637 was supposedly just signed

I hate to see good information shared and debated, and then completely lost when it is important. If we stop bickering ,baiting and attacking each other this thread might survive.... In a perfect world we pull together for a common goal.
I am starting to have my doubts.
 

fowledup said:
Nope not me. Actually I'm hoping you'll drop the east coast buisness and come out here and save us all!:thumbsup: We sure could use the help. Be in your best interest since we all know what happens here sooner than later spreads to there.
Click to expand...

The CWA is a Federal law that should affect us now but thd Feds want the States to enforce the law. So far that hasn't happened. The Feds have actually tried to punish eastern States for not enforcing the CWA.

Senate Bill 637 is a joke! They didn't need to pass a bill to enforce a Federal law. The bill is nothing more than a slap in miners faces. A slap surely due to the Rinehart and 49ers cases. Their cases have been proven to be a waste of time and money.

The Karuk tribe is out for revenge. Revenge due to miners killing their people long ago. I previoisly suggested that miners make peace with the tribe and of course I was slammed. I still say that any attempt to make peace with the tribe would be better than wasting your time in a California court.

Historical Information

History Contact with outsiders was largely avoided until 1850 and the great gold rush. At that time miners, vigilantes, soldiers, and assorted Anglos seized Karuk lands, burned their villages, and massacred their people.
 

Last edited:
Reed Lukens said:
And we will still keep fighting, just like we have been. You see it as a lost cause, I see it as a battle between right and wrong. When the State breaks the law, we need to fight, not bend over and just consider it a lost cause. We that have been fighting for our rights - will continue fighting just like we have been... for decades now.
Click to expand...

The State would be breaking the law by not enforcing the CWA. Stop fighting and make peace!

Do you see the tribes fighting to stop commercial fisherman who net millions of fish?
 

chlsbrns said:
The CWA is a Federal law that should affect us now but thd Feds want the States to enforce the law. So far that hasn't happened. The Feds have actually tried to punish eastern States for not enforcing the CWA.

Senate Bill 637 is a joke! They didn't need to pass a bill to enforce a Federal law. The bill is nothing more than a slap in miners faces. A slap surely due to the Rinehart and 49ers cases. Their cases have been proven to be a waste of time and money.

The Karuk tribe is out for revenge. Revenge due to miners killing their people long ago. I previoisly suggested that miners make peace with the tribe and of course I was slammed. I still say that any attempt to make peace with the tribe would be better than wasting your time in a California court.
Click to expand...

These two items, CWA & the tribe, clearly show you have no idea what you are talking about and are simply trolling this thread. As much as I hate to see lock threads TH I think the time has come to this thread to lock it - no good could come from it and we have crossed the TOS line

ratled

ratled
 

Last edited:
Well its time to get back to a bucket dredge...

4_pan_small.jpg
 

Lets call them all and tell them what you think....

Contact:
Craig Tucker, Karuk Tribe, (916) 207-8294
Elizabeth “Izzy” Martin, The Sierra Fund, (530) 913-1844
Glen Spain, PCFFA, (541) 689-2000
Jonathan Evans, Center for Biological Diversity, (213) 598-1466
John Buckley, CSERC, cell (209) 918-2485; office (209) 586-7440
Bill Jennings, CSPA, (209) 464-5067
 

In re Waters of Hallett Creek (1988)
44 Cal.3d 448 [243 Cal.Rptr. 887, 749 P.2d 324], cert. denied 488 U.S. 824.
The United States has riparian rights on federal reserved lands (e.g., national forest lands).
The riparian rights of the United States on its reserved lands are the same as the rights of a private landowner
on privately held land. However, the riparian rights of the United States on public domain land
(e.g., lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management) are inferior to the rights of appropriation on the public land.
 

I don't think that it's a good idea to post phone numbers to people who can use other peoples money to make things worse for miners.

Why the riparian rights stuff? The CWA is about pollution not the use of water. Riparian rights do not give you a right to polute. Not to mention riparian rights is more of an eastern US thing. The west for the most part has Prior Appropriation. (Rights of appropriation)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prior-appropriation_water_rights

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riparian_water_rights#United_States

Do you understand what you posted?

However, the riparian rights of the United States on public domain land
are inferior to the rights of appropriation on the public land.
 

Last edited:
ratled said:
These two items, CWA & the tribe, clearly show you have no idea what you are talking about...

ratled

ratled
Click to expand...

637 requires compliance with the CWA, The tribe sued to stop dredging and I don't know what I'm talking about?
 

they removed "water right permit" but added the wording "equipment" meaning any parts including the sluice box and could be construed to include high-bankers. ( red is wording removed, blue wording added )

If the State Water Resources Control Board or the appropriate regional water quality control board determines that no water quality or water rights permit is waste discharge requirements, a waiver of waste discharge requirements, or a certification in accordance with Section 1341 of Title 33 of the United States Code is not necessary for the applicant to use of a vacuum or suction dredge, dredge equipment, a letter stating this determination signed by the Executive Director of the State Water Resources Control Board, the executive officer of the appropriate regional water quality control board, or their designee shall be part of the permit application. designee.

link on high-banking, riparian rights and waterboard wanting water right permit
Are Permits Needed For Highbanking In California? - ICMJ's Prospecting and Mining Journal
 

Last edited:
chlsbrns said:
The CWA is a Federal law that should affect us now but thd Feds want the States to enforce the law. So far that hasn't happened. The Feds have actually tried to punish eastern States for not enforcing the CWA.

Senate Bill 637 is a joke! They didn't need to pass a bill to enforce a Federal law. The bill is nothing more than a slap in miners faces. A slap surely due to the Rinehart and 49ers cases. Their cases have been proven to be a waste of time and money.

The Karuk tribe is out for revenge. Revenge due to miners killing their people long ago. I previoisly suggested that miners make peace with the tribe and of course I was slammed. I still say that any attempt to make peace with the tribe would be better than wasting your time in a California court.

Historical Information

History Contact with outsiders was largely avoided until 1850 and the great gold rush. At that time miners, vigilantes, soldiers, and assorted Anglos seized Karuk lands, burned their villages, and massacred their people.
Click to expand...

NO you don't know what you are talking about, changing your OP still doesn't make it any better.

You stated the miners should make peace with the tribe...... they did in 2005 and the NFS was part of that. The miners gave them everything they asked for and offered more. The miners and NFS were invited by the tribe to attend a ceremony to celebrate. What did that get the miners and NFS? The secret, closed door deal called Karuk I. Which by the way is the EXACT same wording as the 2012 regs (things that make you go humm). It was quickly followed by Karuk II and the tribe v NFS.

Treasure Hunter, I am the OP of this thread. We are going off topic of gold mining and that is not permitted with the rules of this forum, please lock this thread.

ratled
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Significant Discovery

⬅️ Previous Thread

where it aint

Next Thread ➡️

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Steve's Detector Rods

Latest Discussions

Back
Top