Home › Forums › 16 to 1 Mine › Ideal Time for Facts
- AuthorPosts
I was a guest speaker at the Sierra Fund conference in Nevada City on May 3, 2012.
Below is the synopsis:“THREE CENTURIES OF CALIFORNIA GOLD
Did you know that America’s oldest gold mining company operates the Sixteen to One mine about one hour from the Miners Foundry in Nevada City? Michael M Miller, president of Original Sixteen to One Mine speaks about the past, present and future of gold. He discusses reasons why and how the Sixteen to One survived through the tough years for gold miners, the Company’s current operation and its plans for leadership and the exciting outlook for the next decade PLUS DETAILS ABOUT THE UPCOMING MINE TOUR. A view from inside the Sierra Nevada turns feelings into facts, dreams into reality. It is safe but your feet get wet.
Sixteen to One mine is an high-grade, underground, traditional, gold deposit with one significant exception: the concentration (pockets) of gold in white quartz is so concentrated it’s measured in ounces per pound. It is one of the richest concentrated gold deposits in the world. Alleghany is recognized as the last gold mining camp in California, a place where history meets the present.
His focus:
GOLD MINING IN THE 21st CENTURY in the Sierra Nevada Mountains of Northern California! Is it beneficial to our communities? Will it bring lasting harm to our environment? Is gold mining history relevant today? Why are people upset with natural resource industries?WHAT IS DIFFERENT ABOUT CALIFORNIA’S GOLD MINES COMPARED TO OTHERS?
COULD AN EVENT LIKE THE ONE IN CHILI HAPPEN HERE?HOW ACTIVE IS GOLD MINING IN THE SIERRA NEVADA GOLD BELT?
IS THERE ANY GOLD LEFT FROM THE GLORY DAYS OF MINING?
WHAT IS STOPPING THE INDUSTRY IN CALIFORNIA?Questions are encouraged on all gold and mining related topics: health concerns; government regulating too much or too little; speculation, investment or a gamble; social/economic benefits or losses.”
This nonprofit took a questionable position last year entitled “Legacy of Toxic Mining in the Sierra Nevada”. Of the sixty speakers, only three of us offered any rebuttal to the exaggerated positions. I was invited back and again too the only rebuttal to the gloom and fear of abandoned mines in the Sierra Nevada, which they now named, “Reclaiming the Sierra”. The organization is sincere and well-meaning but sorely out of touch with real fear for this mountain environment: FIRE.
My talk closed saying, “if you really want help the Sierra Nevada spend your time and money on forest restoration. The Sierra Nevada is in grave danger from fire not abandoned mines.” The overzealous environmentalist has placed our forest in eminent danger. Their position has been: No cutting anything. The understory is over grown and a fire hazard. Poor trees are left to take water and space from healthy trees. The question of fire is not “if” but “when”. They call themselves progressive activists. They are not thinking progressively. They may be smart enough to change. Ignorance is the enemy. Enlightenment is the solution.
Our Company has been aware of the following, discussed it and planned to mitigate the conclusions expressed by the thought expressed below by Ahead of the Heard. The Sixteen to One will overcome the threats due to our foresight and circumstances.
A combination of mass retirements and increasing natural resource demand from emerging economies has created a crisis in the resource extraction sector – one which is definitely not on investor’s radar screens.
Currently there is a “massive talent gap” that is going to get worse because the global mining industry is experiencing the biggest wave of workforce retirements in 70 years – the oldest baby boomers turned 65 years old in 2011.
The Mining Industry Human Resources Council (MIHRC) has recently said that about 40% of the resource extraction industry’s workforce is at least 50 years old and one third of them are expected to retire by 2022. .
Increased resource demand is driving demand for skilled workers. A shortage of skilled workers was the second biggest business risk for mining in 2011 (as it was in 2010) and is forecast to be the number two risk (resource nationalism/country risk is the number one risk) for miners again in 2012. In the coming years a lack of skilled workers is going to be the major cause for concern in the resource extraction industry.
