Gravity dredge question

[rick.ther]

So, I have a quandary..
Not much info with pics so here I go
Running about 100 ft pipe, is it better to use the top end for the suction intake or Y into it at a certain point and use venture effect for suction
Not sure if I am asking correctly or not
Rick

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Family Maps of Hinds County, Mississippi, Deluxe Edition - Grab it through Amazon!

[QNCrazy]

Run direct. I'll be playing with gravity this weekend running direct with no splits or Y's. I did a test last weekend in my creek with 20' of 1 1/2" pool hose, smooth bore. We had 3-4' of drop which surprisingly provided a decent amount of suction. We filled a 5 gallon bucket with material in less than 10 minutes. I know it doesn't sound like much but if I were to dig, classify, sluice, I would only be able to run 6-8 buckets an hour depending on material.

It seems to me that placing a Y anywhere along the line would actually reduce the head pressure at the suction end. I'm new to this as you are and I've learned a lot from trial and error. So play around with it and post your results, with pics if possible.

 

[ClaimStake]

don't use Y's.

here's my setup.


a lot of people don't like this setup. but I don't think they've really tried it. works great for me as long as I'm nice to the pipes.

 

[Hoser John]

100% banned now also sic sic sic kalif regs are insane-John

 

[rick.ther]

Hoser, BANNED? when was this reg done? damn.
Rick

 

[Goldwasher]

100% banned now also sic sic sic kalif regs are insane-John

No!!!!! it is not John nothing in the new reg rewrite or definition ban gravity powered dredging!!! Where do you come up with this stuff? Thats not even getting into your actual rights as a claim holder or prospector.
You still remain at the top of the list for spreading misinformation and negativity within the community it's weird.

 

[Goldwasher]

Hoser, BANNED? when was this reg done? damn.
Rick

it wasn't Rick...sometimes you have to put on a "cranky and disgrunteled not really here to help you filter"

 

[Hoser John]

In ignorance is bliss and as usual your happy. There are no NEW regs just the same sic sic sic promulgated garbage with 5 permits to dredge now including the Army Corp has been drug back into the fray. Will love to see the tickets flow. Let the REAL truth set you free. hahahaha rant on as to me this thread is dead as all you have to do is hit the past posts and all is revealed to those who really care. Judges will finish it all off after the horrendous loss in Oregon on Federal Premption...or did that not also happen-have fun.......John .. there are, moftp://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/sen/sb_0651-0700/sb_670_bill_20090519_amended_sen_v98.htmlre but busy mining today so just why is gravity dredging NOT a vacuum process and it is 1000% more defined in the numerous regs passed to further kill the dredge industry and all it ensues?

 

[ratled]

(g) For purposes of this section and Section 5653.1, the use of vacuum
or suction dredge equipment, also known as suction dredging, is the use of
a mechanized or motorized system for removing or assisting in the removal
of, or the processing of, material from the bed, bank, or channel of a river,
stream, or lake in order to recover minerals. This section and Section 5653.1
do not apply to, prohibit, or otherwise restrict nonmotorized recreational
mining activities, including panning for gold.

 

[Hoser John]

[h=1]Suction Dredge Permits[/h]

Page updated 1/15/2016
[h=2]Current Status[/h] The use of vacuum or suction dredge equipment, otherwise known as suction dredging, is currently prohibited and unlawful throughout California.
Under new state law effective January 1, 2016, the use of vacuum or suction dredge equipment is defined to mean the use of a mechanized or motorized system for removing or assisting in the removal of, or the processing of, material from the bed, bank, or channel of a river, stream, or lake in order to recover minerals.
Under existing state law the California Department of Fish and Wildlife is also currently prohibited from issuing any permits for suction dredging in California under the Fish and Game Code.
With state law in effect, the use of vacuum or suction dredge equipment, otherwise known as suction dredging, is unlawful in California rivers, streams, and lakes, and any such activity is subject to enforcement and prosecution as a criminal misdemeanor.
(See generally Fish & G. Code, §§ 5653, 5653.1, 12000, subd. (a).)
[h=2]New State Law Governing Suction Dredging in California Effective January 1, 2016[/h] New state law governing the use of vacuum or suction dredge equipment, otherwise known as suction dredging, is now in effect, as of January 1, 2016. (Stats. 2015, ch. 680, §§ 2-3.) The new law, commonly referred to as Senate Bill or “SB” 637 (Allen), amends Fish and Game Code section 5653 and adds section 13172.5 to the Water Code.
In general, SB 637 amends Fish and Game Code section 5653 as follows:

