WHY THE CORRUPTION OF FEDERAL FINANCE & WALL STREET ENSLAVES US
Tours by Ted Arman, parties of 10 or more; $100 each person.
Tour 1: Richmond mine portal to ore body through 1300' tunnel
Tour 2: Christ statue location hike.
Tour 3: President Lincoln Patents hike.
Package: All 3 tours with picnic lunch at the Homestake mine. $249.00
TO MAKE RESERVATIONS SEND A FAX TO 530-275-4559
WHEREAS it has become apparent to the citizens of Iron Mountain Mine, that there is no security for life and property, either under the regulations of society as it at present exists, or under the law as now administered; Therefore the citizens, whose names are hereunto attached, do unit themselves into an association for the maintenance of the peace and good order of society, and the preservation of the lives and property of the citizens of Iron Mountain Mine, and do bind ourselves, each unto the other, to do and perform every lawful act for the maintenance of law and order, and to sustain the laws when faithfully and properly administered; but we are determined that no thief, burglar, incendiary or assassin, shall escape punishment, either by the quibbles of the law, the insecurity of prisons. the carelessness or corruption of the police, or a laxity of those who pretend to administer justice.
Conference on The State of Environmental Justice at Iron Mountain Mine
Statement of Purpose
Purpose and goals of conference (Mission):
The year 2010 marked the 160th anniversary of Shasta County, the 30 th anniversary of Superfund, and the 18 th anniversary of the National Law Journal's work that found inequitable enforcement of environmental laws by race and income.
The conference seeks to bring together federal employees, academics, business and industry, non-profit organizations, tribes, faith-based organizations, local community activists and others to participate in dialog on achieving equality of environmental protection. The conference will serve as an academic legal conference to advance scholarship regarding environmental justice. A related goal of this conference is to expose law students to the myriad and complicated aspects of environmental justice.
Conference Planning Process:
Conference planning is organized around an overarching Planning Committee and Work Committees.
The committee will ensure papers and conference speakers represent the diversity in profession and ideas and strategies for achieving environmental justice.
Facilities and Site Selection
EJ and Health Disparities
Land Use Planning
Public Participation in Decision Making
EJ in Indian Country
EJ in Mining Territory
Policies on Key Issues (and measures taken to address them), such as but not limited to:
"The rights of users of property as those rights existed at the time of the adoption of a zoning ordinance are well recognized and have always been protected." (Edmonds v. County of Los Angeles (1953) 40 Cal.2d 642 , 651 [255 P.2d 772].)
Hostis humani generis ( Latin for "enemy of mankind") is a legal term of art , originating from the admiralty law , and referring to the peculiar status, before the public international law , of maritime pirates , since time immemorial , and slavers , since the 18th century. It is also used in the present to describe the status of torturers .
As they [the vigilantes] controlled the press, they wrote their own history, and the world generally gives them the credit of having purged San Francisco of rowdies and roughs; but their success has given great stimulus to a dangerous principle, that would at any time justify the mob in seizing all the power of government; and who is to say that the Vigilance Committee may not be composed of the worst, instead of the best, elements of a community? Indeed, in San Francisco, as soon as it was demonstrated that the real power had passed from the City Hall to the committee room, the same set of bailiffs, constables, and rowdies that had infested the City Hall were found in the employment of the "Vigilantes." [ 4 ]
SPRING CREEK DEBRIS DAM SPILLWAY
We conclude that failure to obtain written consent and in the absence of harm or injury and without QA or QAPP is arbitrary and capricious and is punishable for FEDERAL STATE TYRANNY, EXTORTION, FRAUD, DECEIT AND DERELICTION OF DUTIES damages and civil penalties under THE MORRILL ACT, SHERMAN ACT, AND CLAYTON ACT FOR RETRIBUTION of $450,000 per day ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION AND SLAVERY SINCE JANUARY 1, 1983.
Expansion of surface mining operations after January 1, 1976 may be recognized as a vested nonconforming use under the doctrine of "diminishing assets” as set forth in Hansen Brothers Enterprises, Inc. v. Board of Supervisors (1996) 12 Cal.4th 533.Authority: Sections 2755, 2776 and 2775, Public Resources Code; Hansen Brothers Enterprises, Inc. v. Board of Supervisors (1996) 12 Cal.4th 533.) Reference: Calvert v. County of Yuba, (2007) 145 Cal. App. 4th 613. Encourage the production.Timothy R. Hughes
The US EPA was forced to withdraw a portion of its proposed storm water management regulations in the context of a pending court challenge by the National Association of Homebuilders (NAHB) and other parties. In the pending appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, the EPA filed an unopposed motion to vacate part of its final rule regarding "Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Construction and Development Point Source Category".
The rule proposed to establish a numeric effluent limitation on pollutants from construction and development. The rule limited turbidity to an average daily level of 280 "nephelometric turbidity units" (NTUs). EPA concedes in its motion that, "[T]he Agency has concluded that it improperly interpreted the data and, as a result, the calculations in the existing administrative record are no longer adequate to support ..." the rule.
While we are not in a technical position to evaluate engineering and cost impacts of these regulations, NAHB has quoted, and ABC has supported, an estimate of up to $10 billion in cost annually to meet the overall national regulations as proposed by EPA. We just commented on the regulations generally last week and we believe this is a very significant issue for the construction and development industry. Ann Cosby at Sand Anderson's Environmental Law blog has a nice summary post of the negotiations in Virginia over sediment limits for the Chesapeake Bay Watershed .
By agreement, the motion requested that the case be held in abeyance for 18 months until February 15, 2012, to allow EPA to address the flaw. It will be quite interested to see whether the partial retreat by EPA sets off a chain reaction of challenges or delays in other aspects of the pending regulations.
Nosce te ipsum. Nosce inimicum hostem .
A " 'mine' " is defined as "all mineral bearing properties of whatever kind or character, whether underground, or in a quarry or pit, or any other source from which any mineral substance is or may be obtained." (§ 2200.) " 'Minerals' means any naturally occurring chemical element or compound, or groups of elements and compounds, formed from inorganic processes and organic substances, including, but not limited to, coal, peat, and bituminous rock, but excluding geothermal resources, natural gas, and petroleum." (§ 2005.)
IRON MOUNTAIN MINE IS NOT AVAILABLE FOR GOVERNMENT SPONSORED TOURS.
ENTRY OF THE MINE WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT LARCENY OF MINING PROPERTY BY JOINT AND SEVERAL TRESSPASSERS
Better than Organic
a Conversation with Agricola, part I
By Michael AsteraQ . You were saying Organic farming and gardening aren't really working. How are they not working?
Agricola : They're not working on several levels, including corporate greed, business ethics, and of course “We're from the government and we're here to help you.” But that's not what I'd like to talk about today. I'd like to focus on the nutrition aspect, and on soil, plant, and animal health. Specifically, why most Organic food isn't necessarily more nutritious than chemically grown food.
Q . It isn't? That certainly isn't the conventional wisdom. The people who grow it and buy it seem to think it is.
Agricola : Yes, there's definitely a myth or misunderstanding that organically grown means more nutrition. But when tested or assayed for vitamins, protein, minerals, etcetera there is no good evidence that organically grown food is more nutritious than chemically grown grains and produce. Organic growers and consumers don't like to hear this. They seem to believe that it has to be better, and of course it is better in one way: it has fewer pesticides, herbicides, and other nasty chemical residues. But these are all negative things, saying what organic food doesn't have. They say nothing about what it does have. And the simple fact is that it is possible to grow more nutritious food with standard NPK fertilizers and lime than with just composted organic matter..Q . What? That's heresy! (Laughing)
Agricola : I know. How dare I say such a thing? Well, for one thing, we're not farming much virgin prairie soil any more. The virgin prairie soil was gone a hundred years ago, and all of our best agricultural soils have been farmed and cropped steadily for at least a hundred years. [In the USA] Most of them are worn out, and many of the soils we're farming today weren't that good to start with. Sure, a lot of them need organic matter, they need humus, but they also need minerals. Manure and compost don't have any more in them than the organic materials they're made from–mostly Carbon, Hydrogen, and Oxygen, which the plant gets from air and water, plus, usually, an unbalanced amount of Nitrogen and Potassium and some humic acids. High Nitrogen and Potassium levels can grow big, lush, healthy looking crops, but they're not balanced nutritionally and they may even be harmful.
Let me give you an example. If you have ever wandered around in a cow pasture you have seen these lush green little patches growing where the manure has landed–big, tall bright green grass that the cows won't touch, won't eat. They'll graze right up to it and all around it but they won't eat it. Why not? It's not just because they're finicky about grazing where they pooped. That lush green grass can actually be poisonous to them. It will make them sick if they eat much of it. It's full of nitrates and incomplete proteins and probably too high in Potassium. After maybe a year, after the winter rains and snow have leached and diluted the manure and the soil microorganisms have gone to work on it, and the grass roots have maybe pulled up some Calcium from the subsoil and mellowed things out, then the cattle will graze that spot again. What do they know that we don't know? Well, they know instinctively what is good for them and what is not; whereas we humans seem to have lost that ability.And that's the kind of food that most organic growers are growing. They add tons of manure and compost–the more the better, they think–and grow these same kinds of crops that the cattle won't even graze on–big, lush, green, watery crops loaded with nitrates. And too often that's what we're getting when we buy organic.
Q . So are you saying that you think chemical fertilizers are better?Agricola : Don't get me wrong. I'm no big fan of chemical fertilizers. The right ones used in the right way can grow good, healthful food, but seldom are the right ones used in the right way. Usually the wrong ones are used in the wrong way and they end up killing off the soil life: bacteria, fungi, protozoans etc. which of course leads to erosion, ground water pollution, etc.etc.
However, let's say you used some high quality ammonium sulphate for a Nitrogen source, some single superphosphate, which is just a concentrated form of natural rock phosphate, and a decent Potassium fertilizer like Potassium sulfate or Potassium nitrate ( not muriate of potash, Potassium chloride. That stuff has the same effect on soil life as pouring Chlorine bleach on your soil would). These are all considered “chemical” fertilizers. And let's say you had spread some gypsum or some limestone or even some dolomite lime on the field or garden the previous year.
Now instead of this imbalanced high Nitrogen, high Potassium situation from manure and compost, you might have the proper amounts of Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Potassium, Calcium, Magnesium, and Sulfur plus whatever trace minerals might be in the soil or in the limestone or gypsum you applied.You will hopefully have a little organic matter in the soil from last years crop roots and residues; you're going to be able to grow much healthier and more nutritious crops than you could possibly get from manure and compost alone, simply because you have a wider and more balanced array of nutrients available. It may not be ideal, but you'll certainly grow better food than from just adding organic matter to a depleted soil.
Q . I guess that makes sense. So would you recommend throwing out the conventional organic approach and using a combination of chemical fertilizers and compost or manure?Agricola : Not exactly. More like a combination of science and nature. But let's back up a bit. I'd like to talk a little about how we got to this situation with Organic growing in the first place.
Q . Going back to Sir Albert Howard?Agricola : (laughs)You got it. Albert Howard was a British agriculturalist who was stationed in India for a number of years, from about 1905 to 1924, in an area of poor and worn out soils. He hypothesized that what was wrong with the soil was a lack of organic matter, so he had the locals round up a large quantity of manure and crop residues, which he composted and applied to this worn out soil. I imagine this soil had been farmed for hundreds if not thousands of years. Howard claimed he grew marvelous, abundant crops and that the animals fed these crops were healthy and disease resistant All well and good, but I've always wondered if that was any kind of a solution for the locals. I mean, if they'd been farming and gardening there for hundreds of years, they must have been well aware of the benefits of adding manure and organic matter to the soil. I imagine if the locals had had the ability to round up all their neighbors' manure piles to use on their own crops they might have done so, but their neighbors might have objected. Anyway, Howard didn't invent composting, it was well known in Asia, but he seemed to think he'd discovered something new.
Q . Why is that? Weren't they composting and using manure in England?
Agricola : Oh, of course, but not so much as they had done in the past, and it certainly wasn't the modern, scientific thing to do and wasn't taught or encouraged in the colleges Sir Albert attended. In order to explain why, I'll need to go back a little further.Q . Go ahead.
Agricola : OK. Well, you see, chemistry as we know it really isn't a very old science. Modern chemistry, which is based on knowledge of the 92 natural elements and their properties, didn't really begin until the late 1700's. Dalton isolated Calcium in 1804. Dmitri Mendeleyev didn't publish his Periodic Table of the Elements until the 1870's. Before Mendeleyev, though, some people had come up with some very useful things to do with the new science. In the 1840's, a Paris trained German chemist, Justus von Liebig, burned some barley grains to ash and analyzed what was left. He came up with Nitrogen, Phosphorus, and Potassium. NPK. Von Liebig showed that if he added just N,P and K ( K is for Kalium, the name the German alchemists used for Potassium) to the soil, the plants grew well. He reasoned that certain elements had been depleted from the soil over the years and needed to be replaced, and he was right. Von Liebig rejected the prevailing agricultural wisdom of his day, which was the old idea that humus, totally broken down organic matter, supplied plants with food. NPK worked great, and it was relatively cheap and easy to manufacture. His discovery was immediately seized upon by the German industrialists, and thus was born chemical agriculture. Humus, composting, and manure were off the fashion runway. All one needed was NPK to grow huge crops and the chemical factories made money hand over fist. So did the farmers, for a while, until it got to the point of diminishing returns, where they had exported the reserve fertility from their soil and had to dump more and more chemical fertilizer on their soil to get results. At that point, which was reached anywhere from ten to twenty years after the introduction of chemical fertilizers to the soil, the chemical factories kept on making money but the farmer didn't. His profit was going to make the industrialists rich. And that's how things have remained to the present day.Von Liebig has gotten somewhat of a bad rap over the years and has been blamed by some for the excesses of chemical agriculture, but what he really stated was that whatever needed nutrient was in the shortest supply was going to be the limiting factor in how well the plant grew. He called it the “Law of the Minimum”.
Von Liebig did realize by 1850 that humus was essential, but by then the industrial chemical factories had taken over and no one listened. The manure piled up in the barnyards and the “modern” farmer didn't need to get his hands dirty with it.So by the time Albert Howard was going to school in England in the late 1800's it was all chemical fertilizers, all NPK, and organic matter and humus were forgotten.
Is this getting too detailed here?Q . No, it's fine. You were saying, then, that Albert Howard, later Sir Albert Howard, rediscovered the value of humus and organic matter in the soil?
Agricola : Exactly. And, back in England, he proceeded to put his ideas into practice and to write a couple of very influential books– An Agricultural Testament in 1940 and The Soil and Health in about 1947.Q : And that was the beginning of the Organic movement?
Agricola : More or less. Around 1940 in Pennsylvania, a young health magazine editor named J.I. Rodale happened to read an article about a boy's school near London where the food was grown by the Howard method. A dramatic decline had been seen in the incidence of flu, colds and scarlet fever, except in new arrivals, who soon became well. Rodale read Howard's book, and was so excited that he began corresponding with Howard and soon bought a farm where he began growing crops by this “new” method. Rodale had been sickly. When he noticed an improvement in his own health, he soon became a fanatic.Q . You're calling J.I. Rodale a fanatic? (laughter) I can see your point. But was that good or bad?
Agricola : Both, I guess. It was good that he was inspired to preach the message of Organic agriculture and to start the magazine that became Organic Gardening Magazine, which got the message out to millions of people. Bad, in that he was pretty much what one might call a one trick pony. Organic matter, compost and humus became the litany and the dogma of the Church of Organic Gardening, no heretics need apply. Understand, I mean no disrespect to either Howard or Rodale. Both of them made valuable contributions in waking people up to the dangers of chemical agriculture and the importance of a healthy, living soil. They just sort of got stuck in simplistic answers. They neglected the all important mineral balance. Howard was of the opinion that composted leaves from forest trees would supply all the minerals necessary. He figured the tree roots would go deep into the earth and pull up any that were needed, which may be true if the needed minerals are down there. Pine trees and maple trees, however, don't necessarily need the same mineral balance as cabbages and wheat. Howard's books contain almost no mention of minerals. Neither Howard nor Rodale were well informed chemists or nutritionists.Although Rodale did recommend the use of lime, phosphate rock, and greensand in his later work, it was never strongly emphasized and was largely ignored by his followers. Rodale himself didn't seem to have much understanding of minerals. Neither of them ever advocated a soil test beyond measuring pH, as far as I know. And how is one to really know what's going on without a soil test?
Q . I agree, although interpreting a soil test is rather complicated, and knowing what to do with the results is even more complicated, isn't it?Agricola : Sure. And many gardeners and farmers aren't willing to invest the time, expense, and effort in getting a soil test and educating themselves, especially when it's so simple to just pile on more manure, compost, mulch etc. Which is fine, I think, unless they're actually trying to grow real food to grow healthy bodies and keep them healthy.
I've been fascinated for many years with nutrition, medicine and agriculture. In my opinion, real scientific agriculture trumps medicine and it trumps nutritional science. Nutritional science these days is mostly concerned with supplements–vitamins, minerals, amino acids, enzymes, hormones, herbal extracts and all the pills and potions on the health food store shelves. All of these are only needed because the nutrients that should be in our food aren't there. And why aren't they there? Because the minerals aren't in the soil the food is grown in. For example, Zinc has been shown to be necessary for over three hundred metabolic and enzymatic processes in the body. With no Zinc, or not enough Zinc, you're looking at over three hundred vital processes in your body that aren't going to happen. Could this have an effect on your health? And going back to Howard's mulch of leaves, if the rocks that broke down to form that forest soil didn't contain Zinc, there won't be any Zinc in the leaves, will there?Q . And how does Agriculture trump Medicine?
Agricola : Because Medical care for disease, as opposed to injury, is mostly dealing with the results of malnutrition. Cancer, heart disease, diabetes, arthritis, chronic infections etcetera are largely diseases of malnutrition. This has been shown in thousands of scientific studies for the last century. How much sense does it make to treat malnutrition with drugs and surgery? How much proof do we need? None of these diseases are caused by a deficiency of drugs or surgery. The real nutritionists realize this, so they attempt to alleviate problems by having people change their diets and take supplements, like vitamins and minerals. That wouldn't be necessary if the full complement of nutrients was in everyone's everyday diet.Q . But Organic farming, at least by the Howard/Rodale method, isn't the answer?
Agricola : Well, I'm sure you can see from what I've said so far what I'm leading up to. Mineral balanced agriculture is the only thing that can work. It's the puzzle piece that's been missing from organic gardening, and from nutrition, and from medicine. What we need to do first of all is to figure out exactly what constitutes a perfect or nearly perfect diet for the human body. We can do this. Nutrition is a well advanced science, unlike most of today's agriculture. Much of what has been discovered in nutritional science isn't being taught in the colleges, but the information is there for those who look.Once we've figured out the nutrients we want in our food, then we figure out how to grow crops that contain those nutrients. And in order to grow crops that contain those nutrients, we have to figure out how to build soil that contains the elements the crops need to make those nutrients. When I first grasped this concept it seemed overwhelming because I thought we'd have to start from square one, but as I did more reading and research it turned out that a lot of the work had already been done, mostly in the period from 1930 to 1950. And just like in nutritional science, the research was shut down and the results buried by the chemical/industrial cartels after World War II.
Did you know that there has been no basic research done on soil science in American agricultural colleges since the mid 1950's? None. Zero. What's with that?
There has been plenty of research on hybrids bred to produce bulk tonnage on an NPK diet, and more recently on genetically modified organisms created to survive lethal doses of herbicides etc., but nutrient content and health hasn't even been in the picture. The entire picture has been greed, monopoly, and short term gain. Don't look to corporate agribusiness or the chemical companies to solve world hunger or malnutrition problems–they are the problem.Q . Tell us about the work that has been done.
Agricola : Gladly. There are several major figures who have done original research on soil minerals, people whose work has gotten enough attention to actually make some difference. I already mentioned Von Liebig, who got the ball rolling. Another early contributor of note would be Julius Hensel. In 1893 Hensel published Bread From Stones , an overview of the experiments he had done in Germany using rock powders, ground up rocks, to fertilize farm crops. Hensel was a serious chemist as well as an agriculturalist. He argued against the use of large quantities of manure, saying it weakened the plants and the soil. He also blamed the overuse of chemical fertilizers for ruining German food production, and claimed he got greater quality and quantity of crops using only rock powders. Needless to say, the industrial chemical cartel did their best to discredit him and bury his message, but his book is still in print and well worth reading.The two biggest names in what has become known as Eco-Agriculture, however, are William Albrecht and Carey Reams.
Albrecht was head of agricultural research at the University of Missouri from the 1920's until the mid 1950's. He was very much a classical scientist. He and his colleagues made the single most important discovery in soil science to date, the role of the clay fraction of soil in cation exchange capacity, abbreviated CEC or just EC for exchange capacity. Briefly, it's the ability of the clay and humus in the soil to hold and release tiny particles of certain positively charged minerals, for instance Calcium, Magnesium, Potassium, Sodium, Manganese, Copper. When we talk about clay we are actually talking about colloids, particles so small that they suspend in water and wont settle out. They're not dissolved in the water. The negatively charged clay particles can hold onto positively charged ions of Calcium, for instance, that would otherwise be leached away into the subsoil by rain and irrigation. The clay keeps these minerals from washing away, but gives them up easily to a plant's roots in exchange for Hydrogen (H+).Albrecht discovered why different soils have different exchange capacities. A soil with a lot of clay in it can generally hold onto a lot more minerals than a sandy soil. Humus also has a high exchange capacity, which is a good argument for maintaining soil humus in the ideal 4-5% range.
Albrecht and his crew made this discovery about clay in the 1920's, and this led to many years of experiments with the mineral balance of the soil and its relationship to plant, animal, and human nutrition and health. He believed that animals had a finely tuned sense for what was good food and was good for them. If the pigs, rabbits, or cows wouldn't eat forage that was grown on a certain soil or fertilized in a certain way, or would eat it only if starving, he wanted to know why. His published work, collected in four volumes by Charles Walters, is called The Albrecht Papers . It covers a vast amount of territory, from geology to soil organisms to animal husbandry to human nutrition, and in my opinion it stands as the greatest agricultural work yet written. Yet Albrecht's name doesn't even get a mention in modern soil science textbooks, though they have entire sections devoted to cation exchange capacity and the structure of clays. Sort of like Nikola Tesla or Kary Mullis. Tesla gave us our entire worldwide electrical system, Mullis gave us the polymerase chain reaction that is the basis of all DNA work today, and neither of them get a mention in the textbooks.Q . Linus Pauling comes to mind, too.
Agricola : Yeah, and Pauling spent the last years of his life working out the links between mineral deficiencies and disease. Pauling and Mullis both won Nobel prizes too, and I imagine that million bucks took a bit of the sting out of being shunned by the textbook writers. Albrecht was just shuffled off out of the way when the chemical companies took over the ag colleges in the 1950s. If it hadn't been for his friend Charles Walters, who recognized the importance of his work, Albrecht's work might have been lost and forgotten.Anyway, Albrecht concluded that he got the best results when the exchange capacity was saturated with about 65% Calcium, 15% Magnesium, 5% Potassium, a couple percent Sodium, and a few parts per million of some other minerals–Zinc, Copper, Manganese, Iron. That leaves about 10% of EC which is saturated with Hydrogen. If you add in some humus and organic matter, Phosphorus to equal the Potassium level, some Sulfur and a tiny bit of Boron, you have the basis of the Albrecht method. These ratios will give you the balanced mineral base for a healthy soil, and you should be able to grow bountiful, healthy, highly nutritious crops. The Albrecht method works very well, but of course it's not the whole answer. Carey Reams gave us another big piece of the puzzle.
Q . Yes, I'm curious about Carey Reams. From the little I know I've gotten the impression that he was pretty eccentric.Agricola : Well, if you ever try reading him, I think you'll agree that he was unconventional, at least. Reams was not the same sort of classical scientist as Albrecht was, even if he did have a PhD, but he was an awesome scientist nonetheless. What makes him difficult is that there were no accepted scientific terms for what he was observing and measuring, so he either borrowed terms like cation and anion from mainstream science and used them in his own way, or he made up his own, like his fabled millhouse units of energy. Reams can be obtuse and often verges on the mystical, but he undoubtedly got results.
He was certainly involved in determining the ideal mineral balance in the soil, although he used what's called the LaMotte method for soil testing, which uses a weaker extracting solution and measures easily available nutrients. But his more important focus and contribution was on the energy balance or imbalance of the soil; the flow of energy in the soil.One way of describing his energy ideas might be the comparison of a dead battery and a fully charged battery. Their elemental makeup is identical: the same amount of Lead, Sulfur, and water are in each, but one of them can do useful work while the other one just sits there. There's an energy flow when you connect + and – on the charged battery, nothing on the dead battery.
Let me see if I can make that a bit more clear. The charged battery has the same mix of elements in the same proportions as the dead battery, but there are a lot of potential chemical reactions that haven't happened yet, chemical reactions that release energy. Sort of like a bottle of vinegar and a dish of baking soda; when you pour the vinegar onto the baking soda, things start fizzing, heat and energy are released. When the fizzing stops, things have reached chemical equilibrium and there's no more energy release. A living soil with the right balance of minerals always has a certain amount of chemical imbalance, things being born and dying and decomposing, plant roots exchanging Hydrogen for Calcium or Potassium, grains of sand breaking down and releasing new minerals. Nutrient elements are constantly shuffling around and energy is being released. In a dead soil, nothing is happening, new nutrients are not being released and exchanged, and the only way to get plants to grow is by feeding them synthetic fertilizers.So one could have two soils of identical chemical composition but of different energy potentials, and the energized soil would grow good crops while the “dead battery” soil just sat there. This is a valuable observation Reams made, one that has been overlooked by many agricultural researchers.
Reams and his students also popularized the use of the refractometer in agriculture. A refractometer is a fancy name for a simple tube and eyepiece with a prism lens at one end that is used to measure dissolved solids in a liquid. It measures in the Brix scale and has long been used by professional winemakers to measure the sugar content of grapes–the higher the Brix reading, the sweeter the grapes.Now this is a simple little device that anyone can use. One could even take it with them to the fruit stand and measure the sugar content, hence the mineral content, of an orange or a tomato before buying a bagful. If that orange has a Brix reading of 16%, buy it! If it's only 4 or 6%, don't waste your money on insipid, tasteless food. Pretty cool.
What the refractometer measures is how much light is bent, or refracted, by the dissolved solids in the plant's juice or sap. A thin, watery sap devoid of nutrients won't bend the light passing through it like a sweet, richly mineralized sap will. So a person can use a refractometer to measure the quality of their own homegrown fruits and vegetables.Q . That has to be easier than learning to interpret a soil test.
Agricola : Sure. And you don't have to wait a week or two for your results to come back. Refractometers only give you a snapshot of where you are, though. They can't tell you what minerals are involved. But back to Reams.Reams was a strong advocate of Phosphorus, and he claimed that all nutrients should enter the plant in phosphate form, a claim I've never quite understood. He lived and worked in Florida, which has vast phosphate deposits, so he had plenty of Phosphorus available to experiment with. Now, Phosphorus is sort of a mystery element in the soil. Other elements will readily leach out, but Phosphorus stays put. And no one seems to know exactly why. We know from Albrecht's work that the positively charged cations like Calcium and Potassium are held by static charge to the clay and humus. But we don't know as much about what's going on with the negatively charged anions like Sulfur, Chlorine, and Phosphorus. We do know that these other anions will readily leach out, but not Phosphorus.
Can you believe this? We don't really know how the negatively charged elements are stored or how they move in the soil or get into the plant's roots. In the 1920's Albrecht and crew discovered the CEC connection to clay in the soil. As far as I can tell, that is the last major discovery in soil chemistry–made 80 years ago. And the last one before that was Von Liebig in 1840. And before that?Nope. That's it. As I count it, we have exactly two major discoveries in agricultural soil chemistry, plus Reams' observations about energy flow. And one from the petroleum engineers and geochemists. More about that one when we talk about Calcium.
So we really don't know very much about the soil. The soil of Mother Earth, that feeds us and upholds us, has been the redheaded stepchild for most of the history of modern science.During the dustbowl years of the 1930's, when the topsoil was blowing away on the wind, people were scared and some in the government were scared so between 1930 and the end of the second world war agricultural science was relatively well funded. Not, of course, funded like research into weapons of mass destruction, but at least enough to learn a few things of practical importance.
This all ended as the multinational corporations took aim at the American family farm in the late forties and through the fifties. By the late 1950's they had bought every ag college and land grant university in America, bought as in “ We'll give you a bunch of money but you have to put the people we want in charge and do only the research we pay you to do.” And the foolish, greedy administrators and trustees went for it. They sold out. There has been no real research in soil chemistry since then, only research on pesticides, herbicides, chemical fertilizers, hybrids, and now GMOs. [ed. note: Genetically Modified Organisms]OK. Let me try to get back to Reams and Phosphorus. Reams said that Phosphorus is necessary for the production of sugars, particularly complex sugars, in the plant. No Phosphorus, no sugar. Phosphorus is also essential to the production of DNA. And it is also the element in shortest supply in the soil over most of the world. I don't mean that there's less Phosphorus than the trace elements, but that Phosphorus is one of the major elements required for plant and animal health. Bones and teeth are made of Calcium and Phosphorus. And it's in short supply in most soils. Reams said that there should be twice as much available phosphate as potash for most crops and four times as much phosphate as potash for grains, grasses and legumes like alfalfa.
Q : That disagrees with Albrecht, doesn't it? Didn't Albrecht call for an equal amount of Phosphorus and Potassium?Agricola : (smiling) I see you are paying attention. Very good. Actually, Reams and Albrecht are saying the same thing. Phosphate is P2O5, two atoms of Phosphorus and five atoms of Oxygen. Potash is K2O, two atoms of Potassium and only one of Oxygen. If you do the arithmetic, based on the atomic weights of the elements, you will find that phosphate is only about 44% Phosphorus by weight, while potash is 83% Potassium by weight. One hundred pounds of potash contains eighty-three pounds of Potassium. Two hundred pounds of phosphate contains only about eighty-seven pounds of Phosphorus. So if you want the amount of Phosphorus in your soil to equal the amount of Potassium, by weight, you will need to have twice as much phosphate as potash.
It's worth noting here that the numbers on a fertilizer bag, the NPK numbers, don't actually stand for Nitrogen, Phosphorus, and Potassium, they stand for actual Nitrogen, an amount of phosphate, and an amount of potash. So if the NPK numbers say 5-10-5, for instance, there is about an equal amount of Phosphorus and Potassium. If the numbers say 5-5-5, there's only half as much Phosphorus as Potassium. I don't know why they started doing this, listing phosphate and potash instead of Phosphorus and Potassium, maybe to make it look like there were higher percentages of nutrients in the bag. I said earlier that Phosphorus stays put in the soil. If you spread Phosphorus on top of the soil, that's where it stays. What little we do know about Phosphorus indicates that it readily forms insoluble compounds in the soil that apparently can only be made available through the action of soil microbes and fungi. So you can end up with a situation like we have in the prairie soils of the great plains of Canada and the US, where there is plenty of Phosphorus in the soil, but because the soil is biologically dead, the farmers have to apply large amounts of highly soluble phosphate every year to grow a decent crop, which of course the chemical companies love.
Okay, I was talking about Carey Reams. Reams had some memorable sayings. One was see what you look at. Another was well grown produce doesn't rot, it dehydrates. He claimed to have entered the same watermelon in the county fair three years in a row. I'm just repeating what I read.Q . That melon must have been extremely well grown. I'm developing more respect for Reams and his work after what you've told me. Who else needs a mention?
Agricola : Charles Walters, for sure. None of the people presently working in this field would know much if Charles Walters hadn't had the vision to start his magazine Acres USA.Walters was working as an editor for agricultural newspapers in the 1950s and 60s when he became friends with William Albrecht. The agriculture newspapers that Walters worked for were the same kind that are mailed out free to farmers today, every other page a full-page ad for the chemical companies. Walters was intelligent enough and cared enough to realize the importance of Albrecht's work, and he realized that this work would be lost if someone didn't make it available to farmers. The commercial ag newspapers wouldn't touch this info, because it showed how to grow superior crops without using any of the toxic chemicals that their advertisers were selling. So Walters started AcresUSA in the early 1970s, and it remains to this day the magazine that makes the most significant contribution to sustainable agriculture.
Acres USA isn't just focused on Albrecht's work, though. They are just as likely to publish an article on biodynamics or composting or herbal or Homeopathic medicine, all without prejudice. If it's about natural health, sustainability, Eco-Agriculture, organic gardening, or just better and more efficient farming you will find it there. I can't speak highly enough of this magazine and the work that Charles Walters has done. Anyone interested in the subjects I mentioned owes it to themself to subscribe to it and read it cover to cover. There's just nothing else like it.Walters also gathered together and published William Albrecht's work in four volumes. Volume II, Soil Fertility and Animal Health is required reading, I would say, along with Walters' own tour-de-force Eco Farm .
He has also edited, written, or published dozens of other books on sustainable agriculture and natural health, many written by students of Albrecht or Reams, and all worth reading. The real reason that we have several million acres being farmed sustainably today is mostly due to the vision and work of this one man, Charles Walters. Albrecht and Reams may have laid the foundations of the science, but few would have heard their message without him and AcresUSA. One caveat, though, on reading Walters' books and essays. Somewhat like the old alchemists, he doesn't always give the information in a straightforward manner. Reading his work requires a little patience.
( a long pause.)
OK, that's enough history for now. I am leaving out over a dozen people who have been and are making great contributions to the field, but if I start listing them this wouldn't be an interview, it would be an encyclopedia. Let's get back to “Why Organic isn't Really Working and How it Can.”
Better than Organic
a Conversation with Agricola
by Michael Astera
Part II: (Bad) Science and the (Hopeful) Future
Agricola : Let's get back to “Why Organic isn't Really Working and How it Can.”Q . Absolutely. And after that background I think I have a pretty good idea of how it can. It has something to do with minerals, doesn't it? (Laughing)
Agricola : You got it. It has a lot to do with minerals and it has a lot to do with pulling all the different pieces together. Right now we have a lot of different viewpoints, a lot of different pieces of information, and, unfortunately, a lot of different “sects” in agriculture and gardening, all of them seemingly determined to prove that they're right and everybody else is wrong. To a certain extent this is just human nature–everyone likes to be right. But no one that I've talked about here is wrong. Von Liebig wasn't wrong, and neither was Rodale and neither was Reams.
They all had important pieces of the puzzle.One thing I would very much like to get across is that until about two hundred years ago we didn't even have a science of chemistry. That science was unfortunately kidnapped in its infancy by the corporate industrialists, who have kept it in chains in the basement ever since. Analytic Chemistry is a tool we have never before had in the eight-thousand-plus year history of agriculture. Properly used, it can tell us what we need in our diets for optimum nutrition, and what we need to add to the soil to achieve that in our food.. That sounds doable, to me.
Fertility in the soil is minerals. Minerals are elements, and elements are what this physical reality is made of. Each of these elements has its own unique structure and properties.What Iron can do, Copper can't. Iron oxidizes easily, as in rust. Copper doesn't readily combine with oxygen. So we have Iron to transport Oxygen in our red blood cells, not Copper. And neither Copper nor any other element can replace Iron in hemoglobin. Our bones are a crystalline lattice of Calcium and Phosphorus, and no other element can replace either one and still have healthy bone, even though some fools have tried to do it with Fluorine. Has anyone noticed any decrease in tooth decay?
Q : Not me. I've brushed with fluoride toothpaste most of my life and I've had terrible problems with my teeth.Agricola : Exactly. You and just about everyone else. Each element can do things that no other element can, and each is needed in the correct proportion, in the soil, in plants, and in living things. And guess what? We don't even know what the correct proportions are. We probably should by now, don't you think? This is what science should be used for, not for thinking up new patentable poisons to make someone a buck. We don't even know how Nature is supposed to work, and instead of trying to figure that out we've spent the last century and a half trying to improve on it? How does one improve something they don't even understand?
There has been some basic work done with mineral deficiencies in nutritional science; we know what happens to an experimental animal or a human if they don't get any Zinc in their diet. But we don't know what happens if they don't get any Zinc or any Copper or any Boron, all at the same time. Natural Science, and it's all Natural Science, is in its infancy, an enforced, perverted neoteny. [ed. note: a term used in biology for an organism that remains in an immature state] The poor baby has been chained in the basement (or is it under the stairs?) and forced into prostitution since it was born. This is not hyperbole or exaggeration. It's a nearly perfect analogy.People are attracted to science because of their natural curiosity and love of learning. A true Scientist is inquisitive, observant, and madly infatuated with his subject. He does science because he loves Science. I knew a fellow who graduated with a PhD in Entomology from a university in Arizona. He loved bugs enough to spend eight or nine years of his life living in poverty while going to school to study them. And he loved nature. He was a camper, a hiker, and a mountain climber. Along the way he got married and soon had a family to support. There wasn't much call for Professors of Entomology and what was available to a new graduate wouldn't support a growing family, so he took the only job his education qualified him for that paid well enough: he went to work for an exterminating company, spraying poisons to kill insects. Even though he was an organic gardener and a fitness freak, he died of a massive heart attack at age 49. I'm sure the years of exposure to pesticides that one has to have a license to handle were a major factor, but there's a lot of heartbreak in having to prostitute one's self that has to be factored in too.
I spent some time investigating a cancer research institute in the Midwestern US, so I know a little whereof I speak. With an annual budget of hundreds of millions of dollars, this cancer institute was basically a factory for spending research dollars. Whoever could write the best grant proposal and get the most money to blow was top dog. I assure you, this place had nothing to do with finding a cure for cancer. They had a seven story building as big as a hotel that held room after room after room of experimental animals in little wire cages all stacked up on roll-around carts. They had an assembly line (or should I say a disassembly line) of underpaid women who worked all day slicing up freshly killed white rats, mice, and hamsters and putting the slices on microscope slides and then putting a thin little glass cover over the rat tissue. This took up an entire floor of another large brick building and was called the department of Histology. And what happened to the slides? They were shipped out to a “storage facility” in the boonies where they were stacked on shelves. I was there, once, at this “scientific specimen” storage facility. Imagine a good sized single-story library with high ceilings and high bookshelves throughout, but instead of books there were boxes and boxes of glass microscope slides all carefully labeled, each with a little slice of animal tissue between the slide and the cover glass. Thousand and thousands of boxes of glass slides. And this had been going on for a while, and the housekeeping was none too great. When one walked down the aisles between the shelves one walked on six or eight inches of broken glass slides and had to be careful that a crumbling box full of slides didn't fall on one's head. I swear I am not making this up. And you wouldn't believe the toxic waste from “cancer research” they stored out there in the hinterlands. Barrels and barrels and more leaking barrels. If you're trying to give animals cancer you generate a lot of toxins. You don't want to know how awful this place was.I have to tell you one more story while I'm thinking about this. That seven story building full of rats, mice, and guinea pigs generated a lot of waste. Down in the basement they had a sort of commercial dishwashing setup with a conveyer tunnel that cleaned the cages with high pressure hot water and soap, and all day long there was a constant stream of six foot high rolling racks of dirty animal cages coming down the elevator. Down in the hot, steamy, stinking cage washing area there was a crew of underpaid young black guys who spent all day emptying the mess out of the cages, hosing them off, and re-stacking them to go through the washing tunnel. The cage waste, manure, food, and bedding, most of it highly contaminated with carcinogens, was augered up to a big hopper bin. At least twice a week the bin had to be emptied, so they pulled a large open dump truck up to the hopper, filled it up and proceeded to drive it, uncovered and wafting carcinogenic rat waste, about twenty miles through the city to the municipal dump, where it was dumped right in with the household garbage. These researchers never gave a thought to the fact that they were spreading carcinogenic waste across the city and contaminating the landfill with it. They were strictly in it for the money.
I swear, if you were a researcher at that place and you came up with a cure for cancer they would knife you and stick your body under six feet of cement in the cellar, where no one would ever find you. You would be putting them all out of a job.
Q . Unbelievable. That's science? That's where the thousands of millions of dollars we've been spending every year on cancer research for the last thirty five years has been going?
. Agricola : I'm afraid so. And I'm afraid that's where your money goes when you have a walkathon to raise money for research on whatever,-- pick a disease. If you find a cure, you're out of business as a researcher. Of course, if you can come up with a synthesized drug that affects the disease's symptoms, some drug that is patentable and that people can be convinced they must continue taking for the rest of their life, you can be a rich hot shot too. What is so incredible to me is that this is accepted as normal, rational behavior. It's not, of course. People who don't care what the consequences of their actions are, who don't care who or what they hurt as long as they get theirs, are known in psychology as psychopaths or sociopaths-- dangerous and mentally unbalanced menaces to society. And these kinds of people are who we have running science. And industry. And government.
We have to be able to do better than this. Why are the very people who shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the job running the world?I'm a little off the subject, here.
Q : Yeah, that's OK. I wonder about the same things myself. But you believe that we can fix this mess and get science back on track, so it would be a joyful pursuit for the good of humanity?Agricola : We have to. The human race is smarter than this. We can and we will do it. Right now the whole corporate/industrial paradigm is going through its last tango. Its on its way out, but the death spasms aren't going to be pretty.
The system is just too broken to be fixed. No matter who we elect, appoint or allow they are not going to be able to fix a system that can't work. Taking more than you give back is not sustainable, by any economic or philosophical theory I'm aware of. It may somehow be justified or rationalized but I don't know of any sane person who would call it sustainable.
What we'll have to do is start from scratch and build a system that does work. If there are two systems running side by side, one that is sustainable and even increasing in abundance and efficiency, alongside a system that is only interested in short term gain and the heck with the consequences, which system is going to survive and prosper in the long run?
We humans are supposed to be the caretakers of this planet, for God's sake; the gardeners and the park rangers. Instead we have behaved as thieves and poachers. And who are we stealing from? Our children and grandchildren and ourselves and every other living and non-living thing on this beautiful, generous planet. What ungrateful wretches we are. (Pause.)
