Cache Creek

Any information related to prospecting

Moderators: russau, Leonard

Cache Creek

Postby pickaxe » Tue Mar 06, 2012 9:47 pm

This just in, highbanking is to be no longer allowed at Cache Creek. Not surprising, If you have seen the work done there the last two or three years. Just annoying. If you were thinking of a vacation there just be informed. Sluicing and panning are still allowed. Here is a link to BLM;

http://www.blm.gov/co/st/en/fo/rgfo/min ... ermit.html
pickaxe
 
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 9:26 am

Re: Cache Creek

Postby Hoser John » Wed Mar 07, 2012 6:16 am

:twisted: And the anti mining cancer spreads yet ever wider--GO your claims here??? John :twisted:
Hoser John
 
Posts: 3000
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 6:42 am
Location: Redding Kalif

Re: Cache Creek

Postby COArgonaut » Wed Mar 07, 2012 6:46 am

No, this isn't our claims.
It is further north. The area was created by taking a mixture of public land that had many private parcels into a single larger public track by swapping with the private owners. There had been problems in past years of tresspass on the private tracts (miners, hunters etc).
No claiming was allowed in the area. So, a rather heady situation was created- a public tract with good history of gold. The question was how to manage it. BLM wanted a care taker to oversee it, but had no way to pay for it.
Highbankers, dry washers were the way to go. And go they did. I haven't been up there in a couple of years, but I am not suprised that this resulted.

ed
COArgonaut
 
Posts: 120
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 6:49 pm

Re: Cache Creek

Postby cobill » Wed Mar 07, 2012 10:38 am

The last words from the 2011 season was that out-of-state miners had created a "war zone" at Cache Creek, digging holes 10' deep and 15'+ wide...looked like bomb craters. :evil:

Bill
cobill
 
Posts: 57
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 1:04 pm
Location: Laporte, CO

Re: Cache Creek

Postby russau » Wed Mar 07, 2012 12:30 pm

since thats the mood from last year, watch for LOTS of citations tobe issued this year there!if people are that stupid, they might aswell get cited!but that only makes mining in general look bad!fuel for the wacoenviromentalists fire! and possibly a touchy situation for the entire area! everyone should be on their best behavior this year if this happens like i think it will!
russau
 
Posts: 5924
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 6:17 am
Location: St. Louis Missouri

Re: Cache Creek

Postby pickaxe » Wed Mar 07, 2012 1:56 pm

I'm sorry, what? I guess we should have used teaspoons to feed a td easysluice? If a hole was 10 foot deep it's because that was where the gold was. I was in some of those holes. Got no regrets or apologies. I've got no regrets for being a MINER, or apologies for pulling 19pwt. Worked my ass off for it. The BLM showed once or twice a week. Didn't hear of any citations being given. The camp hosts did their best to guide the situation but it was beyond them. But they did a decent job of keeping BLM happy.
And saying it was out-of-staters is kind of small. I dare say there were a lot more folks that traveled 10-50 miles up there than folk who traveled 400-500-700 miles, huh? And a sluicer can and will dig just as big a hole as a highbanker, just takes a little longer.
Sometimes it surprises me how a miner has to defend himself from the environmental mindset within our own ranks. And I'm not talking about me. As I said the BLM was there onc or twice a week. If they wanted to change the rules they could have. Now they have. Oh, well.
pickaxe
 
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 9:26 am

Re: Cache Creek

Postby bill-costa rica » Wed Mar 07, 2012 2:53 pm

pick axe

thank you , very well said and I agree with you totally. my first thought when I read this post was who in the hell is this guy. Not a miner


bill-cr
bill-costa rica
 
Posts: 128
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 12:52 pm

Re: Cache Creek

Postby pickaxe » Wed Mar 07, 2012 3:13 pm

Thanks Bill.
Yeh, I see now that you mention it, that could be taken as a anti mining type gloating. Not this guy. I know a couple places I'd love to hydraulic. :lol:
pickaxe
 
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 9:26 am

Re: Cache Creek

Postby Bnugget » Wed Mar 07, 2012 6:01 pm

“High banking” is considered motorized sluicing (43 CFR 8365.1–5) and is not recreational level mining. High banking is administered under the 1872 Mining Law. Because the Cache Creek Area is acquired land, the area is not subject to the 1872 Mining Law.

Did DFG just clarify that we miners(dredgers) are not recreationalists? Sounds like it to me!
"Turns out my wife's not the Gold Digger, I am...Go figure"
Bnugget
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 8:44 pm
Location: Antioch, California

Re: Cache Creek

Postby russau » Thu Mar 08, 2012 4:45 am

Bnugget wrote:“High banking” is considered motorized sluicing (43 CFR 8365.1–5) and is not recreational level mining. High banking is administered under the 1872 Mining Law. Because the Cache Creek Area is acquired land, the area is not subject to the 1872 Mining Law.

Did DFG just clarify that we miners(dredgers) are not recreationalists? Sounds like it to me!

the DFG is again trying to dictate/misdirect miners into thinking they can controll/decide what the mining laws say! they infact cant! a persos only defense is knowing the laws to fight off such stupidity!and then sometimes youll need a fat wallet to do that!
russau
 
Posts: 5924
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 6:17 am
Location: St. Louis Missouri

Next

Return to General Prospecting

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 36 guests