Appendix I PUBLIC MEETING TRANSCRIPTS Suction Dredge Permitting Program March 2012 Final Subsequent Project 09.005 Environmental Impact Report SANTA CLARITA: MARCH 23, 2011 Suction Dredge Permitting Program March 2012 Final Subsequent Project 09.005 Environmental Impact Report 1 1 2 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME 3 PUBLIC COMMENTS 4 5 6 7 8 9 TRANSCRIPTION OF AUDIO RECORDING 10 MARCH 23, 2011 11 SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2 1 P R O C E E D I N G S 2 (CD on.) 3 MS. MONAGHAN: -- microphone. And state your 4 name and start talking. 5 MR. CESERE: My name's Tony Cecere. I think 6 something that you're not taking into consideration is 7 the amount of money that we're spending in these small 8 communities and what it's going to be doing to them. 9 Is it on now? No? 10 I don't think you're taking into consideration 11 what you're doing to a lot of these small communities Cesere, Tony 12 around money that we are putting into them. 13 This last -- I have worked in this state for 14 over 30 years. And when I decided to retire, I knew 15 what I wanted to do. I went out and decided to go 16 prospecting. I spent about $30,000 on mining equipment, 17 $200,000 on a motor home that I would go out dredging 18 in, and I'd go to small communities up north. And every 19 summer I would spend between 3 to $5,000. 20 Now, this last year being that you've stopped 21 dredging, I've gone to Alaska. And now I go up to 22 Alaska and spend my money, and which I'll probably do 23 this year also. 24 I think what you're doing with limiting us to 25 four-inch dredges on specific things is making it 3 Cesere, Tony 1 difficult to small miners that go out on these small 2 streams and prospect. Thank you. 3 MALE VOICE: (Inaudible). 4 MR. LAROSA: Mr. Mark Stouffer, thank you for 5 having this meeting. First, my name is Dion Larosa. I 6 would like to comment on this draft supplemental 7 environmental impact report. I've been a resident in 8 the state of California for 38 years, and I enjoy 9 mineral pursuits outdoors. 10 I'd first like to address the terms you use, 11 significant and unavoidable impacts, as well as negative 1. Larosa, Dion 12 impact stated throughout certain chapters within the 13 DSEIR. I submit to you, and anybody else who is 14 concerned, that all the streams and rivers are geologic 15 ongoing provisions of erosion. Erosion within this 16 environment is a combination of weathering, which is a 17 chemical or physical breakdown of the minerals and rocks 18 in a hydrological environment and gravity with the 19 occurring condition currently. 20 The warm or atmospheric temperatures governed 21 over the past decade are expected to lead to a more 22 vigorous hydrological cycle, including more extreme 23 rainfall events. 24 Studies on soil erosion suggests that 25 increased rainfall amounts and intensities will lead to 4 1 greater amounts of erosion. Thus, if rainfall amounts 2 and intensities increase, natural erosion of the rivers 3 and stream beds will -- excuse me -- will also increase 4 up to and including suspension of the entire bed load 5 during flood stages being transported downstream as we 6 have seen in the recent past. 7 Studies by Prusky and Nearing (phonetic) in 8 the Journal of Oil and Water Conservation, 2002, 9 indicate we can expect an approximate 1.7 percent change 10 in soil erosion for each 1 percent change in total 11 precipitation under normal climate change. 1. Larosa, Dion 12 Therefore, I have concluded any dredging 13 activities defined within Section 228 in such a 14 geologically transitory environment are not significant 15 and would not have a negative impact generally. 16 Respectfully, I also find these terms are intentionally 17 deceptive and misleading. 18 My second point, I direct your attention in 19 the 85-page document, the draft, page 35, block 4, 20 Section 19, as it applies to the Los Angeles County 21 area, San Gabriel River, East Fork, main stem and all 22 tributaries upstream to Cattle Canyon Creek. 23 I recently visited the East Fork and noted 24 from the reservoir upstream to Cattle Canyon Creek as 25 written is approximately 4 and three-quarters of a mile, 5 1 two miles of which are private property and 2 approximately two miles of which are inaccessible. This 3 leaves approximately just over a half mile (inaudible) 4 dredge within a 100-mile radius to the next county 5 north. 