November 16, 2018 
 Friday 
 
 

Forum
Topic:
Another U.S. precious metals miner goes foreign

       

Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 ]

 By Dave I.

04/07/2009  6:05PM

We who dredge our rivers need the help of all those who want to protect the right of mining
here in California




“The Enumeration in the constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” : this is the 9th Amendment of the United States Constitution.

This means that the rights identified as written are not the only rights we as a people have. This also means that those making laws in government do not restrict their view of our rights as only those written in the constitution. This gives the responsibility to the legislature in making law, to first evaluate the necessity for the law, that it does not take away these other rights of the people. We have identified these other rights as “FREEDOM” . The freedom of the people is in-fact protected by our constitution.
Sb670 is written to stop river dredging, when in fact river dredging has held and still holds the respect of people as a right and legal method of the miner to retrieve the valuable metal from the river bottom. For the legislature to stop this activity with out evidence of damage to the river eco-system is a false cause to protect the environment. It does not justify such restriction of the peoples right to dredge our river bottoms.
This is an attack on the rights of the people based on false cause and a clear disrespect by certain people in our State legislature who falsely represent their constituents and their obligation to defend the constitutional rights of the people. Please help by standing up to those that would destroy our freedom, and tell your state representative of your objection to SB 670, and to vote against this threat to our freedom.
 By Michael Miller

03/12/2009  4:52PM

John Muir is mentioned (below) as a beacon of light for George Miller and other like-minded Americans and members of Congress. As you read the FORUM entries below and consider whether to make a pro-active effort to squash ignorance, go back to an entry under the topic “Correspondence from the President” on Page 6, written on 06/03/2003, which contains a lengthy and poignant story written by John Muir.

It isn’t too long but full of the real John Muir, a keen observer, not the altered Mr. Muir, altered to give credibility to those who make powerful attacks on the natural resource extraction industries. One sentence goes like this:

“ The importance of these ancient gravels as gold fountains is well known to miners. The hills have been cut and scalped, and every gorge and gulch and valley torn to pieces and disemboweled, expressing a fierce and desperate energy hard to understand. Still, any kind of effort making is better than inaction, and there is something sublime in seeing men working in dead earnest at anything, pursuing an object with glacier-like energy and persistence. Most of the pioneer miners are sleeping now, their wild day done, while the few survivors linger languidly in the washed-out gulches or sleepy village like harried bees around the ruins of their beehive. ”

Ah, John, you wrote so well, these thoughts and observations in 1894. Wish you were here today.
 By bluejay

03/12/2009  8:37AM

I just gave my Congresswoman, Lynn Woolsey, an earfull. This should be the bare minimum for each concerned people to do, directly complain to your people in Congress.
 By Dave I.

03/06/2009  9:02PM

George Miller is the number one tree huger in congress. His district includes the ancestral home of John Miur. The ground zero for environmental advocacy with the Sierra Club and The Wilderness Society.
Geo Miller is one the most powerful congressmen in the House of representatives. He is a chubby guy and looks like a cross between Teddy Roosevelt and Santa Claus. He is a bad foe to have against you and dedicated to everything environmental.
Vallejo is part of his district, and was very active in the up front efforts to keep Mare Island Ship Yard form being closed. We heard later that behind the seen he supported the closure. I am not sure there is any truth to this statement other than here say.
I sincerely doubt that George Miller would represent a sympathetic representative to mining rights and Liberty. He is the one who is writing legislation to condemn the liberty and rights of mining in our nation.
 By Dick Davis

03/06/2009  6:45PM

George Miller may have kept a casino out of Contra Costa. I'm not familiar with Mr. Miller or his agenda. But there is an Indian Casino in San Pablo.

Tribal Organization: Lytton Band of Pomo Indians

SAN PABLO LYTTON CASINO
13255 San Pablo Ave
San Pablo, CA 94806
 By martin newkom

03/06/2009  1:53PM

I believe Geo. Miller reps.
a SF Bay Area District inclu-
ding Contra Coast Co. He kept
an Indian Casino out of that
area as it would compete with
a cardroom he was involved in.
 By Michael Miller

03/04/2009  1:00PM

Let me save you some time in responding to the Rahall legislation detailed below.

