dfg suction dredge report is out

Non-native fish in California

It is well known that many special interest groups (e.g. Bishop Fish planting Club, Sierra Club, Visalia Sportsman Club) with the help of CDFG introduced many non-native species of fish to the California water ways without knowing the full impact.

non-native species Brook Trout, Lake Trout, Atlantic Salmon, Kokanee Salmon, Striped Bass and Brown Trout to name a few

This practice ( fish stocking) started in the mid-1800s and still continues to this very day

It also is well known the many of these species are predacious and salmon eggs is a large part of their diet during salmon/steelhead runs

There is no mention of this in the subsequent environmental impact report for the suction dredge program

It is with this I find this study without merit to be prejudice and inconclusive
 

Sorry guys been busy.
It seems to me that before taking away our right to mine, the burden of proof falls on them to show justifiable and scientifically verifiable facts to support their laws.

?? What has been told or given to the fishermen or any other member of the public to cause the almost hatred of dredgers??

I've never seen dredging hurt fishing or fishermen, asked a few to not throw hooks in the hole when were working, and have seen lots of nice small mouth bass come out of our holes.

The Eco-Nazi propaganda machine seems to be in high gear against all of us, even non miners they just don't see it yet.

Compile as much scientific data as possible, put it together in a comprehensible presentation that will stand up to the rhetoric, refute with facts the misinformation they are selling.
At the same time some might consider writing stories for news papers (keep submitting until they print it) Putting the real facts in the public eye.
Anyone good at stories could also send some to Outdoor Life and Field&Stream, as well as Western outdoor news.
The A$$ holes in Sacramento may ignore you and I, after all were only a few thousand common folk, but I bet if we could get a different view to the public they wouldn't be so ready to sweep us under the carpet without better facts.

Convince fishermen their lead weights are next, and white water rafting traumatizes the wild life and will be the next to go (get my drift)
Just an idea
 

Tarkus said:
It seems to me that before taking away our right to mine, the burden of proof falls on them to show justifiable and scientifically verifiable facts to support their laws.
Click to expand...

Yes, very true statement there, and this must be how our comments to them are reflected. :thumbsup:
 

A lot of the rhetoric spewed to fishermen is from there own kind.Remember that a co sponsor to the original bill was a Trout Foundation(fishermen)they consider themselves purists and are all about the public image,not to say we arent but they might have been smart to jump on the oppositions ship when they seen the opportunity,if you cant beat them join em mentality.I have been on various fishing forums and heard us dredgers bashed and considered only second to Satan himself!It only takes a few "respected",people in high positions to say something and the rest of the Sheeple who dont know different follow.Another forum is the fact that many commercial fishermens lives have been greatly impacted in the past few years with closed seasons and the threat of losing there livelihoods all together,They want answers and the easy target is us,along with the fact that people with personal beliefs in high places have found an opportunity to further there agenda's to take the heat off of them.
I have been a proffessional trapper for the better part of my life and I seen this very same thing happen in 1998 here in Calif.where commercials were ran of staged animals in traps and it was all pure B.S.,heck there was a scene of a dog with a beaver trap on its head,and it was still alive,for one thing this type of trap is never placed above water and second if a dog did get in one it would be dead(I know,I had one catch me by the arm,my mistake,and broke it it clean in two)my point is these types throw there lies and like dredgers they go after groups who dont have the finance's or the ability to get the word out there we just dont have the numbers.
We need biologists on our side,ones that arent afraid to tell the truth which is hard to find because I have seen them fired for doing that if what they find doesnt fit there superiors goals.That is our biggest hurdle.With the state in the condition it is there is sure to be some out of work biologists our money should go to do our own independent study
 

Does anyone have videos with sound of California rivers and streams in high spring runoff conditions. I've been in on the north fork of the American River in February and it was milk chocolate brown, had big trees floating down river, you could hear the boulders bouncing around and dredging does nothing like a spring runoff. Also possibly pictures of the trees and flood debris at the Dam on the north fork of the American River would indicate what each spring flood does to the river, the surrounding banks, trees etc. This would be evidence of what happens naturally each year and the fish still live and survive and have been since God created fish.

A thought about presenting true evidence...........6bkpkr
 

63bkpkr said:
Does anyone have videos with sound of California rivers and streams in high spring runoff conditions. I've been in on the north fork of the American River in February and it was milk chocolate brown, had big trees floating down river, you could hear the boulders bouncing around and dredging does nothing like a spring runoff. Also possibly pictures of the trees and flood debris at the Dam on the north fork of the American River would indicate what each spring flood does to the river, the surrounding banks, trees etc. This would be evidence of what happens naturally each year and the fish still live and survive and have been since God created fish.

