|
|
Post by RKC on Mar 7, 2012 18:47:11 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by RKC on Mar 8, 2012 15:34:24 GMT 12
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2012 18:22:16 GMT 12
Is now the time to hammer them with 217 submissions in regard to no big companies pegging out moving water?
|
|
|
|
Post by RKC on Mar 8, 2012 19:58:54 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by RKC on Mar 9, 2012 12:09:47 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by RKC on Mar 9, 2012 16:44:26 GMT 12
G'day, Minerals West Coast will be attending a workshop on the Crown Minerals Act review in Wellington shortly. This should make us all aware of what is actually intended by the government and make clearer what's written in the discussion paper. It would be worthwhile keeping an eye on the Minerals West Coast web site ( www.mineralswestcoast.co.nz ) for any developments, and members of Minerals West Coast will be notified by email. Apparently New Zealand Petroleum and Minerals have decided not to tinker with hobby mining, or go ahead with anything proposed in the first round of the submission process, because of the large number of submissions from hobby miners in the first round of the submission process ( golddredgingforum.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=554 ). However its probably well worthwhile for any hobbyists to make more submissions this second time around ... maybe in regard to the possible reintroduction of a Miners Right (as discussed here previously). I would like to suggest, before any submissions are written by any GDF members, that any of the production dredgers here make a point in their submissions that they are not hobbyists and that they are more like an owner-operator (or maybe an independent miner or small scale miner) who carries out mining as his livelihood. There are already some concerns for the miners arising from the discussion paper. Its being proposed that anyone applying for a Permit be vetted by government (bureaucrats) as to their competency as a miner. Which is fair enough when applied to a company who wants to start a mine such as the one at Waihi. But it could be used to keep small scale miners from getting a Permit, or even applying for a Permit. And ... always remember, this is about as important as it gets for the small-scale miners of New Zealand!Regards, Rob (RKC) |
|
|
|
Post by RKC on Mar 11, 2012 20:29:11 GMT 12
G'day,
I've just had my first chance for a quick look at the Discussion Paper. The most significant change proposed is to introduce a two tiered system for Crown Owned minerals. Alluvial gold will be in "Tier 2 minerals" ... so, the Tier 2 proposals are what will interest us as river miners.
The issue we have been concerned with for so long regarding large mining company's tying up large areas (including the rivers and streams) with Exploration and Prospecting Permits that effectively have locked us out of ground we would want for dredging, is raised in the Discussion Paper. The paper states ... "Develop a better system for dealing with small-medium alluvial gold mining operations over areas which have already been permitted. There would be a preference for an option to amend the minerals program so that consent of the prior permit holder is sufficient". However, the proposal is that dredge miners will still have to approach the Exploration or Prospecting Permit holder ( a multi-national mining company, usually) to get their permission. One proposed option is to classify alluvial gold and hard rock gold as separate mineral classes and then where the Exploration or Prospecting Permit is looking for hard-rock an alluvial gold miner could apply for a Mining permit over the ground being prospected for hard-rock. But if the company with the Exploration or Prospecting Permit is looking for alluvial then there will be no change to what exists now (a dredge miner would still have to go cap-in-hand to get permission from the Exploration or Prospecting Permit owner ... which is not acceptable!). A solution which is not mentioned in the Discussion Paper would be to have all active rivers and streams excluded from the Exploration or Prospecting Permit areas ... or maybe some way introduced to allow automatic granting of an alluvial Mining permit for dredging, over any waterway enclosed within any Exploration or Mining permit area.
I got the impression from reading through the Discussion Paper that New Zealand Petroleum and Minerals still regard all dredgers as hobbyists. This could present problems further on, especially if some of the proposals in the Discussion Paper are adopted. They are classifying the trommel miners as "small-medium alluvial miners" and the dredge miners who dredge for a living should be in the same category. In the Discussion Paper there is a reference to "small enterprise alluvial gold operations", which would be a better way to describe profession dredgers rather than calling them hobbyists. And the point must be made in any submissions from dredgers here, that there are dredge miners who make their living from dredging. The Discussion Paper stated ... "Maximum permit sizes. 280. It is proposed to place a maximum limit of 50 hectares for hobby and recreation operations and up to 200 hectares for larger mechanized alluvial gold mining, aggregates and other low-value minerals".
