We stumbled upon this article about the Chetco this morning and while it is a pretty standard article about how they are enacting a 5 year ban on dredging in the Chetco, what drew our attention to it is the comments at the bottom. False narratives posted by enviro’s for the purpose of pushing their agenda further. We want to encourage you to comment when you see articles like this with the facts to counter their narrative.
We often see comments like “dredging kills fish”, “dredgers don’t care about the environment”, “miners destroy public lands”… We here at AMRA have many accounts to post back to these folks, we state the studies which show dredging does not harm fish and ask them to provide proof, links, facts to back up their statements. Of course they never do because there aren’t any.
Interior Department extends Chetco River gold mining withdrawal for five years
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on July 26, 2013 at 11:54 AM, updated July 26, 2013 at 9:11 PM
The Department of the Interior has withdrawn 17 miles of southwest Oregon’s vaunted Chetco River from new mining claims for five years.
The withdrawal, which extends a two-year moratorium, comes at the request of the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest and much of Oregon’s congressional delegation. Oregon senators Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley and U.S. Rep. Peter DeFazio, all Democrats, are trying to pass a Chetco River Protection Act that would permanently bar in-stream mining along 80 percent of the Chetco.
The withdrawn section of the river in Curry County has been targeted for in-river gold mining with commercial suction dredges. Interior’s order, issued earlier this month, withdraws 5,610 acres of national forest lands running a quarter mile along the river.
Nearly 45 miles of river, including the lower 17-mile stretch that ends at the national forest boundary just above Loeb State Park, are designated wild and scenic. But absent a withdrawal or permanent protection, the lower portion, classified as scenic or recreational, is still open to mining.
The Chetco, along with other Southwest Oregon rivers, is a battleground between conservationists and miners who say their rights under the federal government’s 1872 mining law trump more recent environmental laws.
The Chetco’s headwaters originate in the Kalmiopsis Wilderness. Barbara Ullian, coordinator of Friends of the Kalmiopsis, said the withdrawal gives Congress time to act.
The Chetco, known for its remarkable clarity, hosts thriving populations of fall chinook, winter steelhead and sea-run cutthroat trout. It’s a destination spot for anglers worldwide, Ullian said.
“The mining that was proposed would have been a huge disturbance of the streambed for 10 years,” she said. “And that streambed is the nursery for the wild fishery.”
— Scott Learn
People with agendas are trying to write the narrative that dredging is bad with no science to back it up.
Open your eyes and think for one minute…………….perhaps someone has ulterior motives for keeping the public off of public lands. Ever wonder why they are closing so many roads, making more and more waterways wild and scenic?
Don’t be a sheep, read, search out the truth and do not vilify small miners who in fact help the environment.
Miners and dredgers are not the bad guys here. Water management, politicians with agendas and groups with agendas are.
Meanwhile, there are resources in the river, i.e., gold, that is there for the taking. There is NO proof that mining the river hurts anything. If it is one of the clearest rivers now, with many salmon as the story states, well, gee, proof that dredging ain’t a hurting the fish.
Once again, those with a political agenda trying to tell others how to live because they are biased against anyone but their own views. Philistines.
Your definition of “proof” leaves something to be desired. Multiple studies have shown the adverse effects on water quality, fish populations, plant populations, amphibian populations and the rest of river bottom ecosystems when the natural order of boulders, sand, small rocks, river channels, etc. are constantly moved around, brought to the top and redeposited after filtration.
Your logic is a bit like “there are trees on public lands (resources) that are there for the taking” so we should just allow people to go out and clearcut wherever they want. I have no problem at all restricting commercial river bottom mining any more than I have a problem with restricting logging, free range cattle grazing, fishing, hunting, etc.
There have been two independent studies (paid for by us taxpayers) performed by DFG, one in 1997 and another in 2009 which conclusively show and state that suction dredging is not harmful to anadramous fish and create fish spawning grounds.
Your narrative that it is harmful is simply wrong. Dredging removes mercury from the rivers which the miners used in the 1850’s to about the 1940’s. It loosens the “concretized” gravels in the river bottom and creates habitat.
No, this is about an agenda and not fish as the studies prove.
Oregon now needs to prohibit or at least severely restrict recreational suction dredge placer mining statewide. Put the recreation back in it by requiring they use sluice boxes and pans.
Probably wishful thinking knowing how the State legislature is made up.
I assume you can provide some evidence that miners “don’t care about the rivers”? Proof?