A thought about presenting true evidence...........6bkpkr
Click to expand...

Great point Backer.I have had boulders I couldnt winch,moved by Mother Nature in a single Spring run off
 

Evidence provided a dozen times utilizing the Forest Services own bio studies on erosion. A single watershed in the siskiyous moves more gravels through erosion than miners in a 100 years. Evidence is NOTHING get used to it--truth ??? justice??? they wipe their anus with it and the environutz plow on with stashes filled with casino cash $$$$$$$ now-John :P
 

Mohavejoe is compiling a list of comments/laws pertaining to this mess in California. he has posted about this over on www.49ermike.com in the prospecting forum,topis #91409 "comment shareing portal (offline). everything he gets will be anonymous and no names/address will ever be given out or refered to. he is setting up a dedicated email site so we can read/post comments to.this may help people to genterate material for comments and not be woried about someone getting their personal contact info and harrasing them. im going todo what i can to help,i hope you also do it!!
 

How about this as it pertains what is in the new seir report.....

The Environmental Impacts of Hydroelectric Power

by

Eric Boissonneault

Last updated: 12/05/2001 08:25:50

Back to title page


Hydroelectric power does not produce the thick black smoke of a coal fired power plant, or the harmful waste of a nuclear power plant, but hydroelectric projects can be the source of other environmental problems. The harmful impacts of altering river systems to produce power can have harmful impacts on both human and aquatic communities in the area surrounding a hydroelectric project.





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Introduction:
Electricity playes an every increasing roll in the average persons life. Because it has become so important we have tried to find many ways in which to produce electricity in a cost-effective manner. In order to make the power "artificially" cheap the environmental impacts of producing electricity are often ignored. We now know that the environmental impacts of producing power have a real affect on the earth's systems, and that these affects can no longer be ignored. There are two things that now need to be done to minimize the impact of power production on our planet. First we need to lower our consumption of electricity, and second we need to produce cleaner power.

Often times when people speak about cleaner power they think of power production methods that do not cause air pollution or require the disposal of harmful waste, however pollution from power production can take many forms. Hydroelectric power is thought to be one of the cleaner ways in which to produce electricity, but it does have its' bad side. The environmental impacts of producing power using large hydroelectric dams is greater then the benefits that are gained from this power.




Abstract:














General Hydropower Information:
There are currently more then 2,300 hydroelectric dams in the US (Schueller, 2001).
Hydropower accounts for about 11% of the electricity supply in the US (Schueller, 2001).
Hydro plants can be owned by just about anyone including: federal, state, and local governments, utility companies (public and private), irrigation companies, and metropolitan water districts ( Brookshier and Sommers, 2000).
Of the 80,000 dams in the US, only 3% are used to produce electricity (FWEE, 2000).

As Figure 1 shows Canada and the US are the two largest producers of hydroelectric power in the world.



Figure 1: Who is Producing Hydropower (WVIC, 2000).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Effects on Fish:


There are many ways in which a hydroelectric dam can affect the fish living in that particular river system. One of the more common concerns has to do with the blocking of spawning grounds for migrating fish. In the US this issue is often associated with the northwestern states, but it is also an issue for fish spacies alone the east coast. Salmon have long used the large rivers of the northwest as spawning grounds, it is estimated that 10 to 15 million salmon traditionally used the Columbia River as their spawning grounds (Reisner, 2000). Now on the Snake River (a tributary of the Columbia) four dams block the fish from reaching their spawning grounds. This has led to the listing of every species of salmon found on the Snake River as either extinct or endangered (FOE, 2000). Figure 2 shows the number of dams in the Columbia River system that the salmon must get past in order to reach their former spawning grounds.


Figure 2: Dams that fish must get past to reach spawning grounds (Flint, 2001).
Fish that do get by the dams and spawn are not guaranteed that their genes will live on. Of 1000 eggs that are fertilized, it is estimated that only 1 will survive to adulthood ( Reisner, 2000). This is due to many different factors. Salmon travel in fast cool waters, when they enter into the warmer, slower moving water behind a dam it takes them a long time to find their way past the dam and down the river. This extra time allows predator fish to feed on more of the young salmon. The warm waters behind a dam make for prime recreational fisheries for warm water fish, however these fish prey on the salmon and can have a major impact on the number of salmon smolts that make it past a particular dam. When you multiple this by the number of dams that one fish may have to travel past, it amounts to much better odds for the predator then the prey.Young fish can also be affected by the turbines that generate the power. These turbines generate high pressures that can crush young salmon smolts (Reisner, 2000).

