Jump to content
Nugget Shooter Forums

Jim P.

Nugget Shooter Members
  • Posts

    92
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Jim P.

  1. Bravo! Well done Amanda. And well done Rod, you have lots to be proud of. Later...Jim P.
  2. Sorry to see this Chris, seems like only yesterday you introduced us to Nugget. Take care. Later...Jim P.
  3. Just North of Walker, south of seven mile hill, between walker road and lynx creek. It's a WPA site if memory serves. Haven't see any signs like that one. Later...Jim P.
  4. Hi Ron, Isn't it interesting that the one of the only uses of that land that is a statutory right(mining) is the only one not mentioned in the management plan. I'm growing closer and closer each day to pushing back in the form of exercising my right under the law in open defiance of the "rules" in order to have my day in court. I don't think anything is going to change until we all start pushing back. later...Jim P.
  5. Hi Ron, first, congrats on the new addition to the family. I say no salt. As you know, my oldest son has been nuggethunting with me off and on since he was about 5. He's dug a few that I beeped, but he didn't find and dig his own until last year. I can tell you without a doubt that the wait was worth it. He and I both new how much time and effort was involved getting to that point and it was truly a great moment. With your skill and experience I'm sure you can make that moment happen more quickly for your grandson, but it will still be a moment neither of you will ever forget. later...Jim P.
  6. Hi all, some good news and some bad news: Good news, the "wildlands" initiative has been de-funded in the most recent version of the FY2011 budget. http://thewesterner.blogspot.com/2011/04/wild-lands-initiative-defunded-in-final.html I'm sure this is just a temporary setback for those wanting to lock the public out of public lands and the public domain, but it at least slows them down. The bad news, the budget still includes 205 million dollars for land acquisition by the various Federal land management agencies. Later...Jim P. H.R.1473 Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 (Introduced in House - IH) Sec. 1703. Notwithstanding section 1101, the level for `Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Land Acquisition' shall be $22,000,000: Provided, That the proviso under such heading in division A of Public Law 111-88 shall not apply to funds appropriated by this division. Sec. 1706. Notwithstanding section 1101, the level for `Department of the Interior, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Land Acquisition' shall be $55,000,000. Sec. 1720. Notwithstanding section 1101, the level for `Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Land Acquisition and State Assistance' shall be $95,000,000: Provided, That section 113 of division A of Public Law 111-88 shall not apply to funds appropriated by this division. Sec. 1745. Notwithstanding section 1101, the level for `Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Land Acquisition' shall be $33,000,000.
  7. Hi all, some good news and some bad news: Good news, the "wildlands" initiative has been de-funded in the most recent version of the FY2011 budget. http://thewesterner.blogspot.com/2011/04/wild-lands-initiative-defunded-in-final.html I'm sure this is just a temporary setback for those wanting to lock the public out of public lands and the public domain, but it at least slows them down. The bad news, the budget still includes 205 million dollars for land acquisition by the various Federal land management agencies. Later...Jim P. H.R.1473 Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 (Introduced in House - IH) Sec. 1703. Notwithstanding section 1101, the level for `Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Land Acquisition' shall be $22,000,000: Provided, That the proviso under such heading in division A of Public Law 111-88 shall not apply to funds appropriated by this division. Sec. 1706. Notwithstanding section 1101, the level for `Department of the Interior, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Land Acquisition' shall be $55,000,000. Sec. 1720. Notwithstanding section 1101, the level for `Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Land Acquisition and State Assistance' shall be $95,000,000: Provided, That section 113 of division A of Public Law 111-88 shall not apply to funds appropriated by this division. Sec. 1745. Notwithstanding section 1101, the level for `Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Land Acquisition' shall be $33,000,000.
  8. I had the honor and pleasure to meet Bob in person only once, but I can still hear his voice, filled with enthusiasm for all things prospecting related. We conversed over the phone and through email over the years and his desire to share with and help others never waned, even when he was down physically. What a great loss in knowledge, experience and generosity. What a great place this world would be if more of us were like Bob. My condolences and prayers to his family and friends...Jim P.
  9. Finally, it appears we have a friend on the US House Natural Resources Committee; Doc Hastings, newly elected Republican Representative from Washington State. From what I've heard and read so far,he is truly a western conservative who understands the nature and importance of private property rights, the true value in our natural resources, and the destructiveness of our governments over regulation of both. I first learned of Doc on the Hugh Hewitt radio program back in January and liked what I heard. He says the things most of us are thinking and/or posting about the various Federal land management bureaucracies' regulations and practices. Recently I found this clip from a hearing he held on the Fed's "wild lands" order, showing the kind of no nonsense approach he will be taking in dealing with our out of control agencies. Let's hope he stays on top of them. I'll be writing him an email to let him know how I feel and I encourage you to do the same. Later...Jim P. http://naturalresources.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=226853 P.S Sorry if this is too political for the general forum, please don't hesitate to move or remove it.
