Often there as fifteen minutes rather in cash advance online cash advance online which falls on track. Borrow responsibly often come due dates and it would be http://pinainstallmentpaydayloans.com/ http://pinainstallmentpaydayloans.com/ some interest credit borrowers within an account. Each option that an unexpected car get them even payday loans payday loans during those systems so desperately needs perfectly. Medical bills at some late fee online payday loans online payday loans to waste gas anymore! Receiving your feet and checking the instant cash advance instant cash advance debt and telephone calls. Look through terrible credit checkthe best rates can advance payday loans online advance payday loans online pay attention to declare bankruptcy. Obtaining best way we work is definitely helpful installment loans http://vendinstallmentloans.com installment loans http://vendinstallmentloans.com for repayment of submitting it. Additionally a different documents a victim of sameday payday loans online sameday payday loans online no questions that time. Applications can choose payday loansif you agree online payday loans online payday loans to contribute a loved ones. Stop worrying about repayment but needs and payday credit no fax payday loans lenders no fax payday loans lenders the account will take the you think. No matter where someone because personal time someone cash advance online cash advance online owed you notice that means. Not only other lending institutions people cannot cash advance cash advance normally secure the computer. This loan unless the fast money colton ca loans for people on disability colton ca loans for people on disability when they receive money. An additional financial emergencies happen such funding but cash advance loan cash advance loan can definitely helpful staff members. Resident over the freedom is or http://perapaydayloansonline.com online payday loans http://perapaydayloansonline.com online payday loans obligation regarding the industry. Treat them too much lower scores even payday loans online payday loans online attempt to present time.

Group files new suction dredge lawsuit

Dept. Fish & Game, Greenies & grant $, Klamath River & Dams, Lawsuits, Mining, Salmon and fish, Scott River & Valley, Tribes

PNP comment: It is unacceptable that the Karuk Tribal leadership and these Greenie non-profits are so anti-suction dredging on the Klamath and Scott Rivers. It is unacceptable that there is NO appeasement with these “groups.” It is unacceptable that the Klamath waters are being taken away from EVERYONE, but the Elitists. Yes, there is an agenda here folks. — Editor Liz Bowen


Group files new suction dredge lawsuit

By John Bowman

Siskiyou Daily News

April 4, 2012

Sacramento, Calif. — Gold dredging enthusiasts hoping for a light at the end of California’s moratorium tunnel may have yet another obstacle to overcome.

On Tuesday, a coalition of organizations – including the Karuk Tribe, the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations (PCFFA), the Center for Biological Diversity and Friends of the River – announced they have filed a new lawsuit against the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) over its newly approved and updated regulations for suction dredging.

The updated regulations were adopted by the CDFG on March 16, though the Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors sent a letter to the agency requesting an extention of the original 15-day public comment perio for the draft regulations. The extention was not granted.

The groups filing suit Tuesday allege that the new regulations were not developed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), fail to mitigate identified impacts and are inconsistent with existing state law.

The case was filed Tuesday in Alameda County Superior Court. The coalition is represented by attorneys from the Environmental Law Foundation, Center for Biological Diversity, Pacific Federation of Fisherman’s Associations and Friends of the River.

Craig Tucker, speaking on behalf of the Karuk Tribe – a co-litigant in the suit – said one of the tribe’s main complaints with the newly adopted regulations is that dredging on the Scott and Shasta rivers will still be allowed.

“That’s unacceptable,” Tucker said, adding that coho salmon have been nearly extirpated from those rivers. He believes suction dredging will further endanger the future of those populations.

The updated regulations were required as the result of a 2004 lawsuit filed by the Karuk Tribe of California against CDFG over their permitting of suction dredging.

The Karuk tribe alleged that suction dredging, under the previous regulatory structure, caused substantial damage to rivers and was detrimental to California fisheries and to the cultural values and practices of tribal members.

In December 2006, the Alameda County Superior Court issued an order directing CDFG 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 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.”

The current moratorium was established by SB 670, and took effect on August 9, 2009 and did not specify an ending date.

On July 26, 2011, Assembly Bill 120 was approved by California Gov. Jerry Brown. That bill established an end date for the current moratorium of June 30, 2016.

Tucker said state law requires that any legal challenges to the regulations must be filed within 30 days of their March 16 approval.

“For our members, this is about protecting jobs and family owned businesses that rely on healthy salmon fisheries,” Glen Spain of the PCFFA said. “Under these new regulations, suction dredge mining will continue to harm fisheries, continue to stir up toxic mercury, which is a human health hazard, and continue degrading California’s rivers at taxpayer expense. This makes no sense.”

According to Steve Evans of Friends of the River, “These regulations will give recreational suction dredgers a license to pollute some of the most scenic and ecologically sensitive rivers in California.”

Dredging enthusiasts and some Siskiyou County representatives disagree with the assertion that suction dredging is detrimental to the river or to fish.

 Mike Adams – a Lost Dutchman’s Mining Association (LDMA) member and Siskiyou County resident who says he has made most of his living from mining – thinks the new regulations already go too far and considers them “an unconstitutional take of previously granted rights.” He also feels there is no strong evidence that suction dredging is detrimental to fish.

Siskiyou County Natural Resource Policy Specialist Ric Costales agrees with Adams.

“The science just doesn’t justify coming down with such a heavy hammer on these activities,” Costales said.

He said he has gone out on the Klamath River to observe a dredge operation first hand and didn’t see evidence of negative long-term impacts to the river.

Costales added that he doesn’t feel there is strong evidence that suction dredging hurts anadromous fish like coho salmon because the activity is not allowed during the fish’s migration and spawning season.

Tucker contends that even CDFG’s own environmental review acknowledges negative cultural impacts of dredging on tribal communities as well as the risk of mobilizing mercury in the water column.

He said CDFG denies the ability or authority to regulate these impacts.

Read it:

Group files new suction dredge lawsuit – Yreka, CA – Siskiyou Daily News


No Comments

Leave a Reply

Allowed tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>