Let's talk about Calcium for a bit, OK?
Q : OK. You've done quite a bit of studying on that subject, haven't you?
Agricola : Yes, it's been like following a conspiracy theory. One gets caught up in the research, and as you gather more and more facts and clues you wonder, how have they kept this hidden? Why don't people know about this? That's pretty much how I feel about Calcium.
Calcium is an absolutely wonderful element. Calcium is the buffer that keeps our blood at a pH of 7.4, so nutrients can be electrically inducted into our cells. It is also the element that carries those nutrients into the cell, releases them, and goes back for more. Calcium ions are what make nerve synapses work. DNA can't be synthesized without Calcium. Calcium can bind to seven oxygen locations on a protein while still holding on to a water molecule and then release them all easily. No other element can do that. Calcium carries the heavy trace minerals like Manganese into the plant from the soil. Have you ever bought a peach or a nectarine where the seed was split open and inside you could see this little shriveled kernel instead of a plump embryo? That seed didn't form because it didn't have any Manganese. Every viable seed requires a molecule, maybe only a single atom, of Manganese to bring the electric charge to the seed and the magnetic force to draw the other elements into the seed. There may be plenty of Manganese in the soil, but if there is a shortage of Calcium to pull it into the plant the seeds will be sterile if they form at all. Or there may be enough Manganese and Calcium, but no Boron, and Boron is needed to move and direct Calcium. It all works together and each part is necessary.
Biologists refer to us as Carbon based life forms, but it's just as arguable that we are Calcium based life forms. Carbon in plants comes mostly from CO2 in the air, but Calcium comes from the Earth, from the soil.
Here's the conspiracy: how have they (whoever they are) managed to hide the knowledge that Calcium is such an important element in all living things? In plants, animals and humans, adequate Calcium is absolutely essential for life. But just about the only mention Calcium gets in soil science is as a pH modifier. If you think your lawn or garden grows better after you lime it because you changed the pH, I have a newsflash for you: Calcium is the single biggest growth stimulant in plants. pH is a measure of free Hydrogen ions in water. It measures Hydrogen ion concentration, H+ and OH-, and that's all it does. One can change the soil pH with any acid or alkali. You can raise the pH with sodium hydroxide, which is lye, drain cleaner, or lower it with hydrochloric acid, for instance, but they aren't going to give you much growth stimulus. They will probably kill the plant. A slightly acid pH of about 6 or 6.5 is ideal, because it gives just the right amount of electrical conductivity in the soil, but plants aren't nearly as finicky about pH as they are about having the right balance of soil minerals.
Rhododendrons, for instance, are supposed to require an acid soil. What they really prefer is a high Magnesium soil. Experimenters in Scotland raised the pH of soil from 5.0 to nearly 8.0 with Magnesium Carbonate, and the rhodies grew better and better as the soil pH went up because the Magnesium level was going up. pH had little to do with it.
So, this is a good thing to know if you are trying to grow rhododendrons in New Mexico, for instance, where the soil is frequently alkaline to start with, although there you would want to use an acid form of Magnesium like Magnesium sulfate, Epsom salts. But your garden, your farm crops and your fruits and berries wouldn't necessarily like it (except the blueberries). High levels of Magnesium in relation to Calcium are common in Organic gardening and farming, though, because people are told to lime their soils with dolomite lime, which is high in Magnesium.
Carey Reams recommended a Calcium to Magnesium ratio of 7/1. Albrecht said a 65% Calcium to 15% Magnesium base saturation was about right, which is a ratio of 4.3 to 1. Once again, Albrecht and Reams are both saying the same thing in different ways. Magnesium is more alkaline than Calcium, so it has a greater ability to saturate the soil colloids, a greater ability to displace free Hydrogen. Reams was talking about a 7/1 ratio by weight, Albrecht was talking about their respective abilities to neutralize free hydrogen. If your soil test reads seven times as much Calcium as Magnesium by weight, and there's enough there to saturate the soil colloids to 80%, you will still end up with Albrecht's 65% to 15% ratio. Dolomite lime, which all the Organic gardening books seem to recommend, frequently has a 2/1 Ca to Mg ratio, and may even be 1/1. [ed. note: he means a 1/1 ratio of their ability to saturate the soil colloids] This is far too high a level of Magnesium to have in your soil for a couple of reasons.
For one thing, when organic matter breaks down in a high Mg environment it produces alcoho l and formaldehyde, both of which are harmful to soil life. Secondly, the Calcium to Magnesium ratio largely determines the looseness or fluffiness of your soil. This was discovered by the petroleum engineers and geologists/geochemists. They had to drill a lot of deep holes full of mud, clay and water. Sometimes this drilling mud was loose and liquid, even if it was mostly clay, and sometimes it was sticky or like cement no matter how much water was in it. They figured out that the stickiness or non-stickiness was mostly due to the Ca/Mg ratio of the base saturation, the Exchange Capacity of the clay . Add more Magnesium, it gets tighter. Add more Calcium, it gets looser. And the exact same thing happens to the soil in your garden, lawn, or cropland. So if you have tight soil, the most likely reason is your Ca/Mg balance. Magnesium makes the soil particles attract each other and stick together, Calcium makes them repel each other and keeps the soil loose. One can, of course, go overboard on the Calcium and the soil will lose all structure and be too loose and fluffy. (laughing) Don't ask me how I know this. But if you get your Calcium/Magnesium ratios right you can drive on your garden and the soil won't compact.
Now is this a valuable piece of information or what? Why isn't this common knowledge? See what I mean when I say it's like a conspiracy?
It's worth mentioning here that if you have an extremely sticky soil, the kind that clumps up an inch or so thick on your boots when it's muddy, you probably have a low Carbon content in your soil as well as a Calcium/Magnesium imbalance. The best cure for low soil Carbon levels is organic matter, or possibly powdered charcoal.
I have made a pastime for a few years of browsing bookstore shelves for Organic gardening and farming books– the ones that have Organic in the title. And I go to the index and look under Calcium, or if there's no listing for that, which there often isn't, I look under lime. I have looked at dozens and dozens of these Organic growing books and none of them get Calcium. One or two actually mention that Calcium is a plant nutrient, but most of them only relate it to pH. And all of them tell the reader to use dolomite lime preferably or to use it interchangeably with high Calcium agricultural lime (Calcium carbonate). This is just wrong. Yes , there are times when dolomite lime is needed to achieve the correct Calcium/Magnesium balance, but only a soil test will tell you when that is the case.
Q : Why do you suppose the writers of these organic gardening books are so far off base?
Agricola : They are simply uninformed, completely unaware of the importance and the science of soil mineralization. I also suspect that the confusion is a result of some misguided information from nutritional science that they are trying to apply to the soil. Yes, most Calcium supplements, food supplements I mean, have a 2/1 or even1/1 Calcium to Magnesium ratio, so it seems intuitive to think that that's what you'd want in your soil. The Ca/Mg ratio in the human body is about two parts Calcium to one part Magnesium. In the Earth's crust the average ratio is 32 parts Calcium to one part Magnesium. What we want, however, is that elusive 5/1 to 7/1 ratio in our gardens and croplands. As long as enough Calcium and enough Magnesium are stored on the soil exchange sites the soil will be loose and the plants and soil microorganisms will be happy. This is pretty simple, pretty easy to do. But you do need a soil test.
Howard and Rodale didn't use or understand soil tests, except maybe for pH. I think they associated soil tests with chemical farming. In the 1940s J. I. Rodale worked, for a while, with William Albrecht and another mover and shaker in the progressive agriculture movement, Louis Bromfield. Bromfield had taken over some worn out farmland in Ohio, a place he called Malabar Farm, and was restoring it to marvelous fertility. I've never heard the details, but there was some sort of falling out between Rodale and the Malabar Farm group over the use of concentrated fertilizers, like ammonium sulfate. I believe Albrecht and Bromfield took the position that if you could use a pure and concentrated source of fertility, one that grew healthy plants and didn't harm the soil , this was just good science and good common sense. And this makes sense to me, too, for a couple of reasons. When you go to the health food store or the drugstore and buy mineral or vitamin supplements, you may want them to be from a natural source, but you don't insist that they be unrefined. For instance, you might want Vitamin E, which generally comes from soy oil, but you don't buy a gallon of soy oil and drink it to get your 400 IU of d-alpha tocopherol. If you want a Selenium supplement you don't buy a pound of ground-up rock to get a few micrograms of Selenium– you might not want the other minerals in that pound of rock. It also makes a lot more sense, economically and ecologically, to ship a few pounds of a purified substance across the country than a ton of raw material.
I suspect also that Rodale might have been intimidated by the science, the chemistry, like many others are. He was a journalist, after all, not a scientist. But for whatever reason, he split from the Malabar Farm group and from there on it was pretty much manure and compost for him. This had unfortunate consequences because Rodale went on to have a vast influence on sustainable agriculture, but soil chemistry, other than a misunderstanding of the role of pH, has been almost totally neglected by organic gardeners and farmers. Today, if you send in a soil sample to a State Ag College or one of the big commercial soil testing labs, chemical fertilizers are what they will recommend, and generally the cheapest, harshest, and most harmful ones to soil and plant health, like muriate of potash or urea nitrogen. Up ‘til now there hasn't been the interest and input from organic growers that would encourage the testing labs to recommend nutrients from natural sources.
Q . But this is only a problem with the recommendations, right, not the laboratory analysis?
Agricola : The soil testing labs generally do a good job of analysis. If you send a soil sample to ten different laboratories it's unlikely that any of them will send back identical results, but they will likely be close. There are variations in equipment and technique. But at least if you have a soil test you have a place to start, and if you send your next soil test to the same lab you can get an idea of what progress you are making. A serious grower needs to find a lab they trust, one they can contact by phone or e-mail and have their questions answered. Hopefully, find one that understands the philosophies of William Albrecht and Carey Reams. Interpreting a soil test, once you have one, isn't all that difficult, you just need tenth grade chemistry and fifth grade arithmetic. As long as you have an idea of where you are now and where you want to get to it's not too hard. Up until now, though, few have had a clear idea where they want to get to, which is the reason I've spent the last number of years putting together my “best guess” chart. [See The Ideal Soil Agricola's Best Guess ed.] I've based it mostly on the work of Albrecht and Reams, along with every clue I can come up with from everybody else plus my own experience. If you follow the recommendations on the chart you won't get into much trouble. I've been careful. And I'm hoping for a lot of feedback from the gardeners out there. This soil minerals thing works, and people tend to get excited about things that really work.
Many Organic gardeners and farmers won't be willing to put in the time and effort it takes to really understand the chemistry, but if they catch the vision that I'm talking about here they're going to want to know what to do with the information on their soil test. Some of the testing laboratories that advertise in AcresUSA, which is a magazine that anyone serious about sustainable agriculture should be reading, are associated with Eco-Agriculture consulting firms. I don't know how much they charge for consultations, but, agriculture not being a get rich quick scheme, I'm sure they're reasonable. Ask around in your own area, too. The consultants out there so far, though, are more used to working with larger growers and farmers. We're going to have to develop some sort of grass roots organization to work with small scale and backyard gardeners.
[Editors Note: and there you have the inspiration for SoilMinerals.com]
Most important, though, is that you get a soil test. A pretty complete soil test including exchange capacity and availability of a dozen or so major and minor elements only costs $20 to $30 dollars. Then you will at least have a place to start.
Q : But you don't see each and every organic gardener learning about soil chemistry?
Agricola : Only enough to realize its importance. The commercial growers especially. Even if one is only growing a few tomatoes and carrots for summer salads this knowledge would still guarantee the best flavor and nutrition. But I realize that many gardeners just aren't going to want to learn the chemistry and do the math, any more than they are going to learn plumbing or electrical work or structural engineering. They just need to understand how the system is supposed to work, so that when there is a problem, like poor flavor or insect attack or rotting in storage they realize that it is probably a mineral problem. In times past most communities had a physician, and maybe what we will end up with is a trained “soil physician” in each community. (laughs) We will need a lot less experts in the field of medicine once we get the food right!
One of the attractive things about Organic gardening and farming has been its simplicity–just add more compost. Unfortunately, unless you happen to be lucky enough to have perfectly mineralized soil, more compost or organic matter is not going to give you more nutrition. Let me give you an example of how out of wack things can get. Let's look at the Puget Sound region of the Northwest US. A few miles South of the bottom end of the Sound is as far as the glaciers went during the last ice age, and most of the soil around there is a stony glacial till left behind when the ice receded. It's mostly formed from broken down granite and basalt, usually high in Potassium, low in Phosphorus, and any Calcium it might once have had has been leached out by sixty to two hundred and fifty inches of rain per year. You will recall that Albrecht recommended equal amounts of phosphate and potash, and Reams said twice as much Phosphorus as Potassium, four times as much for grasses and legumes. So there in the Northwest, d umping more high Potassium compost on the soil is only going to make things worse, nutritionally. Nonetheless, that is exactly what the Organic books recommend. One size fits all really doesn't work too well in gardening.
Phosphate has been described as the major catalyst in all living systems. It is essential for metabolism and photosynthesis, and is, as I mentioned earlier, needed for the synthesis of sugars and the replication of DNA. If you wonder why the organically grown fruit you buy isn't sweet, it's because the Phosphorus/ Potassium ratio is out of balance, the Calcium/Magnesium ratio probably is too, and more organic matter is not going to fix the problem. Another thing that happens when Potassium levels get too high is that the Potassium tries to substitute for Calcium, and though it can latch on to and take some nutrients into the cell it can't get back out again because it's too big, so we end up with cell interiors loaded with Potassium and a deficiency of Calcium and Phosphorus. Excess Potassium can also become fixed to the exchange sites on the clay, aging the clay and messing up its EC and expandability. Not good.
I could go on with what we do know about mineral nutrients, but anyone who has stayed with me thus far is surely getting the picture. We have within our grasp the ability to grow the healthiest, best food that has ever been grown. A good part of the work has already been done for us. The rest of the work is cut out for us and laying on the table, waiting for us to figure it out and put it together.
If we just take off our blinders and look around, we can take the very best from all fields of health, agriculture, and ecology, from Organics, Eco-Agriculture, Permaculture, Biodynamics, nutrition and all the accumulated wisdom of native and traditional methods, and come up with some really hot stuff. Hot stuff that is sustainable, increasingly abundant, and ecologically sound.
Q : I think I hear the bugle call. So how do we go about doing it? The corporations have taken over the ag colleges and the government research stations, and they are not likely to see this as much of a money maker for them.
Agricola : That's true. Healthy food, healthy farms, and healthy people will impact things all up and down the line. What do we need drugs, chemical fertilizers, and poisonous sprays for if we have naturally healthy land and naturally healthy people? They wouldn't sell much green and purple sugar-coated genetically modified breakfast cereal if people knew that it was poisoning their children and causing disease.
What people want is to feel good now , and most of the time most of them don't. Most of us are the result of several generations of malnourished ancestors. At what point were your forebears introduced to unlimited white sugar and white bread?
Q : Me? I'm not sure, but my grandparents who had a farm in the Dakotas were born in the late 1800s, and I never saw anything but white bread and white sugar at their place. When I was growing up there was always a full sugar bowl on the table.
Agricola : Exactly. You and just about everyone else. Dr. Weston A. Price, who did a worldwide survey of aboriginal peoples in the 1920s and ‘30s, concluded that it took twenty years from the introduction of refined carbohydrates for the first serious wave of degenerative diseases to show up: cancer, heart disease, and diabetes. Albrecht, by the way, was well aware of Price's work. I find it fascinating that the Tohona O'odham people of Arizona, the Pimas, have a 90% obesity rate and a diabetes rate almost that high, even developing in preteen children. Their relatives just across the border in Mexico don't have these problems. Why not? Because the government of Mexico isn't “taking care” of them. They still grow and eat their own traditional foods. They didn't grow up on government cheese and frybread with sugar. And why are refined carbohydrates bad for your health? Because they deplete your minerals.
When plants or animals have been malnourished for generations, the seed starts to run out. Health suffers. Reproductive abilities decline, as does the health and vigor of the offspring.
Once again, problems of deficiency and toxicity, exacerbated by the greed and lies of “profit at any cost” corporations with the collusion of our government. And greed equals neediness: unsatisfied, unhappy, needy people who can never get enough because there's no lasting peace in accumulating material wealth, power, and human social status. This is something we all should know at our deepest level.
It's definitely time for a new model, wouldn't you say?
Think of what we can do with this knowledge once we put it together, even as we are putting it together! We can analyze the soil of those places in the world where the people have been shown to live the longest and remain the healthiest–the Caucasus mountains near the Black Sea, the Vilcabamba region in the Andes, maybe the famous Hunza valley in the Himalayas, if it actually exists. We can take this information and use it to recreate the exact combination of mineral elements found in any soil anywhere in the world.
If a winemaker wanted to recreate the soils of Bordeaux in the leached soils of the Pacific Northwest, or if a cattle rancher wanted to recreate the mineral ratios of the buffalo grass prairie soils of the Midwest in the state of Georgia, they could do so
The state of Kentucky is known for raising some of the finest horses in the world. The neighboring states, Tennessee and Indiana for instance, are not. Why? Because Kentucky soils are largely made from broken down limestone, high Calcium and probably high Phosphorus limestone, what strong bones are made of. The same goes for areas of France that have been raising strong, healthy cattle and horses since pre-Roman times–the rocks their soils are made of contain high amounts of Calcium phosphate.
We can recreate any soil we want anywhere in the world. And with a little long term vision, we might only have to do it once.
The soil mineralization that has been done so far has mostly used finely ground stone. Granite, limestone, basalt, glacial rock dust, rock phosphate, trace mineral blends, all have been pulverized as finely as possible in order to make them quick acting. What would happen if we applied them in coarse gravel size and finer, and worked it out so that the minerals would be released steadily over the next five hundred years? Would that work? I think it would.
Of course we're talking about a lot of transportation cost here; rocks are heavy things to be hauling all over the country, but we would end up with little need for the polluting chemical industries and pharmaceutical plants, not to mention most of the whole sickness industry, so I don't doubt that the energy equation would balance out.
Here's another aspect that will appeal to ecologists: with this knowledge we can grow more food, and more nutritionally dense food, on less land, instead of needing to clear more forest land and plow up more prairies. Although we're not plowing up more prairies in this country anymore We're paving them over to build subdevelopments and malls. Some of that is going to be pretty hard to fix.
What we're talking about here, perfectly balanced soil mineralization, would not be something we could afford to do or would want to do everywhere in the world. In the Pacific Northwest, if you don't do anything to the land what you end up with is trees, so that's probably what they should be growing. But the vegetable, berry and flower growers in the valleys could balance their soil minerals one time over the course of a few years and then just replace what they took out of the soil, harvest bountiful crops of increasing quality as the soil life came on-line, and become largely self-sufficient instead of owing their souls to the company store. Those same ideas can be applied to any area.
Will this happen? I'm sure it will. When? It's happening right now, as you read this. There are already millions of acres in the US where the principles of Eco-Agriculture are being applied and are working very well. This is not new information, just deliberately buried and hidden information. Albrecht published most of his work by the 1940's, Reams was teaching and spreading his information in the 1950's and ‘60's. A few people listened and spread the word, largely thanks to Charles Walters and Acres USA .
Q : OK, so how do we go about finding the answers we want, and who is going to pay for it?
Agricola : Yeah, that's the right question. How will we do it? How will we answer our unanswered questions: what happens to the anions like phosphorus in the soil, what's really going on with paramagnetism, what balance of soil microorganisms is best for which crop and which climate? I suggest that most of this work will and should be done by independent researchers, but I'm not sure who is going to pay for it.
It's tempting to say something like “Just think what we could do with a billion dollars US in government money, why we could fund a thousand million-dollar research projects!” But that's not the answer. Our government's money is corrupt; it's extorted under threat of losing your property or going to prison. Taxes stolen from poor waitresses' estimated tips, for Pete's sake. And all the government funded research facilities are controlled by the multinational corporations. They are emphatically not interested in supporting their own demise.
Besides which, most of the important work in science has always been done by independent, curious individuals, not by government funded laboratories. Hensel, Reams, and many others I haven't mentioned never received a dime of government money to support their research as far as I know. Albrecht's state agricultural station work was government funded, barely, but his results were either swept under the rug or appropriated without credit by the chemical fertilizer companies, while he was ignored. Hasn't this kind of stuff gone on long enough? Corporate money, just like government money, always comes with a few slimy strings attached. I say no thanks. We'll do it ourselves.
And yes, this is a bugle call, for all who have ears to hear.
Let's get together and work together, all of us who love and believe in this beautiful emerald gem we live upon. Let's let go of our differences and find our common ground. Let's learn a little bit from each other instead of trying to prove that “our way” is the only right way. As I said earlier, we can bring together the best of Organics, Permaculture, Biodynamics, Eco-Agriculture, native and traditional farming and anything else that is sustainable, healthful, abundant, and works. We can grow the best food that has ever been grown, and become the healthiest, happiest people who have ever lived
It's up to us. We can do this. We must do this.
Q : So be it. Thank you for your time, Agricola.
Agricola : You are very welcome. It has been a pleasure.Discover the Secrets of Soil Mineral Balance
The secrets of soil mineral balance that create ideal soil, plant, and animal health are revealed here for the first time. The amazing results that can be achieved by balancing the major cation minerals Calcium, Magnesium, Potassium and Sodium in the soil according to the teachings of Dr William Albrecht and Dr Carey Reams have changed the world of agriculture. This knowledge has taken the focus away from merely trying to achieve high volume yields to achieving the highest yields of the highest quality and nutritional value, while building optimal health in the soil, the crops, and the people and animals that rely on them for food.
There are no more depleted soils once you discover these secrets; the soil just keeps getting better and better year after year, and all without the use of any sort of toxic rescue chemistry. As Dr Albrecht was known to say, "Well fed is healthy." A well-fed soil leads to well-fed crops and well-fed people and animals.
Professional agronomists charge hundreds or thousands of dollars to consult with you and apply their specialized knowledge of soil nutrients and minerals in order to achieve the perfect balance in your soil. Though we feel they are well worth what they charge, some of us would prefer to have the knowledge and be able to do that for ourselves and others. There are also many home gardeners and small farmers who simply don't have the financial resources to afford the expense of a professional soil consultant. The lack of knowledge or money need no longer keep any grower from having the ideal soil. For only $29.95, about the cost of a single laboratory soil test, this new one of a kind book teaches you everything you need to know to perfectly balance all of the major and minor mineral nutrients in any soil!
Is this difficult to do?
Not at all. The only reason more people have not balanced the minerals in their own soil is because this information has never before been made available to the public. Understandably, trade secrets are just that, secret. With the publication of this book, they are secret no longer.
If you can add, subtract, multiply and divide, (or use a calculator) and you know or are willing to learn some very simple and basic chemistry, you will have no problem learning to balance all of the essential minerals in your own soil. All you need are the results of a standard soil test, a pencil and paper or a calculator, and the easy to understand information in The Ideal Soil . That's all. You can write the perfect mineral prescription for your soil the first day you own the book. All of the information you need is right there, including
*Full instructions on how to read a soil test and understand everything it is telling you
*Easily understandable examples of the simple calculations needed
*Full explanations of why you are doing what you are doing
*The Ideal Soil Chart that shows you exactly what you want to end up with
*Tables that list the mineral content of every commonly used USDA Organic approved soil mineral amendment and fertilizer ingredient.
The New 2010 Edition also tells how to:
*Accurately calculate true exchange capacity using the soil test results from any lab anywhere in the world. These are the formulas used by William Albrecht himself. We believe this is the first time this information has been published; this is the real key to making the Albrecht ratios work.
*What to do about high pH and high salt soils
*How to estimate the available Nitrogen in your soil based on its organic matter content
*How to apply these principles to established orchards and perennials using the Fertile Mulching Method
Every thing you need to know to write the perfect soil mineral prescription for your soil (or any soil anywhere) is included in The Ideal Soil .
Are there other books like this out there?
There are not. While there are hundreds and hundreds of books about both organic and chemical-based agriculture, and even a dozen or so about sustainable Eco-Agriculture, The Ideal Soil is the first and only book that actually tells the reader what the perfect balance of minerals in the soil is, and the only book that shows exactly how to calculate the perfect mineral balance for the soil you are working with. It is also the only book that we know of that gives the reader a chart listing the mineral content of every commonly available USDA Organic Approved mineral amendment and fertilizer ingredient. One could purchase every other agriculture and gardening book in existence and not come up with this information. The simple fact is, no one else has ever before written a book like The Ideal Soil .
Read the Introduction HERE
Read Chapter 1 HERE
In a recent letter to colleagues, U.S. Rep. Jim Oberstar claimed his new bill — “America's Commitment to Clean Water Act” (H.R.5088) — would “restore, but not expand, the geographic scope of the Clean Water Act” that existed before the U.S. Supreme Court declared there are limits to federal power to regulate local rivers, lakes and streams.
According to Oberstar, the Supreme Court got it wrong; Congress intended the Clean Water Act to cover virtually all waters of the United States. Therefore, the federal government, and not state and local authorities, should regulate local land and water use.
To prove this claim, Oberstar turned to the most biased sources he could find — the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. These are the very agencies the Supreme Court castigated for their limitless and ever-changing interpretation of the Clean Water Act. The court ruled the EPA and Corps exceeded the scope of their own regulations, the plain language of the Clean Water Act, the clear intent of Congress and, likely, even the outside boundaries of the U.S. Constitution.
Asking the EPA and Corps if the Supreme Court was wrong to limit federal power over remote water bodies is like asking a felon if the jury that convicted him was wrong.
After more than 30 years of overreaching, power-hungry bureaucrats are not going to admit they exceeded their authority.
Oberstar's claim that, “If a discharge into waters of the United States was not subject to being regulated prior to the Supreme Court cases, it will not become regulated because of the passage of this bill,” is, at best, only a half truth. What Oberstar fails to mention is that although the Clean Water Act expressly prohibits only unauthorized discharges into “navigable waters,” prior to the Supreme Court decisions, the EPA and Corps were exercising control over almost all waters in the nation.
As Justice Antonin Scalia noted in Rapanos v. United States , the EPA and Corps “asserted jurisdiction over virtually any parcel of land containing a channel or conduit — whether man-made or natural, broad or narrow, permanent or ephemeral — through which rainwater or drainage may occasionally or intermittently flow.” That includes “storm drains, roadside ditches, ripples of sand in the desert” and 100-year floodplains.
This is what Oberstar's bill is designed to “restore”: a limitless exercise of federal power over every pond, puddle and ditch in the country.
“America's Commitment to Clean Water Act” would federalize all navigable waters and “all other waters including [but not limited to] intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation, or destruction of which does or would affect interstate or foreign commerce,” as well as all impoundments and tributaries of these waters, including all waters adjacent to these waters. It would also include those waters that are the subject of international treaties or that might affect federal lands.
In other words, “all waters.”
So broad is the bill's definition of covered waters that the only practical limit on federal authority would be the regulators' own subjective judgment. Which is to say there would be no limit at all.
Why should you care? Because in its application, this bill would give remote federal bureaucrats unprecedented power to control the use of virtually any wet spot in the country and much of the surrounding land. And that's power that should be left in the hands of state and local authorities.
Reed Hopper is a principal attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation and represented John Rapanos in his successful challenge to government overreaching in the landmark Supreme Court case Rapanos v. United States. He wrote this exclusively for the News Tribune.
Can a healthy diet be sufficient in today's world?
Gone are the days in our so called advanced western society when healthy living meant simply getting the right nutrients from our foods. Nowadays our foods are jam packed with an array of harmful chemicals not to mention mainstream personal care products that we absorb through our skin many of which are carcinogenic. Nearly all of today's diseases stem from what we absorb, our bodies simply cannot deal with this overload of toxins exceeding the body's capacity to detoxify itself. A staggering 1 in 3 people are now falling to cancer. Experts predict that if we do not do anything to rectify this situation now, in the next 30 years cancer will just about affect 100% of us. The UK alone get through every year a staggering quarter of a million tonnes of food chemicals, 50,000 chemicals are released into the environment by industry and 400 million litres of pesticides and herbicides are sprayed onto to foods and pastures. All of this we of course absorbs into our bodies.
SOIL MINERAL DEPLETION:
Studies By Dr Linus Pauling on Soil Mineral Depletion: Studies By Dr Linus Pauling, twice noble prize winner, said "you can trace every sickness, every disease and every ailment to a mineral deficiency". Yet, all over the world, minerals are disappearing from agricultural soils at an alarming rate. In 1992, the official report of the Rio Earth Summit concluded "there is deep concern over continuing major declines in the mineral values in farm and range soils throughout the world". This statement was based on data showing that over the last 100 years, average mineral levels in agricultural soils had fallen worldwide - by 72% in Europe, 76% in Asia and 85% in North America. What has caused this staggering decline?
Most of the blame lies with artificial chemical fertilisers. We now know that plants absorb 70 to 80 different minerals from the soil, while the number returned to it by plants grown with commercial fertilisers can be counted on the fingers of one hand. Every crop that is cut or animal that is sent to market marks a further depletion in the mineral status of the soil on which it was raised. Organic wastes that in former times would have been composted and returned to the land are nowadays mostly consigned to landfill sites or incineration.
There are many other ways in which the move to chemical farming prevents crops from taking up even the sparse amounts of trace minerals left in the soil. Soil contains bacteria, fungi, plant and animal life, in a state of constant interaction and balance. Every one of these organisms needs dozens of different minerals to survive and play its part in the ecosystem. Some bacteria have a vital role in converting soil minerals into chemical forms that plants can use. NPK fertilisers (fertilisers used in modern farming that only contain nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium) gradually change the soil pH towards acidic conditions in which these bacteria can not survive. To combat soil acidification farmers lay lime on the land adding back calcium and magnesium to raise the soil pH, but it also converts manganese and some other trace minerals into chemical forms that plants are unable to absorb.
Pesticides and herbicides also reduce the uptake of trace minerals by plants. Plants have an important relationship with certain fungi that can form networks covering several acres. The fungus obtains carbohydrates from the plant root, at the same time supplying the plant with nutrients it draws from the soil. This gives the plant access to a vastly greater mineral extraction system than is possible by their roots alone. Chemical fungicide sprays destroy these beneficial fungi and so again reduce the ability of plants to absorb soil minerals. Insecticides can also reduce trace mineral uptake by inactivating choline-containing enzymes in plants, essential for the absorption of manganese and other minerals.
The combined effect of soil mineral depletion and the reduced availability of those minerals that remain is that most of the food that we eat is mineral deficient. The table below summarizes the reductions in the average mineral content of 27 vegetables and 17 fruits, between 1940 and 1991. The results of the latest research are expected to show mineral values in continual decline.
Reduction in average mineral content of fruit and vegetables between 1940 and 1991 shown in graph below:
A new study published earlier this year shows that, as might be expected, mineral levels in animal products reflect the picture in plant foods. Comparing levels measured in 2002 with those present in 1940, the iron content of milk was found to be 62% less, calcium and magnesium in parmesan cheese had each fallen by 70% and copper in dairy produce had plummeted by a remarkable 90%.
In the UK and Ireland government are putting resources into improving health by encouraging people to eat a healthy diet, including 5 portions of fruit and vegetables per day, but you scarcely hear a word about the problem of soil mineral depletion. Food seems to be considered as something quite separate from its source and means of production. But this is not rocket science - the foundation of human health is the quality of the food we eat, which relies ultimately on the vitality of the soil on which it is raised.
What happens to us if we are mineral deficient? Minerals are an essential part of our natural diet and a lack of them may in part account for our increasing susceptibility to diseases - such as heart disease (magnesium), cancer (selenium), diabetes (chromium) and mental illnesses (zinc). Zinc is perhaps the most commonly deficient mineral and the most critical mineral for metal health. The average intake is around 7.5mg, which is half the RDA of 15mg. Every one of us should take care to get the minerals we need, for the good of our health.
A few Signs and a few mild to extreme Symptoms of Mineral deficiency :
Potassium deficiency: Dry skin, poor reflexes, apathy, weakness, confusion, and extreme thirst.
Magnesium deficiency: Apathy, weakness, cramps and muscle tremors (tetany) which leads to convulsions, insomnia, headaches, high blood pressure, depression, constipation, hyperactivity, Irregular heart rhythms.
Calcium deficiency: Muscle weakness or cramps, Brittle bones, rickets, osteoporosis.
Iron deficiency: Shortness of breathe, Fatigue, Iron deficiency anaemia, reduced resistance to infections, poor appetite.
Zinc deficiency: Hair loss, skin changes, diarrhoea, wasting of body tissue, loss of taste and smell, thin fingernails with white spots, acne, fatigue, memory loss, depression, schizophrenia, anxiety, poor immunity, dandruff, psoriasis, hyperactivity,
What functions do mineral have in our bodies?
Minerals are needed for the proper formation of blood and bone, the maintenance of healthy nerve function, heartbeat regulation, reproduction and foetal development. They are essential to the process of growth, healing and energy release. And it is not just the presence of the mineral in the body that is important - they must be in the correct ratio to each other. The level of each mineral has an effect, directly or indirectly, on every other, so if one is out of kilter the whole system is affected. Calcium, magnesium and phosphorous help make up the bones and teeth. Nerve signals, vital for the brain and muscles, depend on calcium, magnesium, sodium and potassium. Oxygen is carried in the blood by an iron compound also essential for oxygenation of and carbon dioxide extraction from the body. Chromium helps control blood sugar levels. Zinc is vital for body repairs, renewal and development. Selenium and zinc help boost the immune system. Brain function depends on adequate magnesium, manganese, zinc and other essential minerals. These are a few out of a thousand key roles minerals play our health.
What can you do to ensure that you are getting the minerals that you need in your diet?
Eat Organic: The first thing you can do is to eat organic. Organic foods have a higher mineral content than those grown with chemicals, plus by eating organic you are supporting the environment.
Take supplements: It is very important nowadays to supplement your diet with good quality supplements that are easily absorbed by your body. There are a lot of supplements out there that are a waste of money because they are manufactured with synthetic ingredients. These should be avoided as your body will not absorb them. We at purenewyou.com offer a complete range of mineral and vitamin supplements. For information go to our section: Vitamins and Minerals.
Campaign: Get in touch with the Soil Association or Food Commission to get further information to raise awareness to the problem of nutrient depletion or write to your local TD. or MP.
The Function of Soil Minerals and Trace Elements in Soil, Plant, Animal, and Human Nutrition and Health
Copper and Zinc
Copper (Cu) is element number 29 on the Mendeleeyev chart, the Periodic Table of the Elements.
The other elements in Copper's specific group (group 1B, directly below it on the table) are Silver (Ag) and Gold (Au), which puts it in some racy company.
Copper is the key to elasticity in the plant. It is an important constituent of many proteins like ascorbic acid oxidase, cytochrome oxidase, diamine oxidase, and polyphenol oxidase. Copper is an important nutrient for many microbes, such as Aspergillis niger. It controls molds and often alleviates perceived zinc deficiencies. Copper interacts with iron and manganese. Andersen Science In Agriculture p236
Bordeaux mixture and Burgundy mixture are two famous sprays used to control fungus in vineyards. Developed in their eponymous provinces of France, Bordeaux mix is copper sulfate, mason's lime (calcium hydroxide), and water; Burgundy mix is copper sulfate, sodium carbonate (washing soda), and water. The full recipes and instructions for using Bordeaux and Burgundy mixtures are given below in the section borrowed from the Copper Development Association's web site.
The story goes that Bordeaux mixture was discovered by accident. During a wet fall in the province of Bordeaux in the 1880s the grapes were being severely attacked by downy mildew. Along a road that ran past one vineyard, the owners had sprayed a mixture of copper and lime on the vines, which turned the grapes a blue green color and was meant to dissuade the passersby from picking the grapes. The French scientist Millardet, while walking along, noticed that those vines were not being attacked by the fungus, and Bordeaux mixture was born.
As a part of of Bordeaux mixture in grape arbors, it functions as a nutrient and not as an insecticide as is often believed. Walters, Eco-Farm p136 [Copper's use in Bordeaux mixture is actually as a fungicide, not an insecticide, but we'll allow Charles Walters the occasional typo. This observation should actually be credited to William Albrecht, who theorized that the copper in the mixture was stimulating the plant's immune system.]
Copper, vitally important to root metabolism, helps form compounds and proteins, amino acids and a host of organic compounds. It acts as a catalyst or part of the enzyme systems. It helps produce dry matter through stimulation of growth, prevents development of chlorosis, rosetting and dieback. Walters Eco-Farm p 197
The role of organic matter in Cu chemistry is also indicated by analysis of the soil solution. More than 99% of the Cu in the soil solution is complexed by organic matter. This complexing is of great importance in maintaining adequate Cu in solution for plant use. Foth and Ellis Soil Fertility p141
Because Cu is not translocated in the plant, the deficiency symptoms appear on the new growth. In small grains and corn the leaves appear olive or yellowish green in color, and often the leaves fail to unroll as they emerge. Often the leaf tips will appear as though the plants have been frost-damaged, and there will be some flags. A flag is is a wilted or dead leaf or a branch with such leaves on an otherwise healthy appearing plant. Soil Fertility p157
Sul-po-mag, [also known as K-Mag and Langbeinite] applied between July 15 and September 15 up to 200 lbs per acre, seems to help in copper availability. Science in Agriculture p236 [K-Mag is available from SoilMinerals.com HERE ]
Copper in Human and Animal Health
An excess of copper results in degeneration of the liver. It causes blood in urine and poor utilization of nitrogen.
A deficiency of copper is created by excess of molybdenum and cobalt. It produces anemia due to poor iron utilization. It depresses growth. Other symptoms...depigmentation of hair and abnormal hair growth; impaired reproductive performance and heat failure; scouring, fragile bones; retained placenta and difficulty in calving; and muscular incoordination in young lambs, and stringy wool. Walters Eco-Farm p367
...a largely vegetarian diet lacks the fat-soluble catalysts needed for mineral absorption. Furthermore, phytates in grains block absorption of calcium, iron, zinc, copper and magnesium. Unless grains are properly prepared to neutralize phytates, the body may be unable to assimilate these minerals. Fallon and Enig Nourishing Traditions p27
Ragweed, for example, is generally indicative of a phosphate/potash imbalance, but, more specifically, it indicates a copper problem. Copper is important in the use of manganese and iron, as well as in many metabolic reactions, Copper also seems to be important in controlling fungal disorders. Many people have allergic reactions to ragweed pollen. This reaction seems to be related to a copper deficiency in the mucous membranes. Andersen Science In Agriculture P.192
Copper: Needed for the formation of bone, hemoglobin and red blood cells, copper also promotes healthy nerves, a healthy immune system and collagen formation. Copper works in balance with zinc and vitamin C. Along with manganese, magnesium and iodine, copper plays an important role in memory and brain function. Nuts, molasses and oats contain copper but liver is the best and most easily assimilated source. Copper deficiency is widespread in America. Animal experiments indicate that copper deficiency combined with high fructose consumption has particularly deleterious effects on infants and growing children. Nourishing Traditions p43
Many enzymes incorporate a single molecule of a trace mineral-- such as manganese, copper, iron or zinc-- without which the enzyme cannot function. Nourishing Traditions p46
Graeme Sait: Can you revert grey hair with copper supplements? I've had grey hair since I was twenty-five.
Joel Wallach: It's definitely a Copper deficiency, and you could revert to your former hair color if you addressed the problem. I see it every day with my clients. It can be quite humorous when a seventy year old grey-haired man returns to his former redheaded glory. Sait, Nutrition Rules p297
In Australia it was discovered that black sheep grazing on copper-deficient pastures turned gray.
In humans copper is stored in the liver. In cases of fever and infection, the level of iron in the bloodstream drops and the blood copper level rises as the copper reserves in the liver are mobilized to aid the immune system in fighting off invaders. This tidbit is from Andre Voison's classic Soil, Grass, and Cancer , in which the French bio-chemist and veterinarian devoted several chapters to the role of copper in human and animal health.
In the 1930s Dr. Weston A. Price investigated the traditional diets of isolated peoples around the world. High in the Andes mountains of South America he discovered the native peoples relied on dried fish eggs and seaweed brought from the ocean to supply trace minerals and other factors lacking in their diet. He writes "The kelp provided a very rich source of iodine as well as copper, which is very important to them in the utilization of iron for building an exceptionally efficient quality of blood for carrying oxygen liberally at those high altitudes. W. A. Price, Nutrition and Physical Degeneration p 265
Copper functions in the body as an enzyme co-factor, formation of hemoglobin and red blood cells, protein metabolism, synthesis of phospholipids, vitamin C oxidation, production of elastin, and formation of RNA. Signs of possible deficiency are white hair, liver cirrhosis, allergies, parasites, hernia, anemia, hyper/hypo thyroidism, arthritis, ruptured disc and iron storage disease. Walters, Minerals for the Genetic Code p122.
Zinc and copper have a seesaw relationship in the body, competing with each other for absorption in the gut. Both zinc deficiency and copper toxicity have increased since the switch from zinc (galvanized) to copper water pipes. We can avoid this problem by not drinking tap water. Haas, Staying Healthy with Nutrition p191
The following wealth of information is from the Copper Development Association's web site at CDA Web Site
|Uses of Copper Compounds: Copper Sulphate's Role in Agriculture|
Copper sulphate has many agricultural uses but the following are the more important ones:
Preparation of Bordeaux and Burgundy Mixtures on the Farm
Because of their importance to farmers, instructions concerning the dissolving of copper sulphate and the preparation of both Bordeaux and Burgundy mixtures have been included in the text.
Dissolving Copper Sulphate
Iron or galvanized vessels must not be used for the preparation of copper sulphate solutions. Plastic vessels, now freely available, are light and very convenient. To make a strong solution, hang a jute sack of copper sulphate so that the bottom of it dips a few inches only in the water. The copper sulphate will dissolve overnight. Copper sulphate dissolves in cold water to the extent of about 3 kg per 10 litres. If more than this is placed in the sack described above, then a saturated solution will be obtained and it may be used without serious error on the basis that it contains 3 kg copper sulphate per 10 litres.
