:: :: "Ca. DFG comments suction dredging 10-19-2007"

people online in the last 1 minutes - 0 members, 0 anon and 0 guests. (Most ever was 34 at 15:22:43 Fri Sep 10 2021)

Offline
posts
Reply

"Ca. DFG comments suction dredging 10-19-2007" ( 17:31:55 SatOct 20 2007 )

here they come ready or not...

copied post: (courtesy of jerry hobbs)

This was posted for comment today 10-19-2007 Lets start getting some comments in on this to the Ca. Department of Fish and Game.
Jerry

Department of Fish and Game —
Public Interest Notice
For Publication October 19, 2007
Notice Soliciting Information Regarding
Suction Dredge Mining
The California Department of Fish and Game (Department)
hereby invites interested public agencies and
members of the public to submit information to the Department
regarding suction dredge mining in California.
The Department is particularly interested in information
relevant to the following issues:
1. Whether suction dredge mining results in adverse
impacts to the environment;
2. Whether suction dredge mining under the
Department’s current regulations governing such
activities results in deleterious effects to fish;
3. Whether there are changed circumstances or new
information available since 1994 regarding
suction dredge mining and the environment
generally; and
4. Whether changed circumstances or new
information available since 1994 indicates suction
dredge mining under the Department’s existing
regulations is resulting in new significant or
substantially more severe environmental impacts
than previously considered by the Department.
All comments or other information should be submitted
in writing to the Department by December 18,
2007. The Department encourages interested public
agencies and members of the public to submit comments
to the Department via email at the following address:
SuctionDredgeMining@dfg.ca.gov.
Comments submitted to the Department via regular
mail should be sent to the following address:
California Department of Fish and Game
Attn: Suction Dredge Mining Program
1416 Ninth Street, 12th Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814
Background: The Department regulates suction
dredge mining in California by authority set forth in the
Fish and Game Code. The Code directs the Department
to promulgate regulations designating waters where
suction dredging may occur subject to various restrictions,
including time of year and size of dredging equipment.
The Code also directs the Department to issue
suction dredge permits upon the payment of designated
fees if it determines, pursuant to adopted regulations,
that the operation will not be deleterious to fish. (See
generally Fish & G. Code, งง 5653, 5653.9.)
The Department promulgated the existing regulations
governing suction dredge mining in California in
1994. (See generally Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, งง 228,
228.5.) The Department promulgated the regulations in
compliance with the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA) (Gov. Code, ง 11340 et seq.) and the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Resources
Code, ง 21000 et seq.). For purposes of CEQA, the Department
certified an environmental impact report
(EIR) and determined that, while suction dredge mining
has the potential to result in significant impacts to the
environment, any such impacts could be avoided or
substantially lessened through compliance with the restrictions
and closures set forth in the existing regulations.
The Department also concluded under the Fish
and Game Code that suction dredging authorized pursuant
to the regulations would not be deleterious to fish.
In May 2005, the Karuk Tribe of California filed a
lawsuit in Alameda County Superior Court challenging
the Department’s suction dredge program based on alleged
violations of CEQA and the Fish and Game Code.
(Karuk Tribe of California v. California Department of
Fish and Game, Super. Ct. Alameda County Case No.
RG 05 211597.) In February 2006, various mining interests,
including several individuals and the New
49ers, Inc., joined the lawsuit by court order as party interveners.
In December 2006, the trial court issued an
order and judgment in the action with the consent of all
parties. The order directs the Department to “conduct
further environmental review pursuant to CEQA of its
suction dredge mining regulations and to implement, if
necessary, via rulemaking, mitigation measures to protect
the Coho salmon and/or other special status fish
species in the watershed of the Klamath, Scott, and
Salmon Rivers, listed as threatened or endangered after
the 1994 EIR.”
This notice and the related request for information regarding
the existing permitting program for suction
dredge mining in California is part of the Department’s
CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2007, VOLUME NO. 42-Z
1784
effort to comply with the court order in the Karuk litigation.
The Department expects there will be additional
opportunities for interested public agencies and members
of the public to provide input to the Department regarding
the existing suction dredge mining program
and the related court ordered environmental review. Interested
public agencies and members of the public are
advised that submitting comments or information to the
Department in response to this notice is not a substitute
for submitting comments to the Department in response
to future notices soliciting public input that may be required
under CEQA or the APA.
Although the Department is providing this notice as
part of its effort to comply with the court order in the
Karuk litigation, the Department is interested in information
related to the issues highlighted above on a
state–wide basis. For example, the Karuk litigation focused
on issues related to the Department’s suction
dredge mining program in the Klamath, Scott, and
Salmon River watersheds. In contrast, the Department
is interested in information as specified above regarding
suction dredge mining throughout California.
Additional information regarding the Department’s
suction dredge permitting program and the court ordered
environmental review is available through the
Department’s website at www.dfg.ca.gov. Information
available through the website includes the 1994 EIR
certified by the Department when it adopted the existing
regulations governing suction dredge mining; relevant
excerpts from the California Fish and Game Code
and Title 14 of the California Regulations governing the
Department’s existing permitting program for suction
dredge mining; and various documents from the Karuk
litigation, including the December 2006 court order.

