U.S. Supreme Court to decide if theyll hear Bohmker on April 26
Welcome guest, is this your first visit?
Results 1 to 8 of 8
Like Tree17Likes
  • 4 Post By ratled
  • 3 Post By winners58
  • 7 Post By winners58
  • 1 Post By russau
  • 1 Post By Hoser John
  • 1 Post By IMAUDIGGER

Thread: U.S. Supreme Court to decide if theyll hear Bohmker on April 26

« Prev Thread | Next Thread »
  1. #1

    Feb 2014
    2185 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting

    U.S. Supreme Court to decide if they'll hear Bohmker on April 26

    I got this in a letter from Sam @ Armadillo in OR. It's from Tom and thought I would pass it around here. Just passing it on for those that would like to know

    Hello all;

    Yesterday we got word from the U.S. Supreme Court that they will be meeting on April 26 which cases will be heard, and which denied.

    We are asking everyone to stop what you are doing and WRITE & SEND LETTERS ASAP to the court urging them to hear the Bohmker case.

    Attached is a list of the Justices and mailing address, along with Sample Letters.

    PLEASE HELP! A few letters will mean nothing... 100's or 1,000s might just make the difference!

    I expect all this info to be posted on the Waldo website by tonight.


    Tom Kitchar

    Waldo Mining District
    Attached Files Attached Files
    Never confuse motion with progress

    Illegitimi non carborundum

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

  2. #2
    Make America Great Again

    Apr 2013
    3790 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting
    Docket 18-979 might be good to add the docket number to your letter.
    link to SCOTUS with all the main documents for and against and responses;
    wildminer, russau and ratled like this.
    " A pessimist is an optimist with experience "

  3. #3
    Make America Great Again

    Apr 2013
    3790 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting

    from Facebook update

    from Kerby Jackson

    As many of you are already aware, despite our best efforts over nearly eight years and incredible assistance from Pacific Legal Foundation, earlier this week, the SCOTUS refused to hear the Bohmker case. No explanation was offered for the refusal, but I can guess. In the first place, we're dealing with an agenda, while in the second place, we are dealing with judges who are so disconnected from the cases that they are ruling on, that they can't even master the basics of proper terminology or grasp what's involved in the processes of that terminology. When judges call motorized mining “sludging, or whatever it is they do ...”, refer to your mining claim as “a lease” and can't even grasp the notion that underwater mineral deposits cannot be mined without access to an air supply and that just because a mining claim covers twenty acres it doesn't mean that the mineral deposit that validated discovery on the claim may be found throughout its entirety, it becomes clear that you're dealing with sheer ignorance and incompetence because we are talking about very simple and basic notions here. At the end of the day, we're talking about what is essentially a takings of property made legal by the highest court in the land. Even the dissenting judge in the 9th Circuit expressed his sheer embarrassment of the decision, chiding the other two judges with “Come on, this cannot possibly be the rationale of our decision in this case”.

    That being said, the fallout from the Bohmker case will eventually be felt well beyond the mining world, because for one of the first times in history, the SCOTUS has allowed a federal Appeals Court ruling to stand that basically agrees with the notion that on a sheer whim, any state can pass any law that destroys any federally protected right and any federally protected property right. (see also, the failure of SCOTUS to overturn a decision in Rinehart that ultimately eradicated the notion of federal preemption where federal legislation created a property right is concerned). This does not bode well if you hunt, fish, cut firewood, log, boat, hike, birdwatch, ride a bike, ride a motorcycle, pick mushrooms, gather wildflowers, run some cows, etc. - forget about those things because you aren't going to stand a chance when the smoke clears. You're a “permitee” with an “implied license” (so says the 9th Circuit) and you don't have any rights at day's end. That's the reality. It'll happen. Yes, even for those who live in the weird world of fish worship. You're done, even if you don't know it yet.

    But, we miners are far from “done for”, so long as we choose not to allow our goose to be cooked. We're just going to have to learn from the reality of our situation and change the way that we've traditionally done things.

