Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Alaska Pebble Mine

locally the Pebble folks have run ads comparing the Kenicott mine to Pebble and the fact that red salmon run the Copper river in perfect health.


makes me burn to think they believe we're really that stupid. From what i can garner info wise Kenicott is a pimple on Pebble's azz.

speakin of, I need to get a license and get my azz to the Copper and get some reds

I was thinking the same thing myself,don't understand you yanks sometimes. Wasn't Sarah all for it? I'm a miner and find the oil patch gets a freer ticket than miners. They usually get their permits overnight, miners take decades to do the same thing. And their aditude is just do it ans we'll pay the fine.

Neither miners nor environmentalists are completely wrong -- but it takes a complete idiot not to understand that you don't crap in your own nest.

That is why the majority of those who live here voted against the mine - those who's only interest is to maybe make a few bucks -- or a lot of them -- and then leave don't care about the mess they will leave.

Once something is destroyed, it stays destroyed for a very long time. The few bucks (or whole bunch of bucks) will be long gone and forgotten fairly soon, but the negative effects of a mine last and last.

edit: I don't see this as a liberal/conservative issue.

If the proposed mine is so safe and such a good idea, attach all Board of Directors/management/stockholders/etc, personal assets to any damages caused by its operation.


...and the project was scraped.

Shoving the true costs of doing business on to the taxpayer is freeloading... Screwing someone seems to be the new business model for many corporations and individuals.

Saw this on Frontline last night and it was a very interesting show. From what I saw it looks like a terrible place to put a giant open pit mine.

therein lies the trouble, most conservatives are against OVER regulation


but even though the left would like to paint conservatives as against all regulation, it doesn't mean we're for NO regulation


it's a case by case basis, measured by risk vs. reward


in the Pebble Mine case it seems to me (and apparently others that normally identify themselves as conservatives) the risk outweighs the reward

Frontline showed the locals panicked and ran to the EPA for help which ticked off the conservatives in Anchorage who don't want the Feds telling them what to do.

I remember seeing a show on the phosphate mines in Idaho. The rancher, a life long republican, who lived next to the proposed mine found no friends in his party and ran to the democrats to help him save his home. Most are pro-growth until it's in their backyard.

The Frontline program was well dona as expected. I thought it was a little slanted towards the conservation side but maybe that is just me. I lived outside Butte MT a number of years ago and the Berkley Pit is a life time commitment towards controlling Acid Run Off and Butte is fairly dry. The thought of a pit that dwarfs the Berkley Pit 10x and in a wet area with so many people depending on the return of the salmon is just a no brainer.

Jeff- a couple more points- ND et al does not "own the land" - or even the mineral rights, the latter is only being leased to them by the state, for insignificant royalties down the line, if developed. Beyond the lease price, there is no significnt monetary benefit to the state - and even the benefits (and numbers) of "jobs created" for state residents for 50-100 years is questionable. Especially considering any spill/leaching damage will last for several millineum, at best.

Second, fugging up their "own" leased land/mineral rights isn't really the issue. When the inevitable chit happens, it's fugging up all the stuff downstream that is NOT "owned" by ND that is the issue.

Try building a "state of the art" cyanide production facility just upwind of a 5,000 population school in a large city.....

The thought of a pit that dwarfs the Berkley Pit 10x and in a wet area with so many people depending on the return of the salmon is just a no brainer. [/quote]

How exactly did you arrive at this figure..as it pertains to the volume of the Pebble pit??

This is a very interesting one. I am a retired environmental consultant who specialized in mining projects, and worked on Quartz Hill out of Ketchikan in the early 1980s. It was a world class molybdenum mine near the salt water in what is now Misty Fjords Nat Monument. We worked on that project for years, with a crew of divers, and wandered over 12 sections of bush with not a single road. The environmental review process ran its course and the project was never allowed to commence largely because of the long-term potential impacts to the salmon fishery. We used to herd the salmon with the prop wash on the helicopter. We saw bears every day. And wolverines, mtn goats, etc.

Even though Alaska is a radically pro-development state, this project seems to really upset people. Even long-time conservative types are against it. I would encourage people to make their voices heard with letters and attend hearings. Trust the environmental review process. The operators will be forced to put a large bond if they get permission to proceed. It is hard to imagine this project ever being approved to go forward. Make sure your voice is heard.

The world needs enough gold to have a stable gold backed currency or else we are all going to starve so the Central bankers can fly from Yacht vacation to Yacht vacation.

My heart is with commercial fishing, it was a job I am proud to have done once upon a time, and I look into opportunities to do it again.

I believe the mines impacts can be mitigated - in a watershed that large the mines true impact is small.

Siskiyou,
There is a good chance that you are right. The proposed mine is also a long way from the saltwater. Miners are very careful about hanging on to any material that has gold in it, including pregnant solutions.

Public sentiment seems to be very much opposed to the project, uncharacteristcally so by Alaska standards. The public's opposition may still be enough to halt the project in its tracks.

How many of you fellers that are against this are democrats? im bettin not one of ya (dont worry i aint either) but what are your thoughts if the EPA is controlled by conservatives and they slackin the rules for mining pollution.

I know I would still be against it. I could care less who's running the EPA. To many risks involved.

acooper,
The EPA is not run by conservatives, far from it. There are very strict rules in place regarding air and water pollution under EPA guidelines. It takes years to get a mine permitted. There is ample opportunity for public imput as part of the EIS process. The environmental review process is not corrupt, but it has been politicized. The EPA promulgates (defers) authority for meetin standards to the states. I don't know who the lead agency for the Pebble Mine probably USFS or BLM. Does anyone know?

Ppine thats what i mean, the dems are generally more stringent (screw business) vs the more pro corp conservatives. If the conservatives take over the epa my worry would be that they would allow more because of polical reason

Show me one large open pit mine where the runoff from the tailings pile hasn't been an environmental disaster?

If only one out of 100 of these types of mines had problems with toxic runoff, it might be worth considering. But when the industry is batting near 100% on toxic runoff and the mining company going out of a business and walking away without paying for the cleanup, it's pretty much a guranteed bad bet.

It's the last place in the world the industry should be allowed to create the worlds largest open pit gold mine "hoping" that this time they get it right.

That's a contradiction.