Preparation of Bordeaux Mixture
Bordeaux mixture is prepared in various strengths from copper sulphate, hydrated lime (calcium hydroxide) and water. The conventional method of describing its composition is to give the weight of copper sulphate, the weight of hydrated lime and the volume of water in that order. The percentage of the weight of copper sulphate to the weight of water employed determines the concentration of the Bordeaux mixture. Thus a 1% Bordeaux mixture, which is the normal, would have the formula 1 :1:100the first 1 representing 1 kg copper sulphate, the second representing 1 kg hydrated lime, and the 100 representing 100 litres (100 kg) water. As copper sulphate contains 25% copper metal, the copper content of a 1% Bordeaux mixture would be 0-25 % copper. The quantity of lime used can be reduced considerably. Actually 1 kg copper sulphate requires only 0.225 kg of chemically pure hydrated lime to precipitate all the copper. Good proprietary brands of hydrated lime are now freely available but, as even these deteriorate on storage, it is safest not to exceed a ratio of 2:1. i.e. a 1:0.5:100 mixture.
In preparing Bordeaux mixture, the copper sulphate is dissolved in half the required amount of water in a wooden or plastic vessel. The hydrated lime is mixed with the balance of the water in another vessel. The two "solutions" are then poured together through a strainer into a third vessel or spray tank.
[Note from soilminerals.com: It appears from the above that one doesn't want to mix the lime solution with the copper solution until one is ready to spray, as the lime precipitates the copper. Well, that makes sense; copper sulfate is acid, calcium hydroxide is alkaline, mix them together and what happens? You probably get calcium sulfate (gypsum) and copper oxide. Copper oxide is not water soluble.]
Preparation of a 1% Burgundy Mixture
Dissolve separately 1 kg copper sulphate in 50 litres water and 125 kg washing soda (or 0.475 kg soda ash) in 50 litres water and slowly add the soda solution to the copper sulphate solution with stirring. Control of fungus diseases
Bordeaux and Burgundy mixtures have been found effective in controlling a whole host of fungus diseases of plants. Normally a 0.5 % to 1 % Bordeaux or Burgundy mixture applied at 2 to 3 week intervals suffices to control most copper-susceptible fungi.
Generally once the fungus spores have alighted on the host plant and penetrated the tissues it is difficult to control them. The principle of control must in most cases depend on protection, ie preventing the fungus spores from entering the host tissues. Copper fungicides are noted for their tenacity and for this reason are much to be preferred in areas of high rainfall.
The simplest method of control is to apply a protective coating of Bordeaux or Burgundy mixture (or other copper fungicide) to the susceptible parts of the plant, so that spores alighting on them come in contact with the protective film of copper and are killed instantly. It is thus important to remember that the first spraying must ideally be made just before the disease is expected and continued at intervals throughout the susceptible period. For this reason it is important to take advantage of the early warning schemes which are in operation to ensure greater accuracy of the timing of the first spraying.
It must also be remembered that fungi are plants and that control measures that will kill them may not always leave the host plant unaffected. The use of too concentrated a fungicide mixture must therefore be guarded against, particularly for the early sprays.
Copper fungicides have been reported effective against numerous plant diseases. A list, by no means exhaustive, of some 300 diseases that have been found amenable to control by copper fungicides. [ note: the list is at the CDA web site ]
Correction of Copper Deficiency in Soils
Where copper deficiency has been confirmed by soil analysis or field diagnosis, whether in plants or animals, it can be corrected very simply either by applying 50 kg copper sulphate per hectare in the form of a fertiliser before sowing or by spraying the foliage of the young cereal plants, when they are about 150 mm high, with 750 grams copper sulphate (dissolved in from 400 to 2,000 litres water) per hectare. The soil application has generally given the better results and has the advantage that it may have a residual effect for more than ten years. The foliar application has to be given annually to each crop. An alternative is to add a copper containing slag (normally about 1% to 2 % copper) at a rate of a tonne to the hectare.
[Note from soilminerals.com: 50kg per hectare of copper sulfate works out to about 5-6 ppm of elemental copper]
Correction of Copper Deficiency in Animals
A method of correcting copper deficiency in livestock is to treat the soil on which animals graze. For example, in Australia and New Zealand swayback in lambs is being prevented by top dressing copper deficient pastures with 5 to 10 kg copper sulphate per hectare some time before lambing begins.
Other methods include drenching periodically with a copper sulphate solution; incorporating copper sulphate in salt and other animal licks; or by what is probably the most general method, incorporating copper sulphate along with other minerals and vitamins in the form of carefully blended supplements in the feeding stuffs.
Stimulation of Growth for Fattening Pigs and Broiler Chickens
The inclusion of up to as much as 0.1% copper sulphate in the diet of bacon and pork pigs and broiler chickens stimulates appetite and produces increased growth rate with a marked improvement in feed conversion.
A molluscicide for the destruction of slugs and snails, particularly the snail host of the liver fluke. All likely habitats of the liver fluke snail should be treated with copper sulphate at the rate of 25 kg to the hectare at least twice a year in June and August (northern hemisphere) or December and February (southern hemisphere).
End of info from CDA web site
SoilMinerals.com carries Copper in the form of Copper Sulfate , containing 25% Cu. It is highly water soluble for use as a soil amendment, a foliar spray, a fertilizer ingredient, or for making Bordeaux or Burgundy mixtures as described above.Zinc
First we hear from Arden Andersen, who thinks zinc is overused in agriculture:
Zinc is an essential component of many enzymes in the dehydrogenase, proteinase, and peptidase groups. It is a minor catalyst for sul-po-mag and copper and is correlated closely with copper and active nutrient systems. Zinc helps to make acetic acid in the root to prevent rotting; it is used to control blight and allows dead twigs on trees to shed off. Perceived zinc deficiency is often only symptomatic. Research has indicated that known soil-zinc deficiencies result in symptoms of plant-zinc deficiency only about 50% of the time. Zinc is much overused and promotes the growth of many weed species. Andersen Science in Agriculture p238
And next from Gary Zimmer, who appears to be a big fan of Zinc, particularly for corn/maize:
Zinc-- contributes to test weight, increased corn ear size, promotes corn silking, hastens maturity, chlorophyll formation, enzyme functions, regulates plant growth. Zimmer The Biological Farmer p109 [Zimmer also writes that zinc is "essential for corn starters" and recommends 5lbs/acre of 35% zinc to supply a corn crop and build soil levels.]
And a few more experts weigh in on zinc:
Charles Walters says that zinc "may act in the formation of chlorophyll.[....]It certainly stimulates plant growth and prevents the occurrence of mottled leaf in citrus, white bud in corn, and other disorders." He further states that "Plants do require it in the 3-100ppm range." and regarding animal health that "An excess of zinc means decreased copper availability and interference with utilization of copper and iron, bringing about anemia. A zinc excess also shows up as bald patches and skin disorders (rough skin), a deficiency is created by excess of calcium. Zinc is absolutely essential for production of sperm. It also increases the need for vitamin A." Walters Eco-Farm p366.
Now a word from the more mainstream guys: " ...zinc uptake by plants declines as pH increases.[....] High levels of phosphorus in soils has been known to intensify zinc deficiency in a number of crops. The exact cause of the zinc-phosphorus antagonism has been difficult to determine....the zinc-phosphorus antagonism occurs on calcareous [high calcium] soils and may be related to iron availability." Foth and Ellis Soil Fertility p142 They also show an increase from 4.2 to 19.9 bushels per acre of pea beans on one field after the addition of 25lbs/acre of zinc, quite the boost.
Here's a fun one from an interview with Klaas Martens in Graeme Sait's Nutrition rules. "...we need to lift our zinc levels as our phosphorus levels increase. We always need to use zinc with our starter fertilizers. At one time, our consultant suggested that we had a zinc deficiency, simply by driving past one of our fields. He didn't need a soil test, because the presence of milkweed was an indicator of a zinc shortage. We've actually seen the milkweed disappear as we have slowly corrected the zinc."
The area of South-central Washington state known as the Palouse is one of the world's great wheat growing regions. When it was first broken to the plow the production was tremendous, but by the 1920s it had fallen dramatically. The problem turned out to be zinc insufficiency. Zinc is easily water soluble, and this fact combined with low initial reserves of zinc in many soils has made zinc deficiency common. It was also one of the earliest trace mineral deficiencies discovered, and its sometimes dramatic effect on crop yields has led to some overuse; one book in front of me lists the results from application of 122lbs/acre of zinc! The results were quite disappointing, understandably.
Both zinc and copper are well known for their need in animal nutrition, and most commercial livestock producers supplement animal feed with these minerals. For that reason, manures from commercial livestock operations are frequently very good sources of zinc and copper (and sometimes boron). The problem with these manure sources of minerals is that one doesn't know how much they are getting, or what else they may be getting that they don't want. See the article Minerals and Manure .
Moving on to the human nutrition aspect, the adult human body contains about 2400 milligrams of zinc. Zinc is most concentrated in the male prostate and semen. The next most concentrated tissues are the retina of the eye, the heart, spleen, lungs, brain, and adrenal glands. Because of zinc's role in RNA and DNA synthesis and in the formation of many enzymes, zinc deficiency leads to slow healing of wounds. In some hospital tests zinc supplements led to surgical incisions healing in one-half the "normal" time. Zinc is important to normal insulin activity, the functions of taste and smell, normal immune function, protein digestion, and the formation of bones and teeth as it is a co-factor of alkaline phosphatase. Fallon and Enig, in Nourishing Traditions , call zinc the "intelligence mineral". It is generally more easily absorbed from animal products than from plants and although grains may contain significant zinc, that zinc may be bound up by the phytates in the grain's outer portion. Many traditional peoples soaked and sprouted seeds and grains before cooking them, a practice that reduces or eliminates this mineral-binding by phytates. Fallon and Enig add "Even a minor zinc deficiency in pregnant animals results in offspring with deformities, such as club feet, cleft palates, domed skulls and fused and missing ribs. In humans, zinc deficiency can cause learning disabilities and mental retardation."
Some of the other human nutritional and health problems associated with zinc deficiency are acne, boils, psoriasis, gastric ulcers (zinc is needed to form digestive acids), cataracts, hypertension, infertility, loss of or poor functioning of the senses of hearing, taste, and smell, weak muscles, and fatigue.
The brilliant British researcher Mark Purdey, in his groundbreaking work with mad cow disease and chronic wasting disease, found in a worldwide survey that both mad cow and CWD were strongly associated with soils that had very low levels of zinc and copper, combined with high levels of manganese and sometimes high levels of strontium and silver. In those conditions copper in the melanin granules, which are transmitters of outside information to the brain, may be replaced by manganese with disastrous results. In other words, neither mad cow disease nor chronic wasting disease are caused by infectious microbes, but are the result of a mineral imbalance. For more info on Mark Purdey's important work see his web site www.madcowpurdey.com .
SoilMinerals.com carries Zinc in the form of Zinc sulfate , a purified soil amendment containing 35.5% Zinc and 17% Sulfur. It is water soluble and is easily used for soil applications, fertilizer mixes, or foliar feeding.
Iron and ManganeseIron
Iron is second only to aluminum in the list of abundant metals. It makes up about 5% of the earth's crust, so it is rarely absent from soils, although it may not be present in an available form.
For garden soil we like to see 50-200ppm of iron on a standard soil test. Above 250 ppm usually indicates something out of balance.
What does iron do in the plant? Paraphrasing Arden Andersen, "Iron draws energy to the leaf by absorbing heat from the sun; it makes the leaf darker, thus absorbing more energy. It will increase the waxy sheen of the crop. Iron is necessary for the maintenance and synthesis of chlorophyll and RNA metabolism in the chloroplasts. It increases the thickness of the leaf, [which] increases nutrient flow geometrically, resulting in a production increase geometrically." Science in Agriculture p236
Iron is needed by nitrogen fixing bacteria.
So iron is a good thing, in most cases. Below we have a couple of different views on just how good it is and how much we want:
Both iron and manganese become less available at pH 7 and above and in the absence of organic matter and water. These conditions are found in some arid parts of the western United States. High calcium soils also tend to have low available iron, particularly if they are also low in organic matter. In a calcareous soil, most of the potentially available iron is tightly bound to organic matter. Some plant roots have been shown to have the ability to obtain iron from these sources by chemically reducing ferric iron (Fe+++) to ferrous iron (Fe++). High phosphorus soils may also have low available iron, as any free iron will chemically bind to from iron phosphate....Correcting an iron deficiency may be difficult because the problem is not a lack of iron in the soil, but that it is chemically bound. Lowering the pH, if practical, is the surest method. Foliar iron sprays are also effective. Foth and Ellis Soil Fertility pp146-147
Here's an excerpt from an interview with Gary Zimmer "In our dairy work we are looking at phosphorus as a key element. We want phosphate uptake for sugars and energy and digestibility and plant health. If I have high iron in my soils, usually from over-tillage, excessive use of caustic materials or too much nitrogen use, I'm not happy. On a dairy farm, I scream and holler if they buy a single pound of commercial nitrogen. If they buy nitrogen, I want to know why. They had better use their manures and alfalfa and rotation, because I don't want iron buildups. Iron binds with phosphate within the plant . Many people who don't feed cattle don't notice this difference. You see, the phosphorus may be in the plant, but when you bind it to iron, it becomes unavailable. Iron has a triple-positive charge and phosphorus has a triple-negative charge, so they will bond very easily. If your feed is high in iron, then the cow is starved for phosphorus. We are fanatical about trying to get our iron down, just so we have better phosphate availability . In high iron soils I don't think our soil tests give an accurate idea of phosphate availability to the plant." [emphasis added] Graeme Sait Nutrition Rules pp187-188. Gary Zimmer works mostly with neutral or alkaline pH soils in the upper Midwestern US, and we don't know offhand what he considers high iron.
The info above brings up some interesting questions about iron supplements in general, don't you think? I wonder what connection there might be between the high iron intake recommended for women and high incidences of osteoporosis? Fallon and Enig have this to say about one type of iron supplementation "Recently, researchers have warned against inorganic iron used to supplement white flour. In this form, iron cannot be utilized by the body and its buildup in the blood and tissues is essentially a buildup of toxins. Elevated levels or inorganic iron have been linked to heart disease and cancer." Nourishing Traditions p44.
Charles Walters has this to say about signs of iron deficiency in plants "When iron deficiency is serious, the entire leaf will turn yellow, leaving only the veins to stand out like road maps....Chlorosis (white leaves that should be green) is possible even in the presence of iron. Lime can complex iron, and yet in the human being calcium and copper must be present for iron to function properly. In order to free iron, the farmer must complex calcium in this case, and this means using either iron sulfates or iron chelates, or substituting a proper foliar blend." Eco-Farm p196.
At soil minerals.com we have seldom seen a soil test that showed a lack of iron. and as we usually are working with gardens and fields of a few acres and smaller, our approach is to bring the pH down below 7 which will make iron (as well as the other cations) more easily available. The alternative, if one cannot lower the pH with minerals because of size, expense, highly calcareous soils, or other constraints, is to increase the biological activity in the soil. As noted above in the excerpt from Foth and Ellis' Soil Fertility, in a calcareous soil most of the iron is tied up with organic matter. Increasing the organic matter content of such soils will provide more holding points for iron, and increasing the biological activity, through the addition or seeding of beneficial bacteria and fungi, should make more Fe available to the plants.
SoilMinerals.com carries Iron in the form of Iron sulfate , a purified soil amendment containing 30% Iron and 17% Sulfur . It is water soluble and is easily used for soil applications, fertilizer mixes, or foliar feeding.
Manganese is synergistic with iron; they work together in biology in ways that are not well understood, but we do know that they need each other. Good steel must have some manganese in it to impart toughness, and that manganese in the steel also absorbs oxygen during the steel making process. Perhaps this is a clue to the biological relationships of Mn and Fe, in that the manganese may slow the oxidation rate of iron in living things.
We at SoilMinerals.com like to see about 1 part manganese to 2 parts iron on soil test results, up to about 50 ppm manganese. Levels above 50 ppm may be too high, particularly if the soil is deficient in copper and zinc. In wet, acid soils below pH 5 or so that naturally contain high amounts of manganese, soluble manganese can reach levels that are toxic to plant roots. The remedy for these conditions would be to drain the soil better, or, if the crop requires a wet, acid soil (e.g. cranberries), the remedy would be to increase water flow through the soil, as more water will bring more oxygen, which will precipitate the excess manganese in an insoluble state.
Arden Andersen calls manganese "the element of life", and says that manganese "brings the electrical charge into the seed, creating the magnetic force to draw the other elements into the seed." (Science in Agriculture p236.) In Eco-Farm , Walters credits manganese with with aiding the oxidase enzyme in carrying oxygen, and entering into the oxidation and reduction reactions needed in carbohydrate metabolism and in seed formation; more clues that manganese has a strong connection with oxygen. Regarding manganese in animal nutrition, Walters tells us that an excess of manganese increases the need for iron, while a manganese deficiency results in leg deformities in calves, eggs not formed correctly, degeneration of testicles, offspring born dead, and delayed heat periods, and also says that an excess of calcium and phosphorus may lead to a manganese deficiency. (Eco-Farm p366)
We definitely know that manganese is necessary for the development of viable seeds. The most common and obvious sign of manganese deficiency is in the almond family. Peaches, nectarines and apricots with split-open pits containing a shriveled seed are the prime example. Dan Skow has some interesting insights on this from the Carey Reams school of thought: "If there is no Manganese in the seed, it will swell up and rot [rather than sprouting]. Manganese has a high atomic weight, 54.9380, meaning it has more power than nutrients in the surrounding soil. [Manganese] puts into play the magnetism necessary to draw nutrients into the seed to feed it and its emerging root system. When there is a shortfall for manganese, the entire fertility program has to be adjusted to create enough energy to pull more manganese." ( Mainline Farming for Century 21p59.) Skow recommends a foliar spray of manganese mixed with phosphoric acid to easily correct manganese deficiency problems, and tells us that manganese is what is needed to ensure regular pecan crops with filled hulls.
Moving on to human nutrition, Elson Haas tells us that manganese is an essential part of the superoxide dismutase enzyme found in the mitochondria, the energy factories in the cells. Manganese also activates the enzymes necessary for the body to use biotin, thiamine (B 1 ), vitamin C, and choline. (Staying Healthy with Nutrition p207). Sally Fallon writes that manganese is "..needed for healthy nerves, a healthy immune system and blood sugar regulation....also plays a part in the formation of mother's milk and in the growth of healthy bones. Deficiency may lead to trembling hands, seizures, and lack of coordination. Excessive milk consumption may cause manganese deficiency as calcium can interfere with manganese absorption...phosphorus antagonizes manganese as well. (Nourishing Traditions p44).
Manganese can also be quite toxic. It has been (likely still is) used as a flux or anti-oxidant coating on arc-welding rods, and some long-time welders have ended up with chronic and acute symptoms much like those listed above for manganese deficiency: trembling hands and other indications that appear identical to Parkinson's disease.
Manganese, we see,as well as being necessary, can be toxic, especially in diets or soils that are deficient in copper, zinc, and perhaps iron. The paragraph below was already posted above under copper and zinc, but bears repeating:
The brilliant British researcher Mark Purdey, in his groundbreaking work with mad cow disease and chronic wasting disease, found in a worldwide survey that both mad cow and CWD were strongly associated with soils that had very low levels of zinc and copper, combined with high levels of manganese and sometimes high levels of strontium and silver. In those conditions copper in the melanin granules, which are transmitters of outside information to the brain, may be replaced by manganese with disastrous results. In other words, neither mad cow disease nor chronic wasting disease are caused by infectious microbes, but are the result of a mineral imbalance. For more info on Mark Purdey's important work see his website www.madcowpurdey.com .
SoilMinerals.com carries Manganese in the form of Manganese sulfate , a purified soil amendment containing 32% Manganese and 19% Sulfur. It is water soluble and is easily used for soil applications, fertilizer mixes, or foliar feeding.
Boron is one of the rarest elements, and one of the most mysterious. It is absolutely essential for calcium metabolism, but no one seems to know its method of action. An often heard phrase in the eco-agriculture field is "Calcium is the truck, but boron is the driver". This refers to the concept that calcium is the transporter of nutrients into and out of the cells, but it can't do its job unless boron is present.
There are apparently only two commercially viable boron deposits in the world, one in Turkey and one in the Mojave desert of Southern California. Boron is easily leached out of soils, so higher rainfall areas are often deficient. In front of me is a map of the USA showing boron deficiency areas. Essentially it shows everything east of the Mississippi River as boron deficient, as well as the Pacific NW as far south as the San Francisco Bay and as far east as central Montana.
Here's Charles Walters on boron: "Plants must have boron, again in the trace range. Texts quote 2 to 75 parts per million as being essential, but note that plants vary in their required amounts according to species. Boron is quite lethal to seeds when used in the salt form." ( Eco-Farm p136). 2 to 75 parts per million is a huge range. At soilminerals.com we would be very concerned to see available boron above 5ppm. Our general rule is 1 part of boron to 1000 parts calcium.
More on boron from Walters' Eco-Farm : "Boron is required so that calcium can perform its metabolic chore. It is essential in several other metabolic processes...it prevents such abnormalities as cracked stem in celery, internal cork in apples, black heart in beets and turnips, yellowing of alfalfa leaves. When boron deficiency is a problem, death of the terminal bud is a common symptom. Lateral buds continue to produce side shoots, but terminal buds on these side shoots fade away. Rebranching may occur, but the multi-branched plant will take on the appearance of a rosette.
In cauliflower, heads fail to mature properly and remain small. Reddish-brown areas become evident. Terminal buds take on a light green color.....root crops are affected by brown heart, dark spots, or by splintering and cracking at the middle in....spuds [potatoes], sweet potatoes, radishes, carrots.
Boron is required for translocation of sugar, and this means boron deficiency can be spotted as a sugar deficiency. Important as it is, a 100 bushel crop of corn requires only 4 ounces of boron.......a ton of alfalfa requires only a single ounce...boron regulates flowering and fruiting, cell division, salt absorption, hormone movement and pollen germination, carbohydrate metabolism, water use, and nitrogen assimilation.
In most soils boron is [found] as highly insoluble tourmaline, the supply being somewhere between 20 and 200 pounds per acre. It takes life in the soil to draw on this bank account, and the Creator has supplied this life in the form of microorganism species which simply have to have boron to live. By using the nutrient themselves and then contributing their bodies to the soil's fertility load, microorganisms change boron into an organic form.
When dry weather hits, microorganisms in soil without tilth and structure go dormant. This means the boron supply is cut off. Generally speaking there is more boron in the subsoil...and roots...dig deeper...for both moisture and for this very essential nutrient.
Too much boron will...restrict growth, cause plants to exhibit that sickly pale green color sometimes mistaken for nitrogen deficiency, preside over root deterioration and poor yield. In short, either a shortage or marked imbalance of boron will set up a plant for insect and fungal attack."
Important stuff, boron. It also has several more esoteric uses and connections, such as remediation of radiation poisoning. According to another Charles Walters book, Minerals for the Genetic Code (based on the work of Dr. Richard Olree), boron controls all the +3 charges in the human body, and it is easily displaced by aluminum, losing three boron molecules to every one aluminum molecule. Furthermore "Boron has the ability to absorb radiation and release it without changing the neutron. The heart is the most active part of the body for which reason boron defends the heart. The story has been told that Soviet truck drivers were offered bonuses to deliver boron to the Chernobyl site, this with the knowledge that their trip would be fatal, but families would be paid. None realized that, fortified with boron [themselves], they could have made their decision with impunity. Boron stopped the "China Syndrome" from occurring in Russia." [ed. note: as is often the case, Walters is being a bit obscure here. He appears to be stating that large quantities of boron were dumped on the nuclear pile at Chernobyl to stop the out-of-control nuclear reaction, and that if the truck drivers had swallowed some of that boron they would have been protected from radiation exposure.]
Continuing the quote on boron from Minerals for the Genetic Code : "Boron is known as the calcium helper and for the metabolism of calcium, magnesium and phosphorus. Boron improves retention of both calcium and magnesium and elevates circulation of serum concentrations of testosterone.
Boron works in the body toward brain function, activates vitamin D, promotes electrical brain activity, enhances memory, and promotes alertness. Signs of possible deficiency include ADD/ADHD, osteoporosis, arthritis, fatigue, decreased motor function, decreased short-term memory, decreased brain function, and increased loss of calcium and magnesium in the urine."
As if all that wasn't enough, boron in the form of boric acid is our safest and most effective ant control, and is used in many areas to treat wood in ground contact from ant and termite damage, as well as being used to fire-proof cellulose insulation and as a flux for soldering and brazing metal. 20 Mule Team Borax, available in the laundry soap section of most grocery stores, is a pure and natural mined product containing about 10% boron. It is quite suitable for garden use in small quantities. 7 ounces of 20 Mule Team Borax per 1000 square feet equals approximately 1 part per million of boron. Take it easy. As noted above, a boron deficiency can be induced simply by dry soil. Don't add boron without a soil test that indicates a need for it. 1-2 ppm per year is maximum.
SoilMinerals.com carries the Solubor brand of agricultural boron, which is standardized to 20% Boron. It is water soluble and is easily used for soil applications, fertilizer mixes, or foliar feeding.
References Cited and/or Used for the above:
(In No Particular Order)
Eco-Farm by Charles Walters and C. J. Fenzau Acres USA 1996
Soil Chemistry 2nd Edition by Bohn, McNeal, O'Connor Wiley-Interscience 1985
Science in Agriculture by Arden Andersen Acres USA 2000
Mainline Farming for Century 21 by Skow and Walters Acres USA 1995
Staying Healthy with Nutrition by Elson Haas Celestial Arts 1992
Nutrition and Physical Degeneration by Weston A. Price Price-Pottenger Nutrition Foundation 1939/2004
Biological Farmer, the by Gary F. Zimmer Acres USA 2000
Soil Fertility by Foth and Ellis John Wiley and Sons 1988
Nutrition Rules by Graeme Sait Soil Therapy Pty Ltd 2003
Chemistry Made Simple by Hess (rev. by Thomas) Doubleday 1984
Minerals for the Genetic Code by Charles Walters with Dr. Richard Olree Acres USA 2006
Nourishing Traditions by Sally Fallon with Mary Enig New Trends 2001
Random House Dictionary of the English Language 2nd Edition Unabridged Flexner and Hauck ed. Random House 1987
HAZARD & REMEDIATION DIRECTORATE - DISASTER ASSISTANCE DIRECTORATE
WASHINGTON | Wed Aug 25, 2010 12:02am EDT
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Central bankers from around the world will assess a darkening economic outlook at their annual U.S. mountain retreat this week with discussion of printing yet more money to spur growth on the agenda.
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke is likely to signal his views about the uncertain prospects for the world's biggest economy but he probably won't give many clues on whether the U.S. central bank will pump more cash to keep the recovery going.
Other top central bankers will arrive in the Jackson Hole resort with concerns, too.
European Central Bank President Jean-Claude Trichet faces his own challenge of a two-tier recovery.
While the euro zone economy as a whole has strengthened thanks to strong German growth, the ECB looks set to keep providing banks with unlimited funds at a fixed rate to help banks and governments in Europe's troubled periphery.
Bank of England and the Bank of Japan officials will come to the Teton mountains likely to talk about how they might have to push more money into their economies to stimulate growth, a last resort when benchmark interest rates approach zero.
"It's not just the U.S. that stalled in June and July, it's the world economy that hit a wall over the summer months," said Ellen Zentner, a U.S. economist for Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ in New York.
The likely mood of concern among the central bankers heading for the wilds of Wyoming contrasts with the optimism of a year ago, when debate at Jackson Hole centered on ways to wean economies off emergency support as they emerged from recession.
The discussions give the world's top central bankers a chance to thrash out the major challenges of the moment as well as hike on trails in the scenic national park.
Past roundups have come at economic turning points: the start of the credit crisis in 2007, the days before Lehman collapsed in 2008 and before the start of the recovery in 2009.
Chicago Federal Reserve Bank President Charles Evans said Tuesday that the risks of a double-dip U.S. recession have risen in the last six months. While he added he did not think that was the most likely scenario, he said high unemployment and a fractured housing sector would make the recovery a fragile one.
EYES ON BERNANKE
Bernanke's speech Friday will be a keystone of the three-day conference, which has chosen as its theme the challenges of the next decade. His audience will be listening keenly for clues about shorter-term support for the economy.
The Fed said on August 10 it would buy Treasury bonds with proceeds of maturing securities in its massive portfolio. It had been letting its balance sheet shrink naturally, effectively removing some of its huge stimulus.
"This wasn't the right time to send a signal that we would be allowing a tightening to take place as these securities rolled off our balance sheet," Dallas Fed President Richard Fisher told Fox Business Network Tuesday.
The big question now is whether the Federal Reserve will start buying Treasury bonds more aggressively again to provide the U.S. economy with a new injection of cash.
The Wall Street Journal said Tuesday that more senior Fed officials than previously thought voiced concerns about or objections to the relatively modest move to use mortgage debt maturities to buy Treasuries at the August 10 meeting.
The reported split within the central bank's upper echelons suggested the Fed could stand pat after rebalancing its balance sheet and set a high bar for any further asset purchases.
"Under these circumstances, it would be premature for Chairman Bernanke to provide a set of guideposts for future policy moves, as helpful as that would be for the markets and as much as we believe that additional easing will ultimately be needed," analysts at Goldman Sachs said in a note Tuesday.
"Instead, we expect him to concentrate on how the economy and the Fed have come to where they are now, with at best just a general sense of economic risks in the months ahead."
(Reporting by Mark Felsenthal; Editing by Kim Coghill)
NEW YORK | Tue Aug 24, 2010 2:54pm EDT
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Sales of previously owned U.S. homes dropped in July to their lowest pace in 15 years, implying further loss of momentum in the economic recovery.
KEY POINTS: * The National Association of Realtors said sales dropped a record 27.2 percent from June to an annual rate of 3.83 million units, the lowest level since May 1995. June's sales pace was revised down to a 5.26 million-unit pace. * Analysts polled by Reuters expected existing home sales to tumble 12 percent to a 4.70 million-unit pace from the previously reported 5.37 million units in June.
Author, "Web of Debt"Posted: August 19, 2010 12:54 PM BIO Become a Fan Get Email Alerts Bloggers' Index
Did you know…?
The process by which a region became a territory. As established by United States law, beginning with the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, when a specifically defined part of the unorganized federal domain was sufficiently populated, its residents (United States citizens) could petition Congress for territorial status. Congress would subsequently pass an organic act, with a bill of rights for territory residents, and set up a three-part government, with appointed executive and judicial branches. Residents elected a legislative branch. The federal government had ultimate authority over territorial affairs, and an elected territorial representative was seated in Congress.
A March 1889 law established a federal court system based at Muskogee, assuming judicial authority and jurisdiction that had been exercised since the 1834 Trade Act by the Western District of Arkansas.
The 1987 amendments to the Clean Water Act (CWA) established the Section 319 Nonpoint Source Management Program. Section 319 addresses the need for greater federal leadership to help focus state and local nonpoint source efforts. Under Section 319, states, territories and tribes receive grant money that supports a wide variety of activities including technical assistance, financial assistance, education, training, technology transfer, demonstration projects and monitoring to assess the success of specific nonpoint source implementation projects.
Abolition of California Debris Commission Pub. L. 99-662, title XI, Sec. 1106, Nov. 17, 1986, 100 Stat. 4229, provided that: ``(a) The California Debris Commission established by the first section of the Act of March 1, 1893 (33 U.S.C. 661) is hereby abolished. ``(b) All authorities, powers, functions, and duties of the California Debris Commission are hereby transferred to the Secretary [meaning Secretary of the Army, see 33 U.S.C. 2201]. ``(c) The assets, liabilities, contracts, property, records, and the unexpended balance of appropriations, authorizations, allocations, and other funds employed, held, used arising from, available to, or to be made available in connection with the authorities, powers, functions, and duties transferred by this section, subject to section 202 of the Budget and Accounting Procedure Act of 1950 [see 31 U.S.C. 1531], are hereby transferred to the Secretary for appropriate allocation. Unexpended funds transferred pursuant to this subsection shall be used only for the purposes for which the funds were originally authorized and appropriated. ``(d) All acquired lands, and other interests therein presently under the jurisdiction of the California Debris Commission are hereby authorized to be retained, and shall be administered under the direction of the Secretary, who is hereby authorized to take such actions as are necessary to consolidate and perfect title; to exchange for other lands or interests therein which may be required for recreation or for existing or proposed projects of the United States; to transfer to other Federal agencies or dispose of as surplus property; and to release to the coextensive fee owners any easements no longer required by the United States, under such conditions or for such consideration as the Secretary shall determine to be fair and reasonable. Except as specifically provided herein all transactions will be in accordance with existing laws and procedures.''
TITLE 33--NAVIGATION AND NAVIGABLE WATERS CHAPTER 14--CALIFORNIA DEBRIS COMMISSION Sec. 682. Malicious injury to works; injury to navigable waters by hydraulic mining; penalty Any person or persons who willfully or maliciously injure, damage, or destroy, or attempt to injure, damage, or destroy, any dam or other work erected under the provisions of this chapter for restraining, impounding, or settling purposes, or for use in connection therewith, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be fined not to exceed the sum of $5,000 or be imprisoned not to exceed five years, or by both such fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court. And any person or persons, company or corporation, their agents or employees, who shall mine by the hydraulic process directly or indirectly injuring the navigable waters of the United States, in violation of the provisions of this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine not exceeding $5,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding one year, or by both such fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court. (Mar. 1, 1893, ch. 183, Sec. 22, 27 Stat. 510.) Section Referred to in Other Sections This section is referred to in section 661 of this title.
Sec. 669. Petition by hydraulic miners The individual proprietor or proprietors, or in case of a corporation, its manager or agent appointed for that purpose, owning mining ground in the territory in the State of California mentioned in section 663 of this title, which it is desired to work by the hydraulic process, must file with said commission a verified petition, setting forth such facts as will comply with law and the rules prescribed by said commission. (Mar. 1, 1893, ch. 183, Sec. 9, 27 Stat. 508.) Transfer of Functions California Debris Commission abolished and functions transferred to Secretary of the Army by Pub. L. 99-662, title XI, Sec. 1106, Nov. 17, 1986, 100 Stat. 4229, set out as a note under section 661 of this title. Section Referred to in Other Sections This section is referred to in sections 661, 671 of this title.
TITLE 33--NAVIGATION AND NAVIGABLE WATERS CHAPTER 14--CALIFORNIA DEBRIS COMMISSION Sec. 671. Petition for common dumping ground, etc. The owners of several mining claims situated so as to require a common dumping ground or dam or other restraining works for the debris issuing therefrom in one or more sites may file a joint petition setting forth such facts in addition to the requirements of section 669 of this title; and where the owner of a hydraulic mine or owners of several such mines have and use common dumping sites for impounding debris or as settling reservoirs, which sites are located below the mine of an applicant not entitled to use same, such fact shall also be stated in said petition. Thereupon the same proceedings shall be had as provided for herein. (Mar. 1, 1893, ch. 183, Sec. 11, 27 Stat. 508.) References in Text Herein, referred to in text, means act Mar. 1, 1893, which comprises this chapter. Section Referred to in Other Sections This section is referred to in sections 661, 676 of this title.
TITLE 33--NAVIGATION AND NAVIGABLE WATERS CHAPTER 14--CALIFORNIA DEBRIS COMMISSION Sec. 676. Allotment of expenses for common dumping grounds; location of impounding works In case the joint petition referred to in section 671 of this title is granted, the commission shall fix the respective amounts to be paid by each owner of such mines toward providing and building necessary impounding dams or other restraining works. In the event of a petition being filed after the entry of such order, or in case the impounding dam or dams or other restraining works have already been constructed and accepted by said commission, the commission shall fix such amount as may be reasonable for the privilege of dumping therein, which amount shall be divided between the original owners of such impounding dams or other restraining works in proportion to the amount respectively paid by each party owning same. The expense of maintaining and protecting such joint dam or works shall be divided among mine owners using the same in such proportion as the commission shall determine. In all cases where it is practicable, restraining and impounding works are to be provided, constructed, and maintained by mine owners near or below the mine or mines before reaching the main tributaries of said navigable waters. (Mar. 1, 1893, ch. 183, Sec. 16, 27 Stat. 509.) Transfer of Functions California Debris Commission abolished and functions transferred to Secretary of the Army by Pub. L. 99-662, title XI, Sec. 1106, Nov. 17, 1986, 100 Stat. 4229, set out as a note under section 661 of this title. Section Referred to in Other Sections This section is referred to in section 661 of this title.
CALUMET PIGMENTS OFFERS 72% GYPSUM 22% IRON OXIDES FAX MR. T.W. ARMAN, PRICES BELOW.
We are continuingly being injured and delayed by incompetent agencies and factors of the federal and state executive and judicial branches, environmentalism is religion for atheists and non-scientists. The Obama administration has ordered EPA to regulate "climate change"
As the Washington Post tells us, the Obama administration is comprised of "true believers."
Epilogue: Securing the Republic
Thomas Jefferson, Preamble to a Bill for the More General Diffusion of KnowledgeFall 1778 Papers 2:526--27
Whereas it appeareth that however certain forms of government are better calculated than others to protect individuals in the free exercise of their natural rights, and are at the same time themselves better guarded against degeneracy, yet experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms, those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny; and it is believed that the most effectual means of preventing this would be, to illuminate, as far as practicable, the minds of the people at large, and more especially to give them knowledge of those facts, which history exhibiteth, that, possessed thereby of the experience of other ages and countries, they may be enabled to know ambition under all its shapes, and prompt to exert their natural powers to defeat its purposes; And whereas it is generally true that that people will be happiest whose laws are best, and are best administered, and that laws will be wisely formed, and honestly administered, in proportion as those who form and administer them are wise and honest; whence it becomes expedient for promoting the publick happiness that those persons, whom nature hath endowed with genius and virtue, should be rendered by liberal education worthy to receive, and able to guard the sacred deposit of the rights and liberties of their fellow citizens, and that they should be called to that charge without regard to wealth, birth or other accidental condition or circumstance; but the indigence of the greater number disabling them from so educating, at their own expence, those of their children whom nature hath fitly formed and disposed to become useful instruments for the public, it is better that such should be sought for and educated at the common expence of all, than that the happiness of all should be confided to the weak or wicked: . . .
The Founders' Constitution
Volume 1, Chapter 18, Document 11
The University of Chicago Press
The Papers of Thomas Jefferson . Edited by Julian P. Boyd et al. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1950--.
MANUFACTURED JURISDICTION: "the circumstances relied upon to establish federal jurisdiction over the offenses charged were artificially created by the Government in an attempt to exceed the proper scope of federal law enforcement." 501 F.Supp. at 1205. The revised PHG of 300 g/L is two orders of magnitude greater than the applicable numeric chemical-specific standards identified in ROD 5 for the protection of freshwater. COPPER, CADMIUM, AND ZINC; QAPP Information: QA Info Missing; Keswick dam to Cottonwood creek; Final Listing Decision: Delist from 303(d) list. JUNE 15, 2010;
Last Update: July 24, 2010 This page compares maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) and public health goals (PHGs).
NOTE: The 2004 version of the Region 9 PRG Table will remain at this web site in case users need to reference this historical document. However, the 2004 Table should no longer be used for contaminant screening of environmental media because it has been replaced with the more current Table above.
Region 9 PRGs 2004 Table (PDF) (16pp, 962 K)
User's Guide/Technical Background Document (PDF) (29pp, 284 K)
"The State Board's mission is to preserve, enhance and restore the quality of California's water resources, and ensure their proper allocation and efficient use for the benefit of present and future generations."
SHASTA COUNTY SHERIFF AND UNITED STATES MARSHALL; MILITIA &- POSSE FOR CRIMINAL TRESPASS OF TREASON AND MISPRISON OF FELONY WRIT OF POSSESSION UPON ADVERSE CLAIMS TRESSPASSERS OF PATENT TITLE; EXTORTION; FRAUDS; DECEITS, FALSE CLAIMS AND FALSE PRETENSES, ULTERIOR MOTIVES; MALICIOUS AND ABUSIVE NEGLIGENT ENDANGERMENT; ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION AND SLAVERY; CONSPIRACY; EVIL UPON THE PUBLIC TRUST; APEX LAW AGGRAVATED LARCENY OF MINING COMPANY SECURITY & COLLATERAL, PIRACY, FRAUDS, MALICE, ABUSE, NEGLECT, HAZARD, HAZARDS, WAIVER OF TORTS ON EXPRESS AND IMPLIED CONTRACT LR10-20762 UNLAWFUL DETAINER AND QUIET TITLE DETINUE SUR BAILMENT
DEPT. OF TOXIC SUBSTANCE CONTROL , CA - JOINT & SEVERAL TRESSPASSERS
Laws, Regulations & Policies
DTSC regulates hazardous waste in California primarily under the authority of the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, and the California Health and Safety Code . Other laws that affect hazardous waste are specific to handling, storage, transportation, disposal, treatment, reduction, cleanup and emergency planning.
In addition, DTSC reviews and monitors legislation , as many as 200 bills each legislative session, to ensure that the position reflects the Department's goals. Staff legislative specialists coordinate DTSC's response to all proposed legislation that may positively or negatively affect the Department. Other functions include developing legislation, coordinating with lawmakers, and responding to constituent complaints.
From these laws, DTSC's major program areas develop regulations and consistent program policies and procedures . The regulations spell out what those who handle hazardous waste must do to comply with the laws. As is the case with environmental risk management decisions, these rulemakings are subject to public review and comment.
