Small-scale Suction Dredging
for Gold – Under Attack
Joseph C. Greene
Research Biologist/Ecotoxicologist
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
RETIRED
“Significant effect on the environment means a substantial adverse change in the environment.”
California Environmental Quality Act Section 21068
I part ways with the environmentalists when their zeal for reform begins to
resemble eco-terrorism, and where the rights and needs of humanity must take a
backseat to nature.
THIS PRESENTATION IS An HONEST review of
scientific research results regarding the effects
of small-scale gold suction Dredging.
THESE DATA demonstrate that the process OF
SMALL-SCALE GOLD SUCTION dredging is
NOT harmful to man, fish, or the environment.
Motor and Air Pump -------
--- Head Box
Water ---
Pump
Pump output hose >
- Sluicebox (gravity
filter)
Flotation
Eductor -------------
< Intake and foot valve
Suction Hose ---
- miner
Salmon
Eggs
Alevin
Harvey and Lisle, 1998, Effects of Suction Dredging
on Streams, A Review and Evaluation Strategy
Fishery managers should be
especially concerned when
dredging coincides with the
incubation of embryos in
stream gravels – Harvey & Lisle
Suction dredge equipment, used by modern-day gold miners on the Klamath and other California rivers, dirty the rivers and
disturb the spawning grounds of already imperiled fish. Photo: courtesy Craig Tucker, Karuk Tribe
the Northcoast Environmental Center, http://yournec.org/index.php?module=pagesetter&func=viewpub&tid=3&pid=741
Flood Stage, Klamath River above Portuguese Creek, 2006
“Mining debris is chemically inert, makes no oxygen demand on the stream and therefore
takes away from the flowing water nothing which the fish require. This is equally true of
this material whether placed in transit by nature or by man since the products are alike in
nature and comes from the same sources…”
Turbidity was 656 NTU
Swartley, A. M. Appendix A. In: Ward, H. B. 1938. Placer Mining on the Rogue River, Oregon, in Its Relation to the Fish and Fishing in
7 that
Stream. Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, State of Oregon, Portland, OR
Klamath River water: The vials were allowed to settled for
24-hours, the right vial was shaken to re-suspend the
particulates. The sample was measured at 656 NTU.
8
Samples provided by Jim Foley and prepared by Claudia Wise
Research has found that duration of exposure plays a
more dominant role than TSS concentration
(Anderson et al. 1996).
For example, turbidity was 0.5 NTU upstream, 20.5 NTU 4 m downstream, and 3.4 NTU 49 m downstream
of an active dredge on Canyon Creek (Hassler et al. 1986).
On Butte Creek and the North Fork of the American River where ambient turbidities were <1 NTU,
maximum turbidity 5 m downstream of active dredges reached 50 NTU but averaged only 5 NTU (Harvey
1986). One must remember sediment plumes below suction dredges are intermittent not continuous.
Wanty et al. (1997) reported turbidity values of 19 NTU 30.5 m (100 ft) downstream of a 10 inch dredge located
below Wilson Creek on the North Fork Fortymile River. Values returned to near background levels (3.7 NTU) within
the next 30.5 m but remained slightly above background levels (2.2 - 2.3 NTU) as far as 150 m downstream
In Gold Creek, Montana, suspended sediment was 340 mg/L at the dredge outflow and 1.8 mg/L 31 m
downstream of an active dredge (Thomas 1985).
THE ROGUE RIVER AS IT FLOWS PAST THE GRANTS PASS, OREGON,
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT, MAY 10, 2005. ACCORDING TO THE
GRANTS PASS DAILY COURIER, TURBIDITY IN THE RIVER DUE TO RECENT
RAINS MEASURED AT APPROXIMATELY 54-61 NTUs.
Sewage Treatment plants
require “NPDES” permits . . .
According to EPA and DEQ,
So do suction dredges.
Approximate size of a
4-inch Suction Dredge
By Tom Kitchar
The addition of a pollutant into a water system is key to
whether or not the EPA and the OR DEQ have regulatory
jurisdiction over specific mining activity.
