Tuolumne county mining district meeting in January Sonora Ca

[Tuolumne]

Anyone get on of these in the mail today?

Anyone know this guy?

Your thoughts tnet?

Any Sunday would have been better for me

I thought you couldn't have vote at first meeting?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[Goldwasher]

Sorry Kevin I know I was harsh on you. I was cold from digging all day, getting location documents ready to file and came in and made the mistake of opening tnet first.

Maybe people getting together will make some headway with the state issues we face. I have been to the capitol several times. I saw that the people at the capitol are surprised when we show up in numbers...but, I also saw how it mattered not one bit.

Can you two please explain to everyone how forming a district will allow you do work more? Explain how once the waterboard finalizes its program. A mining district is going to be allowed to dredge under a different set of regs?

You guys realize that a district does not allow you to set your own rules and avoid prosecution for breaking state law.

Explain why it's not explained to miners that don't have claims that they are working within a district and not part of unless you own a claim.

Explain how its gonna work when two or more groups are forming the same district in the same place under different criteria.

One of you is new here one of you obviously lurks but, can't take the time to converse more.It will be interesting to get more info.

For the sake of sharing can you show us your board members, bylaws, describe how you formed the districts you have. How much response have you gotten from your mailings.

There is a difference between holding people accountable and "bickering"

I'm so over the if you don't support us your not supporting your rights. "the choice is yours"....come the hell on. What has that attitude gotten anyone so far but, wasted donations.
It doesn't separate you guys from the other groups in anyway.
I don't care what happens to guys who only go to club claims and wait for good weather or expect others to fix things for them.

I want to know what your gonna do for guys like me with one wet cold foot from a leaky muckboot, who has to go dig five days a week. Works a drainage that is barely dredable but, can be sluiced during the wet season.The dredge ban sucks but, I'm tired of people saying that they can't work their claim for profit because they can't dredge.

Were gonna form a district comprised of three claims sixty acres. In on small drainage. Form our board make our laws and keep mining the way we are. It isn't going to override any state law.

That is the easiest model to follow do it one canyon at a time. Then act to get the districts to show support for each other with out threat. For the sake of unity.
Telling miners the problem is lack of unity is pointless.

Be an example and show what your doing and how. Miners will notice success if there is any and follow suit. Because they will want to do the same thing.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[AMP_kbell]

Maintaining and ultimately restoring mining rights is going to take several years and a concerted effort by miners in their Districts.

First we need to re-staff the Districts. We understand that people have full time jobs and families and this is a burden on the precious spare time that people have left. Unfortunately there is no longer a choice – If we want to maintain our rights we have to make the commitment.

Second, the Districts need to work together to form regional plans (as they did historically) and as stated in earlier posts we need to attend county and district meetings and have a seat (and a voice) in the process. This way we are in front of the process, helping to shape the plan rather than attending a post decision meeting like SB 637.

Finally, Districts need to attend and represent themselves at State and Federal (BLM and USFS) meetings. These agencies will give us a seat at the table and our voice will be heard. Again at the front of the bus rather than after the decision is made.

We as Districts also need to work collectively on drafting a comprehensive plan that will be the backbone towards restoring rights lost at the State and Federal levels.

What are Robert and I doing? We helping to get the ball rolling. We have spent countless hours researching old documents to find District bylaws, representing the concept at mining club meetings and compiling/preparing mailings such as the one Tuolumne Todd received. We have facilitated several meetings where miners have come together and got their Districts re-staffed.

Next week I will be working to collect water and sediment samples to help strengthen our scientific case. I asked for volunteers on another blog – How many did I get? None. But the work still needs to be done.

No, Robert and I don’t have all the answers – we desperately need people like ClayDiggins, Winner58 and Goldwasher who have attended meetings or gone to the Capital and talked with staffers to step up and help. Districts need to be formed so we can share the load for contacting miners, collecting samples or data, or just attending necessary meetings. If we don’t do this, we’re done. Period.

