| Lost Password :: Posting Pictures :: Who's Online :: Stats :: Memberlist :: Top Posters :: Search |
 |
| Welcome, Register :: Log In | Welcome to our newest member, hubberjonas. |
|
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) |
| Pages: [ 1 ] |
| [ Notify ] | [ Print ] | [ Send To Friend ] | [ Watch ] | [ < ] [ > ] |
|
jcazgoldchaser Offline 1 posts Reply |
Was watching a video on a crevis suction device and read several posts about it being "illegal".
Just started poking around the CA regs and the first I came across was: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/suctiondredge/ On which is Plain text version of 02/17/2012 regulations Where they define suction dedging by
All the definitions I found of 'sluice box' included riffles in the bottom of a trough. Can anyone point to a link containing a DFG legal definition or other CA legal definitions of 'sluice box'? I also noticed regulations pertaining to 'lake and streambed alteration'. Is there any belief that that would in any way apply to a hobby sized dredging operation? Lake and Steambed Alteration Program (LSA) |
|
Rod_Seiad Offline 376 posts Reply |
Are you thinking of a gold recovery system which doesn't fit the CDFG legal sluice box description?
|
|
jcazgoldchaser Offline 1 posts Reply |
Rod,
The video I was watching was a small hand held, electric powered crevicing tool. No sluice box involved. Material is simply collected in a bottle/bucket then run through a sluice. Look at the suction dredge permitting document and consider all the restrictions that do not apply if you are not operating a suction dredge (by simply not having a sluice box). |
|
InspectorTom Offline 315 posts  Reply |
This has been the topic of much discussion since the government decided to violate our Federal Mining Rights...Many of us have questioned Stopher about this and he has indicated, through letters and phone conversations, that if ANY ONE of the definitions, A, B, OR C are not in use or present, then it is NOT suction dredging.
"A person is suction dredging as defined when ALL (emphasis added) of the following components are operating together: (A) A hose which vacuums sediment from a river, stream or lake; and (B) A motorized pump; and (C) A sluice box." On a side note...Stopher also defined an active waterway as a stream that runs year-round...BUT he would not put that in writing! SB 670 ONLY applies to suction dredging in an ACTIVE WATERWAY. So "Booming" is legal according to Mr. Stopher, right? Clear as mud...(excuse the pun) Tom |
|
jcazgoldchaser Offline 1 posts Reply |
Thanks Tom. I'm finding that would be a defensible position. I am a tad worried the law doesn't specify, meaning you could lose a case, but if the guy in the field is going by their regulations you're less likely to get to court in the first place. Kinda like the best way to beat a ticket is to work it out with the officer rather than a judge.
But my original question is, what other regulations apply? You are operating a nozzle/hose, pump, bucket in an active stream. Clearly not suction dredging. What are the other regulations you need to worry about if you do not fall under suction dredging regulation? It is likely the bucket is going to have fines overflowing as well as the larger rocks not making it into the bucket. Any laws about polluting (I've seen the ticket thread) or environmental aspects to this activity (not sure what to call it, gravel collection?). Obviously you're likely going to run a sluice, so what laws and regulations on sluices, both in the active waterway and on land? I've already found the highbanker faq: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/cwa401/docs/suctiondredge/highbank_faq.pdf Which leads me to believe a powered sluice could not be floating (such as the sluice from a suction dredge). Is that correct? Can I manually feed a powered floating sluice? Maybe a recirculating, floating, powered sluice? Are there regulations about feeding a non-powered sluice in an active waterway? Are there regulations about recirculation land sluices? Are there regulations about hydraulically moving collected material to a sluice? I guess maybe I'm asking, is there a place that has a link to the various pertinent CA (fed & EPA too I guess) laws & regulations for mining operations. |
|
InspectorTom Offline 315 posts Reply |
Wow JC,
