[meteorite-list] New BLM Rules - Proposition 120

From: Jim Wooddell <jimwooddell_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 08:09:52 -0700
Message-ID: <CAH_zgwGi+qn2eH6Q0Dw6KGPOR-HnqHKdYoDPfgZ_ZmC6wYURkw_at_mail.gmail.com>

As it stands, right now, the estimated delay in permit processing is
up to 60 days.

Jim





On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 7:07 PM, Richard Montgomery
<rickmont at earthlink.net> wrote:
> This entire topic could be re-titled under a new heading:
> "Watch out, freedom,
> We are the Government and We are here to protect you."
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Adam Hupe" <raremeteorites at yahoo.com>
> To: "Adam" <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
> Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2012 6:43 PM
>
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] New BLM Rules - Proposition 120
>
>
>>
>>
>> It is no surprise at all the government doesn't want citizens investing in
>> gold thus making it impossible to get new mines open. Then reclassifying
>> gold, platinum and silver bullion as collectables under a healthcare reform
>> act so that they can bump them up to the highest capitol gains tax bracket
>> serves to prove this as well. They want you to support the federal reserve
>> by buying bonds so that they can continue to print $.
>>
>> I think the BLM needs to be contacted and the truth be told that there are
>> not millions of dollars worth of meteorites lying around for the taking on
>> federal land. These idiotic new rules will just serve to push the small
>> market underground. It will not be long before they start policing eBay and
>> the shows again for meteorites found on dry lake beds and washes.
>>
>> At least when a drunken sailor blows threw money, it is his own!
>>
>> Adam
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Mark Bowling <minador at yahoo.com>
>> To: "meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com"
>> <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
>> Cc:
>> Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2012 6:12 PM
>> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] New BLM Rules - Proposition 120
>>
>> Not meaning to get off topic, but check your facts Mike. That is not true
>> - nobody was trying to open the Grand Canyon National Park to mining.
>>
>> The mining closures "at the Grand Canyon", that people have challenged are
>> OUTSIDE the Grand Canyon Park Boundaries, on land that has been open for
>> claiming since mining claims have been granted. So it is not true that they
>> are trying to mine the Grand Canyon and certainly nobody is trying to rape
>> it.
>>
>> What has happened is companies have spent millions to develop claims in
>> good faith, on land they were guaranteed as open to claiming. Basically the
>> Feds changed the zoning on them, after they have poured a lot of money into
>> their projects.
>>
>> Nobody is trying to open mines inside the Grand Canyon! They are
>> challenging the unlawful closure of claimable land. Congress creates park
>> land, not the executive.
>>
>> This administration is basically abusing their power by expanding park
>> boundaries without technically doing so. Just like they have inacted these
>> new BLM rules with no PUBLIC INPUT!
>>
>> Don't listen to the talking points and dig into the situation a little.
>> Look at the maps of the park and the maps of the lands closed to claiming.
>> They are not park lands....
>>
>> Sorry to get political, but the truth is our legislature turned a $3B
>> budget deficet into a $400M surplus. Something I wish the Feds would do...
>>
>> We need to craft a response to these new BLM rules and begin to push back.
>> That is our only hope to change things.
>>
>> Mark Bowling
>> Vail, AZ
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Michael Farmer <mike at meteoriteguy.com>
>> To: Paul H. <oxytropidoceras at cox.net>
>> Cc: "meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com"
>> <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
>> Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2012 11:06 AM
>> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] New BLM Rules - Proposition 120
>>
>> This was talked about last year by our amazing Arizona government as a way
>> to open mining in Grand Canyon, a horrible idea by them to profit from the
>> rape of our most beautiful national park! The state wants "sovereignty" to
>> pillage anything of value. This same state government and our esteemed
>> governor sold the state capital building I fund the government during the
>> downturn, only to pay it off and buy it back last year, a $130,000,000
>> "million" dollar scam and loss to the taxpayers.
>> We can not trust them to take care of anything.
>> Go Feds, tell Brewer to "shove off". Since the federal government bought
>> Arizona, all federal lands need to be protected from these short-sighted
>> politicians looking to line their own pockets!
>>
>> Michael Farmer
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Sep 23, 2012, at 9:26 AM, "Paul H." <oxytropidoceras at cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>> In ?New BLM Rules? at
>>>
>>> http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/meteorite-list/2012-September/087388.html
>>> Jim Wooddell wrote,
>>>
>>> ?In light of these new meteorite rules, the people
>>> of AZ have Proposition 120 to consider. In a nut
>>> shell, it's AZ telling the Feds to go pound sand and
>>> reclaim sovereignty they should have had in the
>>> first place.... which is a states right! Something we
>>> all should seriously look at and consider. I know
>>> politics are vodoo here...so I wont state an my
>>> opinion. It does directly effect meteorite hunting
>>> in the State of AZ. How this plays out will be
>>> interesting, to say the least.?
>>>
>>> There is an article about Proposition 120 in:
>>>
>>> Proposition Challenges Control Of Federal Lands
>>> Move to seize 25 million acres divides candidates
>>> for Legislature by Pete Aleshire, Payson Roundup,
>>> September 23, 2012.
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.paysonroundup.com/news/2012/sep/14/proposition-challenges-control-federal-lands/
>>>
>>> The article states:
>>>
>>> ?Many opponents maintain that the whole crusade
>>> amounts to a waste of time and effort, since federal
>>> courts have repeatedly ruled that federal law takes
>>> precedence over state law and that states have no
>>> power to nullify federal law, including the landmark
>>> Cooper v. Aaron case in 1958. The federal government
>>> acquired much of Arizona from Mexico through the
>>> Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo that ended the Mexican-
>>> American War. The federal government acquired the
>>> rest of the territory through the Gadsen Purchase. By
>>> contrast, the 13 original colonies entered the union
>>> with very little public land.
>>>
>>> As a result, a number of independent legal scholars
>>> have concluded that the federal courts would quickly
>>> overturn the measure even if it passes, according to
>>> an analysis of the proposition published by the
>>> Morrison Institute for Public Policy.?
>>>
>>> Look at:
>>>
>>> Perkins, E. J., 2012, Understanding Arizona's Propositions:
>>> 2012 Series. Prop 120 ? State Sovereignty Act. Morrison
>>> Institute for Public Policy, Arizona State University, Phoenix,
>>> Arizona
>>>
>>>
>>> http://morrisoninstitute.asu.edu/2012-understanding-arizonas-propositions/2012-prop-120-state-sovereignty-act
>>>
>>> I would not hold my breathe waiting for proposition
>>> 120 to change matters as far as the BLM goes.
>>>
>>> Also, one result of proposition 120 would be to turn
>>> all national parks, including the Grand Canyon, within
>>> Arizona to the state of Arizona, who could then sell
>>> this property to private individuals and corporation
>>> to do what they want with them. Destroying all of the
>>> national park system within Arizona seems to be a
>>> steep price to pay for getting rid of BLM regulations
>>> that people do not like.
>>>
>>> Also, you may find state officials no different, or even
>>> worse, than federal officials with which to deal. Be
>>> careful for what you wish.
>>>
>>> Best wishes,
>>>
>>> Paul H.
>>> ______________________________________________
>>>
>>> Visit the Archives at
>>> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
>>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>>
>> Visit the Archives at
>> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>>
>> Visit the Archives at
>> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>>
>> Visit the Archives at
>> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>
>
> ______________________________________________
>
> Visit the Archives at
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list

-- 
Jim Wooddell
jimwooddell at gmail.com
928-247-2675

Received on Mon 24 Sep 2012 11:09:52 AM PDT