Regarding the first round of the submission process, which most of us here made submissions to, the Discussion Paper says ... "The August 2010 discussion document proposed to remove the permit requirements for small-scale gold activities in river and lake beds, and coastal marine areas. This proposal received the most feedback, with the vast majority of submitters opposed to the proposal and its implied removal of existing property rights. 267. On the strength of this opposition, it has been decided to retain the permitting requirements for alluvial operators but to investigate measures to significantly reduce the associated administrative workload".
Apart from the dredging aspects, there is a disastrous proposal made in the discussion paper. It is proposed that hard rock gold be classified in Tier 1. If this went ahead it would mean that only the large multi-national mining company's will be mining hard rock in New Zealand. There is tremendous potential in Godzone for small one or two men, hard rock mining operations. This potential is presently unrealized in New Zealand but with the new technology available today, hard rock mining could easily become a significant mining activity of any interested Kiwi small enterprise alluvial gold miners.
Regards,
Rob (RKC)
|
|
|
|
Post by aucn on Mar 12, 2012 7:21:43 GMT 12
could not agree more with you rob.. about the potential for small hard rock mining in nz in fact this area has the most potential also with underground placer mining ,submissions should highlight this also, how to keep these potential small operations in tier 2 is the problem , could be done on mining permit area ie <10ha etc with the way the world is some form of safety training etc will creep in which if done sensible is good , has had a marked effect in decreasing accidents in the opal fields www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/minerals/lightning-ridge/mining-course-informationken |
|
|
|
Post by RKC on Mar 12, 2012 9:05:47 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by RKC on Mar 12, 2012 14:04:59 GMT 12
G'day, Anyone interested in what we have said already in this thread about hard-rock mining carried out on a small-scale, will find this video ( tinyurl.com/7paby6m ) from Alaska fascinating. After watching the video I could very easily imagine such a near surface bonanza quartz vein being found somewhere in New Zealand ... like in the hills above Macetown (Otago, NZ). The scenario I can easily envisage occurring in the future would first involve a small-scale miner taking out an Exploration Permit over the hills above Macetown. Then with legal access he could carry out a geophysical survey that would display for mapping, the anomalies. Then a small excavator could be utilized to trench at the location of the anomalies (carrying out rehabilitation as they proceed). The when/if a payable vein of quartz is uncovered by trenching it could be mined with the excavator. The quartz could then be removed and taken by truck to a processing site where it would be crushed and the gold extracted (There would be environmental advantages in process the ore away from the mine site). And then, if the payable quartz does not continue at depth, the mining site can be easily and quickly rehabilitated before being abandoned. However if the ore should continue to be payable at depth and become out of the reach of the excavator, then the small-scale miner could sell the Permit to a large mining company who could raise the capital required to continue mining at depth. It would be a win-win for the small-scale miner, and the large company. The large company would have a proven ore body that they did not have to spend millions to find by expensive diamond drilling. For my scenario to come true all that's required would be for a suitable legal framework to be in place and the Kiwi miners would do the rest. Regards, Rob (RKC) |
|
|
|
Post by RKC on Mar 12, 2012 14:39:36 GMT 12
G'day,
BTW: I forgot to mention that the government will be looking at changes to the Resource Management Act later into their term. That review will be where the most change needs be brought about so as to better facilitate the granting of Permits and Consents relating to river mining for gold.