    The first lesson in reality is that despite the attacks on small miners, the mining industry in general, is actually stronger and bigger than any time in history. Despite Oregon and California banning your little yellow rubber duckling with its 4” intake, not too mention your blue bowl and spiral wheel, it's still “all systems go” for the nearest open pit mine and its heap leach pads. It's not that mining is banned, per say, but that the idea of the traditional settler-miner is being destroyed. This isn't anything new. Even back in 1990, one USFS employee justified their cabin burning rampage near Denny and Forks of Salmon by saying, “This old homesteader mentality is dead and the big operations pay big bucks”. It's always been about controlling resources at the end of the day, regardless of whatever cute or slimy critter is bandied about as an excuse.

    In many ways, we're at the same cross-roads that Chinese miners were at when the first exclusion laws were passed in the old days. Individually, they were very vulnerable to assorted tyrannies and tended to wind up quite savaged by other groups and especially by government. Many of them opted to become common laborers or sought fortunes doing something other than mining, such as laundering or cooking. However, there is a story not told in mainstream history books about the Chinese miners, and it's the fact, that despite being subjected to all kinds of abuse and being at an obvious disadvantage, in the end, the average Chinese miner who stuck it out became far more successful than most of his “white” counterparts who came to the Far West from the Eastern states hunting for gold and many returned to China wealthy. This is almost the polar opposite of the experience of many who came West and returned to their home states penniless or opted instead to become dirt farmers. Today, most of the mining community understands this and as a result, the majority of miners speak of their Chinese forerunners with reverence and awe. Typically, they point to their patience, persistence, thoroughness and work ethic as the source of their success, usually while gesticulating at some hundred yard long wall of perfectly stacked tailings that is still standing today to help make their point. While those points are true and are undoubtedly good lessons, it is however, not the reason why Chinese miners were more successful than others. The fact is, the real reason for the success of the Chinese as miners is that they not only stood together for their own mutual protection, but that unlike “white” miners, they tended to form highly organized groups for the purpose of mining. Any review of photographs or lithographs of the early mining era reveals that the typical “white” 49'er tended to be a lone prospector, while the Chinese almost were almost always portrayed in so-called “companies”. To add to this point, another feature of the Chinese is that these “companies” were highly organized, with each member having a certain place. Not every member of these Chinese companies wielded a pick, stacked cobble or washed gravel the majority of the day. Some of them, who had carpentry skills, kept things in working order and expanded camp, while others insured that everyone's belly was full by tending to the gardens and preparing meals. When that work was done, they assisted in mining with the others. Their operations were models of great efficiency and often reached a massive scale.

    By contrast, “white” miners tended to be individualistic unless they went industrial, and for the most part, this individualism has been what has imprinted itself on the mining community.

    But, our Chinese forerunners have left us with a great lesson and if the lesson is applied, it will be the savior of miners everywhere in the Far West.

    One under-looked facet in both the California and Oregon situations is that the legislation only targets the “little miner”, particularly those operating small suction dredges and high bankers. With the Oregon legislation in particular, as Magistrate Clarke at the Medford federal court properly pointed out, operations working under the DOGAMI permit or the permit exemption are actually exempt from the prohibition. Much as he pointed out in one footnote, none of the plaintiffs had operations of the scope to even apply for the permit or the exemption. Ultimately, while SB 3 eradicates small scale placer mining in Oregon, it protected mining on the large scale. (This was mostly due to the efforts of the aggregate industry, by the way). And it didn't effect lode mining at all, including chemical processing methods like heap or pad leaching via cyanide, as the ORS already treats that subject.

    As the Alaskans often say, “You go big or you go home ...”.

    Most small miners, even the ones who are self described “recreational miners” (a damnable term you should never use to describe yourself), express interest in “going bigger”. After all, who wants to dig with a shovel and get pennyweights, when you can get ounces by digging with an excavator and feed a nice wash plant? And who wants to get ounces re-working a bunch of old tailings when you can get POUNDS crushing and concentrating a virgin vein? The answer is of course, nobody.

    “I only want to find a little bit of gold”, said no miner ever.

    The problem for the “little miners” in “going big” has always been one of resources. Resources come in many forms — be it actual capital, gear, knowledge, ability, a strong back, property and of course, time. Most miners might have one or two of those things — let's say ability and time — but they lack the others things. That's what stops them from “going big”, especially since the tendency is to always try to do it yourself.

