Calif. takes step to close gold mining loophole

Hefty1

Bronze Member
Dec 5, 2010
1,702
1,477
IT NEVER FRICKIN ENDS!


Calif. takes step to close gold mining loophole
The Associated Press

Published: Friday, Jun. 7, 2013 - 3:40 pm

GRANTS PASS, Ore. -- California officials are taking steps to close a loophole that has allowed gold miners to continue using suction dredges on salmon streams despite a state moratorium.
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife said Friday it is proposing an emergency rule to amend the definition of a suction dredge so that miners can no longer split the equipment in two to keep working.
The dredges amount to giant vacuum cleaners that suck gravel from stream bottoms and settle out the gold.
The action comes at the urging of Indian tribes and conservation groups upset that miners have gotten around a moratorium put in place by the Legislature.
Dave McCracken of the New 49ers gold mining group in Happy Camp says they will fight the change.
 

Upvote 0

vini

Full Member
Jan 10, 2012
228
100
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
I sent stopher a short email letter today basically saying they've given into threats by karuks, enviro whacks and folded to there petition ignoring our petitions and he can KMA and we're going to start suing the living caca out of them just like enviro groups do . The worst part of this is the totally lack of following laws set down by congress, those men knew the importance of what they were writing for the days like we're having now, and the men who are ignoring our historical laws should be hung from trees and there bodys burned for all to see.........
PLEASE feel free to write stuphed idgit stopher a letter

Mark Stopher, Senior Policy Advisor, at (530) 225-2275

[email protected]
 

vini

Full Member
Jan 10, 2012
228
100
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
And by the way i've taken my barrle and thrown it in the corner of my yard to catch rain water, which is illegal in some states too...............good ol america is gone what a sad state/country this is turning to with democrats in charge, done.
 

gold nuggets

Bronze Member
Apr 5, 2008
2,444
176
Springfield, Oregon
Detector(s) used
Explorer SE, Pro coil inline probe. Also the Excal II
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
It's been said before that the hardcore environuts will keep dinking with the laws until someone
gets killed.......hate to see it come to that.....but that's what's gonna happen. :hello:
 

OP
OP
H

Hefty1

Bronze Member
Dec 5, 2010
1,702
1,477
I'm passing this information along so that everyone is up-to-speed on our mining efforts, and the treatment they are getting from government.
- Kirk
---------------

Begin forwarded message:

From: Eric Maksymyk

Date: June 10, 2013 5:59:44 PM PDT

Subject: Fwd: Emergency Rulemaking - Western Mining Alliance Response

[SIZE=-1]I'm forwarding this FYI. This is our response to Friday's announc[SIZE=-1]ement of em[SIZE=-1]ergency rulemaking. We petitioned CDFW in March and stated we were an interested party to any rulemaking. They disregarded us but worked with the environmental extremists. To avoid public discussion or debate they chose to make this an "emergency" even though they have been aware of this for a year and received a request from us in March to be involved.

[SIZE=-1]Our next step will be to file an appeal with the OPA and challenge the "emergency" as well as challenging their exclusion of mining [SIZE=-1]interests while working behind the scenes with environmental groups.

[SIZE=-1]In our opinion a handful of old men on a river trying to dredge doesn't constitute an emergency. If people don't start working to get control of this government soon we're go[SIZE=-1]ing to lose this idea of "[SIZE=-1]Of the People, By the People and For the People." The clo[SIZE=-1]ck is running down.[/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]Eric[/SIZE]
[/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Emergency Rulemaking - Western Mining Alliance Response
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 14:19:38 -0700
From: Craig Lindsay <[email protected]>
To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
CC: [email protected]


Gentlemen,
Attached is the first response from the Western Mining Alliance to your "Emergency Rulemaking Proposed for Suction Dredge Mining" from the announcement dated 7 June 2013.
Several points are detailed in our reponse:​
Your obvious disregard for our prior request, [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]" Pursuant to Section 11346.45 of the California Government Code the Western Mining Alliance is providing you notice that as an affected party to the proposed rulemaking, we hereby request discussions with the Department prior to the rulemaking." [/FONT]
Secondly this rulemaking is NOT an emergency; from California Government Code Section 11346.1 “A finding of emergency based only upon expediency, convenience, best interest, general public need, or speculation, shall not be adequate to demonstrate the existence of an emergency."
In conclusion we find it especially ironic that Director Bonham includes in the rulemaking proposal the statement "consistent with the letter and spirit of controlling law". Since in our view ignoring our request for participation prior to your rulemaking is certainly not in the "spirit of controlling law" if not letter of the law.​

