oil shale occurrences. The BLM may then incorporate this data with economic and other factors to determine the validity of the specific claims in question."