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), signed into law in 1970, requires public agency decision-makers to consider and document the environmental implications of their actions. This law impels agency personnel to look for and use methods to avoid or reduce environmental damage in all projects and decisions they undertake. CEQA further places the responsibility on the agency to show that it has faithfully executed this process. Last year, DTSC produced more than 180 CEQA documents for technical projects and rulemakings.
Twenty-two attorneys provide legal guidance for the Department. They primarily engage in environmental advocacy and litigation ranging from prosecuting environmental violations and revoking permits, to cost recovery and collecting environmental fees.
Director's External Advisory Group
This group is comprised of representatives of various communities of interest served by the DTSC. (A community of interest is not geographic body, but is instead based upon the interest stakeholders have in a site or issue). These include Environmental Groups, representatives from Industry, individuals from local communities, and others who want to share their thoughts and ideas on how DTSC operates. More info: http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/InformationResources/external_advisory_group.cfm
FREE MR. T.W. ARMAN & IRON MOUNTAIN MINES, INC. INNOCENT PRISONERS OF PIRACY BY EPA - DOJ - TRUSTEES SINCE 1983
In 2009, EPA was entrusted with $7.2B dollars to invest in our economy --- to rebuild critical infrastructure in our communities; to invest in jobs that would put our citizens back to work and to rekindle a strong and thriving economy. In that short year, EPA has worked diligently to move that money into the hands of our partners and to clear the way for rapid investments in construction, land reuse and redevelopment.
President Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act on Feb. 17, 2009 and directed the Recovery Act be implemented with unprecedented transparency and accountability. To that end, the American people can see how every dollar is being invested at www.Recovery.gov.
SOURCE: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Mr. T.W. Arman, proprietor , Iron Mountain Mines, Inc., & 'ARMAN' for archaeal Richmond Mine acidophilic nanoorganisms
DISCOVERIES! Geißler, L. & Seifert, Th. (2010): The son of Mother Lode? State and perspectives of the gold deposit research in the French Gulch-Deadwood district, Klamath Mountains, USA. – International Forum-Competition of Young Researchers “Topical Issues of Subsoil Usages”, 21.-23. April 2010, St. Petersburg State Mining Institute. LOCATION
All the rights, privileges, and immunities of the Camden and Magee Military Scrip Warrants for the United States of America State of California Morrill Act University of California San Buena Ventura Agricultural College Patent. May 1, 1862 - President Abraham Lincoln
All the rights, privileges, and immunities of Arman Mines Iron Mountain Investment Co. United States of America Lode and Placer Mining Patents, Arman Mines Apex Relocations, Apex Discoveries, and Apex mining law application, Arman Mines Flat Creek mining district vested and accrued existing rights of the locators of the Lost Confidence Mine, &c; their successors and assigns, and to their and their heirs and assigns and successors use and behoof, forever.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD said mining premises, together with all the rights, privileges, immunities, and apputenances of whatsoever nature thereunto belonging, unto the said grantee above named and to its successors and assigns forever; subject, nevertheless, to the above-mentioned and to the following conditions and stipulations:
FIRST. That the premises hereby granted shall be held subject to any vested and accrued water rights for mining, agricultural, manufacturing, or other purposes, and rights to ditches and reservoirs used in connection with such water rights, as may be recognized and acknowledged by the local laws, customs, and decisions of the courts. And there is reserved from the lands hereby granted a right of way thereon for ditches or canals constructed by the authority of the United States.
SECOND. That in the absence of necessary legislation by Congress, the Legislature of California may provide rules for working the mining claim or premises hereby granted, involving easements, drainage, and other necessary means to its complete development
Since 1849 - Flat Creek Mining District
Since May 1, 1862 - Camden & Magee Agricultural College, Military Scrip Warrant Freehold Estate; 360 acres of land in lieu of Rancho Buena Ventura grant patent title,
1844 Mexican Land Grant and Bounty Warrants prior rights; Rancho San Buena Ventura; Perdido Californio Bosque del Norte . Good Fortune Ranch; Lost California Forest of the North
Since Janurary 4, 1875 - Shasta County Recorder; Morrill land grant Act of Congress - Camden & Magee University of California Agricultural College Patent by Governor Newton Booth.
Since April 8, 1880 - Lost Confidence Mine, Camden North, Camden South, Magee Apex, Sallee Anticline, Sallee Syncline, J Fault, Bear's Den, Bear's Nest, Number 8, Complex, Hornet Gold & Silver, Homestake, Foresight, Backsight, Thistle, Finegold, Oversight, Goldbar, Owl, Grey Squirrel, Ole Hanson, Wedge, Big Dipper, Last Link, Kitchener, Keystone, Pershing, Esther, Spring Creek, Minnesota, Crown Point & Red Star lode Mining Claims.
Since 1895 - Mountain Copper Co. Ltd., Iron Mountain Investment Co. 2898 ACRES OF LAND (Jardine Matheson/ Rothschilds/ Keswick, et al), Iron Mountain Investment Co. The Noble and Scott, Richmond, Lawson, Hoover, Pershing, Tuxedo, Highland, Paradise, Congress, Prince Albert, Claremont, Mocop, Bennington, Canyon, Consolidated lode Mining Claims, &c.
Since 1967 - Stauffer Chemical Co., 8000 ACRES OF LAND - BRICK FLAT PIT ABANDONMENT -(Rhône Polenc, Aktemix 37, Imperial Chemical (ICI America), Aventis Crop Science, AstraZeneca, Bayer Crop Sciences et al), Responsible Parties to Consent Decree.
Since 1976 - Iron Mountain Mines, Inc., 4400 ACRES OF LAND, Innocent landowner - operator Mr. T.W. Arman, 2744 ACRES OF LAND, sole stockholder.
Since 2001 - Essential Solutions, Inc. 52,000 ACRES OF LAND, Agricultural & Horticultural Products Research.
Since 2008 - Hu/Mountain joint venture 88,000 ACRES OF LAND - Relocation, Rediscoveries, Remission, Reversion, Restitution, Remainder, Resource Recovery, Renovation, Residency, Recycling, Reclamation, Reuse, Reinsurance, Reworking, Repossession, Reparations and Repatriations, &c.
SPRING CREEK DEBRIS DAM AND THE SPRING CREEK ARM OF KESWICK LAKE, OUTFALL IS FROM POWER PLANT
Since 2009 - Mr. T. W. Arman, mistaken for 'ARMAN' aka "TWO MINERS AND 103 MILLION ACRES OF LAND" fka - Iron Mountain Mines; the Arman Mines Ministries of Natural & Mineral Resources Federation, the Arman Mines Institute, the Hummingbird Institute, the College of the Hummingbird, Arman Mines Iron Mountain Railway, Arman Mines Iron Mountain Tramway, Arman Mines Iron Mountain Road, Arman Mines Iron Mountain Airport, WESTCHESTER INSTITUTE OF AERONAUTICS, THE HUNDREDS OF THE ARMANSHIRE, PEACEPIPE PIGMENTS, IRON MOUNTAIN PIGMENTS, AMERICAN PIGMENTS, CALIFORNIA PIGMENTS, MINNESOTA PIGMENTS,
WHITEHOUSE PIGMENTS, PRESIDENT PIGMENTS, SOVEREIGN PIGMENTS, FREEHOLD PIGMENTS, PATENT PIGMENTS, TITLE PIGMENTS, REDMAN PIGMENTS, PIRATE PIGMENTS, THUNDERBIRD PIGMENTS, MATHESON PIGMENTS, KESWICK PIGMENTS, JARDINE PIGMENTS, CALUMET PIGMENTS, CONGRESS PIGMENTS, DEPARTMENT PIGMENTS, PRIKAZ PIGMENTS, FEDERATION PIGMENTS, BUREAU PIGMENTS, COUNTY PIGMENTS, SHASTA PIGMENTS, BATTLE CREEK PIGMENTS, DEMOCRAT MOUNTAIN PIGMENTS, BAY PIGMENTS, BEAR PIGMENTS, BARE PIGMENTS, NATIVE PIGMENTS, ARMAN PIGMENTS, AMD&CSI, IMMI, HU/MOUNTAIN, ARMAN MINES MINISTRY OF NATURAL RESOURCES, THE ARMAN MINES MINISTRY OF MINERAL RESOURCES FEDERATION, THE ARMAN LOST HUMAN USE REMEDIATION AND RESTORATION TRUSTS, THE ARMAN MINERALS RESOURCE DEFENSE COUNCIL, THE GUYS OF JUSTICE, THE ARMAN MINES MINISTRY OF MINING & PRINCIPLES OF PIGMENTS; THE ARMAN MINES HAZARD AND REMEDIATION DIRECTORATE, SINCE 1979: HARD PRODUCTS MANUFACTURING, HARD HYDROPONICS AND ORGANICS, HARD NURSERY, HARD LANDSCAPING, HARD MAINTENANCE, HARD PEST CONTROL, THE ARMAN MINES DISASTER ASSISTANCE DIRECTORATE, AND THE ARMAN MINES HUMMINGBIRD INSTITUTE COLLEGE OF THE HUMMINGBIRD CENTER FOR HEALTH INSTITUTE FOR LIBERTY AND INDEPENDENCE. The "Arman Consolidated" lode mining patents, sole proprietor. Innocent landowner- operator, senior citizen, WWII veteran, retired Army Air Force non-commissioned officer - instrument flying / flight simulator pilot instruction. Founder of the Westchester Institute of Aeronautics, author of the FAA 10 hour instrument flyuing course for private pilots license developed from Colonel Duckworth's Air Force Instrument Flying School in 1948. The Westchester Institute was the first private school to offer flight simulator training. Pilots then trained in one of the Westchester Institutes two REPUBLIC Seabees amphibious aircraft. The Hummingbird Institute carries on the tradition of leadership and innovation in higher education pioneered by our founder Mr. T.W. Arman
The United States , like any other proprietor, can only exercise their rights to the mineral in private property, in subordination to such rules and regulations as the local sovereign may prescribe. Until such rules and regulations are established, the landed proprietor may successfully resist, in the courts of the state, all attempts at invasion of his property, whether by the direct action of the United States or by virtue of any pretended license under their authority. (Biddle Boggs v Merced Min. Co,,) 14 Cal. 279.)
It has been difficult for EPA to craft jurisdictional determination guidance that is both legal and usable for field staff. For instance, many streams have no U.S. Geological Survey gauging data. In response, OWOW is partnering with ORD on a method that will turn daily field observations into something that can serve as the basis for a defensible decision about the stream's ephemerality. Ideally, one would need several years of biotic observations before he/she could really determine whether a "significant nexus" exists. Since the Army Corps of Engineers cannot conduct 130,000 jurisdictional determination field visits, some intermediate approach is preferable.
Currently, significant nexus calls are settled at the regional level. The region has 15 days to look at the draft jurisdictional determination and most nexus calls are resolved within this period. If EPA still has issues, it follows the procedure for "Special Cases" established in the 1989 Memorandum of Agreement between EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers. If the Regional Administrator classifies a jurisdictional determination as a "special case," the Army Corps of Engineers must stand down for 10 days and defer the jurisdictional determination to EPA. There have been nine special case requests, six of which have been granted.
The following comments were from an interview with two staff attorneys of the Office of General Counsel (OGC), Water Law Office.
The OGC is very involved with litigation associated with Army Corps of Engineers' actions, especially the coordination of briefs between the two agencies. OGC helps the Army Corps of Engineers assess the legal ramifications of asserting jurisdiction in certain contexts in the post-Rapanos environment. Often, OGC advises the Army Corps of Engineers on whether more information is needed to support a position in a particular case.
Traditional navigable waterways evade easy definition; even the Supreme Court has been vague on the precise scope of traditional navigable waterways. Traditional navigable waterways have arisen in multiple legal contexts over the years, not just in CWA discussions. Many stakeholders find the Appendix D definition to be still too broad to adequately serve the jurisdictional issues created by the Rapanos decision. The OGC attorneys noted that there had been considerable discussion about the scope of traditional navigable waterways in Fall 2007. Traditional navigable waterways continue to be an issue in some "isolated (a)(3)" elevations.
Adjacency was not addressed by the Supreme Court. Although there are 1-2 sentences on it in the interim June 2007 guidance, it remains an imprecise term. However, OGC staff is working with various program offices to create a follow-up to the June 2007 Rapanos guidance where adjacency, among other things, will be addressed. The real debate involves the interpretation of one aspect of the "adjacency" definition: "neighboring." This "neighboring" term was a cornerstone of the debate in the Carabell case.
There have been close to 50 post-Rapanos cases: a pretty significant increase over prior case loads. Many cases have histories stretching back before the Rapanos ruling. The Circuit courts have been deciding, with varying opinions, whether the Kennedy, Scalia or both tests hold in establishing CWA jurisdiction.
Although Rapanos has "trumped everything," OGC is engaged in some other Section 404-related work.
The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals (Atlanta) recently held that only the Kennedy test applies, even though the plurality's test is easier to apply. The 7th and 9th Circuits, meanwhile, have used Kennedy's opinions. Both EPA and the Department of Justice hope that either the plurality or Kennedy tests can be applied in Section 404 jurisdictional decisions. Prior to Rapanos, the 5th Circuit had taken a The Environmental Protection Agency is waging an unprecedented battle to end U.S. farming as we know it. Wielding regulation like a scythe, on the books or proposed, EPA is trying single-handed to make farming obsolete.
How Current is This? The jurisdiction of said commission, in so far as the same affects mining carried on by the hydraulic process, shall extend to all such mining in the territory drained by the Sacramento and San Joaquin River systems in the State of California. Hydraulic mining, as defined in section 668 of this title, directly or indirectly injuring the navigability of said river systems, carried on in said territory other than as permitted under the provisions of this chapter is prohibited and declared unlawful.
How Current is This? (a) Prior to the granting of any license, permit, or other authorization or permission by any agency or instrumentality of the United States to any person for the transportation of spent nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive waste for interim, long-term, or permanent storage to or for the storage of such fuel or waste on any territory or possession of the United States, the Secretary of the Interior is directed to transmit to the Congress a detailed report on the proposed transportation or storage plan, and no such license, permit, or other authorization or permission may be granted nor may any such transportation or storage occur unless the proposed transportation or storage plan has been specifically authorized by Act of Congress: Provided, That the provisions of this section shall not apply to the cleanup and rehabilitation of Bikini and Enewetak Atolls. (b) For the purpose of this section the words “territory or possession” include the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands and any area not within the boundaries of the several States over which the United States claims or exercises sovereignty.
How Current is This? (a) Communication of classified information by Government officer or employee It shall be unlawful for any officer or employee of the United States or of any department or agency thereof, or of any corporation the stock of which is owned in whole or in major part by the United States or any department or agency thereof, to communicate in any manner or by any means, to any other person whom such officer or employee knows or has reason to believe to be an agent or representative of any foreign government, any information of a kind which shall have been classified by the President (or by the head of any such department, agency, or corporation with the approval of the President) as affecting the security of the United States, knowing or having reason to know that such information has been so classified, unless such officer or employee shall have been specifically authorized by the President, or by the head of the department, agency, or corporation by which this officer or employee is employed, to make such disclosure of such information. (b) Receipt of, or attempt to receive, by foreign agent or member of Communist organization, classified information It shall be unlawful for any agent or representative of any foreign government knowingly to obtain or receive, or attempt to obtain or receive, directly or indirectly, from any officer or employee of the United States or of any department or agency thereof or of any corporation the stock of which is owned in whole or in major part by the United States or any department or agency thereof, any information of a kind which shall have been classified by the President (or by the head of any such department, agency, or corporation with the approval of the President) as affecting the security of the United States, unless special authorization for such communication shall first have been obtained from the head of the department, agency, or corporation having custody of or control over such information. (c) Penalties for violation Any person who violates any provision of this section shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000, or imprisonment for not more than ten years, or by both such fine and such imprisonment, and shall, moreover, be thereafter ineligible to hold any office, or place of honor, profit, or trust created by the Constitution or laws of the United States. (d) Limitation period Any person may be prosecuted, tried, and punished for any violation of this section at any time within ten years after the commission of such offense, notwithstanding the provisions of any other statute of limitations: Provided, That if at the time of the commission of the offense such person is an officer or employee of the United States or of any department or agency thereof, or of any corporation the stock of which is owned in whole or in major part by the United States or any department or agency thereof, such person may be prosecuted, tried, and punished for any violation of this section at any time within ten years after such person has ceased to be employed as such officer or employee. (e) Forfeiture of property (1) Any person convicted of a violation of this section shall forfeit to the United States irrespective of any provision of State law— (A) any property constituting, or derived from, any proceeds the person obtained, directly or indirectly, as the result of such violation; and (B) any of the person's property used, or intended to be used, in any manner or part, to commit, or to facilitate the commission of, such violation. (2) The court, in imposing sentence on a defendant for a conviction of a violation of this section, shall order that the defendant forfeit to the United States all property described in paragraph (1). (3) Except as provided in paragraph (4), the provisions of subsections (b), (c), and (e) through (p) of section 853 of title 21 shall apply to— (A) property subject to forfeiture under this subsection; (B) any seizure or disposition of such property; and (C) any administrative or judicial proceeding in relation to such property, if not inconsistent with this subsection. (4) Notwithstanding section 524 (c) of title 28 , there shall be deposited in the Crime Victims Fund established under section 10601 of title 42 all amounts from the forfeiture of property under this subsection remaining after the payment of expenses for forfeiture and sale authorized by law. (5) As used in this subsection, the term “State” means any State of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, and any territory or possession of the United States.
(19) The term “pollution” means the man-made or man-induced alteration of the chemical, physical, biological, and radiological integrity of water.
Upon the recommendation of the Secretary of the Interior, with the approval of the President, after sixty days' notice thereof, published in two papers of general circulation in the State or Territory wherein any national forest is situated, and near the said national forest, any public lands embraced within the limits of any such forest which, after due examination by personal inspection of a competent person appointed for that purpose by the Secretary of the Interior, shall be found better adapted for mining or for agricultural purposes than for forest usage, may be restored to the public domain. And any mineral lands in any national forest which have been or which may be shown to be such, and subject to entry under the existing mining laws of the United States and the rules and regulations applying thereto, shall continue to be subject to such location and entry, notwithstanding any provisions contained in sections 473 to 478 , 479 to 482 and 551 of this title.
How Current is This? All homestead entries which have been canceled or relinquished, or are invalid solely because of the erroneous allowance of such entries after the withdrawal of lands for national-forest purposes, may be reinstated or allowed to remain intact, but in the case of entries canceled prior to March 3, 1911, applications for reinstatement must have been filed in the proper local land office prior to July 1, 1912.
How Current is This? Inasmuch as small areas of land chiefly valuable for agriculture may of necessity or by inadvertence be included in tracts acquired under this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture may, in his discretion, and he is authorized, upon application or otherwise, to examine and ascertain the location and extent of such areas as in his opinion may be occupied for agricultural purposes without injury to the forests or to stream flow and which are not needed for public purposes, and may list and describe the same by metes and bounds, or otherwise, and offer them for sale as homesteads at their true value, to be fixed by him, to actual settlers, in tracts not exceeding eighty acres, in area, under such rules and regulations as he may prescribe; and in case of such sale the jurisdiction over the lands sold shall, ipso facto, revert to the State in which the lands sold lie. And no right, title, interest, or claim in or to any lands acquired under this Act, or the waters thereon, or the products, resources, or use thereof after such lands shall have been so acquired, shall be initiated or perfected, except as in this section provided.
How Current is This? As a condition to the extending of any benefits under this chapter to any lands not owned or controlled by the United States or any of its agencies, the Secretary of Agriculture may, insofar as he may deem necessary for the purposes of this chapter, require— (1) The enactment and reasonable safeguards for the enforcement of State and local laws imposing suitable permanent restrictions on the use of such lands and otherwise providing for the prevention of soil erosion; (2) Agreements or covenants as to the permanent use of such lands; and (3) Contributions in money, services, materials, or otherwise, to any operations conferring such benefits.
How Current is This? (a) Purposes enumerated It is hereby declared to be the policy of this chapter also to secure, and the purposes of this chapter shall also include, (1) preservation and improvement of soil and water quality and related resources; (2) promotion of the economic use and conservation of land; (3) diminution of exploitation and wasteful and unscientific use of national soil resources; (4) the protection of rivers and harbors against the results of soil erosion in aid of maintaining the navigability of waters and water courses and in aid of flood control; (5) reestablishment, at as rapid a rate as the Secretary of Agriculture determines to be practicable and in the general public interest, of the ratio between the purchasing power of the net income per person on farms and that of the income per person not on farms that prevailed during the five-year period August 1909–July 1914, inclusive, as determined from statistics available in the United States Department of Agriculture, and the maintenance of such ratio; (6) prevention and abatement of agricultural-related pollution,  and (7) the promotion of energy and water conservation through dry land farming. The powers conferred under this section and sections 590h , 590i , and 590j to 590n of this title shall be used to assist voluntary action calculated to effectuate the purposes specified in this section. Such powers shall not be used to discourage the production of supplies of foods and fibers sufficient to maintain normal domestic human consumption as determined by the Secretary from the records of domestic human consumption in the years 1920 to 1929, inclusive, taking into consideration increased population, quantities of any commodity that were forced into domestic consumption by decline in exports during such period, current trends in domestic consumption and exports of particular commodities, and the quantities of substitutes available for domestic consumption within any general class of food commodities. In carrying out the purposes of this section due regard shall be given to the maintenance of a continuous and stable supply of agricultural commodities adequate to meet consumer demand at prices fair to both producers and consumers.
• The Domestic Minerals Program Extension Act of 1953 states that each department and agency of the Federal Government charged with responsibilities concerning the discovery, development, production, and acquisition of strategic or critical minerals and metals shall undertake to decrease further, and to eliminate where possible, the dependency of the United States on overseas sources of supply of each such material.
• The Mining and Minerals Policy Act of 1970 declares that it is the continuing policy of the Federal Government to foster and encourage private enterprise in the development of a stable domestic minerals industry and the orderly and economic development of domestic mineral resources. This act includes all minerals, including sand and gravel, geothermal, coal, and oil and gas.
• The Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 reiterates that the 1970 Mining and Minerals Policy Act shall be implemented and directs that public lands be managed in a manner which recognizes the Nation's need for domestic sources of minerals and other resources.
• The National Materials and Minerals Policy, Research and Development Act of 1980 requires the Secretary • The Energy Policy Act of 2005 encourages energy efficiency and conservation; promotes alternative and renewable energy sources; reduces dependence on foreign sources of energy; increases domestic production; modernizes the electrical grid; and encourages the expansion of nuclear energy.
How Current is This? Except as otherwise provided, all valuable mineral deposits in lands belonging to the United States, both surveyed and unsurveyed, shall be free and open to exploration and purchase, and the lands in which they are found to occupation and purchase, by citizens of the United States and those who have declared their intention to become such, under regulations prescribed by law, and according to the local customs or rules of miners in the several mining districts, so far as the same are applicable and not inconsistent with the laws of the United States.
How Current is This? The President is authorized to establish additional land districts, and to appoint the necessary officers under existing laws, wherever he may deem the same necessary for the public convenience in executing the provisions of sections 21 , 22 to 24 , 26 to 28 , 29 , 30 , 33 to 48 , 50 to 52 , 71 to 76 of this title and section 661 of title 43 .
How Current is This? Nothing contained in sections 21 , 22 to 24 , 26 to 28 , 29 , 30 , 33 to 48 , 50 to 52 , 71 to 76 of this title and section 661 of title 43 shall be construed to impair in any way, rights or interests in mining property acquired under laws in force prior to July 9, 1870; nor to affect the provisions of the act entitled “An act granting to A. Sutro the right-of-way and other privileges to aid in the construction of a draining and exploring tunnel to the Comstock lode, in the State of Nevada”, approved July 25, 1866.
How Current is This? Whenever, by priority of possession, rights to the use of water for mining, agricultural, manufacturing, or other purposes have vested and accrued, and the same are recognized and acknowledged by the local customs, laws, and the decisions of courts, the possessors and owners of such vested rights shall be maintained and protected in the same; and the right-of-way for the construction of ditches and canals for the purposes herein specified is acknowledged and confirmed; but whenever any person, in the construction of any ditch or canal, injures or damages the possession of any settler on the public domain, the party committing such injury or damage shall be liable to the party injured for such injury or damage.
How Current is This? No possessory action between persons, in any court of the United States, for the recovery of any mining title, or for damages to any such title, shall be affected by the fact that the paramount title to the land in which such mines lie is in the United States; but each case shall be adjudged by the law of possession.
How Current is This? (a) The Congress finds that— (1) the availability of materials is essential for national security, economic well-being, and industrial production; (2) the availability of materials is affected by the stability of foreign sources of essential industrial materials, instability of materials markets, international competition and demand for materials, the need for energy and materials conservation, and the enhancement of environmental quality; (3) extraction, production, processing, use, recycling, and disposal of materials are closely linked with national concerns for energy and the environment; (4) the United States is strongly interdependent with other nations through international trade in materials and other products; (5) technological innovation and research and development are important factors which contribute to the availability and use of materials; (6) the United States lacks a coherent national materials policy and a coordinated program to assure the availability of materials critical for national economic well-being, national defense, and industrial production, including interstate commerce and foreign trade; and (7) notwithstanding the enactment of section 21a of this title, the United States does not have a coherent national materials and minerals policy. (b) As used in this chapter, the term “materials” means substances, including minerals, of current or potential use that will be needed to supply the industrial, military, and essential civilian needs of the United States in the production of goods or services, including those which are primarily imported or for which there is a prospect of shortages or uncertain supply, or which present opportunities in terms of new physical properties, use, recycling, disposal or substitution, with the exclusion of food and of energy fuels used as such.
How Current is This? (a) The Secretary may enter into a contract providing for the payment or recovery of an appropriate share of the costs of a project under his responsibility with a Federal Project Repayment District or other political subdivision of a State prior to the construction, operation, improvement, or financing of such project. The Federal Project Repayment District shall include lands and improvements which receive identifiable benefits from the construction or operation of such project. Such districts shall be established in accordance with State law, shall have specific boundaries which may be changed from time to time based upon further evaluations of benefits, and shall have the power to recover benefits through any cost-recovery approach that is consistent with State law and satisfies the applicable cost-recovery requirement under subsection (b) of this section. (b) Prior to execution of an agreement pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, the Secretary shall require and approve a study from the State or political subdivision demonstrating that the revenues to be derived from a contract under this section, or an agreement with a Federal Project Repayment District, will be sufficient to equal or exceed the cost recovery requirements over the term of repayment required by Federal law.
FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT (CLEAN WATER ACT)
33 U.S.C. §§ 1251-1387, October 18, 1972, as amended 1973-1983, 1987, 1988, 1990-1992, 1994, 1995 and 1996.
It is the policy of Congress to recognize the primary responsibilities and rights of states to prevent, reduce and eliminate pollution. Congress also intends that the states manage the wastewater treatment works construction grants program and implement the discharge permit programs under the Act. The federal government will support research and provide technical services and financial aid to state and interstate agencies and municipalities. Congress emphasized that the authority of each state to allocate quantities of water within its jurisdiction are not superseded, abrogated or otherwise impaired by the Act.
Administration of the Act. Several sections of the Act are devoted to its administration, to the creation of a Water Pollution Control Advisory Board, to employee protection, to federal procurement, to administrative review and procedure, and to reports to Congress. Citizen suits are permitted under the guidelines and procedures set forth in § 1365. The Act provides further that states, their political subdivisions and interstate agencies are not preempted from adopting or enforcing standards, limitations or requirements as long as they are no less stringent than their federal counterparts. Under § 1377, EPA is authorized to treat Indian tribes as states for purposes of water quality standards and numerous other provisions of the Act. §§ 1361-1377.
Appropriations Authorized. Numerous sections of the Act provide for the authorization of funds to be appropriated for programs and requirements established by the Act. §§ 1254-1258, 1262-1270, 1287-1289, 1324, 1325, 1329, 1330, 1345, 1376 and 1387.
DEMAND FOR EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAW AS A. SUTRO, PIERSON B. READING, WILLIAM MAGEE, AND CHARLES CAMDEN
Final Listing Decision: Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)
The Tenth Circuit noted, “We are well aware that NRD assessment is a costly
proposition. . . . Still, given the AG's original multi-billion dollar claim against GE and ACF, a
few million dollars seems not so significant a cost to take advantage of CERCLA’s rebuttable
presumption of NRDs, especially where the reasonable costs of assessment are recoverable from
In fact, perhaps at least part of the reason NRDs have not taken off originates in the uphill
battle of sustaining an NRD case without the benefit of this presumption.204 The Tenth Circuit
cast the challenge in the following manner:
Without any CERCLA-based NRD assessment to rely on, see 43 C.F.R. Part 11, the State
undertook the arduous task of proving as an initial matter natural resources injury outside
the intended scope of a comprehensive, CERCLA-mandated remediation. The State also
confronted the problem of restrictions which both CERCLA and the NRTA [New
Mexico’s “Natural Resources Trustee Act”205] impose upon the measure of damages even
supposing some redressable injury remains.206
Although following the NRD regulations may present significant hurdles of their own,207
if the other circuits follow the Tenth Circuit’s reasoning, it may be virtually impossible to
recover without the power of the presumption. In effect, whether or not the trustee enjoys the
presumption may defacto become determinative in the face of otherwise speculative damages.
4. Valuation Pitfalls
The Tenth Circuit decision shows the modern-day vitality of the preference for
restoration in lieu of money damages, and is consistent with the D.C. Circuit’s holding in Ohio v.
DOI that Congress preferred “restoration costs as the measure of recovery in natural resource
damage cases.”208 Trustees that favor restoration projects and substitute resources for those that
were damaged also create pathways to settlement with the responsible parties. This may, in part,
explain the success of the New Jersey approach discussed in Part IV. In addition, the Tenth
Circuit’s opinion sheds light on several valuation pitfalls trustees would be advised to avoid.
EPA's Debarment Program officially began in 1982 in response to Congressional oversight hearings that revealed Government-wide inadequacies in the management of Federal contracts and assistance with regard to waste, fraud, abuse and poor performance. On the basis of those hearings, and subsequent task force studies conducted by the President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency (PCIE), the Office of Management and Budget developed a comprehensive Government-wide debarment and suspension system for all Federal contracts, assistance, loans and benefits extended by Executive-Branch agencies.
EPA, as an Executive Branch agency, is part of that Government-wide system. In addition to its discretionary authority to debar pursuant the above, it also has mandatory debarment authority under Section 306 of the Clean Air Act, and Section 508 of the Clean Water Act.
As a result of the historical development of the Agency, these various debarment authorities were, in 1982, located in three locations. The statutory debarment was initially administered by various offices, but eventually was delegated to the Office of Enforcement (OE). Procurement debarment was administered by the then, Procurement and Contracts Management Division, while assistance debarment was administered by the Grants Administration Division.
In 1982, the Office of Administration and Resource Management (OARM) consolidated all EPA discretionary procurement and assistance debarment authority into the Grants Administration Division. In the early 1990s, the Agency further consolidated its debarment authority when OARM assumed the responsibilities for statutory debarment from OE. Today, all EPA discretionary and statutory debarment authority is delegated to the Assistant Administrator for OARM and carried out by the Office of Grants and Debarment (OGD).
The EPA Debarring Official is the Agency's national program manager. As such the EPA Debarring Official establishes the Agency's debarment policy, and is the decision official for all suspension and debarment actions before the Agency.
The Suspension and Debarment Division (SDD) interacts with EPA program offices, the Office of the Inspector General, Department of Justice, and with Federal, state and local agencies, to develop matters for consideration by the EPA Debarring Official.
PETITION FOR CHANGE OF NAME, WATERS DECLARED NONNAVIGABLE: BUENA VENTURA RIVER FROM KESWICK DAM TO REDBLUFF DAM
How Current is This? The review, revision, and adoption or promulgation of revised or new water quality standards pursuant to section 303(c) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act [ 33 U.S.C. 1313 (c) ] shall be completed by the date three years after December 29, 1981. No grant shall be made under title II of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act [ 33 U.S.C. 1281 et seq.] after such date until water quality standards are reviewed and revised pursuant to section 303 (c) , except where the State has in good faith submitted such revised water quality standards and the Administrator has not acted to approve or disapprove such submission within one hundred and twenty days of receipt.
How Current is This? (a) Definitions For purposes of this section: (1) The term “standard of performance” means a standard for the control of the discharge of pollutants which reflects the greatest degree of effluent reduction which the Administrator determines to be achievable through application of the best available demonstrated control technology, processes, operating methods, or other alternatives, including, where practicable, a standard permitting no discharge of pollutants. (2) The term “new source” means any source, the construction of which is commenced after the publication of proposed regulations prescribing a standard of performance under this section which will be applicable to such source, if such standard is thereafter promulgated in accordance with this section. (3) The term “source” means any building, structure, facility, or installation from which there is or may be the discharge of pollutants. (4) The term “owner or operator” means any person who owns, leases, operates, controls, or supervises a source. (5) The term “construction” means any placement, assembly, or installation of facilities or equipment (including contractual obligations to purchase such facilities or equipment) at the premises where such equipment will be used, including preparation work at such premises.
THE TERM "OLD SOURCE" IS SELF EXPLANATORY
Thomas Jefferson authored the Kentucky Resolve of 1798, accompanied by Madison's Virginia Resolve, which was almost identical (See William J. Watkins, Jr., Reclaiming the American Revolution: The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions and Their Legacy). Section One of Jefferson's Kentucky Resolve reads as follows:
Resolved, that the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principles of unlimited submission to their General Government; but that by compact under the style and title of a Constitution For the United States and of amendments thereto, they constituted a General Government for special purposes, delegated to that Government certain definite powers, reserving each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self Government; and that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force . . . . That the Government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that as in all other cases of compact among parties having no common Judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well as of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress.
Madison's Virginia Resolve, in turn, declared that “in case of deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of other powers, not granted by the said compact [i.e., the Constitution], the States who are parties thereto, have the right and are duty bound, to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and liberties appertaining to them.”
With Jefferson's election as president, the Sedition Act ended at midnight on March 3, 1801, the moment Jefferson became president. Upon assuming the office, Jefferson ended all ongoing prosecutions and pardoned those who had been convicted under the Sedition Act.
South Carolina's nullification of the Tariff of Abominations in 1832 was not even the second example of the principle of nullification being implemented. Far from it. After President Jefferson enacted a trade embargo in response to British theft of American ships and the kidnapping of American sailors, New England legislatures nullified the embargo act by quoting Jefferson himself. For example, on February 5, 1809, the Massachusetts legislature declared that the embargo was “not legally binding on the citizens of the state” and denounced the law as “unjust, oppressive, and unconstitutional” (See James J. Kilpatrick, The Sovereign States). All of the New England states (where the shipping industry was concentrated), plus Delaware, officially nullified the embargo act.
When the War of 1812 broke out (also the work of Henry Clay as much as anyone), the New England Federalists essentially seceded from the union by not participating in the war. Their political vehicle was nullification. As stated by the Connecticut state assembly:
[I]t must not be forgotten that the state of Connecticut is a FREE SOVEREIGN and INDEPENDENT State; that the United States are a confederated and not a consolidated Republic. The Governor of this State is under a high and solemn obligation, ‘to maintain the lawful rights and privileges thereof, as a sovereign, free and independent State,' as he is ‘to support the Constitution of the United States,' and the obligation to support the latter imposes an additional obligation to support the former. The building cannot stand, if the pillars upon which it rests, are impaired or destroyed.
Lesser known though were the writings by those opposed to the new Constitution. In these pamphlets the writers expressed their fears over shortcomings in how the Constitution was written. These were known as the Anti-Federalist Papers.
Today we are living in the nightmare scenario that the Anti-Federalists warned us about -- the concentration of power in the hands of a few and the subsequent bypassing or outright ignoring of the limits on power mandated in the Constitution.
The Inspector General report said that failure to document agency activities is a violation of EPA policy and federal law, which require the preparation and preservation of “adequate and proper” records of agency functions, decisions and transactions.
AIG has published their quarterly earnings.
They are finally making money now. Everyone should be happy about that, even those that were against the bailout, via AIG :
Second quarter 2010 adjusted net income was $1.3 billion (compared to $1.1 billion in the second quarter of 2009), including operating income of $2.2 billion from continuing insurance operations, Mortgage Guaranty operating income of $226 million, $604 million in income from the Asia life insurance operating segment (principally American International Assurance Company, Ltd. (AIA)), and fair value gains on Maiden Lane III of $358 million, partially offset by interest and amortization on the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (FRBNY) Credit Facility and third party debt, invested asset impairment charges and other net restructuring and legal settlement charges, and a decrease in the net deferred tax asset. More good news is that adjusted net income has stabilized. The bad news is that it is way insufficient to repay the government what it is owed.
The total outstanding debt and equity assistance given by the government is $132.1 billion. Of that amount, the amount requiring repayment from AIG to taxpayers is $101.2 billion. The difference between the $132.1 billion in government assistance outstanding and the $101.2 billion debt and equity balance requiring repayment is attributable to the $30.9 billion outstanding on the Maiden Lane II and III loans as of June 30, 2010.
Recap of the amount outstanding, via AIG :
Debt: Federal Reserve Bank of New York (FRBNY) initially provided AIG with a revolving credit facility of $85 billion. The current outstanding balance of $26.5 billion at June 30, 2010 includes accumulated interest and fees. Accumulated interest does not reduce the available balance of the revolving credit facility. EQUITY: U.S. Dept. of Treasury TARP Shares were issued to pay down the FRBNY Revolving Credit Facility. These shares were later exchanged for TARP Series E noncumulative preferred shares. Unpaid dividends on the series D shares were added to the liquidation preference of the Series E shares. As of June 30 2010, the balance outstanding on the series E shares was $41.6 billion. EQUITY: Preferred Interests in AIA and ALICO Held by FRBNY: In December 2009, AIG transferred to the FRBNY preferred equity interests in newly-formed special purpose vehicles (SPVs) in exchange for a $25 billion reduction of the balance outstanding and the maximum credit available under the FRBNY Credit Facility. As of June 30, 2010, the equity balance outstanding was $25.6 billion. The debt to equity swaps that the FRBNY has done has hidden the true nature of the problem. Looking at strictly the current earnings and ignoring the restructuring plans, it will be next to impossible for the taxpayers to be paid back with a return above inflation. AIG probably will be able to eventually payoff the 26.5 Million. Their quarterly earnings are at roughly 1BB which means it would take approximately 7 years for the taxpayers to get repaid with a 6% interest rate if all of their earnings were diverted into debt repayment. If only half of their Earnings go to debt repayment, then it will take approximately 15 years.
If we take all earnings and plug back into debt reduction, in seven years we have a company which is approximately worth 56 Billion if we have a discount rate of 10% with a 2% growth rate. The taxpayers aren't getting paid back this way.
As of today we are owed 26.5 in debt and 75 Billion in equity
The 55 Billion that is still owed the taxpayers is almost exactly equal to what the company is worth at the end of seven years. However, the assumption which is being made is that the pieces that are being sold off will not materially be affecting earnings. That assumption is highly unrealistic.
So from the companies own financial statements, it should be clear that AIG will begin paying back the money which it is owed. However, that the taxpayer gets paid in full out of this seven headed beast is a pipe dream.
Three or four years down the road we will hear that the AIG rescue was effective and the taxpayer received all the money owed. Don`t buy it.
The debt will likely be repaid. The equity will likely never get even half paid down. But since it is equity, it doesn`t have to. It was an accounting sleight of hand .
The federal government is seeking response costs for cleaning up contaminated sediments in the waterways. Iron Mountain Mines roadways and storm sewers could not be considered a single CERCLA facility along with the waterway because they “are reasonably or naturally divided into multiple parts or functional units.”
CERCLA Recovery; August 03, 2010 -- The Ninth Circuit has struck a bid to hold companies liable for anticipated cleanup costs citing failure to hold the same companies liable for costs already incurred. Characterizing the case as a question of first instance, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals on Monday affirmed a lower court's ruling
OLD WORLD MIX - MINERALS & METALS, PAINTS, STAINS & DYES, CATALYSTS & NANOSTUFF
PAHOMAKI FERTILIZER ADDS IMMI MINERALS SLOW RELEASE ESSENTIAL MICRONUTRIENTS
SULFUR COATED IBDU/UREA & ARMAN MIX OFFERED FOR NURSERYMANS SPECIALTY BLEND
HUMATE RICH CORN GLUTEN MICROBIAL INNOCULANT FOR HU/MOUNTAIN COMPOST
ARMAN MINES MINISTRY PLEDGES BILLION LBS. IRON MOUNTAIN MINERALS RESTORATION
PIPESTONE PIGMENT CO. OFFERS 72% GYPSUM 22% IRON OXIDES NATURAL IRON MOUNTAIN COLOR FOR CEMENT , CONTACT BY FAX MR. T.W. ARMAN, PRICES AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE.
We are continuingly being injured and delayed by incompetent agencies and factors of the federal executive and judicial branches, environmentalism is religion for atheists and non-scientists. The Obama administration has ordered EPA to regulate "climate change"
As the Washington Post tells us, the Obama administration is comprised of "true believers."
CITIZENS & PEOPLES CLASS ACTION TO RESTORE THE SWAMPS IN NEW YORK, SACRAMENTO, AND WASHINGTON D.C.
We conclude that failure to obtain written consent and in the absence of harm or injury and without QA or QAPP is arbitrary and capricious and is punishable by nonupled EPCRA 313/ RCRA7002(a)(1)(A)(B),(a)(2)7003(a) § 6972. Citizen suits, section III violations (a)(1)(A)&(a)(1)(B)&(2)(2) against the Administrator where there is alleged a failure of the Administrator to perform any
act or duty under this chapter which is not discretionary with the Administrator.
In any action under subsection (a)(1)(A) of this section in a court of the United States, any person may intervene as a matter of right.,
178. (d) Intervention
In any action under this section the Administrator, if not a party, may intervene as a matter of right.