“Given the aging profile of the current workforce and a lack of engineers and geologists with enough experience, the labor resourcing requirements for new mining projects at various stages of development across the globe are simply not going to be met. Production targets and project deadlines are inevitably going to slip. The time taken to train a mining professional can be up to five years, but it is the candidate with around ten years experience who is in particularly short supply. A failure by the mining industry to recruit and train during the tough times in the 1990s, when the price of metals plummeted, has led to particular shortages of mid-career professionals.” Mining Global Employment Review 2011, Faststream RecruitmentJust when we need it the most the mining industry is starting to suffer a massive loss of accumulated wisdom, knowledge and field experience. This loss of experience, when combined with labor shortages, means future mineral output will be constrained and that has bullish implications for prices.
Michael Miller’s message below rings a loud bell!
I have seen the Chinese walls that extend 1000-ft below the one-lane treacherous decent into the Kanaka Creek on Tyler Foote Crossing (scariest road I’ve ever driven) and peek over the edge with wondrous abandonment:
How did they do that??
Michael’s message below brings forth the message that historical knowledge must be nurtured, lest be lost.
It takes a strong will, unfathomable strength of character and will, to even go underground and break rock….I only know this because I have only witnessed it, a very few times first-hand, and nothing close to the reality is takes….scared the crap outta me to even live it for a few hours….
The only, ONLY way this knowledge can be shared, the wisdom passed along for future exploration, empowered by the passion it takes to even try, is to have the freedom to do so.
From the Casey Wire:
If history has taught one certain lesson, it is that the less fettered an economy, the better humankind is able to do what it does best: run from trouble and run toward opportunity. In this way mistakes are quickly resolved and progress assured.
Conversely, the deeper the muck of regulation, mandates, taxes, subsidies and other bureaucratic meddling, the slower we humans are in following our natural instincts until the point that progress is slowed or even stopped.
It is said that history doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes. In the current circumstances, it appears that enough time has passed that current generations have completely forgotten the critical connection between the ability of humans to freely pursue their aspirations and economic progress.
That is one the remarks of wisdom to reality that I have had the pleasure of reading. We need Government to get out of the way.
In a 10/2/11 interview with Jim Puplava, Martin Armstrong said the following concerning lawmakers:
Martin: Well unfortunately they’re not economists. Most of them are not even business people. Most of them tend to be probably the dominant profession of lawyers. And they have this attitude that they can pass a law and everybody has to comply. But that is not the case. You can pass a law and say 65 miles an hour and nobody can go above that. I mean, we are always looking at more and more regulation, and the problem is that we had this economic decline and then the natural response from someone is to say it wasn’t regulated enough.
We had more than ten agencies regulating the CDSs that collapsed. Not a single one did anything to prevent a central crisis in this country. We keep adding layers and layers and layers of regulation, but they simply do not work. I mean the SEC has not prevented one economic recession, one economic decline. We have too many agencies and that is the problem of why they created Homeland Security because they admitted that a lot of these agencies had information on 9/11. Even the people who were from the first attack on the world trade center had drew the world trade center on the walls of their jail cells with planes going into it a year before. They took pictures all kinds of stuff, but nobody does anything.
You have too many agencies and so they create Homeland Security supposedly to sit on top of all these agencies to get the information, and we are just so over regulated. I mean, just have one agency to do this. Why do we need so many different ones and they all contradict each other and then they compete and won’t share information. So we seem to defeat everything we do, but the answer is always to not improve what we have, but always add another agency until the point we have so many people running around, it is crazy.
Mike, in my very humble opinion you did the right thing with SMARA. Continued litigation, especially with the government, is a heavy pall that can prevent forward progress. I expect to learn a lot more about SMARA in May. Looking forward to meeting you, Ron
September 12, 2005….date when I initiated this topic…when the CDAA was riding rough-shod over the mine with criminal intent.
Corruption doesn’t change course, does it?
