A Little Forum For Gold Microclusters Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : A Little Forum For Gold Microclusters

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Chuca Marsh who wrote (41)	8/12/1997 8:56:00 PM
From: Michael J. Wendell	of 142

Chuca, I think the fish is in your tree. I do agree that it costs money to promote. I understand the owner of the Oro Grande has plenty of that. Money. Don't forget, there were thousands of mines started in the 1920s and 30s by people that had lost their farms. They were referred to as farmers, although some of them were darn good miners. They staked claims, learned fast becaust they had to. Started with nothing, some as contract miners developing their own mines on weekends. According to the published estimates, this country had produced more than 13,000 tons of gold before there were but a handful of larger mining companies. And there were no Newmonts then. I quit going to the various small miners meetings when it dawned on me that all of the miners were too old to mine and the others just tallked and promoted. One time I was sitting at a meeting of about a hundred people and it dawned on me that only two of us at that meeting had ever mined and sold ore. I do not know who you are talking to regarding the Patented rights of the Oro Grande, but if I may, the answer is that only a small portion of the Oro Grande is Patented mineral and surface. The rest of the property is composed of posession claims. Possession claims are staked claims and have almost no rights until Patented. A patented mining claim doesn't have the same rights it had 20 years ago. At that time it came with an almost certain right to mine as guaranteed by the mining act of 1882. That act has been altered and beat up and today only the rifght to patent remains. Today it is a right to mine if properly permitted and there is no assurance a right to mine permit will ever be granted. Another question, with all of the growth in realestate development in that part of Arizona, are the residential folks starting to infringe on the Oro Grande impact area? I have to admit that population growth has destroyed more than one potential gold mine in the West. Parks, National Monuments and Wilderness withdrawals have done their share of stopping mining also. It seems that mineral areas are withdrawn from mineral development after a blind geologist reviews the area and finds it to be non mineral. I remember one picture that was used as an example of "no mineral potential" in a survey showed just wilderness. No roads, nothing. The photo was taken from a mine dump. The mine had produced hundreds of $millions if the metals were produced at todays prices. The road that accessed that mine was built to access the mine as were most of the mountain roads in Colorado. No one has to withdraw the non mineral areas because no one would mine them anyway. I say that you are either too close to resident populations or you are in the wilderness. There is no area in between. But now you are getting me onto another subject that is for the next generation to cure. mike

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next