As water travels over a dam it will hit the bottom pool with great force and cause an increase in the amount of air that is in the water. Since air is 78% nitrogen, the levels of dissolved nitrogen will greatly increase. When fish travel from an area that has high levels of nitrogen to areas of low nitrogen they can develop air bubbles in their bloodstream. These air bubbles can then lead to injury or death of the fish. (FWEE, 2000).




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes in the Movement of Sediments:
A dam will block the natural flow of sediments down a river system. This can have many different affects. For one it will block the passage of gravels used by fish for spawning. Blocking of gravels can also cause the river below a dam to erode its own bed and banks, which in turn can lead to lowering the groundwater table along a river, and the undermining of bridges and other structures along a river ( Pottinger, 2001). Dams will also stop or reduce the size of floods. While this may seem like a good aspect of dams, these floods provide the sediment nutrients that plant species along a river need for growth and reproduction. Since many of the most productive natural areas are along rivers the reduction in flood size and frequency will lead to a gradual decline in the productivity of these lands ( Pottinger, 2001). As the plant production is decreased so to will the health of animal communities that use these plants.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Flooding Caused by Impoundments
Once an area is flooded the power company will often raise and lower the water levels depending on the need for power. When this happens the normal vegetation that would become established along the banks cannot become established. This can lead to increased erosion along the banks of the reservoir.

Flooding also may force the removal of native people. Not only are native people going to lose their lands, but also with the increased access to native lands from new roads these people will often loose much of their culture. These people are led to believe that the hydro projects will raise their standard of living by providing electricity and new jobs. However, degrading the environment which provides their traditional livelyhood, often outweighs any gains that they receive. Often these populations also show a decrease in health do to a reduction in the quality of their water. This aspect is addressed in the water quality section.

In many developing nations where large reservoirs have been created behind hydroelectric ther has been an increase in health problems. A large reservoir will attract mosquitoes, which in turn can spread diseases, such as malaria, through the human population much faster then normal (Freeman, 2000).




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Water Quality



Hydroelectric dams can have a major impact on the quality of the water that is held behind them. One of the major concerns with water quality has to do with the build up of toxic mercury in the water. Mercury is naturally leached from the earth by water, however when a dam blocks the flow of water this mercury can build up in the water to higher then normal levels (May, 1994). If the flooded area behind a dam is full of organic matter, bacteria can turn the insoluable mercury that is present into soluable methyl-mercury (Raphals, 1992). Methyl-mercury can then accumulate in the biomass of fish, and has been shown to be the cause of many human health problems. In the area flooded by the James Bay hydro project in Quebec Canada methyl-mercury levels have gone up dramatically. The native Cree that live in this area rely heavily on fish as a food source, and as is shown in Figure 3 the amount of mercury in the fish has increased since the project began.


Figure 3: Mercury present in the pike population (Dumont, 1995).
Another water quality issue has developed in other parts of the World. Many developing nations are being targeted for hydroelectric projects, however in many of these nations industrial and human waste is released directly into rivers. Damming these rivers will "turn the river into a cesspool of human and industrial wastes" (Freeman, 2000).

Water quality is also affected by the stratification of water behind a dam. This is when the warmer water on top traps colder water below it. This will lead to lower oxygen levels in the colder water. When this colder water is released to produce electricity it will have a negative impact on the aquatic ecosystem below the dam.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference List

Brookshier,Peggy and Garold Sommers, 2000. Hydropower Program: US Department of Energy. Retrieved on 20 January, 2001 from the World Wide Web:http://www.inel.gov/national/hydropower/more.htm.

Dumont, C., 1995. Proceedings of the 1995 Canadian mercury network workshop mercury and health: The James Bay Cree experience. Retrived on 13 February, 2001 from the World Wide Web: http://www.cciw.ca/eman-temp/reports/publications/mercury95/part4.html.

Flint, Tom, 2001. The Dams. Retrived on 5 Febuary, 2001 from the World Wide Web: http://www.saveourdams.com/snake_columbia_dams.htm.

