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 👍

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

[Goldwasher]

Barry and MadMarshall - If you guys have an idea where at the end of the day Mining and Miners are better off count me in. I'll do research, pull paperwork from County archives, meet with mining clubs, hand out fliers at gold shows, whatever it takes - We need to all work together to push back future State legislation and try and restore as many of our mining rights as possible. Lets get started - Tell me what you want me to do.

Miners have not been organized enough to sustain a large dynamic constituency - Goldwasher and several local miners have been trying to educate legislators in California to push back these drastic mining laws but it isn't enough. We need miner numbers, dollars and voices attending ALL local, State and Federal meetings in addition to WB meetings where the decision probably has already been made.

Garnering 10% attendance in one county can not really be called organized. What's worse is the people at that meeting that took part in the vote actually believe you formed a district, and you didn't. The bylaws you used don't even include placer mining. So, your gonna have to vote on new inclusive ones and based on attendance you are not considering the majority of miners in your proposed district.
No majority support = no district it's pretty simple.
If you two actually want to help you need to try harder to know what the hell your doing.

Since you didn't leave MMAC voluntarily would you still be pushing their agenda? I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt but, it sure seems like you just want to be seen as someone who is "saving" mining. Did you just have the need to continue telling other claim owners the way things are going to be for them per your actions?

if you want to lead, lead by example. Lock down your own formable districts in your actual area. Show others how you did it, how it is valid and recognized and bring testimonials to meetings and these forums. have proof these things are happening.

Right now you have formed districts by name only and it is not impressive. Forming more just makes it look like your trying to build a bandwagon for the sake of seeing who will get on board.

If you do actually form a valid district and are actually working with the state and Feds you will be able to show tangible evidence of value.

It is absolutely logical that people who know how districts can be formed. Who see people who actually backed MMAC and were willing to try and push them when they were part of it, to question those people when they get booted yet continue on the same path.

Be it that you just don't know or have an agenda it just doesn't look good. If you didn't know enough about mining law to not get involved with the scammer that is J. Mortari if you actually looked into Sleepy Bear and still wanted to be involved. Well, there are serious issues many will have backing you.

Because considering what you say it is you are trying to do, you should know better.

Every new group, every new leader who tells people do this spend here at this point is un organizing the community. Spinning wheels and forming invalid districts is not going to help.

The legislature doesn't need educated they know exactly what they are doing and we are a democracy in Ca. so the majority rules. So, we need to educate the prospectors. That's what these forums are for and meeting with people and sharing info.

And shutting down the sort of thing You and Robert are doing.

The best leaders end up in their position via action and others desire to have them there based on seeing their example. Not by creating followers.
Do a better job get more support.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[AMP_kbell]

Barry -

I did a cursory review of AEMA - How is their focus is split between large scale corporate operations and small local mining interests? It looks like their partner NMA focuses primarily on the large scale operations. Also in checking their state issues section it doesn't list California, even though I'm sure they cover "hot topic" issues.

Do they talk about California issues at their annual meeting?
Should individual small miners join this organization or would it be more suited for local organizations like Mining Clubs, etc?

 

[Clay Diggins]

Barry -

I did a cursory review of AEMA - How is their focus is split between large scale corporate operations and small local mining interests? It looks like their partner NMA focuses primarily on the large scale operations. Also in checking their state issues section it doesn't list California, even though I'm sure they cover "hot topic" issues.

Do they talk about California issues at their annual meeting?
Should individual small miners join this organization or would it be more suited for local organizations like Mining Clubs, etc?

AEMA is mostly small miners. They have supported many small miners in their court cases for more than 100 years. If you don't get over your small minded fetish about small vs large miner you will fail in your plans to form mining districts. The vast majority of mining claims are held by exploration companies and majors. The same people you need to form a mining district.

AEMA were amicus curiae in Rinehart. AEMA wouldn't touch the dredging cases nonsense in San Bernadino, they recognize a stupid unwinnable argument. Yes they talk about California issues but when all the attention is directed towards donation schemes like PLP or stupidities like MMAC there is little chance they will get involved. They work for actual miners not bumbling wannabe "miners" without claims like Martori and PLP. AEMA has been involved in virtually all of the major cases affecting small miners in the past century. They have the best track record in the industry.

AEMA works closely with the Mountain States Legal Foundation. MSLF has won more cases for small miners than any other law group. They have continually supported mining rights throughout their 40 year history. Follow that link and you can see just a few of the mining cases AEMA and Mountain States are involved in currently.