I called to open a dialog on the subject of why and how did Rep George Miller decide to co-sponsor this legislation. After three transfers and about ten minutes I was told Miller’s personal office number is (202) 225-2095. Call this number, explain that you want to learn his justifications for co-sponsoring. He or she will listen and ask for your e-mail address, which is how his office handles this type of request. I expect to hear from him.

A different Miller employee suggested I call the Natural Resources Sub Committee, ask for energy and mineral resources (202 225-6065). He also recommended going on internet to find its members and seek out the one most representative of my district. I said that nine co-sponsors were Californians and eight other states were also represented; however natural resources are a countrywide issue important to every American regardless of our state borders.

I also picked Rep Patrick Kennedy to contact. Being smarter it took six minutes but I got a person’s e-mail address plus I left a phone message to Ben Kershaw, who handles my type of question. Rhode Island is unlike California in significant ways but this bill will adversely affect its Americans who are likely far removed from gold and other mineral producers.
 By Rick

03/03/2009  6:00PM

Well, we've received "change" ....thanks to the ignorant.
 By Dave I.

03/02/2009  10:57PM



Dear Michael Miller,

I stand in opposition to the fact of congress is once again performing an abortion on the 1872 mining law and that which is being aborted is the freedom and opportunity of American Citizens to seek and hold the mineral wealth of our nation. I ask congress not to do this. To let the 1872 Mining Law to stand as it has to provide our nation with the resources to the demand of our society and nation.
The History of the congress for the last half of the twentieth century and now the beginning of the twenty first century has done more to steal the freedom of the people than any time in the history of our nation. That the liberty of the United States is more and more being taken from us in bits and pieces by the continuous siege on the good laws that were developed to keep America free and vital. This freedom and vitality has so impressed other nations that they are now emulating us for good reason, they want freedom. That does not mean that we want any less freedom.
The examples of freedom lost are many, such as the gutting of the homestead act, so that it is only a law in name. The creation of the wilderness law which imposes restrictive use of national land for the benefit of the few. The same restriction for the wild and scenic rivers law.
All were created for a grand cause of preservation, but they shame the face of liberty for these causes prevent access by the thirsty, the disabled, and the old. The Nation has the responsibility to manage our national lands thru multiple use policy as the best benefit to all of us. To provide a safety valve for people to live when private ownership becomes so restrictively priced.
Our nation needs no change of the 1872 mining law. Our nation does need a law with regards to making laws. A law that must require any new law to be tested to the intent of the constitution by a majority vote of the house and senate prior to any law being considered for a vote of enactment. This would be a commitment by our law makers that would preserve the environment of peoples freedom and the law of the constitution that protects that freedom.
Such a law is needed when so many mighty causes of our nation would trample the greatest cause of all: the liberty and power of the people.
 By Michael Miller

03/02/2009  5:47PM

I’ve known Scott Harn (see below) since he took over the operation of the California Mining Journal from his father, also a solid acquaintance. The magazine is now called ICMJ’s Prospecting and Mining Journal. It can be found on line.

Scott put some extra juice in this ill designed proposed legislation. I would not be sensitive to the mining industry if I had not immersed myself in it 35 years ago. This industry is as important and necessary to the welfare of our country and its people as food production and heavy industry manufacturing. There is no employment that embodies the American creed, cultures spirit as that found in the development of our natural resources. Otherwise smart people are just plain ignorant to suggest the following be passed into law. I offer you Scott’s presentation on a shocking and troubling desire to turn America’s well being on its ass. I hope you will take time to read it.


Rahall Proposes Bill to End All Mining in the U.S. - March 2009 (Vol. 78, No. 7)

Rahall Proposes Bill to End All Mining in the U.S.by Scott Harn
Nick Rahall, chairman of the House Resources Committee, reintroduced mining reform legislation in the House of Representatives on January 27, 2009. The Congressman has obviously been away from real work for far too long. H.R. 699, the Hardrock Mining and Reclamation Act of 2009, should be labeled H.R. 666 because it appears to have been written by the Devil himself. If it passes as written, it will completely destroy an entire industry.Here are a few “highlights” from H.R. 699:

· Casual use would be redefined to allow only those activities that do not cause “any disturbance of public lands and resources.” The collection of samples, use of gold pans and non-motorized sluices would be the only activities allowed without a Notice or Plan. Taking a vehicle off-road would also require a Notice or Plan. Any extraction of minerals for sale or use would require a Notice or Plan.