Respectfully,
Craig A. Lindsay
President, Western Mining Alliance

















_______________________________________________
Administrator: [email protected]
Website: www.DefendRuralAmerica.com
Unsubscribe or manage account settings: DRA Info Page
[h=3]Attachments[/h]

  • WMA Response to CDFW 10 June 2013.pdf
Download All
Delete Reply Reply to All Forward Move Spam Actions Next Previous
 

OP
OP
H

Hefty1

Bronze Member
Dec 5, 2010
1,702
1,477
Sent electronically and via registered mail
10 June 2013

Dear Mr. Bonham and Mr. Stopher;

We are in receipt of your letter dated 7 June 2013 indicating your proposed emergency rulemaking.
We are disappointed you did not consult with us during this process as we requested in our Petition dated 28 March 2013 of which we have provided the relevant request below:
“In light of the existing regulations under Section 5653 and the Center’s proposed amendments, the Western Mining Alliance respectfully requests that any such rulemaking and consultation of any proposed amendments necessarily include the Western Mining Alliance as an affected party.”
Pursuant to Section 11346.45 of the California Government Code the Western Mining Alliance is providing you notice that as an affected party to the proposed rulemaking, we hereby request discussions with the Department prior to the rulemaking.”

THEWMA.ORG - PO Box 33218, Reno, NV 89532 – PH. 916-813-0104

Director Charlton H. Bonham
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
1416 Ninth Street, 12th Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814

Mr. Mark Stopher
Senior Policy Advisor
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
601 Locust Street
Redding, CA 96001

Mr. John Laird
Secretary for Natural Resources
California Natural Resources Agency
1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1311
Sacramento, CA 95814

Mr. John Mattox
Senior Staff Counsel
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
1416 Ninth Street, 12th Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814

Mr. Thomas Howard
Executive Director
State Water Resources Control Board
P.O. Box 100
Sacramento, CA 95812-0100

Our interpretation of the word “shall” in Section 11346.45 would indicate it is mandatory. We find it surprising and disheartening you would spend so much effort consulting with anti-mining interests yet would fail to consult with the only mining organization that explicitly expressed an interest in your proposed rulemaking.
We advise you again the situation you describe does not meet the criteria of an emergency and it appears you are only using the emergency rulemaking set out in Section 11346.1 to merely avoid public discussion. We’re sure you are well aware of the requirements of this section as you have chosen to cite this section for your rulemaking thus eliminating any public discussion, but we choose to remind you of the definition of an emergency:

“A finding of emergency based only upon expediency, convenience, best interest, general public need, or speculation, shall not be adequate to demonstrate the existence of an emergency. If the situation identified in the finding of emergency existed and was known by the agency adopting the emergency regulation in sufficient time to have been addressed through nonemergency regulations adopted in accordance with the provisions of
Article 5 (commencing with Section 11346), the finding of emergency shall include facts explaining the failure to address the situation through nonemergency regulations.”

It is clear you were aware of the alternative methods of mining as early as last summer and have responded to public inquiry in regards to this in written and oral communications. You received two requests for rulemaking in regards to this in March 2013. You have certainly had sufficient time to involve the public in your rulemaking yet you disregard the requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act in favor of responding to a small minority of vocal activists.
While the presence of miners and businesses attempting to salvage the summer mining season may annoy you and the activists you are supporting, it does not reach the level of emergency and you have demonstrated no harm or no imminent danger to the public, fish or wildlife. The report you are basing your “emergency” on merely documents miners on Federal mining claims – it does not document harm. As stated in Section 11346.1
you may not use speculation as the basis for emergency rulemaking. Lacking any documentation of harm to the public or fish and wildlife it is sheer speculation that mining has caused any harm.
The “evidence” you refer to in your notice is merely the observations of anti-mining activists of miners on the rivers. They are observations of people mining but lack any statements of harm to fish, wildlife or the public.
We don’t believe miners’ presence on the river constitutes an emergency. We’re unclear when the very act of mining became illegal. We don’t read Section 11346.1 as allowing emergency rulemaking to include an agency being annoyed that miners have figured out how to continue to mine despite the complete prohibition on mining in violation of Federal law and Congressional intent. (See South Dakota Mining Association v. Lawrence
County, 1998)
Again we advise you that the existing regulations and any amendments qualify as “Major Regulations” as defined in Section 11342.548. "Major regulation" means any proposed adoption, amendment, or repeal of a regulation subject to review by the Office of Administrative Law pursuant to Article 6 (commencing with Section 11349) that will have an economic impact on California business enterprises and individuals in an amount exceeding fifty million dollars ($50,000,000), as estimated by the agency.”
It is our opinion the emergency rulemaking is a clear violation of the Administrative Procedures Act, especially in light of our request nearly two months ago to be involved in any proposed rulemaking. Why the Department chose to ignore the miners’ request and honor the activists’ request is beyond us.