That' a lot of questions! and I can pass on some info that I have "acquired" but let me first say that this is not legal advice and should not be construed a s such! Actually, since the dredge ban, we (as an industry) have become aware of how nebulous all this crap really is! Your first statement is correct, simply, it depends on what jurisdiction you are in...The DF&G around the Klamath area seems to be OK with high-banking and booming if done non-commercially. However down in the Stanislaus and Sierra Nat. Forests they are getting more anti-mining. "You are operating a nozzle/hose, pump, bucket in an ACTIVE STREAM. Clearly not suction dredging." WRONG! Active stream(bed) falls within the authority of sb670...Don't use a (suction)nozzle/pump bucket in an active streambed...the question has become "what is an active streambed? To my knowledge there are no regs. on using a sluice...only regs. on creating a "significant disturbance" no matter what equipment you are using to recover the values. As far as the Waterboard's permit thing, I'm pretty militant on that, maybe you otta' ask a lawyer 'cause I believe our Federal mining rights, that state that we have riparian water rights, etc., supersede any of that other crap they have come up with. "Can I manually feed a powered floating sluice? Maybe a recirculating, floating, powered sluice?" Again, it's my understanding, from Mr. Stopher, that if any of A, B, or C is not being used, it is not a suction dredge and does not fall under the authority of sb670... As far as all this and the rest of your questions, I would hope someone else on the forum would chime in and also correct any errors of mine... Tom |
|
jcazgoldchaser Offline 1 posts Reply |
What is the link to the law/regulation that leads you to believe that? Per this DFG regulation "suction dredging" consists of (A) Hose, (B) Pump, (C) Sluice Box. No sluice box, none of that document applies. |
|
InspectorTom Offline 315 posts Reply |
JC,
I was just trying to help you NOT get in trouble ...The above comments are things that I have come across through my and others conversations with Mark Stopher...Clearly you need to ask your local Game warden these questions...Best of luck... Tom |
|
jcazgoldchaser Offline 1 posts Reply |
My, isn't this an interesting turn
http://www.goldgold.com/underwater-suction-gravel-transfer-systems.html |
|
UncleMark Offline 531 posts Reply |
Actually,
There were some individuals who created systems based on topics like this and used them this last year in California. Those people contacted various individuals and offices of CDF&G and created mining devices that were not "suction dredges" This idea of how to perform in water mining in a manner that does not violate the dredging moratorium is not a new concept, and was not a new concept last spring. I promise people have been thinking about this since the moment Arnold signed the bill. If someone deserves credit, I would give it to the individuals whom worked with CDF&G to make sure what they were creating was not a violation and for having the courage to truly be an innovator who created a device and got in the water and used it without being cited. :thankyou: |
|
colo_nuggets Offline 453 posts Reply |
So how how big can said device be? The potential for other spots could be huge!
|
|
Rod_Seiad Offline 376 posts Reply |
I been wondering about that too! If I could get this stupid houseboat somehow moved from Shasta Lake over to ... river? Bigger might not be better. Let's use our existing technologies to achieve improved efficiencies. Advances in technology cannot be stopped, no matter who's feathers get ruffled. |
|
UncleMark Offline 531 posts Reply |
At this point in time, I would caution against "big". A 1602 permit is required for "significant" disturbance.
Significant is not legally defined, and is open to some judicial interpretation. Just be aware that it is against the law to fail to comply with the 1602 process. It requires you to initiate an application and fees to have CDF&G inspect/inquire as to whether or not CDF&G believes your activities will require that permit. So unless you intend to apply and pay the fees to obtain one of these permits that are site specific, keep it small. A thorough reading of the newly adopted dredging regulations should give you an understanding of where CDF&G currently feels this threshold is. |
| Pages: [ 1 ] |
| [ Notify ] | [ Print ] | [ Send To Friend ] | [ Watch ] | [ < ] [ > ] |
|
Total Members: 4903 | Register :: Log In :: Administrators The time is 12:43:10 Tue Sep 26 2023 |
![[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]](http://kitconet.com/charts/metals/gold/tny_au_en_usoz_2.gif)
|
|
![[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]](http://kitconet.com/charts/metals/silver/t24_ag_en_usoz_2.gif)