Regards,
Rob (RKC)
|
|
|
|
Post by RKC on Mar 20, 2012 16:40:39 GMT 12
G'day, C R O W N M I N E R A L S A C T RE V I E W – A S T E P
F O R W A R D" The discussion paper for the review of the
Crown Minerals Act 1991 was released last
week. Overall th e changes proposed in the
discussion paper are a step forward towards
improving and simplifying the regulatory
environment for petroleum and minera l
operations in New Zealand.
It is clear the MED has had regard to the
industry and other submissions made on the
August 2010 discussion document and this
is reflected in a number of the proposed
amendments. We would exp ect the bulk of
the proposals set out in the discussion
document to be welcomed by industry." www.bellgully.co.nz/resources/pdfs/Crown-Minerals-Act-Review-A-Step-Forward.pdfRegards, Rob (RKC) |
|
|
|
Post by powderburns on Mar 24, 2012 8:15:46 GMT 12
A life devoid of risk is a life devoid. The so called concerns of the safety crowd eventually morphs into a desire to control your life. They know better, little man. Politics and power - Not a concern for their fellow man. Small scale mining makes their lust for power glow. Easy to regulate out of existence. The greens, safety, pc morons, legal snakes, are all parasites. When then run out of the ability to siphone off your wealth, they will run out of steam and slither into the shadows.
Small scale mining needs encouraging and support. The legislative environment we have crushes the dreams of us little people. There are many quartz leaders in otago you could follow and make a buck. Gold mining is hard work. Extracting gold from solid rock is hard work. Coupled with adversarial law and bureaucratic nonsense, probably impossibly hard work.
|
|
|
|
Post by roughau on Mar 25, 2012 6:13:19 GMT 12
Powderburns.
Thanks for your clear expression of what we all know and believe. It is for your well thought out reasons, that we should all be joining and supporting the excellent work that West Coast Minerals do in presenting a united front for small Miners.
I believe that all communications, applications, dealings etc, with all levels of, so called Government, should be with a type of format, or orchestrated anti-propaganda, that ably counters the California Eco-Loons type mis-information, that these idiot bureaucratic and grant sucking green power freaks wallow upon. You know, Pigs at the public purse. The un-productive sector.
In my own dealings with these trough suckers, I go into some depth regarding the infinitesimal environmental effects that suction dredging has upon the creek/river beds, in comparison to the colossal gravel, rock and debris upheaval of even a small flood. We all know that this is just normal, Kiwi common sense, but to our weird, extremist power-freak Eco-Loons, it is just another distortion of facts, to claim justification of their very odd agenda's.
Perhaps, if more of us voiceless, below the radar types, were to adopt more anti-propaganda approaches, ideally through West Coast Minerals, the Eco-Loons may not gain so much from the idiotic deceptions and twisted reasoning that they have gained, and suck from, in California. Is this inevitable here. ? .
People I know were attempting to create a Bush Railway in Charleston, to enhance their Caving tourism business. By chance, I happened to visit the site with one of the Buller areas notorious, and very vocal (all mouth, no brain) Eco-Loons. He sat with me in the entrance to the tourist Cave and said, "The problem with this development, is that I will not be able to control it, when they sell out to the big guys."
Yes Powderburns, your posting portrays the suck perfectly.
CHEERS
JET
|
|
|
|
Post by RKC on Mar 25, 2012 12:15:21 GMT 12
G'day,
There has been a rather disappointing drop off in membership of Minerals West Coast with some miners who joined after the meeting in Greymouth not renewing their memberships for the following year. Its going to take an increase in membership of Minerals West Coast for them to continue as efficiently as they have to lobby on behalf of the small scale gold mining sector... so please rejoin if you have let your membership lapse and get as many others to join as possible.
Without the effort of Minerals West Coast to let miners know of the review, there would not have been the success in getting NZ Petroleum and Minerals to drop its proposal to entirely do away with Mining Permits for dredging. There was an overwhelming number of submissions in the first round of the submission process against the proposal with, thankfully, only a few submissions from naive hobbyists supporting the proposal.
Regards,
Rob (RKC)
|
|
