No Minning in MARIPOSA COUNTY???????????????????????????????????????????? ???????

[Oakview2]

There is a strong rumor that a advisory committee in Mariposa will be requesting at the Supervisors meeting on July 14th, to ban all minning in the county of all types. Their was a item on the June 2 meeting for proposed new regulations, but was withdrawn. This is a common tactic of green groups to gauge opposition, and allows them to come back unopposed. Let all claimholders in the county be put on notice...














Meeting Calendar - Mariposa County, California

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[Asmbandits]

Wow.. No respect for heritage, with such rich mining history and many great story tellers that came from the area, very sad that they would stoop to this..

 

[Oakview2]

Unconfirmed until the July agenda is published, but claimholders beware.

 

[Clay Diggins]

Total waste of time and energy. No county can outlaw mining. It's been tried before with bad results for the anti mining crowd.

SOUTH DAKOTA MINING ASSOCIATION INC v. LAWRENCE COUNTY

The ordinance's de facto ban on mining on federal land acts as a clear obstacle to the accomplishment of the Congressional purposes and objectives embodied in the Mining Act. Congress has encouraged exploration and mining of valuable mineral deposits located on federal land and has granted certain rights to those who discover such minerals.   Federal law also encourages the economical extraction and use of these minerals.   The Lawrence County ordinance completely frustrates the accomplishment of these federally encouraged activities.   A local government cannot prohibit a lawful use of the sovereign's land that the superior sovereign itself permits and encourages.   To do so offends both the Property Clause and the Supremacy Clause of the federal Constitution.   The ordinance is prohibitory, not regulatory, in its fundamental character.   The district court correctly ruled that the ordinance was preempted.

 

[Oakview2]

Absolutely agree, but that will not stop them from trying. That is why all claimholders should be on notice. The rule of law and what is right or wrong means nothing to them....

 

[Aufisher]

Time for the miners to vote on a new advisory committee and supervisors!

 

[Mad Machinist]

Not to worry. The Big Boys are already on it.

All of this has to do with the PM 2.5 laws, which need to be eliminated anyhow. But I guess when you have no understanding of how the natural environment works you can do things like this and than claim it's climate change. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_condensation_nuclei

 

[Maitland]

Total waste of time and energy. No county can outlaw mining. It's been tried before with bad results for the anti mining crowd.

SOUTH DAKOTA MINING ASSOCIATION INC v. LAWRENCE COUNTY

Uhh, sometimes living in this state can be so embarrassing. I don't know how many people I've ran into here who hate mining with a passion; they call the police to report people for gold panning in the creeks, and they wish that the only commercial gold mine still in operation here would shut down immediately. They sure love their "summer cabins"/McMansions that are all on old patented mining claims, though. I mean, if it wasn't for the discovery of gold, this area probably would never have been settled and there would not be any private land here, instead it would most likely be all tribal land or possibly a Nat'l Park or something along those lines. Hypocrisy at its best. Geologically-speaking, the Black Hills are probably one of the most unique and interesting areas in the world, and there's a lot of cool mining history here and there's still more gold here than most people could possibly ever imagine; but these anti-mining pricks have been ruining it here for decades as that case link clearly points out. Anyway, don't mean to go off-track with this post, but there are clearly some stupid people out there in this country with some stupid agendas and it's something that's always been and probably always will be.

 

[Clay Diggins]

Not to worry. The Big Boys are already on it.

Big Boys? I checked and Mountain States Legal Foundation doesn't even have this on their radar. Not surprising since it's only a rumor.

 

[Clay Diggins]

The 2.5 "laws" Mad Machinist is referring to have very little effect on mining. Any government agency thinking they can control mining through that plan will be sucking eggs in court. The 2.5 regulations (not laws) are based on the Montreal Protocol treaty that attempts to reduce cross border acid rain from motor vehicle emissions. Congress went along to this extent:

(a) Findings
The Congress finds that—
(1) the presence of acidic compounds and their precursors in the atmosphere and in deposition from the atmosphere represents a threat to natural resources, ecosystems, materials, visibility, and public health;
(2) the principal sources of the acidic compounds and their precursors in the atmosphere are emissions of sulfur and nitrogen oxides from the combustion of fossil fuels;
(3) the problem of acid deposition is of national and international significance;
(4) strategies and technologies for the control of precursors to acid deposition exist now that are economically feasible, and improved methods are expected to become increasingly available over the next decade;
(5) current and future generations of Americans will be adversely affected by delaying measures to remedy the problem;
(6) reduction of total atmospheric loading of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides will enhance protection of the public health and welfare and the environment; and
(7) control measures to reduce precursor emissions from steam-electric generating units should be initiated without delay.
(b) Purposes
The purpose of this subchapter is to reduce the adverse effects of acid deposition through reductions in annual emissions of sulfur dioxide of ten million tons from 1980 emission levels, and, in combination with other provisions of this chapter, of nitrogen oxides emissions of approximately two million tons from 1980 emission levels, in the forty-eight contiguous States and the District of Columbia. It is the intent of this subchapter to effectuate such reductions by requiring compliance by affected sources with prescribed emission limitations by specified deadlines, which limitations may be met through alternative methods of compliance provided by an emission allocation and transfer system. It is also the purpose of this subchapter to encourage energy conservation, use of renewable and clean alternative technologies, and pollution prevention as a long-range strategy, consistent with the provisions of this subchapter, for reducing air pollution and other adverse impacts of energy production and use.