• 
  [*=1]Prohibits the Department from issuing any suction dredging permits absent a complete application which must include, among other things, a copy of any water quality permit or other authorization required by the State Water Resources Control Board or the relevant Regional Water Quality Control Board, or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or a written determination by such agency that no water quality permit or other such authorization is necessary;
  [*=1]Conditions Department issuance of permits on regulations implementing the section that must ensure the use of vacuum or suction dredge equipment will not cause any significant effects to fish and wildlife, as opposed to prior law which conditioned the issuance of permits on regulations ensuring suction dredging would not be deleterious to fish;
  [*=1]Provides the Department with authority to adjust permit fees to an amount sufficient to cover all reasonable costs incurred by the Department to regulate suction dredging as provided by the Fish and Game Code;
  [*=1]Directs the Department to work with the State Water Resources Control Board and the Regional Water Quality Control Boards regarding potential violations of requirements, conditions, or prohibitions governing the use of vacuum or suction dredge equipment; and
  [*=1]Defines for the first time by statute what it means to use vacuum or suction dredge equipment, otherwise known as suction dredging, as the use of a mechanized or motorized system for removing or assisting in the removal of, or the processing of, material from the bed, bank, or channel of a river, stream, or lake in order to recover minerals; but also clarifying the definition does not apply to, prohibit, or otherwise restrict nonmotorized recreational mining activities, including panning for gold.

In general, Water Code section 13172.5, added by SB 637:

• 
  [*=1]Defines the use of vacuum or suction dredge equipment, otherwise known as suction dredging, in the same terms as described above and now provided in Fish and Game Code section 5653;
  [*=1]Provides the State Water Resources Control Board or the appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Board may take one or more of three specified actions related to suction dredging to protect water quality, including (1) the adoption of waste discharge requirements or a waiver of such requirements; (2) specifying certain conditions or areas where the discharge of waste or other adverse impacts on beneficial uses of the waters of the state from the use of vacuum or suction dredge equipment is prohibited; or (3) prohibit any particular use of, or methods of using, vacuum or suction dredge equipment, or any portion thereof, to extract minerals based on a determination generally that doing so will cause or contribute to an exceedance of applicable water quality objectives or unreasonably impact beneficial uses; and
  [*=1]Directs the State Water Resources Control Board or the appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Board to solicit public input as detailed and to hold at least one noticed public hearing before taking any action as provided.

