Page 1 of 1

Public comment needed for BLM: Cache Creek

PostPosted: Fri Dec 05, 2014 3:59 pm
by russau
goto : http://www.blm.gov/co/st/en/fo/rgfo/min ... creek.html the BLM is wanting to redo the rules there plus charge a fee. Please leave your comment for them.

Re: Public comment needed for BLM: Cache Creek

PostPosted: Sat Dec 06, 2014 6:53 am
by Hoser John
:? The significent increase in camping is causing extensive enviromental damage so they want/may/can/will ban all forms of mining??? Must be a GPAA claim there-John

Re: Public comment needed for BLM: Cache Creek

PostPosted: Sat Dec 06, 2014 1:19 pm
by Joe S (AK)
John, John, John ---

It's the BLM, remember - *B*L*M* *!*!*!* :roll: :o :roll: :o :roll: :o

We believe ... , We have heard ... , It's obvious that ... , Everyone knows ... and It's a well known fact that ... , There is no question that ... .

Just more of your tax money "at work".

Joe

Re: Public comment needed for BLM: Cache Creek

PostPosted: Sat Dec 06, 2014 1:24 pm
by russau
very good observation Joe! :D

Re: Public comment needed for BLM: Cache Creek

PostPosted: Sun Dec 07, 2014 6:27 am
by Hoser John
Yep -AT WORK....putting honest miners ...OUT OF WORK...then they no longer HAVE TO DO ANY WORK sic sic sic :? John

Re: Public comment needed for BLM: Cache Creek

PostPosted: Mon Dec 08, 2014 6:18 pm
by Ornery Cuss
I like the part that says "The land was acquired, it is not covered under the 1872 mining law" what a bunch of sheite.....
I'd bet this would loose in court, it wouldn't be in my life time if ya started now however, I'm 57yo.

its a concerted effort to keep miners out of known mineral bearing areas, and talking what the goberment thinks belongs to them.
They know where its at, and know it aint goin nowhere, they would have the resources to go after it if needed. :twisted:


OC

Re: Public comment needed for BLM: Cache Creek

PostPosted: Wed Dec 10, 2014 4:53 pm
by Gold Seeker
Ornery Cuss wrote:I like the part that says "The land was acquired, it is not covered under the 1872 mining law" what a bunch of sheite.....
I'd bet this would loose in court, it wouldn't be in my life time if ya started now however, I'm 57yo.

its a concerted effort to keep miners out of known mineral bearing areas, and talking what the goberment thinks belongs to them.
They know where its at, and know it aint goin nowhere, they would have the resources to go after it if needed. :twisted:


OC


Here east of the Mississippi all of the "pubic" land, e.g. National Parks, National Forests, etc. are acquired lands, meaning that it was once privately owned land that was bought from the private land owners and in some cases you might as well say taken by the government to turn into these public lands, and as such aren't covered under the 1872 Mining Laws.

If Cache Creek was at one time privately owned the the same would apply I guess.

Re: Public comment needed for BLM: Cache Creek

PostPosted: Thu Dec 11, 2014 7:17 am
by Hoser John
Back in the late 60 the feds took over half my Uncles claim,put hiway 49 right smack dab through the middle of it. They blew up 2 tunnels AND blew up General John Freemonts(Founder of calif) original historical rock cabin too. Total payment was $32..... :shock: bureauratz at work sic sic sic -John

Re: Public comment needed for BLM: Cache Creek

PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2014 8:08 am
by nebraskadad
Hoser John wrote::? The significent increase in camping is causing extensive enviromental damage so they want/may/can/will ban all forms of mining??? Must be a GPAA claim there-John


John,

the GPOC has a contract for managing the area, their group is largely the ones who camp there. I do know there are people that park campers in the area..