ELR Citation: 45 ELR 20009
No(s). 31409-0-III (Wash. Ct. App. Jan 15, 2015)

A Washington appellate court upheld a state agency's decision to issue a hydraulic mining permit to an individual on the condition that he limit his suction dredging operations within a specified two-week work period. The individual engages in "placer" mining—searching for gold that has moved away from its original host rock, migrated downstream, and settled into the streambed sediment. State regulations allow placer miners to use certain small handheld tools without restriction. However, miners using motorized equipment, such as suction dredges, are restricted to specific dates, or work windows, in order to protect fish spawning activity and egg development. Miners wishing to prospect outside those dates can apply to the state's wildlife agency for an individual hydraulic project approval. Here, the individual applied for such a permit, and the agency said that if the individual provided site-specific information to allow the agency to perform a site assessment, it might be able to allow suction dredging outside of the two-week work window. Otherwise, dredging would be limited to the preexisting window. Instead of providing the information, however, the individual appealed before an administrative hearing board, which upheld the permit condition. The appellate court affirmed. The board's determination that the individual needed to provide more information to qualify for an exception to the work window was not a misinterpretation of the law. In addition, the conditions are reasonably designed to protect fish life and do not impose restrictions unrelated to or out of proportion to the proposed dredging activity. Further, the board's decision is supported by the evidence, and the condition does not conflict with federal regulations on mineral prospecting.