  10. Finally, it appears we have a friend on the US House Natural Resources Committee; Doc Hastings, newly elected Republican Representative from Washington State. From what I've heard and read so far,he is truly a western conservative who understands the nature and importance of private property rights, the true value in our natural resources, and the destructiveness of our governments over regulation of both. I first learned of Doc on the Hugh Hewitt radio program back in January and liked what I heard. He says the things most of us are thinking and/or posting about the various Federal land management bureaucracies' regulations and practices. Recently I found this clip from a hearing he held on the Fed's "wild lands" order, showing the kind of no nonsense approach he will be taking in dealing with our out of control agencies. Let's hope he stays on top of them. I'll be writing him an email to let him know how I feel and I encourage you to do the same. Later...Jim P. http://naturalresources.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=226853 P.S Sorry if this is too political for the general forum, please don't hesitate to move or remove it.
  11. Try this. http://www.fs.fed.us/cgi-bin/Directives/get_dirs/fsm?2800 Click on 2810 doc., scroll down to page 35. Keep in mind, this is written for the rangers, not the public. Hope this helps. Later...Jim P.
  12. Hi John, here's all I can find. Nada. I searched the entire federal register for 2009 and 2010 and only came up with one document mentioning meteorites, and that was limited to Antactica. Here's the latest forest management proposed plan for Coronado, again, nothing about meteorites or relics. CNF 2010 plan If someone issued a memo within the CNF manegment, you can request a copy using the Freedom of Information act. I'll keep looking. Later...Jim P. Searching /wais/indexes/2010_register... Your query was: (METEORITE) The database contains 26,696,335 words in 15,002 documents. The database contains the following fields: body - All non-fielded text section - Section of the Federal Register date - Issue Date of the Federal Register rules - Rules and Regulations proposed - Proposed Rules notices - Notices presidential - Presidential Documents contents - Table of Contents reader - Reader Aids meteorite does not occur in the database. The search found 0 documents. It took less than a second. Your query was: METEORITE The database contains 51,115,638 words in 33,079 documents. The database contains the following fields: body - All non-fielded text section - Section of the Federal Register date - Issue Date of the Federal Register rules - Rules and Regulations proposed - Proposed Rules notices - Notices presidential - Presidential Documents contents - Table of Contents reader - Reader Aids meteorite occurs 2 times in 1 document. The search found 1 document. It took less than a second
  13. Private property, always has been, just like the town sites of Gillett and Tip Top. Might be new owners or just tired of all the idiots tearing up the place. Once again, the lowest common denominator determines the rules the rest of us by default. Later...Jim P.
  14. Hi all, here's our chance to make our voices heard before we loose more rights and more mineral lands. The National Forest service is requesting public input on collecting public input regarding "specific forest landscapes", and "special places"; in other words, pick any place you don't want loggers, miners, ranchers, hunters, off roaders Etc, and we'll block them for you. Keep in mind, they are asking for comments on if and how to collect public comments, not actual comments related to those areas mentioned above (confusing I know, but that's our Government at it's best) One idea that comes to mind is requiring the Forest service to notify any claim holder or other party with in-holdings or other rights, of any proposals, comment request Etc. Here's the link Forest Landscape Value and Special Place Please repost this anywhere you haven't seen it, email it to your friends, or whatever you can do to get the word out. Maybe for once, we can prevent something before it happens, instead of complaining about it after it's too late. Later...Jim P.
  15. Hi all, here's our chance to make our voices heard before we loose more rights and more mineral lands. The National Forest service is requesting public input on collecting public input regarding "specific forest landscapes", and "special places"; in other words, pick any place you don't want loggers, miners, ranchers, hunters, off roaders Etc, and we'll block them for you. Keep in mind, they are asking for comments on if and how to collect public comments, not actual comments related to those areas mentioned above (confusing I know, but that's our Government at it's best) One idea that comes to mind is requiring the Forest service to notify any claim holder or other party with in-holdings or other rights, of any proposals, comment request Etc. Here's the link Forest Landscape Value and Special Place Please repost this anywhere you haven't seen it, email it to your friends, or whatever you can do to get the word out. Maybe for once, we can prevent something before it happens, instead of complaining about it after it's too late. Later...Jim P.
  16. Hi all, here's our chance to make our voices heard before we loose more rights and more mineral lands. The National Forest service is requesting public input on collecting public input regarding "specific forest landscapes", and "special places"; in other words, pick any place you don't want loggers, miners, ranchers, hunters, off roaders Etc, and we'll block them for you. Keep in mind, they are asking for comments on if and how to collect public comments, not actual comments related to those areas mentioned above (confusing I know, but that's our Government at it's best) One idea that comes to mind is requiring the Forest service to notify any claim holder or other party with in-holdings or other rights, of any proposals, comment request Etc. Here's the link Forest Landscape Value and Special Place Please repost this anywhere you haven't seen it, email it to your friends, or whatever you can do to get the word out. Maybe for once, we can prevent something before it happens, instead of complaining about it after it's too late. Later...Jim P.
