What's the penalty for not filing a PoO to dredge with the FS

[winners58]

American Mining Rights Association - Shannon Poe dredging on the south fork Clearwater, ID
13 hrs ago - https://www.facebook.com/americanminingrights/ watch the video from the day before here.

We wanted to give you an update here in Idaho. Things are beginning to get very interesting.

Last night, we were approached by the USFS LEO (Law Enforcement Officer) who informed us that we will be required to accept a "notice of non-compliance" or a "warning of non-compliance" which are essentially one in the same. The notice gives us 48 hours to "get in compliance" or face citation and arrest. To get in compliance, we would have to obtain a Plan of Operations, which is fundamentally impossible to obtain in that time line. We are being told we have to pull our dredges from our real property mining claims which we have valid permits from the State of Idaho to mine. We have even walked with, and worked very closely with Idaho Department of Water Resources all this week on critical habitat, where we can and cannot dredge and they believe we are completely in compliance for the state.

Yes folks, the USFS are talking arrest for not obtaining a Plan of Operations (PoO) for suction dredging which is not required as a matter of settled law. The basis for the creation of requiring the PoO by this particular USFS division was, in our opinion created fraudulently. The miner determines what is a "significant disturbance", then the miner is to work with, and consult with the District Ranger for what steps to follow after that determination. District Ranger Nevius up here in the Nez Perce NF has stated, on film in front of us, and his own Supervisor Cheryl Probert that he does not consider suction dredging as causing a significant disturbance. The only other reason Probert has stated as the reason for a PoO is that the studies show it is potentially impactful. The study the USFS adopted which she cites has on all items studied came back "deminimus" meaning no harm. No harm, but she still puts forth this shutdown and regulatory nightmare. She has refused to talk with the stakeholders (the miners with claims) and has unilaterally forced egregious regulations down the throats adversely impacting the stakeholders way of life, their income and even results in a degradation of the value of the claims up here as a result of these regulations.

Of note........we can quote a dozen other District Rangers within the USFS which firmly believe a PoO is NOT required for suction dredging with a 6" or smaller, but this one little division is the only one in the entire United States we are aware of which is claiming it is required, the only one. As a Federal agency who's charter is "to encourage mining" and manage the "people's forests" they sure aren't consistent, nor are they following the law in our opinion.

We will be posting about this more shortly and will be giving the USFS our formal response on this issue at 5pm tomorrow as agreed by both parties. They will be coming to our camp.

We have been very professional, polite, but very firm in our confidence of what we know about the laws, the regulations and their authority over requiring this. In fact, we have yet to meet anyone within the USFS which can have an in depth conversation about the specific laws and regulations with us and at the same level as our knowledge. This statement is not intended to sound braggadocios, but a statement of just how uninformed the people we are having to deal with actually are.

We are heading to Grangeville to meet with the Sheriff.

More to come shortly as we are sending this from a little Cafe in Elk City ID and have very limited access to the internet.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A History of Mining on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska - Grab it through Amazon!

[M.E.G.]

May help

 

[Clay Diggins]

I don't do Facebook so I'm not seeing a video.

No one is required to accept anything. A "notice of noncompliance" doesn't mean squat until you are served. Threats only it sounds like.

Lot's of questions. Did they ask for a copy of the determination signed by the District Ranger? Have they asked if this is a "final decision"? Do they even know why they should ask those questions?

There are a lot of ways to stop this nonsense while it's still in the administrative realm but unless they demand the administrative process be followed they could be complaining from jail. Forest Service LEOs do have criminal arrest powers. You can argue about whether it's criminal after you are arrested or you can demand they follow their administrative process.

Heavy Pans

 

[Clay Diggins]

Just a part of the administrative process:

The Forest Service must make a diligent effort to resolve differences through agreement and document all communications and actions relative to the requirements in paragraphs 2a-c.

Except in the most clear cut cases, the District Ranger should request the assistance of a Forest Service mineral specialist or certified mineral examiner (FSH 2809.15, sec. 10.5) to evaluate the situation on the ground, and advise the officer whether the proposed or existing surface use is logically sequenced, reasonable, and consistent with existing laws and regulations.

The advice should be used to help with negotiations to secure willing cooperation. If negotiations fail, the advice should be formalized using the surface use determination procedures (FSM 2817.03a and FSH 2809.15, ch. 10).

As stated in FSM 2817.03, willing cooperation should be sought, but legal remedies are available through the Department of Justice.

