February 16, 2019 

Ideal Time for Facts


Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6 | Page 7 | Page 8 | Page 9 | Page 10 | Page 11 ]

 By Rick

04/14/2012  10:05PM

September 12, 2005....date when I initiated this topic...when the CDAA was riding rough-shod over the mine with criminal intent.

Corruption doesn't change course, does it?

Most instructive to recognize, throughout this battle against obstructionist non-elected, imbedded, corrupt and criminal regulators is the stark reality that the former CDAA rep is holding an active position in the EPA.

Where is the integrity of the California AG? Or the former, now Gov, AG???

Hey Jerry, do some home-work to realize what crap you've decided to ignore. Your reputation and integrity is at stake....

Summary: politically appointed adjenda-driven regulators will never be held accountable for criminal actions when the head of the snake doesn't look back into the crap in its intestines.

04/14/2012  11:06AM

Mike, in my very humble opinion you did the right thing with SMARA. Continued litigation, especially with the government, is a heavy pall that can prevent forward progress. I expect to learn a lot more about SMARA in May. Looking forward to meeting you, Ron
 By bluejay

04/13/2012  9:14PM

You have an obligation out of respect to thoroughly read and digest the gift that our founding father bestowed upon us, the people in our Constitution. The following article by Martin Armstrong is one of the best works I have ever read concerning the people's rights that have been slighted by some of the "high priest" judges that have been appointed to the Court in the past along with the Congress of mostly lawyers who have done no better.

 By Michael Miller

04/12/2012  2:57PM

April 11, 2012. Realizing it is better to bend than break, the Company signed a stipulated agreement from the Department of Conservation to end litigation seeking damages for alleged violations of California’s Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA). When asked why he signed, President Miller said that a lean compromise is better than a fat lawsuit and quoted the great American statesman, Samuel Johnson, “Life cannot subsist in society but by reciprocal concessions”. See entry below on 9-20-11 for more information about SMARA.
 By bluejay

11/12/2011  3:33PM

Here's another shaft job by government you might not hear about. This time it's the State of South Carolina reported by the Internatonal Forecaster this morning:

Shawana Busby does not seem like the sort of customer who would be at the center of a major bank's business plan. Out of work for much of the last three years, she depends upon a $264-a-week unemployment check from the state of South Carolina. But the state has contracted with Bank of America to administer its unemployment benefits, and Busby has frequently found herself incurring bank fees to get her money.

To withdraw her benefits, Busby, 33, uses a Bank of America prepaid debit card on which the state deposits her funds. She could visit a Bank of America ATM free of charge. But this small community in the state's rural center, her hometown, does not have a Bank of America branch. Neither do the surrounding towns where she drops off her kids at school and attends church.

She could drive north to Columbia, the state capital, and use a Bank of America ATM there. But that entails a 50 mile drive, cutting into her gas budget. So Busby visits the ATMs in her area and begrudgingly accepts the fees, which reach as high as five dollars per transaction. She estimates that she has paid at least $350 in fees to tap her unemployment benefits.

"It really boggles my mind," she said. "This bank is taking little bits of money out of thousands of pockets, including mine."
 By Rick

11/11/2011  12:55PM

Bluejay and everyone: government is the problem...lest we not forget the other half: politically appointed judges with bias toward those that put them there. Its akin to two wolves and a lamb voting on what's for dinner.
 By bluejay

11/11/2011  8:48AM

Because government is the PROBLEM, they live in a state of denial and cannot correct the situation for they cannot objectively look at themselves. Instead, they attack the people.
 By bluejay

11/10/2011  5:48PM

The regulating Federal agencies of the SEC and the CFTC are in the same camp as the Water Board, abusers of power.

In the following excerpt from the November 4, 2011 article entitled "Is Western Civilization on the Verge of the Equivalent to the Fall of Rome?" Martin Armstrong spells out the failings of important market overseers.