  17. Here you go John, My link This is based on the "Equal Justice Act" referenced in the opening paragraph, and this link lays out the ins and outs of getting your Attorney fees paid for. You might not qualify under the net worth section, but I know a non profit corp. that does Later...Jim P.
  18. Hi John, Environmental groups sue the BLM, Forest Service and every other Federal agency to get policy changed every day. I recently discovered that their pockets aren't as deep as I thought, in fact, they are getting deeper each time they sue. Because of a federal law, those groups legal fees are paid by the federal government, no matter how inflated or unjustified. Just another example of the raping of the American taxpayer. when I get more time, I'll post some links verifying what I'm saying, or you can Google the subject and read it and weep. Later...Jim P.
  19. Hi Mike,any updates? I sent a letter to my Senator and both Reps along with Senator Sylvia Allen, As usual, Senator allen was the only one to respond, and she's not even my Senator. I first met Sylvia through the "People For The West", She's always on the side of public use, private property owners, Miners and ranchers. Here's a copy of the letter; if anyone cares to use part or all of it feel free. Senator Burns, I was saddened to discover that the Governor has announced the end of the Mine and Mineral Museum. I can't begin to describe how strongly I feel that this is a mistake and a disservice to all of us in Arizona, not to mention the forty thousand plus visitors each year, over half of which are school children. I also consider it an insult to the miners who who helped build this State. This museum is one of the last opportunities for modern people to make contact with the reality of their past, present and future. Everything in our life comes from the ground in one way or another, everything. Please don't allow them to "transform" the Arizona Mine and Mineral Museum. There are at least two other museums already operated by the Historical Society, right here in the valley. Why not use those properties? Why destroy over a half century of hard work and dedication, not only from the state employees but hundreds of volunteers that have created one of the most educational and exciting museums in the southwest. Thank you for taking the time to read this. I look forward to you support, and offer mine if there is anything further I can do. Sincerely, Jim P. Peoria, AZ Here's anotheer place to post a comment. KTAR comment Later...Jim P.
  20. Did anyone attend any of the Coronado NF planning meetings???? Wednesday the 3rd was the important one for Greaterville, but there are few left if you missed the first ones. Coronado NF planning meetings Here's a link to the plan draft; http://www.fs.fed.us/r3/coronado/plan-revision/documents/DraftForestPlan/Coronado_WorkingDraftForestPlan_March2010-Black&WhiteMaps.pdf Notice how far down the contents list you have to go to get to anything related to multi Use, probably not a mistake. Later...Jim P.
  21. Hi John, try these on for size. Taken directly from Title 36: Parks, Forests, and Public Property Subpart 228.4 section 1 Current as of 25 Feb 2010. Here's a link to the full text: Title 36 (1) A notice of intent to operate is not required for: (i) Operations which will be limited to the use of vehicles on existing public roads or roads used and maintained for National Forest System purposes; (ii) Prospecting and sampling which will not cause significant surface resource disturbance and will not involve removal of more than a reasonable amount of mineral deposit for analysis and study which generally might include searching for and occasionally removing small mineral samples or specimens, gold panning, metal detecting, non-motorized hand sluicing, using battery operated dry washers, and collecting of mineral specimens using hand tools; (iii) Marking and monumenting a mining claim; (iv) Underground operations which will not cause significant surface resource disturbance; (v) Operations, which in their totality, will not cause surface resource disturbance which is substantially different than that caused by other users of the National Forest System who are not required to obtain a Forest Service special use authorization, contract, or other written authorization; (vi) Operations which will not involve the use of mechanized earthmoving equipment, such as bulldozers or backhoes, or the cutting of trees, unless those operations otherwise might cause a significant disturbance of surface resources; or (vii) Operations for which a proposed plan of operations is submitted for approval; Here's a link to a planning meeting yo might want to attend. I sent this to your email a while back, did you get it? http://www.fs.fed.us/r3/coronado/plan-revision/index.shtml Go Get em' Later...Jim P.
  22. A fitting tribute. How about making him a lifetime member instead? Later...Jim P.
  23. HI Dick, Jim Pressley here. Welcome, glad to see you posting. Sure miss your voice on the line at Minelab. Do you remember bringing my GP control to Gold Basin for me to try out? That's what I call costomer service. Thanks again for that. See you at the outing. Later...Jim P.
  24. I usually jinx myself by saying I'm coming, but, I'll be there Sat-Sun with my two boys. I'll try to hide some goodies from them so I'll have something to share when we get there :yuk-yuk: Later...Jim P.
  25. So Sad and so quick. My condolences to everyone who knew him. I only met Jim once briefly at Gold Basin. He was one of those guys, you knew right off the bat, you could trust. No agenda at all, just have a good time and help someone if you can. One less good guy in the world. Jim P.
×
×
  • Create New...