As I stated before the vast majority of AEMA members are individual miners. The fact that AEMA have large company sponsors and support is a benefit for all miners. If you believe that the big mining companies are your enemy you might as well give up your plans today.

Heavy Pans

 

[MadMarshall]

Barry and MadMarshall - If you guys have an idea where at the end of the day Mining and Miners are better off count me in. I'll do research, pull paperwork from County archives, meet with mining clubs, hand out fliers at gold shows, whatever it takes - We need to all work together to push back future State legislation and try and restore as many of our mining rights as possible. Lets get started - Tell me what you want me to do.

Miners have not been organized enough to sustain a large dynamic constituency - Goldwasher and several local miners have been trying to educate legislators in California to push back these drastic mining laws but it isn't enough. We need miner numbers, dollars and voices attending ALL local, State and Federal meetings in addition to WB meetings where the decision probably has already been made.

It amazes me how naive and arrogant you gentlemen are.. from page one of this thread beginning with clays very first post in regards to mining districts and your actions and intentions. Yet you take no advice nor do you even take the time to educate yourselves in regard to your pursuit. It's astounding.
The fact that Amra and other groups support you is a testament to how little Shannon Poe and individuals àffiliated with them have no clue on anything and most certainly nothing mining related. And honestly I don't think you guys give a sht. You don't care about all the peoples time you have wasted in these make believe districts you have staffed. Nor do you to choose to account for all the ignorance you and associate's have spread.
I hate being bullshtted . From the government to environmental groups. But I hate it even more when miners bullsht miners. And worse in your case your making them stupider. Plus your emptying Thier wallets . People like to give others the benefit of the doubt and that's good. But in your cases let the years of your action and recent actions speak the truth.
For myself I will not allow nor tolerate any intrusion on my mining interests. This goes for Amra. Mmac. Kevin Bell. Robert Guardia. Chris Giorgi. And the others who have taken upon themselves to take advantage of the mining community. You gentlemen are conmen. All donations circulating between you paying for the podium in which you preach your ignorance.

 

[Tuolumne]

When I first saw the date of the meeting on a weekday 6:30pm right after work I knew it was exclusionary, everyone is coming off winter break, not a good time to hit up people for time off to go out of the way to the meeting. Didnt bend over much to accommodate the best possible date, like any weekend at any time say 12 noon ...

Tuolumne is vast county, how many people came from Mammoth mountain area on the other side of the sierra to the meeting in Sonora? Great now the mining groups formed with neighbors near mammoth or other far off Tuolumne areas will have to worry about your group messing things up for the "real" districts lol, thats where this is going..........

 

[AMP_kbell]

Barry -

Thank you for the info. I am going to read this site more thoroughly. Also MSLF.
Have you been to their annual meeting? Do they have "expert" panels or booths where you can ask questions?

 

[getmesomegold]

Tuolumne Todd , exclusionary it was not and actually weekdays are usually the highest attended meetings and that was reflected at this meeting!
Sorry you couldn't make it but there will be many more so we look forward to your attendance at those !
To Goldwasher , I actually have claims in most of the districts we are setting up and trying to make sure I will retain the rights to mine them ! I will also say to you, as far as 10% attendance, that is actually high for first time meetings like this and most organizations have to build years to reach 10% ! I'm sure they will continue to grow ! We hope that as our efforts continue we will be able to show those tangible successes you are looking for and my hope of course is that you will participate in those successes!
As far as the blow about MMAC and it's ill, I probably deserve that , how ever if I hadn't stayed involved we probably would not be having this conversation or moving forward . An for the rest about MMAC, we'll let the lawyers figure it out . The Fact that Mining Districts are part of our law is well documented, why miners refuse to organize explore and learn what this can mean to us or how we can use it to benefit us is disturbing to me! As I have a lot to lose if our adversaries are successful as well as all of you! Maybe less then some of you, but it's still a lot to me!
For those of you that just want to call names , good luck with your struggles as I really do not have time for you if you have no real suggestion or input and only want to put somebody down !
To others like Clay Diggins that are providing info that can help, Thank You! As it is helpful!! I do not proclaim to know everything, but what I do know is that I need to know more! But it also requires action!
AEMA, sounds like a great group and I will gladly learn more about them ! 2100 members over 42 states is impressive averaging over 50 members per state , I'm sure I probably know a few members that will help in this quest of mining districts!
Thank You! To all of you on this thread , I will continue to monitor and participate as I think collectively we can make a difference!
As we move forward, any info that you think may prove beneficial please share as it may be helpful! And I'll even appreciate being put in check if I deserve it !