"Then, if we look at the current global economy, the catalyst for the immediate debt crisis began with the abuse of credit which emerged from the New York Investment Banks that were primarily regulated NOT by the Federal Reserve, but by the SEC and CFTC! The SEC and CFTC are directly responsible for everything instead of merging and reforming them, they are handed more power to abuse.

They regulated the Investment Banks and derivatives. They were supposed to be the first line of defense. Yet, they have NEVER managed to ever prevent a single crisis or scandal from Madoff to the collapse of Lehman and Bear Stearns not to mention the quick and dirty sale of Merrill Lynch to prevent that from going into oblivion. They have served no purpose and protected the very people that created the economic crisis. Even the Pro-NY Banks mouthpiece Bloomberg News reported on October 28th, 2011: “The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s internal watchdog has castigated the agency for missing the Bernard Madoff fraud, spotlighted employees who viewed online pornography and called for a criminal probe into the ethics of the SEC’s former top lawyer.”

 By bluejay

10/23/2011  3:11PM

Bureaucrats suppress society to maintain their power. They care nothing about a vision of the future. It is always immediate gratification.

Martin Armstrong
 By Lone Wolf Geologist

09/21/2011  4:59PM

Keep in mind, Judges no longer work for the county, but the State of California.
 By Bigsbkahuna

09/21/2011  4:20PM

Is this why we have 12 to 20 per. Unemployment ?!

In California ?

The Golden State
 By Bigsbkahuna

09/21/2011  4:12PM

Go Mr. Miller

I will read your note to my daughter in the hopes they can get us out of this mess.

Viva California, and it's free citizens
 By bluejay

09/21/2011  8:15AM

During all this, where does Sierra County stand on the State's beating up on one of its resident companies who use to be a significant employer?

I strongly believe the County owes us as a result of the mistake of permitting the State's carpetbagging attorney lynch mob into our backyard.
 By Michael Miller

09/20/2011  12:18PM

The following is for the youth of America

California regulators are suing our corporation to protect their own personal interests. Unknown others are supporting litigation and other forms of interferences to either gain a personal advantage or for their own personal interests. None of these legal shenanigans benefit the public. The California employees who are initiating and perpetuating this particular lawsuit are doing it willfully, which, if supported by evidence, creates personal exposure to monetary restitution and criminal prosecution.

The thread of California Department of Conservation (formerly known as the Department of Mines & Geology) justification extends from a regulation born in legislation of 1976. Surface mines became a public concern when technology, equipment and the miner’s mental capacities to exploit low-grade large surface deposits of valuable minerals expanded. The fears were the surface disturbances after mining would cease. Reclamation became the solution and regulations were the guidelines to solutions.

Over the years the regulations expanded faster than open pit mines in California. The initial permit carried no or low costs; the surface disturbance requiring compliance shrank from 5 acres to a teaspoon of dirt; fees and monitoring increased like feral cats in Alleghany. Eventually, mining in California stopped as the miners and financiers moved to other countries. By the way, other countries have few regulations; therefore if stopping mining in California is a goal of environmental advocates, their approach has failed to protect the earth.

SMARA recognized conditions that existed prior to passing the law. The Sixteen to One sites qualified under this exemption except for a cut and fill bench that was excavated by a lessee after 1976. A reclamation plan was approved by lead agency, Sierra County, and after seven years the cut and fill were approved as reclaimed. A payment (bond) of $5,000 was returned to the Company.

There are widespread problems in California with regulation management. Individuals responsible and accountable to the public are not held accountable up the chain of command for negligence. (In the Executive Branch the governor is chief. In the Legislative Branch our Senators and Assemblymen are top dogs.) We are experiencing the worst kind of negligence by government employees…knowing and willful negligence. If proven, those perpetrators may face criminal prosecution as well.

California legislators and more noticeable all employees working in the Executive Branch are failing the public’s interests , rights and protection as stated in the U.S. Constitution, Amendment XIV, Section 1: “nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” This lawsuit ignores constitutional rights.