Respectfully,
Craig A. Lindsay
President, The Western Mining Alliance

Copy Furnished to Others, including the following:
(See next page)

Congressman Doug
LaMalfa
506 Cannon HOB
Washington, DC 20515

Congressman Tom
McClintock
333 Cannon HOB
Washington, DC 20515

Senator Ted Gaines
State Capitol, Room 3070,
Sacramento, CA 95814

Senator Tom Berryhill
State Capitol, Room 3076,
Sacramento, CA 95814

Senator Bob Huff
State Capitol, Room 305,
Sacramento, CA 95814

Senator Jim Nielsen
State Capitol, Room 4062,
Sacramento, CA 95814

Assembly Member Frank Bigelow
P.O. Box 942849, Room
4116, Sacramento, CA 94249

Assembly Member Brian Dahle
P.O. Box 942849, Room 2174,
Sacramento, CA 94249

Assembly Member Beth Gaines
P.O. Box 942849, Room 2130,
Sacramento, CA 94249

Assembly Member Eric Linder
P.O. Box 942849, Room 2016,
Sacramento, CA 94249

Assembly Member Dan Logue
P.O. Box 942849, Room 4158,
Sacramento, CA 94249

Assembly Member Mike Morrell
P.O. Box 942849, Room 4144,
Sacramento, CA 94249

Colin Hayes
United States Senate
Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources
304 Dirksen Senate Building
Washington, DC 20510

Kathleen Benedetto
House Subcommittee on
Energy and Mineral
Resources
1333 Longworth HOB
Washington, DC 20515

Pete Obermueller
Executive Director,
Congressional Western Caucus
113 Cannon, HOB
Washington, DC 20515

Public Lands for the People
7194 Conejo Dr.
San Bernardino, Ca. 92404

Attorney James Buchal
3425 S.E. Yamhill, Suite
100, Portland, OR 97214

Pacific Legal Foundation
930 G Street
Sacramento, CA 95814

Mountain States Legal Foundation
2596 South Lewis Way
Lakewood, Colorado 80227

Defend Rural America
[email protected]

Attorney David Young
11845 W Olympic Blvd .
Los Angeles, CA 90064
 

Last edited:

Oakview2

Silver Member
Feb 4, 2012
2,807
3,348
Prather CA
Detector(s) used
Whites GMT
Primary Interest:
Other
HOT DOG WMA. If they have public meeting we need to have every miner in the Western United States show up in force:hello2:
 

OP
OP
H

Hefty1

Bronze Member
Dec 5, 2010
1,702
1,477
[h=2]Emergency Rulemaking Proposed for Suction Dredge Mining[/h]June 7, 2013 by ahughan

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) is proposing an emergency rulemaking to amend an existing regulation defining suction dredge mining. CDFW is taking this action to close an apparent loophole that may allow activity that goes against the spirit of the legislative moratorium prohibiting the use of any vacuum or suction dredge equipment for instream mining.
CDFW provided notice of the proposed emergency action earlier today. Consistent with the Administrative Procedure Act, CDFW will submit the related rulemaking package to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) no sooner than Monday, June 17. After OAL posts notice on its webpage, the public will have five calendar days to submit comments. Interested members of the public may want to begin monitoring OAL’s webpage (www.oal.ca.gov) beginning June 17.
For specific regulatory language of CDFW’s proposed emergency action, or additional information about the moratorium and suction dredge mining in California, please visit www.dfg.ca.gov/suctiondredge.
If you have any questions regarding this proposed emergency action, please contact Craig Martz, CDFW Regulations Unit Manager, at (916) 653-4681. Related comments or questions to CDFW can also be submitted to [email protected].
Media Contact: Jordan Traverso, CDFW Communications, (916) 654-9937
Public Contact: Craig Martz, CDFW Regulations Unit, (916) 653-4681
 

russau

Gold Member
May 29, 2005
7,250
6,701
St. Louis, missouri
and as a whole, America dont even know about this OR really give a hoot. RIGHTS?? our socalled "representatives" will trade off your "rights" in a heart beat and we keep voteing them jerks into office! now whos the dumb one!
 

