GOOD NEWS OR BAD ?

[Fullpan]

I'm not familiar with that area, so someone that is, please explain.

Placer Land Trust Protects 417 acres of American River Land

I do know that each of you paid for it through your calif. taxes

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Oakview2]

Nothing like paying to get screwed

 

[Clay Diggins]

It was private land. It has been for a very long time.
Now it's still private land but the new owner is Placer Land Trust.
You never could prospect or mine there - it's been private property for a long time.

So what changed?

You couldn't prospect, camp or hike there before.

Now if you become a member of the Placer Land Trust the first benefit you get when you pay up is:

Exclusive Trail Access – Private trail runs, mountain bike rides, rucks, gorge scrambles, hikes, special events and adventures!

Maybe if you pay them some money (they call it "donating") they will let you prospect?


These Placer Land Trust folks are greenies out of the Roseville area. They aren't a threat to prospectors as long as they stick to buying private property. I doubt they can restrict themselves to that though. Eventually they are going to want the whole North Fork to be one big, safe jogging path.

jogging...

 

[Oakview2]

Placer Land Trust is working with California State Parks on the management of the land, and plans to transfer it to State Parks as part of the Auburn State Recreation Area later this year. Change

 

[Hoser John]

Time will tell what d l-John

 

[Clay Diggins]

Placer Land Trust is working with California State Parks on the management of the land, and plans to transfer it to State Parks as part of the Auburn State Recreation Area later this year. Change

So how does that change anything for the prospector?

You couldn't prospect there before - you can't prospect there now.

It was not public land before and it's not public land now. If they donate it to the State Parks (as they plan to) it still won't be public land.

Not Yours gets sold to Not Yours and they are talking about donating to Not Yours. In any case it's still Not Yours.

You might as well complain about how the neighbor's car is too ugly. Nothing you can do about it because it's Not Your car.

If you had really wanted to prospect the land you could have bought it when it was for sale. Then it would be yours and Not Theirs.

 

[Fullpan]

So how does that change anything for the prospector?

You couldn't prospect there before - you can't prospect there now.

It was not public land before and it's not public land now. If they donate it to the State Parks (as they plan to) it still won't be public land.

Not Yours gets sold to Not Yours and they are talking about donating to Not Yours. In any case it's still Not Yours.

You might as well complain about how the neighbor's car is too ugly. Nothing you can do about it because it's Not Your car.

If you had really wanted to prospect the land you could have bought it when it was for sale. Then it would be yours and Not Theirs.

You are right clay, but there is something wrong with being forced (through taxes) to help buy the neighbors car, and then have no say in how ugly it is.

 

[ALewis]

"You might as well complain about how the neighbor's car is too ugly. Nothing you can do about it because it's Not Your car. "

My neighbor complained about my bug in high school and got the city to ticket it as abandoned, or left on street for 3 straight day's ! I even lost the appeal, even though it was reg'd & insured & I was driving it, had a parking pass from college I attended... still, had to pay $75 to park in front of my house...still not over that, but thankfully he moved.... sorry, off topic I know.....

 

[Oakview2]

Clay

I don't like the fact that these green groups extort land from private land holders, perhaps I could have purchased it, had pulbic money been given to me, and I had enough legal arm twisiting to convince a developer to give it up. I appreciate your optimistic outlook, but wake up and smell the coffee, the greens are constantly placing all types of lands in enclaves to make sure that it will never be grazed, logged or mined. Maybe we can all deliver pizzas and return this country to its once glory.

 

[benny]

I've seen a trust like this in Oregon. Even if the land is sold, it cannot be developed for any purpose. It can't be mined, cultivated, used in any manner. The land in Oregon was sold by the state for a song.

 

[dredgeman]

In Fresno Area we have the San Joaquin river parkway conservancy group.
Forced the rancher thru regulation to not develop the land and then bought it for pennies on the dollar. The rancher figured at least it will be protected now.

The group has a small lead group who get state grants and restrict access. They also have a check for life.

Oh and they also have some plans to sell some of it for development around the edges of the corridor.

 

[Oakview2]

EXACTLY RICK

 

[Reed Lukens]

Actually it is private land now, but it was patented mining land before that for generations. Sorefinger Point was hit hard year after year and there are plenty of great stories of great amounts of gold that came out of it. The Goldhounds went there every year for outtings for a long time until the owner passed away. He also owned the Liberty Hill mine and others. There are lots of privately owned mines in the area but this one was a huge loss to the mining industry. I have been in there many times but not for quite a few years now since it was sold after the owners death and from then on it became off limits to miners & groups. There aren't many privately owned areas of the river anymore, the State has been going for it all for many years.

 

[Clay Diggins]

Actually it is private land now, but it was patented mining land before that for generations.