The Foundation for Water and Energy Education, 2000. Hydro Tours. Retrieved on 20 January, 2001 from the World Wide Web:http://www.fwee.org/Tours.html.

Freeman, Aaron, 2000. Financing Disaster.Canadian Dimension 34:18.

Friends of the Earth, 2000. Lower Snake River Campaign. Retrieved on 25 January 2001 from the World Wide Web: http://www.foe.org/foenw/rivers/snake.html.

Higgens, Margot, 2000.Kennebec River revived after Edwards Dam removal. Retrived on 5 Febuary, 2001 from the World Wide Web: http://www.enn.com/news/enn-stories/2000/06/06302000/edwards_14337.asp.

May, Elizabeth, 1994. Native garden of the north. Sierra79:130.

Pottinger, Lori, 2001. The Environmental Impacts of Large Dams. Retrived on 25 January, 2001 from the World Wide Web:http://www.irn.org/basics/impacts.shtml

Raphals, Philip, 1992. The hidden cost of Canada's cheap power. New Scientist133:50-55.

Reisner, Marc, 2000. Unleash the Rivers: Dams are responsiblefor some of the worst environmental tragedies in history. We're starting at last to take some down.Time 155:66.

Schueller, Gretel H., 2001. Hydropower Threatens Nation's Rivers. Retrieved on 20 January, 2001 from the World Wide Web: http://www.enn.com/news/enn-stories/2001/01/01102001/hydropower_41184.asp?P=1.

Wisconsin Valley Improvement Company, 2000. Facts About Hydropower Retrived on 31 January, 2001 from the World Wide Web:www.wvic.com/hydro-facts.htm
 

Yes,that is why I said somebody needs to be looking into the Hydro dams in Oregon,that is where the water in the Klammath is being warmed thus killing the salmon.Put the blame where it really is.
 

just another tidbit

The 50 deaths this summer are approaching the recent high of 57 in 2003, according to the nonprofit American Whitewater organization's Web site. It's the third time in the past 12 years that 50 or more people have died in whitewater accidents in the United States.
 

I have found alot of these reports from USGS from around the country stating this exact same thing.

Any dam!!!
1400 or more in ca.
 

2cmorau said:
just another tidbit

The 50 deaths this summer are approaching the recent high of 57 in 2003, according to the nonprofit American Whitewater organization's Web site. It's the third time in the past 12 years that 50 or more people have died in whitewater accidents in the United States.
Click to expand...

That is 57 more than merc deaths in ca.
 

Re: dfg suction dredge report is out 16March Very High Water

At this moment the water in the Auburn area is very high, Clementine Dam on the North Fork of the American River was flowing at 15,000cfs.

Can somone get into the debris catching area at Clementine and take pictures of 1) Debris 2) The color of the water and then these pictures need to go to the DFG meeting as an example of what happens each year naturally. I suspect the water is a milk chocolate brown color and it should be seen by the people who claim we do so much damage.\

See my comments under the Metal Detecting Section dated 15March11..............63bkpkr
 

Mean like this:

FloodYuba97copy1.jpg




And this too:

klamathfloodcopy.jpg
 

Picture is worth a thousand words!!Great photo's!!!Please make sure these get seen,by "THEM".
 

Yep, will do. :thumbsup:

Glad to have the time to make comment and put thought into a comment letter for the CDFG proposals.

Struggled at first with the approach but now have it all figured out just need to continue to work it out into a refined version.

Sorry will not be posting any of my comment letters on any forum as we have seen in the past it makes its way to the wrong eyes. :-X
 

I think a lot of people don't understand how a river works at flood stage. They just go to the river a couple times a year and see the water dribbling over the nice moss covered rocks and say WOW isn't that pretty, then they go home.

Gravel Hog...
With those pictures I think it would pay to use a graph that shows the sediment in the river going from it's normal state ( The Pretty side of It ) to the full blown raging river. Starting with a graph that would show starting to flood, bed eroding-Full flood, bed eroded-Retuning to normal- Normal flow, normal bed.
How can they explain how BOULDERS the size of cars are round??? If the water just ran over the rocks only the tops would be affected, but there round on all sides. Why is that???

Hammer down....Take no Prisoners....
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Is there an easy way to determine where claims are and are not?

⬅️ Previous Thread

New California Proposed Dredge Regulations here:

Next Thread ➡️

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
We Dig Metal Detectors

Latest Discussions

Back
Top