I hope that many Tuolumne County claim holders will attend the meeting - I look forward to meeting everyone and hearing concerns, questions and positive direction.

 

[Goldwasher]

Keep in mind that during the bill process for 637 we were there in opposition every step of the way. The problem is the bills as decided to go through regardless. The Senators did not weigh our info. They voted their party as expected.

Water testing is a good Idea, getting them to recognize the results is a totally different animal. They're not gonna trust our results, were not gonna trust theirs. Factually if its about discharge of pollution. If the river isn't classified as polluted then how on earth could the processing of streambed material be pollution. We all know this already.

It's all this "potential" harm crap. that needs to stop.

 

[QNCrazy]

Kevin - I never recieved a post card like the one Tuolumne Todd did. Was I on the list you got from BLM? All my information is current with BLM. Just wondering. I was also surprised I didn't get this information first hand.

 

[MadMarshall]

Kbell maybe you can clarify on the reason for mmacs post on the actions you and Robert have taken? And what about these other so called mining districts you and Robert help get organized? Mariposa mining district? Grizzly FLAT? ECT ECT. Maybe you can share the current bylaws of these districts. Kbell do you have any claims in tuolomne county? If you and Robert have organized your or any mining district? What has it done to assert itself and get its seat at the table with other authorities? What does your mining districts do?

 

[AMP_kbell]

MadMarshall – At this time we can’t clarify or discuss MMAC’s post on actions Robert and I have taken. What I can tell you that both of us will continue to help miners re-staff their districts.

Mariposa, Grizzly Flat, Lower Calaveritas and Murphys Mining Districts have been re-staffed since Mid October 2016. I will put copies of the original bylaws acknowledged in the October 2016 meetings on miningdistricts.com. They will be located on each Districts page. The bylaws for Tuolumne will be available at the meeting and online in the future.

Currently we are working internally with officers to prepare them for interacting with other agencies. We also need to determine which agency meetings to attend and prepare ourselves with background information so we come in to each meeting well-versed and able to be effective.

I have claims in Mariposa and Grizzly Flat Districts.
Robert has claims in Mariposa, Grizzly Flat and Tuolumne Districts.

I did want to clarify an earlier post about Mariposa District. It was formed in 1851 and covered all claimholders in Mariposa county. Mariposa was one of the largest of the original 27 counties, covering about one-quarter of California.

 

[AMP_kbell]

Goldwasher - You are absolutely right that water tests are important but a tough sell. The plan was to re-test sites used in a previous water study done several years ago. If we photograph and document sampling techniques while taking several samples at each location it will be easier for resultant tests to be accepted. It also proves we are willing and able to provide annual testing at locations they originally chose. Hopefully lends credibility to our case.

 

[Clay Diggins]

I did want to clarify an earlier post about Mariposa District. It was formed in 1851 and covered all claimholders in Mariposa county. Mariposa was one of the largest of the original 27 counties, covering about one-quarter of California.

Nonsense. In the current Mariposa County boundaries there were at least 5 mining districts formed before 1851. Many more districts had already been formed before your imaginary 12 county district was formed.

A few examples in Mariposa County:
1849 Whitlock Mining District
1850 Kinsley Mining District

And many more including Cathy, Quartzburg, Indian Gulch, Hornitos and Colorado mining districts.

That's just a few of the real mining districts founded in the early 1850's in the current Mariposa County. You will notice that each was formed by miners and was only a few square miles in area.

I'd love to see the mining district records for your 1851 Mariposa "mining district" covering 1/4 of modern day California. I'll bet you think the Quartzburg Thorne proposal amounted to a mining district? Just like your own efforts Col. Thorne never accomplished an actual majority vote of all the claim holders. A district isn't just some words on paper it requires the actual claim holders to participate and agree on the terms. Seven friends appointed by Col Thorne don't amount to a mining district.