So it's all about energy production and use. The rest is just hot air and politically correct smoke. Unless you are mining coal or uranium or operating a power plant you shouldn't have any issues with 2.5. Then again we are talking about California where lawns are more important than crops and as long as they can put the problem of air pollution on poor peoples cars they feel clean.

Heavy Pans

 

[Mad Machinist]

The 2.5 "laws" Mad Machinist is referring to have very little effect on mining. Any government agency thinking they can control mining through that plan will be sucking eggs in court. The 2.5 regulations (not laws) are based on the Montreal Protocol treaty that attempts to reduce cross border acid rain from motor vehicle emissions. Congress went along to this extent:



So it's all about energy production and use. The rest is just hot air and politically correct smoke. Unless you are mining coal or uranium or operating a power plant you shouldn't have any issues with 2.5. Then again we are talking about California where lawns are more important than crops and as long as they can put the problem of air pollution on poor peoples cars they feel clean.

Heavy Pans

http://www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/eiip/techreport/volume09/minqur3.pdf

Has more effect than you think.

 

[Clay Diggins]

http://www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/eiip/techreport/volume09/minqur3.pdf

Has more effect than you think.

The bogus nature of the crossover from acid rain/sulfur compounds is even admitted in your brief offering Mad Machinist.

Uncertainties / Shortcomings of Current Methods:
The emission factors used to calculate the PM10 emissions from western surface
coal mining (see AP-42, Section 11.9) are used for all mining activities.

Obviously since non coal mining itself contributes virtually nothing to vehicle emissions (see the exemption for non road engines), or the acid components of cross border rain, they have to rely on coal mine regulation to try to include mining as a class.

It should be painful for the public to see more bogus actions by the EPA that will eventually fail over and over. At this rate the EPA budget will soon mostly consist of legal fees to defend their constant illegal assault on subjects outside their authority. Luckily at this time it appears that only California and New York are supporting them in their delusions. I hope you aren't believing in their BS too Mad Machinist - we need good people like you on our side.

The courts will be basing any judgements on:
The law - which I presented in my previous post.
The facts - the compilation of which has already been undermined by the EPA quote about methodology above.

IF the county is stupid enough to take on this fight they will lose and waste huge amounts of taxpayer money in a poor county. Whether they base their illegal actions on the 2.5 regulations or not.

Heavy Pans

 

[fowledup]

They have more lawyers than we do, they know full well they don't have a snowballs chance in hell. Its just another hearts and minds mission to keep the agenda moving and in the public eye. It's an oppurtunity to further demonize mining and recruit some new blood and funding along the way. Cheap marketing and publlicity for them.

 

[Mad Machinist]

The bogus nature of the crossover from acid rain/sulfur compounds is even admitted in your brief offering Mad Machinist.


Obviously since non coal mining itself contributes virtually nothing to vehicle emissions (see the exemption for non road engines), or the acid components of cross border rain, they have to rely on coal mine regulation to try to include mining as a class.

It should be painful for the public to see more bogus actions by the EPA that will eventually fail over and over. At this rate the EPA budget will soon mostly consist of legal fees to defend their constant illegal assault on subjects outside their authority. Luckily at this time it appears that only California and New York are supporting them in their delusions. I hope you aren't believing in their BS too Mad Machinist - we need good people like you on our side.

The courts will be basing any judgements on:
The law - which I presented in my previous post.
The facts - the compilation of which has already been undermined by the EPA quote about methodology above.

IF the county is stupid enough to take on this fight they will lose and waste huge amounts of taxpayer money in a poor county. Whether they base their illegal actions on the 2.5 regulations or not.

Heavy Pans

Clay,

I don't believe their BS for one second. But they will try. And considering the influx of the morons from Cali and the snowbirds, this actually has a better than average chance of getting forced through. Especially when they want to have no emissions 1 week before and 1 week after no burn days like Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Years, etc. So believe me, they are trying to hit way below the belt on this by guilt tripping people in to this.