Information regarding state and federal water quality permitting requirements, and related action by the State Water Resources Control Board, the Regional Water Quality Control Boards, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is available at the following links:
SWRCB
USACE San Francisco District
USACE Sacramento District
USACE Los Angeles District
[h=2]Ongoing Litigation[/h]The California Department of Fish and Wildlife, formerly the Department of Fish and Game, has been a named defendant or respondent in various lawsuits related to suction dredging in California since 2005. By order of the Judicial Council of California, various ongoing civil proceedings are coordinated in San Bernardino County Superior Court. (Suction Dredge Mining Cases, Super. Ct. San Bernardino County, Judicial Council Proceeding No. JCPDS4720.) An appeal stemming from those proceedings is pending in Division Two of the Fourth Appellate District. (In re Suction Dredge Mining Cases, No. E064087.)
Related litigation is also pending before the California Supreme Court. (People v. Rinehart, No. S222620.) The Rinehart litigation stems from a criminal prosecution for unlawful suction dredging in 2012. According to the web page of the California Supreme Court, the case presents the following issue: Does the Mining Act of 1872 (30 U.S.C. § 22 et seq.) preempt California Fish and Game Code sections 5653 and 5653.1 with respect to the use of vacuum and suction dredging equipment? The matter is fully briefed and the parties, including the People of the State of California represented by the California Attorney General, await further notice from the Court.
General information regarding the ongoing litigation concerning suction dredging in California is available by case number at: www.courts.ca.gov.
This web page will be updated, resources permitting, should there be any significant developments in the ongoing litigation regarding suction dredging that affects the current status quo.
[h=2]Mining Activity Not Currently Prohibited by the Moratorium[/h]The ongoing statutory moratorium established by Fish and Game Code section 5653.1 prohibits some, but not all forms of mining in and near California rivers, streams, and lakes.
Individuals engaged or interested in otherwise lawful instream mining should be aware that other environmental laws may apply to these various other mining practices. Fish and Game Code section 5650, for example, prohibits the placement of materials deleterious to fish, including sand and gravel from outside of the current water level, into the river or stream. Further, Fish and Game Code section 1602 requires that any person notify the Department before substantially diverting or obstructing the natural flow of, or substantially changing or using any material from the bed, channel or bank of any river, stream or lake. See additional related information.
[h=2]2013 CDFW Report to the California Legislature[/h]On June 27, 2012, the State of California enacted Senate Bill 1018 (SB 1018), amending Fish and Game Code section 5653.1. (Stats. 2012, ch. 39, § 7.)
SB 1018, among other things, directed the Department to consult with various agencies, and to provide recommendations to the Legislature by April 1, 2013 regarding statutory changes or authorizations necessary for the Department to promulgate regulations to implement Fish and Game Code section 5653 which will, among other things, fully mitigate all identified significant environmental effects and include a fee structure that will fully cover Department costs to administer its related permitting program. (Fish & G. Code, § 5653.1, subd. (c)(1).)
The Department prepared and submitted the required report to the California Legislature on April 1, 2013.
[h=2]General Background Information Regarding CDFW and Suction Dredging[/h][h=3]Fish and Game Code Statutes and Related Regulations[/h] CDFW regulates suction dredging and the use of any related equipment in California pursuant to Fish and Game Code section 5653 specifically. Under that authority, the use of any vacuum or suction dredge equipment by any person in any river, stream or lake in California is prohibited, unless authorized under a permit issued by CDFW. (Fish & G. Code, § 5653, subd. (a).) Notwithstanding that authority, the use of any motorized vacuum or suction dredge equipment is prohibited in California, and CDFW is prohibited from issuing any related permits under the Fish and Game Code. (Id., § 5653.1.)
CDFW regulations governing its suction dredge permitting program are found in the California Code of Regulations, Title 14, sections 228 and 228.5. CDFW adopted a comprehensive update of its suction dredge regulations effective April 27, 2012. (Cal. Reg. Notice Register 2012, No. 19-Z, p. 641.) CDFW amended the regulatory definition of suction dredging as an emergency action effective June 28, 2013. (Cal. Reg. Notice Register 2013, No. 28-Z, pp. 1034-1035.) CDFW adopted the amended regulatory definition of suction dredging through a regular noticed rulemaking action under the Administrative Procedure Act (Gov. Code, § 11340 et seq.), effective August 4, 2014. (Cal. Reg. Notice Register 2014, No. 33-Z, p. 1461.)
Key documents from CDFW’s 2012 and 2014 environmental review and rulemaking efforts are available below, scrolling further down this webpage.
To access the Fish and Game Code and CDFW’s suction dredge regulations, please click on the following link:

• Access California Fish and Game Code and CDFW’s regulations

[h=3]Key Documents from the 2014 Environmental Review and Rulemaking Effort[/h]

• Notice of Public Hearing, Section 228 (a) Suction Dredging Definition (PDF)
  Rescheduled for June 11, 2014
• OAL Form 400 (PDF)
• Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (PDF)
• Initial Statement of Reasons (PDF)
• Text of Specific Regulatory Language to be Amended (PDF)
• Economic Impact Assessment (PDF)
• Economic and Fiscal Impact Statement (STD 399) (PDF)
• OAL Approved Form 400 (August 4, 2014) (PDF)
• Approved Regulatory Text (August 4, 2014) (PDF)
• CEQA Addendum (PDF)
• CEQA Notice of Determination (PDF)

[h=3]Key Documents from the 2012 Environmental Review and Rulemaking Effort[/h] On March 16, 2012 CDFW completed a multi-year environmental review and rulemaking effort to update its suction dredge regulations implementing Fish and Game Code section 5653. The regulations as approved by the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) and filed with the Secretary of State took effect consistent with the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) on April 27, 2012. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, §§ 228, 228.5; Cal. Reg. Notice Register 2012, No. 19-Z, p. 641.) The updated regulations are the first comprehensive update of CDFW’s suction dredging regulations since 1994.
As part of the effort, CDFW also prepared and certified a Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Key documents prepared by CDFW as part of its final action under CEQA and the APA are available here:

• CEQA Notice of Determination
• Final Statement of Reasons
• Final Adopted Regulations Approved by the Office of Administrative Law
• Final Adopted Regulations (underline/strikeout version)
• CEQA Findings of Fact
• Office of Administrative Law Notice of Approval of Regulatory Action

The Draft and Final SEIR prepared and certified by CDFW for its Suction Dredge Permitting Program are available here:
[h=3]Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (FSEIR)[/h]

