[env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune- Proposed Suction Dredging Regs Causing a Stir

[Jay_Glase at nps.gov]

Tucker reiterated that the regulations are an improvement but still not
adequate. “Until Fish and Game can come up with regulations that don't
jeopardize the survival of salmon, lamprey, mussels, and water quality, the
Karuk Tribe will continue this fight,” he said.

This line jumped out at me because of the mussel reference, which led me to
find this website below - in case anyone else is interested,
http://treesfoundation.org/publications/article-393

It's nice to see these fascinating animals getting some attention west of
the Mississippi.  And for those of you that think mussels aren't
fascinating, check out a few videos from this site from missouri state
university - mostly different genera than you'll find in that area, but
still worth checking out
http://unionid.missouristate.edu/

cheers,
jay

Jay Glase
National Park Service
Great Lakes Area Fishery Biologist
402-661-1512



                                                                           
             Tom Stokely                                                   
             <tstokely at att.net                                             
             >                                                          To 
             Sent by:                  env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca 
             env-trinity-bounc         .us                                 
             es+jay_glase=nps.                                          cc 
             gov at velocipede.dc                                             
             n.davis.ca.us                                         Subject 
                                       [env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune-   
                                       Proposed Suction Dredging Regs      
             03/08/2012 05:58          Causing a Stir                      
             PM                                                            
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           




Proposed Suction Dredging Regs Causing a Stir


By Malcolm Terence, Two Rivers Tribune Contributing Writer


Published March 6, 2012








            The state’s new round of proposed regulations for suction
dredging for gold is getting mixed reviews by the stakeholders. The Karuk
Tribe, which has opposed dredging because of harm to fish and water
quality, says they are an improvement in every way, but still inadequate.
And the Western Mining Alliance (WMA) says “this is the end of suction
dredging in the state of California.”





            The dredges, currently banned by legislation until June 30,
2016, operate as floating vacuum cleaners that use a gas-powered pump to
suck up gravel and cobble in a river or stream and run it through a sluice
box that winnows out any gold.





            At its height, dredgers lined up close together in large
numbers in places like the Salmon River where their operations triggered
concerns about the effects on dwindling aquatic populations.





            The WMA website for January said that miners need to focus on
overturning two specific state laws—SB670 and AB120—that block continued
mining. The group wrote that 2011 “was the year that propaganda, mistruths,
and extreme environmentalism threw us off the rivers.”





            The group appealed to their members’ support, a litigation
strategy, by each donating $250 to fund an hour of lawyer time. The WMA
website said claim holders had been slow to respond to an appeal from
People for Public Land for information about individual claims. Only a few
claim holders had responded so far.





            In their detailed response to the Department of Fish and Game
(DFG), the mining advocates challenged several specific regulations
including the 4 inch maximum nozzle size, the ban on dredging within 3 feet
from a channel bank, and the requirement that no dredge operate within 500
feet of another. They claim a part of the state’s environmental review
shows that sediment settles within 300 feet and that the turbidity isn’t
harmful to fish, anyway.





            They also objected to a requirement that a containment system
be used so fuel and oil don’t enter the river and said fuel isn’t spilled
unless a dredge is flipped, an event that would submerge the containment
system anyway.





            And they complained that there was no basis for the issuance
limit in the new regulations of only 1,500 permits statewide, a figure that
they said would not allow one permit for every 10 claim holders.


            The 1,500-permit limit was actually one of the best
improvements in the new regulations, according to Craig Tucker, Klamath
coordinator for the Karuk Tribe since 2004. He also praised the 500-foot
separation between dredges.





            “The regs are an improvement in almost every way but they are
still unacceptable,” Tucker wrote in an e-mail to the Two Rivers Tribune.
He pointed out that they still allow dredges in the main stem of the Salmon
River which is refuge of the Klamath’s last spring Chinook, and the Scott
and Shasta Rivers which are habitat for the threatened coho salmon.





The regulations do ban dredges in the lowest 8 miles of the main stem
Salmon River as well as many other locations in the Klamath Basin. They
include a ban on dredging anything within a 500-foot radius of where a
stream enters a river. These stretches of cold-water refugia often fill
with migrating fish as the main river water warms in late summer and early
fall.





One Salmon River resident, a member of the Karuk Tribe, who lives near such
an area, praised that regulation and said “Good. I won’t have to have
miners threaten to kick my butt when I tell them they shouldn’t mine
there.”


            Tucker, a biochemist, challenged the claims of mining advocates
that the dredges did not stir up old mercury deposits and said “You’re
welcome to your own opinion but not your own facts. Studies by California
Water Quality Control Board specifically measuring the concentrations of
suspended mercury above and below an operating dredge show that dredging
dramatically increases the concentrations of this highly toxic heavy metal
in the river. Miners actually participated in the study and they are part
of the CEQA record. Problem is the Department of Fish and Game claim their
job is not to regulate water quality. Fish and Game basically leave it up
to the water board to regulate dredging to prevent the mercury problem and
the water board does not have law enforcement personnel.”





            Tucker reiterated that the regulations are an improvement but
still not adequate. “Until Fish and Game can come up with regulations that
don't jeopardize the survival of salmon, lamprey, mussels, and water
quality, the Karuk Tribe will continue this fight,” he said.





            Another condition of AB 120 is that the costs of a permit
should fully recover all the costs to the DFG related to administration of
dredging. Such a change would need to be approved by the legislature.
Pro-dredging advocates said that such a fee might be prohibitive.





            Dave McCracken, owner of the New 49ers recreational mining
business in Happy Camp could not respond to telephone calls because he was
out of the country, and also did not respond to repeated e-mailed interview
questions from Two Rivers Tribune. He has postings on the issue on his
website at http://www.goldgold.com .





            The actual regulations are available at
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/suctiondredge/. The website for the Western Mining
Alliance is http://westernminingalliance.org/.
_______________________________________________
env-trinity mailing list
env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us
http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity