Skip
"ACTION ALERT
May 11, 2011
From:
ICMJ's Prospecting and
MINING JOURNAL
Action Needed Now
California considering 5-yr moratorium on dredging in current budget bill
Sorry to bother you, but we just received word that Subcommittee 2 in the California State Senate is considering adding language to a budget bill that would place a moratorium on suction dredge mining for a period of five years and stop the court-ordered Supplemental Environmental Impact Report that is already under way.
Page 39 of the agenda for tomorrow, May 12, 2011, states:
Staff Recommendation: Approve the following:
(1) Trailer bill language to continue the moratorium on issuance of suction dredge permits for an additional five years, or until such time as new regulations that fully mitigate all identified significant environmental impacts, and a proposed fee structure that will fully cover all program costs, are in place.
(2) Approve Budget Bill Language prohibiting any funding at the department from being used for suction dredge mining regulation, permitting or other activities.
The recommendation is based on the faulty premise that the suction dredge permits only cost $25 and the program creates a net-loss for the California Department of Fish & Game.
When SB 670 was passed the bill clearly stated that passage of that bill would negatively impact DFG and that enforcement activities were covered by permit fees. Here is the exact wording from the bill:
FISCAL EFFECT of SB670: According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, loss of approximately $175,000 in annual revenue each year the moratorium is in effect, resulting from loss of suction dredge permit fees (Fish and Game Preservation Fund). Currently, fee revenue pays for suction dredge permit enforcement at the cost of approximately $50,000 per year, activity which will presumably continue during the moratorium.
Here is what you need to do tonight:
Only three Senators -- all part of Subcommittee 2 -- will decide whether or not to add the above language to the budget bill at this time. Call each one of them tonight. There is no time to send a letter -- you must call. If their mailboxes are full, then you must call them in the morning to make an impact.
Phone numbers:
Sen. Lowenthal (916) 651-4027 and (562) 495-4766 and (562) 529-6659
Sen. Simitian (chair) (916) 651-4011 and (408) 277-9460 and (831) 425-0401
Sen. Fuller (916) 651-4018
Here is the info they need to hear from you:
1. The Background info supplied to the Committee is inaccurate. DFG does not lose money as a result of the suction dredging program.
2. The stated fee structure in inaccurate. The cost for permits are $47.50 in-state, and $167.25 out of state ( a far cry from the $25 stated in this Background proposal)
3. PLEASE VOTE NO for the moratorium on suction dredging
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Scott Harn
Editor/Publisher
ICMJ's Prospecting and Mining Journal
www.icmj.com
Supporting Documents:
May 12, 2011 Agenda for Subcommittee 2, California Senate
Fiscal Impact of SB670"
Replies
This email came in from Shasta Patriot today. In the U tube video they mention Craig Tucker, He was at the SB670 hearings, in the hallway I heard him threaten one to the Kayruk tribsman who was speaking out against the bill.
From: Shasta Patriot <shasta_patriot@yahoo.com>
Subject: Karuk Council/DNR agenda to use Coho as new Spotted Owl in 2001
Date: Monday, July 18, 2011, 10:46 AM
postings on cal trout one by mark stopher
http://caltrout.org/2011/07/trout-clout-alert-urge-governor-brown-t...
Hi, I am new to this forum and I do have an intrest in this situation as I have a claim in Tuolunme Co. Maby this is over simplifing the solution but Gov. Brown has unequivocly stated that the permiting program pays for its self, so maybe the solution is to get Gov brown to glet the rider pushers to understand that the budget bill will be vetoed if this rider is included in the bill. I am not the political type and maybe I don't understand how this works but if the Gov makes it perfectly the the to the state 's politians that this is his stand maybe the majority of the politians will vote or through out the rider, so maybe Gov Brown is the one we should persue.
Like I said, I am not a political person and don't understand the process but this is my thought on this.
flairboater
Bill Sandberg
Jim Maynard. Hunter, Fisherman, Vacationer, Tax Payer & Gold Prosector
There are two articles out on the 5 year budget moratorium rider in the Ca budget.
Here's the press I issued today. Hope we get continued traction in the media, the Capitol is a white hot buzz right now.
Fax the Governor, fax your local Legislators (doesn't matter if they are Dem or Rep, they're voting on this), and if you can try to help out with your local TV station or radio station, get this press article to them.
http://classic.cnbc.com/id/43300290
That's it for now. Keeping up the good fight,
Rachel
This is the second article
This published today in the Sac Bee, and we should begin commenting on this one now. This is in our own backyard - it's the best thing we've got right now.
Could you rally out the troops again to move over to this article and start posting?
Remember - 2 sentences are fine! If you have more to say, break up your comments so you get more posts out of your ideas, instead of posting one long letter.
http://www.sacbee.com/2011/06/06/3681088/california-budget-committee-attempts.html?storylink=lingospot_related_articles
Keeping up the good fight,
Rachel
At the California legislative portal and find the representative for your district. Try the first link for best results.