· H.R. 699 would be retroactive. Existing mining that is not already operating under a Notice of Plan would require proof of a valuable discovery to retain a mining claim, and those operating under a Notice or Plan would have ten years to bring their operation under compliance with the new regulations.

· The patenting of mining claims, which has been suspended by yearly legislation since 1994, would be permanently discontinued.

· The federal government would be entitled to an 8 percent gross royalty for all locatable minerals for any new mining operation. Even if the miner is unable to make a reasonable profit at current commodity prices, he would have to give 8 percent to the federal government. Existing operations at the time the bill is passed would be subject to a 4 percent gross royalty, and any federal lands added to the operation after enactment of the bill would be subject to the 8 percent royalty.

· The reporting requirements are absurd. Anyone transporting a locatable mineral, concentrate or product derived from a locatable mineral shall carry documentation declaring the amount, origin and intended destination. Miners shall create and maintain reports relating to the quantity, quality, composition, volume, weight and assay value of all minerals extracted from a mining claim. Failure to produce these reports when requested by any officer or employee designated by the federal government may result in involuntary forfeiture of the mining claim.

· The federal government would be authorized to conduct audits of all claim holders, operators, transporters, purchasers, processors, or other persons directly or indirectly involved in the production or sales of locatable minerals. · Mining claim maintenance fees would be raised to $150 per claim, and would be adjusted at least every five years based on the Consumer Price Index. The location fee would be increased to $50 per claim.

· Tens of millions of acres would be added to existing areas that are already off-limits to mining, including Wilderness Study Areas; areas of critical environmental concern; areas designated for inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System; areas designated for potential addition, or eligible for inclusion; and any area identified in the set of inventoried roadless maps contained in the Forest Service Roadless Area Conservation Final Environmental Impact Statement, Volume 2, dated November 2000.

· Any State, political subdivision of a State, or Indian tribe could petition the Secretary of Interior to withdraw areas based on drinking water supplies, wildlife habitat, cultural or historic resources, scenic vistas or other similar values. Indian tribes could also petition for the withdrawal of areas for religious or cultural value. The bill would give the Secretary the authority to deny any operation that may cause undue degradation. To get an approved Plan, the operator would have to be able to show that no treatment of discharged water will be necessary 10 years after mine closure, and any Plan could be changed or halted if additional information about scientific, cultural or biological resources becomes available.

The miner would have to submit an application to the federal government to request any cessation of operations greater than 180 days. A miner would have to obtain consent of the federal government to transfer ownership of any operation, and the transfer would require a fee to be paid to cover the government’s administrative costs.

· Financial assurance (bonding) would be required for any operation—presumably this would also apply to suction gold dredging—and the amount would be evaluated and adjusted every 3 years. Where water treatment is necessary, financial assurance funds would not be released until there is 5 full years where treatment is not necessary. · States would be allowed to implement regulations that exceed the regulations in this bill.

· The federal government would be allowed to collect administrative fees to cover expenses incurred while regulating mining operations. · Mining operations would be subjected to a minimum of one complete inspection per year. · The bill would provide environmental lawyers an unending source of income. Any citizen would be allowed to file a civil lawsuit against the miner or the federal government to force compliance with the mining laws after giving sixty days written notice. The court would be allowed to award the costs of litigation, including attorney and witness fees, as the court deems appropriate. ·Any miner who fails to comply with any portion of a permit would be subjected to a fine of $25,000 per day.

· Any citizen who believes they are being adversely affected by a mining operation could request an inspection. If the Secretary agrees that an inspection is warranted, the complainant would be allowed to join in the inspection. Complainants could remain anonymous if desired. ·Any person who engages in mineral activities without the required permit, if convicted, would be punished by a fine of not less than $5,000 per day or by imprisonment for up to 3 years or both. ·

Designated employees of the Department of Interior and Department of Agriculture would be given full law enforcement powers over permitted miners, including the power to subpoena miners to force attendance, testimony, and disclosure of all paperwork, and warrantless searches of vehicles and buildings expected to contain locatable minerals or products derived from them would be allowed.

