facts as presented on BBC....Sit before reading

[Goldwasher]

You guys are gonna love this well written fact based unbiased article.

BBC - Earth - There are people mining gold illegally in California's hills

Wish it was a different format. use the arrows to go through the gallery and read the text.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[Aufisher]

Don't ever trust anyone who discriminates against men with beards.

 

[Actionman]

And the article's solution is more laws---GREAT! This country needs less laws, a lot less! He goes out to a lawless place- "forest service is too thin to enforce" and comes back with "we need more laws" MKayyyy.? Seems the miners are doing fine policing them selves.

 

[bug]

Ya never mind that gold miners built this state. Now they are outlaws. What about when the big money developers in the Motherload gold country wipe out huge tracts of land and pave them over with a sea of track homes. What about that habitat? Where are the BBC environmentalists then. No, they would rather demonize a few guys with shovels. What a joke!!!

 

[goldog]

What is frustrating about the issue in this case is the untruths. Citing the word "withdrawal" as proof it's illegal. Mineral withdrawal is commonly used for open areas to allow non-commercial prospecting.

Since they have determined not even panning is allowed there are no guidelines as to what you can do. I'm not willing to accept their policy. I follow basic rules but who's to say what's right. got me some of that illegal gold this weekend.

 

[Tuolumne]

yeah is this article is what most average people think? terrible. Its this sociological viewpoint that pervades our culture, this is what small miners need to change and its a multigenerational copernican shift that needs to take place. But the first part of the article made me want to puke- there are different sub cultures of miners, like in the LA mountains, but this is not indicative of the average 20 acre or more claim owners in the mother load areas. The one thing I liked about the article that all sub miner groups agree is that we are the ones protecting the environment, picking up trash, so on and so on. This is the ember that needs to be cultivated and established in the publics mind set, that we are cleaning and helping more than normal folk. Two hand and pans at work do more trash cleanup yearly than 10,000 civies donating to some pre-emtive striking anti small mining group.....

 

[jere64ca]

Yep, this article about made me puke as well, all lies and propaganda. The fact is the East Fork San Gabriel has been "Withdrawn from Mineral Entry" for a very long time and prospectors have been mining there all along. Now that it has been declared a "National Monument" a "Management Plan" must be developed and guess what,,,,, it has NOT been completed yet, which means the East Fork is still OPEN to prospecting, at least until the Management Plan is finalized. If you go prospecting there be prepared to get hassled,,, sick, sick, sick.

 

[Falkor]

Wow, what a hit piece. I had to create an account just to comment.

I'm new to the hobby so I don't have the perspective some might but I found these assertions to be particularly egregious:

Laws like the General Mining Act of 1872 are clear that removing minerals from this river is illegal.

Um that is the law that says it is legal.

On 12 April 2016, I submitted a media request to accompany the US Forest Service upriver. Press approval is a slow process, and agents told me off-the-record that mining "isn't a high priority," and "not well-enforced.

And yet he couldn't find any actual harms on the ground, even though there is NO enforcement. Sounds like the mining community is enforcing itself pretty well to me.

Local police told me there were no reported crimes committed by miners, or hiker run-ins. "We haven't received any calls," Azusa police dispatcher Lauren Santamaria confirmed.
Fair enough. But what are the miners doing to rivers and the species that live in them?

Again, no reported issues but the author feels like there must a be problem so he goes prospectin' for some.

Peter Moyle of the University of California Davis has been studying California's fish since 1969. He says the simple act of dumping rocks damages the environment and reduces the prey available to fish. Even the most conscientious miners will impact something's habitat, he adds.

An 'impact' is not the same as a negative impact. If I change the orientation of a stone or draw a pattern in the sand I've had an impact but its absurd to think it is somehow harming the environment.

This watershed is one of 20 river systems that feed Los Angeles. That means the people working in it could affect the purity of drinking water, even if they do not use heavy chemicals.
"It's not ideal, obviously," admits Wen Huang, manager for engineering at the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District. "There could be increased turbidity of source water."
The more people in rivers, the more impurities may be introduced into source water. That means more work for treatment systems "to get rid of that," Huang says.

So the issue is people, not miners. If it is really an issue and you want to ban people from the area then do that; why target prospectors specifically? No one uses heavy chemicals so not sure why those are brought up at all. I seriously doubt a little gravel dust that quickly settles back out in a stream dozens or hundreds of miles from a treatment system has any impact whatsoever.

Still, the other accusation stands: that the miners are polluting the land with trash, diverting rivers and threatening species.

Still, the other UNFOUNDED AND FALSE accusation stands: that the miners are polluting the land with trash, diverting rivers and threatening species. FTFY

Flower gold

Minor quibble but indicative of the lack of research that went into this piece.

Getting serious gold requires destroying rocks and sometimes altering rivers. Many miners build shelters and fires, and stay in the wilderness over 21 days. This is all against the law.

Destroying rocks? Definitely not required, not against the law. Building a shelter and a fire? Heavens! That almost sounds like ... camping. Not against the law.