Neither the Department of Conservation nor the State water regulators held a public administrative hearing to discuss and eventually vote on motions affecting the Sixteen to One mine (required). The mine never had the opportunity to face its accusers as required in regulations for both departments. This seems odd. If the charges of wrongdoing were harmful to the public, both agencies failed to act responsibly and in a timely fashion to stop or mitigate the source of the concern.

Both agencies waited years before filing a lawsuit. If the problem was serious, such as killing bugs or fish, why didn’t those responsible for monitoring the reports report the failures to file sooner and help with a solution? A common answer: they do not care about the information in the reports. They care about filing paper and collecting money.

It is the public agencies that are negligent not the Sixteen to One. If anybody failed the public, it is the agencies; however they do not really care about results. In both cases the negligence is gross, knowing and willful. Unfortunately, the prosecutor for both lawsuits is also the enforcer of criminal complaints against those who hurt the People of California. The Attorney General is prosecuting the wrong party. Justice, in our third branch of government, is difficult and costly to attain.

I am trying to stay focused on SMARA (Surface Mining and Reclamation Act) lawsuit as cited by Rick but both lawsuits are similar. The Sixteen to One is an underground operation and has surface improvements (assets) such as roads, buildings and storage sites. Should gold mining cease, these improvements will remain. They are not only assets to the owners, but they benefit the public as well. The Sixteen to One mine is not subjected to SMARA. The government knows this or should have known this prior to requesting the Attorney General to file a claim for damages, which hurt the gold mine operation. Youth of America, the saying is old but true: FOLLOW THE MONEY.
 By Rick

09/18/2011  8:56PM

So far, no one has responded to my question.

I'll cut straight to the issue:

My question regards the lawsuit against our Mine, specifically regarding how ambient arsenic levels in the local water upstream and downstream of the mine remains not only ambient, but also how the thug legal angle falls flat and hence is spurious....

The spurious onslaught has shifted. Since there is no "angle" for them regarding ambient levels of naturally occuring arsenopyrite, the thugs try to re-define the historic nature of this operation:

Hey, guess what??? The Original Sixteen to One Mine is now a "surface mine" !!!

 By Rick

09/09/2011  9:01PM

In my years being associated with this stellar underground mine, I cannot recall any hint that the original Sixteen to One Mine is a "surface mine", and does anyone ?????

Long ago, mill-processing may have brought under-ground mining rock to the surface, and then all piles were sent down into the mill within hours of being exposed to the surface.

Residual non-baring coarse rock was routinely sorted through the grizzly process. Most of this rock has lined the roads to the portal to support safe travel.

HOW is it possible that the ongoing legal issues concerning Water, in a current outrageous legal action against this mine, is a debate surrounding whether the Original Sixteen to One Mine is a surface mine??????


Anyone with common knowledge to identify this fraud, I implore you to go on record to decry this onslaught.

I will personally testify to the fact that surface rock has no gold; that never has surface mining been in practice; and testify to this fact ever since the mill was shut down.

If some a-hole lawyers want to suggest that hauling underground rock above the surface for mill-processing (stopped a decade ago) somehow suggest an above-ground mining project today, I will eat a donkey.

And I'll go further: any a-hole state-sponsored lawyer who suggests that a 'surface-mining-operation' exists today and/or since the mill shut itself down, I invite their deposition.
 By bluejay

08/04/2011  11:20AM


I would recommend going to the website http://www.martinarmstrong.org and read all of his writings. He is the world expert on this subject.

You will be doing yourself a great favor while adding to your over-all knowledge.
 By mnewkom

08/04/2011  10:16AM

What would happen and how would
thing change if our nation went
on the GOLD standard. Will some-
one please answer that?
 By Michael Miller

08/03/2011  10:48AM

Responsible Use of California’s Natural Resources.
Excerpts from a seasoned mining man living in California.