This search with your street city and zip will find both your State Senator and Assemblyman.
http://192.234.213.69/smapsearch/framepage.asp
Full list
Senators http://senate.ca.gov/senators
Assemblyman http://www.assembly.ca.gov/acs/acsframeset7text.htm
I sure would like to read all of the content of what was just signed.
Anyone know where I can find it?
This came From Rachel Dunn who was at the budget meeting with her Husband and business partner Mike. They Operate GoldPanCalifornia a small mining shop in Concord . The building also houses Rachel Dunn Chocolates.
I didn't catch his name but a man spoke on behalf of a group of rural counties today at the hearing too in support of the miners.
The anti-mining people who were there and who wrote this bill were
Allison Harvey auburn rancheria, Steve Evans friends of the river , Cal trout sierra club and a guy from an Indian artifacts protection group.
So there you have it. The exact same people who wrote sb670 the same handfull have done it again. Shortly ill find out who the legislator is who is carrying this bill - we already know who wrote it!
Follow the money yall.
Auburn Rancheria is in Senator Wolks district. She was responsible for ab1032 prior to SB 670.
Rachel got the word out to her long list of email contacts as soon as she heard this.
Pucky and East bay prospectors, Coarsegold prospectors, United Prospectors and several other clubs with cross membership all pitched and fired up their network . Many other clubs and individuals across the state contributed.
Here is the text of what was sent to us a scant 16 hours prior to the vote.
By the way DFG testified during the SB670 debate that the permit program paid for itself. So this rider is a complete fabrication.
This is from page 39: of the budget
1. Suction Dredging Budget
Background. Background: The Department of Fish and Game is responsible for administering Section 5653 of the Fish and Game Code which requires a permit from DFG to conduct recreational motorized suction dredge mining in state waters. The Department's existing suction dredge mining regulations, which were adopted in 1994, were the subject of a court order in 2006 which found that the regulations could result in environmental impacts harmful to coho salmon or other fish species listed as threatened or endangered under state or federal law, and ordered DFG to conduct a new environmental impact review and update the regulations as necessary. The Department was ordered by the court to complete the EIR by July of 2008.
After the Department failed to meet that deadline, the court in July 2009 prohibited DFG from issuing any suction dredge mining permits as long as the related litigation was pending. At the same time, the Legislature passed and the Governor signed into law SB 670 (Wiggins, c. 62, Statutes of 2009) on August 6, 2009. SB 670 imposed an immediate moratorium on suction dredge mining until three specified actions occur: 1)DFG completes the court-ordered environmental review of its permitting program; 2) DFG updates the existing regulations governing the program as necessary; and 3)The updated regulations take effect. DFG's draft EIR for suction dredge mining and new proposed revised regulations were released for public comment in February 2011. The draft EIR identifies a number of significant and unmitigated environmental impacts.
DFG has acknowledged in previous years that the current fees for suction dredge mining permits are inadequate to cover the full costs of the program. The current statutory base fee for a permit is $25, which when adjusted for inflation equates to approximately $40. The base fee is $130 if an onsite inspection is required. Nonresident base fees are $100 for a basic permit and $220 for onsite inspection. The Senate policy committee analysis for SB 670 notes that DFG "has previously estimated that the permits cost an average of $450 to process and to cover the costs of the program, which if extrapolated to the approximate 3,000 permits would result in an expenditure of about $1.3 million."
Under the new proposed regulations DFG proposes to issue up to 4,000 permits. DFG's new estimate of revenue from 4,000 permits and onsite inspection fees is $373,000. If the department's previous cost estimates are accurate, the program will cost $1.8 million, not counting the additional costs of onsite inspections, potential legal defense costs if anticipated lawsuits challenging the regulations are filed, and costs for SWRCB permitting since the proposed regulations acknowledge that suction dredging in mercury impaired waters will cause significant unmitigated environmental impacts, but do not propose to limit suction dredging in such waters, leaving that problem to the SWRCB. The department has used 27 DFG employees in the development of the regulations so far. DFG wardens would also be required to enforce the regulations. The gap between the current fees and the costs of the program result in an estimated $2 million subsidy of the program from the Fish and Game Preservation Fund and/or the General Fund.
Staff Recommendation: Approve the following:
(1) Trailer bill language to continue the moratorium on issuance of suction dredge permits for an additional five years, or until such time as new regulations that fully mitigate all identified significant environmental impacts, and a proposed fee structure that will fully cover all program costs, are in place.
(2) Approve Budget Bill Language prohibiting any funding at the department from being used for suction dredge mining regulation, permitting or other activities.
URGENT! Please print this out and have everyone you know sign this!
Attach sheets of paper and have everyone sign it. forward all ORIGINAL SIGNATURES to:
Gary Goldberg
11070 Brentwood Dr.
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
He would like them within the end of the month. Even if it's only 1 signature.
If GPAA won't get off their slack @**, we need to!
Well Pucky, you're right, we find out stuff like this to late, they passed this crap 2 to 1 today, so no dredging in California for 5 more years now, the only hope we have is that "Moonbean" sees something he doesn't like in the budget bill and rejects it when it get to his desk to sign it!!!ARRRGG
Our government is getting way out of control and they seem to love doing crap like this behind our backs!!!
Skip