If you are going to fight the lion you better know which end does the biting and which end does the defecating.

Heavy Pans

 

[uglymailman]

I worked in the Eng. Dept. of a coal mine for 10 yrs.. We had an inspection each month by MSHA and the State and there was SOMETHING out of compliance every time. You were given 30 days to become compliant or given an extension each time. Never anything to cause a shut down. Ask for an extension if necessary.
Every inspection by a Gvt. entity that I've dealt with, Mining,FMHA houses and USPS had to have some problem found. If an inspector goes somewhere they have to find something wrong to justify their existence. Good luck.

 

[winners58]

It's going to get interesting, I was also thinking are the FS following administrative process

suction dredging is only moving material already in the stream.
its a scour zone! nothing they could do compares to what mother nature does every winter.

the video is of Shannon talking to a guy from the Idaho conservation league that was taking photos of their license plates.
*I can see the video without being logged on to facebook;
https://www.facebook.com/americanmi...397529020995/1812534562173945/?type=2&theater

 

[M.E.G.]

When Bureaucratic Truth is Administrative Felonies
Sugar Pine Mine – Documentation


Hal Anthony, Jefferson Mining District assemblyman, has the Behind the Woodshed internet radio show, digs into the Sugar Pine mining issue
43 CFR Subpart 3809: Surface Managment
3809.1: What are the purposes of this subpart?

The purposes of this subpart are to:

(a) Prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of public lands by operations authorized by the mining laws. Anyone intending to develop mineral resources on the public lands must prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of the land and reclaim disturbed areas. This subpart establishes procedures and standards to ensure that operators and mining claimants meet this responsibility; and

(b) Provide for maximum possible coordination with appropriate State agencies to avoid duplication and to ensure that operators prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of public lands.

§ 3809.2 What is the scope of this subpart?
(a) This subpart applies to all operations authorized by the mining laws on public lands where the mineral interest is reserved to the United States, including Stock Raising Homestead lands as provided in §3809.31(d) and (e). When public lands are sold or exchanged under 43 U.S.C. 682(b) (Small Tracts Act), 43 U.S.C. 869 (Recreation and Public Purposes Act), 43 U.S.C. 1713 (sales) or 43 U.S.C. 1716 (exchanges), minerals reserved to the United States continue to be removed from the operation of the mining laws unless a subsequent land-use planning decision expressly restores the land to mineral entry, and BLM publishes a notice to inform the public. (d) This subpart does not apply to private land except as provided in paragraphs (a) and (c) of this section. For purposes of analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, BLM may collect information about private land that is near to, or may be affected by, operations authorized under this subpart.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. JULY 19, 1866. That the mineral lands of the public domain, both surveyed and unsurveyed, are hereby declared to be free and open to exploration and occupation.

Linked from http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/gold-prospecting/460480-sugar-pine-mine-43-cfr-3809-follow-up.html

 

[Reed Lukens]

They're going to come out armed to the teeth, ready to steal all of your gear. Bringing out the militia now would help you insure your safety, especially after what we have all seen the blm and dfw do recently. I just have a feeling that this time the dfw is stepping it up against Shannon because this has been they're way of doing things these days in their so called forest... I would expect nothing less than an all out assault, snipers, M16's, etc... You better dig in... At the very least, have the sheriff there to keep the dfw from going above the law.

 

[Clay Diggins]

They're going to come out armed to the teeth, ready to steal all of your gear. Bringing out the militia now would help you insure your safety, especially after what we have all seen the blm and dfw do recently. I just have a feeling that this time the dfw is stepping it up against Shannon because this has been they're way of doing things these days in their so called forest... I would expect nothing less than an all out assault, snipers, M16's, etc... You better dig in...

The DFW isn't involved Reed. This is in Idaho and it involves just one Forest district. The State is all good with their dredging.

I doubt you could get a Forest LEO to jump in the river to steal a dredge. This is all about one woman's ego and her poorly trained lap dog LEO.

Heavy Pans

 

[winners58]

looks like the LEO was told to stand down by his higherups saying they fear for his safety.
.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zdBH_G4f6v8

 

[Rail Dawg]

It’s a main reason we prospect and mine deep in the Northern Nevada desert on BLM land.

But you have our support and will stand with you.

 

[Bejay]

Pitkin VS USFS worked so keep up the vids and pressure. You can watch the YouTube presentations as well titled Pitkin v Goliath if you want.


