Scott Harn - Editor

Administrators
  • Content count

    52
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Scott Harn - Editor last won the day on February 18 2016

Scott Harn - Editor had the most liked content!

About Scott Harn - Editor

  • Rank
    Administrator
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    California

Recent Profile Visitors

349 profile views
  1. Chris Ralph and I were just discussing that last night. About a year ago we were having problems with people using the forum for spamming and advertising, and it was very difficult to keep a handle on it. We were going to let the forum die a slow death. But we have reconsidered. There's a lot of good people on here and some past info that many still read because it's "good stuff." And we think we have solved a few of the problems with spammers. The forum was recently overhauled/updated on January 11, 2017, and we seem to have the spammers from China and Russia blocked for good now. (We'll see if that lasts.) We will still have to manually delete the advertisements and block the accounts of users who fail to read the terms of service or can't resist posting promotional material. Chris is going to put the word out that we are back, and would appreciate your help doing the same. Thank you very much for your support and your comments! Scott
  2. Sorry Dave, but we currently don't have the resources, staff, etc. to take this on. Might be something we consider for the future.
  3. We only do this every two years. It's going to be April 16-17 this time, with additional hands-on training classes on Friday April 15 & Monday April 18. Our underground class sold out in the first 48 hours, but there is still some room in the above ground placer class. Booth spaces are sold out for the vendor/lecture/exhibit portion on Saturday & Sunday. Lecture schedule is now set. More info: www.icmj.com/miningsummit.php
  4. Responses in this thread were deleted -- sounded like someone was trying to pick a fight and we're not going to tolerate that. Thanks. Scott Harn Editor/Publisher
  5. If you are getting spammed with personal messages, please leave me a message and I will block their account.
  6. Suction Gold Dredge Miners WIN on Federal Preemption ...full story Judge Ochoa went so far as to call the California permit scheme "unenforceable"
  7. Please read the update on our website summarizing the December 12, 2014 court hearing: Significant progress made in court for California suction gold dredgers; still more work to be done Scott Harn Editor/Publisher ICMJ's Prospecting and Mining Journal
  8. FYI -- Two of the three Third Court of Appeals judges who recently ruled in favor of suction gold dredger Brandon Rinehart will be on the ballot for some of you in northern California. The two judges are Ronald B. Robie and Andrea Lynn Hoch. Robie and Hoch ruled that the lower court erred and should have allowed Rinehart to provide evidence that federal mining law preempts state mining law. Robie received a score of "7" on Huey's Judicial Index and a "9" for qualifications. Hoch received a score of "7" on Huey's Judicial Index and a "7" for qualifications. I would vote "Yes" for both of these Appeals Court judges if they were in my county. They cover "District 3" and should be on the ballot in the following counties: Alpine, Amador, Butte, Calaveras, Colusa, El Dorado, Glenn, Lassen, Modoc, Mono, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Shasta, Sierra, Siskiyou, Sutter, Tehama, Trinity, Yolo and Yuba. My home county -- Santa Cruz -- is in District 6 for the California Court of Appeals. Huey and I agree on these and I will be voting as follows: NO! - Marquez (activist judge) NO! - Grover (activist judge) YES!!! - Bamattre-Manoukian (Enthusiastic yes -- I'd vote for her multiple times if I could!) YES - Elia YES - Premo
  9. David, one of our readers from northern California, emailed me a very appropriate question today: Which judges should we be voting for? Here is my "two cents." First off, there's no way we have time to do background checks here at the Mining Journal on judges. It's beyond our resources. In my eyes, I want to eliminate "activist" judges who act based on their own agenda or set of beliefs. I want someone who upholds the US Constitution and values a free economy, family values and religious freedom. I know -- they are difficult to find sometimes in my home state of California. Fortunately, there is a gentleman by the name of Craig Huey who shares my views on this issue. He has taken the time and made the effort to research every judge on the ballot in California. He was kind enough to come up with a rating system that takes into account experience and judicial activism. He gives each candidate up to ten points for qualifications and up to another ten points based on their "Judicial Index" which consists of positions, rulings, statements, etc. The average of the two is their "score." If the candidate receives a "7" for qualifications but is an extreme activist and only gets a "1" for what Huey calls their "Judicial Index," the average of the two would be a score of "4." The higher the score, the better the candidate. I don't agree with all of his recommendations, but I do agree with the majority of them. I tend to frown more heavily than Huey does on those judges who "legislate from the bench" instead of strictly adhering to law. One recommendation of his in particular I don't agree with is a "Yes" vote for Kathryn Mickle Werdegar for the California Supreme Court. She received a score of "9" for her qualifications, but could only muster a "4" in the Judicial Index category. In other words, according to Huey, she is more likely to follow her own agenda and beliefs than adhere to the law. You could have a perfect "10" in terms of qualifications, but I'm not going to vote for you if you don't follow the Constitution and the rule of law. I will be voting "no" for each of the California Supreme Court judges on the ballot this November 4. Superior Court judges run against each other and you can glean some decent information from their statements and endorsements. Dig around and learn their backgrounds before you vote. Appeals Court judges and Supreme Court judges win or retain their seats if more than 50% say "Yes" on their voter cards and it's a little tougher to gather quality information. Huey does a fairly thorough job and provides ratings for every Superior Court, Appeals Court and Supreme Court judge in California seeking a seat at the bench. Huey's website is a good place to start: www.judgevoterguide.com If you have a similar or useful source for evaluating judges in your home state, please chime in and share that information with us. Thanks, Scott Scott Harn, Editor/Publisher
  10. There was a monster nugget found in Butte County back in July. Story/video
  11. We had out IT folks make a few adjustments. You should be able to post photos up to 760 pixels now. Anything over that will be reduced to a thumbnail. Scott
  12. I talked with one of John's daughters and we'll have a similar article in the October issue. John was a subscriber of ours for decades and he will certainly be missed.
  13. ...or you can look at the article at www.icmj.com and click on the "print" link at the top right of each article page for a clean copy if you are an online subscriber. Here's the page, and you'll see the print link to the right of the title. (You have to log in to see it, so those of you who don't have an online subscription won't see it.) Also, in case you didn't know it, you can click on "About Us" then "Writers" and look up all the articles we've published by a particular writer for the past 15 years. Scott
  14. If you haven't read it already, here is our summary of the Brandon Rinehart case and an update on the suction gold dredging cases in California. Scott
  15. Sorry -- that was by me. I was in a hurry to get in finished and didn't include the byline.