179. The administrator is a party in this matter.
(f) Other rights preserved
180. Nothing in this section shall restrict any right which any person (or class of persons) may
have under any statute or common law to seek enforcement of any standard or requirement relating
to the management of solid waste or hazardous waste, or to seek any other relief (including relief
against the Administrator or a State agency).
181. (under RCRA, 42 U.S.C. Sec. § 6972(c), suit may be brought against the Administrator
immediately after notice is given provided the action alleges violation of the Hazardous Waste
Management provisions, 42 U.S.C. Sec§. 6912 et seq., while under 33 U.S.C. Sec. § 1365(b)(2),
FWPCA citizen suits may be brought against the Administrator immediately after giving notice
when a violation of National Toxic Waste Standards is alleged under 33 U.S.C. Secs. §1316 and §
§ 6979b. Law enforcement authority
182. With respect to violations of the criminal provisions of this chapter, and on the basis of a
showing of need, the Attorney General of the United States shall deputize qualified employees of
the Office of the Warden of the Forest for the equal protection of the petitioner and these defendants
and properties, and to serve as special deputy United States marshals in criminal investigations
with respect to violations of the criminal provisions of this chapter.
The decision of the United States or the Administrator
to enter into or not to enter into such Consent Decree, covenant or agreement shall not constitute
a final agency action subject to judicial review under this chapter or chapter 7 of title 5.
We therefore now reject, as unsound in principle and unworkable in practice, a rule of immunity
from federal regulation that turns on a judicial appraisal of [whether] a [469 U.S. 528, 547] particular
governmental function [is "integral" or "traditional."]. Any such rule leads to inconsistent
results at the same time that it disserves principles of democratic self-governance, and it breeds inconsistency
precisely because it is divorced from those principles. If there are to be limits on the
Federal Government's power to interfere with state functions - as undoubtedly there are - we must
look elsewhere to find them. We accordingly return to the underlying issue that confronted this
Court in National League of Cities - the manner in which the Constitution insulates States from the
reach of Congress' power under the Commerce Clause. GARCIA v. SAN ANTONIO METRO.
TRANSIT AUTH., 469 U.S. 528 (1985)
187. …the Constitution offers no guidance about where the frontier between state and federal
power lies. In short, we have no license to employ freestanding conceptions of state sovereignty
when measuring congressional authority under the Commerce Clause. When we look for the
States'" residuary and inviolable sovereignty," The Federalist No. 39, p. 285 (B. Wright ed. 1961)
(J. Madison), in the shape of the constitutional scheme rather than in predetermined notions of sovereign
power, a different measure of state sovereignty emerges. Apart from the limitation on federal
authority inherent in the delegated nature of Congress' Article I powers, the principal means
chosen by the Framers to ensure the role of the States in the federal system lies in the structure of
the Federal Government itself. It is no novelty to observe that the composition of the Federal [469
U.S. 528, 551] Government was designed in large part to protect the States from overreaching by
Congress. 11 The Framers thus gave the States a role in the selection both of the Executive and the
Legislative Branches of the Federal Government. The States were vested with indirect influence
over the House of Representatives and the Presidency by their control of electoral qualifications
and their role in Presidential elections. U.S. Const., Art. I, 2, and Art. II, 1. They were given more
direct influence in the Senate, where each State received equal representation and each Senator was
to be selected by the legislature of his State. Art. I, 3. The significance attached to the States' equal
representation in the Senate is underscored by the prohibition of any constitutional amendment divesting
a State of equal representation without the State's consent. Art. V.
188. The extent to which the structure of the Federal Government itself was relied on to insulate
the interests of the States is evident in the views of the Framers. James Madison explained that the
Federal Government "will partake sufficiently of the spirit [of the States], to be disinclined to invade
the rights of the individual States, or the prerogatives of their governments." The Federalist
No. 46, p. 332 (B. Wright ed. 1961). Similarly, James Wilson observed that "it was a favorite object
in the Convention" to provide for the security of the States against federal encroachment and
that the structure of the Federal Government itself served that end. 2 Elliot, at 438-439. Madison
placed particular reliance on the equal representation of the States in the Senate, which he saw as
"at once a constitutional recognition of the portion of sovereignty remaining in the individual [469
U.S. 528, 552] States, and an instrument for preserving that residuary sovereignty." The Federalist
No. 62, p. 408 (B. Wright ed. 1961). He further noted that "the residuary sovereignty of the States
[is] implied and secured by that principle of representation in one branch of the [federal] legislature"
(emphasis added). The Federalist No. 43, p. 315 (B. Wright ed. 1961). See also McCulloch v.
Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316, 435 (1819). In short, the Framers chose to rely on a federal system in
which special restraints on federal power over the States inhered principally in the workings of the
National Government itself, rather than in discrete limitations on the objects of federal authority.
State sovereign interests, then, are more properly protected by procedural safeguards inherent in the
structure of the federal system than by judicially created limitations on federal power.
NCP CLEAN WATER ACT NULLIFICATION OF SOVERIEGNTY BY GOVERNMENT FRAUD, FALSE CLAIMS, RECKLESS NEGLIGENT ENDANGERMENT WITH MALICE AND ULTERIOR MOTIVES AND DERELICTION OF DUTIES TO THE PUBLIC TRUST AND THE PUBLIC HEALTH TO PERPETUATE AN INSIDIOUS PARASITIC BUREAUCRACY BY ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION AND SLAVERY - DODECUPLED damages and civil penalties under CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. § 9604(e)(5)(B). FRAUD AND FALSE CLAIMS of $450,000 per day SINCE SEPTEMBER 4TH, 1982.
Our government... teaches the whole people by its example. If the government becomes the lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.
The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in the insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding.
Those who won our independence... valued liberty as an end and as a means. They believed liberty to be the secret of happiness and courage to be the secret of liberty.
Experience teaches us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficent.
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
In the frank expression of conflicting opinions lies the greatest promise of wisdom in governmental action.
Fear of serious injury alone cannot justify oppression of free speech and assembly. Men feared witches and burnt women. It is the function of speech to free men from the bondage of irrational fears.
Those who won our independence... valued liberty as an end and as a means. They believed liberty to be the secret of happiness and courage to be the secret of liberty.
To declare that in the administration of criminal law the end justifies the means is to declare that the Government may commit crimes in order to secure a conviction of a private citizen, and would bring terrible retribution.
We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both.
The most important political office is that of private citizen.
That the existing unemployment is, in large part, of the gross inequality in the distribution of wealth and income which giant corporations have fostered; that by the control which few have exerted through giant corporations, individual initiative and effort are being paralyzed, creative power impaired and human happiness lessened; that the true prosperity of our past came not from big business, but through the courage, the energy and the resourcefulness of small men; that only by releasing from corporate control the faculties of the unknown many, only by reopening to them the opportunities for leadership, can confidence in our future be restored and the existing misery overcome; and that only through participation by the many in the responsibilities and determinations of business, can America secure the moral and intellectual development which is essential to the maintenance of liberty.- Justice Louis D. Brandeis
These injuries are a continuing negligent imminent hazard with felonious unlawful detainer and breach of warrantee for patent title from President Abraham Lincoln, May 1st, 1862; and breach of patent title from Governor Newton Booth, recorded January 4th, 1875 .
matters for which the court may wish to take judicial notice
Rancho Buena Ventura (also called "San Buena Ventura") was a 26,632-acre (107.78 km 2 ) Mexican land grant in present day Shasta County, California , given in 1844 by Governor Manuel Micheltorena to Major Pierson B. Reading (1816–1868). [ 1 ] The land grant is named for the former name of the adjacent Sacramento River , Buena Ventura, which meant good fortune in Spanish. The grant extended some nineteen miles on the west side of the Sacramento River, from Cottonwood Creek on the south to Salt Creek on the north, and extended approximately three miles west of the Sacramento River the length of the grant. [ 2 ] The grant encompassed present day towns of Anderson , Cottonwood and Redding . [ 3 ] This was the northernmost land grant in California. [ 2 ] Redding, however, was not named for Major Reading; it was named for B. B. Redding, a land agent for the Central Pacific Railroad . [ 2 ]
Governor Micheltorena and John Sutter , his alcalde granted Rancho Buena Ventura to Pierson B. Reading (listed as Pearson B. Reading in the land case documents) in 1844. Reading, who was at that time working for John Sutter at Sutter's Fort in Sacramento as a clerk and trapper, visited the land grant but did not move onto it. He stocked the land with cattle and built a house for his overseer but it was burned down by natives in 1846. [ 2 ] Reading was active in promoting the Bear Flag Revolt of 1846. After serving as an artillery lieutenant then as paymaster at the rank of major in a battalion led by John C. Frémont , he built a permanent adobe dwelling and settled on his grant in 1847. [ 2 ] He became the second (after Lansford Hastings ) permanent settler of what was to become Shasta County. [ 2 ]
With the cession of California to the United States following the Mexican-American War , the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo provided that the land grants would be honored. As required by the Land Act of 1851, a claim for Rancho Buena Ventura was filed with the Public Land Commission in 1852. [ 4 ] The US appealed the claim on the grounds that Reading was not a Mexican citizen. [ 5 ] In 1854 Reading went to Washington, D.C. for the hearing before the US Supreme Court on his land grant claims. There he met and married Fanny Wallace Washington. The claim was upheld by the Supreme Court [ 5 ] and the grant was patented to Pearson B. Reading in 1857. [ 6 ]
The first land sale was made in 1853. By 1866, over 5,000 acres (20.2 km 2 ) of the land grant was sold. In 1866, Reading borrowed from the estate of his longtime friend Samuel J. Hensley, using the remaining rancho lands as collateral. After Reading's unexpected death in 1868, the remaining rancho lands were sold to James Ben Ali Haggin at public auction in 1871 to satisfy the unpaid debt. [ 7 ] After the auction, the only remaining land from the original land grant was the one square mile (640 acres (2.6 km 2 )) Washington section purchased by Fanny Washington's mother.
William Magee was the U.S. deputy surveyor for Shasta County . Charles Camden was the most successful miner in Shasta County, he bought and sold much of the land at the Rancho, 800 acres for Military Scrip Warrants ( U.S. Patent Title), They were partners. Under their rights of Pre-emption The U.S. Land Office at Marysville granted 360 acres of land on Iron Mountain in lieu of land in the Rancho Buena Ventura. Mining was insignificant until James Sallee discovered a seam of sliver in the ore and the Lost Confidence Mine was recorded April 8, 1880.
JULY, 2010: MR. T.W. ARMAN & IRON MOUNTAIN MINE COMMUNITY NOTICE OF LODGING CRIMINAL TRESPASS ON PRESIDENT OBAMA - GOVERNOR SCHWARZENEGGER - ATTORNEY GENERALS BROWN AND HOLDER - CONGRESS - CALIFORNIA - EPA - DOJ - CVRWQCB - CAL FED - CAL DTSC - UNITED STATES EASTERN DISTRICT COURT SACRAMENTO - NATURAL RESOURCE TRUSTEES - HOMELAND SECURITY - DEPT. OF INTERIOR - BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT - CH2MHILL - AISLIC - IRON MOUNTAIN OPERATIONS, LLC - AIG CONSULTANTS - AIG - BAYER CROP SCIENCES - FEMA - ASTRAZENECA - SANOFI/AVENTIS - JARDINE MATHESON; FRAUDS, THIEVES, KILLERS, JOINT AND SEVERAL TRESSPASSERS, PIRATES, ENSLAVERS, STARVATION! EJECTMENT:
SHASTA COUNTY SHERIFF - POSSE FOR TRESPASS OF TREASON AND MISPRISON OF FELONY WRIT OF POSSESSION UPON ADVERSE CLAIMS TRESSPASSERS OF PATENT TITLE; EXTORTION; FRAUD; DECEIT; MALICIOUS AND ABUSIVE NEGLIGENT ENDANGERMENT; ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION AND SLAVERY; CONSPIRACY; EVIL UPON THE PUBLIC TRUST; APEX LAW AGGRAVATED LARCENY OF MINING COMPANY SECURITY & COLLATERAL LR10-20762
INNOCENT PRISONERS OF THE EPA - DOJ SINCE 1983
FREE MR. T.W. ARMAN & IRON MOUNTAIN MINES, INC.
Administrative - EPA Order 3120.1b Scientific misconduct, fabrication or knowing falsification of data, research procedures, or data analysis is an offense which can result in
immediate removal/ Suspension and Debarment / Civil Sanctions / Fines / Local AUSA Must Decide If Fraud Meets Criminal Prosecution Threshold / Culpability / Harm
Fraud - 18 USC 1341 - 1343 , PROCEDURAL FRAUD, MEASUREMENT FRAUD
False Statements - 18 USC 1001
Conspiracy - 18 USC 371
Concealment of a felony - 18 USC 4 (misprision)
False Claims - 18 USC 287
Obstruction of Justice - 18 USC 1505 Consequences Ferro incumbere.
Penalties up to 20 years imprisonment for destroying, concealing or falsifying records with intent to obstruct or impede a legal investigation
"Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force. Like fire; it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." - George Washington
MILITIA & POSSE - LOCKE & LODE!
$336,706,450 + $93,590,773 = $430,297,223 PAYABLE TO BEGIN SUPERFUND REMEDIATION
* 9 = $3,872,675,007 NONUPLED DAMAGES
SAN FRANCISCO -- American International Group said Monday that it has repaid almost $4 billion to the U.S. government as the company's aircraft-leasing business was able to finance itself in the debt market.
AIG said it got $3.95 billion from International Lease Finance Corp. The insurer used that money to pay off some of its revolving credit facility with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York .
The payment will reduce what AIG owes to the New York Fed to just over $15 billion, not including accumulated interest and fees. The total principal and interest owed on the credit facility is about $21 billion.
It's the largest single cash payment the insurer has made on the facility, AIG added. The payment also reduces the size of the New York Fed credit line available to AIG from about $34 billion to roughly $30 billion.
TWO DECIMAL POINTS AND EXPONENTIAL DAMAGES; HUNDREDS OF THE ARMANSHIRE
An appeals court refused to reconsider a decision compelling the Federal Reserve Board to release documents identifying banks that might have failed without the U.S. government bailout.
The full U.S. Court of Appeals in New York, in a docket entry dated Aug. 20, denied a May 4 request by the Fed to review a three-judge panel's unanimous March 19 decision requiring the agency to release records of the unprecedented $2 trillion U.S. loan program begun primarily after the 2008 collapse of Bear Stearns Cos.
Unless the court stays its decision, the Fed will have seven days to disclose the documents. In the event of a stay, the central bank and the Clearing House Association LLC, an organization of 20 commercial banks that joined the Fed in defense of the lawsuit, will have 90 days to petition the Supreme Court to consider their appeal. The Clearing House has already said it will ask the high court to rule on the case.
“We are reviewing the decision and considering our options for appeal,” David Skidmore , a Fed spokesman, said.
At issue are 231 “term sheets” documenting Fed loans to financial firms during 2008. The records, which include the banks' names, the amounts borrowed and the collateral posted in return, were originally requested by late Bloomberg News reporter Mark Pittman through the Freedom of Information Act, which allows citizens access to government papers.
The March appeals court ruling upheld a decision of a lower-court judge in Manhattan who in August 2009 ordered that the information be released.
The Fed argued in the case, which was brought by Bloomberg LP, the parent of Bloomberg News, that disclosure of the documents threatens to stigmatize borrowers and cause them “severe and irreparable competitive injury,” discouraging banks in distress from seeking help. The appeals court panel rejected that argument.
“The decision is of exceptional importance,” the Fed's lawyers wrote in a legal brief on May 4 in which they asked the circuit court to reconsider the decision. “The real-world consequence of the panel's decision will be serious, perhaps irreparable harm to the institutional borrowers whose information will be revealed.”
The 157-year-old New York-based Clearing House Payments Co., which processes transactions among banks, is owned by its 20 members. They include JPMorgan Chase & Co. , Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc., Bank of New York Mellon Corp., Deutsche Bank AG, HSBC Holdings Plc, PNC Financial Services Group Inc. , UBS AG, U.S. Bancorp and Wells Fargo & Co.
Clearing House Action
The Clearing House Association, a lobbying group with the same members, joined the lawsuit in September 2009, after the initial ruling against the central bank in federal court in Manhattan.
Iya Davidson, a spokeswoman for the Clearing House, didn't return calls seeking comment.
The amount the Fed and the U.S. government lent, spent and guaranteed to stem the recession and rescue the banking system peaked in March 2009 at $12.8 trillion, most of it following the September 2008 bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.
Fox News, a unit of New York-based News Corp., also sued the Fed to force the release of loan documents for transactions in 2008 and 2009.
The New York Times Co. , the Associated Press and Dow Jones & Co., publisher of the Wall Street Journal, are among media companies that have signed up as friends of the court in support of Bloomberg.
Argument for Disclosure
“The public interest in disclosure in this case could hardly be greater,” the friends of the court said in their letter. Despite the Fed's “massive outlay, the public knows little about who has received these funds or the terms of their loans. Without this information, it is impossible to monitor the Board's actions, and FOIA's core purpose is defeated.”
The case is Bloomberg LP v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 09-04083, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (New York).
By James Regan and Tracy Zheng
SYDNEY/SHANGHAI | Tue Aug 24, 2010 7:13am EDT
SYDNEY/SHANGHAI (Reuters) - China's visceral response to the $39 billion BHP Billiton bid for Potash Corp -- talk abounds of a possible Chinese white knight -- show it fears a concentration of pricing power in the big miner more than the current Russia n-Canadian marketing cartel.
It must seem like deja vu to China after it struggled to stop BHP gaining control of Rio Tinto and almost half its supply of imported iron ore, then got into a bruising battle with the company over the pricing of the steel-making raw material.
Though BHP is likely ditch the cartel for a market-based pricing system if its hostile bid for the Canadian fertilizer producer is successful, some China-based buyers worry the changes will be to their detriment.
"As one of the biggest importers of potash, China does not want to see more concentration in this market. The same could apply to India which relies on imports for 100% of its potash consumption," said Emilien Mazo, an analyst with Louis Dreyfus Commodities.
These two countries may have good reasons to worry about such a deal, he said.
Potash buyers currently face a duopoly dominated by two companies; Canpotex, an export organization owned by Potash and two smaller producers, Agrium Inc and Mosaic Co; and Belarusion Potash Co (BPC) which sells material produced in Russia and Belarus.
Collectively, Canpotex and BPC control 70 percent of global potash exports, in the same way Brazil's Vale, and BHP and Rio control around two thirds of the seaborne iron ore business.
While some buyers welcome idea that shaking up this cozy cartel could lower prices, China's fertilizer users aren't convinced.
"If BHP, which is infamous for monopoly, buys Potash Corp., it will make the pricing system worse for consumers," an official with a Chinese compound fertilizer maker said.
He added his company would also not be happy if China's Sinochem bought Potash, as the state-owned company was involved throughout the entire industry chain and therefore a competitor.
Chinese government officials were not available for comment.
An official at the China Inorganic Salts Industry Association, a non-government group covering the potash fertilizer industry, said the association could not comment on the issue until industry representatives met to agree on their position.
"The potash market is a little like iron ore. The Chinese want bargaining power. In a free market they worry their influence will be diluted versus the situation now where they and one or two others set the price from the buyers' side," a Shanghai-based commodities trader said.
"You also have to remember that from the Chinese perspective, they have had a difficult experience with BHP over the years -- the shift in iron ore pricing and the loss of price participation in copper concentrate deals," he added.
The split with tradition was rancorous, heightened by the conviction of a number of Rio Tinto's iron ore team in China for industrial espionage.
Chinese buyers, under the auspices of the China Iron and Steel Association, finally acquiesced earlier this year, effectively ending benchmark pricing in the key steel making raw material.
But the breakup of the Canadian-Russian potash cartel and market pricing may win favor with other buyers and with regulators.
"We think it would be a good thing if BHP went to market pricing," said Ian Ballantyne, chief executive of Canegrowers Association of Australia, whose members use more potash than any other fertilizer.
"We have seen an escalation in the price of fertilizers, particularly potash, brought about for no other reason than there is a cartel in place," Ballantyne said. "Fertilizer demand and fertilizer supply has been in our view manipulated by a range of parties for some time."
An Australian analyst, who was not authorized to speak on the record, said: "No one likes a cartel and even if someone does complain to the regulator, the benefit of a breakdown of the duopoly should trump competition fears."
Analysts familiar with BHP's strategy behind its hostile bid for Potash told Reuters BHP had already mapped out plans to push a spot market index for potash, wielding Potash's direct 18 percent control of the global market in the growth markets of China and India, traditionally buyers on annual terms.
"Wherever possible we do transform markets into pricing mechanisms where we get today's cost every day," Chief Executive Marius Kloppers said last week.
(Writing by Nick Trevethan; Editing by Michael Urquhart )
Aug. 23, 2010
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- The Federal Reserve has lost an appeal it lodged at the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals that may force the central bank to disclose documents regarding borrowing from its discount window and other emergency lending programs. The loss means that the Fed now only has the U.S. Supreme Court as a venue to appeal. A Fed spokesman said it's reviewing the decision.
MELBOURNE (Reuters) - BHP Billiton, the world's biggest miner, reported a 47 percent rise in second-half profit on Wednesday, in line with analysts' forecasts, after a sharp rebound in iron ore and copper prices.
PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE
2755. The board shall adopt regulations that establish state policy for the reclamation of mined lands in accordance with Article 1 (commencing with Section 2710) of this chapter and pursuant to Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code. 2756. State policy shall apply to the conduct of surface mining operations and shall include, but shall not be limited to, measures to be employed by lead agencies in specifying grading, backfilling, resoiling, revegetation, soil compaction, and other reclamation requirements, and for soil erosion control, water quality and watershed control, waste disposal, and flood control. 2757. The state policy adopted by the board shall be based upon a study of the factors that significantly affect the present and future condition of mined lands, and shall be used as standards by lead agencies in preparing specific and general plans, including the conservation and land use elements of the general plan and zoning ordinances. The state policy shall not include aspects of regulating surface mining operations which are solely of local concern, and not of statewide or regional concern, as determined by the board, such as, but not limited to, hours of operation, noise, dust, fencing, and purely aesthetic considerations. 2758. Such policy shall include objectives and criteria for all of the following: (a) Determining the lead agency pursuant to the provisions of Section 2771. (b) The orderly evaluation of reclamation plans. (c) Determining the circumstances, if any, under which the approval of a proposed surface mining operation by a lead agency need not be conditioned on a guarantee assuring reclamation of the mined lands. 2759. The state policy shall be continuously reviewed and may be revised. During the formulation or revision of the policy, the board shall consult with, and carefully evaluate the recommendations of, the director, any district technical advisory committees, concerned federal, state, and local agencies, educational institutions, civic and public interest organizations, and private organizations and individuals. 2760. The board shall not adopt or revise the state policy, unless a public hearing is first held respecting its adoption or revision. At least 30 days prior to the hearing, the board shall give notice of the hearing by publication pursuant to Section 6061 of the Government Code. 2761. (a) On or before January 1, 1977, and, as a minimum, after the completion of each decennial census, the Office of Planning and Research shall identify portions of the following areas within the state that are urbanized or are subject to urban expansion or other irreversible land uses that would preclude mineral extraction: (1) Standard metropolitan statistical areas and other areas for which information is readily available. (2) Other areas as may be requested by the board. (b) In accordance with a time schedule, and based upon guidelines adopted by the board, the State Geologist shall classify, on the basis solely of geologic factors, and without regard to existing land use and land ownership, the areas identified by the Office of Planning and Research, any area for which classification has been requested by a petition which has been accepted by the board, or any other areas as may be specified by the board, as one of the following: (1) An area that contains mineral deposits and is not of regional or statewide significance. (2) An area that contains mineral deposits and is of regional or statewide significance. (3) Areas containing mineral deposits, the significance of which requires further evaluation. (c) The State Geologist shall require the petitioner to pay the reasonable costs of classifying an area for which classification has been requested by the petitioner. (d) The State Geologist shall transmit the information to the board for incorporation into the state policy and for transmittal to lead agencies. 2762. (a) Within 12 months of receiving the mineral information described in Section 2761, and also within 12 months of the designation of an area of statewide or regional significance within its jurisdiction, every lead agency shall, in accordance with state policy, establish mineral resource management policies to be incorporated in its general plan which will: (1) Recognize mineral information classified by the State Geologist and transmitted by the board. (2) Assist in the management of land use which affect areas of statewide and regional significance. (3) Emphasize the conservation and development of identified mineral deposits. (b) Every lead agency shall submit proposed mineral resource management policies to the board for review and comment prior to adoption. (c) Any subsequent amendment of the mineral resource management policy previously reviewed by the board shall also require review and comment by the board. (d) If any area is classified by the State Geologist as an area described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 2761, and the lead agency either has designated that area in its general plan as having important minerals to be protected pursuant to subdivision (a), or otherwise has not yet acted pursuant to subdivision (a), then prior to permitting a use which would threaten the potential to extract minerals in that area, the lead agency shall prepare, in conjunction with preparing any environmental document required by Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000), or in any event if no such document is required, a statement specifying its reasons for permitting the proposed use, and shall forward a copy to the State Geologist and the board for review. If the proposed use is subject to the requirements of Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000), the lead agency shall comply with the public review requirements of that division. Otherwise, the lead agency shall provide public notice of the availability of its statement by all of the following: (1) Publishing the notice at least one time in a newspaper of general circulation in the area affected by the proposed use. (2) Directly mailing the notice to owners of property within one-half mile of the parcel or parcels on which the proposed use is located as those owners are shown on the latest equalized assessment role. The public review period shall not be less than 60 days from the date of the notice and shall include at least one public hearing. The lead agency shall evaluate comments received and shall prepare a written response. The written response shall describe the disposition of the major issues raised. In particular, when the lead agency's position on the proposed use is at variance with recommendations and objections raised in the comments, the written response shall address in detail why specific comments and suggestions were not accepted. (e) Prior to permitting a use which would threaten the potential to extract minerals in an area classified by the State Geologist as an area described in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of Section 2761, the lead agency may cause to be prepared an evaluation of the area in order to ascertain the significance of the mineral deposit located therein. The results of such evaluation shall be transmitted to the State Geologist and the board. 2763. (a) If an area is designated by the board as an area of regional significance, and the lead agency either has designated that area in its general plan as having important minerals to be protected pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 2762, or otherwise has not yet acted pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 2762, then prior to permitting a use which would threaten the potential to extract minerals in that area, the lead agency shall prepare a statement specifying its reasons for permitting the proposed use, in accordance with the requirements set forth in subdivision (d) of Section 2762. Lead agency land use decisions involving areas designated as being of regional significance shall be in accordance with the lead agency's mineral resource management policies and shall also, in balancing mineral values against alternative land uses, consider the importance of these minerals to their market region as a whole and not just their importance to the lead agency's area of jurisdiction. (b) If an area is designated by the board as an area of statewide significance, and the lead agency either has designated that area in its general plan as having important minerals to be protected pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 2762, or otherwise has not yet acted pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 2762, then prior to permitting a use which would threaten the potential to extract minerals in that area, the lead agency shall prepare a statement specifying its reasons for permitting the proposed use, in accordance with the requirements set forth in subdivision (d) of Section 2762. Lead agency land use decisions involving areas designated as being of statewide significance shall be in accordance with the lead agency's mineral resource management policies and shall also, in balancing mineral values against alternative land uses, consider the importance of the mineral resources to the state and nation as a whole. 2764. (a) Upon the request of an operator or other interested person and payment by the requesting person of the estimated cost of processing the request, the lead agency having jurisdiction shall amend its general plan, or prepare a new specific plan or amend any applicable specific plan, that shall, with respect to the continuation of the existing surface mining operation for which the request is made, plan for future land uses in the vicinity of, and access routes serving, the surface mining operation in light of the importance of the minerals to their market region as a whole, and not just their importance to the lead agency's area of jurisdiction. (b) In adopting amendments to the general plan, or adopting or amending a specific plan, the lead agency shall make written legislative findings as to whether the future land uses and particular access routes will be compatible or incompatible with the continuation of the surface mining operation, and if they are found to be incompatible, the findings shall include a statement of the reasons why they are to be provided for, notwithstanding the importance of the minerals to their market region as a whole or their previous designation by the board, as the case may be. (c) Any evaluation of a mineral deposit prepared by a lead agency for the purpose of carrying out this section shall be transmitted to the State Geologist and the board. (d) The procedure provided for in this section shall not be undertaken in any area that has been designated pursuant to Article 6 (commencing with Section 2790) if mineral resource management policies have been established and incorporated in the lead agency's general plan in conformance with Article 4 (commencing with Section 2755).
PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE
2770. (a) Except as provided in this section, no person shall conduct surface mining operations unless a permit is obtained from, a reclamation plan has been submitted to and approved by, and financial assurances for reclamation have been approved by, the lead agency for the operation pursuant to this article. (b) Any person with an existing surface mining operation who has vested rights pursuant to Section 2776 and who does not have an approved reclamation plan shall submit a reclamation plan to the lead agency not later than March 31, 1988. If a reclamation plan application is not on file by March 31, 1988, the continuation of the surface mining operation is prohibited until a reclamation plan is submitted to the lead agency. For purposes of this subdivision, reclamation plans may consist of all or the appropriate sections of any plans or written agreements previously approved by the lead agency or another agency, together with any additional documents needed to substantially meet the requirements of Sections 2772 and 2773 and the lead agency surface mining ordinance adopted pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 2774, provided that all documents which together were proposed to serve as the reclamation plan are submitted for approval to the lead agency in accordance with this chapter. (c) If a person with an existing surface mining operation has received lead agency approval of its financial assurances for reclamation prior to January 1, 1991, the lead agency shall administratively review those existing financial assurances in accordance with subdivision (d) prior to January 1, 1992. The review of existing financial assurances shall not be considered a project for purposes of Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000). Any person with an existing surface mining operation which does not have financial assurances that received lead agency approval prior to January 1, 1991, shall submit financial assurances for reclamation for review in accordance with subdivision (d). (d) The lead agency's review of reclamation plans submitted pursuant to subdivision (b) or of financial assurances pursuant to subdivision (c) is limited to whether the plan or the financial assurances substantially meet the applicable requirements of Sections 2772, 2773, and 2773.1, and the lead agency surface mining ordinance adopted pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 2774, but, in any event, the lead agency shall require that financial assurances for reclamation be sufficient to perform reclamation of lands remaining disturbed. Reclamation plans or financial assurances determined to substantially meet these requirements shall be approved by the lead agency for purposes of this chapter. Reclamation plans or financial assurances determined not to substantially meet these requirements shall be returned to the operator within 60 days. The operator has 60 days to revise the plan or financial assurances to address identified deficiencies, at which time the revised plan or financial assurances shall be returned to the lead agency for review and approval. Except as specified in subdivision (e) or (i), unless the operator has filed on or before July 1, 1990, an appeal pursuant to subdivision (e) with regard to nonapproval of the reclamation plan, or has filed on or before January 1, 1994, an appeal pursuant to subdivision (e) with regard to nonapproval of financial assurances, and that appeal is pending before the board, the continuation of the surface mining operation is prohibited until a reclamation plan and financial assurances for reclamation are approved by the lead agency. (e) Any person who, based on the evidence of the record, can substantiate that a lead agency has either (1) failed to act according to due process or has relied on considerations not related to the specific applicable requirements of Sections 2772, 2773, and 2773.1, and the lead agency surface mining ordinance adopted pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 2774, in reaching a decision to deny approval of a reclamation plan or financial assurances for reclamation, (2) failed to act within a reasonable time of receipt of a completed application, or (3) failed to review and approve reclamation plans or financial assurances as required by subdivisions (c) and (d), may appeal that action or inaction to the board. (f) The board may decline to hear an appeal if it determines that the appeal raises no substantial issues related to the lead agency's review pursuant to this section. (g) Appeals that the board does not decline to hear shall be scheduled and heard at a public hearing within 45 days of the filing of the appeal, or any longer period as may be mutually agreed upon by the board and the person filing the appeal. In hearing an appeal, the board shall only determine whether the reclamation plan or the financial assurances substantially meet the applicable requirements of Sections 2772, 2773, 2773.1, and the lead agency surface mining ordinance adopted pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 2774. A reclamation plan or financial assurances determined to meet these requirements shall be approved. A reclamation plan or financial assurances determined not to meet these requirements shall be returned to the person filing the appeal with a notice of deficiencies, who shall be granted, once only, a period of 30 days, or a longer period mutually agreed upon by the operator and the board, to correct the noted deficiencies and submit the revised reclamation plan or the revised financial assurances to the lead agency for review and approval. (h) (1) Within 90 days of a surface mining operation becoming idle, as defined in Section 2727.1, the operator shall submit to the lead agency for review and approval, an interim management plan. The review and approval of an interim management plan shall not be considered a project for purposes of Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000). The approved interim management plan shall be considered an amendment to the surface mining operation's approved reclamation plan, for purposes of this chapter. The interim management plan shall provide measures the operator will implement to maintain the site in compliance with this chapter, including, but not limited to, all permit conditions. (2) The interim management plan may remain in effect for a period not to exceed five years, at which time the lead agency shall do one of the following: (A) Renew the interim management plan for another period not to exceed five years, if the lead agency finds that the surface mining operator has complied fully with the interim management plan. (B) Require the surface mining operator to commence reclamation in accordance with its approved reclamation plan. (3) The financial assurances required by Section 2773.1 shall remain in effect during the period that the surface mining operation is idle. If the surface mining operation is still idle after the expiration of its interim management plan, the surface mining operation shall commence reclamation in accordance with its approved reclamation plan. (4) Within 60 days of the receipt of the interim management plan, or a longer period mutually agreed upon by the lead agency and the operator, the lead agency shall review and approve the plan in accordance with its ordinance adopted pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 2774, so long as the plan satisfies the requirements of this subdivision, and so notify the operator in writing. Otherwise, the lead agency shall notify the operator in writing of any deficiencies in the plan. The operator shall have 30 days, or a longer period mutually agreed upon by the operator and the lead agency, to submit a revised plan. (5) The lead agency shall approve or deny approval of the revised interim management plan within 60 days of receipt. If the lead agency denies approval of the revised interim management plan, the operator may appeal that action to the lead agency's governing body, which shall schedule a public hearing within 45 days of the filing of the appeal, or any longer period mutually agreed upon by the operator and the governing body. (6) Unless review of an interim management plan is pending before the lead agency, or an appeal is pending before the lead agency's governing body, a surface mining operation which remains idle for over one year after becoming idle as defined in Section 2727.1 without obtaining approval of an interim management plan shall be considered abandoned and the operator shall commence and complete reclamation in accordance with the approved reclamation plan. (i) Any enforcement action which may be brought against a surface mining operation for operating without an approved reclamation plan, financial assurance, or interim management plan, shall be held in abeyance pending review pursuant to subdivision (b), (c), (d), or (h) or the resolution of an appeal filed with the board pursuant to subdivision (e), or with a lead agency governing body pursuant to subdivision (h). 2770.5. Whenever surface mining operations are proposed in the 100-year flood plain for any stream, as shown in Zone A of Flood Insurance Rate Maps issued by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and within one mile, upstream or downstream, of any state highway bridge, the lead agency receiving the application for the issuance or renewal of a permit to conduct the surface mining operations shall notify the Department of Transportation that the application has been received. The Department of Transportation shall have a period of not more than 45 days to review and comment on the proposed surface mining operations with respect to any potential damage to the state highway bridge from the proposed surface mining operations. The lead agency shall not issue or renew the permit until the Department of Transportation has submitted its comments or until 45 days from the date the application for the permit was submitted, whichever occurs first. 2770.6. (a) Whenever surface mining operations are proposed within the boundaries of the San Gabriel Basin Water Quality Authority that may penetrate the groundwater, and whenever proposed reclamation activities may impact groundwater quality, the lead agency reviewing an application to conduct surface mining operations, or reviewing an application for the approval of a reclamation plan, shall notify and provide copies of the subject application to the appropriate California regional water quality control board, and any watermaster for the groundwater recharge basin. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the appropriate California regional water quality control board may impose an administrative fee on the applicant to cover its costs associated with the review of, and preparation of, comments on the subject application, as required pursuant to this section. (b) Each agency shall have 60 days to review and comment on the proposed surface mining operation described in subdivision (a) and the adoption of any reclamation plan therefor. Each agency shall comment on the existing groundwater quality and the potential impacts to water quality that may result from the mining operations and the proposed reclamation plan, and shall recommend methods and procedures to protect groundwater quality and prevent groundwater degradation. Each agency shall also comment on the proposed mining activities, including the conduct of excavation and backfilling operations in contact with groundwater, and the impact of any proposed alternative land uses on groundwater quality. When the proposed surface mining operations or reclamation plan will impact the groundwater, the lead agency shall not approve the reclamation plan without requiring actions to ensure the reasonable protection of the beneficial uses of groundwater and the prevention of nuisance. Each agency shall have 60 days to review and comment or until 60 days from the date of application, whichever occurs first. (c) This section applies to activities otherwise subject to this chapter conducted within the boundaries of the San Gabriel Basin Water Quality Authority. To the extent of any conflict between this section and any other provision of this chapter, this section shall prevail. 2771. Whenever a proposed or existing surface mining operation is within the jurisdiction of two or more public agencies, is a permitted use within the agencies, and is not separated by a natural or manmade barrier coinciding with the boundary of the agencies, the evaluation of the proposed or existing operation shall be made by the lead agency in accordance with the procedures adopted by the lead agency pursuant to Section 2774. If a question arises as to which public agency is the lead agency, any affected public agency, or the affected operator, may submit the matter to the board. The board shall notify in writing all affected public agencies and operators that the matter has been submitted, specifying a date for a public hearing. The board shall designate the public agency which shall serve as the lead agency, giving due consideration to the capability of the agency to fulfill adequately the requirements of this chapter and to an examination of which of the public agencies has principal permit responsibility. 2772. (a) The reclamation plan shall be filed with the lead agency, on a form provided by the lead agency, by any person who owns, leases, or otherwise controls or operates on all, or any portion of any, mined lands, and who plans to conduct surface mining operations on the lands. (b) All documentation for the reclamation plan shall be submitted by the lead agency to the department at one time. (c) The reclamation plan shall include all of the following information and documents: (1) The name and address of the surface mining operator and the names and addresses of any persons designated by the operator as an agent for the service of process. (2) The anticipated quantity and type of minerals for which the surface mining operation is to be conducted. (3) The proposed dates for the initiation and termination of surface mining operation. (4) The maximum anticipated depth of the surface mining operation. (5) The size and legal description of the lands that will be affected by the surface mining operation, a map that includes the boundaries and topographic details of the lands, a description of the general geology of the area, a detailed description of the geology of the area in which surface mining is to be conducted, the location of all streams, roads, railroads, and utility facilities within, or adjacent to, the lands, the location of all proposed access roads to be constructed in conducting the surface mining operation, and the names and addresses of the owners of all surface interests and mineral interests in the lands. (6) A description of, and a plan for, the type of surface mining to be employed, and a time schedule that will provide for the completion of surface mining on each segment of the mined lands so that reclamation can be initiated at the earliest possible time on those portions of the mined lands that will not be subject to further disturbance by the surface mining operation. (7) A description of the proposed use or potential uses of the mined lands after reclamation and evidence that all owners of a possessory interest in the land have been notified of the proposed use or potential uses. (8) A description of the manner in which reclamation, adequate for the proposed use or potential uses will be accomplished, including both of the following: (A) A description of the manner in which contaminants will be controlled, and mining waste will be disposed. (B) A description of the manner in which affected streambed channels and streambanks will be rehabilitated to a condition minimizing erosion and sedimentation will occur. (9) An assessment of the effect of implementation of the reclamation plan on future mining in the area. (10) A statement that the person submitting the reclamation plan accepts responsibility for reclaiming the mined lands in accordance with the reclamation plan. (11) Any other information which the lead agency may require by ordinance. (d) An item of information or a document required pursuant to subdivision (c) that has already been prepared as part of a permit application for the surface mining operation, or as part of an environmental document prepared for the project pursuant to Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000), may be included in the reclamation plan by reference, if that item of information or that document is attached to the reclamation plan when the lead agency submits the reclamation plan to the director for review. To the extent that the information or document referenced in the reclamation plan is used to meet the requirements of subdivision (c), the information or document shall become part of the reclamation plan and shall be subject to all other requirements of this article. (e) Nothing in this section is intended to limit or expand the department's authority or responsibility to review a document in accordance with Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000). 2772.5. (a) A reclamation plan by any person who owns, leases, or otherwise controls or operates on all, or any portion of any, mined lands within the boundaries of the San Gabriel Basin Water Quality Authority, and who plans to conduct surface mining operations on those lands, in addition to the information required pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 2772, shall include a description of any programs necessary to monitor the effects of mining and reclamation operations on air, water, and soil quality, on the surrounding area, backfill characteristics, geologic conditions, and slope stability, similar to the California Environmental Quality Act document for the reclamation project. (b) This section applies to activities otherwise subject to this chapter conducted within the boundaries of the San Gabriel Basin Water Quality Authority. To the extent of any conflict between this section and any other provision of this chapter, this section shall prevail. 2772.6. (a) In addition to meeting the requirements of Section 2773.1, the amount of financial assurances required of a surface mining operation within the boundaries of the San Gabriel/Basin Water Quality Authority for any one year shall be in an amount not less than that required to ensure reclamation of the disturbed areas is completed in accordance with the approved reclamation plan. (b) This section applies to activities otherwise subject to this chapter conducted within the boundaries of the San Gabriel Basin Water Quality Authority. To the extent of any conflict between this section and any other provision of this chapter, this section shall prevail. 2772.7. (a) A lead agency, upon approval of a reclamation plan or an amendment to a reclamation plan, shall record a "Notice of Reclamation Plan Approval" with the county recorder. The notice shall read: "Mining operations conducted on the hereinafter described real property are subject to a reclamation plan approved by the ____ (lead agency), a copy of which is on file with the ____." (b) In addition to the information required by subdivision (a), the notice shall also include the name of the owner of record of the mine operation, the name of the lead agency, and the acknowledged signature of the lead agency representative. 