Waldo MD Letter to U.S. Dept. of Justice & the Solicitor General regarding the Rineha
Welcome guest, is this your first visit?
Member
Discoveries
 
Results 1 to 8 of 8
Like Tree19Likes
  • 4 Post By ratled
  • 5 Post By ratled
  • 2 Post By jog
  • 4 Post By Bejay
  • 4 Post By winners58

Thread: Waldo MD Letter to U.S. Dept. of Justice & the Solicitor General regarding the Rineha

« Prev Thread | Next Thread »
  1. #1

    Feb 2014
    898
    2269 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting

    Waldo MD Letter to U.S. Dept. of Justice & the Solicitor General regarding the Rineha

    Jim Foley posted for this for Tom Kitchar, President of the Waldo Mining District. It is a letter that Waldo Mining District sent to The Dept. of Justice and Solicitor General. It is rather lengthy and very informative. It is so long rather than try and post it here I'll just post the link

    THANKS Waldo MD and everyone for their support!

    ratled

    The New 49'ers :: Gold Prospecting :: Letter to U.S. Dept. of Justice & the Solicitor General regarding the Rinehart
    winners58, russau, Bejay and 1 others like this.
    Never confuse motion with progress


    Illegitimi non carborundum

    __________________
    ███ ████ everything ████ ███ ███████ ██ is ███████ fine █████.
    ███████ ██ ████ trust █████ your █████ ███ government.

  2. #2
    us
    Mar 2013
    Excalibur II
    1,637
    661 times
    Mining, Detecting, diving, spearfishing, bow hunting, duck hunting, treasure hunting, real men!
    The Federal Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 is the oldest federal environmental law in the United States. The Act makes it a misdemeanor to discharge refuse matter of any kind into the navigable waters, or tributaries thereof, of the United States without a permit; this specific provision is known as the Refuse Act. The Rivers and Harbors Act also makes it a misdemeanor to excavate, fill, or alter the course, condition, or capacity of any port, harbor, channel, or other areas within the reach of the Act without a permit.

    The letter in the op says California banned mining. They didn't ban mining. Dredging is one form of mining just like hydraulic mining is one form of mining.

  3. #3

    Feb 2014
    898
    2269 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting
    "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 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."
    Never confuse motion with progress


    Illegitimi non carborundum

    __________________
    ███ ████ everything ████ ███ ███████ ██ is ███████ fine █████.
    ███████ ██ ████ trust █████ your █████ ███ government.

  4. #4
    jog
    jog is offline
    us
    jog

    Nov 2008
    Tillamook Oregon
    Whites MXT / GMT
    1,364
    678 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting
    Quote Originally Posted by chlsbrns View Post
    The Federal Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 is the oldest federal environmental law in the United States. The Act makes it a misdemeanor to discharge refuse matter of any kind into the navigable waters, or tributaries thereof, of the United States without a permit; this specific provision is known as the Refuse Act. The Rivers and Harbors Act also makes it a misdemeanor to excavate, fill, or alter the course, condition, or capacity of any port, harbor, channel, or other areas within the reach of the Act without a permit.

    The letter in the op says California banned mining. They didn't ban mining. Dredging is one form of mining just like hydraulic mining is one form of mining.
    The key words here are Navigable waterways!

    Sent from my SM-G920V using TreasureNet.com mobile app
    Oregon Viking and winners58 like this.
    Those Who Say It Can't Be Done Shouldn't Interupt Those That Are Doing It.

  5. #5
    us
    Mar 2013
    Excalibur II
    1,637
    661 times
    Mining, Detecting, diving, spearfishing, bow hunting, duck hunting, treasure hunting, real men!
    Quote Originally Posted by jog View Post
    The key words here are Navigable waterways!

    Sent from my SM-G920V using TreasureNet.com mobile app
    "navigable waters, or tributaries"

    You all are where you are at because you wear blinders and see only what you want to see!

  6. #6
    Charter Member
    us
    Ed Tracy

    Jan 2015
    Shoreline,wa
    Equinox 800
    608
    988 times
    Prospecting
    Refuse, Defined as " food waste, scraps, or garbage " how does that apply to mining ?

