| # | Name | Comments |
|---|
| 1 | David Shackleton | Strongly oppose AB1032 |
| 2 | Mike Anderson | |
| 3 | Anonymous | This an attempt to circumvent the federal court order to do an EQA report |
| 4 | Anonymous | |
| 5 | Matt Evans | |
| 6 | Don Hirlinger | I prospect for gold as a Hobby. Please do not disregard us as you review the bill. Please do not vote for it. |
| 7 | Joe Rooney | As a recreational dredger I urge those of you that are voting to eliminate suction dredging do not realize the fiscal impact that will occur if this passes. The money that is spent by those of us that spend time in this activity would be enormous. From the equipment that is purchased, to the permit fees, camping equipment and fees, food gasoline, equipment repairs from breakdowns and so forth. The fact is that the rivers and streams have mercury still in them . We are actually cleaning the rivers with suction dredging with the benefit of trying to get gold at the same time. Dredgers are very eco-minded people because we take the trash that we find in the rivers and streams and have it disposed of properly. Don't shut this down! As far as fish are concerned ther is no problem. They are left alone even when they swim to the nozzel end of the dredge. Sincerly , Joe Rooney |
| 8 | Anonymous | California's history is built on gold mining. How can you get rid of the very essential thing that made California so popular? And if you are going to prohibit mining, you might want to prohibit anything else that affects water such as fishing, swimming, and everything else inbetween. |
| 9 | Anonymous | I plan on visiting California with my family this summer, at least with my dad and my brother. We will not be coming if this occurs because our right to prospect in that state will be taken from us. This unjustly blames small time gold prospectors with a notional problem that doesn't even exist. It's just flat out wrong, deceiving, and stands on no facts. |
| 10 | Herschel "Jim" Hinesley | |
| 11 | Douglass Foster | |
| 12 | GEORGE P. MACKEY | |
| 13 | Anonymous | |
| 14 | alan j joyce | |
| 15 | Gaston Cannon | |
| 16 | James Simons | I feel the Gold Prospector and Gold Miner does more good to the enviroment, than any harm. At least we cleanup what up the enviroment as we go. |
| 17 | James Kremmel | |
| 18 | Jim | I beleive that our right to prospect is a valid right as citizens, and a historical right. Our government should be protecting it and not takeing it from us. |
| 19 | Robin Adair | Our country has a rich and prosperous history concerning gold mining. The financial resources that were generated from gold miners help our
country recover from the " War for Independace" and gave us the financial stability to develop into the great country we are. As I teach my son,
it is part of our HIstory and part of our Heritage. This bill seriously undermines my right to honor history and my heritage and share it with the next generation. I do not support this bill. |
| 20 | Trevor Neuman | One thunderstorm causes more turbidity in any given stream than all recreational prospecting combined. |
| 21 | Stan Elder | This will have not only an impact here in California, but could stretch to other states as well. Here in Ca. the effects are going to be far reaching. This will take monies from counties that rely on miners and the mining industry to supplement their economy. This will give the DFG the green light to do as they wish. They feel they can pull an end around on the studies they were ordered to complete and shirk their responsibilities. In a sense, spit in the eye of the legal system. They think they are above the law. |
| 22 | Peter Jaffa | |
| 23 | russ pearce | common sense dictates that this bill should be voted down. |
| 24 | Ken Coulson | This bill is an attempt by DFG to try to do politcally what they were not able to do administratively because there is no evidence that suction dredging harms fish. |
| 25 | Wylie Phillips | |
| 26 | Scott Miller | This bill is not based on any scientific evidence. In fact it actually goes against published research conducted in many states that shows no negative impact, and in fact, positive effects from suction dredging and fish.
It will also severly impact tourism and dollars spent, often in small rural towns that rely heavily on tourist dollars.
