- Report Finds Partial Peer Reviewers on the Endangered Species Declarations
- Special interests influence costly EPA regulations
- CEQA: The Great Uncertainty Facing California Businesses
- CEQA Reform Should Separate Legit Complaints from Project Haters
- Big ‘Green’ Groups Join Texas Anti-Frackers to Spread Bans Across State
- The problem of conservation
- The mere threat of sage grouse being listed as threatened is stifling development
- New EPA regulations could threaten the future of small businesses
- EPA: Time to Abolish, Not Merely Restrict
- U.S. green groups sue EPA over stormwater regulations
- Don’t Hold Your Breath on CEQA Reform
- Greenpeace has gotten too big for its britches. A small environmentalist speaks out at the environmental “Big Boys”
- Put Anti-Energy Activists on the “Naughty” List
- How Obama and his environmental base are planning to eradicate the oil and gas industry
- GIVING ENVIROS THE BIRD: Republicans Block Sage Grouse Endangered List in Budget Bill; CO Intends to Sue
- Fifth District Rejects CEQA Challenge to Fresno County Aggregate Mine Project EIR In Partially Published Decision, Clarifies State Mining Board’s Smara Powers and CEQA’s Farmland Loss Mitigation Rules
- U.S. board says federal law trumps state environmental lawsuits on high-speed rail
- How Endangered Species Act litigation means big money for environmental groups
- Financial, professional conflicts of interest mar endangered species decisions
- Western Caucus Questions “Peer Reviewed (Junk) Science” Regarding Endangered Species Act
- ‘CRomnibus’ may include sage grouse rider but no money for forested counties
- The U.S. Supreme Court Will Decide if EPA Should Consider Costs
- Endangered Species Act Regulations Ruled Unconstitutional
- Yellow-Billed Cuckoo Critical Habitat: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Sets December 18, 2014 Public Hearing in Sacramento
- Mining groups, Nev. counties challenge settlements between FWS, greens
- EPA to farmers: ‘Trust us’
- Keeping EPA out of your pockets
- Congressman Jason Smith: New Proposed EPA Rule is War On Rural America
- Congress turns up the heat on EPA
- Congress Moves to Block EPA’s Land Grab
- A Wake-Up Call For U.S. Farmers: The EPA Is Trying To Put You Out of Business
- Report: EPA Lost Millions Of Taxpayer Dollars To Fraud, Poor Management
- EPA experiments on humans debunk their ozone and particulate matter health claims
- EPA’s Goofy Green-Energy Rules
- Regulate First, Ask Questions Later
- Green for Green: The Cost of Environmental Protection
- States can do a better job of savings endangered species and jobs, too
- Backers of Alaska gold mine win court battle with EPA
- In Recent Prairie Dog Case, the Federal Government Admits Something it Tries to Cover-Up
- Federal judge sides with Pebble to halt EPA mine action for now
- New Mexico Jobs Are Endangered…Again
- How about an Affordable Heat Act?
- Conservation Through Private Initiative
- In Recent Prairie Dog Case, the Federal Government Admits Something it Tries to Cover-Up
- Threatened species designation is for the birds
- House passes bill to reform EPA science panel
- Baker County ranchers sign sage grouse pact
- Death by dirty water: Storm runoff is killing fish
- Federal Court holds the line on species listings
- Proposed Water Rule Could Put ‘Property Rights of Every American Entirely at the Mercy’ of EPA
We are the Western Mining Alliance
The State of California has asked the Supreme Court to depublish the Rinehart Decision.
The State requested the Appeals Court to re-try the case and the Appeals Court refused. Now the State is asking the decision be pulled, and prevented from being used by other miners in an effort to maintain the illegal ban on dredging.
If the Rinehart decision is depublished it’s as if it never happened at all.
