Suction Dredging DOA

[Ralph]

Due to budget constraints, the legislature has decided the state can't afford to subsidize hobby suction dredging.

http://troutunderground.com/2011/05/...e-budget-cuts/

[Bob Laskodi]

I would much rather have a "real" ban on suction dredging, but I'll certainly take a "defacto" ban instead. Hopefully the State will be out of money for a long time!

[NCL]

I am not sure this is a truly good message. If you read it closely the text says "permit and enforcement" program so there will not be any permits but also there will not be anyone to enforce against those that are dredging without said permit. I am not sure if Warden's enforce that part of the law or it is a different section of Fish and Game. As Bob said a true ban would be better.

[Ralph]

I am not sure if Warden's enforce that part of the law or it is a different section of Fish and Game. As Bob said a true ban would be better.

Wardens enforce any environmental degradation or stream bed alteration.

I'm sure the gravel suckers won't sit still for this. They'll counter (quite rightly) that there are more than permit fees to counter state costs. There are sales and use taxes associated with dredging and some amount of trickle down to the local economy. I wish DFG would simply halt suction dredging altogether where it harms fisheries or liberates mercury. Their job is to protect the environment.

[Bob Laskodi]

As Ralph said, DFG Wardens will still enforce the ban regardless, so a quick call to CalTip should quickly end any scofflaws. I'm sure the recreational mining community will be up in arms over this, but I was not aware that dredgers pay Dingell-Johnson fee's, and as far as sales tax go, those are general funds directed and are not earmarked (and can't be).