2773. (a) The reclamation plan shall be applicable to a specific piece of property or properties, shall be based upon the character of the surrounding area and such characteristics of the property as type of overburden, soil stability, topography, geology, climate, stream characteristics, and principal mineral commodities, and shall establish site-specific criteria for evaluating compliance with the approved reclamation plan, including topography, revegetation and sediment, and erosion control. (b) By January 1, 1992, the board shall adopt regulations specifying minimum, verifiable statewide reclamation standards. Subjects for which standards shall be set include, but shall not be limited to, the following: (1) Wildlife habitat. (2) Backfilling, regrading, slope stability, and recontouring. (3) Revegetation. (4) Drainage, diversion structures, waterways, and erosion control. (5) Prime and other agricultural land reclamation. (6) Building, structure, and equipment removal. (7) Stream protection. (8) Topsoil salvage, maintenance, and redistribution. (9) Tailing and mine waste management. These standards shall apply to each mining operation, but only to the extent that they are consistent with the planned or actual subsequent use or uses of the mining site. 2773.1. (a) Lead agencies shall require financial assurances of each surface mining operation to ensure reclamation is performed in accordance with the surface mining operation's approved reclamation plan, as follows: (1) Financial assurances may take the form of surety bonds executed by an admitted surety insurer, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 995.120 of the Code of Civil Procedure, irrevocable letters of credit, trust funds, or other forms of financial assurances specified by the board pursuant to subdivision (e), which the lead agency reasonably determines are adequate to perform reclamation in accordance with the surface mining operation's approved reclamation plan. (2) The financial assurances shall remain in effect for the duration of the surface mining operation and any additional period until reclamation is completed. (3) The amount of financial assurances required of a surface mining operation for any one year shall be adjusted annually to account for new lands disturbed by surface mining operations, inflation, and reclamation of lands accomplished in accordance with the approved reclamation plan. (4) The financial assurances shall be made payable to the lead agency and the department. Financial assurances that were approved by the lead agency prior to January 1, 1993, and were made payable to the State Geologist shall be considered payable to the department for purposes of this chapter. However, if a surface mining operation has received approval of its financial assurances from a public agency other than the lead agency, the lead agency shall deem those financial assurances adequate for purposes of this section, or shall credit them toward fulfillment of the financial assurances required by this section, if they are made payable to the public agency, the lead agency, and the department and otherwise meet the requirements of this section. In any event, if a lead agency and one or more public agencies exercise jurisdiction over a surface mining operation, the total amount of financial assurances required by the lead agency and the public agencies for any one year shall not exceed that amount which is necessary to perform reclamation of lands remaining disturbed. For purposes of this paragraph, a "public agency" may include a federal agency. (b) If the lead agency or the board, following a public hearing, determines that the operator is financially incapable of performing reclamation in accordance with its approved reclamation plan, or has abandoned its surface mining operation without commencing reclamation, either the lead agency or the director shall do all of the following: (1) Notify the operator by personal service or certified mail that the lead agency or the director intends to take appropriate action to forfeit the financial assurances and specify the reasons for so doing. (2) Allow the operator 60 days to commence or cause the commencement of reclamation in accordance with its approved reclamation plan and require that reclamation be completed within the time limits specified in the approved reclamation plan or some other time period mutually agreed upon by the lead agency or the director and the operator. (3) Proceed to take appropriate action to require forfeiture of the financial assurances if the operator does not substantially comply with paragraph (2). (4) Use the proceeds from the forfeited financial assurances to conduct and complete reclamation in accordance with the approved reclamation plan. In no event shall the financial assurances be used for any other purpose. The operator is responsible for the costs of conducting and completing reclamation in accordance with the approved reclamation plan which are in excess of the proceeds from the forfeited financial assurances. (c) Financial assurances shall no longer be required of a surface mining operation, and shall be released, upon written notification by the lead agency, which shall be forwarded to the operator and the director, that reclamation has been completed in accordance with the approved reclamation plan. If a mining operation is sold or ownership is transferred to another person, the existing financial assurances shall remain in force and shall not be released by the lead agency until new financial assurances are secured from the new owner and have been approved by the lead agency in accordance with Section 2770. (d) The lead agency shall have primary responsibility to seek forfeiture of financial assurances and to reclaim mine sites under subdivision (b). However, in cases where the board is not the lead agency pursuant to Section 2774.4, the director may act to seek forfeiture of financial assurances and reclaim mine sites pursuant to subdivision (b) only if both of the following occurs: (1) The financial incapability of the operator or the abandonment of the mining operation has come to the attention of the director. (2) The lead agency has been notified in writing by the director of the financial incapability of the operator or the abandonment of the mining operation for at least 15 days, and has not taken appropriate measures to seek forfeiture of the financial assurances and reclaim the mine site; and one of the following has occurred: (A) The lead agency has been notified in writing by the director that failure to take appropriate measures to seek forfeiture of the financial assurances or to reclaim the mine site shall result in actions being taken against the lead agency under Section 2774.4. (B) The director determines that there is a violation that amounts to an imminent and substantial endangerment to the public health, safety, or to the environment. (C) The lead agency notifies the director in writing that its good faith attempts to seek forfeiture of the financial assurances have not been successful. The director shall comply with subdivision (b) in seeking forfeiture of financial assurances and reclaiming mine sites. (e) The board may adopt regulations specifying financial assurance mechanisms other than surety bonds, irrevocable letters of credit, and trust funds, which the board determines are reasonably available and adequate to ensure reclamation pursuant to this chapter, but these mechanisms may not include financial tests, or surety bonds executed by one or more personal sureties. These mechanisms may include reclamation bond pool programs. (f) On or before March 1, 1993, the board shall adopt guidelines to implement this section. The guidelines are exempt from the requirements of Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code, and are not subject to review by the Office of Administrative Law. 2773.15. Notwithstanding Section 2773.1, a surety bond that was executed by any personal surety that was approved by the lead agency prior to February 13, 1998, to ensure that reclamation is performed in accordance with a reclamation plan approved by a lead agency prior to that date, may be utilized to satisfy the requirements of this chapter, if the amount of the financial assurance required to perform the approved reclamation plan, as amended or updated from time to time, does not change from the amount approved prior to February 13, 1998. 2773.2. The mineral owner and owner of the surface estate, if legally entitled to do so, shall allow access to the property on which the mining operation is located to any governmental agency or the agent of any company providing financial assurances in connection with the reclamation plan and expending those financial assurances for reclamation, in order that reclamation may be carried out by the governmental agency or company, in accordance with the reclamation plan. 2773.3. (a) In addition to other reclamation plan requirements of this chapter and regulations adopted by the board pursuant to this chapter, a lead agency may not approve a reclamation plan for a surface mining operation for gold, silver, copper, or other metallic minerals or financial assurances for the operation, if the operation is located on, or within one mile of, any Native American sacred site and is located in an area of special concern, unless both of the following criteria are met: (1) The reclamation plan requires that all excavations be backfilled and graded to do both of the following: (A) Achieve the approximate original contours of the mined lands prior to mining. (B) Grade all mined materials that are in excess of the materials that can be placed back into excavated areas, including, but not limited to, all overburden, spoil piles, and heap leach piles, over the project site to achieve the approximate original contours of the mined lands prior to mining. (2) The financial assurances are sufficient in amount to provide for the backfilling and grading required by paragraph (1). (b) For purposes of this section, the following terms have the following meaning: (1) "Native American sacred site" means a specific area that is identified by a federally recognized Indian Tribe, Rancheria or Mission Band of Indians, or by the Native American Heritage Commission, as sacred by virtue of its established historical or cultural significance to, or ceremonial use by, a Native American group, including, but not limited to, any area containing a prayer circle, shrine, petroglyph, or spirit break, or a path or area linking the circle, shrine, petroglyph, or spirit break with another circle, shrine, petroglyph, or spirit break. (2) "Area of special concern" means any area in the California desert that is designated as Class C or Class L lands or as an Area of Critical Environmental Concern under the California Desert Conservation Area Plan of 1980, as amended, by the United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, pursuant to Section 1781 of Title 43 of the United States Code. 2773.5. Section 2773.3 does not apply to either of the following: (a) Any surface mining operation in existence on January 1, 2003, for which the lead agency has issued final approval of a reclamation plan and the financial assurances prior to September 1, 2002. (b) Any amended reclamation plan or financial assurances that are necessary for the continued operation or expansion of a surface mining operation in existence on January 1, 2003, that otherwise satisfies the requirements of subdivision (a). 2774. (a) Every lead agency shall adopt ordinances in accordance with state policy that establish procedures for the review and approval of reclamation plans and financial assurances and the issuance of a permit to conduct surface mining operations, except that any lead agency without an active surface mining operation in its jurisdiction may defer adopting an implementing ordinance until the filing of a permit application. The ordinances shall establish procedures requiring at least one public hearing and shall be periodically reviewed by the lead agency and revised, as necessary, to ensure that the ordinances continue to be in accordance with state policy. (b) The lead agency shall conduct an inspection of a surface mining operation within six months of receipt by the lead agency of the surface mining operation's report submitted pursuant to Section 2207, solely to determine whether the surface mining operation is in compliance with this chapter. In no event shall a lead agency inspect a surface mining operation less than once in any calendar year. The lead agency may cause an inspection to be conducted by a state licensed geologist, state licensed civil engineer, state licensed landscape architect, or state licensed forester, who is experienced in land reclamation and who has not been employed by a surface mining operation within the jurisdiction of the lead agency in any capacity during the previous 12 months. All inspections shall be conducted using a form developed by the department and approved by the board that shall include the professional licensing and disciplinary information of the person who conducted the inspection. The operator shall be solely responsible for the reasonable cost of the inspection. The lead agency shall notify the director within 30 days of the date of completion of the inspection that the inspection has been conducted. The notice shall contain a statement regarding the surface mining operation's compliance with this chapter, shall include a copy of the completed inspection form, and shall specify which aspects of the surface mining operations, if any, are inconsistent with this chapter. If the surface mining operation has a review of its reclamation plan, financial assurances, or an interim management plan pending under subdivision (b), (c), (d), or (h) of Section 2770, or an appeal pending before the board or lead agency governing body under subdivision (e) or (h) of Section 2770, the notice shall so indicate. The lead agency shall forward to the operator a copy of the notice, a copy of the completed inspection form, and any supporting documentation, including, but not limited to, any inspection report prepared by the geologist, civil engineer, landscape architect, or forester, who conducted the inspection. (c) Prior to approving a surface mining operation's reclamation plan, financial assurances, including existing financial assurances reviewed by the lead agency pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 2770, or any amendments, the lead agency shall submit the plan, assurances, or amendments to the director for review. All documentation for that submission shall be submitted to the director at one time. When the lead agency submits a reclamation plan or plan amendments to the director for review, the lead agency shall also submit to the director, for use in reviewing the reclamation plan or plan amendments, information from any related document prepared, adopted, or certified pursuant to Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000), and shall submit any other pertinent information. The lead agency shall certify to the director that the reclamation plan is in compliance with the applicable requirements of this chapter and Article 9 (commencing with Section 3500) of Chapter 8 of Division 2 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations and the lead agency' s mining ordinance in effect at the time that the reclamation plan is submitted to the director for review. (d) (1) The director shall have 30 days from the date of receipt of a reclamation plan or plan amendments submitted pursuant to subdivision (c), and 45 days from the date of receipt of financial assurances submitted pursuant to subdivision (c), to prepare written comments, if the director so chooses. The lead agency shall evaluate any written comments received from the director relating to the reclamation plan, plan amendments, or financial assurances within a reasonable amount of time. (2) The lead agency shall prepare a written response to the director's comments describing the disposition of the major issues raised by the director's comments, and submit the lead agency's proposed response to the director at least 30 days prior to approval of the reclamation plan, plan amendment, or financial assurance. The lead agency's response to the director's comments shall describe whether the lead agency proposes to adopt the director's comments to the reclamation plan, plan amendment, or financial assurance. If the lead agency does not propose to adopt the director's comments, the lead agency shall specify, in detail, why the lead agency proposes not to adopt the comments. Copies of any written comments received and responses prepared by the lead agency shall be forwarded to the operator. The lead agency shall also give the director at least 30 days' notice of the time, place, and date of the hearing before the lead agency at which time the reclamation plan, plan amendment, or financial assurance is scheduled to be approved by the lead agency. If no hearing is required by this chapter, or by the local ordinance, of other state law, then the lead agency shall provide 30 days' notice to the director that it intends to approve the reclamation plan, plan amendment, or financial assurance. The lead agency shall send to the director its final response to the director's comments within 30 days following its approval of the reclamation plan, plan amendment, or financial assurance during which period the department retains all powers, duties, and authorities of this chapter. (3) To the extent that there is a conflict between the comments of a trustee agency or a responsible agency that are based on the agency's statutory or regulatory authority and the comments of other commenting agencies which are received by the lead agency pursuant to Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) regarding a reclamation plan or plan amendments, the lead agency shall consider only the comments of the trustee agency or responsible agency. (e) Lead agencies shall notify the director of the filing of an application for a permit to conduct surface mining operations within 30 days of an application being filed with the lead agency. By July 1, 1991, each lead agency shall submit to the director for every active or idle mining operation within its jurisdiction, a copy of the mining permit required pursuant to Section 2774, and any conditions or amendments to those permits. By July 1 of each subsequent year, the lead agency shall submit to the director for each active or idle mining operation a copy of any permit or reclamation plan amendments, as applicable, or a statement that there have been no changes during the previous year. Failure to file with the director the information required under this section shall be cause for action under Section 2774.4. 2774.1. (a) Except as provided in subdivision (i) of Section 2770, if the lead agency or the director determines, based upon an annual inspection pursuant to Section 2774, or otherwise confirmed by an inspection of the mining operation, that a surface mining operation is not in compliance with this chapter, the lead agency or the director may notify the operator of that violation by personal service or certified mail. If the violation extends beyond 30 days after the date of the lead agency's or the director's notification, the lead agency or the director may issue an order by personal service or certified mail requiring the operator to comply with this chapter or, if the operator does not have an approved reclamation plan or financial assurances, cease all further mining activities. (b) An order issued under subdivision (a) shall not take effect until the operator has been provided a hearing before the lead agency for orders issued by the lead agency, or board for orders issued by the director, concerning the alleged violation. Any order issued under subdivision (a) shall specify which aspects of the surface mine' s activities or operations are inconsistent with this chapter, shall specify a time for compliance which the lead agency or director determines is reasonable, taking into account the seriousness of the violation and any good faith efforts to comply with applicable requirements, and shall set a date for the hearing, which shall not be sooner than 30 days after the date of the order. (c) Any operator who violates or fails to comply with an order issued under subdivision (a) after the order's effective date, as provided in subdivision (b), or who fails to submit a report to the director or lead agency as required by Section 2207, shall be subject to an order by the lead agency or the director imposing an administrative penalty of not more than five thousand dollars ($5,000) per day, assessed from the original date of noncompliance with this chapter or Section 2207. The penalty may be imposed administratively by the lead agency or the director. In determining the amount of the administrative penalty, the lead agency or the director shall take into consideration the nature, circumstances, extent, and gravity of the violation or violations, any prior history of violations, the degree of culpability, economic savings, if any, resulting from the violation, and any other matters justice may require. Orders setting administrative penalties shall become effective upon issuance thereof and payment shall be made to the lead agency or the director within 30 days, unless the operator petitions the legislative body of the lead agency, the board, or the superior court for review as provided in Section 2774.2. Any order shall be served by personal service or by certified mail upon the operator. Penalties collected by the director shall be used for no purpose other than to cover the reasonable costs incurred by the director in implementing this chapter or Section 2207. (d) If the lead agency or the director determines that the surface mine is not in compliance with this chapter, so that the surface mine presents an imminent and substantial endangerment to the public health or the environment, the lead agency or the Attorney General, on behalf of the director, may seek an order from a court of competent jurisdiction enjoining that operation. (e) Upon a complaint by the director, the department, or the board, the Attorney General may bring an action to recover administrative penalties under this section, and penalties under Section 2207, in any court of competent jurisdiction in this state against any person violating any provision of this chapter or Section 2207, or any regulation adopted pursuant to this chapter or Section 2207. The Attorney General may bring such an action on his or her own initiative if, after examining the complaint and the evidence, he or she believes a violation has occurred. The Attorney General may also seek an order from a court of competent jurisdiction compelling the operator to comply with this chapter and Section 2207. (f) The lead agency has primary responsibility for enforcing this chapter and Section 2207. In cases where the board is not the lead agency pursuant to Section 2774.4, enforcement actions may be initiated by the director pursuant to this section only after the violation has come to the attention of the director and either of the following occurs: (1) The lead agency has been notified by the director in writing of the violation for at least 15 days, and has not taken appropriate enforcement action. (2) The director determines that there is a violation which amounts to an imminent and substantial endangerment to the public health or safety, or to the environment. The director shall comply with this section in initiating enforcement actions. (g) Remedies under this section are in addition to, and do not supersede or limit, any and all other remedies, civil or criminal. 2774.2. (a) Within 30 days of the issuance of an order setting administrative penalties under subdivision (c) of Section 2774.1, the operator may petition that legislative body of the lead agency, if the lead agency has issued the order, or the board for orders issued by the director, for review of the order. If the operator does not petition for review within the time limits set by this subdivision, the order setting administrative penalties shall not be subject to review by any court or agency. (b) The legislative body of the lead agency or the board shall notify the operator by personal service or certified mail whether it will review the order setting administrative penalties. In reviewing an order pursuant to this section, the record shall consist of the record before the lead agency or the director, and any other relevant evidence which, in the judgment of the legislative body or the board, should be considered to effectuate and implement the policies of this chapter. (c) The legislative body or the board may affirm, modify, or set aside, in whole or in part, by its own order, any order of the lead agency or the director setting administrative penalties reviewed by the legislative body or the board pursuant to this section. (d) Any order of the legislative body or the board issued under subdivision (c) shall become effective upon issuance thereof, unless the operator petitions the superior court for review as provided in subdivision (e). Any order shall be served by personal service or by certified mail upon the operator. Payment of any administrative penalty which is specified in an order issued under subdivision (c), shall be made to the lead agency or the director within 30 days of service of the order; however, the payment shall be held in an interest bearing impound account pending the resolution of a petition for review filed pursuant to subdivision (e). (e) Any operator aggrieved by an order of the legislative body or the board issued under subdivision (c) may obtain review of the order by filing in the superior court a petition for writ of mandate within 30 days following the issuance of the order. Any operator aggrieved by an order of a lead agency or the director setting administrative penalties under subdivision (c) of Section 2774.1, for which the legislative body or board denies review, may obtain review of the order in the superior court by filing in the court a petition for writ of mandate within 30 days following the denial of review. The provisions of Section 1094.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure shall govern judicial proceedings pursuant to this subdivision, except that in every case the court shall exercise its independent judgment. If the operator does not petition for a writ of mandate within the time limits set by this subdivision, an order of the board or the legislative body shall not be subject to review by any court or agency. 2774.3. The board shall review lead agency ordinances which establish permit and reclamation procedures to determine whether each ordinance is in accordance with state policy, and shall certify the ordinance as being in accordance with state policy if it adequately meets, or imposes requirements more stringent than, the California surface mining and reclamation policies and procedures established by the board pursuant to this chapter. 2774.4. (a) If the board finds that a lead agency either has (1) approved reclamation plans or financial assurances which are not consistent with this chapter, (2) failed to inspect or cause the inspection of surface mining operations as required by this chapter, (3) failed to seek forfeiture of financial assurances and to carry out reclamation of surface mining operations as required by this chapter, (4) failed to take appropriate enforcement actions as required by this chapter, (5) intentionally misrepresented the results of inspections required under this chapter, or (6) failed to submit information to the department as required by this chapter, the board shall exercise any of the powers of that lead agency under this chapter, except for permitting authority. (b) If, no sooner than three years after the board has taken action pursuant to subdivision (a), the board finds, after a public hearing, that a lead agency has corrected its deficiencies in implementing and enforcing this chapter, and the rules and regulations adopted pursuant to this chapter, the board shall restore to the lead agency the powers assumed by the board pursuant to subdivision (a). (c) Before taking any action pursuant to subdivision (a), the board shall first notify the lead agency of the identified deficiencies, and allow the lead agency 45 days to correct the deficiencies to the satisfaction of the board. If the lead agency has not corrected the deficiencies to the satisfaction of the board within the 45-day period, the board shall hold a public hearing within the lead agency's area of jurisdiction, upon a 45-day written notice given to the public in at least one newspaper of general circulation within the city or county, and directly mailed to the lead agency and to all surface mining operators within the lead agency's jurisdiction who have submitted reports as required by Section 2207. (d) Affected surface mining operators and interested persons have the right, at the public hearing, to present oral and written evidence on the matter being considered. The board may, at the public hearing, place reasonable limits on the right of affected surface mining operators and interested persons to question and solicit testimony. (e) If, after conducting the public hearing required by subdivision (c), the board decides to take action pursuant to subdivision (a), the board shall, based on the record of the public hearing, adopt written findings which explain all of the following: (1) The action to be taken by the board. (2) Why the board decided to take the action. (3) Why the action is authorized by, and meets the requirements of, subdivision (a). In addition, the findings shall address the significant issues raised, or written evidence presented, by affected surface mining operators, interested persons, or the lead agency. The transcript of testimony and exhibits, together with all papers and requests filed in the proceedings, shall constitute the exclusive record for decision by the board. (f) The lead agency, any affected surface mining operator, or any interested person who has presented oral or written evidence at the public hearing before the board pursuant to subdivision (d) may obtain review of the board's action taken pursuant to subdivision (a) by filing in the superior court a petition for writ of mandate within 30 days following the issuance of the board's decision. Section 1094.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure governs judicial proceedings pursuant to this subdivision, except that in every case the court shall exercise its independent judgment. If a petition for a writ of mandate is not filed within the time limits set by this subdivision, the board's action under subdivision (a) shall not be subject to review by any court or agency. 2774.5. (a) If, upon review of an ordinance, the board finds that it is not in accordance with state policy, the board shall communicate the ordinance's deficiencies in writing to the lead agency. Upon receipt of the written communication, the lead agency shall have 90 days to submit a revised ordinance to the board for certification as being in accordance with state policy. The board shall review the lead agency's revised ordinance for certification within 60 days of its receipt. If the lead agency does not submit a revised ordinance within 90 days, the board shall assume full authority for reviewing and approving reclamation plans submitted to the lead agency until the time the lead agency's ordinances are revised in accordance with state policy. (b) If, upon review of a lead agency's revised ordinance, the board finds the ordinance is still not in accordance with state policy, the board shall again communicate the ordinance's deficiencies in writing to the lead agency. The lead agency shall have a second 90-day period in which to revise the ordinance and submit it to the board for review. If the board again finds that the revised ordinance is not in accordance with state policy or if no revision is submitted, the board shall assume full authority for reviewing and approving reclamation plans submitted to the lead agency until the time the lead agency's ordinances are revised in accordance with state policy. (c) In any jurisdiction in which the lead agency does not have a certified ordinance, no person shall initiate a surface mining operation unless a reclamation plan has been submitted to, and approved by, the board. Any reclamation plan, approved by a lead agency under the lead agency's ordinance which was not in accordance with state policy at the time of approval, shall be subject to amendment by the board or under the ordinance certified by the board as being in accordance with state policy. (d) Reclamation plans approved by the board pursuant to this section shall not be subject to modification by the lead agency at a future date but may be amended by the board. Reclamation plans approved by the board shall be remanded to the lead agency upon certification of the lead agency's ordinance, and the lead agency shall approve the reclamation plan as approved by the board, except that a subsequent amendment as may be agreed upon between the operator and the lead agency may be made according to this chapter. No additional public hearing shall be required prior to the lead agency's approval. Nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing the board to issue a permit for the conduct of mining operations. 2775. (a) An applicant whose request for a permit to conduct surface mining operations in an area of statewide or regional significance has been denied by a lead agency, or any person who is aggrieved by the granting of a permit to conduct surface mining operations in an area of statewide or regional significance, may, within 15 days of exhausting his rights to appeal in accordance with the procedures of the lead agency, appeal to the board. (b) The board may, by regulation, establish procedures for declining to hear appeals that it determines raise no substantial issues. (c) Appeals that the board does not decline to hear shall be scheduled and heard at a public hearing held within the jurisdiction of the lead agency which processed the original application within 30 days of the filing of the appeal, or such longer period as may be mutually agreed upon by the board and the person filing the appeal. In any such action, the board shall not exercise its independent judgment on the evidence but shall only determine whether the decision of the lead agency is supported by substantial evidence in the light of the whole record. If the board determines the decision of the lead agency is not supported by substantial evidence in the light of the whole record it shall remand the appeal to the lead agency and the lead agency shall schedule a public hearing to reconsider its action. 2776. (a) No person who has obtained a vested right to conduct surface mining operations prior to January 1, 1976, shall be required to secure a permit pursuant to this chapter as long as the vested right continues and as long as no substantial changes are made in the operation except in accordance with this chapter. A person shall be deemed to have vested rights if, prior to January 1, 1976, the person has, in good faith and in reliance upon a permit or other authorization, if the permit or other authorization was required, diligently commenced surface mining operations and incurred substantial liabilities for work and materials necessary for the surface mining operations. Expenses incurred in obtaining the enactment of an ordinance in relation to a particular operation or the issuance of a permit shall not be deemed liabilities for work or materials. (b) The reclamation plan required to be filed under subdivision (b) of Section 2770, shall apply to operations conducted after January 1, 1976, or to be conducted. (c) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as requiring the filing of a reclamation plan for, or the reclamation of, mined lands on which surface mining operations were conducted prior to January 1, 1976. 2777. Amendments to an approved reclamation plan may be submitted detailing proposed changes from the original plan. Substantial deviations from the original plan shall not be undertaken until such amendment has been filed with, and approved by, the lead agency. 2778. (a) Reclamation plans, reports, applications, and other documents submitted pursuant to this chapter are public records, unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the lead agency that the release of that information, or part thereof, would reveal production, reserves, or rate of depletion entitled to protection as proprietary information. The lead agency shall identify such proprietary information as a separate part of the application. Proprietary information shall be made available only to the director and to persons authorized in writing by the operator and by the owner. (b) A copy of all reclamation plans, reports, applications, and other documents submitted pursuant to this chapter shall be furnished to the director by lead agencies on request. 2779. Whenever one operator succeeds to the interest of another in any incompleted surface mining operation by sale, assignment, transfer, conveyance, exchange, or other means, the successor shall be bound by the provisions of the approved reclamation plan and the provisions of this chapter.
ADOPTED REGULATION TEXT
Article 15. Vested Rights Determination
Section 3950. Purpose of Regulations.
No person who has obtained a vested right to conduct surface mining operations prior to January 1, 1976 shall be required to secure a permit pursuant to Section 2770 of the Public Resources Code. Any person claiming a vested right to conduct surface mining operations in a jurisdiction where the State Mining and Geology Board (the Board) is lead agency pursuant to section 2774.4 of the Public Resources Code must establish such claim in a public proceeding under this article. In such a proceeding the Claimant shall assume the burden of proof.
Authority: Sections 2755 and 2775, Public Resources Code. Reference: Calvert v. County of Yuba, (2007) 145 Cal. App. 4th 613.
Section 3951 Vested Right(s) - Definition.
A “vested right” is the right to conduct a legal nonconforming use of real property if that right existed lawfully before a zoning or other land use restriction became effective and the use is not in conformity with that restriction when it continues thereafter. A vested mining right, in the surface mining context, may include but shall not be limited to: the area of mine operations, the depth of mine operations, the nature of mining activity, the nature of material extracted, and the quantity of material available for extraction.
A person shall be deemed to have a vested right or rights to conduct surface mining operations if, prior to January 1, 1976, the person has, in good faith and in reliance upon a permit or other authorization, if the permit or other authorization was required, diligently commenced
surface mining operations and incurred substantial liabilities for work and materials necessary for the surface mining operations. Expenses incurred in obtaining the enactment of an ordinance in relation to a particular operation or the issuance of a permit shall not be deemed liabilities for work or materials. Expansion of surface mining operations after January 1, 1976 may be recognized as a vested nonconforming use under the doctrine of Adiminishing assets” as set forth in Hansen Brothers Enterprises, Inc. v. Board of Supervisors (1996) 12 Cal.4th 533.
Authority: Sections 2755, 2776 and 2775, Public Resources Code; Hansen Brothers Enterprises, Inc. v. Board of Supervisors (1996) 12 Cal.4th 533.) Reference: Calvert v. County of Yuba, (2007) 145 Cal. App. 4th 613.
Expansion of surface mining operations after January 1, 1976 may be recognized as a vested nonconforming use under the doctrine of "diminishing assets” as set forth in Hansen Brothers Enterprises, Inc. v. Board of Supervisors (1996) 12 Cal.4th 533.Authority: Sections 2755, 2776 and 2775, Public Resources Code; Hansen Brothers Enterprises, Inc. v. Board of Supervisors (1996) 12 Cal.4th 533.) Reference: Calvert v. County of Yuba, (2007) 145 Cal. App. 4th 613. Encourage the production.
You might call them the water police.
Their beat runs from storm water runoff to overt dumping and extends throughout California.
Their staff of 12 is evenly split between scientists and Special Investigations team members, their cases made and culprits exposed through lab work.
While they carry no firearms, the sting of their punishment — including millions of dollars in fines — has proven so punitive and persistent that it's prompted some cities to band together under the League of California Cities and draft a state bill to try to soften their impact.
And we in the Santa Clarita Valley may be next.
The agency is called the Office of Enforcement, and it reports directly to the California Water Resources Control Board, diligently reaching back over the past decade to enforce cold-case violations of state and federal clean water laws.
Thanks to its Office of Enforcement, the state water board last year collected $13.65 million in water-quality fines and penalties — more money from fines than during any year prior, and almost double the board's highest tally on record.
The maximum collected before last year's precedent-setting total was $7.37 million — in the 2006-2007 fiscal year, the year the Office of Enforcement took effect.
Residents of Fillmore were hit with $243,000 in fines; the tiny farm town of Dixon paid $223,000; even tinier San Juan Batista is poised to shell out at least $25 for each man, woman and child in town — just the latest round of fines suffered by the Salinas Valley hamlet.
Are we next?
The Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District is facing possible fines of at least $3,000 a day. That tab would likely be picked up by homeowners and businesses in the form of rate increases.
Hook-up fees for new businesses could skyrocket to as much as $300,000, a devastating blow to the local economy.
Despite repeated phone calls and e-mails last week to its director, Reed Sato, and lead attorney David M. Boyers, neither would talk directly to The Signal about fines or the Office of Enforcement.
Need for money
It was June 2006. California housing prices began their steep decline, and as news began trickling in about the prospect of devastating financial implications of the sub-prime mortgage crisis, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger created an agency within the state Water Resources Control Board that would bring in more money.
With the state facing a $6.4 billion operating deficit that year, the governor predicted in his proposed 2006-2007 budget that “revenues will be $929 million more than the LAO (Legislative Analyst's Office) forecast.”
The Office of Enforcement was set up to issue fines and enforce outstanding violations of the state and federal clean water laws — the 1972 Clean Water Act and the state's 1969 Porter-Cologne Act.
The monies collected from fines and penalties are deposited in a fund dedicated to improving the environment.
Although top officials for the Office of Enforcement would not talk to The Signal, a Signal investigation into their records indicate the enforcers shifted the water boards' focus. Previously, the focus had been encouraging compliance through dialogue and compromise.
After the enforcers received their mandate, the focus became “fair and firm enforcement of compliance,” which translated into revenue-generating — and punitive — fines.
Enforcers scrutinized a backlog of hundreds of water-quality violations over an entire decade.
They found 7,880 violations — between Jan, 1, 2000, and Dec. 31, 2007 — had not received a penalty at or above the mandatory minimum amount, according to the 2007 Water Board's Enforcement Report. These violations provided opportunities for “direct action” as spelled out in the water board's mandate.
In its 2008 report, the water board stated: “After discussing the ways to efficiently address these outstanding violations, the water boards started the statewide initiative for MMP enforcement.”
MMP means mandatory minimum penalties, which were deemed absolutely enforceable by Senate Bill 709, a 2003 state law.
The agencies charged with monitoring water quality, limiting pollution and enforcing water-quality standards are the nine state Regional Water Quality Control boards, each of which has nine members appointed by the governor.
The governor also appoints the state water board members.
The prospect of being fined by the state water board through its regional office in Los Angeles remains worrisome for local city and sanitation officials struggling to clean up the water discharged into the Santa Clara River.
In order to ensure salty chloride levels do not exceed 117 milligrams per liter — a threshold Ventura County farmers growing salt-sensitive crops such as strawberries and avocados downstream expect the regional board to uphold — the Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District plans to build a $210-million salt-ridding reverse-osmosis plant.
To build it, the district has to raise money. It proposed raising Santa Clarita Valley homeowners' and businesses' sewer rates over four years.
At a public meeting held last month to address proposed rate hikes, chloride levels, river water quality, strawberries and money, attendees sent a clear message to Sanitation District board members:
We will fight the rate increases and challenge the water board.
The discussion of rate hikes was put off until spring.
Will the state water board's new water-policing Office of Enforcement fine Santa Clarita Valley homeowners over excessive chloride levels in the Santa Clara River?
You can ask city officials in Fillmore, population 15,000, who were fined $231,000 — the year after they built a state-of-the-art water-treatment plant.
You can also ask the homeowners of Dixon, which is near Sacramento and has a population of 14,000 — a farming
town with neither river nor lake — who were fined $250,000 over chloride levels.
The Signal went to each of these towns looking for answers, insight and advice about fighting the fines, about paying them and about working to provide clean, uncontaminated water for the farmers who surround both communities.
Small town, big fine
The short answer, however, could probably be found in the tiny farm town of San Juan Batista, near Salinas.
This year, the 1,549 town folk who live in San Juan Batista can expect a $39,000 fine from the Office of Enforcement,
The Signal has learned from a member of the Central Coast Regional Water Board.
The penalty, not yet formally announced and still being drafted, averages to at least $25 for every man, woman and child in the town.
Including the pending fine, the cumulative average fine amount for every man, woman and child in San Juan Batista works out to at least $57 for all fines since 2002.
They were cited for eight chloride violations, having discharged the salt into a San Benito River tributary, so small it doesn't have a name, which is upstream from the Salinas River and the watershed for Salinas, commonly called the Salad Bowl of America.
Should we consider the lesson learned at San Juan Batista as a barometer by which to gauge the likelihood of a fine leveled here? Consider this:
San Juan Batista was also fined $12,000 last year, again for chloride excesses. It was also fined $18,000 in 2003 and another $20,000 the year before that, all for making the Salinas River too salty for “beneficial uses” downstream such as farming.
The Clean Water Act guarantees natural, uncontaminated water for downstream beneficial uses.
Cecile DeMartini, one of nine members on the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, was asked if she and her fellow board members reflected on how such big fines would affect such a small community.
She replied: “It is what it is. We just follow the law.”
Chloride equals fines
The city of Paso Robles was also fined for having contaminated the Salinas River with chloride, netting four chloride violations.
Other chloride violators hit with fines last year include:
— The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation for eight chloride violations at the California Men's Colony in San Luis Obispo, for having discharged excessive amounts of chloride into Chorro Creek.
— The Antioch Pulp and Paper Mill owned by the Gaylord Container Corp. for having twice discharged unlawful amounts of chloride into the San Joaquin River.
League of Cities
Officials in some cities hit with hefty water fines appealed to the League of California Cities for help.
“A lot of the cities hit don't have the money, and have to pay out of their general fund,” said a source close to the fines issue at a state level who did not want to be identified.
“A lot of folks feel it's like kicking someone when they're down,” the source said, referring to an economy struggling to rebound.
Next month, a state bill articulating the resentment expressed by cities over high fines is expected to hit the state Legislature's floor.
Officials with the League of California Cities helped draft Senate Bill 1284 in response to city representatives' concerns over fines issued for water quality paperwork that isn't filed to the board on time.
SB 1284 would not take on the fines for pollution being levied by the Office of the Enforcement. It would tackle fines for filing late paperwork.
“We have a number of cities that have not discharged excessive amounts of anything but have failed to file their paperwork,” said League spokeswoman Kyra Ross.
“And, these fines are enormous — from $200,000 to $600,000 — issued to very little cities, very little towns with very little water plants.
“This bill attempts to correct that in a way that caps these fines at $3,000 for each discharge violation.”
Ross said league officials have fielded complaints from various city leaders about punitive fines leveled by the Office of Enforcement specifically for excessive chloride discharge, which SB 1284 would not address.
First things first, she said.
In Monday's paper, Santa Clarita Valley weighs options and consequences of being fined.
4400 acres of land in Shasta County
Detinue Sur Bailment should be granted immediately, and the EPA lien void & vacated..
“A patent to land, issued by the United States under authority of law, is the highest evidence of title, something upon which its holder can rely for peace and security in his possession. It is conclusive evidence of title against the United States and all the world. ..” 2 The American Law of Mining, § 1.29 at 357. Nichols v. Rysavy, (S.D. 1985) 610 F. Supp. 1245.
"Congress has the sole power to declare the dignity and effect of titles emanating from the United States … and [Congress] [D]eclares the patent the superior and conclusive evidence of legal title." Langdon v. Sherwood, 124 U.S. 74 (1888).
The “general rule” at least is, “that while property may be regulated to a certain extent, if regulation goes too far it will be recognized as a taking.” [Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon , 260 U.S. 393, 415, 67 L. Ed. 322, 43 S. Ct. 158 (1922).]
The Court stated, “Takings jurisprudence balances the competing goals of compensating landowners on whom a significant burden of regulation falls and avoiding prohibitory costs to needed government regulation. Citing Dolan v. City of Tigard , 512 U.S. 374, 384 (1994), “TheTakings Clause assures that the government may not force 'some people alone to bear public burdens which, in all fairness and justice, should be borne by the public as a whole.'"
In the history of the United States , no Land Patent has ever lost an appellate review in the courts. In Summa Corp. v. California ex rel. State Lands Comm'n 466 US 198, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the Land Patent would always win over any other form of title. In that case, the land in question was tidewater land and California 's claim was based on California 's constitutional right to all tidewater lands. The patent stood supreme even against California 's Constitution, to wit:
[The patent] “[P]assing whatever interest the United States has in the premises and thereby settling any question of sovereign ownership….” Pueblo of Santa Ana v. Baca (CA10 NM) 844 F2d 708; Whaley v. Wotring ( Fla App D1) 225 So 2d 177; Dugas v. Powell, 228 La 748, 84 So 2d 177. [quote at 28 Am. Jur. 2D, F. 2 § 49].
With the title passes away all authority or control of the executive department over the land and over the title which it has conveyed. Moore v. Robbins, 96 U.S. 530, 533, 24 L. Ed. 848.
There is no license from the United States or the state of California to miners to enter upon private lands of individuals for the purpose or extracting the minerals in the soil. (Biddle Boggs v Merced Min. Co.) 14 Cal. 279.)
The United States , like any other PRIVATE PROPRIETOR, with the exception of exemption from state taxation, having no municipal sovereignty or right of eminent domain within the limits of the state-cannot, in derogation of the rights of the local sovereign to govern the relations of the citizens of the state, and to prescribe the rules of property, and its mode of disposition, and its tenure, enter upon, or authorize an entry upon, private property, for the purpose of extracting minerals. The United States , like any other proprietor, can only exercise their rights to the mineral in private property, in subordination to such rules and regulations as the local sovereign may prescribe. Until such rules and regulations are established, the landed proprietor may successfully resist, in the courts of the state, all attempts at invasion of his property, whether by the direct action of the United States or by virtue of any pretended license under their authority. (Biddle Boggs v Merced Min. Co,,) 14 Cal. 279.)
“A valid and subsisting location of mineral lands, made and kept in accordance with the provisions of the statutes of the United States , has the effect of a grant by the United States of the right of present and exclusive possession of the lands located.”
U.S. Supreme Court, 1884
With the title passes away all authority or control of the executive department over the land and over the title which it has conveyed. It would be as reasonable to hold that any private owner who has conveyed it to another can, of his own volition, recall, cancel or annul the instrument which he has made and delivered. If fraud, mistake, error, or wrong has been done, the courts of justice present the only remedy. These courts are as open to the United States to sue for the cancellation of the deed or reconveyance of the land as to individuals, and if the government is the party injured this is the proper course”.
Moore v. Robbins, 96 U.S. 530, 533, 24 L. Ed. 848.
That whenever the question in any court, state or federal, is whether a title to land which has once been the property of the United States has passed, that question must be resolved by the laws of the United States; but that whenever, according to those laws, the title shall have passed, then that property, like all other property in the state, is subject to state legislation, so far as that legislation is consistent with the admission that the title passed and vested according to the laws of the United States”.
Wilcox v. McConnell, 13 Pet. ( U.S. ) 498, 517, 10 L. Ed. 264.
“Title by patent from the United States to a tract of ground, theretofore public, prima facie carries ownership of all beneath the surface, and possession under such patent of the surface is presumptively possession of all beneath the surface.
Lawson v. United States Min. Co. 207 U.S. 1, 8, 28 Sup. Ct. 15, 17, 52, L. Ed. 65.
Grub-stake contracts will be enforced by the courts, but only as other contracts; that is to say, it is not enough for parties to assert that they have rights, in order to secure legal protection, but they must be able to prove in each case a clear and definite contract, and that by the terms and conditions of such contract, and compliance therewith on their part, rights have become vested.
Cisna v. Mallory (C.C.) 84 Fed. 851, 854.
