Jump to content
Nugget Shooter Forums

Cal Supreme Court Rules 7-0 Against Dredgers


Recommended Posts

In a slip opinion published today the California Supreme Court Ruled 7-0 to reverse the Appellate Court opinion, thus affirming the trial court judgment.  The basis of the opinion is that federal law does not preempt California's moratorium on suction dredging.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was actually thinking that I would be able to take my 2 dredges out of the shed and finally get to use them, I guess not !! I sure hope the State of Jefferson movement works out for us. John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Schizophrenia is repeating the same mistake repeatedly that always ends in failure and expecting a positive outcome from the same exact action. That giant sucking sound is over $3 million being sucked down the toilet into Lawyers pockets and court coffers. Onward to San Bernadino so now Judge Ochoa can issue his ruling now that this is out of the way...SOJ hahahahaha  flush $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$-John

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't been able to read the opinion so can't comment, yet..

What I can comment on, however, is my inability to understand how the powers-that-be in any state or commonwealth can view the destruction of thousands of jobs and the loss of millions in license, tax and tourist dollars as some sort of a good thing..

Swamp

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This should not be a surprise to anyone. Brandon's case was weak from the beginning, and the lawyer was pathetic. Now look at all the leaches that came out of the water to latch on and get their take from all this - PLP, MMAC, AMRA... It's all bull-you-know-what! I'm no better. I gave Jerry Hobbs $500 in Stanton. I was a fool.

It's time to stop giving money to these do-nothing organizations, and start DEMANDING that the Equipment Manufactures take care of the legal stuff while we educate Peter Politician and Jody Joe Public. We need to open up our base and promote "Recreational" gold mining as well as small mining.Unless we make this a "Family Sport," and draw in more support we are screwed.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I'm going to say right now is the word "recreational" is an extremely slippery slope.. I definitely would not use that word in conjunction with mining west of the Mississippi, since there is no such thing as a recreational miner.. You are either a miner or you aren't.. Small time..? Yes.. Recreational..? No..

To the best of my knowledge, the only place in the USA that word's use would be acceptable in going for the gold is in North Carolina..

Swamp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/22/2016 at 10:17 AM, Micro Nugget said:

In a slip opinion published today the California Supreme Court Ruled 7-0 to reverse the Appellate Court opinion, thus affirming the trial court judgment.  The basis of the opinion is that federal law does not preempt California's moratorium on suction dredging.

It seems to me that federal law sure does preempt a lot of other things these days. Funny how that works. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Terry Soloman said:

This should not be a surprise to anyone. Brandon's case was weak from the beginning, and the lawyer was pathetic. Now look at all the leaches that came out of the water to latch on and get their take from all this - PLP, MMAC, AMRA... It's all bull-you-know-what! I'm no better. I gave Jerry Hobbs $500 in Stanton. I was a fool.

It's time to stop giving money to these do-nothing organizations, and start DEMANDING that the Equipment Manufactures take care of the legal stuff while we educate Peter Politician and Jody Joe Public. We need to open up our base and promote "Recreational" gold mining as well as small mining.Unless we make this a "Family Sport," and draw in more support we are screwed.

Peter Politician and Jody Joe are getting their education elsewhere. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Dakota Slim said:

Peter Politician and Jody Joe are getting their education elsewhere. 

Yep, from the Green Meanies. How much has PLP spent on printing and mailing to local politicians and educators? How about AMRA? Unless they know we are out here and care - THEY don't care. We will NEVER win in court until we get better support, which equals more money, power and better lawyers. There is nothing wrong with "RECREATIONAL." When I was in business I catered to thousands of recreational gold miners. We need MORE families and minorities to get involved in our clubs and organizations. You aren't "protected" under the mining laws now. The old bearded prospector is so five-minutes ago. It's time for some new blood and new thinking!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There should not be a problem using the word "recreational.." Unfortunately, there very much is..

I really don't want to get into a drawn-out "discussion" about definition, syntax, meaning(s), rights-and-wrongs etc. about that word much less our own multiple org's good points / bad points and/or the disarray of mining districts, mainly since I pretty much agree with you across-the-board.. * The problem is a court of law will not agree, because neither the Mining Act Of 1872 nor any other Federal mining law and/or regulation make mention of, much less note provision(s) for, "recreational mining.." Bottom line.. End of story.. Period.. It doesn't matter that everyone on both sides of the fence knows exactly what is meant by "recreational mining" in the here-and-now; what matters is: according to Federal law there is no such thing as "recreational mining.."

If we begin using the term "recreational mining" all we end up doing is undermining ourselves.. It shows we either don't know the law or are scofflaws.. The majority of people who use the phrase are a combination of 'language lazy' and embarassed.. I know you've all heard this reply before, and may have even used it yourself at one time when asked what you'd done today: "Oh, I was out mining.. But I only do it recreationally.. It isn't my real job.."

Really..? You work that hard and don't consider it "work..?" Then I suppose you have no problem coming over and recreationally painting my house, do you..?