Brandon Rinehart’s Attorney, James Buchal’s Response: Opposition to Depublish Rinehart Case 24 November 2014
Siskiyou County’s Letter to the Supreme Court: California Supreme Court Rinehart Decision Do Not Depublish
Other related documents:
12/16/14 House of Representatives Committee on Natural Resources Questions “Peer Reviewed” (Junk) Science Used In Endangered Species Act Listings (Finally!!!!) : esa_peer_review_science-staff_report
12/15/14 From GPAA: MINING RIGHTS: Court battle hinges on Supremacy Clause: http://www.goldprospectors.org/News/News-Details/ArtMID/636/ArticleID/68/MINING-RIGHTS-Court-battle-hinges-on-Supremacy-Clause
James Buchal’s 141205 response: Answer-Petition-for-Review-12-5-14
Welcome to the web home of the Western Mining Alliance. It’s likely we’re out chasing gold. If you are interested in the hunt for American gold, then you’ve found the right place. We are the largest organization of independent miners in the country. We’re committed to preserving the uniquely American tradition of exploration, prospecting and development of mines. We support reasonable environmental protection and we encourage responsible mining.
There’s still a lot of gold in them hills. Geologists estimate there is twice as much gold remaining as was taken out during the gold rush. Most operational gold mines shut down during World War II and the expense of reopening them exceeded the return with gold at $32 an ounce. Today, with gold exceeding $1,300 an ounce there is a renewed interest in gold mining.
We support and defend a type of gold mining called suction gold dredging. The suction gold dredge is the most efficient mining equipment invented. It is portable, causes no environmental damage and is 98% efficient in recovering gold on the bottoms of the rivers. This type of mining has been ongoing since the invention of the air regulator, over 50 years. As opposed to environmentalist claims, there is no environmental harm. These small machines move a few cubic yards of gravel per day from the river bottom, and then redeposit the same gravel back to the same spot. The spring floods erase all traces of the previous year’s activity.
We disagree with the State of California’s Environmental Impact Report. The media typically reports simply “significant environmental effects” were found. Did you ever stop to wonder what those effects were?
What’s the Controversy About
(1) We create noise. A suction dredge typically uses the same engine your lawnmower does, and it operates on a federal mining claim deep in the canyons of the mountains. The average runs about 64db which is 4 db above conversation levels. A chainsaw runs about 110 db.
(2) We stir up silt. This is true, we do stir up silt, but there is not a single documented case, ever, of a single fish being harmed by this silt. All research papers which have studied dredges in operation have found the silt dissipates rapidly, in fact it’s completely gone within 100 meters of the operation.
(3) We stir up mercury. Not true. The EIR speculated a suction dredge would disturb the mercury and release mere molecules of mercury. However, the theory wasn’t proven. In fact during the test using an instrumented suction dredge the researchers found mercury levels below the dredge were lower than mercury levels above the dredge. The environmental report ignored this result and instead used a hand dug pit in the most mercury contaminated location in the state to achieve their results. It would have been impossible for a real suction dredge to have operated where they dug their pit. The truth is flexible.
(4) We release mercury forever trapped in sediment layers. Mercury, and in fact nothing, is forever trapped. A recent study by Dr. Michael Singer of the University of California, Santa Barbara, confirms even the deepest levels of sediment bound mercury are released with the ten year flood. Do you want to recover this mercury before it moves, or let it move to the valleys? The EIR found suction dredgers have likely removed from the California waterways more than 2.5 tons of mercury, but this was ignored in favor of stopping a few molecules of mercury from being released.
(5) We endanger wildlife. Absolutely untrue and completely unsupported by the record. There is not a single documented case of a suction dredger harming even one fish during fifty years of operation. Not one single case.
Propaganda is Not the same as Research
- The environmental groups spend over $4 billion per year to convince you the environment is in dire trouble, it’s not true
- There are currently 1,516 species in the United States listed as threatened or endangered and environmental groups are petitioning to add hundreds more per year
- Critical habitat already approaches nearly 50% of the land mass of California and Oregon
- Recent endangered species listings are the result of sub-dividing species into more and more specific locations, for example there are millions and millions of Coho Salmon, but when you subdivide this species into only where it lays its eggs you end up with the endangered Upper Columbia River Coho, the endangered Middle Columbia River Coho.
- The federal government owns nearly 1/3 of all the lands in this country that’s over 770 million acres
- Environmentalists continue to push for even more lands to be withdrawn from the private economy and even more restrictions be placed on existing lands including private property
Our Cause is Freedom
Economic freedom and the support of rural America. We, and other groups are doing something about it. It’s simple, we’re shining the light of day of the interconnected web of environmental groups, universities, corporations and the government. At the end of the day it’s all about money, and there’s a lot of money involved in saving the environment. Being a non-profit doesn’t make you an angel, it’s just as likely to make you a demon.
RECENT TOPIC DOWNLOADS