Biggest problem is California society, its culture and actions or inaction. This general statement’s value must identify specifics for any directional change to take place. Instead of gold as the metal of interest, substitute copper. Mankind needs copper to maintain its quality of life or improve the lives of less fortunate peoples. (Some people believe that gold is an unneeded relic.)

An economic copper deposit is in northern California (Plumas County). It sits idle, no action and questionable plans for exploitation. Why?
1. Cost of permitting and ongoing delays.
2. Canadian security laws encourage mineral extraction while US laws discourage mining.
3. Philosophical or attitudinal approach to investment by Americans is short-term. A mine is a long-term commitment. Sacramento is a good example of government paying for votes in the next election. Short-term thinking.
4. Public does not want to be bothered. Not true for small minority that actively oppose mineral extraction anywhere. California is a handy place to live, work and practice their trade.
5. Public lack of understanding history. Apathy. Don’t want to be bothered.
6. Corporate insiders of many exploration companies (officers, directors, geologists) interested in good meals, travel, nice salaries at shareholder expense or hyping stock value. These Canadian companies increase outstanding shares like rabbits create bunnies by diluting shareholder interest via private stock offerings.
 By Michael Miller

05/19/2011  1:25PM

Steve Forbes (see four entries below) opined a return to the gold standard, which cause me to ponder its consequences with 17 questions. I hoped to read your thoughts. I’ll give number 1 a shot. They are tough questions without simple answers. Pick one and offer us your thoughts (answer all if your brain can stay engaged).

1. Advocates have differing motives for advocating gold as a security. Since 1975 guys grabbed gold as a topic to make money selling advice, forecasts, books or articles and speaking engagements. Some have made their living doing this and a few continue today. The gold standard may lessen the unknowns about present and future values of gold. Interest may subside and there goes the advocates cash cow. (Gold investment/speculation history records peaks and troughs and bear markets longer than bull. In the 1970’s and early 1980’s a negative for gold was that it did not produce income as money in the bank produced interest. Therefore, when the pundits saw interest rates rising they shouted that gold was a poor investment.)

During these years I read dozens of gold bugs or nay Sayers newsletters, etc. I also attended conferences in New York, New Orleans, Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Spokane, Denver and San Francisco. True gold miners (producers) were only in attendance at one, a special private two-day event in New York. During the 70’s and 80’s there were thousands of gold companies. Hype reached a crescendo emanating across America. The word on the street was that the best stock return came from exploration companies not gold producing companies. The reasoning was that exploration companies had a terrific upside potential. Once a company went into production, revenue and profit became known. It seems it was easier to hype the unknown over the known.

My answer to number one is “No”. The seventeen questions are listed below.

1. Will gold advocates think conversion is positive for them?

2. For the country?

3. For gold?

4. Who are future gold buyers and why buy (hold) if gold and dollars exchange at par?

5. What happens if the printing presses continue to create paper dollars?

6. Where will the gold be stored?

7. Who will conduct oversight or audits?

8. What is different now than 1933, when FDR’s administration bumped the dollars required to buy gold?

9. Will the government decide it is in its interest to order Americans to “sell” their gold for dollar redemption?

10. Will it be a criminal offense for those who refuse?

11. How is life different today?

12. How are our monetary economics the same?

13. What will a new Gold Standard do for us? For you?

14. Will other currencies float against the dollar or gold?

15. What if the EU or the Yuan ties their price (value) to an ounce of gold?

16. How easy will it be for people to convert their dollars into gold?

17. Or their gold into Dollars?

Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6 | Page 7 | Page 8 | Page 9 | Page 10 | Page 11 ]


© 2019 Original Sixteen to One Mine, Inc.
PO Box 909
Alleghany, California 95910

(530) 287-3223      
(530) 287-3455

      Gold Sales:  

(530) 287-3540


Design & development by
L. Kenez