Jump to content
Nugget Shooter Forums

Oakview2

Nugget Shooter Members
  • Posts

    235
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Oakview2 last won the day on January 25 2014

Oakview2 had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Prather Ca

Recent Profile Visitors

4,247 profile views

Oakview2's Achievements

Silver Member

Silver Member (2/7)

43

Reputation

  1. Rosemary Smallcombe refuses to recuse herself even though she is on the Board of Merg, a leftist enviormental group that has the CUP proposal before the board of supervisors. And obvious conflict of intrest. This proposal is in direct conflict with the 1872 Mining Law, and would be in violation of the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution.
  2. Awesome, just add gold and screw Fish and Shame.
  3. Judge issues court order in California dredging case By Brad Jones GPAA Managing Editor California Superior Court Judge Gilbert Ochoa has issued a long-awaited court order on federal preemption in the ongoing legal battle over the statewide suction-dredge mining ban since the original two-year “moratorium” was imposed in 2009. The court order is follow-up to Ochoa’s ruling on federal preemption in January. The court order, dated May 1, 2015 was issued exactly one year after Ochoa ordered a Mandatory Settlement Conference between gold miners, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and environmental groups. Last May, miners packed the courtroom as a show of their opposition to the state’s illegal dredging ban, which even the judge called an “extraordinary scheme” by the state to keep suction dredge miners from obtaining a permit. Public Lands for the People, one of the plaintiffs in the case, will issue an official statement on the court order tomorrow, PLP President Walt Wegner said today. Wegner said the court order is essentially the same as Ochoa’s January ruling which says that the state is acting in violation of federal mining laws, which are recognized as the supreme law of the land under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The court order states: “The court finds there is no triable issue of material fact on the issue of federal preemption and that as a matter of law and in actual fact that the state’s extraordinary scheme of requiring permits and then pursuant to Fish and Game Code section 5653.1 refusing and/or being unable to issue permits for years stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment of the full purposes and objectives of Congress under California Coastal Commission v Granite Rock Co (1987) 480 U.S. 572 and a de facto ban This de facto ban created by Fish and Game Code section 5653.1 on suction dredge mining permits has rendered commercially impracticable the exercise of plaintiffs’/petitioners’ mining rights as granted by the federal government.” PLP was hoping for more teeth in the order to provide some “injunctive relief” for miners, Wegner said. “The judge did not order the state to act,” Wegner said. “His order is the same as his ruling.” In the meantime, New ’49ers and PLP are contemplating filing an injunction against the state of California in Ochoa’s court. The injunction would prevent the state from citing dredgers, to begin issuing dredging permits or both, Wegner said. “Issue a permit or leave us alone,” Wegner said. On May 5, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife posted on its website a notice warning dredgers that it is still unlawful to dredge, despite the May 1 court order: CDFW reminds the public suction dredge mining remains unlawful in California. “The state is acting like the judge’s ruling doesn’t even exist when he ruled the state is preempted by federal law,” Wegner said. “They are totally disregarding his ruling ... They can’t do what they are doing and the state is doing it anyway.”
  4. Thanks for taking us along.
  5. http://www.goldgold.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Rinehart-opening-brief-as-filed.pdf Hard to read without throwing up in your mouth a bit, I have no tolerance for liars.
  6. If you could post a specific description or a picture of the items, maybe they will try and fence it, more than likely it will be melted, but couldn't hurt, hope they catch the rat bast#@ds
  7. Sorry, lazy me should have written it out, Western Minning Alliance. You give them your e-mail and they send you via e-mail and they will send you the newsletter every month. Hoser John and others have had some great articles in recent months. This board is turning up some very talented writers with great stories to be told.... http://westernminingalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/WMA-February-2015-Newsletter.pdf
  8. Sure will put me out of the market at that pricepoint.
  9. 94 permit was 35.00, under judges order, they cannot prohibit minning, only regulate, a large permit fee would be prohibitive and therefore unlawful. They established a fee structure the same range as hunting and fishing licenses in 94, they are stuck with it... for now, until the next endless legal challenge comes up
  10. Rumor has it the judge in the SB case will issue his order this week, permists will have to be issued under the 94 regs.
×
×
  • Create New...