What recent news of DEIR report could mean
Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 6:03 pm
Good morning: My name is Rob Toth and I'm a new member of the 49er's. I also happen to be a fly fisherman and learned to steelhead fish on the Klamath as a kid. Some might find it odd that I've joined the club, but I still believe that there is a happy medium where conservationists and fishermen can peacefully coexist with miners and even dredgers. While I would consider myself more of a low impact miner (sniping, crevicing, detecting, etc), I was hoping to be able to run a high banker at some point on the Klamath. The fact that high banking has been lumped into the current dredging moratorium is, in my view, unfair as well as unnecessary. It is also borderline illegal in my humble opinion. I'm certainly hoping that more clarity is delivered on this issue in the near term!
Meanwhile, the first Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) on the 3 dams of the upper Klamath River was just released. I have not read the report in its entirety, but I found this article interesting and thought I'd share it.
http://www.mtshastanews.com/news/201901 ... y-concerns
The question that the results of this draft report begs is this: if some 20 million cubic yards of sediment behind the three dams released into the Klamath will not result in any significant long term (up to 24 months) negative impact on the water quality of the river, how can a minute fraction of that sediment moved by dredgers and (gasp, scratch your head) high bankers using settling pools be considered a major negative impact????
Maybe I'm missing something as I've just recently started researching this topic from a miner's perspective. But I thought I'd post it as a conversation topic. Maybe someone has some insight as to what the issue could mean for dredging and high banking the Klamath in the near future.
Rob Toth
San Francisco
Meanwhile, the first Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) on the 3 dams of the upper Klamath River was just released. I have not read the report in its entirety, but I found this article interesting and thought I'd share it.
http://www.mtshastanews.com/news/201901 ... y-concerns
The question that the results of this draft report begs is this: if some 20 million cubic yards of sediment behind the three dams released into the Klamath will not result in any significant long term (up to 24 months) negative impact on the water quality of the river, how can a minute fraction of that sediment moved by dredgers and (gasp, scratch your head) high bankers using settling pools be considered a major negative impact????
Maybe I'm missing something as I've just recently started researching this topic from a miner's perspective. But I thought I'd post it as a conversation topic. Maybe someone has some insight as to what the issue could mean for dredging and high banking the Klamath in the near future.
Rob Toth
San Francisco