BILL ANALYSIS ------------------------------------------------------------ |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 670| |Office of Senate Floor Analyses | | |1020 N Street, Suite 524 | | |(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | | |327-4478 | | ------------------------------------------------------------ THIRD READING Bill No: SB 670 Author: Wiggins (D) Amended: As introduced Vote: 27 - Urgency SENATE NATURAL RES. & WATER COMMITTEE : 8-3, 4/28/09 AYES: Pavley, Benoit, Kehoe, Leno, Padilla, Simitian, Wiggins, Wolk NOES: Cogdill, Hollingsworth, Huff SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : Senate Rule 28.8 SUBJECT : Vacuum or suction dredge equipment SOURCE : Author DIGEST : This bill imposes a temporary moratorium on the granting of new suction dredging permits until the ongoing environmental review is certified. It provides that the issuance of permits is not a ministerial act, and that, therefore, such permits may not be issued until a valid underlying environmental document is in place. ANALYSIS : Under existing law, the Fish and Game Code prohibits suction dredging except when permitted by the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) and when consistent with regulations adopted by the department. The statute requires the regulations to designate streams where dredges may be operated pursuant to a permit, streams where dredging is not allowed, and the time or times of year when CONTINUED SB 670 Page 2 dredging is allowed. Permit fees for residents are established at $25 unless a site inspection is necessary in which the fee is $130. The respective non-resident fees are $100 and $220. Approximately 3000 permits are issued annually. It is illegal to use a suction dredge within 100 feet of a closed area. This bill imposes a temporary moratorium on the granting of new suction dredging permits until the ongoing environmental review is certified. It provides that the issuance of permits is not a ministerial act, and that, therefore, such permits may not be issued until a valid underlying environmental document is in place. Background According to a recent report by the Sierra Fund, an estimated 26 million pounds of mercury were used to extract gold from ore in California. Half of this mercury was lost in the environment in placer and hard rock mining operations where it remains in watersheds where it is commonly encountered. Mercury runoff from these watersheds is a source of mercury contamination of the California Bay-Delta. Suction dredgers remove gravel from riverbeds with a hose powered by an engine. The water quality controversy involves what opponents characterize as the tendency of dredging operations to "flour" mercury in the water, making it more readily available for bacteria to methylate, a process that converts base mercury into a developmental neurotoxin that accumulates in the food chain and that humans ingest through fish that they consume. Dredgers may try to separate mercury from any amalgamated gold, and the recovered mercury is then either stored or disposed of in an unauthorized manner. Storage of mercury is subject to regulation also, but there is no available information from state agencies that mercury obtained by dredgers is regulated. CONTINUED SB 670 Page 3 Dredging permits issued by DFG state that the applicant will comply with all appropriate water quality regulations. However, the State Water Resources Control Board does not have a program to regulate suction dredging. The board found, however, in a 2003 study, that dredging exacerbates mercury contamination of rivers and streams. FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No SUPPORT : (Verified 5/11/09) Cal Trout California Coastkeeper Alliance California Tribal Business Alliance Clean Water Action Friends of the River Karuk Tribe Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations Planning and Conservation League Sierra Club California Sierra Fund Sierra Nevada Alliance OPPOSITION : (Verified 5/11/09) County of Siskyou New 49'ers Regional Council of Rural Counties ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : Friends of the River supports the bill but believes the temporary moratorium should be expanded to include more than salmon streams. It believes that suction dredging affects wild and scenic rivers, wild trout populations, other wildlife, and river-based recreational opportunities. Many supporters categorize suction dredging as a rather crude technology by which miners "literally vacuum up our river beds and spawning grounds, and disturb and mobilize the mercury left behind by gold mining operations" as was stated in several letters. All of the supporters agree that the rules governing this practice are outdated. CONTINUED SB 670 Page 4 Sierra Club California and Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations point to the ban on commercial salmon fishing and argue that the salmon crisis threatens thousands of jobs. Sierra Club California concludes that "It simply does not make sense to jeopardize an entire fishery, and to ask commercial fishermen to sit idle, while allowing ongoing environmental harm for a recreational hobby." ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : The Regional Council of Rural Counties argues that the existing regulations are sufficiently restrictive and protective and allow individuals to legally mine their claims of precious minerals. It points to parts of rural California where mining remains an important port of the culture, history, and economy of some local communities. Siskyou County separately asserted these same concerns. The New 49'ers, a mining advocacy group, argues that no scientific information points to suction dredging as a cause in the collapse of salmon, that the collapse is due to ocean conditions and an over-reliance on hatchery fish, and that a moratorium would violate the private property rights of those who have federal mining claims and create "takings" liability on the part of the state. CTW:nl 5/11/09 Senate Floor Analyses SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE **** END **** CONTINUED