Heavy Pans

 

[MadMarshall]

Kevin and Robert.. well I suggest you guys truck it up where your mining interests lie. But in regards to everywhere else I think you should not be asserting your stupidity over other mining districts or miners for that matter. Take care of your own mining interests. Anyway it screwed up ...Everything you and Robert have done is wrong... It's not the environmentlist that's going to undo small scale mining. It's poeple like you and Robert. Groups like Mmac. Amra . ECT ECT.

 

[getmesomegold]

Well guys, let me ask you this, If restaffing the mining Districts will not help, what will? What do you feel the plan of action should be? How will you go about getting results to be able to continue mining?
Clay Diggins , Your Right! There are hundreds of other mining districts, several are within some of the larger districts and in my opinion they are just as important and should be staffed! If you would have attended one of our educational meetings you would have heard us say exactly that . But, you have to start somewhere and we started with larger districts to get maximum coverage! We have always stressed the importance of the claim owner participating and being in control . And we welcome others who would like to staff the smaller districts and offer our help! But, in my opinion, it would be in the best interest of the districts to work with each other on current and future mining issues so that there's a continuity that can propel us forward. We have never advocated that a mining district give up its power to any other mining district or entity.
The only competition here should be the miners rushing in to take control of their legal interest before other authorities and environmental groups do so!
Which, is already happening!
There are a lot of legal concerns and challenges going forward! And there are a lot of personalities in the mix!
I'm concerned with being able to work my claims with my preferred methods which are now making me a criminal by current circumstances!
So if you have a better idea, voice it‼ if you have another vehicle that we can use to keep us mining, Let's use it!
We have never said we have all the answers ‼ And the fact is, we never will!
But if we don't use the tools we have, someone else will!
I'm young at mining issues and only started getting involved back in 2008 when dredging was being threatened and eventually taken away. I stood amongst many and spoke at the hearings and attended every one even the ones down south. Since then I've talked to representatives at federal, state and local levels and continue to do so. Two of their biggest concerns are that we don't have enough support as miners to make a difference and that we are not organized. If we can't show either, we will never be a force to be reckoned with‼ or recognized ‼
I quickly found out that working with the local gold mining organizations we could show that we had the start of both and the ear of several aides . As as my journey continues , I continued to learn about the mining law and two plus years ago was introduced to the mining district concept . But when I really confirmed that I was on the right path was August 24 2016 when the reinhart decision was handed down. And although most people were upset at the decision, I got excited ‼ because in the 28 page (I think) decision, to me it seems as if the judge is asking " Why is this in my court room " and he spells out the validity of mining Districts and the power they hold and don't use because there's no one to answer the phone .
Does that mean Mining Districts are the savior of our troubles, No‼ But it is a good tool we can use to help overcome them‼
Is any one district more powerful then the other? I would say No‼ They are all equally important ‼ Should they be controlled by Me or anyone else or entities,? No ‼ in my opinion they should be run and controlled by the claim owners in that district ‼
All me and Kevin are trying to do is get those claim owners to use every tool at their disposal so they can continue to do what they love to do and work their claims as well as be in control of their own futures ‼

 

[AMP_kbell]

Clay Diggins - Attached is an image of the mines located section of the Mariposa Gazette dated May 16, 1903. Listed are recorded mining locations that show an example of the Mariposa District in use. Please note entries for Quartzburg Mining district as well indicating both districts in use simultaneously. While Districts overlap their existence is not mutually exclusive.

This is found online in the California Digital Newspaper Collection.

 

[Goldwasher]

You can't have a district within a district.

Mariposa and Quartzburg Districts were miles apart from each other. One was not within the other.

The Mariposa District was only around the area of Mariposa?

You can't rewrite history.

So moving forward from Geography.....and back to Mining Law and the current situation because of the introduction of the BLM.

You will only be able to re-staff certain districts. I may be wrong but I don't think you can form a new one with new boundaries. You do have to have the support of the majority of claim owners in the area to form a district.