Remember, these are PUBLIC lands, and the public should and has the right to access them in a reasonable manner. |
| 27 | Chip Hess | The passing of this bill would put small businesses such as ours (over $100K in inventory of dredges and supporting equipment) out of business in the state of California. |
| 28 | Robert H Keith | |
| 29 | sammy clark | this bill is a slap in the face of a freedom loving american. remember, you were elected to office and we will know who to vote for when your term is up |
| 30 | Michael D. Vickers | |
| 31 | Alan Hughes | |
| 32 | MARTIN WOOD | |
| 33 | Neal R Tomaszewski | |
| 34 | Chris Ralph | This bill is without scientific support and seeks to accomplish through the legislature authority no court would give the DFG. No eveidence exists that this bill would accomplish anything to improve California fisheries, while it would cleary prohibit law abiding citizens from recreational use of California rivers.
It attacks a single user group without any due process or right to hearing. I strongly urge the legislature to reject this bill.
- Chris Ralph |
| 35 | Bruce Villotti | Strongly oppose AB1032. Bad Law on even worse grounds. |
| 36 | Buck Rogers | |
| 37 | Richard Haynes | this would have great negative monetary impact on cities and mining related buisness |
| 38 | John D. Moon | |
| 39 | Anonymous | |
| 40 | Eathan Mertz | |
| 41 | Thomas Wiggs | I know that I am from Alabama and this bill does effect me "down the road"... The passing of AB 1032 is another attempt to force an issue that has already be proven wrong and ruled against in a court of law... This will also effect the economy of several Counties and the State of California as a whole!!! The people that are supporting this bill has already lost once and keep trying to bring the same argument to another level with no new proof... If anything the people that are pushing for the passage of this bill should be sued for the cost of trying to stop an action already ruled on in a court of law... So, PLEASE oppose this bill AB 1032... |
| 42 | Randol Thrasher | I oppose this bill for a number of reasons
1. I see this as an attempted “end run" around the court ordered environmental study, which is (and should be) required to establish what if any new evidence there is that would support these changes to the existing regulations.
2. The “concerns” about the Yellow Legged Frog being forced into areas where dredging activities are taking place during periods of low flow is addressed in the current regulations, This is the first line in section 2 of the background statement “Current law allows DFG to close streams that were previously open to vacuum or suction dredging if there is an unanticipated change in water level.”
3. The Background statement, in general, is based on speculation and is misleading: ‘The court's order in the case notes that declarations filed with the court state that in the opinion of DFG, suction dredge mining in those watersheds is resulting in deleterious effects on the Coho salmon, as the Tribe alleged.” There were no studies introduced in court to substantiate this opinion. All of the studies that can be found point to the DAMS on the Klamath as the cause of the declining fisheries. |
| 43 | Gerald Kracher Jr | Fiscal impacts to the State of California will be HUGE. Millions of dollars are spent annually in the State from both residents and out of State small scale miners. California was borne with the gold rush, lets keep our heritage ALIVE! |
| 44 | MELVIN SHORT | no to ab 1032 |
| 45 | Anonymous | Follow Judge Sabraw ruling. To save fish put a stop to all Gill Nets used by Tribes |
| 46 | Anonymous | |
| 47 | Ira Holmes | |
| 48 | Edward Murphy | I spend several thousands of dollars every dredging season on my recreational mining activities in California. And I am not alone. Additionally, I own claims in California that are worth tens of thousands of dollars today. If this bill is enacted, their value will be essentially nill. What is the compensation plan for the government's taking? In all my years of suction dredging, I have never seen or heard of a single fish dying as a result of that activity - not one. Look for any science proving otherwise and you will come up empty handed. This is a bill that is obvious discrimination against a small grouop of people. Vote no on AB1032. |
| 49 | Sandra Brown | I strongly oppose AB 1032. Where is the proof that dredging negatively affects wildlife. Where are the studies,science or research to prove that fact.There are studies out that show the opposite. Without that proof,this is just another ploy to deny the public access to their own public land.The public will remember this come election time. |
| 50 | Jim Hughes | |