Feds admit lead mercury researched a member of enviro group
Last Post 12 Feb 2015 06:23 PM by LEO LORENZ. 5 Replies.
Printer Friendly
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
Sort:
PrevPrev NextNext
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Author Messages
BRAD JONESUser is Offline
Sluicer
Sluicer
Posts:56



--
07 Jan 2015 01:15 PM

    The following is a media release issued by the Western Mining Alliance Jan. 7. 2015:

    PRESS RELEASE
    Reno, NV January 7th, 2015
    For Immediate Release

    FEDS ADMIT LEAD MERCURY RESEARCHER A MEMBER OF ENVIRO GROUP

    In a recently released report the US Geological Survey admitted a mercury researcher was a member of an environmental group which lobbied for the California suction dredging ban.

    Following a request for an investigation by the Western Mining Alliance (WMA), the Department of Interior released their final report looking into allegations of scientific misconduct by one of their scientists.

    The WMA challenged the findings of a 2011 report prepared by Dr. Charles Alpers, of the US Geological Survey (USGS), which concluded suction gold dredging equipment increased mercury levels in streams. The WMA alleged the scientist withheld five years of data and was also a member of an environmental group which was lobbying for a prohibition on suction dredging equipment.

    The final report acknowledged Dr. Alpers was not only a member of the environmental group, The Sierra Fund (TSF), but was also on the Board of Advisors of TSF, a position which determined policy and strategy for the group.

    The Sierra Fund, based in Nevada City, California, lobbied the California legislature for a permanent ban on suction dredging equipment citing the results of Alper’s report as evidence there was a significant threat to the environment.

    “There’s just one problem,” said Craig Lindsay, president of the WMA, “He claimed there was only one year of data available, but we did a Freedom of Information Act request and it turns out he withheld an additional five years of data. The inclusion of the additional data shows no linkage whatsoever, but shows a strong linkage to the size of the spring floods.”

    The controversy surrounding the use of suction gold mining equipment has led to a six year ban on the equipment which miners are challenging in court. The miners won their first legal victory from a California Appeals Court in September and appear poised to win a second victory later this month, effectively overturning the ban.

    “We were shocked by the deliberate withholding of the data”, said Lindsay. “That Alpers belonged to an environmental group which was lobbying for the ban seemed a little too convenient. The full data set shows no evidence of linkage. The data shows mercury levels in insects have increased significantly since the ban was imposed.”

    Despite his membership in the environmental group, and withholding the data the US Geological Survey investigation concluded there was no conflict of interest.

    “…the research chemist’s membership in TSF was authorized and complemented USGS interests.” The investigation concluded. The report further justified Alper’s actions by stating “There is a growing trend for people to file scientific integrity complaints in an effort to change legislative decisions they do not like.”

    “All we wanted was honest research, not science based on advocacy,” said Lindsay, “Three consecutive California Water Board studies over ten years have shown no linkage between California gold miners and increased mercury. The Alper’s Report was a bit of an outlier to those studies which made us wonder why.”

    You can read the publically available USGS report at
    http://www.doi.gov/oig/reports/uplo...Public.pdf

    You can read the WMA article on the report at
    http://www.westernminingalliance.org

    WILLIAM HALLUser is Offline
    Lost Dutchman
    Lost Dutchman
    Posts:351



    --
    07 Jan 2015 03:36 PM
    hmmm imagine that, someone of prominence spinning or withholding information to fit into their agenda.

    That would NEVER happen in America.....



    Bill
    So much river....So little time....Get out there
    joseph LoydUser is Offline
    Lost Dutchman
    Lost Dutchman
    Posts:426



    --
    08 Jan 2015 07:30 PM
    He needs to find a new job .Those types need fired emidiatly .If not their bosses .
    Member LDMA and several other clubs in CA.
    GEORGE BRANIGANUser is Offline
    Greenhorn
    Greenhorn
    Posts:3



    --
    11 Feb 2015 04:32 PM

    If anything we reduce the amount of mercury and lead as a direct result of us taking it out of the river system.Of course the enviro nazies will never admit to it.Instead they fabricate data and lie.

    RVN,70-71-72
    DENNIS HUGGINSUser is Offline
    Greenhorn
    Greenhorn
    Posts:3



    --
    12 Feb 2015 02:57 PM
    i like the report that mister Jones released if the u.s.g.s. will not take an secound look at Dr Alpers data Is it because of the USGS has confidence in Dr. A alpers or do you think that they are embarrassed But the USGS credibility would suffer, are possibly the people in charge in the USGS are also biased on the side of the environmental Extremists
    In the last five years that I've dealt with the BLM over my mining claims. These dealings have given Me the opportunity's to be upfront on some of the land use plans around the state of California. All of the land use plans lean to the environmentalists, and conservation extreme advocates. This leaves me wondering ; does the Federal government have unofficial policy whose main agenda is to separate The public from public lands, which also means a war on mining in particular. And other scenario would be that the BLM or U.S. Forest service have so many employees that lean way a pass center toward total conservation Of the lands controlled by the agency they are working for. Therefore there is an internal built in bias. Scenario three is that when the U.S. Forest service or the BLM have a land use plan, the extreme environmental groups Have a larger financial resources available to buy the Manpower and legal fees to persuade for their cause.i am at a loss who do we fight and how .
    LEO LORENZUser is Offline
    Lost Dutchman
    Lost Dutchman
    Posts:378



    --
    12 Feb 2015 06:23 PM
    Dennis, When employees are hired in the BLM or Forest Service you can bet, and I know for a fact, that after doing background checks on the prospective employee, they already know your political leanings and your affiliations and memberships within any type of social organizations. So, they can pretty much pick and choose who they want to stack the deck with. Many citizens are super naïve and just go about their lives "not" reading into the details about how things really work. Its only after decades go by, can the shift in policies actually be seen as a "what???!! is this all about". By then its too late. We already have a good idea what political party is detrimental to our recreational interests. Some of you may have grown up in a hard core blue collar life style which at one time in society have groups that did look out for your personal well being. That is long gone now, and you have to be willing to change with the times. Those "groups" leadership have been perverted and morphed into something else. People nowadays are even afraid to speak for their truths or don't want to because they are afraid to create controversy. The "environmentalists" have learned key rules that in order to affect "change", you fight from the inside of the system. Those people are now all at upper levels of management within their districts management and now control more. Read Saul Alinsky....Rules for Radicals...it is the playbook for this type of  government control. Any way....just thought I would contribute.
    Leo
    You are not authorized to post a reply.