Oakview2

Silver Member
Feb 4, 2012
2,807
3,348
Prather CA
Detector(s) used
Whites GMT
Primary Interest:
Other
Hefty

Do you know what the WMA response will be. I think we need to put boots on the ground or booties in the river. ...
Encircle the capital with dredges, invade the river with dredges??????? I don't have a dredge, but will tend for someone:BangHead: They continue to flaunt US law and the states laws and I am madder than a wet hen

Emergency Rulemaking Proposed for Suction Dredge Mining

June 7, 2013 by ahughan

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) is proposing an emergency rulemaking to amend an existing regulation defining suction dredge mining. CDFW is taking this action to close an apparent loophole that may allow activity that goes against the spirit of the legislative moratorium prohibiting the use of any vacuum or suction dredge equipment for instream mining.
CDFW provided notice of the proposed emergency action earlier today. Consistent with the Administrative Procedure Act, CDFW will submit the related rulemaking package to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) no sooner than Monday, June 17. After OAL posts notice on its webpage, the public will have five calendar days to submit comments. Interested members of the public may want to begin monitoring OAL’s webpage (www.oal.ca.gov) beginning June 17.
For specific regulatory language of CDFW’s proposed emergency action, or additional information about the moratorium and suction dredge mining in California, please visit www.dfg.ca.gov/suctiondredge.
If you have any questions regarding this proposed emergency action, please contact Craig Martz, CDFW Regulations Unit Manager, at (916) 653-4681. Related comments or questions to CDFW can also be submitted to [email protected].
Media Contact: Jordan Traverso, CDFW Communications, (916) 654-9937
Public Contact: Craig Martz, CDFW Regulations Unit, (916) 653-4681
 

OP
OP
H

Hefty1

Bronze Member
Dec 5, 2010
1,702
1,477
Any individual who has knowledge of current Federal mining law knows that the "Miner" was Granted "decreed/exclusive rights" to the use of water on federal lands for the purpose of extracting valuable mineral resources per the current mining laws that are still upheld by the US Supreme Court.......... with all do considerations per The Mining Acts of the United States:
Law of Possession of 1865
Mineral Grant of 1866
Placer Act of 1870
Act to Protect the Rights of Miners of 1871
General Mining Act of 1872
 

dredgeman

Sr. Member
Feb 14, 2013
340
249
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
Well
Mon is the 17th and should be the day that CDFW submits the new regulation to the OAL office of Administrative Law. If that happens there is a 5 day comment window.

Everyone type an email or response and send it. Or do not use a pump near the water unless you want to go to court. Just like Oregon Calif will be done.
 

OP
OP
H

Hefty1

Bronze Member
Dec 5, 2010
1,702
1,477
[h=2]Proposed Emergency Regulations Under Review[/h]You may view the contents of a proposed emergency rulemaking currently under review by OAL by clicking on the link(s) below. The material posted here is the Form 400, the proposed text and the finding of emergency as submitted by the rulemaking agency. These documents may sometimes be revised or withdrawn during the OAL review process.
Unless the emergency situation clearly poses such an immediate, serious harm that delaying action to allow public comment would be inconsistent with the public interest, OAL must allow five calendar days for public comments after posting a notice of the filing of a proposed emergency regulation on this website. Unless otherwise indicated below, the proposed emergency regulations are posted the day they are filed with OAL.
Questions concerning emergency regulations should be directed to the agency's rulemaking contact person. For questions about the emergency regulation process, see Emergency Regulation Process page or contact the OAL Reference Attorney at (916) 323-6815 or [email protected]. If you wish to make comments on a regulation listed here, please send them to the agency contact person and the OAL Reference Attorney at [email protected].

Emergency
Action
Submitted
to OAL on:
OAL File No. AgencySubject/CCR Sections
Affected
Agency
Contact
06-18-20132013-0618-02EDepartment of Fish and WildlifeSuction Dredging; Use of Vacuum and Suction Dredge Equipment

Title 14, Section 288, subdivision (a)
Craig Martz
Ph: (916) 653-4681
06-18-20132013-0618-01EEDepartment of Food and Agriculture
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Top