In 2015, in the narrows, a section of river hemmed in by sheer rock walls, a miner in his 60s was crushed by a boulder. His body was not found for 10 days.
Another old-timer, Papa Bear – a Vietnam veteran who was a fixture along with his common-law wife, Mama Bear – also passed in 2015, from a heart attack.
Not many miners are left. "You could probably count them on fingers and toes," Pat lamented.

Is the author trying to imply that prospecting is an inherently dangerous activity? Doesn't the fact that there aren't many miners left undercut the entire argument that this is a big problem?

Hikers splash in the water a hundred yards off, but they could hardly be farther away. The "us vs them" mentality sharpens upon Savage's arrival.

No further evidence to back up this claim about a feeling the author had.

On his chest are tattoos of a skull and bones, and a shovel and pickaxe. They look like gang colours.

...

Later that night, under cover of darkness because he is wary of unexpected guests, Savage showed us where he lives. It is a few feet from a trail, sandwiched against manzanitas and an overhanging oak. You could be leaning on his front door and not know it.

So the one guy that is technically breaking the rules is doing so in a way that is almost impossible to notice. Portrait of the guy is someone suffering, perhaps slightly unhinged, yet seems to have found a safe space where he doesn't bother anyone else. Something must be done! Clearly this guy should be forced into a mental hospital and pumped full of pharmaceuticals rather than the therapy of the outdoors he has chosen. It would be much better for everyone if he was another homeless bum on the corner committing petty crimes and wasting public resources...

It is also, in financial terms at least, not terribly worthwhile.

Again, really undercuts your argument that this is some giant problem if there isn't much money to be made.

Both sides villainise the other. In the miners' defence, I did not see any endangered species threatened, or miners dumping chemicals or trash. Yet, that does not mean they are not having an effect. Certainly, I saw plenty of streams diverted, and men working in them.

So you went to investigate and saw with your own eyes that this narrative is false yet....

I also worry that, one day, a wayward trekker will startle a miner who has made a big find, and gold fever will turn tragic. Even if this dramatic scenario never comes to pass, the miners chuck rocks around carelessly, which seems like a recipe for an accident.

Wow. What a vivid imagination the author has, maybe they should stick to fiction. Is everything an Us-vs-Them issue these days? Author seems to have a bigger issue with the miner's assumed political stances than anything they are actually doing to the environment. (And I say that as a filthy liberal.. well ok moderate.. but either way we're not all crazy.)

 

[goldenIrishman]

Seems to me that this is yet another propaganda piece by an environmentalist for environmentalists and those with no knowledge of mining. Considering that the environuts have their own agenda, have done tests designed in such a way to give the results that THEY want, we've been fighting an uphill battle for a long time now.

Where I feel the author went astray was in not researching the actual laws. He badly misquoted them which shows a lack of proper research prior to setting pen to paper. He also failed to research the fact that if a person had a claim in the area before the President made it a monument (to nothing) that existing claims are grandfathered in as long as they keep their annual maintenance fees paid up.

With a few exceptions when an area is removed from mineral entry, that only means that you can't file a claim within that withdrawn area. You can still prospect in the majority of them. Many also think that you can't prospect within the boundaries of a wilderness area. You can as long as you're not using any powered equipment. Hands and pans are allowed as would something like a hand cranked puffer drywasher.

It's a shame that a news organization like the BBC didn't do a much better job of vetting an article of this type before putting it out for public consumption.

 

[goldog]

I know some of these guys including Savage. They really are good guys. There is some disdain for the hikers but they'll stop their day to help when needed. A lot of people run into trouble due to poor planning. Losing their way, lacking water, etc... There are real dangers out there and these guys have saved a few lives. If someone goes missing a dozen strangers will show up to search. I saw it for a miner and was impressed. I saw them do it because there was a sign. Total stranger. Just as much of a mission. They know how little help the FS will give so there is really no choice. I could go on about pet rescues, escorts out at night on and on...

 

[ecmjamsit]

The British are just jealous they have no gold mines of our stature. That's why they attack our way of life.

 

[TAKODA]

Hopefully ...... in a few weeks we might be able to TRUMP some of this crap .

 

[russau]

Seems to me that this is yet another propaganda piece by an environmentalist for environmentalists and those with no knowledge of mining. Considering that the environuts have their own agenda, have done tests designed in such a way to give the results that THEY want, we've been fighting an uphill battle for a long time now.

Where I feel the author went astray was in not researching the actual laws. He badly misquoted them which shows a lack of proper research prior to setting pen to paper. He also failed to research the fact that if a person had a claim in the area before the President made it a monument (to nothing) that existing claims are grandfathered in as long as they keep their annual maintenance fees paid up.

With a few exceptions when an area is removed from mineral entry, that only means that you can't file a claim within that withdrawn area. You can still prospect in the majority of them. Many also think that you can't prospect within the boundaries of a wilderness area. You can as long as you're not using any powered equipment. Hands and pans are allowed as would something like a hand cranked puffer drywasher.

It's a shame that a news organization like the BBC didn't do a much better job of vetting an article of this type before putting it out for public consumption.

A lie ,if repeated enough, will become the truth if NOT stopped dead in its tracks quickly!!!