Suction Dredge Permitting Program

Page updated 5/15/2012

Approved Suction Dredge Regulations and Related Documents

On April 27, 2012 the Office of Administrative Law approved updated regulations governing suction dredge mining under Fish and Game Code section 5653 et seq., the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Administrative Procedures Act (APA).

You may review or download the following documents:

DFG is not selling suction dredge permits at this time, and cannot predict when that might occur. DFG is currently prohibited by statute from issuing suction dredge permits. (Fish & G. Code, § 5653.1, subd. (a).) The use of any vacuum or suction dredge equipment in any river, stream, or lake in California is also currently prohibited by statute through June 30, 2016. (Id., subd. (b).)

The following additional background information may be helpful. As amended with the enactment of AB 120 in July 2011, the existing moratorium on instream suction dredge mining could end earlier than June 30, 2016, if DFG certifies to the California Secretary of State that five specific conditions have occurred. Those conditions are currently detailed in Fish and Game Code section 5653.1, subdivision (b). With the current actions by the Department, the first three conditions are projected to be complete in May 2012. The following explains the two remaining conditions that must be met, consistent with current law, for the moratorium to end before June 30, 2016

One remaining condition involves certification that updated regulations adopted by DFG fully mitigate all identified significant impacts associated with authorized suction dredging. The Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (FSEIR) does identify significant and unavoidable impacts for purposes of CEQA, which are not mitigated to less than significant level by the adopted regulations.. As a result, based upon the information currently available, DFG will not be able to determine that the final regulations fully mitigate all identified significant impacts. The reasons are described in the CEQA Findings of Fact.

The second remaining condition involves DFG certification that a fee structure is in place that will fully recover all costs to DFG related to the administration of it permitting program. The permitting fees DFG collects for its suction dredge permitting program are set by statute. (See Fish & G. Code, § 5653, subd. (c).) Any changes to the fee structure will require action by the California Legislature and related approval by the Governor. As of this time, DFG is not aware of any proposed legislation to address either the fee structure or any other aspect of the moratorium.

In short, DFG is currently prohibited by law from issuing suction dredge permits until either all of the above requirements are met, or July 1, 2016, whichever comes first.

Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (FSEIR)

The Final SEIR is now available and includes the following

Cover
Title Page, Table of Contents and Chapters 1, 2 and 3
1. Chapter 1 - Introduction
2. Chapter 2 - Comments Received on the Draft SEIR
3. Chapter 3 - Suction Dredge Regulations and Comment Responses
Chapter 4 – Responses to DSEIR Comments
Chapters 5, 6 and 7
1. Chapter 5 - Changes and Corrections to the EIR
2. Chapter 6 - Report Preparation
3. Chapter 7 – References
Appendices

Legislative Status

On July 26, 2011, Assembly Bill 120 was approved by Governor Brown. Assembly Bill 120 affects suction dredging in several ways.

First, it establishes an end date for the current moratorium of June 30, 2016.

Second, AB 120 requires that any “new regulations fully mitigate all identified significant environmental impacts.” As directed by the Alameda County Superior Court and SB 670, DFG prepared the Draft SEIR to meet requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In addition to CEQA, AB 120 now requires DFG to meet a “fully mitigate” standard for any adopted suction dredge mining regulations in order for the new moratorium to end any earlier than June 30, 2016.

Third, a new condition, required by AB 120 is “a fee structure is in place that will fully recover all costs to the department related to the administration of the program.” The fee structure for DFG’s permitting program is prescribed by statute (i.e. Fish and Game Code section 5653). Changes to the fee structure are beyond the authority of DFG and will require action by the California Legislature and related approval by the Governor.

Finally, the previous moratorium established by SB 670 was clear that DFG needed to take several actions (i.e. comply with CEQA and adopt amended regulations) which would then allow suction dredge mining to resume, under the new regulations. Said another way, before enactment of AB 120, DFG had the final State approval to complete the process, subject only to the Alameda County Superior Court’s concurrence. AB 120 adds a legislative step, described in the previous paragraph.

Mining Which is not Prohibited by the Moratorium

The moratorium established by SB 670 and AB 120 does not prohibit or restrict non-motorized recreational mining activities, including panning for gold. It also does not prohibit or restrict some other forms of mining, including, for example, practices known as high banking, power sluicing, sniping or using a gravity dredge, so long as gravel and earthern materials are not vacuumed with a motorized system from the river or stream. The method of mining known as booming, is prohibited with 100 yards of any river, stream or lake.

It is important for you to know that other environmental laws may apply to some of these mining practices. Be aware that Fish and Game Code section 5650 prohibits the placement of materials deleterious to fish, including sand and gravel from outside of the current water level, into the river or stream. Further, Fish and Game Code section 1602 requires that any person notify the Department of Fish and Game before substantially diverting or obstructing the natural flow of, or substantially changing or using any material from the bed, channel or bank of any river, stream or lake. Additional information is available at www.dfg.ca.gov/habcon/1600 .

The State Water Resources Control Board has authority for the protection of water quality and has recently provided additional information regarding highbanking. The Department of Fish and Game recommends that you review the Highbanking Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) provided at the following link:

Suction Dredge information from the State Water Resources Control Board

Background

Small-scale suction dredge mining activity in California began in the 1960s and peaked during high gold prices in the late 1970s and early 1980s. The existing regulatory framework governing the activity as administered by DFG is rooted in statutory amendments to the Fish and Game Code that took effect originally in the late 1980's. Under the statute and regulations, any California resident or non-resident may obtain a suction dredge mining permit from DFG upon payment of a fee required by statute. On average, DFG has issued approximately 3,200 suction dredge mining permits to California residents every year for the last 15 years. The comparable average number of non-resident suction dredge mining permits issued annually by DFG was approximately 450.

DFG's existing regulations governing suction dredge were promulgated after preparing and certifying an environmental impact report under CEQA in 1994. DFG considered proposed amendments to the existing regulations governing suction dredge mining in 1997, releasing a draft subsequent environmental impact report for public review that same year. However, the 1997 Draft SEIR was never completed or certified.

DFG's current effort to amend the existing regulations and comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is required by a court order issued in a lawsuit brought against DFG by the Karuk Tribe of California. The lawsuit focused on the Klamath, Scott and Salmon River watersheds in northern California; included allegations regarding impacts to various fish species, including coho salmon; and contended that DFG's administration of the suction dredging program violated the (CEQA) and various provisions of the Fish and Game Code.

In December 2006, the Alameda County Superior Court issued an order with the consent of all parties, directing DFG to “conduct further environmental review pursuant to CEQA of its suction dredge mining regulations and to implement, if necessary, via rulemaking, mitigation measures to protect Coho salmon and/or other special status fish species in the watershed of the Klamath, Scott, and Salmon Rivers, listed as threatened or endangered after the 1994 EIR.”

Based on information DFG collected from interested parties, DFG informed the Alameda County Superior Court in early 2008 that DFG could not proceed with the court-ordered environmental review in reliance on an addendum to the 1994 EIR. DFG informed the court at the same time that more than minor additions or changes to the 1994 EIR would be necessary and that statewide issues would need to be addressed in a subsequent environmental document in order to fulfill DFG's obligations under CEQA. As a result, DFG informed the Alameda County Superior Court that it intended to prepare a subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report that would be statewide in scope to comply with the December 2006 Court Order.

Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (DSEIR)

Administrative Procedures Act Documents

For more information

All questions related to the Suction Dredge Permitting Program environmental review may be directed to: Mark Stopher, Senior Policy Manager, at (530) 225-2275 or mstopher@dfg.ca.gov.