• Cover
• Title Page, Table of Contents and Chapters 1, 2 and 3
  • Chapter 1 - Introduction
  • Chapter 2 - Comments Received on the Draft SEIR
  • Chapter 3 - Suction Dredge Regulations and Comment Responses
• Chapter 4 - Responses to DSEIR Comments
• Chapters 5, 6 and 7
  • Chapter 5 - Changes and Corrections to the EIR
  • Chapter 6 - Report Preparation
  • Chapter 7 - References
• Appendices
  • Comment Letters (organized by date received in 2011)
    • A01 02/28-03/20
    • A02 03/21-03/28
    • A03 03/28
    • A04 03/29-03/30
    • A05 03/30 Siskiyou County
    • A06 03/31-04/02
    • A07 04/03-04/09
    • A08 04/10-04/13
    • A09 04/13 CSERC
    • A10 04/13-04/19
    • A11 04/20-04/27
    • A12 04/28-04/30
    • A13 05/01 Moore
    • A14 05/01-05/02
    • A15 05/02-05/03
    • A16 05/04
    • A17 05/05
    • A18 05/05 Wess
    • A19 05/05-05/07
    • A20 05/07 Hobbs
    • A21 05/07-05/09
    • A22 05/09 Eno
    • A23 05/09
    • A24 05/09-05/10
    • A25 05/09 Oates
    • A26 05/09 Oates Supplement 1
    • A27 05/09 Oates Supplement 2
    • A28 05/10 C-D
    • A29 05/10 E-M
    • A30 05/10 M-R
    • A31 05/10 S-W
    • A32 05/11-08/02
  • List of Individuals Submitting Generic Form Letters
  • Form Letter 1 and Variants
  • Form Letter 2 and Variants
  • Form Letter 3 and Variants
  • Form Letter 4 and Variants
  • Form Letter 5 and Variants
  • Form Letter 6 and Variants
  • Public Meeting Transcripts
  • Cross-Reference of Responses to Individual Comments
  • Cross-Reference of Responses to Comments Provided at Public Meetings
  • Cross-Reference of Responses to Form Letters and Variants

[h=3]Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (DSEIR)[/h]

• Cover Page and Table of Contents
• Executive Summary
• Chapter 1. Introduction
• Chapter 2. Program Description
• Chapter 3. Activity Description
• Chapter 4. Environmental Impacts
  • Chapter 4.1 Hydrology and Geomorphology
  • Chapter 4.2. Water Quality and Toxicology
  • Chapter 4.3. Biological Resources
  • Chapter 4.4. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
  • Figure 4.4-1 Fire Hazard Severity Zones in State Responsibility Areas
  • Figure 4.4-2 Fire Hazard Severity Zones in Local Responsibility Areas
  • Figure 4.4-3 Fire Hazard Severity Zones in State Responsibility Areas in Yuba County
  • Figure 4.4-4 Fire Hazard Severity Zones in Local Responsibility Areas in Yuba County
  • Chapter 4.5. Cultural Resources
  • Chapter 4.6. Aesthetics
  • Chapter 4.7. Noise
  • Chapter 4.8. Recreation
  • Chapter 4.9. Transportation and Traffic
  • Chapter 4.10. Mineral Resources
• Chapter 5. Other Statutory Considerations
• Chapter 6. Alternatives
• Chapter 7. Report Preparation
• Chapter 8. References
• Appendix A.. Fish and Game Code Section 5653 et seq
• Appendix B. Initial Study and Notice of Preparation
• Appendix C. Scoping Report
• Appendix D. Literature Review
• Appendix E. Comparison of Suction Dredge Mining Regulations in the United States
• Appendix F. Suction Dredge Survey and Summary of Results
• Appendix G. Public Advisory Committee Meeting Summaries
• Appendix H. Socioeconomic Report on Regulatory Amendments
• Appendix I. Descriptions of Habitat Types Likely to Occur in or Adjacent to Proposed Program Activities
• Appendix J. CNDDB Species Lists
• Appendix K. Detailed Life History Descriptions for Fish Action Species
• Appendix L. Species-Based Restrictions on Proposed Program Activities
• Appendix M. Management of Invasive Species

Laws should be posted in FULL and not just what you like as ALL is relative...the end ,time to go get under water-John

 

