Show the "Greenies"

[dredgeman]

The only way to fight the Neo Environmentalist is thru Jurisdiction of the groups to enact their programs.
Also cut funding thru tax payer money. By starting a conservancy the same way as the mining districts were formed, you can get state money to operate. Because it becomes a state recognized entity.

CABY area is just the beginning of the next wave of take over to line a new set of pockets.

 

[Fullpan]

Here is the workshop I sat in on (webinar) a couple months ago. You need to chose the different segments, one at a time, as the total is about 8 hrs. This
is the front line of an eventual army who will spend billions in mercury remediation - enjoy!

CLU-IN | Hg Remediation in Aquatic Environments

And no - no miners are part of this activity. They will eventually perform an "eminent domain" type action (who's gonna stop em?)
to get any part of the watershed they want, is my guess.

 

[fowledup]

Fullpan, thanks for the info. Plan on watching this evening. Have they said what their sampling methods will be? Or what is the criteria for remediation i.e. Historical land use data. Another words how are they deciding what watershed gets remediated. Will the contracts be sole sourced or open invitation to bid. Hope I'm not asking to many questions that will be answered upon watching. Thanks again for keeping us all in the loop.

 

[Fullpan]

In this workshop, fowledup, its more basic than that. There are more planned. Its more like "in 2008, we did this study and the study cost 2.1 mill and the results were inconclusive, so we need more funding to expand the study", etc. Carrie Monohan the science advisor with the sierra fund talks about specific regions that have already been funded for "studies" in the sf Yuba as well as combie reservoir in which she admits that their merc machine is ineffective on silt-sized particles QUITE REVEALING !! Please give us your take on the whole mess in a couple days.

Side note: From a miners point of view, the talk by Charlie Alpers, USGS, was interesting. He talks at 95 mph, but his slides showing emergency mercury operations (and their huge costs) in the bear river area, gave me new info on that region.

 

[fowledup]

Aarrrrggh! It won't play on my kindle fire, so I tried it on my wife's laptop where I got as far as Mrs. Wood' s presentation. My opinion thus far- every government watchdog organization around should be all over this. Mining isn't the only 150 year old history they are using. These folks would make Stanford and Huntington proud. They are selling the state another railroad system using the state's own money. In all seriousness I bet Mrs. Wood caught considerable flack. I think she gave an honest presentation based on facts. Her real science kind of shot the Sierra Funds science full of holes, even though she tried to showcase only the mining damage. Two things stuck- first she cut the general mining argument in half by showing there were two variables in the equation-mining and water chemistry in relation to the food web. She admitted water chemistry had a significant impact but she didnt want to talk about it in this presentationtation, only minings effect (huh?). Then she cuts the argument in half again by showing the relationship of naturally occurring mercury in reservoirs and the mehg levels of the fish in them, compared to reservoirs with mining induced mehg and levels of the fish in those reservoirs, about the same for both. Them backs it up by showing hg levels of reservoirs with and without mining activity upstream, again about the same. My favorite was the slide showing the average hg levels of the reservoirs in California with the statement below in parenthesis (that she did not read) stating "typical of U.S. reservoirs".
Don't get me wrong none of this says we don't have a mercury problem. It does in my mind clearly show mining is being used as the fallguy to help them achieve their goals (funding). "Naturally occurring" isn't sexy enough, you have to have a human element to focus the lions share of blame on. Regardless of the proven fact we are the most experienced and best equipped to address the problem in the most economical and efficient manner. It also shows their blatant manipulation of the facts, figures, and science to make their case and fulfill their agenda. It totally irks the he'll out of me that there is no presence of mining, be it opinion, or technical experience. Someone on the inside needs to step forward and be a whistle blower on this, that's how we win.

 

[Fullpan]

Please try to get thru the whole thing - it gets lonely out here. Maybe we get together an Army of two to fight this, lol

Keep in mind, there is not one case of mercury poisoning to justify this waste.

P.S. - I got your Huntington, standford reference. At least SOME good came of that scam.

 

[fowledup]

Trying another computer to finish watching, my wifes crashed- I will get thru this one way or another. Im all for it, I'd bet the army is gonna grow! Your absolutley right, there is not one case. And the case that is the closest to meeting the criteria- Lake Nacimiento was a Merc mining site and naturally occuring, the was no dredging or hydraulic gold mining anywhere near there! So you have to ask why are they not focusing their funding and efforts on the worst cases in the state. For either merc levels present in the watershed or levels in the fish populations. If this is truly about species protection and human protection and doing whats best for the environment - again, why are the top three (hell top 10) worst case reservoir/sites not being addressed? STINKS from one end to the other! It all rolls back to who and where this got started. Guess a few privaleged folks will get their lake front access cleaned up by taxpayer dollars after all.

 

[fowledup]

Got thru most of it, still a little queasy. This is my take, not that it means much. I believe we as miners need to take back our work. I don't want to keep fighting these idiots, and their biased science presentations, I want to COMPETE against them. Using a proven method (dredging), I want to do it efficientiently using experienced miners. I want the remediation to pay for itself, not contribute to an all ready bankrupt economy. We do this by making mercury remediation an income supplement to the gold mining industry. Price per ounce of remeditated mercury (not mined and processed cinnabar). Feed the economy not rape it. Create jobss for a failing industry and economy. Possibly provide a means for folks to make a living mining that otherwise couldn't without the extra income mercury could provide. This is what we should be fighting for! We don't need to manipulate science, or fraud our government to prove its feasible and we can do the job, we've already done that! What we need is a means to get our message out to the public, and subsequently get the general public to pressure the government. Because of the reality shows the public has interest, now it needs direction and a voice. Figure that out and we will be back in the water in no time. Mercury could indeed be the next goldrush, so aren't miners the most qualified to get it? Some say it's to late, but I don't think so. Especially with what your seeing with things like Obamacare, and people's mistrust. Or judges speaking out against sue and settle tactics. It ain't to late, folks are fed up with being rooked. We just need a way in to the party, once in it won't be hard to point out the bs.

 

[jog]

If you go to East Lake in central Oregon they have posters posted around the lake warning of mercury in the fish. This lake is not man made, it is an old volcano and the fish have been planted there by man. This lake is very well known for it's record size fish and very popular. There is no mining history in the area, so by stocking this lake with fish man has created the mercury problem in fish. The mercury has allways been there but by adding fish to the lake now it becomes a health issue because people are eating the fish. Just my two cents worth....