NQMA Making Detecting On Leases Illegal.

[mbasko]

The problem when one only reads and interprets what they want things to say.

From the Qld. Fossicking Act
s.8 Meaning of Expressions used in this and other Acts:

1. The following expressions have the meaning given by the Mineral Resources Act 1989--
"exploration licence, mineral, mining claim, mineral development licence, mining district, mining lease, occupied land, owner, prospect, prospecting permit, reserve."

From the Dictionary, Mineral Resources Act 1989 the following is given:

exploration permit.. means any exploration permit under Chapt. 4,

exploration tenement.. means any exploration permit or mineral development licence,

mining tenement.. means any prospecting permit, exploration permit, mineral development licence or water monitoring authority

It could hardly be more clear, an Authority given under the Regulations provides necessary protections for which the applicant (miner) pays, whether it be BHP or Tom Smith round the corner.

Yes you are aren't you
The Fossicking Act clearly states Mining Claim & Mining Lease both of which are defined seperately in the Minerals Act dictionary & Act.
If you've been chasing fossickers off your Qld EPM that are the required distance away from any of your exploration activities then you've likely been doing that illegally.

 

[mbasko]

Double post - internet drop out

 

[Rockwall]

This is the response to a forum member who asked the question.

 

[mbasko]

https://www.prospectingaustralia.co...1576465752_screenshot_2019-12-16-13-07-43.jpg

This is the response to a forum member who asked the question.

Very clear & just as the relevant legislation states.

 

[boobook]

I often wonder what happened to rc62burke ha ha . I wont bother about him, he has enough problems.

You could ask that question of the registra at any number of mining registries and get a different answer, they are usually dumb as.
It is quite obvious the MRA dictionary is incorrect.......please.

I would put out the challenge for anyone to obtain and publish an opinion on this matter from an experienced minerals industry lawyer.
There just may be a different outcome.

I am surprised that this nonsense was started by goldhounds, they were pinged nearly $10,000.00 for breaching the conditions of an EPM

 

[Rockwall]

I often wonder what happened to rc62burke ha ha . I wont bother about him, he has enough problems.

You could ask that question of the registra at any number of mining registries and get a different answer, they are usually dumb as.
It is quite obvious the MRA dictionary is incorrect.......please.

I would put out the challenge for anyone to obtain and publish an opinion on this matter from an experienced minerals industry lawyer.
There just may be a different outcome.

I am surprised that this nonsense was started by goldhounds, they were pinged nearly $10,000.00 for breaching the conditions of an EPM

So it is personal.

 

[mbasko]

I would put out the challenge for anyone to obtain and publish an opinion on this matter from an experienced minerals industry lawyer.
There just may be a different outcome.

You could ask different lawyers & likely get different interpretations especially where no cases in law exist. Do you know anyone who's been charged for fossicking on a EPM? Have you got some links to the court documents & Judges decision?
The legislation is clearly set out for Fossicking. I deal with various Mining Legislation regularly, get audited on it by Mines Inspectors & know it reasonably well (better than the average fossicker/prospector) but I'm not a lawyer.
If you think there's a hidden meaning to the legislation then I challenge you to provide such from an experienced minerals industry lawyer. The legislation to us (& it seems the Deputy Registrar) is clearly in black & white in the Act. EPM's clearly don't afford exclusive land use in Qld.

Getting really sick & tired of people holding "paper" permits over otherwise accessible land, especially Crown Land, thinking they have the right to exclude other lawful activities on such land.
There are a multitude of people in this country paying a pittance to hold "paper" permits over land that either don't use the land under the permit/lease terms or think they have exclusive rights of use but simply do not.
It's about time we kicked back in this country.

I can see by how personal your attacks on others are getting you have no legitimate basis to your argument only personal agenda.

 

[Rockwall]

I often wonder what happened to rc62burke ha ha . I wont bother about him, he has enough problems.

You could ask that question of the registra at any number of mining registries and get a different answer, they are usually dumb as.
It is quite obvious the MRA dictionary is incorrect.......please.

I would put out the challenge for anyone to obtain and publish an opinion on this matter from an experienced minerals industry lawyer.
There just may be a different outcome.

I am surprised that this nonsense was started by goldhounds, they were pinged nearly $10,000.00 for breaching the conditions of an EPM

Seems they aren't alone in making the odd transgression.

 

[Rockwall]

I would put out the challenge for anyone to obtain and publish an opinion on this matter from an experienced minerals industry lawyer.
There just may be a different outcome.

You could ask different lawyers & likely get different interpretations especially where no cases in law exist. Do you know anyone who's been charged for fossicking on a EPM? Have you got some links to the court documents & Judges decision?
The legislation is clearly set out for Fossicking. I deal with various Mining Legislation regularly, get audited on it by Mines Inspectors & know it reasonably well (better than the average fossicker/prospector) but I'm not a lawyer.
If you think there's a hidden meaning to the legislation then I challenge you to provide such from an experienced minerals industry lawyer. The legislation to us (& it seems the Deputy Registrar) is clearly in black & white in the Act. EPM's clearly don't afford exclusive land use in Qld.