Most instructive to recognize, throughout this battle against obstructionist non-elected, imbedded, corrupt and criminal regulators is the stark reality that the former CDAA rep is holding an active position in the EPA.
Where is the integrity of the California AG? Or the former, now Gov, AG???
Hey Jerry, do some home-work to realize what crap you’ve decided to ignore. Your reputation and integrity is at stake….
Summary: politically appointed adjenda-driven regulators will never be held accountable for criminal actions when the head of the snake doesn’t look back into the crap in its intestines.
You have an obligation out of respect to thoroughly read and digest the gift that our founding father bestowed upon us, the people in our Constitution. The following article by Martin Armstrong is one of the best works I have ever read concerning the people’s rights that have been slighted by some of the “high priest” judges that have been appointed to the Court in the past along with the Congress of mostly lawyers who have done no better.
http://www.martinarmstrong.org/files/Is%20Paper%20Money%20Legal/index.htm
April 11, 2012. Realizing it is better to bend than break, the Company signed a stipulated agreement from the Department of Conservation to end litigation seeking damages for alleged violations of California’s Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA). When asked why he signed, President Miller said that a lean compromise is better than a fat lawsuit and quoted the great American statesman, Samuel Johnson, “Life cannot subsist in society but by reciprocal concessions”. See entry below on 9-20-11 for more information about SMARA.
Here’s another shaft job by government you might not hear about. This time it’s the State of South Carolina reported by the Internatonal Forecaster this morning:
Shawana Busby does not seem like the sort of customer who would be at the center of a major bank’s business plan. Out of work for much of the last three years, she depends upon a $264-a-week unemployment check from the state of South Carolina. But the state has contracted with Bank of America to administer its unemployment benefits, and Busby has frequently found herself incurring bank fees to get her money.
To withdraw her benefits, Busby, 33, uses a Bank of America prepaid debit card on which the state deposits her funds. She could visit a Bank of America ATM free of charge. But this small community in the state’s rural center, her hometown, does not have a Bank of America branch. Neither do the surrounding towns where she drops off her kids at school and attends church.
She could drive north to Columbia, the state capital, and use a Bank of America ATM there. But that entails a 50 mile drive, cutting into her gas budget. So Busby visits the ATMs in her area and begrudgingly accepts the fees, which reach as high as five dollars per transaction. She estimates that she has paid at least $350 in fees to tap her unemployment benefits.
“It really boggles my mind,” she said. “This bank is taking little bits of money out of thousands of pockets, including mine.”
Bluejay and everyone: government is the problem…lest we not forget the other half: politically appointed judges with bias toward those that put them there. Its akin to two wolves and a lamb voting on what’s for dinner.
Because government is the PROBLEM, they live in a state of denial and cannot correct the situation for they cannot objectively look at themselves. Instead, they attack the people.
The regulating Federal agencies of the SEC and the CFTC are in the same camp as the Water Board, abusers of power.
In the following excerpt from the November 4, 2011 article entitled “Is Western Civilization on the Verge of the Equivalent to the Fall of Rome?” Martin Armstrong spells out the failings of important market overseers.
“Then, if we look at the current global economy, the catalyst for the immediate debt crisis began with the abuse of credit which emerged from the New York Investment Banks that were primarily regulated NOT by the Federal Reserve, but by the SEC and CFTC! The SEC and CFTC are directly responsible for everything instead of merging and reforming them, they are handed more power to abuse.
They regulated the Investment Banks and derivatives. They were supposed to be the first line of defense. Yet, they have NEVER managed to ever prevent a single crisis or scandal from Madoff to the collapse of Lehman and Bear Stearns not to mention the quick and dirty sale of Merrill Lynch to prevent that from going into oblivion. They have served no purpose and protected the very people that created the economic crisis. Even the Pro-NY Banks mouthpiece Bloomberg News reported on October 28th, 2011: “The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s internal watchdog has castigated the agency for missing the Bernard Madoff fraud, spotlighted employees who viewed online pornography and called for a criminal probe into the ethics of the SEC’s former top lawyer.”