· The Secretary would be forced to prevent mineral activities that could have an adverse impact on the resources and values of National Conservation System Units. H.R. 699 would completely wipe out all small-scale mining in the United States. Small-scale miners do not have the time and resources to handle the fees, lawsuits and reporting requirements. Large-scale mining would be also phased out as mining companies would be unable to deal with the unattainable requirements of these regulations, citizen lawsuits, thin profit margins, reporting requirements, and the uncertainty that comes with the federal government’s new authority to halt a mining operation when “undue degradation” is occurring or a scientific, biological or cultural resource is discovered. Many areas that may have potential would be inaccessible. No one in their right mind would provide funding for exploration or operations under the proposed conditions.

The most likely outcome would be that the environment would suffer as mining companies move all operations to countries with little or no regulations.Like the current situation with oil, Americans would be forced to obtain natural resources overseas, sending money to countries that don’t like Americans and would love to control our prices.The legislation is co-sponsored by Reps. George Miller (D-CA), Henry Waxman (D-CA), Ed Markey (D-MA), Howard Berman (D-CA), Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ), Rush Holt (D-NJ), Jim Costa (D-CA), Donna Christensen (D-VI), Pete Stark (D-CA), Dale Kildee (D-MI), Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), Earl Blumenauer (D-OR), Patrick Kennedy (D-RI), Ron Kind (D-WI), Lois Capps (D-CA), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Mike Honda (D-CA), John Salazar (D-CO), Anna Eshoo (D-CA), Niki Tsongas (D-MA), and Gerry Connolly (D-VA).

The legislators who have sponsored this bill should be labeled as un-American, voted out of office, and sent packing for attempting to decimate one of the few industries that has managed to stay afloat and provide an honest paycheck during these tough economic times.Please take a minute to contact your Representative and Senator to let them know your stance on H.R. 699. Better yet, why not start a recall effort if one of the bill’s sponsors is in your area, or stop by their local office for a bigger impact? Contact information for each of the bill sponsors:· Nick Rahall (D-WV) phone 202 225-3452 · George Miller (D-CA) phone 202 225-2095 · Henry Waxman (D-CA) phone 202 225-3976 · Ed Markey (D-MA) phone 202 225-2836 · Howard Berman (D-CA) phone 202 225-4695 · Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ) phone 202 225-2435 · Rush Holt (D-NJ) phone 202 225-5801 · Jim Costa (D-CA) phone 202 225-3341 · Donna Christensen (D-VI) phone 202 225-1790 · Dale Kildee (D-MI) phone 202 225-3611 · Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) phone 202 225-6335 · Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) phone 202 225-4811 · Patrick Kennedy (D-RI) phone 202 225-4911 · Ron Kind (D-WI) phone 202 225-5506 · Lois Capps (D-CA) phone 202 225-3601 · Adam Schiff (D-CA) phone 202 225-4176 · Mike Honda (D-CA) phone 202 225-2631 · John Salazar (D-CO) phone 202 225-4761 · Anna Eshoo (D-CA) phone 202 225-8104 · Niki Tsongas (D-MA) phone 202 225-3411 · Gerry Connolly (D-VA) phone 202 225-1492
 By martin newkom

05/05/2008  10:24AM

Why not just go fishing in
either the Yuba, the Downie
or Kanaka Crk. and hunt for
the wedding ring attributed
to Juanita the "ghost fish"?
 By Thushara.Weligama

05/03/2008  9:34PM

I think a few million dollars is all they need, and a substantial interest could be purchased.
..................

Thusha
Wow, check out this site called www.fluc.com. Free SMS and free mobile ads!! Its fantastic
 By Michael Miller

01/26/2008  6:17PM

Ecuador says seizes foreigners' mining concessions
QUITO, Jan 25 (Reuters) - Ecuador's leftist government seized 17 mining concessions held by foreign companies as it seeks to overhaul the rules for the growing sector, the mining minister said on Friday.