I also fight this from the OHV side too, so I tend to hear about things before the miner's do. The OHV side has a lobbyist on staff so this is getting hit from all sides. Any miner's want to throw in with the OHV side and start to present a united front?

 

[ratled]

Looks like it has been withdrawn Adopt a Resolution Abandoning Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2014-078 and Initiating New General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Amendments to Establish and Implement New General Plan Policies and Regulations for Mining - Mariposa County, California

ratled

 

[Clay Diggins]

OK I guess I'm out of the loop along with everyone else reading this thread. Let's recap:

Someone (?) heard a rumor and thinks there "may" be a proposal to outlaw mining in Mariposa County.

Other "thems and theys" unknown want to keep some (unknown) agenda going.

Other "thems and theys" unknown have more lawyers than "us".

Cali and the snowbirds seem to be the supporters?

WTF

Does anyone have any facts or is this just going to be another downtrodden miner fantasy?

Are we going to be warned that wiser "Big Boys" than us are going to handle this non event and tell us when they need more money to fight the unknown "them"? That's been the song and dance for years now. Any chance we will get to hear the words to this new tune or are we all supposed to just hum along until more cash is needed like before?

The system of "more lawyers" and "more money needed" has produced absolutely nothing, zip, nada while a single miner just insisting on justice prevails.

I think it's time to put away the drama and secrets and try something new.

Maybe the law and the facts could be useful?

Heavy Pans

 

[Oakview2]

Clay, the rumor comes from someone on the inside, and privy to the actions of this advisory committee. All will be know when the July 14th agenda, until then my call was for vigillance, not for action. As I posted above, it was withdrawn on the 6/2, perhaps it goes away, perhaps it doesn't. The price of freedom is every vigillance, Thomas Jefferson....

 

[Mad Machinist]

Clay, the rumor comes from someone on the inside, and privy to the actions of this advisory committee. All will be know when the July 14th agenda, until then my call was for vigillance, not for action. As I posted above, it was withdrawn on the 6/2, perhaps it goes away, perhaps it doesn't. The price of freedom is every vigillance, Thomas Jefferson....

You want the truth? I guess it's time to let some of the cats out of the bag. Let's see if you can handle it, my friend.

I own 51% of a junior mining company now. Instead of rebuilding my company, I took the easy way out and bought controlling interest in one. I now have to spend a lot more time in a suit than I really like. Guess it goes with the territory.

The purpose of me building the ball mill is to see if it can be done by anyone with what they have laying around and incorporate a few things into it to build a trailer mounted processor for the whole purpose of small guys being able to do an initial process on material to only transport the valuable material and leave the gangue behind. it's a lot cheaper to smelt high grade ore than it is to smelt low grade.

I am in the process of working through the whole nightmare of seeing if a small induction furnace or two with portable fume extractors full of activated carbon will pass the regulations set forth by the EPA concerning smelters, so I tend to have a unique understanding of the laws.

Due to me buying controlling interest in a junior and the subsequent meetings with other junior concerning setting up a small smelter, the Big Boys in the mining industry some how found out about what was being looked at and took an interest. I ended up sitting down with some of them and laying out the plans. Needless to say, they took interest in this as there are FAR more small deposits out there than there are "world class" deposits. One of the deals being thrown around is we get access to their high powered attorneys and we sign contracts to deliver whatever ore we mine to them at a price that is profitable to all of us. Still a lot to be worked out.

With the nondisclosure agreements thrown around, I have to be careful of how much and what information I give out. Like I said, the Big Boys are getting involved as the world class deposits are playing out and they still need and want to make money.

All of this is still in it's infancy and has a long way to go. Hell, it may fail miserably, it may work. I still see small scale and artisanal mining as the future of this industry. Small mines, small impacts. IF they want to leave money laying on the table and walk away, no problem, I'll still fight for my share.

And because of some things I do, I am privy to a lot of information. I just have to be careful on how and what I let out sometimes.

As I once told Ms. Tuell from the Center for Biological Destruction, "step on my toes and I find a way to cut yours off". And that is exactly what I am doing.

 

[Hoser John]

Kudos MM as tough as nails getting a "legal" op going of any size. Here in Redding the local club demanded their RIGHT to mine a area that had just been rehabbed from damages made from gravel removal to build Shasta Dam back in the 40s. City Council banned ALL forms of mining within city limits forever. Never underestimate the enemies ability to play every foul game in the book to achieve their goal. Emergency is their favorite tool to bulldog this sort of garbage through, I've mined there in Mariposa County since 56 and some of my friends much longer even. Diligence is greatly appreciated. Wish ya luck and prosperity-John

 

[Goldwasher]

Good luck Machinest!!!!
I'm pretty sure withdrawn from agenda....means withdrawn from agenda.....