Bureaucrats suppress society to maintain their power. They care nothing about a vision of the future. It is always immediate gratification.
Martin Armstrong
During all this, where does Sierra County stand on the State’s beating up on one of its resident companies who use to be a significant employer?
I strongly believe the County owes us as a result of the mistake of permitting the State’s carpetbagging attorney lynch mob into our backyard.
Keep in mind, Judges no longer work for the county, but the State of California.
Is this why we have 12 to 20 per. Unemployment ?!
In California ?
The Golden State
Go Mr. Miller
I will read your note to my daughter in the hopes they can get us out of this mess.
Viva California, and it’s free citizens
The following is for the youth of America
California regulators are suing our corporation to protect their own personal interests. Unknown others are supporting litigation and other forms of interferences to either gain a personal advantage or for their own personal interests. None of these legal shenanigans benefit the public. The California employees who are initiating and perpetuating this particular lawsuit are doing it willfully, which, if supported by evidence, creates personal exposure to monetary restitution and criminal prosecution.
The thread of California Department of Conservation (formerly known as the Department of Mines & Geology) justification extends from a regulation born in legislation of 1976. Surface mines became a public concern when technology, equipment and the miner’s mental capacities to exploit low-grade large surface deposits of valuable minerals expanded. The fears were the surface disturbances after mining would cease. Reclamation became the solution and regulations were the guidelines to solutions.
Over the years the regulations expanded faster than open pit mines in California. The initial permit carried no or low costs; the surface disturbance requiring compliance shrank from 5 acres to a teaspoon of dirt; fees and monitoring increased like feral cats in Alleghany. Eventually, mining in California stopped as the miners and financiers moved to other countries. By the way, other countries have few regulations; therefore if stopping mining in California is a goal of environmental advocates, their approach has failed to protect the earth.
SMARA recognized conditions that existed prior to passing the law. The Sixteen to One sites qualified under this exemption except for a cut and fill bench that was excavated by a lessee after 1976. A reclamation plan was approved by lead agency, Sierra County, and after seven years the cut and fill were approved as reclaimed. A payment (bond) of $5,000 was returned to the Company.
There are widespread problems in California with regulation management. Individuals responsible and accountable to the public are not held accountable up the chain of command for negligence. (In the Executive Branch the governor is chief. In the Legislative Branch our Senators and Assemblymen are top dogs.) We are experiencing the worst kind of negligence by government employees…knowing and willful negligence. If proven, those perpetrators may face criminal prosecution as well.
California legislators and more noticeable all employees working in the Executive Branch are failing the public’s interests , rights and protection as stated in the U.S. Constitution, Amendment XIV, Section 1: “nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” This lawsuit ignores constitutional rights.
Neither the Department of Conservation nor the State water regulators held a public administrative hearing to discuss and eventually vote on motions affecting the Sixteen to One mine (required). The mine never had the opportunity to face its accusers as required in regulations for both departments. This seems odd. If the charges of wrongdoing were harmful to the public, both agencies failed to act responsibly and in a timely fashion to stop or mitigate the source of the concern.
Both agencies waited years before filing a lawsuit. If the problem was serious, such as killing bugs or fish, why didn’t those responsible for monitoring the reports report the failures to file sooner and help with a solution? A common answer: they do not care about the information in the reports. They care about filing paper and collecting money.
It is the public agencies that are negligent not the Sixteen to One. If anybody failed the public, it is the agencies; however they do not really care about results. In both cases the negligence is gross, knowing and willful. Unfortunately, the prosecutor for both lawsuits is also the enforcer of criminal complaints against those who hurt the People of California. The Attorney General is prosecuting the wrong party. Justice, in our third branch of government, is difficult and costly to attain.