Suction dredging within the normal high water mark of a river
channel does not add a pollutant to the water system. Because
the miners and prospectors are in the river channel, they can’t
add anything that isn’t already there.
U. S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s majority
opinion rendered in the South Florida Water Management
District v. Miccosukee Tribe of Indians et al. tends to support
the miner’s position that turbidity is not a pollutant added to a
waterway.
The Chief Justice likened a water system to a pot of soup. She
reasoned that, “If one takes a ladle of soup from a pot, lifts it
above the pot, and pours the soup back into the pot, one has
not ‘added’ anything else to the pot.”
Impact WQ‐2: Effects of Contaminant Discharges of Oil or Gasoline
Used in Suction Dredges
(Less than Significant)
…the amount of fuel and oil spilled each year into surface water
caused by recreational dredging activities would be anticipated to
be relatively small based on the size of dredging motors, total
number of dredges anticipated to operate under the Program, and
low probability that any individual dredger would cause substantial
fuel or oil spills while refueling.
California Department of Fish and Game, Suction Dredge Permitting Program, Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report,
February 2011, page 4.2-28
Leroy Cyr, Fish Biologist, 2005, Interoffice Memorandum to Jerry Boberg, Fish and Watershed Program Manager, Six Rivers National Forest.
Leroy Cyr, Fish Biologist, 2005, Interoffice Memorandum to Jerry Boberg, Fish and Watershed Program Manager, Six Rivers National Forest.
2004 SALMON RIVER, CA STUDY
53 dredging sites were documented within
the Salmon River Basin.
1,066 linear feet of river bottom was dredged
within the entire river system.
The North Fork, South Fork and mainstem
Salmon River is approximately 79 miles long
(417,120 linear feet).
Suction dredge holes disturbed <0.26% of the
river bottom.
Leroy Cyr, Fish Biologist, 2005, Interoffice Memorandum to Jerry Boberg, Fish and Watershed Program Manager, Six Rivers National Forest.
Salmon River Study Conclusions by Greene
Refugia are defined in the literature as any
hole in a river bottom that is 3 feet in depth
or deeper.
This study identified 27 such holes caused
by suction dredging.
Therefore, suction dredge holes disturbed
only <0.26% of the river bottom, and
51% of the 53 dredged holes had the
potential for improving the habitat to
support the survival of species in the river.
Dredge hole in the Klamath with circling salmon, September 2009, Avery Rathburn
Sample Letter to Legislators
In his court declaration Dr. Peter Moyle stated, “It should be
assumed there is harm, unless it can be proven
otherwise, One reason for my taking this conservative
position is that we simply do not know the effects of
dredging on many species” (page 8, lines 13-15).
He goes on to say, “Even for salmonids, information on the
effects of dredging, with the exception of a few studies
such as that of Harvey (1998), is largely anecdotal or in nonpeer reviewed reports” (page 8, lines 20-23).
Declaration of Peter B. Moyle, Ph.d., In Support of Entry of Stipulated Agreement, Karuk vs CA Dept. Fish and Game, Superior Court of
California, County of Alameda, Hayward Division, Case No: RG 05 211597. Jan. 06, 2006.
22
Effects of dredging commonly appear to be minor and local, but
natural resource professionals should expect effects to vary widely
among stream systems and reaches within systems.
… Given the current level of uncertainty about the effects of dredging,
where threatened or endangered aquatic species inhabit dredged
areas, fisheries managers would be prudent to suspect that
dredging is harmful to aquatic resources.
HARVEY AND LISLE, 1998, Effects of Suction Dredging on Streams, A Review and Evaluation Strategy
Bret C. Harvey is a fish ecologist and Thomas E. Lisle is a geomorphologist for the U.S. Forest Service,
Pacific Southwest Research Station, 1700 Bayview Drive, Arcata, CA 95521 USA
In 1,388 pages of text IN THE CALIFORNIA SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
(SEIR) the term “Is Proven” is not once used. There are over forty years of suction dredging
history yet the SEIR must speculate on what “may” occur if gold dredging resumes.
%
74.0
1.8
21.9
1.3
0.4
0.6
This chart illustrates that 99-percent of the supporting statements were based upon conditional
verbs not scientific results.