Bejay

 

[Reed Lukens]

After the murders and shootings by the blm, etc, times have changed, now their worried? They're the murderers... Hang'em!

 

[winners58]

Update Sunday, July 22nd

American Mining Rights Association

Update Sunday, July 22nd, 12:45 pm:

Yesterday little brown envelopes were placed on several of our vehicles. In those were several things.

1) a “warning notice” from the LEO stating we were dredging without a PoO and which, he said days earlier this document (should we be given one) was only that we agreed to disagree, it was only for documentation.

2) a “notice of non-compliance” stating the same thing.

3) an “incident report” which states again, the same thing, but this time it was only handed out to the AMRA dredges (3) on the river, not to the other miners and it states on this document that it is a “misdemeanor” instead of the citation (like a parking ticket) stated in their own governing documents and as per their own LEO Brooks Beegle.

4) a PoO form to fill out to “come into compliance”.

It is quite interesting that the level of alleged offense was escalated to a misdemeanor and only given to AMRA. Seems a bit … how do we say it….discriminatory and harassing? I’ve now missed three full days of mining, and when you average ounces per day, it adds up pretty fast the losses you incur for this material interference.

They are giving us until noon tomorrow to remove our dredges and stop all operations or face potential arrest and now criminal citations.

I’m wondering to all the people reading this, are you sick of the government telling you that you cannot do anything without their permission? Our activities are similar to one who roto-tills their garden. We dredge with lawn mower sized motors, do not add any pollutants and loosen the gravels creating fish habitat to get the gold we have a deed to obtain. It is real property which we mine, we have deeds. Nothing is added, but we do remove 98% of all mercury (if it is present) all trash like the old beer cans we already have and so much fishing lead we can make our own dive weights each year. Yesterday I found a 1920’s butter knife.

Yesterday, I filmed about 100 fish which are now calling our little hole home (about 4′ deep) in the river with our GoPro. Before we started, there were no fish, now there are over a hundred, but they say we create an impact for the fish. Yup, we agree, but it’s a positive impact as proven by science and I don’t know….umm our own eyes and decades of experience.

Last night in camp, we compared pictures from the 4 years we’ve dredged up here and to be honest folks, I could not tell where I dredged in previous years because Mother Nature erased any evidence of our holes each spring with the floods and Spring runoff…but we create a significant disturbance according to them. Even the scientific report by Idaho Fish and Game stated we are “deminimus” meaning no harm.

Let’s challenge you fine folks reading this and tell us where in this picture the area was dredged just last year?


Why is the government so afraid to have an adult, polite conversation with us miners who are stake holders, own the mineral rights and want to voice our opinions and grievances against an over-regulatory USFS up here. This is the ONLY USFS division out of 155 National Forests which require a PoO for suction dredging. 1 out of 155, let that sink in. Take into consideration that the Supervisor up here is mandated by their own governing manual (what we call the 2800 manual) under 2817.3 to take a majority of the voices of the miners, use past experience and also sound scientific studies in making regulatory decisions. Did Ms. Probert do that? No.

There were nearly 200 people in opposition to her regulatory scheme (all of the miners) and a handful of radical environmental groups which were in favor. Doesn’t sound like Ms. Probert is aware of her own governing documents….but we are.

Why won’t the USFS sit down with those they severely and adversely impact? Why don’t they follow their own rules? Why can’t they have an adult conversation with us? Why are they threatening arrest and citations to valid property owners which are not required by law to obtain her false permit?

It is time we all call our Congressman, our Senator, our Governor and start asking some questions. We would be happy to provide any lawmaker with the evidence of the acts Ms. Probert used to jam this down the throat of the public. Make the call to yours.

So we have until tomorrow at noon to either get in lock step with them on over-regulation, loss of income, asking permission for something that is virtually zero impact, but in fact helps fish habitat or they are going to do what? Like they did in Chicken Alaska and send in the SWAT teams for a bunch of unarmed, peaceful miners? Somehow I don’t think it is the LEO who, just two days ago cited something about officer safety, but us, the public, on public lands just trying to make a living legally, with valid state permits who is concerned for their safety.

Ask yourself another question. Why have the Idaho Department of Fish and Game been “suction dredging to create fish habitat”? It’s true, they see the value, but the USFS and Ms. Probert apparently listen to the radical environmental groups instead of the public, science, facts, truth and the miners, whom she obviously despises.

Tomorrow will be an interesting day….