I am trying to stay focused on SMARA (Surface Mining and Reclamation Act) lawsuit as cited by Rick but both lawsuits are similar. The Sixteen to One is an underground operation and has surface improvements (assets) such as roads, buildings and storage sites. Should gold mining cease, these improvements will remain. They are not only assets to the owners, but they benefit the public as well. The Sixteen to One mine is not subjected to SMARA. The government knows this or should have known this prior to requesting the Attorney General to file a claim for damages, which hurt the gold mine operation. Youth of America, the saying is old but true: FOLLOW THE MONEY.
So far, no one has responded to my question.
I’ll cut straight to the issue:
My question regards the lawsuit against our Mine, specifically regarding how ambient arsenic levels in the local water upstream and downstream of the mine remains not only ambient, but also how the thug legal angle falls flat and hence is spurious….
The spurious onslaught has shifted. Since there is no “angle” for them regarding ambient levels of naturally occuring arsenopyrite, the thugs try to re-define the historic nature of this operation:
Hey, guess what??? The Original Sixteen to One Mine is now a “surface mine” !!!
REALLY?????
In my years being associated with this stellar underground mine, I cannot recall any hint that the original Sixteen to One Mine is a “surface mine”, and does anyone ?????
Long ago, mill-processing may have brought under-ground mining rock to the surface, and then all piles were sent down into the mill within hours of being exposed to the surface.
Residual non-baring coarse rock was routinely sorted through the grizzly process. Most of this rock has lined the roads to the portal to support safe travel.
HOW is it possible that the ongoing legal issues concerning Water, in a current outrageous legal action against this mine, is a debate surrounding whether the Original Sixteen to One Mine is a surface mine??????
Outrageous.
Anyone with common knowledge to identify this fraud, I implore you to go on record to decry this onslaught.
I will personally testify to the fact that surface rock has no gold; that never has surface mining been in practice; and testify to this fact ever since the mill was shut down.
If some a-hole lawyers want to suggest that hauling underground rock above the surface for mill-processing (stopped a decade ago) somehow suggest an above-ground mining project today, I will eat a donkey.
And I’ll go further: any a-hole state-sponsored lawyer who suggests that a ‘surface-mining-operation’ exists today and/or since the mill shut itself down, I invite their deposition.
Martin
I would recommend going to the website http://www.martinarmstrong.org and read all of his writings. He is the world expert on this subject.
You will be doing yourself a great favor while adding to your over-all knowledge.
What would happen and how would
thing change if our nation went
on the GOLD standard. Will some-
one please answer that?Responsible Use of California’s Natural Resources.
Excerpts from a seasoned mining man living in California.Biggest problem is California society, its culture and actions or inaction. This general statement’s value must identify specifics for any directional change to take place. Instead of gold as the metal of interest, substitute copper. Mankind needs copper to maintain its quality of life or improve the lives of less fortunate peoples. (Some people believe that gold is an unneeded relic.)
An economic copper deposit is in northern California (Plumas County). It sits idle, no action and questionable plans for exploitation. Why?
1. Cost of permitting and ongoing delays.
2. Canadian security laws encourage mineral extraction while US laws discourage mining.
3. Philosophical or attitudinal approach to investment by Americans is short-term. A mine is a long-term commitment. Sacramento is a good example of government paying for votes in the next election. Short-term thinking.
4. Public does not want to be bothered. Not true for small minority that actively oppose mineral extraction anywhere. California is a handy place to live, work and practice their trade.
5. Public lack of understanding history. Apathy. Don’t want to be bothered.
6. Corporate insiders of many exploration companies (officers, directors, geologists) interested in good meals, travel, nice salaries at shareholder expense or hyping stock value. These Canadian companies increase outstanding shares like rabbits create bunnies by diluting shareholder interest via private stock offerings.Steve Forbes (see four entries below) opined a return to the gold standard, which cause me to ponder its consequences with 17 questions. I hoped to read your thoughts. I’ll give number 1 a shot. They are tough questions without simple answers. Pick one and offer us your thoughts (answer all if your brain can stay engaged).