 

[winners58]

AEMA represents "mining concerns" small, large, junior mining they will not allow MMAC or their bill to move forward if
they are putting just themselves or the small scale miners in charge of mining on public lands, its a wasted effort.
mining districts should be in the best interest of local miners. to just have a mining district as a "platform"
isn't what I would consider building a strong foundation that will weather the storm, ask yourself what is a mining district?
To have an association of paper mining districts like MMAC is unproven, there has to be a track record,
accomplishments, building of reputation, with the rift in California and not working together with the other groups,
and with not having the support of all “mining concerns”, their house will fall with the first big storm.

 

[getmesomegold]

Yep, the work has just begun, and there is lots to do ! And it's going to take the cooperation of all the mining associations and concerns! We need to show numbers as well as unity but we also have to get involved with all of the local authorities and that is going to have to be done at the local level to be most effective.

 

[Goldwasher]

10% of the claim owners in a county can't form a district that encompasses that whole county. The forty three people at your meeting last night did not form a mining district that encompasses all of that county.
Mining districts don't exist to be political platforms for the masses. They are for the miners in the district. People have been fighting and doing a lot for a long time now. Even with the clown car approach we see most of the time the righteousness of our battle has done us well. The dredging and " recreational" side is easy to go after as it is "normal" people doing it and they stand a lot to lose in their personal lives so they tend to give in.
I have never understood the animosity towards the " big guys" oh, wait back in the 80's and early 90's that's who all the magazines and abc groups were calling the enemies of the miners.

 

[getmesomegold]

Well, Goldwasher or any one who would like to just complain, do you have better ideas [emoji362] better solutions [emoji780] or a better path that we should take[emoji780] and is it something that is mentioned in old and current law ?
Mailers were sent , and there was even some adverts ...... so what is your better way to get more then what showed up to participate [emoji780]
Not to knock AEMA as I see they are doing an excellent job, but,
As stated above, a 122 year old association has 2100 members in 42 states..... that works out to about 50 per state. That isn't even 1% of any states miners ....... now I understand that they have more in some states then others but 2100, that's not even 10% of the miners in any of the western states alone ?
Now , Why is that? Why aren't more people getting involved?
How many people are participating in this thread? Do you think we have 10% here? Doesn't look like it? In fact I'm not sure there's 10% of the miners on TreasureNet.com? Why? After all, it's a great way to communicate, is it not?
I've certainly enjoyed it and have learned much from the conversations I've encountered!
In fact if you look at most mining groups, blogs or associations, I bet you will find very few that even have 10% involvement?
Let me ask another simple question, Who do you see most active in the promotion and protection of mining rights ?
How do you support them?
How do you recruit your fellow miner, your neighbor, your friends to support them?
Now......
Some of the things our team has done.....
1. We share the benefits of mining at local fairs , shows and festivals, I believe 8 last year .
2.We've done radio and print advertising to promote a positive view of mining
3. We hold a gold show every year in Sonora with about 4000 attending, about 30% non miners
4. We talk to local state and federal representatives on a regular basis
5. We attend local and state meetings and speak when appropriate .
6. We run several information sites for mining rights and education
7. We offer beginners and experienced miners a place to mine and learn for free
8. We have raised thousands of dollars and donated to various entities to help keep the rights of miners intact
9. We have promoted the benefits of mining districts and the importance of keeping the power of the mining districts in the miners hands , (probably why we are not still in MMAC's favor among other things )
10. Not just me, but our team donates thousands of hours out of our busy life's and give up our time that we would spend mining to try and help the mining community and do everything we possibly can think of to continue the fight.

This is just a few of the things we do....... now , you can continue to tear us down and berate us...... or you can help us help you ! You and everyone in here have a great team that's trying to do the right thing at your disposal! They will work with you and for you! None of them expect to get paid nor profit by volunteering their time! They just want to work their claims legally and allow their children's children to do the same...........
How successful they can become depends on everyone in here and the thousands who are not ...... and unfortunately I see more people tearing unity down instead of building it up!
You want tangible success, then open your eyes [emoji102]
There's lots of tangible success out there !
It may not be as successful as you would like but together we can be more successful then we've been!