 

[Bejay]

No doubt many such conflicts are protected under the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. That protection of "equal application" is to be carried out at the Federal, State, and local levels. Lately it appears "equal application of the laws and equal protection" are forgotten.

Bejay

 

[Goldwasher]

the only way to do anything about it is to keep standing up to it.

Shannon flat out tells them where he will be and what he will be doing. With the challenge to come and get him.

It may just work

 

[winners58]

 

[ouachitacaveman]

The USFS obviously has a few Obama-era tree huggers calling the shots in this area. Maybe after the swamp is drained, things will get better for us....

 

[winners58]

.

American Mining Rights Association
36 mins ·

I am posting the letter (email) we sent to the USFS Minerals Examiner last night in response to their notice left on our windshields. You can read it below, but also wanted to say we did darn good dredging today .....all of today. We just came out of the water and it is 6pm. We found the largest piece of gold I have ever found on the South Fork Clearwater! (I'm sure my beautiful wife will claim it though).

We hope the USFS will recognize the egregious errors they have made and talk to us how it can be remedied. We don't have our hopes up from past experiences with them. Adult, polite and professional conversations seem to be something they abhor and actively avoid. They did not answer this email.

To: District Ranger Terry Nevius, NPNF July 22, 2018 1803 hours

Dear Ranger Nevius, Ms. Probert and Mr. Marty Jones.

I am in possession of the little brown envelope Mr. Beegle placed on the windshield of my vehicle Friday July 21, 2018.

I oppose the assertion I need to obtain a PoO for suction dredging. In the USFS Manual under 2817.3, it clearly and definitively states the miner and the Ranger (Nevius and Poe) determine if the activities create or cause a significant disturbance. In February of 2016, during the public comment period and the conference call with Probert, Mr. Nevius stated, on the recorded call that he never said suction dredging creates a significant disturbance. I am of the firm opinion, based on factual science that it does not cause a significant disturbance either. In August of 2017, I flew over to Idaho and had a face to face meeting with Probert, Jones, Gay Richardson, Brian Koch and a few other USFS staff. Mr. Nevius stated again, on a call in to the room “I’ve never said it causes a significant disturbance, I didn’t write a letter saying so and never told Cheryl Probert it does either”. On July 18, 2018 above my dredge near mile marker 39 at 1608 hours, Mr. Nevius walked down the hill to my dredge with LEO Brooks Beegle, Under Sheriff Jim Gorges, Marty Smith and I had my dredge tender Jere Clements with me. All of them witnessed myself asking Mr. Nevius if he still believed suction dredging doesn’t cause a significant disturbance and he responded “I’ve never said it did and never told Probert that”.

Based on the black and white language in 2817.3, I have had one on one conversations with Ranger Nevius for 1 1/2 years and together, we have determined it does not cause, nor create a significant disturbance. I am not required, nor are the other miners on the river to obtain a PoO for suction dredging.

I am aware that Mr. Nevius signed the notice of non-compliance. I am curious as to why Mr. Nevius has contradicted his previous 3 public statements stating otherwise.

Again, I assert my first Amendment right and respectfully, but firmly disagree with any assertion that I need to obtain a permit for something their own District Ranger stated on multiple times that I do not meet the threshold for requiring one.

We will continue to dredge with our valid, current and approved IDWR suction dredge permits for 2018.

Sincerely,

Shannon Poe
David Hembree
Jack Johnson
Carl Grissom
Nicole Carlson
Dave Schroeder
Ten Mile Mining District
American Mining Rights Association

,

 

[winners58]

July 24th 2018 11am

American Mining Rights Association
1 hr ·

We wanted to send a sincere thank you to the readers, supporters, members and followers of our plight up here on the South Fork Clearwater.

We are humbled by how many people are sick of an out of control agency putting their boot on the necks of the middle class with illegal regulations.

We have been informed by one of our 'insiders" that it has caught the attention of some very important people and we are opening up a line of communication with them. We'll leave it at that for now.

Ms. Probert, this all could have been avoided had you followed the law, talked with the miners and actually followed your own rules, but you took a different path....an unfortunate one. You have cost the tax payers a lot of money with your schemes and will continue to cost the tax payers a lot of money digging out of your schemes. Frankly ma'am, in my opinion, you are a disgrace to the USFS and to all the other hard working, fine folks within the USFS who recognize their job is to manage our forests for us, not dictate your ideology onto the public.

We believe strongly you should resign.