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

[Tom Stokely]

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/. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20120308/91f1c493/attachment.html>