 

[MadMarshall]

up to like 2 months ago all your efforts were in promotion of Mmac. all those things you put claim to were in Mmac best interests.
literally for 2 months you have supposebly not been working for Mmac and sometimes i wonder if you guys might still be supporting them in some ways. truth is you gentlemen aint done squat.

 

[Goldwasher]

Tuolumne Todd , exclusionary it was not and actually weekdays are usually the highest attended meetings and that was reflected at this meeting!
Sorry you couldn't make it but there will be many more so we look forward to your attendance at those !
To Goldwasher , I actually have claims in most of the districts we are setting up and trying to make sure I will retain the rights to mine them ! I will also say to you, as far as 10% attendance, that is actually high for first time meetings like this and most organizations have to build years to reach 10% ! I'm sure they will continue to grow ! We hope that as our efforts continue we will be able to show those tangible successes you are looking for and my hope of course is that you will participate in those successes!
As far as the blow about MMAC and it's ill, I probably deserve that , how ever if I hadn't stayed involved we probably would not be having this conversation or moving forward . An for the rest about MMAC, we'll let the lawyers figure it out . The Fact that Mining Districts are part of our law is well documented, why miners refuse to organize explore and learn what this can mean to us or how we can use it to benefit us is disturbing to me! As I have a lot to lose if our adversaries are successful as well as all of you! Maybe less then some of you, but it's still a lot to me!
For those of you that just want to call names , good luck with your struggles as I really do not have time for you if you have no real suggestion or input and only want to put somebody down !
To others like Clay Diggins that are providing info that can help, Thank You! As it is helpful!! I do not proclaim to know everything, but what I do know is that I need to know more! But it also requires action!
AEMA, sounds like a great group and I will gladly learn more about them ! 2100 members over 42 states is impressive averaging over 50 members per state , I'm sure I probably know a few members that will help in this quest of mining districts!
Thank You! To all of you on this thread , I will continue to monitor and participate as I think collectively we can make a difference!
As we move forward, any info that you think may prove beneficial please share as it may be helpful! And I'll even appreciate being put in check if I deserve it !

Robert all do respect, obviously you haven't been here long enough to have read all I have ever said. Or know who or what or why I back it. I back every grass roots effort I can that avoids any money that anyone gives, from going anywhere, but to the cause it was given for.

I am not tearing down anything. 10 percent of prospector participation in legal efforts, tech meetings, workshops etc. That's on the prospectors.

Trade shows with 30% non prospector participation that have booths for education are great, seeing them at fairs that is great, Going to other non mining outdoor shows as well. we get a lot of support there. I never ever have said anything against these things.

In fact if you go back through my posts over the years I flat out say that the primary reason people aren't digging on their claims is that they just don't dig their claims. Sometimes from laziness. But, most of the time because they have convinced them selves that they can't. Seems that a lot of guys join groups so they can complain together about not mining.

But, I have always stood up for peoples right to support the groups they want or causes they want via a group. I still do. with the exception of MMAC and PLP. I think Delta Gold Diggers is great. I do not understand how they weren't used as a way to make viable districts in the foothills close to the member base. The communication network is there. The Sonora show is much cooler than any GPAA show and get's a lot of visitors. Already poised and trusted.

Yet, not involved. So, who is enabling unity here? Every time one of these offshoots happens it was someone who was part of something, that wants to go do it better. Or more likely be seen as doing it better. Once these groups get formed they tend to introvert. And stop working with others, It is literally a constant.

The thing is none of that is relevant to Mining Districts! Public participation in activity related socialization has no relation to, forming a small governing body of mineral explorers and producers.

The reason you don't have district is that you don't have enough participation in your proposed district to form it. You literally need to go smaller until you do have consensus of the owners within the proposed area to form it. Your public notice is not to inform those that don't go that they can't or won't be part of the district.
You are actually asking claim owners if they want to form one.
And based on the response the answer was NO! And Congress says that there is nothing you can do about it.
But, neither Congress nor I has said that you should not support the continued ability of citizens to prospect and mine. Or form a valid district as set out per the law. Get over the personal offense and don't tell me what I or others don't or won't do because we don't take part in your doins'

Or point out actual facts. I'm not tearing anything down. It just ain't all that built up.

You can't possibly help me work my claim more, with your non formed district. You need guys like me way more than I do you.

 

[getmesomegold]

I hear what your saying, but , I think that's where we have missed the boat , Every time I talk to a representative whether at the local, state or federal level, it always comes down to numbers..... unfortunately it's not about law or what's right, it's about whether that group or this group is relevant to the next election? I get that the public isn't relevant to the workings of a district and I also get that the district should have more claim holder involvement, but..... if we don't have public opinion for us and we have low miner participation, we don't have a chance in hell of getting the representatives to do the right thing!
What exactly did you mean by " Yet , not involved " ? If you mean me and my team, please take another look [emoji102]! We may not be involved in some of the things you are , but maybe it hasn't been brought to our attention yet ? Or maybe you think we can't help? I got to tell you, we are pretty open to suggestions..... so run it past us and maybe we will surprise you? And as far as the districts go , I've probably talked to a hundred claim owners who have a wait and see attitude , unfortunately the longer we wait, the more nothing will get done [emoji736] However, unlike others that are forming or trying to form districts , we are trying to build tools to use by the districts to continue to build the districts! Your right about not being effective with a small amount of participation, but you have to start somewhere and hopefully more people will get involved! That's why I think it's important to start the meetings, it's important to show there is activities going on that may benefit those who choose to sit on the fence .
At the end of the day , if we are the smallest group with the smallest voices, we lose!
And we lose no matter what law we have backing us up!
It seems everyone in here is taking things personal, I have tried to keep my comments positive unlike some as I think negatives only go towards the destruction of what we are trying to accomplish! It sounds like you have a lot of good suggestions you can lend to the equation, so please do! Understand, that I really do not care what I'm called or how little people think we accomplish, the fact is , we are in motion, and we want feedback, but we want constructive criticism and helpful suggestions ‼
What facts do you want me to point out?
How about the fact that on page 10 of the Reinhart decision it spelled out why the judge is ruling the way he did and that is because there are not Mining Districts in place that should handle the argument?
How about after all the dust is settled on sb637 they went on record as there being no opposition to the bill after 100s of miners took the day off to oppose the bill and spoke at the public hearing?
So there are facts and clues all around us , that we as a community continue to ignore ( so we don't make this personal, I'm not saying you specifically, I'm referring to the overall community. As you continue to point out that we have a small participation rate)
So if we continue to get hit over the head about numbers and authority, why do the masses still sit on the fence?
Like someone said in hear earlier, If someone had a problem with how things were being done and had an opportunity to show up and do something about it or at least voice their opinions, why didn't they?
Now , we'll hear the excuses from I had to work or it's a long way or whatever whatever, The underlying fact is , it wasn't important enough to them to make it happen . They had another priority that was more important to them! The difference for me and the others that showed up , that was our priority and we rearranged our schedule, some of us lost money by not working or just spent money they didn't have to participate in what they felt was important! That being said, understand that it's not my intent here to berate anyone for not showing, but it was a good forum for those who wanted to to take advantage to meet with other people in their community and try and come together on a solution! We had some very intelligent and inquisitive people show up and they asked some very good questions that we answered openly and honestly, the people in that room chose to move forward and see if they can make a difference! No promises were made except of our continued support if they wanted it !
We talked of the need for more participation! And we outlined some of the things they will need to do such as open lines of communication with the local authorities!
Again we stressed the importance of the miners in the districts retaining the power in the district controlled by the miners of that district! We also stressed that by just re-staffing
The district doesn't give you the right to go against current law and that what it really gives you is a seat at the table ( only if you do the work to get there) so the miners can help shape the roles of their futures !
But , they have to have participation!
There's a lot of work to be done and the people doing it are going to lose a lot of time at the work which pays for their livelihood!
So I got to leave one last comment on your last comment,
It's partly right and it's partly wrong,
There probably is no one better then you for knowing how to work your claim so in that respect I may not be able to help...... but if the action I and others take give you more time to work that claim with less restrictions, could that help?
And lastly " You need guys like me more then I do you"
I will admit that we need you as a community to be part of that community but personally I need you no more then you need me , we actually need each other and the community needs us to participate at the level we are suitable!
Again in your words, let's not make this personal but professional and helpful to the community!
The whole reason I'm on this thread is to learn , communicate and participate!
If I can do better, then I want to know How, so I can !!

 

[RobertF]

10% of the claim owners in a county can't form a district that encompasses that whole county. The forty three people at your meeting last night did not form a mining district that encompasses all of that county.
<snip>.