One-hundred-and-fifty years ago, if you were mining being good at it was the difference between eating and starving to death.. It wasn't a choice you had between that or golf.. Just because this is how it is today doesn't automatically make it recreational, at least not as far as the way the laws are currently written.. If you mine on the side, you're small-time, not a recreationist -- North Carolina excepted..

Swamp

NOTE: Beyond * , you = you plural..

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Swampstomper Al said:

Then I suppose you have no problem coming over and recreationally painting my house, do you..?

Swamp

LMAO !!    :ROFL:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems to me if you have staked, filed, and are working a claim, you are "protected" under the mining law whether you call yourself a "small," "recreational," or "transgender" miner. Hell, you can call yourself "Betty" if you buy a claim, the Feds don't really care! 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Terry Soloman said:

Seems to me if you have staked, filed, and are working a claim, you are "protected" under the mining law whether you call yourself a "small," "recreational," or "transgender" miner. Hell, you can call yourself "Betty" if you buy a claim, the Feds don't really care! 

Correct.. "You" can call "yourself" whatever you desire given the conditions stated and neither the Feds nor anyone else cares, nor can they do anything about it..

The problem(s) arise(s) when 'you' describe yourself "recreational" in front of those who ultimately can and will use that word against you in a court of law..

Which is why I tried to stave this off earlier.. I have no desire nor is there any benefit derived from persuing this line of "reasoning" any further at this time: It's already been through the courts, and thanks to the beauty of non self-updating word definitions within the wonderful world of legalese we got our butts soundly trounced..

Folks much smarter than I have already written numerous articles in regard to this subject, explaining in great detail the hows and whys this whupping took place.. There's no need for redundency on my part; it's all already been said..

We need to learn from our mistake(s).. Trying to force the term "recreational" into a legal battle where that word doesn't even exist anywhere within the numerous texts making up western-state's mining laws is a non-starter, again..

This battle can be won within the confines of the Federal verbage as currently written.. The CA "moratorium" on dredging is no such thing.. It's supposed licensing replacement is a joke -- an affront on all legal systems within the borders of the USA.. Calling it a sham is entirely too polite.. It's an outright snake-oil scam at best; a Catch-22 perpetrated with unmitigated gall and total disregard for the law / laws "they" were elected to protect..

It's wayyy past time for us to stop playing defense and go on the offense..!

Swamp

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So glad we left that faggot, left wing state 20 years ago ... Guarantee you I'd end up in a  shootout or in jail...Maybe both... Kali sucks!... Cheers, yer Unc in ARIZONA!

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem, as I see it, is the number of "miners" -- be it big time, full time, part time, recreational or whatever -- is very small compared to the number of anti mining progressive liberals, many of whom are firmly entrenched in all levels of government or involved in progressive liberal organizations (can you say Sierra Club?) that have a lot of cash and a lot of clout.  The fact that the California Supreme Court Ruled 7-0 against the dredgers says it all.  

* Be careful out there. The powers that be would probably love to have a Bundy type incident to drive home their point. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes lousy lawyers and absolutely no cooperation just send them benjamins so lavish lifestyle will continue as case after case after case lost with same insipid bs for way tooooooooo many years.well the 1872 mining laws say blah blah blah as environutz and lousy lawyers reap millions-9 season cost now IN CASH/IOUs $3,000,000--that huge flushing sound is your cash and a entire industry flushed down the toilet. We've been dead since 94 when the rights groups did all their wrongs and killed the dredge committee as without a place at the table to protect your rights just say adios to them all-CENSORED FRIGGN' GREED-John

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was at the hearing.  I considered their lawyer's oral argument inept but the justices put words in his mouth.  The lawyer for the miner's side said some things that didn't need to be said but I think based upon the decision of 7-0 they had already decided the matter and it was really a moot point for them.

There are still some pending decisions about mining issues in the state.  They are going to be decided by the judge in San Bernardino County.  He has been waiting for this decision so now much of the miner's fate as it relates to water mining is in his hands.

More challenges are coming to dry land mining also.  There are the state lands and the new Obama Monument lands to consider.  It depends on which agency administers them.  All of these agencies can withdraw lands for mineral entry.

When you hear about local hearings that will close roads, close OHV use or any land restrictions, this will put mining claims out of our reach.  The arguments against entry and use play well against us now.

Let's help kids, boy and girl scouts, ... anyone who will grow up to support us.  Take your friends and neighbors out and tell them this might be the last time they can get there legally.

Mitchel

Edited by mn90403
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I listened live at home as can NOT keep my temper down on this issue anymore and almost went to jail in Cal legislature  Committee hearing. I love that our lyers let -they are going to dynamite Yosemite and steal all our gold and decimate it----NO DREDGE STUDIES EVER DONE---and this bs was let go as fact with NO argument or evidence to the contrary. Worthless CENSORED sobs. John.....PS -the idjets in Washington just listed the SPOTTED OWL(KILLED THE TIMBER INDUSTRY 99% ALREADY) as endangered because it mates with just about any kind of owl with a heart beat so they are SHOOTING other owls by the 1,000 to protect them horney little devils sic sic sic eco bs

Edited by Hoser John
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...