Senate Analysis on SB637

minerrick

Sr. Member
Feb 18, 2013
277
357
Detector(s) used
Makro Racer
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting

Attachments

  • 201520160SB637_Senate Natural Resources And Water.pdf
    98.5 KB · Views: 167
Last edited:
There's no mercury where I've dredged. What about the watersheds with no mercury or heavy metals except gold, and no Salmon. This blanket ban just shows they are using doctored science to fullfill a private agenda, and the Democrats are beleiving the inaccurate false scientific opinions of the Sierra Club/Fund etc... Instead of getting off their asses and finding out the real scientific facts. There's no new majic science the Sierra fund/club all of a sudden discovered. This whole ban is based on lies perpatrated by people that are just pushing a marxist agenda. Dredging is safe. and the science proves it.
 

You better be sitting down while reading this.

I highlighted the "best" parts.

The parts I "like" the best:

a. 1 person in opposition

b. Definition of a suction dredge "contains ANY OF THE FOLLOWING...."
That description pretty much rules out everything except a gold pan and a spoon.

How good propagandist science is made to obtain a desired shocking sentence.


-A four inch dredge releases 10 percent of the annual discharge of a watershed (how big is watershed)in a DRY year..Answer;in a dry year there is just not enough waterforce to move the heavy mercury,so there is basically no mercury release in a dry year ,meaning if in the dry year 1gram of mercury is released by the watershed himself,if you move 100miligrams with your four inch you got your 10 percent.And this ten percent where ALREADY in the river.Then they don,t mention that the four inch dredge in the same time Recovered a 1000 percent of the natural release of a watershed in DRY year.
Countermath;(i don,t fill in the correct numbers,i don,t know them,just to show the relations) a four inch dredge releases 0.00000001percent released from a watershed (they don,t mention the size of the watershed) in a NORMAL year, or 0.0000000000000001percent in a flood year.Also then do not mention that the 4 percent of the mercury that escaped (while recovering 96 percent)from the dredge recovery system quickly settles back beeing heavy and because dredging does not happening during floods so it wan,t stay suspended .And then do not mention that in the next flood there will be less mercury released in that watershed because the dredge removed it.
Thats why they work with percentages,(because weights probably would be ridiculous) and a dry year to construct a shocking sentence.Picking selective equations.Not a overall picture.Not mentioning the benefits etc..

Somebody knows who dredged,with what equipment?
Correct me if i,m wrong,I,m no expert in this

p.s.Above all, They state; "a suction dredge COULD release 10 percent of the .."

Yeah..Probably at full throttle washing out everything out of the box..
 

Last edited:
This is how subtractive entities have to operate IMO. The sierra clubs involvement in this might turn out to be a silver lining, but I doubt it.

The only Moratoruims California legislature should be considering right now are on building permits for housing.
 

and only 1 in opposition! your right ! im glad I was sitting down to read that cr*p! and we feed them $$ thru our taxs and their lawsuits for more $$$$$$$$$$$! I don't see anywhere where they had any harm! and if they didn't get any of our $$$ they wouldn't even bother with these lawsuits! maybe we ought to push for this type of recommendation!:BangHead:
 

The room was packed with people against the bill and they say NONE in opposition????what the Frick?
 

The room was packed with people against the bill and they say NONE in opposition?what the Frick?

They were talking about the politicians,they could care less about what anybody else thinks.
 

So what does this mean? Can the state pass a bill outlawing dredging even after losing in court?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Senator Jeff Stone
District 28, u all can e-mail

evrybody else will need to fax or mail
The district, which is entirely in Riverside County, stretches from the vineyards of the Temecula Valley to the Colorado River and includes the cities of Blythe, Canyon Lake, Cathedral City, Coachella, Desert Hot Springs, Indian Wells, Indio, Lake Elsinore, La Quinta, Murrieta, Temecula, Palm Springs, Rancho Mirage, and Wildomar.Capitol Office





State Capitol, Room 4062
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 651-4028
Fax: (916) 651-4928
Indio Office

45-125 Smurr Street, Suite B
Indio, California 92201
Phone: (760) 398-6442
Fax: (760) 398-6470
Murrieta Office

25186 Hancock Ave, Suite 320
Murrieta, Ca. 92562
Office: (951) 894-3530
Fax: (951) 894-3536
 

So what does this mean? Can the state pass a bill outlawing dredging even after losing in court?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Your thinking of the state in terms of being one entity, it's not. This is another swing from a different direction, ie. another agency same agenda. Our side tried to get all the agencies involved under one suit. This agency held out and I think you can see why now. They are plan Q or P of the states back up plan.
 


I watched the entire hour and 34 minutes. Opposition, small scale miners. They told it like it is. Their history, who they are, what they do, and how long they have been doing it. Facts. Best part of the movie.
The Senators. Who the hell elected these imbeciles? babble babble...waste time...pretend you know anything relevant to the subject. Blame other government agencies...pretend you are a scientist....babble/lie some more.
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top