Western Mining Alliance 2012
99%
Fish feeding below the outfall from
a small-scale gold suction dredge sluice box
25
More fish feeding behind small-scale gold suction dredges
Effect of scale
27
28
CONCLUSION
Small-scale gold suction
dredging effects a very
small area in the
environment relative to
the entire area in which
all dredges operate.
But, what about government activity
and their effect on the
environment???
Grand Canyon awash with Sediment as
Scientists Study Impact
The White Salmon River, WA at its confluence with the Columbia has filled with silt and is only inches deep since the
breaching of Condit Dam. The first 300 yards upstream from the Highway 14 bridge, once 18 to 20 feet deep and a
popular trolling spot for boating anglers, now has just a few inches of water running over a deep bed of sediment.
The sluice box filters out gold, platinum, lead, mercury, and many scrap metals
from the river’s gravels.
We recovered 65 lbs of lead, from the Lewis River, WA in just one fishing hole so far and we
have not finished with it. Yet.
Note from Scott Atkinson
Garbage in the river? Say it ain’t so!!
Source: Western Mining Alliance
Source: Western Mining Alliance
Realize that all this stuff was taken out of
ONE dredge hole during a summer season on
the South Fork of the American River.
Source: Western Mining Alliance
IS IT ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN THAT'S DRIVING
MINING OUT OF THE UNITED STATES OR RATHER
POLITICS ON THE GRANDEST SCALE?
The current administration has designated millions of acres of federal land off-limits to multiple uses
such as mining---and seems to be attempting to lock up public land --- all without consulting Congress
or the public.
The administration seems to be conforming U.S. environmental policy to United Nations Strategies.
The International Union for Conservation of Nature, an accredited scientific advisory body to the
United Nations, incorporates U.S. federal agencies, non-governmental organizations and United
Nations agencies in its proclaimed war against "ignorant humans."
Globalizing Mining in America, from Mining Voice Magazine Volume 6(2):26-35, March-April 2000
Critics of the administration’s land grab point to the
United Nations. They accuse the president of
implementing the UN’s Agenda 21 and the
Convention on Biological Diversity. Both were
introduced during the June 1992 Earth Summit held
in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Agenda 21 is a 40-chapter, 381 page book focused on reorganizing society around
"sustainable" use and development of the planet. Based on socialist principles of equal
sharing of all natural resources. Agenda 21 sets a goal to control all human activity to
protect the Earth’s ecosystems and biological diversity.
Mining, for instance, would have to be "environmentally sound" and could only be
done "in areas adjacent to protected areas with a view to furthering protection of these
areas."
The meaning of "protected areas" and "environmentally sound" is not defined in
Agenda 21, but it is clarified in the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (Biodiversity
Treaty) and the Wildlands Project.
Dr. Reed Noss who is associated with the
Wildlands Project as well as the University of
Oregon and other radical environmental groups
describes a corridor that would be needed to
assure viability of the grizzly bear in Montana.
"If the population of grizzlies in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem is to be connected to other
populations, which seems to be necessary to assure population viability, then wide corridors
with resident grizzlies must connect Yellowstone with the Northern Continental Divide
Ecosystem (about 200 miles away) and the wildlands of central Idaho. …corridor for grizzly
bears should be at least 27.5 miles wide."
In further describing the corridor, he states, "Because Road densities above about 0.5 miles of
road per square mile of habitat may be a threat to grizzlies, road closures would be required to
make inter-regional corridors safe ."
TECHNICAL REVIEW OF THE WILDLANDS PROJECT AND HOW IT IS AFFECTING THE
MANAGEMENT OF STATE, FEDERAL AND PRIVATE LANDS IN THE UNITED STATES
by Tom McDonnell
This review details much of the structure and objectives of the Wildlands Project.
