New Zealand Gold Prospecting & Metal Detecting Forums Archive

"Hi" GBM.

I'd guess that "Non-mechanised", means just that? and encompasses the use of detectors too?

There certainly not "Mechanised", because I cant find a petrol filler cap on mine.

Cheers---Colin.

Have you had a look at the minerals Review posting by me.

Its was 4 am, and I had just been woken up as my subconscious mind finished digesting the Bills implications whilst I slept, and then promptly woke me up to its happy calculation of the Review’s “Probable” significance for me.

At first glance it doesn’t seem to be of much interest at all, bit droll really?

But do we need More?
(I don’t really, because I am only detecting now, and clause 5.1 suits me fine.)

If we cant get concessions included in the final legislations for freedom to fossick on Crown lands, or Exploration licenses, by submitting a petition,then not to worry to much, as there are a couple of “Good Points” in our favor in the bill as proposed !

Being able to fossick without a permit, puts this category into the same light as it now stands in the Governments “Public” gold fossicking areas.
This “Proposed” new ruling, should now mean that what we find, is “Ours” to keep.
It should also clear the way for us to sell our small finds legitimately.
(Because you can do this if you find gold in a public fossicking area!)

So this clause needs our support?

If we can get concessions to Crown, or Exploration grounds, then you can bet that I’ll be a real happy person. Because, there’s enough of these lands in the Coromandel area where I live to keep me happy for yonks.
And if I can now negotiate with the Iwi’s for myself, without getting tied up with big costs, and loads of bureaucratic paperwork, then there’s also some of their lands on gold bearing ground here.
“VIVA NEW ZEALAND” !!!!!!
For me, these new regulations cant come round fast enough.

So for better or worse, the proposed pending regulation in Clause 5.1 has got my long winded submission letter down to just one word---YES!

Cheers---Colin.

Hi Gang.

This was my long winded letter that I was going to send to the CMA,
re--"The Review".

However,I have realized that I may not bother to do so now.
I decided to post it, so that some of you good people may be able to
use some of its "Valid"? points to maybe beef up your own submissions.

You are most welcome to do this if your stuck for a few ideas?

Enjoy!
=========================================

Dear Sir,

The development of metal detectors in the 1980s, and the rapid advances in their development, has led to a renewed interest in prospecting and small mining practices in New Zealand.
These small scale mining practices are an important part of our heritage.

We propose that the current regulations should be lessened in severity somewhat, so that smaller players may gain some personal benefits of satisfaction from their hobby.
These persons are mainly only focused on shallow mineralized deposits of possible interest to themselves, and their personal activities cause very low risk operations, which hopefully, should not pose any concerns for the community and/or the environment.

A reduction of some of the current regulations in force, would definitely benefit this minority industry, and generally cause a saving of some of those exorbitant administrative costs for our Government.

We also strongly believe in the right of individuals to have the opportunity to share in New Zealand’s considerable mineral wealth.

In our avocations:

We note that the regulations within the mining sector have become practically untenable for smaller parties, who’s sole interests are divided between pursuing their efforts in this field in completely nondestructive ways, so as to be involved in the mining, prospecting, or fossicking for metallic substances, minerals, and gemstones.
Our major concern is centered around the facts that the current legislation does not provide for these lower risk activities, which we consider, are part and parcel of our pastime hobbies.
That said, it is our belief that that the current regulations and costs could be softened for those of us that participate in these activities.

In respect of the above submissions, it is also of increasing concern to us that the old “Miners Right” was removed from our environment, thereby making the searching for minor riches? extremely dubious to perform without falling foul of the laws current in the present mining act.

We see no light at the end of this tunnel, which has been effectively blocked to us, by a cave in of regulatory paperwork descending upon our heads, and blocking any way forwards in the pursuit of our explorations for those things which we value as our recreations.

These activities are an important part of our lives, as they were to those from the past, which ultimately will continue to be loved into the future, if these changes are made now to provide for such venues as those depicted above.

I remain in total respect of any decisions that you may deem to be practical to resolving this scratchy, “Thorn in our side” problem.

May I be permitted to make a “tongue in cheek” request:
We would be exceptionally grateful if you could see your way clear to reinstate the “Miners Right” privilege that previously existed in the past.

I thank you for taking the time to peruse this plea.

Yours most sincerely--- Colin. N. Atkinson.
============================================


FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES ONLY.
"Casual mining".

Recreational mining, is an overall term generally used to describe the activities undertaken by individuals using very different types of smaller mining equipments than those that bedeck large company sites.
It also has been referred to as “Recreational” mineral prospecting, gold panning/sluicing/gold dredging, or just, recreational prospecting.

“Recreation”, being defined as.
“The use of a persons leisure time for personal satisfaction and enjoyments, plus being good for their physical and mental health”.

Inherent in any search for valuable minerals, there is always the hope of “Striking it rich”, and this means that there could possibly be some economic benefits derived from recreational mining activities.
But unfortunately for those of our ilk, there are no concessions within the current mining act that even vaguely suggests that this result may be obtainable, without us falling foul of the laws that make it illegal to do so.

But ask those who enjoy recreational mining what their real motivation is, and very often most will answer “The thrill of the hunt”! or, “The sense of adventure”.
Recreational mining certainly differs from normal mining in one very important way, as professionals usually seek to obtain the exclusive rights to mineral deposits by staking “Mining claims”.

Recreationally minded persons on the other hand, generally desire areas with easy access, where they can go to search for valuable minerals.
Current mining licenses represent areas a recreational miner is presently excluded from, unless special permission is obtained.