The common-law rule is that the lessee of real property may work already opened mines, but cannot open new ones. But the lease may expressly, or by implication from express powers, give the right to take the minerals, the instrument is a genuine lease.
Oshoon v. Bayaud 123 N.Y. 298. 25 N.E. 376
On the other hand, if an attempt is made by the instrument to pass title to the minerals in place, there is really a sale of the mineral.
Plummer v. Hillside Coal & Iron Co. 104 Fed. 208, 43 C.C. A. 490
Whatever the form of the instrument of conveyance, and even though the parties speak of it in its terms as a lease, if its fair construction shows that the title to the minerals in place is to pass upon the delivery of the instrument, while the surface is retained, or vice versa, and, of course, for all time, if the fee is granted, except that the fee to the space occupied by the minerals seems to terminate when the mine is exhausted.
McConnell v. Pierce, 210 Ill. 627, 71 N.E. 622., Moore v. Indian Camp Coal Co.,493, 0 N.E. 6.
The relationship among joint venturers was eloquently described by United States Supreme Court Justice Cardozo in the seminal 1928 case of Meinhard v. Salmon - “joint adventurers, like copartners, owe to one another, while the enterprise continues, the duty of the finest loyalty. Many forms of conduct permissible in a workaday world for those acting at arm's length, are forbidden to those bound by fiduciary ties. Not honesty alone, but the punctilio of an honor the most sensitive, is then the standard of behavior. As to this there has developed a tradition that is unbending and inveterate. Uncompromising rigidity has been the attitude of courts of equity when petitioned to undermine the rule of undivided loyalty by the ‘disintegrating erosion' of particular exceptions. Only thus has the level of conduct for fiduciaries been kept at a level higher than that trodden by the crowd.”)
Artesian Mineral Development & Consolidated Sludge, Inc.& Iron Mountain Mines, Inc.
insitu remediation summary & history of copper cementation and bioleaching
Cementation of copper began with the discovery of silver at the Lost Confidence Mine by 1890 and before the beginning of copper mining at Iron Mountain and Mountain Copper Co. Ltd. around 1896. By 1908 the State Geologist reported that the operation was so extensive that a building was being constructed over and around it. In 1919 copper prices crashed and the mine closed, in 1920 fish kills were reported. In 1921 copper cementation resumed and was thereafter operated continuously until the EPA implemented their High Density Sludge treatment and driven Ted Arman from the business.. After WWII Iron Mountain mines produced sulfur and iron for fertilizers until 1963. Iron Mountain has 20,000,000 tonnes proven and 5,000,000 tonnes probable ore reserves. The naturally occurring archaea living in the Richmond mine are reported to be capable of producing the most acidic natural mine waters on the planet, pH -3.6. Iron Mountain Mines, Inc. bioleaching naturally produces about 8 tons of metals per day. One of the earliest records of the practice of leaching is from the island of Cyprus. Galen, a naturalist and physician reported in AD 166 the operation of in situ leaching of copper. Surface water was allowed to percolate through the permeable rock, and was collected in amphorae. In the process of percolation through the rock, copper minerals dissolved so that the concentration of copper sulphate in solution was high. The solution was allowed to evaporate until copper sulphate crystallized. Pliny (23-79 AD) reported that a similar practice for the extraction of copper in the form of copper sulphate was widely practiced in Spain. The cementation of copper was also known to the Chinese, as documented by the Chinese king Lui-An (177-122 BC). The Chinese implemented the commercial production of copper from copper sulphate using a cementation process in the tenth century.
(not for marijuana cultivation) no smoking
|Element||Deficiency symptoms||Probable cause and ordinary remedy|
|Nitrogen||Growth is poor; shoots are short; leaves are small; and yellow brassicas turn pink then orange. Fruit or tubers
|As an immediate booster, spray with diluted liquid
seaweed or fish fertiliser. Incorporate as much compost
and manure as possible.
|Root development and flower bud formation are poor, and plants sometimes also show symptoms similar to that of nitrogen deficiency. Brown spots may appear on leaves, or leaf edges may turn brown. Fruit has an acid flavour.||Bonemeal is rich in phosphorus. Incorporate 120 g per square metre before planting. The deficiency appears more often in acid soils.|
|Potassium||Growth becomes stunted, and leaves turn a dull bluegreen, with browning at the leaf tips or leaf margins, or showing as blotches. Leaves of broad-leaved plants
|Most often seen on light, sandy soils. Comfrey tea is high in potassium; dilute 1 part tea to 15 parts water and apply to soil. Wood ash is high in potassium.|
|Magnesium||Magnesium deficiency shows either as a loss of colour or as a mottling of red, orange, brown and purple tints.||Excessive potash application may be responsible. Spray with a solution of Epsom salts (250 g in 12 litres water).
If liming soil, apply dolomite, which is rich in magnesium as well as calcium, or green sand.
|Manganese||Manganese deficiency occurs in sandy and alkaline soils, frequently in combination with iron defi ciency. Chlorosis (loss of colour) begins on older leaves. The leaves of green peas develop brown patches. Beetroot leaves have red-brown speckling.||This is most evident in poorly drained soils. Lift beds to
improve drainage. Overliming can also be responsible. Never apply manganese to soils with a pH below 6.
|Chlorosis (loss of colour) occurs on young shoot tips and leaves, while the veins remain green. Eventually, shoots die back. This condition usually occurs in alkaline soils,
which prevent plants from absorbing iron.
|Sequestered iron (iron EDTA) used as a foliar spray produces rapid results. Check soil pH and acidify with sulphur and regular compost additions.|
|Boron||The roots of beetroots, swedes and turnips turn brown. Cauliflower curds also turn brown. Brown cracks appear across the stalks of celery. Apple cores become ‘corky'. The growing points of plants die off.||Mix 30 g borax with sand and disperse evenly over 18 square metres of soil. Or spray crops fortnightly with liquid seaweed fertiliser. Overliming can cause
|Leaves, particularly of broccoli and cauliflowers, develop a disorder known as whiptail. Leaves become distorted and shrink back to the midrib, giving a tail-like appearance. On tomatoes, leaves become mottled and roll forward.||Apply ground dolomite to acidic soils. Add kelp meal to soil. For a short-term remedy, apply sodium molybdate at 30 g per 8 litres water. This will treat 8 square metres of soil.|
|Calcium||This shows most commonly in tomatoes and capsicums as a darkened, shrivelled end on fruit. It also causes bitter pit in apples.||Uneven soil moisture causes a failure of calcium uptake from the soil. This is particularly evident in pot-grown plants and in light soils. Water regularly. To add calcium,
incorporate crushed eggshells into compost.
Ag-Gel micronutrient with soluble silicate offers growers these performance benefits in agricultural applications:
Reduces disease pressure.
Provides resistance to mineral stress.
Decreases climate stress.
Improves plant strength.
Increases growth and yeild.
Ag-Gel micronutrient with silicate reduces the stress from diseases including powdery mildew, pythium root rot, and rice blast. It resists or prevents toxicity from phosphorous, manganese, aluminum, and iron, and increases plant tolerance to salt.
Application of Ag-Gel micronutrient with soluble silicate improves leaf erectness, reduces susceptibility to lodging in grasses, and improves photosynthesis efficiency.
Crops that have demonstrated benificial responses to Ag-Gel micronutrient with soluble silicate application include rice, wheat, barley, sugar cane, tomatoes, beans, cucurbits, strawberries, grapes, roses, apples, grass, and ornamental plants.
Ag-Gel micronutrient with soluble silicate can increase growth and yield by providing micronutrients and by reducing susceptibility to diseases and pests.
Iron in Plants
Iron is a absorbed by plant roots as Fe²+ and Fe³+. The chemical properties of iron making it an important part of oxidation-reduction reactions in both soils and plants. Because iron can exist in more than one oxidation state, it accepts or donates electrons according to the oxidation potential of the reactants. The transfer of electrons between the organic molecule and iron provides the potential for many of the enzymatic transformations. Several of these enzymes are involved in chlorophyll synthesis, and when iron is deficient chlorophyll production is reduced, which results in the characteristic chlorosis symptoms of iron stress.
Iron is a structural component of porphyrin molecules. These substances are involved in band oxidation-reduction reactions in respiration and photosynthesis. As much as 75% of the total cell iron is associated with chloroplast, and up to 90 percent of the iron in the leaves occurs with lipoprotein of the chloroplast and the mitochindria membranes.
The sufficiency range of time in plant tissue is normally between 50 and 250 ppm. and in general, when iron contents are 50 ppm or less in the dry matter, deficiency is likely to occur. Iron deficiency symptoms show up in the young leaves of plants, first because iron does not readily translocate from older tissues to the tip meristem; as a result, growth ceises. The young leaves develop an interveinal chlorosis, which progresses rapidly over the entire leaf. In severe cases the leaves turn entirely white. Iron toxicity can be observed under certain conditions. For example, in rice grown on poorly drained or submerge soils, a condition known as a bronzing is associated with greater than 300 ppm iron levels in rice leaves at telling.
Iron in soil
Mineral Fe. Iron comprises 5% of the earth's crust and is the fourth most abundant element in the lithosphere. Common primary and secondary iron minerals are olivene, siderite, hematite, goethite, magnetite, and limonite. Iron can be either concentrated or depleted during soil development; thus, iron concentrations in soil vary widely, from 0.7 to 55%. Most of the soil iron is found in primary minerals, clays, oxides, and hydroxides.
Forms and functions of Calcium in plants.
Ca is absorbed by plants as Ca²+ from the soil solution and is supplied to the root surface by mass flow and root interception. Ca deficiency is uncommon but can occur in highly leached and unlimed acidic soils. In soils abundant in Ca²+, excessive accumulation in the vicinity of roots can occur.
Ca²+ concentration in plants range from 0.2 to 1.0%. Ca is important in the structure and permeability of cell membranes. Lack of Ca²+ causes a breakdown of membrane structure, with resultant loss in retention of cellular diffusible compounds. Ca enhances uptake of NO3 and therefore is interrelated with N metabolism. Ca²+ provides some regulation in cation uptake. For example, studies have shown that K+ and Na+ uptake are about equal in the absence of Ca²+, but in its presence, K+ uptakes greatly exceeds Na+ uptake.
Ca is essential for cell elongation and division, and Ca²+ deficiency manifests itself in the failure of terminal buds of shoots and apical tips of roots to develop, which causes plant growth to cease. In corn Ca²+ deficiency prevents the emergence and unfolding of new leaves, the tips are almost colorless and are covered with sticky gelatinous material that causes them to adhere to one another. In fruits and vegetables, the most frequent indicator of Ca²+ deficiency consists of disorders in the storage tissues. Examples of Ca²+ disorders are bloom-end rot in tomato and bitter pit of apples. Finally, Ca²+ is generally immobile in the plant. There is very little translocation of Ca²+ in the phloem, and for this reason there is often a poor supply of Ca²+ to fruits and storage organs. Downward translocation of Ca²+ is also limited in roots, which usually prevents them from entering low-Ca soils.
Conditions impairing the growth of new roots will reduce root access to Ca²+ and induce deficiency. Problems related to inadequate Ca²+ uptake are more likely to occur with plants that have smaller root systems than with those possessing more highly developed root systems.
Special attention must be given to the Ca²+ requirements of certain crops, including peanuts, tomatoes, and celery, which are often unable to obtain sufficient Ca²+ from soils supplying adequate Ca²+ for most other crops. Proper Ca²+ supply is important for tree fruits and other crops such as alfalfa, cabbage, potatoes, and sugar beets, which are known to have high Ca²+ requirements.
Ca in Soil
The Ca concentration in the earth's crust is about 3.5%; however, the Ca²+ content in soils varies widely. Sandy soils of humid regions contain very low amounts of Ca²+, whereas Ca²+ normally ranges from 0.7 to 1.5% in noncalcareous soils of humid temperate regions; however, highly weathered soils of the humid tropics may contain as little as 0.1 to 0.3% Ca. Ca levels in calcareous soils vary from less than 1% to more than 25%.
Calcium concentrations in the soil higher than necessary for proper plant growth normally have low affect on the Ca²+ uptake, because Ca²+ uptake, is genetically controlled. Although the concentration of the soil solution is about 10 times greater than that of potassium, it's a uptake is usually lower than that a potassium. Plants capacity for uptake is limited because it can be absorbed only by young root tips in which the cell walls of the in the endodermis are still unsuberized.
As a general rule, course-textured, humid-region soils formed from rocks low in calcium minerals are low in calcium. The fine-textured soils formed from rocks high in calcium are much higher in both exchangeable and total calcium. However, in humid regions, even soils formed from limestone are frequently acetic in the surface layers because of the removal of calcium and other cations by excess leaching. As water containing dissolved CO2 percolates through the soil, the H + forms displaces Ca²+ (and other basic cations) on the exchange complex. If there is considerable percolation of such water through the soil profile, soils gradually become acidic. When leaching occurs, Na+ is lost more readily than Ca²+, however, since exchangeable and solution Ca²+ is much greater than Na+ in most soils, the quantity of Ca²+ lost is also much greater. Calcium is often the dominant cation in drainage waters, springs, streams, and lakes. Leaching of calcium ranges from 75 to 200 lbs. per acre per year. Since Ca²+ is absorbed on the cation exchange capacity (CEC), losses by erosion may be considerable in some soils.
Copper in plants.
Cu is absorbed by plants as the cupric ion, Cu²+, and may be absorbed as a component of either natural or synthetic organic complexes. It's normal concentration in plant tissue ranges from 5 to 20 ppm. Deficiencies are probable when Cu levels in plants fall below 4 ppm in the dry matter.
Symptoms of Cu deficiency vary with crop. In corn the youngest leaves become stunted, and as the deficiency becomes more severe, the young leaves pale and the older leaves die back. In advanced stages, dead tissue appears along the tips and edges of the leaves in a pattern similar to that of K deficiency. Cu-deficient small-grain plants lose color in young leaves, which eventually break, and the tips die. Stem melanosis and take-al root rot disease occur in certain wheat varieties when Cu is deficient. Also ergot infection is associated with Cu deficiency in some wheat and barley varieties. In many vegetables crops the leaves lack turgor. They develop a bluish-green cast, become chlorotic, and curl, and flower production fails to take place.
Cu in it's reduced form readily binds and reduces O2. In the oxidized form the metal is readily reduced, and protein-complexed Cu has a high redox potential. Enzymes that create complex polymers such as lignin and melanin exploit these properties of Cu. Cu is unique in its involvement in enzymes, and its cannot be replaced by any other metal ion.
Toxicity symptoms include reduced shoot vigor, poorly developed and discolored root systems, and leaf chlorosis. The chlorotic condition in shoots superficially resembles Fe deficiency. Toxicities are uncommon, occurring in limited areas of high Cu availability; after additions of high-Cu materials such as sewage sludge, municipal composts, pig and poultry manure's, and mine wastes; and from repeated use of Cu-containing pesticides.
Copper in soil.
Cu concentration in the earth's crust average about 55 t0 70 ppm. Igneous rocks contain 10 to 100 ppm Cu, while sedimentary rocks contain between 4 and 45 ppm Cu. Cu concentration in soils ranges from 1 to 40 ppm and averages about 9 ppm. Total soil Cu may be 1 or 2 ppm in deficient soils.
Copper interaction with other nutrients.
There are numerous interactions involving Cu. Applications of N-P-K fertilization can induce Cu deficiencies. Furthermore, increased growth resulting from the application of N or other nutrients may be proportionally greater than Cu uptake, which dilutes Cu concentration in plants. Increasing the N supply to crops can reduce mobility of Cu in plants, since large amounts of N in plants impede translocation of Cu from older leaves to new growth. High concentration of Zn, Fe, and P in soil solution can also depress Cu absorption by plant roots and may intensify Cu deficiency.
Crops vary greatly in response to Cu. Among small-grain species, rye has exceptional tolerance to low levels of soil Cu and will be healthy, whereas wheat fails completely without the application of Cu. Rye can extract up to twice as much Cu as wheat under the same conditions. The usual order of sensitivity of the small grains to Cu deficiency in the field is wheat > barley > oats > rye. Varietal differences in tolerance to low Cu are important, and sometimes they can be as large as those among crop species.
Severe Cu deficiency in crops planted in soils with high C/N residues is related to (1) reactions of Cu with organic compounds originating from decomposing straw, (2) competition for available Cu by stimulated microbial populations, and (3) inhibition of root development and the ability to absorb Cu. If the soil-available Cu is low, manure added to a field may accentuate the problems. Organic material from manure, straws, or hay can tie up Cu, making it unavailable to plants.
Copper - Functions in the plant or soil
Essential for chlorophyll formation
Essential in many plant enzymes (oxidases in particular)
It is involved in electron transfer
Essential in enzyme systems associated with grain, seed, and fruit formation
It has a marked effect on the formation and chemical composition of cell walls - Very distinct on stem tissue
Copper - Special considerations
Copper can be used as a fungicide on plants
Excessive amounts of copper can cause iron deficiency
It is rather immobile in plants, therefore deficiency symptoms usually occur on new growth
Copper - The conditions associated with deficiencies
High organic soils
High pH soils
Soils with high concentrations of phosphate and nitrogen
Copper - Deficiency Symptoms
General chlorosis of younger leaves
Leaf tips die and curl like pig tails
Interveinal chlorosis toward lower end of leaves
High organic matter soils - Yellowing of plant
Leaf tip dieback and twisting of leaf tips
Youngest tissue turns faded green with grayish cast
Plants appear bushy and drought-stricken
Forms and Functions of Magnesium (Mg) in Plants
Mg is absorbed by plants as Mg²+ from the soil solution and, like Ca²+, is supplied to plant roots by mass flow and diffusion. Root interception contributes much less Mg²+ to uptake than Ca²+. The amount of Mg²+ taken up by plants is usually less than that of Ca²+ or K+.
Mg²+ concentration in crops varies between 0.1 to 0.4%. Mg²+ is a primary constituent of chlorophyll, and without chlorophyll the autotrophic green plant would fail to carry on photosynthesis. Chlorophyll usually accounts for about 15 to 20% of the total Mg²+ content of plants.
Mg also serves as a structural component to ribosomes, stabilizing them in the configuration necessary for protein synthesis. As a consequence of Mg²+ deficiency, the proportion of protein N decreases and that of non proteins N generally increases in plants.
Mg is associated with transfer reactions involving phosphate-reactive groups. Mg is required for maximum activity of most every phosphorylating enzyme in carbohydrate metabolism. Most reactions involving phosphates transfer from bad adenosine triphosphate (ATP) require Mg²+. Since the fundamental process of energy transfer occurs in photosynthesis, glycolysis, the citric or acid cycle, and respiration, Mg²+ is important throughout plant metabolism.
Because of the mobility of plant Mg²+ and it's ready transportation from older to younger plant parts, deficiency symptoms often appear first on the lower leaves. In many species, shortage of Mg²+ results in interveinal chlorosis of the leaf, in which only the veins remain green. In more advance stages the leaf tissue becomes uniformly pale yellow, then brown and necrotic. In other species, notably cotton, the lower leaves may develop a reddish-purple cast, gradually turning brown and finally necrotic.
Mg in Soil
Mg constitutes 1.93% of the earth's crust; however, the Mg²+ content of soils ranges from 0.1% in course, sandy soils in humid regions to 4% in fine-textured, arid, or semiarid soils formed from high-Mg parent materials.
The Mg concentration of soil solutions is typically 5 to 50 ppm in temperate- region soils, although Mg²+ concentrations between 120 and 2,400 ppm have been observed. Mg²+, like Ca²+, can be leached from soils, and Mg losses of 5 to 60 lbs./acre have been observed. The amounts lost depend on the interaction of several factors, including the Mg content of soil, rate of weathering, intensity of leaching, and the uptake by plants. Leaching of Mg²+ is often a problem in sandy soils, particularly following the addition of fertilizer such as KCL and K2SO4. Very little Mg displacement occurs when equivalent amounts of K are applied as either CO3²-, HCO3, or H2PO4-. Apparently, Mg²+ desorption and leaching in coarse-texture soils are enhanced by the presence of soluble Cl- and SO4²-. As with Ca²+, erosion losses can be considerable in some soils.
Mg in clay minerals is slowly weathered out by leaching and exhaustive cropping. Conditions in which Mg is likely to be deficient include acidic, sandy, highly leached soils with low CEC; calcareous soils with inherently lower Mg levels; acidic soils receiving high rates of lining materials low in Mg; higher rates of NH4+ or K+ fertilization; and crops with Mg demand.
In contrast to calcium, the primary nutrient fertilizers contain magnesium, with the exception of K2SO4 · MgSO4. Dolomite is commonly applied to low-Mg acidic soils. K2SO4 · MgSO4 and MgSO4 (Epsom salts) are the most widely used materials in dry fertilizer formulation. Other materials containing Magnesium are magnesia (MgO, 55% Mg), magnesium nitrate [Mg(NO3)2. 16% Mg], magnesium silicate (basic slag, 3 to 4 % Mg; serpentine, 26% Mg), magnesium chloride solution (MgCl2 ( 10 H20, 8 to 9% Mg), synthetic chelates (2 to 4% Mg), and natural organic complexing substances (4 to 9% Mg). MgSO4, MgCl2, Mg(NO3)2, and synthetic and natural magnesium chelates are well-suited for application in clear liquids and foliar sprays. Magnesium deficiency of citrus trees in California is frequently corrected by foliar applications of Mg(NO3)2. In some tree-fruit growing areas, MgSO4 solutions are applied to maintain levels, and in seriously deficient orchards several annual applications are necessary. K2SO4 ¸ MgSO4 are the most widely used magnesium additives in suspensions. Special suspension grade [100% passing through a 20-mesh screen] of this material is available commercially. Magnesium content in animal and municipal waste is similar to S content and can therefore be used to supply sufficient magnesium.
Manganese in Soil
Mineral manganese. Manganese concentration in the earth's crust average 1000 ppm, and manganese is found in most iron-magnesium rocks. Manganese, when released through weathering of primary rocks, will combine with O2 to form secondary minerals, including pyrolusite (MnO2), hausmannite (Mn3O4), and manganite (MnOOH). Pyrolusite and manganite are the most abundant.
Total manganese in soils generally range between 20 and 3,000 ppm and averages about 600 ppm. Manganese in soils occurs as various oxides and hydroxide coated on soil particles, deposited in cracks and veins, and mixed with iron oxides and other soil constituents.
Soil solution manganese. The principal species in solution is Mn²+ , which decreases 100-fold for each unit increase in pH, similar to the behavior of other divalent metal cations. The concentration of Mn²+, in solution is predominately controlled by MnO2. Concentration of Mn²+ in the soil solution of the acidic and neutral soils is commonly in the range of 0.01 to 1 ppm, with organically complexed Mn²+ comprising about 90 percent of solution Mn²+. Plants take up Mn²+, which moves to their root surface by diffusion.
Manganese in soil solutions is greatly increased under acidic, low-redox conditions. In extremely acidic soils, Mn²+ solubility can be sufficiently great to cause toxicity problems in sensitive plant species.
Interaction with other nutrients
High levels of copper, iron, or zinc, can reduce manganese uptake by plants. Addition of acid-forming NH4+ to soil will enhance manganese uptake.
Several plant species exhibit differences in sensitivity to manganese deficiency. These differences in the response of manganese deficient and manganese inefficient plants are due to internal factors rather than to the facts of the plants on the soil. Reductive capacity at the root may be the factor restricting manganese uptake and translocation. There may also be significant differences in the amounts and properties of root exudates generated by plants, which can influence Mn²+ availability. It is possible that plant characteristics possessed by irony fission plants may similarly influence manganese uptake in plants and their tolerance to manganese stress.
Organic manganese. The manganese concentration in most animal wastes is similar to zinc, ranging between 0.01 and 0.05% (0.2and 1 lb. / t). Thus, with most manures, average application rates will provide sufficient plant available manganese. As with iron, zinc, and copper, the primary benefits of organic waste application is increased organic material and associated natural chelation properties that increased manganese concentration in soil solution and plant availability. As with the other micronutrients, manganese content in municipal waste varies greatly depending on the stores. On average, manganese content is about half the copper content (0.05%, or one pound per ton).
Organic manganese. Manganese sulfate is widely used for correction of manganese deficiency and may be soil or foliar applied. In addition to organic manganese fertilizers, natural organic complexes and chelated manganese are available and are usually foliar applied.
Manganese oxide (MnO) is only slightly water soluble, but it is usually a satisfactory source of manganese. Manganese oxide must be finely ground to be affected. Rates of manganese applications range from 1 to 25 lbs. per acre; higher rates are recommended for broadcast application, while lower rates are foliar applied. Band-applied manganese is generally more effective than broadcast manganese, and band treatments are usually about one-half of the broadcast rates. Oxidation to less available forms of manganese is apparently delayed with band-applied manganese. Applications at the higher rates may be required on organic soils. Band application of manganese in combination with N-P-K fertilizers is commonly practiced.
Broadcast application of manganese chelates and natural organic complexes is not normally advised because soil calcium or iron can replace manganese in these chelates, and the freed manganese is usually converted to unavailable forms. Meanwhile, the more available chelated calcium or iron probably accentuates the manganese deficiency. Limestone or high-pH-induced manganese deficiency can be rectified by acidification resulting from the use of sulfur or other assets-forming materials.
Manganese - Functions in plant or soil
It has a role in production of chlorophyll but is not a component
It is involved in electron transfer reactions
Involved in enzyme systems, arginase and phosphotransferase
Involved in enzyme systems of sugar metabolism
Participates in oxygen-evolving system of photosynthesis
Involved in electron transport in chloroplasts
Involved in transfer of electrons from water to the photosynthetic II protein fraction
It accelerates germination and maturity
Manganese - Special considerations
Its solubility increases 100 fold per unit drop in pH - can be toxic in low pH soils
Manganese concentrated in leaves and stems - seeds contain only small amounts
High concentration of Mn in soil can lead to poor iron absorption
Manganese - The conditions associated with deficiencies
High soil pH
High organic soils
Cool wet soil conditions
Overlimed soils - High calcium levels
Manganese - Deficiency symptoms
Corn & Grain Sorghum
Interveinal chlorosis with general stunting similar to iron deficiency except iron is seldom short on high organic matter soils
Marginal gray and brown necrotic spots and streaks appearing on basal portion of leaves
Ends of affected leaves may stay green for an extended time
On older affected leaves the spots are oval and gray brown
As deficiency becomes more severe, leaves become pale green, then yellow
Brown necrotic spots develop as deficiency becomes more pronounced
Veins remain darker as compared to iron deficiency
Zinc is involved in many enzymatic activities, but it is not known whether it acts as a functional, structural, or regulatory cofactor.
Zinc - Functions in plant or soil
Involved in large number of enzymes - including dehydrogenases, aldolases, isomerases, transphosphorylases, RNA and DNA polymerases
Involved in carbohydrate metabolism
Involved in the rate of protein synthesis
Zinc - Special considerations
Availability enhanced significantly by presence of mycorrhizal fungi in the soil
It is not subject to oxidation-reduction reactions in soil-plant system
It is quite immobile in the soil
It will bond strongly with sulfide formed from decomposing humus under anaerobic conditions
Solubility increases 100 fold for each pH unit lowered
Zinc - The conditions associated with deficiencies
High pH soils
Soils where anaerobic decomposition is present
High soil phosphorus levels - Varies by crop
Cold wet soils
Zinc - Deficiency symptoms
Appear within first 2 weeks after emergence
Broad band of chloritic tissue on one or both sides of leaf midrib - most pronounced towards base of leaf
Young leaves most severely affected
Delayed maturity and reduced yields
Similar to corn
Similar to corn
Chlorosis of younger leaves
Chlorosis may extend to all leaves on plant
Total chlorosis without green veins
Silica is one of the most abundant elements on the surface of the earth. Silica contributes to the structure of cell walls. Concentrations of up to 10% occur in silica rich plants. Silica primarily impregnates the walls of epidermis and vascular tissues, where it appears to strengthen the cell wall, reduce water loss, and retard fungal infection.
The involvement of silica in root functions is believed to be its contribution to the drought tolerance of crops. Although no biochemical role for silica in plant development has been positively identified, it has been proposed that in enzyme-silicon complexes they act as protectors or regulators of photosynthesis and enzyme activity.
The beneficial effects of silicon have been attributed to corrections of soil toxicity arising from high levels of available manganese, iron, and aluminum; plant disease resistance; increased availability of phosphorus; and reduced transpiration.
Silica - Functions in plant or cell
In epidermal cell walls silica reduces water loss by cuticular transpiration
Silica acts as a barrier against invasion of parasites and pathogens in endodermis cells of roots
Silica increases epidermal layer of leaves resistance to fungal attacks.
Silica is associated with incorporation of inorganic phosphate into ATP, ADP, and sugar phosphates
Silica - Special considerations
Because of the abundance of silica in the soil, it is difficult to prove it is an essential micronutrient for higher plants
Silica reduced manganese and iron toxicity where soil levels are excessive
Silica - The conditions associated with deficiencies
Silica - Deficiency symptoms
Reduced vegetative growth and grain production
Drastic reduction in growth
Leaf freckling on leaf blades directly exposed to full sunlight
Although more than 95% of soil sulfur is bonded in organic forms and present in the upper layers of most soils, these reserves are not readily available to the plant.
Forms of Sulfur in Plants:
Sulfur is absorption by plant roots almost exclusively as sulfate, SO4-². Small quantities of SO2 can be absorbed through plant leaves and utilized within plants, but high concentrations are toxic. Typically concentrations of sulfur in plants range between 0.1 and 0.5%. Among the families of crop plants sulfur content increases in order Gramineae < Leguminosae < Cruciferae and is reflected in the differences in sulfur content of their seeds: 0.18-0.19%, 0.25-0.3%, and 1.1-1.7%, respectively.
Functions of Sulfur in Plants
Sulfur is required for synthesis of the S-containing amino acids, which are essential components of protein. Approximately 90% of the sulfur in plants is found in these amino acids. Increasing sulfur availability increase sulfur content in leaves, which increases sulfur containing amino acids.
Plants suffering sulfur deficiency accumulate non-protein nitrogen in the form of NH2 and NH3. It is apparent that sulfur fertilization improves the quality of this forage by narrowing the nitrogen to sulfur ratio. A Nitrogen to sulfur ratio of between 9:1 and 12: 1 is needed for effective use of nitrogen by rumen and microorganisms. This beneficial effect of sulfur fertilization on improving crop quality through reductions in the nitrogen to sulfur ratio is important in animal nutrition.
Ag-Gel is a naturally occurring micronutrient plant fertilizer concentrated into a soluble silicate gel. Produced from naturally occurring micronutrient mineral sources, Ag-Gel is a semi-permeable gel membrane that absorbs and holds over 700% its dry weight in water. When applied to the soil it creates a nutrient rich moisture barrier which helps reduce evaporation from the soil while providing plants essential nutrients they need to thrive.
by Dawn Adrienne Taylor
Information has finally reached the daily press warning of the link between
mineral-deficient foods and degenerative diseases. But what can we
do to improve our health immediately and prevent future disease?
It took almost 30 years of sourcing optimum nutrition before
I discovered a unique 75 organic plant-derived mineral
supplement that is transforming my health
and that of countless others.
“Minerals in the soil control the metabolism of plants, animals and man.
All of life will be either healthy or unhealthy according to the fertility of the soil.”
This was a statement made by Dr Alexus Carrel, Nobel Prize Winner, in 1912. Almost a hundred years later, agriculturist and writer, Graham Harvey, wrote in The Daily Telegraph , 18 February 2006: “Britain's once fertile soil has been systematically stripped of its crucial minerals by industrial farming, leaving our fruit and vegetables tasteless and a nation in chronic ill health.”
William Albrecht (1896-1974 Illinois), referred to as the Father of Soil Research for his pioneering studies of the effects of infertile soil on plants and animals, warned in 1930s that if the land was not remineralised, there would be a massive increase in human degenerative diseases.
under the circumstances of the case the demand for entry or inspection is arbitrary and capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law.
forbidden from taking petitioners' land for the purpose of conferring a private benefit on a particular private party. See Midkiff, 467 U.S. , at 245
no legitimate purpose of government and would thus be void”); Missouri Pacific R. Co. v. Nebraska , 164 U.S. 403 (1896
evidence of an illegitimate purpose in this case. 6 when this Court began applying the Fifth Amendment to the States at the close of the 19th century, it embraced the broader and more natural interpretation of public use as “public purpose.” See, e.g. , Fallbrook Irrigation Dist . v. Bradley , 164 U.S. 112 , 158—164 (1896). Thus, in a case upholding a mining company's use of an aerial bucket line to transport ore over property it did not own, Justice Holmes' opinion for the Court stressed “the inadequacy of use by the general public as a universal test.” Strickley v. Highland Boy Gold Mining Co., 200 U.S. 527 , 531 (1906). 9 We have repeatedly and consistently rejected that narrow test ever since. 10
Reaffirming Berman 's deferential approach to legislative judgments in this field, we concluded that the State's purpose of eliminating the “social and economic evils of a land oligopoly” qualified as a valid public use. 467 U.S. , at 241—242. Our opinion also rejected the contention that the mere fact that the State immediately transferred the properties to private individuals upon condemnation somehow diminished the public character of the taking. “[I]t is only the taking's purpose, and not its mechanics,” we explained, that matters in determining public use. Id. , at 244.
Our earliest cases in particular embodied a strong theme of federalism, emphasizing the “great respect” that we owe to state legislatures and state courts in discerning local public needs. See Hairston v.Danville & Western R. Co ., 208 U.S. 598 , 606—607 (1908) (noting that these needs were likely to vary depending on a State's “resources, the capacity of the soil, the relative importance of industries to the general public welfare, and the long-established methods and habits of the people”). 11 For more than a century, ourpublic use jurisprudence has wisely eschewed rigid formulas and intrusive scrutiny in favor of affording legislatures broad latitude in determining what public needs justify the use of the takings power
Quite simply, the government's pursuit of a public purpose will often benefit individual private parties. For example, in Midkiff , the forced transfer of property conferred a direct and significant benefit on those lessees who were previously unable to purchase their homes
“When the legislature's purpose is legitimate and its means are not irrational, our cases make clear that empirical debates over the wisdom of takings–no less than debates over the wisdom of other kinds of socioeconomic legislation–are not to be carried out in the federal courts.” Midkiff, 467 U.S. , at 242. 20 Indeed, earlier this Term we explained why similar practical concerns (among others) undermined the use of the “substantially advances” formula in our regulatory takings doctrine. See Lingle v. Chevron U.S. A. Inc. , 544 U.S. ___, ___ (2005) (slip op., at 14—15) (noting that this formula “would empower–and might often require–courts to substitute their predictive judgments for those of elected legislatures and expert agencies”). The disadvantages of a heightened form of review are especially pronounced in this type of case. Orderly implementation of a comprehensive redevelopment plan obviously requires that the legal rights of all interested parties be established before new construction can be commenced. A constitutional rule that required postponement of the judicial approval of every condemnation until the likelihood of success of the plan had been assured would unquestionably impose a significant impediment to the successful consummation of many such plans.
1. “[N]or shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” U.S. Const., Amdt. 5. That Clause is made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment . See Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. v. Chicago, 166 U.S. 226 (1897).
2. Various state agencies studied the project's economic, environmental, and social ramifications. As part of this process, a team of consultants evaluated six alternative development proposals for the area, which varied in extensiveness and emphasis. The Office of Planning and Management, one of the primary state agencies undertaking the review, made findings that the project was consistent with relevant state and municipal development policies. See 1 App. 89—95.
3. In the remainder of the opinion we will differentiate between the City and the NLDC only where necessary.
4. While this litigation was pending before the Superior Court, the NLDC announced that it would lease some of the parcels to private developers in exchange for their agreement to develop the land according to the terms of the development plan. Specifically, the NLDC was negotiating a 99-year ground lease with Corcoran Jennison, a developer selected from a group of applicants. The negotiations contemplated a nominal rent of $1 per year, but no agreement had yet been signed. See 268 Conn. 1, 9, 61, 843 A. 2d 500, 509—510, 540 (2004).
5. See also Calder v. Bull , 3 Dall. 386, 388 (1798) (“An act of the Legislature (for I cannot call it a law) contrary to the great first principles of the social compact, cannot be considered a rightful exercise of legis-
lative authority… . A few instances will suffice to explain what I
mean… [A] law that takes property from A. and gives it to B: It is against all reason and justice, for a people to entrust a Legislature with such powers; and, therefore, it cannot be presumed that they have done it. The genius, the nature, and the spirit, of our State Governments, amount to a prohibition of such acts of legislation; and the general principles of law and reason forbid them” (emphasis deleted)).
6. See 268 Conn., at 159, 843 A. 2d, at 595 (Zarella, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part) (“The record clearly demonstrates that the development plan was not intended to serve the interests of Pfizer, Inc., or any other private entity, but rather, to revitalize the local economy by creating temporary and permanent jobs, generating a significant increase in tax revenue, encouraging spin-off economic activities and maximizing public access to the waterfront”). And while the City intends to transfer certain of the parcels to a private developer in a long-term lease–which developer, in turn, is expected to lease the office space and so forth to other private tenants–the identities of those private parties were not known when the plan was adopted. It is, of course, difficult to accuse the government of having taken A 's property to benefit the private interests of B when the identity of B was unknown.
7. See, e.g. , Dayton Gold & Silver Mining Co. v. Seawell , 11 Nev. 394, 410, 1876 WL 4573, *11 (1876) (“If public occupation and enjoyment of the object for which land is to be condemned furnishes the only and true test for the right of eminent domain, then the legislature would certainly have the constitutional authority to condemn the lands of any private citizen for the purpose of building hotels and theaters. Why not? A hotel is used by the public as much as a railroad. The public have the same right, upon payment of a fixed compensation, to seek rest and refreshment at a public inn as they have to travel upon a railroad”).
8. From upholding the Mill Acts (which authorized manufacturers dependent on power-producing dams to flood upstream lands in exchange for just compensation), to approving takings necessary for the economic development of the West through mining and irrigation, many state courts either circumvented the “use by the public” test when necessary or abandoned it completely. See Nichols, The Meaning of Public Use in the Law of Eminent Domain, 20 B. U. L. Rev. 615, 619—624 (1940) (tracing this development and collecting cases). For example, in rejecting the “use by the public” test as overly restrictive, the Nevada Supreme Court stressed that “[m]ining is the greatest of the industrial pursuits in this state. All other interests are subservient to it. Our mountains are almost barren of timber, and our valleys could never be made profitable for agricultural purposes except for the fact of a home market having been created by the mining developments in different sections of the state. The mining and milling interests give employment to many men, and the benefits derived from this business are distributed as much, and sometimes more, among the laboring classes than with the owners of the mines and mills. … The present prosperity of the state is entirely due to the mining developments already made, and the entire people of the state are directly interested in having the future developments unobstructed by the obstinate action of any individual or individuals.” Dayton Gold & Silver Mining Co. , 11 Nev. , at 409—410, 1876 WL, at *11.
9. See also Clark v. Nash, 198 U.S. 361 (1905) (upholding a statute that authorized the owner of arid land to widen a ditch on his neighbor's property so as to permit a nearby stream to irrigate his land).
10. See, e.g. , Mt. Vernon-Woodberry Cotton Duck Co. v. Alabama Interstate Power Co. , 240 U.S. 30 , 32 (1916) (“The inadequacy of use by the general public as a universal test is established”); Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co. , 467 U.S. 986 , 1014—1015 (1984) (“This Court, however, has rejected the notion that a use is a public use only if the property taken is put to use for the general public”).
11. See also Clark , 198 U.S., at 367—368; Strickley v. Highland Boy Gold Mining Co., 200 U.S. 527 , 531 (1906) (“In the opinion of the legislature and the Supreme Court of Utah the public welfare of that State demands that aerial lines between the mines upon its mountain sides and railways in the valleys below should not be made impossible by the refusal of a private owner to sell the right to cross his land. The Constitution of the United States does not require us to say that they are wrong”); O'Neill v. Leamer, 239 U.S. 244 , 253 (1915) (“States may take account of their special exigencies, and when the extent of their arid or wet lands is such that a plan for irrigation or reclamation according to districts may fairly be regarded as one which promotes the public interest, there is nothing in the Federal Constitution which denies to them the right to formulate this policy or to exercise the power of eminent domain in carrying it into effect. With the local situation the state court is peculiarly familiar and its judgment is entitled to the highest respect”).
13. It is a misreading of Berman to suggest that the only public use upheld in that case was the initial removal of blight. See Reply Brief for Petitioners 8. The public use described in Berman extended beyond that to encompass the purpose of developing that area to create conditions that would prevent a reversion to blight in the future. See 348 U.S. , at 34—35 (“It was not enough, [the experts] believed, to remove existing buildings that were insanitary or unsightly. It was important to redesign the whole area so as to eliminate the conditions that cause slums. . . . The entire area needed redesigning so that a balanced, integrated plan could be developed for the region, including not only new homes, but also schools, churches, parks, streets, and shopping centers. In this way it was hoped that the cycle of decay of the area could be controlled and the birth of future slums prevented”). Had the public use in Berman been defined more narrowly, it would have been difficult to justify the taking of the plaintiff's nonblighted department store.
14. Any number of cases illustrate that the achievement of a public good often coincides with the immediate benefiting of private parties. See, e.g. , National Railroad Passenger Corporation v. Boston & Maine Corp., 503 U.S. 407 , 422 (1992) (public purpose of “facilitating Amtrak's rail service” served by taking rail track from one private company and transferring it to another private company); Brown v. Legal Foundation of Wash. , 538 U.S. 216 (2003) (provision of legal services to the poor is a valid public purpose). It is worth noting that in Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff, 467 U.S. 229 (1984), Monsanto , and Boston & Maine Corp ., the property in question retained the same use even after the change of ownership.
15. Notably, as in the instant case, the private developers in Berman were required by contract to use the property to carry out the redevelopment plan. See 348 U.S. , at 30.