1. Advocates have differing motives for advocating gold as a security. Since 1975 guys grabbed gold as a topic to make money selling advice, forecasts, books or articles and speaking engagements. Some have made their living doing this and a few continue today. The gold standard may lessen the unknowns about present and future values of gold. Interest may subside and there goes the advocates cash cow. (Gold investment/speculation history records peaks and troughs and bear markets longer than bull. In the 1970’s and early 1980’s a negative for gold was that it did not produce income as money in the bank produced interest. Therefore, when the pundits saw interest rates rising they shouted that gold was a poor investment.)
During these years I read dozens of gold bugs or nay Sayers newsletters, etc. I also attended conferences in New York, New Orleans, Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Spokane, Denver and San Francisco. True gold miners (producers) were only in attendance at one, a special private two-day event in New York. During the 70’s and 80’s there were thousands of gold companies. Hype reached a crescendo emanating across America. The word on the street was that the best stock return came from exploration companies not gold producing companies. The reasoning was that exploration companies had a terrific upside potential. Once a company went into production, revenue and profit became known. It seems it was easier to hype the unknown over the known.
My answer to number one is “No”. The seventeen questions are listed below.
1. Will gold advocates think conversion is positive for them?
2. For the country?
3. For gold?
4. Who are future gold buyers and why buy (hold) if gold and dollars exchange at par?
5. What happens if the printing presses continue to create paper dollars?
6. Where will the gold be stored?
7. Who will conduct oversight or audits?
8. What is different now than 1933, when FDR’s administration bumped the dollars required to buy gold?
9. Will the government decide it is in its interest to order Americans to “sell” their gold for dollar redemption?
10. Will it be a criminal offense for those who refuse?
11. How is life different today?
12. How are our monetary economics the same?
13. What will a new Gold Standard do for us? For you?
14. Will other currencies float against the dollar or gold?
15. What if the EU or the Yuan ties their price (value) to an ounce of gold?
16. How easy will it be for people to convert their dollars into gold?
17. Or their gold into Dollars?
Our nation was on the gold standard through the 1920’s. I Remember spending 3 each 50 dollar gold certificates; which I received from a bank when I cashed a check in 1965. I still have the dinning room set that I bought then.
Our nation is still on the gold standard: a “Federal Reserve Note Dollar” can still be traded for gold sold by the mint, based on 1 troy oz. coin weight.
The value of the dollar has the backing of the gross domestic product, the security of all our commodity wealth, the productive capability of our society, and our national security at arms to protect it.
So if you want gold for your dollars, then buy gold, for in time the mines will meet the demand as the reserve dwindles.
I recommend that folks read the ” Sermon On The Mount” by our Lord Jesus Christ, from the Bible. He gave to us the “Lords Prayer”: the understanding of this request by man as stated in this prayer: “GIVE US THIS DAY OUR DAILY BREAD” is the basic responsibility to the economic well being of human kind to support all of us. It is the need to fill our bellies that drive our economy.
A volume of static gold is still being stored at Fort Knox. That a certain amount of gold is coined and sold to the public at market value in dollars. I think our nation has got it right with the economics of gold and The Federal Reserve Note.You don’t have to answer all seventeen questions asked two entries below. I’ll give it a try next week but come on, give it a shot.
a good book ” The GOLD Standard in Theory and History
Edited by Barry EichengreenAnother good read is
The U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 10. ” No State shall coin money; emit Bills of Credit; Make any Thing but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of Debts;”…..
The nation is not on the gold and silver standard, but by Constitutional law the States are required to be. This a national issue of Constitutional Contempt.Steve Forbes is quoted today as seeing a return to a dollar backed by gold or what is historically called the Gold Standard. He goes on to state the need for, the reasons why and the result of America’s returning to the Gold Standard. We know most of this; however what few ever write about is what this means for gold, private gold holders and how the gold/dollar conversion will actually work.
Since the great majority of people or companies do not have a gold-based investment, there will be lackluster interest in deep analytical study of such a conversion. Will gold advocates think conversion is positive for them? For the country? For gold? Who are the future buyers and why buy if gold and dollars exchange at par?