You can't form a district around other miners.

Please do share what your doing and how. And what recognition you get.

I know I disagree with Marshall about your intent(as in yours is good) and I bet he thinks your to inept to be leading a cause such as this.

I think you should keep doing what your doing. But, are still throwing wet noodles against the wall.

Robert I know who you are from Facebook we have aquaintances in common. Kevin I broke your balls hard here about your sluice and have talked to you twice in person without introducing myself cause I'm a creep like that.

You both have rarely conversed here. You need to keep in mind that there are hundreds of guys out there that are working their claims by hand and making money even...and breaking a few "laws" when they get the chance. There are quite a few of us, that aren't goin to give money to others, to do things for us, to help us do things were already doing !!

I've been hearing from grumpy old men for the last twenty years about how you can't mine anymore. And seen group after group ask for money to stop that very situation.
I am not blind and do agree that there has been an attitude shift and we are in a way "under attack".

I know where your hearts are thank you don't get discourage .

BUT!! For the love of GOD stop be more articulate about the what's and the whys. Especially if your gonna bring it to the TNET Prospecting forum trying to educate and looking for support.

and don't start talking about damned mercury

 

[Jeff95531]

I view this as an attack of/from a different angle. It does not have my support (FWIW) and I could not have said it better than GW, so I won't. I prospect where I want, how I want, when I want and only when it can be done responsibly. I seek/need no help from others who BTW, can actually CLAIM local ground to themselves to prospect/mine. Just sayin.

 

[Clay Diggins]

I may be wrong but I don't think you can form a new one with new boundaries. You do have to have the support of the majority of claim owners in the area to form a district.

Thanks for easing off on the district makers Goldwasher. They may be misguided, misinformed and missing the facts but I think they really do want the best for their fellow miners.

New mining districts are entirely legal and appropriate.

Trying to resurrect the dead districts is necromancy and in some states is illegal.

Miners have a current and historical right to form mining districts. Form a district with your local claimholders. There's no need to try to make a district from 150 years ago fit your needs today. Make it what you need and ignore the carpetbaggers trying to get you to contribute to their idea of how your district should be formed.

Heavy Pans

 

[AMP_kbell]

Goldwasher -

Actually there are several examples of districts within the boundaries of another district. For instance you have Iowa Hill and Wisconsin Hill districts within the boundaries of Placer County's Township #7 District. While another district known as Angels District is not specifically bounded in the bylaws it is historically shown around the town of Angels Camp (Angels creek) which is within the district boundaries of the Murphys District.

I am still researching the whos and whys (which is tedious and time consuming) but my guess is they either wanted more local autonomy or there may have been special claim or other requirements not covered in the larger district bylaws. something like the need to specify smaller claims because of tight canyons or calling out how claims are covered near water ditches.

I agree about not giving money to others - You should support your mining district that will be representing you at the County, State, WB, BLM and USFS meetings. When we demonstrate support of dozens of mining districts at these meetings they will listen. Off the rah rah box now.

Clay Diggins - There is a moratorium on new districts called out in a section of California law - That is why it is important to locate original bylaws. Not sure about other states. (The Great Southwest is Arizona or New Mexico?)

I agree with all of you that claimholders should get together and form their own districts. And I guess we deserve getting kicked around a bit until we prove ourselves.

Explaining the subtleties of Mining Districts on this forum would create more confusion and frustration. It would be better to come to the meeting and listen to the presentation. It is a public meeting so everyone's invited but only Tuolumne Claimholders can vote (if necessary).

 

[Goldwasher]

this map. way more important http://www.westernmininghistory.com/article_images/caligold/calimap-grid-750.jpg

 

[Goldwasher]

than this map

 

[Goldwasher]

I really really hope you know the importance and relevance to your efforts.

 

[Goldwasher]

I really hope no one skips out on this conversation

 

[jog]

Read the MMAC contract, it could be considered extortion from my point of view.