6 I also noted the area is multi-use by 7 swimmers, campers, hikers and fishermen as well as 8 people just wanting to get outdoors by driving through 9 the mountains. 10 In order to alleviate crowding by all user 1. Larosa, Dion 11 groups enabling everyone to have an educational or 12 memorable experience which is in line with the current 13 administrations, outdoors initiative campaign with the 14 boundary of Cattle Canyon Creek be amended to a location 15 known as Shumaker Canyon. 16 This new boundary of Shumaker Canyon is 17 approximately two miles upstream on the East Fork from 18 Cattle Canyon Creek, and it is far downstream of the 19 wilderness boundary as it joins the main stem at 20 approximately Allison Gulch. 21 The area proposed is not designated scenic or 22 critical habitat, and is consistent with Title 14, 23 Sections 550 and 630, CCR, as it relates to dredging and 24 wildlife areas and ecological reserve. I also request 25 that the area be re-amended to the Class A size it is 6 1. Larosa, Dion 1 currently. Thank you, 2 MR. BELEY: My name is Eugene Beley, and I 3 would like to make this first question to Michael. 4 Michael, and -- I want to know how does it 5 feel to work -- 6 MS. MONAGHAN: (Inaudible). 7 MR. BELEY: Oops. How does it feel to work 8 for an organization that received a 30 percent increase 9 in funding, which your organization is clearly causing Beley, Eugene 10 at least a 30 percent decrease in dredging activities in 11 the right of Americans to pursue minerals in this 12 country as U.S. citizens. 13 And here I'd like to say that during 14 regulations -- or the regulations that are stated on 15 page 17 through -- through page 67, which gives all the 16 regulations wherever you can and can't dredge, and what 17 particular times and seasons and all this stuff, the 18 whole thing. 19 And I'm just wondering where would that 20 information -- why other additional demanding pieces of 21 information needed listed in page 3, Section C, through 22 page 5, Section G, things like a list of up to six 23 locations where you'll be dredging, counties, river, 24 stream, lake name, range, township, California mining 25 club number, approximate dates of proposed dredging. 7 1 And in any changes that the above permit applicant must 2 be amended with the Department of Fish and Game. I 3 mean, wow, these kind of (inaudible) -- these kind of 4 (inaudible) are a failure in fear of citations at the 5 discretion of the Department of Fish and Game personnel 6 based on what is clearly based in nature. 7 MS. MONAGHAN: (Inaudible). 8 MR. BELEY: Okay. I'll try to speak up a Beley, Eugene 9 little bit more, but -- 10 MS. MONAGHAN: Yeah. (Inaudible). 11 MR. BELEY: I'll start over with the 12 regulation part, not the part with the mic there. I 13 think we're okay on that. 14 Again, the regulations have always been 15 regulated as to when, where and how you can dredge 16 according to the Classes A through H. 17 Well, I've got previous dredge permits and 18 information from years past, and it's always been the 19 same. With these new regulations, you're also adding on 20 there -- and all these regulations are all worked around 21 to the spawning of fish and endangerment of their eggs 22 and that kind of stuff. That's why there's certain 23 seasons that you can dredge and can't dredge. 24 Well, now you're -- now you're asking, you 25 know, for all of this additional information that 8 1 includes, you know, locations -- six locations, county, 2 river, stream, lake, name, range, township, meridian and 3 center point, longitude, latitude of where you're going 4 to be dredging. 5 And here's the thing about that, too, is you 6 get all of this information that's documented on the Beley, Eugene 7 permit and Department of Fish and Game. That's not -- 8 is that a safe and secure place? There are disgruntled 9 employees which are found to be in many companies and 10 corporations that could use this information in a 11 harmful way as to where and when you are, and when and 12 where you're not, given that type of information. It's 13 like a -- an infringement on your privacy. I mean, that 14 I think regulating way too much.