Following the California Gold Rush, Congress chose to create a split-estate land disposal policy for the West when it enacted the Survey Act of 1853. By Section 8 of that Act Congress granted the “right of occupation and cultivation” to western residents settling “on or near the mineral lands” (10 Stat 247).
March 3, 1853 Survey Act, Section 8
The first split-estate law providing for settlement on “mineral land” which granted the “right of occupation and cultivation only” to settlers “on or near the mineral lands” www.facebook.com/angusmcintosh2/posts/3184283468249008
The Coal Land-Townsite Act of 1865 (13 Stat 530) explicitly seperated surface title from the mineral deposits as did the Sutro Land Grant Act of 1866 (14 Stat 243).
Section 10 of of the Ditch & Canal Act of 1866 provided for entry under the Homestead Act of 1862 without acreage limitation where the surface was more suitable for agricultural use (14 Stat 253).
The Act of 1866 as amended by the Act of 1870 and 1872 (16 Stat 218, 17 Stat 91), and construed with the Grazing Rights Act of 1875 (18 Stat 481), was an explicit recognition of surface ownership rights to grazing land. www.facebook.com/angusmcintosh2/posts/3261105833900104
1872 Mineral Land Act together with the 1875 Grazing Rights Act
Construed together gave stockraising settlers only a “surface claim” or surface title as an “adverse claimant” under the 1872 Act (which incorporated Section 13 of the 1870 Act). No “permit” was mentioned or required as the intent of Congress was land “disposal”. www.facebook.com/angusmcintosh2/posts/3219525581391463
Congress specifically applied “grazing” to mineral land under the 1872 Mineral Land Act. This change in the law allowed Western ranchers to establish a claim to “surface” title as an “adverse claim” on land that might later be found to contain valuable minerals. www.facebook.com/angusmcintosh2/posts/3213519435325411
1884 Act for Disposal of Military Reservations
The first Act to mention “grazing permits” Grazing permits were only required for grazing stock on active military forts. This was upheld by unanimous decision of the Supreme Court in Curtin v Benson in 1911. www.facebook.com/angusmcintosh2/posts/3219525581391463
The seemingly unconnected provisions of the General Revision/Forest Act of 1891 was a Congressional affirmation and compilation of the split-estate mineral land disposal policy created by Congress over the previous 47 years beginning with the Survey Act of 1853. www.facebook.com/angusmcintosh2/posts/3196672950343393
Survey Act of 1897 (aka “Organic Act”)
The 1891 GR/FA gave bureaucrats 5 or 6 years to challenge title of actual settlers validated by the Act, after which they could never attack the rancher’s title. So, 6 years later Congress enacts the Survey Act of 1897 (aka “Organic Act”) which authorizes the Secretary of Interior to “permit the use of timber and stone” in order to regulate the government’s retained mineral and commercial timber interests. The bureaucrats have tried to confuse “surface owner” ranchers ever since. www.facebook.com/angusmcintosh2/posts/3196672950343393
1914 Cooperative Improvement Fund Act
“Cooperative agreement”, later known as a Grazing Permit
(Cooperative Improvement Fund Act 1914; Taylor Grazing Act 1934). They merge the “permit” for “timber and stone” with the “cooperative agreement” and this is what they enforce against you in court.
1976 National Forests Management Act-NFMA Section 6(i)