What happens if the printing presses continue to create paper dollars? Where will the gold be stored? Who will conduct oversight or audits? What is different now than 1933, when FDR’s administration bumped the dollars required to buy gold? And will the government decide it is in its interest to order Americans to “sell” their gold for dollar? Will it be a criminal offense for those who refuse?
In 1971 the gold market began changing. On December 31, 1974 the restrictions were lifter on ownership and price controls. How is life different today? How are our monetary economics the same?
As gold miners (those who find, mine and sell gold) what will a new Gold Standard do for us? It will stabilize the dollar price of our product and I imagine that other currencies will float against the dollar or gold. Or will they? What if the EU or the Yuan ties their price (value) to an ounce of gold? How easy will it be for people to convert their dollars into gold? Or their gold into Dollars?
I’ve been a gold miner, gold producer, an investor and a voracious student of gold for 36 years. I graduated with an economic major from UCSB, familiarized myself with the IMF and Federal Reserve and cannot readily answer these seventeen questions. Will you try?
COURT AFFIRMS FORESTRY’S POSITIVE ROLE IN ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE is a headline in THE SIERRA booster dated March 4, 2011. The decision verifies carbon benefits of active forest management in a strongly worded opinion by Judge Patrick Riley in El Dorado County Superior Court.
Environmental activists challenged 19 timber harvest plans (THPs) and argued that the plans did not comply with the California Environmental Quality Act because they did not properly or adequately address greenhouse gas emissions from the timber harvesting. Judge Riley disagreed. He said, “In conclusion the court finds all of the issues raised by Plaintiff (CBD) in its opening and reply briefs, whether directly addressed herein or not, are without merit in so far as they contend the THPs involved failed to fully advise the public concerning the GHG issue as well as the entire environmental impact picture and provide a complete and penetrating overview of the environmental and GHG impacts in particular.”
The following quote is the best part of the analysis and why this forest (natural resource industry) decision relates to our gold mining (natural resource production). “This ruling means SPI and other forestland owners can proceed with forest management activities that provide family wage jobs in rural California communities, supply lumber for consumers and conserve forest resources.” Hip, hip, hurray! Hip, hip, hurray for a decision of correct judicial thinking!
The California Forest Association president David Bischel offered, “Efforts by activists to stop timber harvesting and force jobs out of rural California by arguing that forestry harms the environment were soundly rejected by the court. Forestry is the only economic sector in the state that provides a net carbon sequestration benefit, yet taxpayers unwittingly subsidize an endless stream of litigation designed to block it.”
The plaintiff is The Center for Biological Diversity. How and who finances this most likely non-profit corporation? Activists have performed wonderful social, economic and scientific behaviors throughout history. The environmental fear and unscientific banter went too far and became lost in a herd of well meaning people who have been ruthlessly misled. The pendulum swings and it is picking up momentum. Even though, our plight with water regulators from Sacramento needs a broader base of awareness. Help any way you can. Our young men in Sierra County, Yuba County and Nevada County also need “family wage jobs”. Efforts to stop mining in California harms everyone except the handful of activists and lawyers who continue to mislead the public and the governmental employees who carry out the foul repression.
[putting Mike Miller’s previous post back on top]
read below:
ARTICLE X of the Constitution of California, Section 2 reads,
“It is hereby declared…the general welfare requires that the water resources of the State be put to the beneficial use to the fullest extent of which they are capable…and that the conservation of such waters is to be exercised with a view to the reasonable and beneficial use thereof in the interest of the people and for the public welfare.”
Can any other language and the interpretation thereof be any clearer that this?
DO blue-collar jobs that increase the GDP benefit California?
Are the interests of the people influenced by newly mined gold from California?
Will newly mined gold be beneficial to the public welfare?If you agree, please feel free to strengthen you beliefs.
If you do not agree with the above, please offer you evidence and explain your opinion and the logic thereof.Bluejay points out the no-brainer which somehow escapes the entrenched burocrats: they need funding.