Getting really sick & tired of people holding "paper" permits over otherwise accessible land, especially Crown Land, thinking they have the right to exclude other lawful activities on such land.
There are a multitude of people in this country paying a pittance to hold "paper" permits over land that either don't use the land under the permit/lease terms or think they have exclusive rights of use but simply do not.
It's about time we kicked back in this country.

I can see by how personal your attacks on others are getting you have no legitimate basis to your argument only personal agenda.

I know property owners who can't remember the last time there was any actvity on their property from EPM holders. Maybe it is time to put the holding costs up considerably, not to mention much tougher requirements and policing of activity reports. Maybe that shouId be lobbied for! Could be a can of worms getting opened.

 

[Macman 01]

Unfortunately GD, you seem unable to either access or understand the Qld. Legislation "Mineral Resources Act 1989"

Chapt. 1 Pt. 4-6b "Meaning of Prospect"
6d "Types of Authority under Act

Chapt. 2 Pt.1 13-20 "Prospecting Permits"
Pt.2 21-47 "Other Provisions"

It is quite clear that where Tenements (EPM etc.) granted under the act are concerned, without a Prospecting Permit you have no authority to be there unless by given written consent of the Tenement Holder. Regardless of what authority the Land Holder may have provided or what "Fossickers Licence" you may hold.

As stated earlier, In the past I have been involved in both Qld. EPM's and ML's, and particularly, I have no axe to grind against prospectors who make the right approaches and abide by the regulations.
But making those unsubstantiated allegations and rambling does nothing to enhance the needs of the prospecting community, only cause confusion and possible infringement.

I rather suspect I have little further to add, maybe perhaps a little more entertainment reading about Goldhounds Exploration and Mining Pty. ltd.

Hi Boobook, I was not even going to comment any further on this subject as we have sold all our tenements and machinery. You want some entertainment at taking a swipe at us, well mate as ex ceo of Goldhounds I will fill you in with some FACTS. For a start we were a week out from a Supreme court hearing in Cairns on our fine of testing our fully paid for EPM,The station owner was notified by our AHR manager months before entering the property. We were accused of many things that were simply not true and PROVEN WRONG thanks to the freedom of information on the reports given to the DRME by an inspector. We also had the avenue of suing him civilly for his conduct on the day. ALL our tenements were then put in a holding pattern for years on a decision to be made while STILL paying rentals on all our tenements. We were held to ransom to pay the fine through the department bleeding us dry, as we could not transfer ANY tenements until the fine had been paid. We decided to pay the fine to free up OUR tenements for sale. WE where contacted by our AHR and ADVISED after a call from DRME if we Goldhounds DROP OUR SUPREME COURT CHALLANGE AGAINST THE DRME our leases would get fast tract for approval, That my friend is called perverting the course of justice !!! You work it out from there. That's not even half the story.

 

[boobook]

Please blokes, if possible, just think a little more clearly.

I have clearly stated that the holder of a Prospecting Permit has access to any granted EPM in Qld.
This permit, granted individually (not a family) allows written landholder permission access to all areas except an ML (unless ML holder written permission given) This INCLUDES an EPM with conditions noted in the Act.
This permit, which can be for up to 12 months over selected locations, costs around $600. There are eligibility requirements. I repeat, it is a Prospecting Permit (pt. 4/6b/6d in MRA 1989)

A Fossickers licence does NOT grant access to any Tenement of any sort without written permission of the Tenement Holder. It then follows that the Fossicker licence does not grant access to an EPM because in the MRA Act an EPM is classified as a Tenement. (Dictionary MRA) It is not ambiguous. The comment that the holder of an EPM does not "occupy land" is just ignorant rubbish. What the hell is the EPM holder doing if he is not "occupying" land. Dished up to suit the occasion :8

Why not read and try to understand the Acts as applicable, as I have said I am not against Fossickers/Prospectors only the fact there is a law to protect the small miner.
I do think there is confusion between the names ie. Fossicking Licence.....Prospecting Permit.
I do know of one seller of Fossickers Licences who will say "with a $10000 detector, you are not a Fossicker, you are a Prospector.
Like some Mining Registra's, I have known, not very smart and not very effective in the field.

When we had EPM's in W.Qld. we had a spending budget of $9,000/block (we only held one block at a time) most of this money was spent on fuel, for our expenditure report, we allocated our own time (3 pers.) at $120/hr. each plus camp costs. Our returns over an average 3 months exploration expenditure mostly did not lead to a lease application. WE certainly did not welcome "speckers" who could easily pick up a $10,000 stone at our expense.

No, there is no personal agenda here, unlike the previous comments of GD who protested about a certain person that "He hates me...."
I would also be happy to see more inspections of work requirements on EPM's, there is too much ground held for too long, but the relinquishment that must occur helps with that plus the moratorium following.