  7. #7
    us
    Brian

    Mar 2014
    Central Oregon Coast
    Whites GMT Garret fully underwater
    1,020
    2500 times
    Prospecting
    The Waldo Letter is very well put.

    I thought it might be interesting to see how a State (in this case Oregon) might come to feel they have water rights over the "miner": who was Granted those exclusive rights to water per the Federal Mining Laws. In other words where does the State of Oregon get the idea they can halt placer mining......from where is their projected authority derived? Now [B]the following is from the current Oregon Law Book of Water Resources. [/BFrom the 2010 Oregon Law Book:
    537.334 Findings.
    The people of the State of Oregon find and declare that:
    (1) Public uses (of water) are beneficial uses.
    (2) The recognition of an in-stream water right under ORS 537.336 to 537.348 shall not diminish the public’s rights in the ownership and control of the waters of this state or the public trust therein. The establishment of an in-stream water right under the provisions of ORS 537.332 to 537.360 "shall not take away or impair any permitted, certificated or "decreed right" (do you suppose the Federal Grant is a decreed right?) which [" is a legislative grant, and being given by act of congress, is equivalent to a patent from the United States to the same."] to any waters or to the use of any waters vested prior to the date the instream
    water right is established pursuant to the provisions of ORS 537.332 to 537.360." [1987 c.859 3]
    537.335
    Wow....that is pretty dynamic let's look further
    Then on page 152:
    APPROPRIATION OF WATER FOR MINING AND ELECTRIC POWER
    UNDER the Oregon 1899 ACT
    541.110 Use of water to develop mineral resources and furnish power. The use of the water of the lakes and running streams of Oregon for the purpose of developing the mineral resources of the state and to furnish electric power for all purposes, is declared to be a public and beneficial use and a public necessity. Subject to the provisions of the Water Rights Act (as defined in ORS 537.010), the right to divert unappropriated waters of any such lakes or streams or such public and beneficial use is "granted".
    NOW NOTE THAT THE ABOVE REFERENCES THE Oregon Water Law of 1899.
    If you study the Oregon Water Resource law you will be very surprised to see that the current legislative actions have compromised the very laws governing the State of Oregon.

    Additionally when Oregon was Granted Statehood the Federal Government retained the ownership of the water for the public and only granted the State the right to see it used equitably.

    Bejay
    ratled, russau, winners58 and 1 others like this.

  8. #8
    Make America Great Again

    Apr 2013
    Oregon
    1,655
    3830 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting
    SOUTH DAKOTA MINING ASSOCIATION, INC.; Homestake Mining Company
    V. LAWRENCE COUNTY, Jack Cole, Intervenor-Appellant.
    Preemption
    Having determined that the plaintiffs' preemption claim is ripe, we now address Cole's challenge to the
    district court's order declaring the Lawrence County ordinance preempted by federal law and enjoining its
    enforcement. Cole argues that the Lawrence County ordinance is not preempted by the Federal Mining
    Act because the ordinance is a reasonable environmental regulation of mining on federal lands.
    Specifically, Cole claims that because the ordinance only bans one type of mining, surface metal mining,
    and does so only within a limited area
    , the ordinance does not prevent the accomplishment of the purposes
    and objectives of federal mining law. [FN4]

    FN4. We note that Cole also urges us to remand the case to the district court to allow
    further discovery regarding the purposes and policies underlying the ordinance. We reject this argument
    because these purposes and policies are immaterial to the preemption analysis here.
    See Perez v. Campbell, (holding that "any state legislation which frustrates the full effectiveness
    of federal law is rendered invalid by the Supremacy Clause" regardless of the underlying purpose of its enactors
    ).

    South Dakota Mining Ass'n v. Lawrence County, 977 F. Supp. 1396 (D.S.D. 1997) :: Justia
    Last edited by winners58; May 30, 2017 at 04:04 AM.
    russau, ratled, Bejay and 1 others like this.
    " A pessimist is an optimist with experience "

 

 

Home | Forum | Active Topics | What's New

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.3.0