Hmmm….either by confiscatory regulatory intrusion, or by creating a flourishing situation that contributes.
Somehow there is a breakdown in brain-power at the State regulation level, since, as I pointed out earlier under another topic:
A public sector job is dependent upon private sector taxes to exist…initially through taxation, or easier for them, criminally, through un-regulated czar-like water-board-like un-elected boards with no electoral accountability.
Seems like the public sector regulators have fingered it out: they would have to pay 100% of their salaries in income tax to justify their existence (be the accountant for this)…or pull out the red-pen and start fining the private sector. Heck, everyoner hates mines, right?
Target the golden goose. No-one will know, especially with the politics of green-crap so prevelant.
Regulation = feed trough
Is there any wonder why people work for the government? The answer is, they get paid twice as much as if they were employed in the private sector, including benefits.
The pin-heads at our local Water Board extort their salaries from companies and property owners at a great social expense for no other reason than, Californians must be regulated. What a sick premise.
Recently, Peter Schiff stated that the U.S. Departments of Energy and Education should be eliminated. I wonder what Mr. Schiff would think of all the regulators in California who with their big salaries and benefits have bankrupt the State to the extreme that now the poor will be suffering more.
In the Press Democrat here in the Santa Rosa area the paper headlined, in so many words, this morning Arnold’s fighting words to reduce the budget: stick it to the little guy with drastic cuts to health and welfare recipients. The paper stated, SONOMA COUNTY: “Officials appalled by ‘Unfathomable’ proposed cuts to social services.”
One answer for a partial rememdy to the State’s irresponsible financial collapse is to get rid of, for the most part the private contractors at the water boards, a useless State agency that curtails the ability of companies to gainfully employ the unemployed to increase State revenues.
If these water board employees sincerely care about the environment and not just making their mortgage payments at other people’s expense, then they should offer their services to the State of Alaska and get involved with real polluters.
http://northern.org/news/epa-rescinds-key-red-dog-mine-permit-limits
I like it blue Jay. Write the governor, and an article to the Press Democrat We need to influence public opinion now for the excesses of the government regulation. i can,t do it all my self, even though I try. Keep it up Friend. this Forum is great.
Mr. Michael Miller and Original Sixteen to One are under attack by bureaucrats running the State’s water quality programs. My familiarity with Sierra Nevada watersheds and specifically those highly mineralized zones like the Kanaka Creek canyon tell me so. Unless we, the public, who are the legally described beneficiaries of the Sierra County Superior Court law suit filed by the Central Valley Regional Water Board against one of the greatest small mines in the world, tell the politicos that persecuting this historic and valuable California resource into bankruptcy is not for the benefit of the public (us), the slaughter will continue until the company no longer exists. It has happened before.
As far as the actual water that passes through the Alleghany Mining District and other gold producing areas, the permitting issues now alleged by the water agency and prosecuted by the California Attorney General are summarized below:
Results are predictable
Costs are prohibitive.
Benefits are zero.
Government is non-responsive.Requirements are outrageous.
Enforcement is punitive.
Administration is unequal.
Decisions are political.
Demands are unscientific.Recent comments from Martin Armstrong:
“This is the real behind-the-scenes life with regulators, they are relentness and will NEVER yield to the truth.”
“It’s all about winning and they WILL do whatever it takes to win.”
An excellent YouTube presentation by the Patriot, Gerald Celente, in keeping us focused on Washington’s continuing support of the Wall Street crooks:
The following recent comments by Martin Armstrong indirectly makes one question, in our case, if the controlling Water Board is, at the minimum, a circus act?
“True knowledge emerges from experience. This is why one cannot understand a subject(the Mine’s position) until he actually does what he has studied. Our most significant mistake is creating higher learning taught by people who have never done what they teach. There is a indescribable quality that one can know every aspect of a subject, yet is blind without experience that opens the eyes and allows one to see dynamic structure hiding behind the facade of order and control.”
- AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.