More particularly I would like to see a better understanding of the legal requirements of prospecting. If any of you are members of APLA (WA) you would know of the work the President is doing to help educate people to understand WA mining law. And from some of the comments here I can now see why many "Easteners" are unwelcome over there

 

[Simmo]

Hey Guys,
I think I do have a little more to say on this matter, but absolutely need to get things straight in my head before doing so.

Thank you all, in the last page or so, debating with proof and opinion!

I have had a LONG phone conversation tonight, with a knowledgable party, and need to think of my response very carefully.

 

[Rockwall]

Please blokes, if possible, just think a little more clearly.

I have clearly stated that the holder of a Prospecting Permit has access to any granted EPM in Qld.
This permit, granted individually (not a family) allows written landholder permission access to all areas except an ML (unless ML holder written permission given) This INCLUDES an EPM with conditions noted in the Act.
This permit, which can be for up to 12 months over selected locations, costs around $600. There are eligibility requirements. I repeat, it is a Prospecting Permit (pt. 4/6b/6d in MRA 1989)

A Fossickers licence does NOT grant access to any Tenement of any sort without written permission of the Tenement Holder. It then follows that the Fossicker licence does not grant access to an EPM because in the MRA Act an EPM is classified as a Tenement. (Dictionary MRA) It is not ambiguous. The comment that the holder of an EPM does not "occupy land" is just ignorant rubbish. What the hell is the EPM holder doing if he is not "occupying" land. Dished up to suit the occasion :8

Why not read and try to understand the Acts as applicable, as I have said I am not against Fossickers/Prospectors only the fact there is a law to protect the small miner.
I do think there is confusion between the names ie. Fossicking Licence.....Prospecting Permit.
I do know of one seller of Fossickers Licences who will say "with a $10000 detector, you are not a Fossicker, you are a Prospector.
Like some Mining Registra's, I have known, not very smart and not very effective in the field.

When we had EPM's in W.Qld. we had a spending budget of $9,000/block (we only held one block at a time) most of this money was spent on fuel, for our expenditure report, we allocated our own time (3 pers.) at $120/hr. each plus camp costs. Our returns over an average 3 months exploration expenditure mostly did not lead to a lease application. WE certainly did not welcome "speckers" who could easily pick up a $10,000 stone at our expense.

No, there is no personal agenda here, unlike the previous comments of GD who protested about a certain person that "He hates me...."
I would also be happy to see more inspections of work requirements on EPM's, there is too much ground held for too long, but the relinquishment that must occur helps with that plus the moratorium following.

More particularly I would like to see a better understanding of the legal requirements of prospecting. If any of you are members of APLA (WA) you would know of the work the President is doing to help educate people to understand WA mining law. And from some of the comments here I can now see why many "Easteners" are unwelcome over there

So anyone who disagrees with you is lacking intelligence. Interesting way to view the world.
Oh, I am originally from WA and have held a WA Miner's Right since the early 80's when I first started digging holes.

 

[Simmo]

I think I got my Vic. Miners right 40 years ago!!

 

[Macman 01]

Sorry guys even to forget the culture heritage inspection was done beforehand at nearly 5K, YOU want to keep taking a shot at Goldhounds on their own tenements, bring it on brother.

 

[Simmo]

ok

 

[Rockwall]

Today.

 

[mbasko]

Again exactly as the legislation states.

 

[Simmo]

I don't think most of us have questioned that?

 

[Simmo]

Legislation regarding EPM's in QLD, will change next year.
The dropping of blocks will change to 5 years/ 50%... to moratorium.

I suppose, it means that big companies, can lock up land for a bit longer?? 15 years??
But small miners get a bit more time to explore on small lots?...

The thing is, in this debate, Dale is correct, and so am I, as a small miner.... in ways!!
But the manner, in which this is portrayed and conducted is so wrong!!

The FACTS remain, that miners in the patch I operate in, have had machinery, parts, fuel, food, hoses, GOLD, you name it, stolen or tampered with..
This is why, thankfully, it has come to a head!!
Small miners have had enough of the pilfering of what we pay for!
This is why, it has been presented, to our representative body, the NQMA, to address.... and that they are. The trespassing and stealing has to stop.

Sure, there is an issue, between interested parties, that has been going on for a long time (years), and I hear, not particularily in this state??
That doesn't matter!!! Personalities dont matter!! The legislation matters, and hopefully, there is a change.

And it doesn't help us small guys like Brother Rob for example.. find a bit, post a video, come back 3 days later and the place is riddled???Come on??

It's a matter of legislation, I'm sure, we will see further movements in this regard in the future..
(Thats whilst I and others can afford the fee's to be classed a small scale miner....)

YES!! Lets get legislation into place, where you have to ask permission from the people that are paying!!!

Too many people, think its OK, to wander around and steal shit..... well its not!!!