During the past several years, resource industries, state and local governments and
communities nationwide have been buried under an avalanche of: new species
listings; appeals and litigation to stop water development, logging, mining, grazing
and recreational activities. There have been vast amounts of legislation proposing
new wilderness areas, heritage areas, scenic rivers, biological corridors, state and
national parks or wildlife refuges, as well as management plans involving critical
habitat, watersheds or ecosystems.
http://citizenreviewonline.org/april_2002/wildlands_project_history.htm
While many of these actions seem to
be isolated incidence, a review of
Wildlands
Project
documents
suggests that the actions are often
well coordinated activities aimed
according to the Project's text at
establishing a "regional reserve
system which will ultimately tie the
North American continent into a
single Biodiversity Reserve."
http://citizenreviewonline.org/april_2002/wildlands_project_history.htm
…the mission articulated by White House Science and Technology czar, John Holdren, who said,
“A massive campaign must be launched to restore a high-quality environment in North America
and to de-develop the United States.”
Paul and Anne Ehrlich and John Holdren, Human Ecology Problems and Solutions (San Francisco: WH Freeman and Company, 1973), 279.
Significant additions to the timetable, was provided by President Barack Obama. Consider the
executive memorandum quietly issued by the White House on April 16, 2010, deceptively
titled “America’s Great Outdoors Initiative.” The stated goals of the Initiative: Reconnect…
America’s rivers, waterways, landscapes of national significance, ranches, farms and forests,
great parks, and coasts and beaches by… creating corridors and connectivity across these
outdoor spaces, and for enhancing neighborhood parks; and determine how the federal
government can best advance those priorities though public/ private partnerships and locally
supported conservation strategies.
Barack Obama, “Presidential Memorandum— America’s Great Outdoors,” White House, April 16, 2010.
In presenting his unilateral order, Obama sealed the deal on what promoters of the green
agenda have desired for decades: “reconnect” the land of North America, creating several
sweeping “corridors” designed to provide seamless “connectivity” between millions of
acres of “outdoor spaces.”
Notice that “ranches, farms and forests” and “coasts and beaches” are also included in the
reconnection goals. This means that private ownership of such property is in the
crosshairs of this scheme. The Initiative will be advanced by “the federal government…
working through public/ private partnerships and locally supported conservation
strategies.” This simple phrase empowers environmental organizations and their deeppocketed donors to have a seat at the table with policymakers at all levels of government.
Barack Obama, “Presidential Memorandum— America’s Great Outdoors,” White House, April 16, 2010.
Sign Petition: This is why it is important!
Each year since 1986, American Rivers has released its
America's Most Endangered Rivers report to spotlight
the nation's ten most imperiled rivers. This year, the
Chetco River found itself at #7 on the Most Endangered
Rivers List. Southern Oregon's Wild and Scenic Chetco
River boasts pristine waters and abundant wild salmon
and steelhead, but it faces an immediate threat from a
strip mining proposal
damaging method of dredging.
that would use a highly
Oregon's Senators Wyden and Merkley, Congressman
DeFazio, and Governor Kulongoski are calling on the
agencies that manage this river to prohibit mining in or
near the Chetco River this summer. This reprieve
would allow Congress time to legislate the best
possible long-term protection for the Chetco River.
http://www.change.org/petitions/the-endangered-chetco-river-needs-your-help
The Chetco River, Oregon “faces an immediate threat from a strip mining
proposal that would use a highly damaging method of dredging.”
Why have a consortium of extreme environmental groups joined
together together to deny small-scale gold suction dredgers their right to
mine?
Karuk Tribe
Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations
Institute for Fisheries Resources
Klamath Riverkeeper
Center For Biological Diversity
Friends of the River
California Tribal Business Alliance
The Sierra Fund
California Trout
Environmental Law Foundation
Environmental Justice Coalition for Water
Friends of the North Fork American
California Sportfishing Protection Alliance
The decision to change our name to
“Wildlands Network” has been both
exciting
and
difficult.
“Wildlands
Project” has been a cherished part of
our 18-year history. However, thanks to
you and our other partners and
supporters, we are no longer just a
project. We are an expanding network
of conservationists. You are part of this
network that is continuing to tackle the
continental challenge of protecting
healthy North American wildlands and
wildlife far into the future.
http://www.twp.org/sites/default/files/wc_fall08.pdf
Social engineering and behavior modification are some of the true
objectives being implemented under the guise of environmental
and climate protection.