    Let's go back to our Chinamen. They didn't do things the way we do them. They threw together to pool labor, pool skills and pool resources, as well as to protect each other from a society that didn't understand their ways and that tried to oppress, destroy and sometimes even kill them. They went patiently and persistently about their business and in the end, many of them overcame all the obstacles in front of them. They found their Gum San (Golden Mountain) in the end.

    That's the lesson of the day and ultimately, my takeaway from about a decade of litigation over mining.

    Our only hope is that if little miners band together for once in their lives and work together for a mutual benefit. That ultimately means pooling resources to create mining projects that don't fall under the scope of these assorted bans. In particular, that means LODE MINING, which is not only still profitable enough to pay pretty handsomely, but is considered the “corporate standard”. Try as they might, the enviros will never eliminate lode mining and the methods of processing ore for the simple fact that the corporate side of mining will always defend their own mining methods and they've got far more political power than the trough feeders and their allies do at day's end. This is especially true with Gang Green's greed for so-called "green technology", which is ONE HUNDRED PERCENT reliant on mining. It's not a coincidence that the green energy sector today is mostly owned by the mining industry.

    If the “little miners” were to follow the lead of their Chinese forerunners and work together on mining projects and to protect each other, they'd be shocked at what could be accomplished in a short time. That is especially so if they focused on adapting to recent advances in geology, geophysical technology and metals recovery. If you don't understand those things, this is an ideal time to learn, even if you just pick one and your pards pick a different one for themselves to learn. In that way, you put each specialist in charge of whatever he/she is good at and work together as a unit. Mine together, mine smarter, be persistent, mine bigger and benefit together.

    In an ideal world, miners would need to do this on the local level, with groups of miners in each county working toward developing mining projects as a a cooperative effort and figuring out who has what skills, abilities, gear, properties, etc. and using them to the best advantage for a mutual benefit. We've already got the networks to do it.

    Alternatively, you can just go slink around the woods with your little dredge and hope you don't get caught, at least until they make a couple examples out of some poor *******s who they managed to find and use him to scare the rest of the people slinking around in the woods to death so that they knock it off and just give up completely. It'll happen.

    But not to this kid. I'm going with drones, dozers and dynamite, not dredges
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	59867429_2400409476657722_2306988356732452864_n.jpg 
Views:	48 
Size:	64.4 KB 
ID:	1709107
    " A pessimist is an optimist with experience "

  4. #4

    May 2005
    St. Louis, missouri
    4561 times
    Another "fine mess" our socalled "representatives" got us into !
    Hoser John likes this.

  5. #5
    May 2005
    Drake, Costa Rica
    2038 times
    good historical summary, and a positive proposal going forward
    but I think most here are weekenders wanting to splash around for a bit, and then go home

  6. #6
    Mar 2003
    6698 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting
    That's the problem-that bit a mutzing and a futzing will get your exit happily erased. Accept this garbage is to end it in all forms-John
    winners58 likes this.

  7. #7

    Mar 2016
    3676 times
    All Types Of Treasure Hunting
    Quote Originally Posted by BillA View Post
    ...a positive proposal going forward
    but I think most here are weekenders wanting to splash around for a bit, and then go home
    Don't speak for me! That's fine for them folks that would be happy to "hands and pans" to find $0.50 in flower gold on the river. There's places for them to do that no matter what.
    wildminer likes this.
    This Communication HEREBY Serves as OFFICIAL NOTICE That All Messages in This Thread Have Been REVIEWED. FURTHERMORE, All Messages of Positive Nature SHALL IRREVOCABLY Be Considered "LIKED" INSOFAR as Applicable to This Forum. FINALLY, All Discrimination is Strictly PROHIBITED.

  8. #8
    Jun 2010
    390 times
    Wonderful piece!So well put!Lets all fight togethter , and hang togeteher, if we must!



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

Similar Threads

  1. BOHMKER vs OREGON 9th circuit court - Bad news
    By winners58 in forum Gold Prospecting
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: Oct 27, 2018, 10:46 AM
  2. Replies: 37
    Last Post: May 18, 2017, 11:18 PM
  3. Supreme Court says no....
    By delnorter in forum Gold Prospecting
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: Mar 26, 2013, 11:34 AM
  4. Supreme Court refuse to Hear dredging Case
    By Hoser John in forum Dredging & Hi Banking
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: Mar 21, 2013, 07:43 PM
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.3.0