|







|
Become a friend of
the Klamath Bucket
Brigade
Send
Donations Here
All donations are tax
deductible
|
|
This Website is Dedicated to
Alvin Alexander Cheyne
January
10, 1921 - June 17, 2005
|
|
|

Karuk Final
Decision on Klamath River Suction Dredging Regulations
On
December 20th, Alameda Superior Court Judge Bonnie L. Sabraw signed an
Order and Consent Judgment http://www.goldgold.com/legal/finalorder.pdf
which has effectively put an end to the Karuk/DFG litigation which was
challenging California’s existing suction dredge regulations.
Consistent with all of the arguments which the mining community has been
making, this Final Order makes it clear to everyone that the only way
our regulations can be changed is through the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA).
Through this litigation, which has been ongoing for about 18 months,
both the Karuk Tribe of California and the California Department of Fish
& Game (DFG) have attempted to bypass all of the State’s legal
obligations under the Administrative Procedures Act by asking Judge
Sabraw to endorse a Stipulated Agreement http://www.goldgold.com/legal/amendedproposedjudgment.pdf
which they made between themselves in secret, to enforce stricter
regulations upon suction dredgers. This, without ever having to
justify the changes to anyone, including the judge.
Their argument was basically that the State was not required to follow
its own mandated administrative obligations to the public, because the
changes were being made to our regulations as a result of ongoing
litigation. Consistent with our arguments, several months ago,
Judge Sabraw ruled http://www.goldgold.com/legal/2nd001.pdf]ruled
that DFG broke the law by attempting to modify our regulations as the
result of an Agreement between themselves and the Karuk Tribe. That was
a big win for us.
Then, as a result of Judge Sabraw’s Ruling, DFG changed its tactics
and filed a Declaration http://www.goldgold.com/legal/Manjideclaration.pdf
to the Court stating that they now believe suction dredging under
existing regulations is harmful to coho salmon (which is listed as
threatened in California). Prior to this, DFG’s position in the
litigation was that dredging was not harmful to fish!
Still refusing to present any showing of proof to support their new
Declaration of [I]“harm,”[/I] DFG and the Karuks asked the Judge
Sabraw to accept their internal (informal) finding of harm (to coho
salmon) and impose further restrictions upon suction dredgers through an
injunction. Our attorneys argued strongly that no determination of
“harm” to coho could be made formal absent a full CEQA
process, or at least a contested hearing within the litigation whereby
proof could be presented and properly challenged. http://www.goldgold.com/legal/New49erCaseStatusStatement.pdf
The judge ultimately agreed, saying that she would not endorse a
determination of harm unless there was a proper hearing where the
evidence could be carefully examined and properly weighed. That
effectively put an end to the litigation, because it was clear that DFG
was not prepared to present evidence within a formal proceeding
to prove suction dredging is harmful to coho salmon.
The result of all this is the judge’s Order and Consent Judgment which
has been signed by all parties who were involved with the litigation.
This Order basically says: (1) New information available to DFG suggests
that suction dredging under existing regulations could be harmful to
coho Salmon. (2) The mining community disagrees that there is any
harm. (3) Therefore, DFG is Ordered to conduct further
environmental analysis pursuant to the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) and modify the regulations, only if necessary, through
California’s lawful administrative process. (4) DFG is allowed
18 months to complete any necessary CEQA process. (4) The motion for
injunctive relief (request for the Court to endorse more restrictive
regulations upon us) has been withdrawn. (5) Judge Sabraw will retain
jurisdiction over the matter.
Basically, the Order puts an end to this litigation, confirming
arguments from the mining community that our regulations can only
be changed through California’s formal administrative procedures
– which require a substantial showing of proof, with mitigation
measures (changed regulations, if any) which would be the
least-restrictive upon suction dredge miners.
Therefore, unless the State intends to implement emergency regulations
under CEQA, (which requires a substantial showing of proof), we should not
see any changes to the 2007 California dredging regulations.
Here is one more litigation-challenge that we can put behind us. Whew!!
We should all pat ourselves on the back for another job very well done!
For those who are interested, we have devoted a special page http://www.goldgold.com/legal/karukvsdfg.htm
to this litigation on our web site http://www.goldgold.com
which includes all of the key documents along with explanations.
While we should allow ourselves a pat on the back, we should also
immediately begin preparing ourselves for the upcoming administrative
process. We went through the whole process during the
mid-1990’s, when DFG began (as they are doing here) with a
preconceived decision that suction dredgers were harming fish.
Ultimately, we were able to bring them around; because the formal
Administrative process requires the State to address all evidence using
good science, place potential harm in perspective to the real world, and
adopt solutions (if any are even necessary) which are least-restrictive
to the people who will be affected. Bad decisions and/or arbitrary
and capricious determinations can be (will be) challenged in
Court.
We will need to prepare ourselves for the Administrative process which
will be starting soon.
Knowing that both the miners and the Karuks will be standing by with our
attorneys ready to challenge any miss-step in the process, I predict
that DFG will eventually work out findings and determinations that are
based upon the best (defendable) science available. That’s what
happened in the mid-90’s.
I personally am feeling hopeful, that as long as we maintain united
within our industry and generate enough financial support for the
ongoing process (attorneys and expert witnesses for our side), we will
come out of this in pretty good shape, with unshakable suction dredge
regulations in California that should last us another 10 years or so.
Good for our side!
At present, we are $2,000 in arrears to our attorneys. They have won
another case for us. In turn, we need to bring our accounts up to date
and move forward. With this in mind, I am requesting a $10
donation from each of you that is able to contribute. Can you
please help? Contributions can be made to The New 49’ers Legal
Fund, P.O. Box 47, Happy Camp, CA 96039. There is also a Pay Pal
link on top of this page.