16. Nor do our cases support Justice O'Connor's novel theory that the government may only take property and transfer it to private parties when the initial taking eliminates some “harmful property use.” Post , at 8 (dissenting opinion). There was nothing “harmful” about the nonblighted department store at issue in Berman , 348 U.S. 26 ; see also n. 13, supra; nothing “harmful” about the lands at issue in the mining and agriculture cases, see, e.g. , Strickley , 200 U.S. 527 ; see also nn. 9, 11, supra; and certainly nothing “harmful” about the trade secrets owned by the pesticide manufacturers in Monsanto , 467 U.S. 986 . In each case, the public purpose we upheld depended on a private party's future use of the concededly nonharmful property that was taken. By focusing on a property's future use, as opposed to its past use, our cases are faithful to the text of the Takings Clause. See U.S. Const., Amdt. 5. (“[N]or shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation”). Justice O'Connor's intimation that a “public purpose” may not be achieved by the action of private parties, see post , at 8, confuses the purpose of a taking with its mechanics , a mistake
we warned of in Midkiff , 467 U.S. , at 244. See also Berman , 348 U.S. , at 33—34 (“The public end may be as well or better served through
an agency of private enterprise than through a department of
17. Courts have viewed such aberrations with a skeptical eye. See, e.g. , 99 Cents Only Stores v. Lancaster Redevelopment Agency , 237 F. Supp. 2d 1123 (CD Cal. 2001); cf. Cincinnati v. Vester , 281 U.S. 439 , 448 (1930) (taking invalid under state eminent domain statute for lack of a reasoned explanation). These types of takings may also implicate other constitutional guarantees. See Village of Willowbrook v. Olech , 528 U.S. 562 (2000) (per curiam).
19. A parade of horribles is especially unpersuasive in this context, since the Takings Clause largely “operates as a conditional limitation, permitting the government to do what it wants so long as it pays the charge.” Eastern Enterprises v. Apfel , 524 U.S. 498 , 545 (1998) (Kennedy, J., concurring in judgment and dissenting in part). Speaking of the takings power, Justice Iredell observed that “[i]t is not sufficient to urge, that the power may be abused, for, such is the nature of all power–such is the tendency of every human institution: and, it might as fairly be said, that the power of taxation, which is only circumscribed by the discretion of the Body, in which it is vested, ought not to be granted, because the Legislature, disregarding its true objects, might, for visionary and useless projects, impose a tax to the amount of nineteen shillings in the pound. We must be content to limit power where we can, and where we cannot, consistently with its use, we must be content to repose a salutory confidence.” Calder , 3 Dall., at 400 (opinion concurring in result).
20. See also Boston & Maine Corp., 503 U.S., at 422—423 (“[W]e need not make a specific factual determination whether the condemnation will accomplish its objectives”); Monsanto , 467 U.S., at 1015, n. 18 (“Monsanto argues that EPA and, by implication, Congress, misapprehended the true ‘barriers to entry' in the pesticide industry and that the challenged provisions of the law create, rather than reduce, barriers to entry… . Such economic arguments are better directed to Congress. The proper inquiry before this Court is not whether the provisions in fact will accomplish their stated objectives. Our review is limited to determining that the purpose is legitimate and that Congress rationally could have believed that the provisions would promote that objective”).
21. The amici raise questions about the fairness of the measure of just compensation. See, e.g. , Brief for American Planning Association et al. as Amici Curiae 26—30. While important, these questions are not before us in this litigation.
22. See, e.g. , County of Wayne v. Hathcock , 471 Mich. 445, 684 N. W. 2d 765 (2004).
23. Under California law, for instance, a city may only take land for economic development purposes in blighted areas. Cal. Health & Safety Code Ann. §§33030—33037 (West 1997). See, e.g. , Redevelopment Agency of Chula Vista v. Rados Bros ., 95 Cal. App. 4th 309 (2002).
24. For example, some argue that the need for eminent domain has been greatly exaggerated because private developers can use numerous techniques, including secret negotiations or precommitment strategies, to overcome holdout problems and assemble lands for genuinely profitable projects. See Brief for Jane Jacobs as Amicus Curiae 13—15; see also Brief for John Norquist as Amicus Curiae . Others argue to the contrary, urging that the need for eminent domain is especially great with regard to older, small cities like New London , where centuries of development have created an extreme overdivision of land and thus a real market impediment to land assembly. See Brief for Connecticut Conference for Municipalities et al. as Amici Curiae 13, 21; see also Brief for National League of Cities et al. as Amici Curiae .
Clearly, there is no basis for exempting economic development from our traditionally broad understanding of public purpose.
Exempts officers and employees of the Government disposing of property under Property Act from liability with respect to such disposition, except for their own fraud, and from liability for the collection of any purchase price determined to be uncollectible.
Deals with the civil liability of persons who engage in fraudulent activities for obtaining any payment, property, or other benefit from the United States in connection with procurement, transfer, or disposition of property.
Confers jurisdiction on the courts to hear, try, and determine the suits provided for in subsection (b).
Provides that civil remedies provided for under this section shall be in addition to all other criminal penalties and civil remedies provided by law.
SUBCHAPTER V--URBAN LAND UTILIZATION
Directs that urban land transactions (acquisition, use, and disposition) entered into for GSA or on behalf of other Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable, be consistent with zoning and land-use practices and in accordance with planning and development objectives of the local governments and local planning agencies concerned.
Directs the Administrator, prior to offering urban land for sale, to notify and provide the local zoning office an opportunity of zoning for the use of such land in accordance with local comprehensive planning. Further directs the Administrator to furnish prospective purchases with information concerning zoning and availability of utilities to urban property.
Directs the Administrator, when proposing to acquire or change the use of any real property situated in an urban area, to notify the local zoning and land-use office and, to the extent practical, comply with and conform to regulations and the planning and development objectives of the local government.
Authorizes the waiver of sections 532 and 533 during national emergencies.
Provides the definition of terms used in Subchapter V--Urban Land Utilization.
SUBCHAPTER VI--SELECTION OF ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS
Provides the definition of terms used in Subchapter VI.
States the intent of Congress that the Federal Government publicly announce all requirements for architectural and engineering services, and to negotiate contracts for such services on the basis of demonstrated competence, qualifications and fair and reasonable prices.
Directs an agency head, for each proposed project, to evaluate statements of qualifications and performance data and conduct discussions with no less than 3 firms and select therefrom, in order of preference, no less than 3 firms deemed to be the most qualified to perform the services required.
Directs the agency head to negotiate a contract with qualified firm at fair and reasonable compensation taking into account the estimated value of the services to be rendered, the scope, complexity and professional nature thereof.
Should the agency head be unable to negotiate a satisfactory contract with the highest qualified firm, negotiates should be formally terminated. The agency head should then undertake negotiations with the second most qualified firm. Failing accord with the second firm, the agency head should terminate negotiations and undertake negotiations with the third most qualified.
Failing to negotiate a satisfactory contract with any of the selected firms, the agency head should select additional firms in order of their competence and qualification and continue negotiations in accordance with this section until an agreement is reached.
Fraud, deception and lies in research reveal how science is (mostly) self-correcting
In his 1974 commencement speech at the California Institute of Technology, Nobel laureate physicist Richard P. Feynman articulated the foundation of scientific integrity: “The first principle is that you must not fool yourself—and you are the easiest person to fool.... After you've not fooled yourself, it's easy not to fool other scientists. You just have to be honest in a conventional way after that.”
Unfortunately, says Feynman's Caltech colleague David Goodstein in his new book On Fact and Fraud: Cautionary Tales from the Front Lines of Science (Princeton University Press, 2010), some scientists do try to fool their colleagues, and believing that everyone is conventionally honest may make a person more likely to be duped by deliberate fraud. Nature may be subtle, but she does not intentionally lie. People do. Why some scientists lie is what Goodstein wants to understand. He begins by debunking myths about science such as: “A scientist should never be motivated to do science for personal gain, advancement or other rewards.” “Scientists should always be objective and impartial when gathering data.” “Scientists must never believe dogmatically in an idea or use rhetorical exaggeration in promoting it.” “Scientists should never permit their judgments to be affected by authority.” These and many other maxims just do not reflect how science works in practice.
Knowing that scientists are highly motivated by status and rewards, that they are no more objective than professionals in other fields, that they can dogmatically defend an idea no less vehemently than ideologues and that they can fall sway to the pull of authority allows us to understand that, in Goodstein's assessment, “injecting falsehoods into the body of science is rarely, if ever, the purpose of those who perpetrate fraud. They almost always believe that they are injecting a truth into the scientific record.” Goodstein should know because his job as the vice provost of Caltech was to investigate allegations of scientific misconduct. From his investigations Goodstein found three risk factors present in nearly all cases of scientific fraud. The perpetrators, he writes, “1. Were under career pressure; 2. Knew, or thought they knew, what the answer to the problem they were considering would turn out to be if they went to all the trouble of doing the work properly; and 3. Were working in a field where individual experiments are not expected to be precisely reproducible.”
To detect fraud, we must first define it, and Goodstein does: “Research misconduct is defined as fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results.” Next there must “be significant departure from accepted practices of the scientific community.” Then, the misconduct must be “committed intentionally, or knowingly, or in reckless disregard of accepted practices,” and finally, as in any court of law, the fraud charge must be proved by a preponderance of evidence.
Clear-cut cases of fraud include the twin studies of British psychologist Cyril L. Burt (who faked so many twins that he had to fabricate additional twin researchers), the Sloan-Kettering Institute cancer researcher William Summerlin's experiments on inducing healthy black skin grafts on white mice (which he was caught enhancing with a black felt-tipped pen), physicist Victor Ninov's alleged discovery of element 118 (predicted by others so he faked data for its existence), and of course the famous Piltdown Man hoax (which turned out to be the jaw of an orangutan dyed to look old). Other cases are not so clear. Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons's “discovery” of cold fusion, Goodstein concludes, was most likely a case of scientists who “convince themselves that they are in the possession of knowledge that does not in fact exist.” This self-deception is distinctly different from deliberate deception.
So some scientists sin, it's true. Given the fiercely competitive nature of research funding and the hardscrabble intensity of scientific status seeking, it is surprising that fraud isn't more rampant. The reason that it is so rare (compared with, say, corruption in politics) is that science is designed to detect deception (of one's self and others) through colleague collaboration, graduate student mentoring, peer review, experimental corroboration and results replication. The general environment of openness and honesty, though mythic in its idealized form, nonetheless exists and in the long run weeds out the cheats and exposes frauds and hoaxes, as history has demonstrated.
We consider a question that has split the federal courts:
May a non-settling PRP intervene in litigation to oppose a consent decree incorporating a settlement that, if approved, would bar contribution from the settling PRP?
States may make whatever laws they wish (consistent with their State Constitutions) except as prohibited by the US Constitution. Only Laws made by Congress, which are pursuant to the Constitution, qualify as part of the General Government Law of the Land.
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof … shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. [emphasis added]
"Though this was the intent of the Congress [to waive sovereign immunity] in passing the 1972 Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments, the Supreme Court, encouraged by Federal agencies, has misconstrued the original intent." S. Rep. No. 370, 95th Cong., 1st Sess. 67 (1977), reprinted in 1977 U.S.C.C.A.N. 4326, 4392. See Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977, Pub. L. No. 95-95, [section] 116, 91 Stat. 711 (1977); see also Clean Water Act Amendments of 1977, Pub. L. 217, [subsection] 60, 61(a), 91 Stat. 1597, 1598 (1977).
Words that everyone once used are now obsolete, and so are the men whose names were once on everyone's lips: Camillus, Caeso, Volesus, Dentatus, and to a lesser degree Scipio and Cato, and yes, even Augustus, Hadrian, and Antoninus are less spoken of now than they were in their own days. For all things fade away, become the stuff of legend, and are soon buried in oblivion. Mind you, this is true only for those who blazed once like bright stars in the firmament, but for the rest, as soon as a few clods of earth cover their corpses, they are 'out of sight, out of mind.' In the end, what would you gain from everlasting remembrance? Absolutely nothing. So what is left worth living for? This alone: justice in thought, goodness in action, speech that cannot deceive, and a disposition glad of whatever comes, welcoming it as necessary, as familiar, as flowing from the same source and fountain as yourself. (IV. 33, trans. Scot and David Hicks)
TITLE 5 > PART I > CHAPTER 3 > § 301 Miner's Apex Law Application
§ 301. Departmental regulations - Creation by General Mining Law
The head of an Executive department or military department may prescribe regulations for the government of his department, the conduct of its employees, the distribution and performance of its business, and the custody, use, and preservation of its records, papers, and property. This section does not authorize withholding information from the public or limiting the availability of records to the public.
§ 302. Delegation of authority
(a) For the purpose of this section, “agency” has the meaning given it by section 5721 of this title. (b) In addition to the authority to delegate conferred by other law, the head of an agency may delegate to subordinate officials the authority vested in him— (1) by law to take final action on matters pertaining to the employment, direction, and general administration of personnel under his agency; and (2) by section 3702 of title 44 to authorize the publication of advertisements, notices, or proposals.
§ 305. Systematic agency review of operations
(a) For the purpose of this section, “agency” means an Executive agency, but does not include— (1) a Government controlled corporation; (2) the Tennessee Valley Authority; (3) the Virgin Islands Corporation; (4) the Atomic Energy Commission; (5) the Central Intelligence Agency; (6) the Panama Canal Commission; or (7) the National Security Agency, Department of Defense. (b) Under regulations prescribed and administered by the President, each agency shall review systematically the operations of each of its activities, functions, or organization units, on a continuing basis. (c) The purpose of the reviews includes— (1) determining the degree of efficiency and economy in the operation of the agency's activities, functions, or organization units; (2) identifying the units that are outstanding in those respects; and (3) identifying the employees whose personal efforts have caused their units to be outstanding in efficiency and economy of operations.
§ 306. Strategic plans
(a) No later than June 30th, 2010, the head of each agency shall submit to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and to the Congress a strategic plan for program activities. Such plan shall contain— (1) a comprehensive mission statement covering the major functions and operations of the agency; (2) general goals and objectives, including outcome-related goals and objectives, for the major functions and operations of the agency; (3) a description of how the goals and objectives are to be achieved, including a description of the operational processes, skills and technology, and the human, capital, information, and other resources required to meet those goals and objectives; (4) a description of how the performance goals included in the plan required by section 1115 (a) of title 31 shall be related to the general goals and objectives in the strategic plan; (5) an identification of those key factors external to the agency and beyond its control that could significantly affect the achievement of the general goals and objectives; and (6) a description of the program evaluations used in establishing or revising general goals and objectives, with a schedule for future program evaluations. (b) The strategic plan shall cover a period of not less than five years forward from the fiscal year in which it is submitted. The strategic plan shall be updated and revised at least every three years, except that the strategic plan for the Department of Defense shall be updated and revised at least every four years. (c) The performance plan required by section 1115 of title 31 shall be consistent with the agency's strategic plan. A performance plan may not be submitted for a fiscal year not covered by a current strategic plan under this section. (d) When developing a strategic plan, the agency shall consult with the Congress, and shall solicit and consider the views and suggestions of those entities potentially affected by or interested in such a plan. (e) The functions and activities of this section shall be considered to be inherently Governmental functions. The drafting of strategic plans under this section shall be performed only by Federal employees. (f) For purposes of this section the term “agency” means an Executive agency defined under section 105 , but does not include the Central Intelligence Agency, the Government Accountability Office, the Panama Canal Commission, the United States Postal Service, and the Postal Regulatory Commission.
ARMAN MINES MINISTRY OF MINERAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL AND THE LOST HUMAN USE REMEDIATION AND RESTORATION TRUST CENTER FOR HEALTH, INSTITUTE FOR LIBERTY AND INDEPENDENCE HAZARD AND REMEDIATION DIRECTORATE AND THE LOST CONFIDENCE MINE & THE NATIVE COPPER CO. DISASTER ASSISTANCE DIRECTORATE ANNOUNCE PLANS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES ON THE FEDERAL LANDS SURROUNDING IRON MOUNTAIN, INCLUDING THE COMMUNITIES OF KESWICK, TAYLOR, WHITEHOUSE, MATHESON, MINNESOTA, CORAM, MOTION AND THE CHAPPIE-SHASTA OHVA AND THE WHISKEYTOWN-SHASTA-TRINITY NATIONAL FORESTS, DEMOCRAT MOUNTAIN, BATTLE CREEK, AND THE SACRAMENTO RIVER SHORELINE WITH SAFE AND AFFORDABLE FIRE AND EARTHQUAKE RESISTANT CONSTRUCTION AND SPECIAL ASSISTANCE, TRANSPORTATION, AND FINANCING PROGRAMS FOR SENIORS, VETERANS, AND THE POOR OR DISABLED. ADMINISTRATIVE JURISDICTION AND LAND ACQUISITIONS WILL BE COORDINATED WITH THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT, HUD, DOT, THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND THE ARMAN MINERALS RESOURCE DEFENSE COUNCIL & THE LOST HUMAN USE REMEDIATION & RESTORATION TRUST.
CALUMET PIGMENT CO. OFFERS 72% GYPSUM 22% IRON OXIDES NATURAL IRON MOUNTAIN COLOR FOR CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION AND ROOFING
An Archaeal Iron -Oxidizing Extreme Acidophile Important in Acid Mine Drainage
Katrina J. Edwards, 1 2 * Philip L. Bond, 1 Thomas M. Gihring, 1 Jill ian F. Banfield 1
A new species of Archaea grows at pH ~0.5 and ~40°C in slime streamers and attached to pyrite surfaces at a sulfide ore body, Iron Mountain , California. This iron -oxidizing Archaeon is capable of growth at pH 0. This species represents a dominant prokaryote in the env iron ment studied (slimes and sediments) and constituted up to 85% of the microbial community when solution concentrations were high (conductivity of 100 to 160 millisiemens per centimeter). The presence of this and other closely related Thermoplasmales suggests that these acidophiles are important contributors to acid mine drainage and may substantially impact iron and sulfur cycles.
1 Department of Geology and Geophysics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1215 West Dayton Street, Madison, WI 53706, USA.
2 Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, Department of Marine Chemistry and Geochemistry, Woods Hole, MA 02543, USA.
* To whom correspondence should be addressed at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, Department of Marine Chemistry and Geochemistry, Woods Hole, MA 02543, USA.
Enigmatic, ultrasmall, uncultivated Archaea
+ Author Affiliations
? 1 Present address: Department of Geological Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109.
Edited by Norman R. Pace, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, and approved March 30, 2010 (received for review December 16, 2009)
Metagenomics has provided access to genomes of as yet uncultivated microorganisms in natural environments, yet there are gaps in our knowledge—particularly for Archaea—that occur at relatively low abundance and in extreme environments. Ultrasmall cells (<500 nm in diameter) from lineages without cultivated representatives that branch near the crenarchaeal/euryarchaeal divide have been detected in a variety of acidic ecosystems. We reconstructed composite, near-complete ~1-Mb genomes for three lineages, referred to as ARMAN (archaeal Richmond Mine acidophilic nanoorganisms), from environmental samples and a biofilm filtrate. Genes of two lineages are among the smallest yet described, enabling a 10% higher coding density than found genomes of the same size, and there are noncontiguous genes. No biological function could be inferred for up to 45% of genes and no more than 63% of the predicted proteins could be assigned to a revised set of archaeal clusters of orthologous groups. Some core metabolic genes are more common in Crenarchaeota than Euryarchaeota , up to 21% of genes have the highest sequence identity to bacterial genes, and 12 belong to clusters of orthologous groups that were previously exclusive to bacteria. A small subset of 3D cryo-electron tomographic reconstructions clearly show penetration of the ARMAN cell wall and cytoplasmic membranes by protuberances extended from cells of the archaeal order Thermoplasmatales . Interspecies interactions, the presence of a unique internal tubular organelle [Comolli, et al. (2009) ISME J 3:159–167], and many genes previously only affiliated with Crenarchaea or Bacteria indicate extensive unique physiology in organisms that branched close to the time that Cren - and Euryarchaeotal lineages diverged.
Weird, Ultra-Small Microbes Turn Up in Acidic Mine Drainage
ScienceDaily (May 6, 2010) — In the depths of a former copper mine in Northern California dwell what may be the smallest, most stripped-down forms of life ever discovered.
The microbes -- members of the domain of one-celled creatures called Archaea -- are smaller than other known microorganisms, rivaled in size only by a microbe that can survive solely as a parasite attached to the outside of other cells. Their genomes, reconstructed by a group at the University of California, Berkeley, are among the smallest ever reported.
The researchers also discovered another mine-dwelling microbe that occasionally produces weird protuberances unlike any structures seen before in Archaea and uses them to penetrate the ultra-small microbes.
"Other cells in the mine have what looks like a needle that sometimes pokes right into the cells," said Brett J. Baker, a researcher in UC Berkeley's Department of Earth and Planetary Science and first author of a new paper describing the findings. "It is really remarkable and suggests an interaction that has never been described before in nature."
These cellular extensions are only present when this interaction between the microbes is seen, noted co-author Luis R. Comolli, a microscopist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL).
Baker, Comolli and a team led by Jillian Banfield, UC Berkeley professor of earth and planetary science and of environmental science, policy and management and staff scientist at LBNL, published their findings in the online early edition of the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences .
Under a light microscope, the ultra-small microbes look like specks of dust. But Comolli used a state-of-the-art cryoelectron microscope, or cryoEM, to obtain high-resolution, 3-D images and even measure an individual microbe's internal volume -- between one-tenth and one-hundredth the volume of an E. coli bacterium. Each of the microbes, dubbed ARMAN, for archaeal Richmond Mine acidophilic nanoorganisms, is ellipsoidal and only 200-400 nanometers in diameter, one-third the diameter of the rod-shaped E. coli .
The team reconstructed the genomes of three distinct lineages of ARMAN and found them to be tiny -- a mere 1 million base pairs, in contrast to hundreds of billions in humans. In the smallest of the three, the average gene length is only 774 base pairs, in contrast to the average gene length in humans of 10,000 to 15,000 base pairs. Base pairs, the smallest chemical units of the gene, are nucleic acids that come in four forms. The base pairs are chained together to make DNA, and a gene is a sequence of base-pairs coding for a unique protein.
The genomes are so small that the researchers initially suspected that the ARMAN microbes are parasites upon other microbes, since parasites can afford to lose genes that their host already has.
But of the 70 individual specimens so far imaged in 3-D, 90 percent seem to be free-living. The other 10 percent are impaled on the mysterious needle-like spines of Thermoplasmatales, the other Archaea living alongside ARMAN in the mine. The researchers suspect that the penetrating spines may mean that the microbes live off other microbes at least part of the time, unlike symbiotic organisms or parasites, which must always associate with other organisms to live.
"ARMAN are among the smallest microbes we know of that, if not free-living, are at least not permanently obliged to be a parasite or symbiont," Comolli said.
The cells are about as large as the largest viruses, which can replicate only in living organisms and are not considered to be "living."
"The genome is very compact," Baker added." A microbial genome 10 percent larger has the same number of genes as ARMAN."
The organism has a much higher percentage -- 45 percent -- of unknown genes than any other organism sequenced, he said.
"ARMAN share a lot of genes with Euryarchaeota and Crenarchaeaota , but they also have a lot of genes not seen before in these branches of Archaea ," he said, suggesting that ARMAN may have been around since these two branches split billions of years ago.
Three-dimensional cryoEM tomographic reconstructions show the unique architecture of ARMAN, Comolli said. It has very few ribosomes -- the machines that build proteins per unit volume, for example; in the same volume, E coli would have 100 times more. The ribosomes also are distributed close to the cell wall. ARMAN cells also have an enigmatic internal tube. Like other Archaea , however, they have no nucleus or other internal organelles.
Banfield's group first described the ARMAN microbes four years ago, after identifying the organisms in acidic pools in the Richmond Mine, which is owned by Ted Arman, in Iron Mountain, Calif. The team's continued analysis has revealed amazing organization within the mine drainage biofilm communities that grow on solutions with the acidity of battery acid. The new data will help the researchers explore even further the community of organisms in the mine and determine how the organisms are able to live in such harsh environs and convert iron sulfides to sulfuric acid.
"Having these microbes described at the genomic level allows us to develop molecular identification methods and combine these methods with a 3-D view of the microbes to study the distribution of these organisms within this little ecological system, this little society, in the mine," Comolli said.
The work was supported by the Department of Energy and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Astrobiology Institute. Sequencing was provided by the Community Sequencing Program at the Department of Energy Joint Genome Institute. This work was supported by DOE Genomics:GTL project Grant No. DE-FG02-05ER64134 (Office of Science) and sequencing was done at the DOE Joint Genome Institute. AFA was supported by grants from the Swedish Research Council and Carl Tryggers Foundation.
Community-wide analysis of microbial genome sequence signatures
Gregory J Dick, 1, 3 Anders F Andersson, 1, 4, 5 Brett J Baker, 1 Sheri L Simmons, 1 Brian C Thomas, 1 A Pepper Yelton, 1 and Jillian F Banfield 1, 2 1 Department of Earth and Planetary Science, University of California, 307 McCone Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA 2 Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Hilgard Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA 3 Current address: Department of Geological Sciences, University of Michigan, 1100 N. University Ave, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1005, USA 4 Current address: Evolutionary Biology Centre, Department of Limnology, Uppsala University, Norbyv. 18 D, SE-75236, Uppsala, Sweden 5 Current address: Department of Bacteriology, Swedish Institute for Infectious Disease Control, Nobels väg 18 SE-17182 Solna, Sweden Corresponding author. Gregory J Dick: email@example.com ; Anders F Andersson: firstname.lastname@example.org ; Brett J Baker: email@example.com ; Sheri L Simmons: firstname.lastname@example.org ; Brian C Thomas: email@example.com ; A Pepper Yelton: firstname.lastname@example.org ; Jillian F Banfield: email@example.com Received April 29, 2009; Revised July 10, 2009; Accepted August 21, 2009.
Abstract Background Analyses of DNA sequences from cultivated microorganisms have revealed genome-wide, taxa-specific nucleotide compositional characteristics, referred to as genome signatures. These signatures have far-reaching implications for understanding genome evolution and potential application in classification of metagenomic sequence fragments. However, little is known regarding the distribution of genome signatures in natural microbial communities or the extent to which environmental factors shape them. Results We analyzed metagenomic sequence data from two acidophilic biofilm communities, including composite genomes reconstructed for nine archaea, three bacteria, and numerous associated viruses, as well as thousands of unassigned fragments from strain variants and low-abundance organisms. Genome signatures, in the form of tetranucleotide frequencies analyzed by emergent self-organizing maps, segregated sequences from all known populations sharing < 50 to 60% average amino acid identity and revealed previously unknown genomic clusters corresponding to low-abundance organisms and a putative plasmid. Signatures were pervasive genome-wide. Clusters were resolved because intra-genome differences resulting from translational selection or protein adaptation to the intracellular (pH ~5) versus extracellular (pH ~1) environment were small relative to inter-genome differences. We found that these genome signatures stem from multiple influences but are primarily manifested through codon composition, which we propose is the result of genome-specific mutational biases. Conclusions An important conclusion is that shared environmental pressures and interactions among coevolving organisms do not obscure genome signatures in acid mine drainage communities. Thus, genome signatures can be used to assign sequence fragments to populations, an essential prerequisite if metagenomics is to provide ecological and biochemical insights into the functioning of microbial communities.
Background The age of genomics has opened up new perspectives on the natural microbial world, offering insights into organisms that drive geochemical cycles and are critical to human and environmental health. The prevalence of horizontal gene transfer, recombination, and population-level genomic diversity underscores the dynamic nature of bacterial and archaeal genomes and demands reconsideration of fundamental issues such as microbial taxonomy [ 1 , 2 ] and the concept of microbial species [ 3 , 4 ]. Application of genomics to uncultivated assemblages of microorganisms in natural environments ('metagenomics' or 'community genomics') has provided a new window into in situ microbial diversity and function [ 5 - 7 ]. To date, community genomics has revealed the form and extent of recombination and heterogeneity in gene content [ 8 - 11 ], elucidated virus-host interactions [ 12 ], redefined the extent of genetic and biochemical diversity in the oceans [ 13 - 15 ], uncovered new metabolic capabilities [ 16 - 19 ] and taxonomic groups [ 20 ], and shown how functions are distributed across environmental gradients [ 21 ]. An important approach to study evolutionary and ecological processes, pioneered by Karlin and others [ 22 ], is the analysis of nucleotide compositional characteristics of genomes. The simplest and most widely used measure of nucleotide composition, the abundance of guanine plus cytosine (%GC), is shaped by multiple factors encompassing both neutral and selective processes. Neutral factors include intrinsic properties of the replication, repair, and recombination machinery that result in mutational biases [ 23 , 24 ]. Selective processes encompass both internal (for example, translation machinery) and external influences such as physical (temperature, pressure), chemical (salinity, pH) and ecological factors (competition for metabolic resources [ 25 ] and niche complexity [ 26 ]). Although the relative importance of these factors remains uncertain [ 27 ], it is clear that %GC varies widely between species but is relatively constant within species. Thus, %GC has been used to trace origins of DNA fragments within genomes [ 28 ] and to assign fragmentary metagenomic sequences to candidate organisms [ 16 ]. Such inferences must be made with caution: %GC simplifies nucleotide composition down to a single parameter with known limitations for investigating genome dynamics [ 29 ]. Oligonucleotide frequencies capture species-specific characteristics of nucleotide composition more effectively than %GC [ 30 ]. Analyses of genome sequences from cultivated organisms have shown that the frequency at which oligonucleotides occur is unique between species while being conserved genome-wide within species [ 22 , 30 - 34 ]. Taken together, the frequency of all oligonucleotides of a given length defines the 'genome signature' (for example, the frequency of all possible 256 tetranucleotides). Sequence signatures are evident in oligonucleotides ranging from di- (two-mers) to octanucleotides (eight-mers). While the specificity of genome signatures increases with oligonucleotide length [ 35 ], the number of possible oligomers increases exponentially with oligomer length, so signatures based on longer oligomers require calculations over larger genomic regions to achieve sufficient sampling. Genome signatures have been used to detect horizontally transferred DNA [ 36 - 39 ], reconstruct phylogenetic relationships [ 22 , 32 , 40 ] and infer lifestyles of bacteriophage [ 41 , 42 ]. Genome signatures also offer a compelling means of assigning metagenomic sequence fragments to microbial taxa, a procedure termed 'binning' [ 43 ]. This is a prerequisite for realizing some of the most valuable opportunities random shotgun metagenomics offers, including assignment of ecological and biogeochemical functions to particular community members and assessment of population-level genomic diversity and community structure. However, binning is a formidable challenge because: the inherent diversity of microbial communities typically limits genomic assembly, resulting in highly fragmentary data [ 13 ]; there are few universally conserved phylogenetically informative markers, leaving the vast majority of metagenomic sequence fragments 'anonymous' with regard to their organism of origin; and current sequence databases grossly under-represent the microbial diversity in the natural world, limiting the utility of fragment recruitment or BLAST-based methods [ 13 , 44 , 45 ]. Consequently, it is important to develop methods that classify all genome sequence fragments independently of reference databases. Genome signatures are a promising approach for sequence classification. However, it is important to understand the source of the signal and how environmental effects and evolutionary distance will compromise it. To date, sequence signatures have been explored using genomes from cultivated microbes [ 22 , 30 - 34 ], and prospects for binning have been evaluated based largely on simulated datasets consisting of mixtures of isolate genomes [ 44 , 46 - 48 ]. Although these studies are indispensable in that they allow theoretical evaluation of binning capability, they do not represent the diversity (community-wide and within population) and dynamics (for example, horizontal gene transfer, recombination, viruses) of real microbial communities. Further, they employ genomes derived from disparate environments and so do not address the extent to which environmental factors shape genome signatures. It has been reported that environment shapes nucleotide composition [ 26 , 49 - 51 ]. If so, then genome signatures may not discriminate coexisting, coevolving organisms, especially where environmental pressures are extreme. On the other hand, binning results of real microbial communities [ 46 , 48 , 52 ] are inherently difficult to evaluate because the true identity of most sequence fragments is unknown. Thus, there remain fundamental questions regarding the forces and processes that give rise to and maintain genome signatures, and the extent to which these signatures are obscured by shared environmental pressures and community interactions such as horizontal gene transfer and broad host range viruses. Here we present a comprehensive analysis of genome signatures in sequences derived from natural biofilms inhabiting a subsurface chemolithoautotrophic acid mine drainage (AMD) ecosystem in the Richmond Mine at Iron Mountain, CA [ 53 ]. The biofilms are dominated by just a handful of organisms that are sustained primarily by the oxidation of Fe(II) derived from pyrite (FeS 2 ) dissolution [ 54 ]. Due to this relatively low diversity, modest levels of shotgun sequencing (approximately 100 Mb per sample) have yielded deep genomic sampling (10 to 20× sequence coverage) of the dominant populations, enabling reconstruction of 12 near-complete genomes from three samples [ 16 , 55 , 56 ] (BJ Baker et al ., submitted). These assembled composite genomes provide the organism affiliation of sequences with which binning accuracy can be evaluated. Therefore, the dataset allows assessment of binning performance while capturing sequence heterogeneity that is an intrinsic feature of natural microbial populations. We find that AMD biofilm microorganisms are indeed distinguished by population-specific genome signatures and show that sequence signatures can be used to identify and cluster sequences from low-abundance community members de novo , without reference genomes or reliance on databases. Our results have implications for metagenomic binning and provide new insights into the sources of genome signatures that distinguish coexisting populations.
Results Description of samples, community genomic sequencing and assembly An overview of our methodology is shown in Figure Figure1. 1 . Community genomic sequence was obtained from two previously described biofilm samples from the UBA location of the Richmond Mine at Iron Mountain: a pink subaerial biofilm collected in June 2005 ('UBA') [ 55 ] and a thicker floating biofilm collected in November 2005 ('UBA BS') [ 12 ]. These two biofilms contained overlapping subsets of organisms in different proportions. The UBA biofilm was dominated by bacterial Leptospirillum spp. group II and group III ( Nitrospirae ) populations, for which near-complete genomes have been reconstructed [ 55 , 56 ]. The most abundant microorganisms represented in the UBA BS genomic data were from archaeal populations, including an uncultivated representative of a novel euryarchaeal lineage, ARMAN-2 [ 20 ], and A-plasma, E-plasma, and I-plasma, members of the order Thermoplasmatales. To facilitate reconstruction of genomes from these and other lower-abundance organisms, a combined assembly included unassigned sequences from UBA and all sequences from UBA BS. Random shotgun sequences derived from both ends of approximately 3-kb DNA fragments, and each fragment was likely sampled from a different individual cell with a potentially distinct genome sequence. Therefore, genome reconstructions represent composite sequences. However, single nucleotide polymorphism density was typically very low (< 0.3%). For a small subset of the many cases where there were subpopulations with different gene content, alternative genome paths were also reconstructed [ 9 , 55 ].
Proteogenomic basis for ecological divergence of closely related bacteria in natural acidophilic microbial communities
+ Author Affiliations
? 1 Present address: University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824.
Bacterial species concepts are controversial. More widely accepted is the need to understand how differences in gene content and sequence lead to ecological divergence. To address this relationship in ecosystem context, we investigated links between genotype and ecology of two genotypic groups of Leptospirillum group II bacteria in comprehensively characterized, natural acidophilic biofilm communities. These groups share 99.7% 16S rRNA gene sequence identity and 95% average amino acid identity between their orthologs. One genotypic group predominates during early colonization, and the other group typically proliferates in later successional stages, forming distinct patches tens to hundreds of micrometers in diameter. Among early colonizing populations, we observed dominance of five genotypes that differed from each other by the extent of recombination with the late colonizing type. Our analyses suggest that the specific recombinant variant within the early colonizing group is selected for by environmental parameters such as temperature, consistent with recombination as a mechanism for ecological fine tuning. Evolutionary signatures, and strain-resolved expression patterns measured via mass spectrometry–based proteomics, indicate increased cobalamin biosynthesis, (de)methylation, and glycine cleavage in the late colonizer. This may suggest environmental changes within the biofilm during development, accompanied by redirection of compatible solutes from osmoprotectants toward metabolism. Across 27 communities, comparative proteogenomic analyses show that differential regulation of shared genes and expression of a small subset of the ~15% of genes unique to each genotype are involved in niche partitioning. In summary, the results show how subtle genetic variations can lead to distinct ecological strategies.
by VJ Denef - 2010 - Cited by 5 - Related articles
Feb 9, 2010 ... We thank Mr. T. W. Arman (President, Iron Mountain Mines Inc.) and ... Contributed by Jillian F. Banfield , November 13, 2009 (sent for review July 21, 2009) ..... PNAS Profiles. (Biographical profiles of Academy members) ...
The work was supported by the Department of Energy and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Astrobiology Institute. Sequencing was provided by the Community Sequencing Program at the Department of Energy Joint Genome Institute. This work was supported by DOE Genomics:GTL project Grant No. DE-FG02-05ER64134 (Office of Science) and sequencing was done at the DOE Joint Genome Institute. AFA was supported by grants from the Swedish Research Council and Carl Tryggers Foundation.
IMPEACH MENDEZ, RESTORE THE BUREAU OF MINES, COMMISSION THE APPOINTMENT TO FEMA
PEACEPIPE PIGMENT CO. OFFERS 72% GYPSUM 22% IRON OXIDES NATURAL IRON MOUNTAIN COLOR FOR CEMENT
$1,200.00 per ton or $89 per 5 gallon plus shipping
'ARMAN' & 'AG-GEL' solutions $50 per 5 gallon. plus shipping: fax orders to 530-275-4559
MR. T.W. "TED" ARMAN, INNOCENT VICTIM OF DISCRIMINATION BECAUSE OF PIGMENTS, PRESIDENT, CHAIRMAN, CEO OF IRON MOUNTAIN MINES, INC. OWNER OF IRON MOUNTAIN MINE, IRON MOUNTAIN, THE COPPER MOUNTAIN MINING CO., MOUNTAIN COPPER CO., IRON MOUNTAIN INVESTMENT CO., GRAN DUCADO DE ARMAN, BARONY OF THE ARMANSHIRE, THE ARMAN CONSOLIDATED MINES, THE ARMAN CONSOLIDATED MINING CLAIMS, THE ARMAN MINES EQUITABLE TRUSTS, THE ARMAN SOVEREIGN WAR ON POVERTY FUND, THE ARMAN MINES CHARITABLE FOUNDATION, THE ARMAN MINES MINISTRY OF NATURAL RESOURCES FEDERATION, THE ARMAN LOST CONFIDENCE MINE, THE ARMAN AGRICULTURAL COLLEGE CAMDEN AND MAGEE PAID IN GOLD PREEMPTION RIGHTS MORILL LAND GRANT PATENTS, THE ARMAN BOUNTY WARRANTS OF MILITARY SCRIP TO SOLDIERS IN SERVICE TO THE NATION FREEHOLD ESTATE FOR 360 ACRES OF LAND IN LIEU OF LAND IN THE RANCHO SAN BUENAVENTURA GRANT PATENT TITLE FROM GOVERNOR NEWTON BOOTH AND PRESIDENT ABRAHAM LINCOLN PATENTS, CEO OF ESSENTIAL SOLUTIONS, INC., ONLY MEMBER OF IRON MOUNTAIN MINES, LLC.,VICTIM OF PREJUDICE TRADEMARK CO-OWNERS OF PEACEPIPE PIGMENTS, IRON MOUNTAIN PIGMENTS, AMERICAN PIGMENTS, CALIFORNIA PIGMENTS, MINNESOTA PIGMENTS, PIPESTONE PIGMENTS, WHITEHOUSE PIGMENTS, PRESIDENT PIGMENTS, SOVEREIGN PIGMENTS, FREEHOLD PIGMENTS, PATENT PIGMENTS, TITLE PIGMENTS, REDMAN PIGMENTS, PIRATE PIGMENTS, THUNDERBIRD PIGMENTS, MATHESON PIGMENTS, KESWICK PIGMENTS, JARDINE PIGMENTS, CALUMET PIGMENTS, CONGRESS PIGMENTS, DEPARTMENT PIGMENTS, PRICKAZ PIGMENTS, FEDERATION PIGMENTS, BUREAU PIGMENTS, COUNTY PIGMENTS, SHASTA PIGMENTS, BATTLE CREEK PIGMENTS, DEMOCRAT MOUNTAIN PIGMENTS, BAY PIGMENTS, BEAR PIGMENTS, BARE PIGMENTS, NATIVE PIGMENTS, ARMAN PIGMENTS, AMD&CSI, IMMI, HU/MOUNTAIN, ARMAN MINES MINISTRY OF NATURAL RESOURCES, THE ARMAN MINES MINISTRY OF MINERAL RESOURCES FEDERATION, THE ARMAN LOST HUMAN USE REMEDIATION AND RESTORATION TRUSTS, THE ARMAN MINERALS RESOURCE DEFENSE COUNCIL, THE GUYS OF JUSTICE, THE ARMAN MINES HAZARD AND REMEDIATION DIRECTORATE, THE ARMAN MINES DISASTER ASSISTANCE DIRECTORATE, AND THE ARMAN MINES HUMMINGBIRD INSTITUTE COLLEGE OF THE HUMMINGBIRD CENTER FOR HEALTH INSTITUTE FOR LIBERTY AND INDEPENDENCE. THE HUMMINGBIRD INSTITUTE IS ESTABLISHED AS A FOUNDATION FOR THE CARE OF THE IRON MOUNTAIN CHRIST STATUE AND SPIRITUAL RETREAT. In loco parentis, parens patriae; Fiat justitia, pereat mundus; tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito
Sub specie mali : The stream of thought flows on; but most of its segments fall into the bottomless abyss of oblivion. Of some, no memory survives the instant of their passage. Of others, it is confined to a few moments, hours or days. Others, again, leave vestiges which are indestructible, and by means of which they may be recalled as long as life endures. -William James