jeff_jas

Offline
posts
Reply

Re: "Ca. DFG comments suction dredging 10-19-2007" No EIR? ( 23:14:44 SatOct 20 2007 )

Hi
so I have some thoughts and questions on this (ooooooooof
course :smile:

my thoughts are; doesn't it (or ? ) seem like the DFG is
'fishing ' for people of the 'third kind' to respond to this - cause they already know what we'll write and say...

The Department is particularly interested in
information relevant to the following issues:

1. Whether suction dredge mining results in adverse
impacts to the environment;

obviously looking for a special interest response here to say "You Bet there is"; but more than that why are they
asking this question as formed when 'a scientific study' or
EIR is what is needed to determine this and not 'speculative opinion', and or ideological bias? (i mean don't they know?)

2. Whether suction dredge mining under the
Department’s current regulations governing such
activities results in deleterious effects to fish;

(i meeeeeeeean doesn't the DFG know?)
Although the reports i have read indicate that the 'current
regulations' result in less than significant impact why would this question be posed at all? Shouldn't the DFG be
determining this themselves rather than cloud the issue with further inconclusive non scientific speculations?
It's like they are specificaly fishing for a one sided input.

3. Whether there are changed circumstances or new
information available since 1994 regarding suction dredge
mining and the environment generally; and

(Does DFG not have any new information?)
Isn't that what the DFG is suppossed to determine by
conducting a new EIR? The judge didn't say = go out yonder
and gather up the new information of changed circumstances
from those who think they know what the enviornment is like
up yonder from their networked, misinformed, or politicaly
biased, laptops... Oh, pssstt, and let us know what can be
done to shut down other areas of california while your at it.

4. Whether changed circumstances or new information
available since 1994 indicates suction dredge mining under
the Department’s existing regulations is resulting in new
significant or substantially more severe environmental
impacts than previously considered by the Department.

(Can't you tell us if there is?)
They seem to be trying to gather information (that they
apparently don't have) from the "may be's" "might have's" and "could be's" while ignoring all the "less than's" since 1994;
including from their own Department/s. They are fishing.

This seems to be an unresponsive response to getting an
actual EIR. (?)

i don't know what my comments would be because all i could do is to use the references we have all come to know; while the other side of the issue still uses their non scientific references.

This is bogus isn't it?

jeff

Jim_Alaska

Offline
1928 posts
Administrator

Re: "Ca. DFG comments suction dredging 10-19-2007" No EIR? ( 03:29:20 SunOct 21 2007 )

Jeff, I already posted this notice from Jerry Hobbs in the prospecting forum.

But to answer your question, the questions they are asking are for public comment input. They are looking for comments, both for and against. They have to do this according to the administrative procedures act. It is part of any new rule making.

This is only the beginning, there will be more comments asked for, as well as commemt hearings scheduled in different parts of the state. This is going to take quite a bit of time to do.

They have to do the EIR before they can change or implement any new regulations.

---
Jim_Alaska
Administrator
jfoley@sisqtel.net

jmaxwell

Offline
57 posts
Reply

Re: "Ca. DFG comments suction dredging 10-19-2007" No EIR? ( 03:38:52 SunOct 21 2007 )

Jim, I thought that they needed to get scientific facts, not just peoples opinion.

Jim_Alaska

Offline
1928 posts
Administrator

Re: "Ca. DFG comments suction dredging 10-19-2007" No EIR? ( 03:59:37 SunOct 21 2007 )

Maybe I didn't explain well enough. They do have to get scientific facts. We are looking at two different things here. The questions they are asking are in preparation for rule making. I don't believe they have anything to do with the EIR.
If you read down through the notice you see these:

"The Code directs the Department to promulgate regulations"

"This notice and the related request for information regarding
the existing permitting program for suction
dredge mining in California is part of the Department’s
CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2007, VOLUME NO. 42-Z
1784"

In any event, this will be a long process and there will be plenty of opportunity to comment. It is imperative that we repsond to each request for information. We have the existing science and law to use for our comments.

It would be a grave mistake to wait until the last moment. This is our opportunity.

I am going to lock this thread down, since the one I posted has the contact info and you just have to click on it to send email. No sense splitting this subject between two threads. It is also pinned at the top and marked "important".

Any more discussion can be done on the other thread.

---
Jim_Alaska
Administrator
jfoley@sisqtel.net

Total Members: 4903

Can't start a new thread. (Admins Only)

Can't start a new poll. (Admins Only)

Can't add a reply. (Admins Only)

Can't edit your posts.(Everyone Registered)