[bill-costa rica]

ya john, your just a grumpy old man that doesn't want to help anyone,,,,,,,,,, hmmmmm

bill

Originally Posted by rick.ther Hoser, BANNED? when was this reg done? damn.
Rick
it wasn't Rick...sometimes you have to put on a "cranky and disgrunteled not really here to help you filter"

 

[Reed Lukens]

So, I have a quandary..
Not much info with pics so here I go
Running about 100 ft pipe, is it better to use the top end for the suction intake or Y into it at a certain point and use venture effect for suction
Not sure if I am asking correctly or not
Rick

Because there is no motor to give you the extra suction, plan on at least a 4 to 1 ratio for pipe size if you just have a few feet of drop. Plan on an 8" pipe maybe moving 2" cobbles. It will move a lot of them at once but you will need to experiment with what makes it through. A plug up in a gravity fed hose can simply be a sand plug caught behind a rock that gets stuck in the hose. For me... 8" is minimum, 12" moves a lot more but will drain a small river quickly. 6" works also but just not fast enough for me... but... it works. for gravity dredging, the bigger the hose, the better the suction

 

[rick.ther]

WHOA GUYS, Lets not start an argument..
Hoser, I really enjoy reading your comments and bow down to your MANY years and contributions for this industry ( though I don't understand all the cryptic speak sometimes) . Your crusty, straight talk is what we need at times.
For the others, I respect ALL opinions and agree with a lot of them. Comes down to how we interpret the laws as they ( gov't entities) try to confuse this whole mess.
As I read the regs, they seem to mean that we are not allowed anything but a hand and pan. BUT, If we kneel to the ones that want to own us, we won't survive. they would drive this industry to other countries and let them destroy their backyard ( no reasonable regulations), while we have had REASONABLE regs for many years and have worked well.
This started with a simple question in which to discuss a process for mining. I know that more folks have used this technique and hoped to gather insight.
Let's get back the fire ring, pick up a beer and crusty or shiny let all of our wisdom contributions count
Rick

 

[Goldwasher]

please explain how a pipe with natural flow can be defined as motorized or mechanized......Sluice boxes are not banned?....By the very definition you are trying to latch onto for some strange reason a stream is a "Dredge".....

 

[Goldwasher]

(g) For purposes of this section and Section 5653.1, the use of vacuum
or suction dredge equipment, also known as suction dredging, is the use of
a mechanized or motorized system for removing or assisting in the removal
of, or the processing of, material from the bed, bank, or channel of a river,
stream, or lake in order to recover minerals. This section and Section 5653.1
do not apply to, prohibit, or otherwise restrict nonmotorized recreational
mining activities, including panning for gold.

it doesn't matter Ratled....when dredging is 'Gone" he wins so....yea weird

 

[Goldwasher]

WHOA GUYS, Lets not start an argument..
Hoser, I really enjoy reading your comments and bow down to your MANY years and contributions for this industry ( though I don't understand all the cryptic speak sometimes) . Your crusty, straight talk is what we need at times.
For the others, I respect ALL opinions and agree with a lot of them. Comes down to how we interpret the laws as they ( gov't entities) try to confuse this whole mess.
As I read the regs, they seem to mean that we are not allowed anything but a hand and pan. BUT, If we kneel to the ones that want to own us, we won't survive. they would drive this industry to other countries and let them destroy their backyard ( no reasonable regulations), while we have had REASONABLE regs for many years and have worked well.
This started with a simple question in which to discuss a process for mining. I know that more folks have used this technique and hoped to gather insight.
Let's get back the fire ring, pick up a beer and crusty or shiny let all of our wisdom contributions count
Rick

" we" don't interpret law.....the courts do and the courts agree with me....

 

[QNCrazy]

So if your interpretation of the current laws are that you can run a gravity dredge (which for record is my interpretation and will not argue about it), how would you run yours? Straight or with a Y. Lets help Rick out here.

I never got out to my claim this weekend to try my gravity dredge, but went out with the club and got some decent gold(pic to follow).

 

[Goldwasher]

Straight if you have a good run and pipe.

A y with venturi if you have a hundred feet good fade and the roll out abs

 

[Goldwasher]

I've tapped into a stream box/ wier and ran into a tank in the eastern sierra. I used tank volume to hold back the pressure.
The owner tried several times to go straight to the line and kept blowing hose bibs and cracking pipe. You can build a lot of pressure with two inch line and 20 ft of drop from the source.

 

[ClaimStake]

a gravity dredge is "NOT" a powered "vacuum" or "suction" device, it is a non powered "siphoning" device.

completely different things. completely legal.