We all understand why this is so, but find it harder to understand why this ruling should apply “Ad hoc” to “Exploration” license areas that cover immense areas of country and preclude us from fossicking upon it.

These minor activities are today acceptably called. “Fossicking” which can be defined as searching/collecting materials from the near surface by digging with “Hand tools”.
It may be essentially be termed “Scrounging” for gold, mainly by sifting through prospective areas of grounds, which may possibly be old and abandoned mining sites. And by reworking those old washings and waste piles of “Mullock” for the bits left behind when they were throw aside and abandoned by those miners as being un-payable.

Respectfully---Colin. N. Atkinson.

Hi Glen.

Thanks, for the thanks!

But I’m curious as to how you arrive at your comment of:
“One small spark at the start of the month and here we are now”.

To this, I make the following observation that, that, spark was kindled on this forum back in June this year by a post in the topic, “Seeking permission from land owners”
Which appears in the forum under, “LOCATIONS“.

To clarify: on 16/6/2010 a post appeared about a letter being sent to the PM, John Keys.
And on 5/7/2010 a “Reply” letter from the Minister of energy, Gerry Brownley, was also posted in the same forum topic.

There was also another relevant post made on 18/6/2010.

Cheers and regards---Colin.

Hi Gavin.

Good on you for spotting what could be a problematical technicality.

I had considered this, but came to the conclusion that the wording of clause 5.1 could be construed to cover this concern by the use of the word “AND”.

I.E. “ It is proposed to remove the requirement to obtain a permit for non-mechanized gold activities (such as gold panning) and operations using low mechanization (where the machinery used does not exceed 5 horsepower)in river and lake beds and coastal marine areas“.

But your right, The wording of this phrase may be changed dramatically in the final draft. So It wouldn’t hurt to attempt to clarify the whole phrase by adding to it with something like: (such as gold panning), or the use of metal detectors over land areas that apply to the acts recommendations, and operations using low----------------------------.

Or, just try to get the words “(such as gold panning)” deleted from the phrase?

Just thinking!
Cheers---Colin.

Hello,

I agree.

It takes very little effort to approach your local MP. Moreover, if they are National, you will find them quite interested in this. However, on a short political note ;) of either party Labour issued the greatest number of mining consents (so I am told). Go figure.

It is the collective knowledge of a forum that affords an opportunity to change things for the better. That said, it is the responsibility of the individual to review and act on the knowledge presented to them.

When I requested emails from people - I received but one. Granted the direction of RMA as apposed to CMA may have been a little off track. However, the process was to approach a representative of the government to gain direction and support. I feel that this has been achieved. Granted, the process is slow. However, the iron is HOT. Thanks to the diligence of others we are now able to offer our submissions at an opportune time.

Never rest on your laurels and think that it is someone else’s responsibility… it is yours and yours alone.

Glen

NB: if this post is off topic - Gavin - feel free to remove it ;)

Don't worry - I'm not in the habit of removing people's posts unless requested to do so or if they're obviously abusive / spam. It's not my forum, it's everyones ;)

Hi nzgold
That is in the discussion paper ther talking of getting rid of the public fossicking areas all together so basically if thers no claim and you have the landowners consent you could procpect/fossick but 1 thing i would like to point out is that if you want to be all leagle beagle thers still the issue of consent from the local council,doc etc "tree huggers spring to mind!"and ther is mention of that in the discussion paper as well and that could be harder to get around than crown minerals....also i feel ther ther should be some sort of ticket or permit that give,s info as to what is or isnt claim,d as a lot of you may no thers the crown minerals web sight but if it was some how worked like a hunting permit would be great...say you wanted to go prospecting in otago or the west coast youd get a different permit for each region that gives you reasonably accurate info...
cheers all...gbm

yes would be a big improvement so make shure you let them no what you want....also i was thinking....can you get 5h,p motors..? iv seen a few 5.5hp,s...im thinkn maybe it should be higher like 6.5 as i really havent heard much of a 5hp before...just seems like an uncommon number!.

Gidday everyone
Been a while since I have managed to get on here, been reading a few of the posts at work during breaks to keep abreast of happenings but that is all.

My birthday today and my darling wife buys me a book I keep borrowing from thelibrary - Mike Johnston's Gold in a Tin Dish Vol Two, the History of the Eastern Marlborough Goldfields.
Yay. Just over the Wairau river from me. Just a shame that the alluvial gold areas are still cut off to the public due to logging. And it is still illegal.

This forum is helping correct this wrong. More people are breaking the law every weekend, by going out fossicking for gold with pan or detector, than ever before. Have you been on Trademe recently and seen how many detectors are for sale? Some look pretty crappy to me but I bet they are finding more coins and rings than me at the moment. Then there are the fine gentlemen who are providing us with cheap pans, suckers, sluiceboxes and all of the other bits and pieces.

I think one way people can look at the detector side of things if we can get the law changed is that quite often, unless you get a signal, you do not dig a hole. On the other hand, I have been to places where people have pretty much rearranged the run of a creek, dug into banks and tracks and left a blooooody mess. Time we cleaned up our act. One rule we have in the Te Tahi Dtector Club is "Fill your holes". We want good press, we don't want the greenies on our cases and tying us in with the large scale miners.

Yes I will be sending a submission through which will include detector use but I also think that we need to weed out those who do desecrate and despoil the land by making and leaving a mess when it is unnecessary.

Keep up the good work guys

Dave