Thanks for whatever you can do!
On December 20th, Alameda Superior Court Judge Bonnie L. Sabraw signed
an Order and Consent Judgment http://www.goldgold.com/legal/finalorder.pdf
which has effectively put an end to the Karuk/DFG litigation which was
challenging California’s existing suction dredge regulations.
Consistent with all of the arguments which the mining community has been
making, this Final Order makes it clear to everyone that the only way
our regulations can be changed is through the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA).
Through this litigation, which has been ongoing for about 18 months,
both the Karuk Tribe of California and the California Department of Fish
& Game (DFG) have attempted to bypass all of the State’s legal
obligations under the Administrative Procedures Act by asking Judge
Sabraw to endorse a Stipulated Agreement http://www.goldgold.com/legal/amendedproposedjudgment.pdf
which they made between themselves in secret, to enforce stricter
regulations upon suction dredgers. This, without ever having to
justify the changes to anyone, including the judge.
Their argument was basically that the State was not required to follow
its own mandated administrative obligations to the public, because the
changes were being made to our regulations as a result of ongoing
litigation. Consistent with our arguments, several months ago,
Judge Sabraw ruled http://www.goldgold.com/legal/2nd001.pdf]ruled
that DFG broke the law by attempting to modify our regulations as the
result of an Agreement between themselves and the Karuk Tribe. That was
a big win for us.
Then, as a result of Judge Sabraw’s Ruling, DFG changed its tactics
and filed a Declaration http://www.goldgold.com/legal/Manjideclaration.pdf
to the Court stating that they now believe suction dredging under
existing regulations is harmful to coho salmon (which is listed as
threatened in California). Prior to this, DFG’s position in the
litigation was that dredging was not harmful to fish!
Still refusing to present any showing of proof to support their new
Declaration of [I]“harm,”[/I] DFG and the Karuks asked the Judge
Sabraw to accept their internal (informal) finding of harm (to coho
salmon) and impose further restrictions upon suction dredgers through an
injunction. Our attorneys argued strongly that no determination of
“harm” to coho could be made formal absent a full CEQA
process, or at least a contested hearing within the litigation whereby
proof could be presented and properly challenged. http://www.goldgold.com/legal/New49erCaseStatusStatement.pdf
The judge ultimately agreed, saying that she would not endorse a
determination of harm unless there was a proper hearing where the
evidence could be carefully examined and properly weighed. That
effectively put an end to the litigation, because it was clear that DFG
was not prepared to present evidence within a formal proceeding
to prove suction dredging is harmful to coho salmon.
The result of all this is the judge’s Order and Consent Judgment which
has been signed by all parties who were involved with the litigation.
This Order basically says: (1) New information available to DFG suggests
that suction dredging under existing regulations could be harmful to
coho Salmon. (2) The mining community disagrees that there is any
harm. (3) Therefore, DFG is Ordered to conduct further
environmental analysis pursuant to the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) and modify the regulations, only if necessary, through
California’s lawful administrative process. (4) DFG is allowed
18 months to complete any necessary CEQA process. (4) The motion for
injunctive relief (request for the Court to endorse more restrictive
regulations upon us) has been withdrawn. (5) Judge Sabraw will retain
jurisdiction over the matter.
Basically, the Order puts an end to this litigation, confirming
arguments from the mining community that our regulations can only
be changed through California’s formal administrative procedures
– which require a substantial showing of proof, with mitigation
measures (changed regulations, if any) which would be the
least-restrictive upon suction dredge miners.
Therefore, unless the State intends to implement emergency regulations
under CEQA, (which requires a substantial showing of proof), we should not
see any changes to the 2007 California dredging regulations.
Here is one more litigation-challenge that we can put behind us. Whew!!
We should all pat ourselves on the back for another job very well done!
For those who are interested, we have devoted a special page http://www.goldgold.com/legal/karukvsdfg.htm
to this litigation on our web site http://www.goldgold.com
which includes all of the key documents along with explanations.
While we should allow ourselves a pat on the back, we should also
immediately begin preparing ourselves for the upcoming administrative
process. We went through the whole process during the
mid-1990’s, when DFG began (as they are doing here) with a
preconceived decision that suction dredgers were harming fish.
Ultimately, we were able to bring them around; because the formal
Administrative process requires the State to address all evidence using
good science, place potential harm in perspective to the real world, and
adopt solutions (if any are even necessary) which are least-restrictive
to the people who will be affected. Bad decisions and/or arbitrary
and capricious determinations can be (will be) challenged in
Court.
We will need to prepare ourselves for the Administrative process which
will be starting soon.
Knowing that both the miners and the Karuks will be standing by with our
attorneys ready to challenge any miss-step in the process, I predict
that DFG will eventually work out findings and determinations that are
based upon the best (defendable) science available. That’s what
happened in the mid-90’s.
I personally am feeling hopeful, that as long as we maintain united
within our industry and generate enough financial support for the
ongoing process (attorneys and expert witnesses for our side), we will
come out of this in pretty good shape, with unshakable suction dredge
regulations in California that should last us another 10 years or so.
Good for our side!
At present, we are $2,000 in arrears to our attorneys. They have won
another case for us. In turn, we need to bring our accounts up to date
and move forward. With this in mind, I am requesting a $10
donation from each of you that is able to contribute. Can you
please help? Contributions can be made to The New 49’ers Legal
Fund, P.O. Box 47, Happy Camp, CA 96039. There is also a Pay Pal
link on top of this page.
Thanks for whatever you can do!
Dave McCracken, General
Manager
New 49'ers
New 49'er's
Newsletter: http://www.goldgold.com/newsletterlatest.htm
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted
material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those
who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for
non-profit
research and educational purposes only. For more information go
to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
Source:
http://www.goldgold.com/legal/karukvsdfg.htm
|