This is accomplished by exploiting people's desire to maintain a
healthy and lasting environment in the name of
“sustainability.”
the concept of sustainability is a call for government
policies that demand changes in human behavior and
lifestyles under penalty of law.
On its own, SUSTAINABILITY is one of those slogans that
sounds typically benign: But like most left-oriented
expressions, there is a sinister translation.
United nations Agenda 21 calls for worldwide population
reduction and suggests moving people from rural areas to
the cities, so “sustainable development” can be more
easily managed.
One of the United nations objectives is to reduce the
world’s human population by up to two-thirds of what is
was in 1992.
Eco-Tyranny
“While
I was researching Climategate, I was
astonished by a recurring theme: since the
inception of the environmental movement, its
leaders have been consumed with eliminating
capitalism and ushering in a global era of
socialism.
Their call for being “green” goes far beyond
demanding clean air, pure water, healthy
forests, and alternative sources of energy.
The leftists at the helm of the
environmentalist hierarchy want to control
the air, water, forests, and natural resources.”
Brian Sussman, (2012). Eco-Tyranny: How the Left's Green Agenda will Dismantle America.
“These leftists contend that some people are randomly spit out of
their mother’s womb with a better brain than most. Those with the
best brains have a Darwinian authority to rule over those with the
lesser brains, lest those with the deficient brains destroy the planet
and kill one another; thus, the need for a heavy-handed form of
government loaded with burdensome regulations, and the perfect
excuse for socialism, communism, and fascism.”
Brian Sussman, (2012). Eco-Tyranny: How the Left's Green Agenda will Dismantle America.
“Leftists (Marxists) believe they have the power to define all societal
morality, rules, and laws subject to their goals. Hence, the inalienable
rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as recognized by
America’s founders are viewed as absurd, because an imaginary God
cannot declare rights.
Marxism demands that all so-called rights be issued by the government in
the form of laws.
And just as a law can be issued by the government, so shall it be taken
away by that government if deemed necessary.”
Brian Sussman, (2012). Eco-Tyranny: How the Left's Green Agenda will Dismantle America.
The environmental agenda has been infected by
extremism—it's become an economic suicide
pact.
You must understand, the green agenda— from guano to
global warming— is not about celebrating the beauty of our
planet; it is an assault on mankind. It’s an agenda that has no
regard for your needs, lifestyle, dreams, desires, or feelings.
Brian Sussman, (2012). Eco-Tyranny: How the Left's Green Agenda will Dismantle America.
ENVIRONMENTALIST ACTIVISTS (eco-socialists) ARE DOGMATIC,
ideological radicals hell-bent on transforming society into a colossal,
highly regulated, redistributive commune void of inalienable rights.
Their lack of integrity enables them to look you straight in the eye
and lie about the facts, while they spin out tailor-made, cherrypicked research supposedly proving their many fictitious claims
regarding the state of the global ecosystem. The primary goal of their
green agenda is not a pristine environment— it’s about gaining
absolute control over your life.
Brian Sussman, (2012). Eco-Tyranny: How the Left's Green Agenda will Dismantle America
In June 1972, official representatives from 113 countries, hundreds of
nongovernmental organizations, and thousands of media outlets assembled in
Sweden to change the world.
The Declaration was nothing less than socialism cleverly cloaked in an
ecological wrapper—
“ reduce the gap” between the rich and poor;
 “shape our actions” by surrendering to nature;
 “demand the acceptance of responsibility” through heavy-handed
government regulations and laws.
It was a corrupted prescription written with the goal to one day
infect America.
Brian Sussman, (2012). Eco-Tyranny: How the Left's Green Agenda will Dismantle America
UNITED NATIONS Agenda 21 is a
carefully disguised attempt to
hijack the worthy cause of
environmentalism in the pursuit of
political objectives.
ECO-TYRANNY
How the Left’s Green Agenda
Will Dismantle America
Midpoint Trade Books
27 West 20th Street, Suite 1102
New York, NY 10011
First Edition
ISBN: 978-1-936488-50-6