Patented mining land IS private land.

It's nice that the owner allowed you to prospect there but it has not been open to the public in more than 100 years. Not all of the Patent was sold. The rest is going to be developed as high end residential on the river. Probably going to be snapped up by the joggers who helped buy the Placer Trust Land in the first place.

Joggers are better than miners. That's why you have to pay a special tax to the private Placer Land Trust whenever you buy a house less than 20 years old in Placer county.

joggers...

 

[Clay Diggins]

It IS still privately owned, as most of the North Fork drainage is.

The reason it's mostly private property is because many miners worked hard to perfect their claims and then were granted mineral patents. Mineral Patents are private property. The miners and their ancestors own the land as well as the minerals.

Would you tell those miners and their families that they shouldn't be able to sell the private land they worked so hard to earn? They made this country rich and powerful. Now you want to keep them from selling to whoever they wish under whatever term they wish?

 

[Oakview2]

Clay

By your own admission, some of the land was sold for a song, and the developer that owned all of it was allowed to develop some high end riverfront. Let me translate, give us what we want or we will block you from doing what you wish with your private property. That my friend is extortion, why would you tell miners and their familes that they must submit to not developing the full potential of their property. That in my humble opinion is not what made this country great, but is the preferred stratedgy of the green libertards. JMHO

 

[Clay Diggins]

Clay

By your own admission, some of the land was sold for a song, and the developer that owned all of it was allowed to develop some high end riverfront. Let me translate, give us what we want or we will block you from doing what you wish with your private property. That my friend is extortion, why would you tell miners and their familes that they must submit to not developing the full potential of their property. That in my humble opinion is not what made this country great, but is the preferred stratedgy of the green libertards. JMHO

I think you may be confusing my writings with someone else?

I never implied that "some of the land was sold for a song". No one anywhere I know of has in any way implied the land was sold cheaply or that anyone was prevented from mining it. There is no evidence this was a forced or coerced sale.

Nor did I state that any developer was "allowed" to keep or develop anything.

I never wrote anywhere that miners "must submit to not developing the full potential of their property". Extortion? Strong words with no facts to back it up.

Thanks for sharing your opinions about these folks private dealings with their private property. We all have opinions.

Please do not include me in any of your future musings about what might be. Please do not attempt again to put words in my mouth. I have been very clear in what I wrote about the situation. Perhaps if you read again what I posted here you will come to understand what was written rather than what you believe I might have written?

 

[Clay Diggins]

You are right clay, but there is something wrong with being forced (through taxes) to help buy the neighbors car, and then have no say in how ugly it is.

I agree.

What hasn't been revealed here is that every house that was built less than 20 years ago, that is sold in Placer county, pays a tax that goes to the private Placer Land Trust. That is where they get the money to buy private land along the river.

I personally think that is wrong, unfair, downright unsustainable and a sucker job on all those who buy a house less than 20 years old in Placer county. That's my opinion.

Still it's only the "taxpayer money" for those who buy a newer house in Placer county. If you were to live in Placer county you would have every right to not only complain about how ugly that particular tax is but you can also change the law!

That's right, all those evil folks that passed this garbage tax in the first place are elected by you and your neighbors. You want to make this go away? Vote anyone who supports this out of office. It's easy in such a small county as Placer. How many votes were those idiots elected by? How many would you have to take away to get them booted at the next election?

The big cry these days is for local control of government. Here it is right in front of you. Take control. You will be surprised how easy it is. I've done it. Put them in fear of losing their power and they will do whatever you want. How do you think the Placer Land Trust got their freebies in the first place?

I have no reason to object to private lands exchanging hands. Private property is one of the foundations of freedom in this country. I'll be the last man to tell someone what they can or cannot do with their private property.

That's my opinion. Doesn't mean a hill of beans because I don't live in Placer county. I CAN"T get that stupid law repealed, I can't vote for laws in other peoples counties.

Maybe some of you here do live in Placer county?

 

[KevinInColorado]

Well said CD! My wife has spent time working in state and local government and seen how this really works. At the local level, a few noisy people can drive a lot of govt action if no one opposes their proposals. The most powerful influences at the local level are usually developers. They have a lot of money, see the chance to make a LOT of money and can promise increased tax revenue to the city/county. Hard to fight all that money but hey, that's the American way right?

 

[Oakview2]

"The rest is going to be developed as high end residential on the river", from your post. I do apoligize if associated your specific post with the sale, but this tactic of devalueing land, throwing the developer a bone by allowing them to develop a smaller portion, and buying it at at greatly reduced price with funds siezed from the public is extortion. The same tactics were used on the original owner of Emily Camp, locally here on the SJ river. I disagree with your assement, but I certainly did not intend to be disagreeable. I won't darken your posts in the future.