Just for clarification from the legal aspect, and hence why it's extremely important for those that disagree with the mining district concept to show up to these "modernization" meetings, is that the number of miners required to hold a meeting, vote, etc is all in the existing bylaws of the district. For example, some districts back in the 1860's only required three miners and a sign posted in the district five days in advance to call a meeting. Going by the existing bylaws, for most old districts, notifying any claimants via US mail is above and beyond what is required. So until new bylaws are written, those old ones are still in effect and anyone can get the initial meeting going with whatever quorum is listed. Once a meeting is held according to those old bylaws and new bylaws are voted in, what then happens within the district may be out of your control if you just ignore them.


Now aside from that end, I really don't care for MMAC and Martori and as such, I didn't want MMAC representing me at any level so when the meeting for my local district was organized, I got involved and spoke my peace about my thoughts on MMAC, and because of that point of view, I ended up getting nominated and elected as chairman. We've got a board that thinks the same way about MMAC and while none of us are mining law legal beagles, we're doing what we can to represent our local miners and keeping them abreast of legislative issues that are coming up. At the very least we've been successful in getting our guys, especially the non club affiliated ones, motivated to write and call their legislators. It's not much and maybe it won't help in the end but it's more than these guys were doing before to help themselves.


Being that MMAC's bill didn't get in this last go around, nothing is happening until 2018 on it at the earliest... but in the mean time keep thinking about what you can do for MMAC, not what they can do for you. Crap, they might label me an impostor now for using their line...

 

[MadMarshall]

What does mining districts do? Now that this newly formed tuolomne county mining district is formed? What's its purpose?
Seems to me mining districts to alot of you are just something you think that will give the appearance of a voice of solidarity.and gives certain individuals a platform to spread thier gospel to the masses.
I also find it troubling that all claim owners are not given an opportunity to know about or attend. Mining districts are the miners of that community. All miners. Because that's who mining districts affect. It's ridiculous to be using bylaws of mining districts from the 1800s. . honestly it sounds to me like cherry picking and looking for things to support the irresponsible behavior of the individuals who coordinated the meeting. .

The simple truth the distriçts that have been reestablished by Robert and Kevin are not valid or legal in no shape or form.

 

[Goldwasher]

Mining law dictates how to form a mining district ,not old bylaws of dead districts. I do not disagree with the 'Mining Claim concept" I can't you see it is Mining law. So, I don't disagree with it. In fact it wouldn't matter if I did because they can exist regardless of what I say. Unless it is in the geographic location of my claim and someone tries to form a district and myself and other local miners do not support it by majority. That is literally the only time I could "Disagree with the concept" of a mining district.

I disagree with people saying they formed mining districts that they didn't actually create.

 

[getmesomegold]

On a different note, have you guys worked on written or oral comments for the water board workshops ?

 

[RobertF]

Mining law dictates how to form a mining district ,not old bylaws of dead districts. <SNIP>

I disagree with people saying they formed mining districts that they didn't actually create.

To the part before the snip, can you show me the citation for it? I've looked before and have never seen actual regulation/law as to how you can form them. I've seen plenty of people toss around numbers, but never any actual reference to where the number came from.

To the latter part, I'm not seeing many (if any) of these people claiming that they've CREATED a new mining district. Just that they've voted in officers, to existing districts, based on existing bylaws.

On a somewhat related topic, I've seen several people reference a California moratorium on creating mining districts, does anyone have an actual citation for that too?

 

[Clay Diggins]

On a somewhat related topic, I've seen several people reference a California moratorium on creating mining districts, does anyone have an actual citation for that too?

There is no moratorium on forming mining districts in California or any other State. The right for claim owners to form a mining district is granted by federal law, states couldn't pass a law prohibiting that right.

Check out the supremacy clause Article VI clause 2 of the United States Constitution to understand why states can't overrule federal law. It's important to understand the different powers the Federal and State governments have if you are going to understand how mining districts fit into the regulatory scheme.

Once you get a good grounding there look over the Mining Act of 1872. That is where you will find the authority for claim owners to form their own mining districts - not in any State laws.

I haven't seen anyone here or anywhere else suggest that any law prohibits forming a mining district except yourself. California and most other public land States specifically recognize mining districts. Have you finally realized that the mining law grants the right to form a mining district but doesn't grant any right to reform a mining district?

There are State laws that prohibit the reforming of mining districts. Perhaps you heard that fact somewhere and misunderstood?

Even when the law doesn't specifically prohibit the reforming of mining districts often the bylaws of retired districts can not be included in a current district. Prejudice and exclusionary practices were common in the bylaws of the old mining districts. That stuff don't fly any more socially or legally.

Heavy Pans