S.African power crisis halts gold, platinum mining
Fri 25 Jan 2008, 12:03 GMT
Shares in most of the affected firms dived as the government said the power cuts that have darkened homes and hurt businesses in Africa's biggest economy were "a national emergency".
AngloGold Ashanti, Gold Fields, and Harmony said they had stopped all gold mining after they were informed by state-owned power utility Eskom that it could not guarantee power supply to their operations.
The world's No. 1 platinum producer, Anglo Platinum (Angloplat), also said it had shut down production at all its South African mines to reduce electricity consumption.
"This is a disaster in terms of production and economic growth," said Fidelis Madavo, analyst at the Public Investment Corporation fund. "The government has to find an emergency solution to this problem."
The South African government blames the power cuts on the closure of power stations for maintenance, breakdowns at other plants and faster-than-expected economic growth. Critics say the government has failed to invest in new power generation, arguing the country has too little power capacity to meet demand from its growing economy.
Gold Fields said it would lose 7,000 ounces of gold a day while production was halted. Eskom informed its key customers, mainly big miners to plan on survival levels for the next two to four weeks.
"This will have a serious effect on the South African operations and will negatively affect our gold production," Ian Cockerill, chief executive officer of Gold Fields, said. Harmony said it would lose about 300 kg of gold output, or 60 million rand, a day. AngloGold said it could not estimate its daily losses as it calculated its output on a quarterly basis.
"We are only running power for emergency supplies, such as pumping water out, and have stopped producing at all mines," Steve Lenahan, a
"It seems to me this is not going to be a quick process (resolution). They issued us with a warning that we should only do emergency work, so we can't take a chance sending our people underground," Harmony CEO Graham Briggs told Reuters.
About 900 kg of gold (28,935 ounces) and 590 kg (18,969 ounces) of platinum output could be lost a day, an analyst said.
 By Rockroby

12/21/2007  5:03PM

Whoops
Christmas/// been a rough month
 By Rockroby

12/21/2007  4:58PM

Hi All
Look's like i will be trying to buy for over .75 cents next week,maybe Greenhorn will put some of the $8,000.00 profit he made back into the mine.
Merry Chrismas & may the New Year be GOLDEN!!!!!!
 By Michael Miller

12/19/2007  5:03PM

Hi Greenhorn,

Wanted to chat about your last entry on the FORUM. I realize you are traveling but maybe you’ll have a break to call (530) 287-3223.

My memory may be wrong, but you picked up some stock on the gray market for pennies and sold 1000 shares through our web site. I remember we talked about the market and the mine but not the details.

The gray market is a joke; but even though, the last trade was at $.75, which is the same as the bid on the web site. I know ten people who have placed limit buy orders ranging from $.50 to $.75 without them being filled. An A.G. Edwards broker is monitoring the trades. This increase occurred with just a little pressure on whoever was making the market at $.0001 to be professional. Also a letter to the SEC may have helped bring this market closer to our web market.

Both markets are illiquid, but anyone can now see what may happen with this stock with effort and some capital. Ten percent of this company with the guarantees given for $5 million will be the buy to remember once the public gets interested in precious metals again. Five million dollars is a small amount of investment when compared to other gold opportunities, which is why the NovaGold fiasco is important to reveal. The industry will be announcing more of these collapsed “deals” in future months.

A gold deposit like the Sixteen to One is rare and unusual. It is well suited for rare and unusual operators not large corporations. Ours is not an exploration program like the deals mostly around. The small exploration guys today are dreaming that a major will come to their rescue and spend money to put the exploration target into production. If not these exploration guys always spit out meaningless drilling reports that few understand to promote their property. Most of these properties have been looked at a dozen times already. For anyone venturing into a virgin prospect like Galore Creek, well you now know what can happen. The other unpublicized event that continues to happen is when third world countries change the game once money is spent. The record is lengthy and financially devastating.

Which brings me back to your idea. It is okay but unlikely. Another factor is always the bureau racy with any large company. It takes hungry men to win gold. Increasing the price of a share of a gold corporation can be done on a full stomach. We are hungry.

I think you are smarter than exhibited with your entry. As a legal and economic consultant, I would expect you to bring a sophisticated thought process to the Gold Sector. There is no better time to make a lot of money in it. There is no better opportunity around to make a lot of money cleanly and with minimal risk than what is on the table with Original Sixteen to One Mine, Inc.

I encourage intelligent people with the money to play or the ability to locate those that do to spend some time with me. I hope you meet these situations. Come on up for a visit and see for yourself.
 By greenhorn

12/18/2007  9:33AM

Do you think any of those folks might be interested in buying the entire operation and then investing further in it? The current stock price seems to make that an attractive option as compared to the $5 million deal.
 By Rick

12/16/2007  7:21PM

Mike, forward this to them, AKA their missed boat. Shucks, how about their share-holders?
 By Michael Miller

12/15/2007  12:39PM

Many of you may have missed the stunning news released on November 26 by NovaGold and Teck Cominco Ltd. These two companies partnered up on a gold deposit called Galore Creek in northern British Columbia, Canada. They invested $665 million in infrastructure but decided the plans were faulty, the engineering studies were flawed and the cost analysis was grossly underestimated.

The companies intended to spend $2 billion, yes two billion dollars before mining an ounce of gold or copper. Construction estimates were raised to $5 billion and construction time increased from two years to five years. The two companies will spend a mere $100 million more of their shareholders money to wind down construction.

The Financial Post first published the story and quoted NovaGold president Rick Van Nieuwenhuyse, who told the Post, “other companies might have said, ‘just go ahead, and after we spend US$2-billion we’ll let everyone know it’s actually going to be twice that.’ We didn’t think that was the right approach. So I think when the dust settles, people will realize that we’re looking out for the best interest of our shareholders.” The article stated that one problem was that the massive ore trucks were too big to move through narrow parts of the valley.

I believe this is another reality check about all the hype of large companies funding the development of raw or virgin metal deposits in remote areas of the world. I expect more of these revelations will be announced. So, why have I taken the time to write this? Simple! Our infrastructure is in place. Our plans call for $5 million dollars. Our gold brings a huge premium over the $800 spot bullion price. Our geology supports our plans to find a lot of gold and make an obscene profit in the process. Can you imagine walking away from a $765 million goof and responding to its shareholders as NovaGold did?
 By Michael Miller

02/21/2007  2:52PM

Project Survey 2007 issued by the Raw Materials Group (RGM) reports more than 200 new mining projects with an estimated value of almost $38 billion were added to its database. Old projects (projects listed before 2006) were of the same order of magnitude as newly registered projects, around $33 billion. Capital is going towards higher equipment costs and the necessity to develop more difficult ore bodies that may involve deeper mines, lower grades and remote locations. The number of projects involving restart of inactive or abandoned mines increased.

RGM’s main database also includes more than 1500 projects for which no cost estimates have been announced. Most of these projects are at the conceptual phase. Total investment in the global mining industry’s pipeline at the end of 2006 was $208 billion. This figure represents a 50%-55% increase from 2005, and reflects the on going boom in global mining activity. Many, if not most, of the early stage projects included in the $208 billion figure will not or at least not in the near future pass from the conceptual study phase to the construction stage. The reasons for these failures can range from insufficient profitability and inadequate ore reserves to failure to secure financing, technological problems or excessive political risks.

Projects involving copper, gold, nickel and iron ore account for 83% of the total projects. Iron ore leads the metals in total amount of investments in new projects (30). Gold projects require the smallest price tag. The average gold project has reached $110 million but is still less expensive than the $280 million average cost for copper projects. This is due to the fact that it is still possible to find small high-grade gold deposits that can be mined profitably by junior or mid-sized companies, while most new copper projects are often huge, low-grade open-pit operations.

Ten countries account for 67% of total mining investment. Australia was first (15.4%). The United States was eighth (4.0%). Engineering and Mining Journal compiled a project survey for new gold locations and status (52 entries). The top ten dominate the invested dollars. None of this capital will create projects with near term gold production: four are prefeasibility, four are feasibility and two are restart plans. None are in the construction stage. Barrick controls three projects. NovaGold and Goldcorp control two projects. Latin America leads the location list with five projects. One is in Russia, USA, Canada, Australia and South Africa.

You can see that mining is undertaken by few companies and requires a large dollar commitment. Most projects never materialize. These are factors that, if widely known, would place Original Sixteen to One Mine in an attractive category for investment capital. There is no other gold mine more high-grade than those in Alleghany. Also, the total capital estimated to bring the project into production is small. Low risk and big rewards justify the further development of the vein.

Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 ]

 

  
 
© 2018 Original Sixteen to One Mine, Inc.
PO Box 909
Alleghany, California 95910
 

Phone:   
Fax:
E-mail:
 
(530) 287-3223      
(530) 287-3455
corp@origsix.com
 

      Gold Sales:  


(530) 287-3540

goldsales@origsix.com
 



Design & development by
L. Kenez