Trump letter - Pebble Mine

[ratled]

This week’s letter to President Trump is on behalf the Pebble Mine out of Alaska. It is a very interesting story for those who haven’t followed it. They are up against the exact same folks that the independent miners and prospectors of the West coast are, the same junk science and preconceived agendas. It has the EPA stepping in overriding the Army Corp, very questionable contact and interaction with NGOS’s, state and federal officials. One of the key players even fled the US for some time!
https://www.adn.com/environment/article/hard-find-retired-epa-scientist-tells-where-hes-been-and-why-he-fought-pebble/2016/04/04/

I have mentioned the Pebble Mine in the past, but as a big outfit and not what we are use to as independent miners and prospectors, IT's THE REASON IT IS THIS WEEK’S THEME, and it clearly shows that what can happen to us little guys can happen to the big boys. THIS is why the big outfits need to pay attention to what happens to us. Additionally, it shows that the new administration is concerned with minerals on federally managed public lands. Rep. Smith, Texas, and House Science Committee chair, wrote a letter to the EPA citing the questionable science http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/gold-prospecting/532402-house-urges-epa-rescind-veto-alaskan-mine-despite-local-opposition.html and just yesterday, 3/8/17, the White House Press Secretary announced in his daily briefing that President Trump was meeting that day with newly minted DOI Secretary Zinke and two Alaska senators to discuss how to best manage federally managed public lands in Alaska. While it is just on Alaska (and I’m sure Pebble will be discussed) it clearly shows that minerals are in the administrations big plan. We just need to get the independent gold miners and prospectors to be part of that plan.

Make no mistake about it, even the biggest outfits get their big money makers by putting some poor guy on the ground walking around prospecting.

Sorry for being a little long winded but this week’s theme is a little outside of the box for some of us. In addition to sending this week’s letter to President Trump I will be cc’ing it to Rep Smith out of Texas and the House Science Committee Chair, DOI Secretary Zinke, EPA Administrator Pruitt, and Rep Rob Bishop out of Utah, the House Resource Committee Chair. I'll post the addresses in a bit

Thank you for your support. Please send in letters, our letter writing campaign has worked before.

ratled

As always, please send your letter to the president here https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact#page

Donald J. Trump, President of the United States
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear President Trump,

For weeks now the West Coast independent gold miners and prospectors have been asking you for assistance to get us back to work in the face of the environmental movements massive push to over regulate us out of existence. We will continue to seek your assistance to get us back to work. This week we reach out to you on behalf of one of our of big brothers, the Pebble Mine in Alaska.

Just last week Representative Smith, Texas, Chair of the House Science Committee, wrote Administrator Pruitt of the EPA asking him to reverse the extraordinary actions against the Pebble Mine “amid claims that the agency overstepped its statutory authority under President Barack Obama…… and was justified by a questionable scientific assessment that relied on predetermined conclusions developed by EPA officials,”

These are the exact same tactics that have been thrust upon the independent gold miners and prospectors of the West Coast. We been have fighting against them for 8 years now and seek assistance from your administration. Any action that we lose will be used against the other users of natural resources such as Pebble Mine, energy developers and others.

You recently met with DOI Secretary Zinke and two senators from Alaska to discuss the priorities of federally managed public lands in Alaska. We ask that you consider all the natural resource users in all of the states, especially where it impacts the independent gold miners and prospectors. The EPA and many of the state run water agencies are causing extreme undo burden upon the miners and must be stopped. In several cases they have flat out banned our pursuits.

We bring millions of dollars annually to the smaller communities we operate in. We are all hard working Americans who once used to augment our incomes, fixed income retirees who need to supplement our needs through other than hand outs, and full time miners who are just trying to scratch out an existence in the rural American West were economic opportunities can be scarce.

We look forward to working with you to Make America Great Again and get the gold miners back to work!

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[Sockeye1730]

No offense rattled, just an Alaskan voicing his opinion, and I fully respect yours. Cheers

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Sockeye1730]

And imo there is an enormous difference between wild and hatchey fish.

 

[Mad Machinist]

I see where both of you are coming from. Federal overreach has just downright gotten out of hand and that crap needs to stop, period. The EPA violated so many laws on this one, it isn't funny.

Sockeye,

Get ready to have everything you all love about Bristol Bay ripped away from you and every other Alaskan. So many people have had so much taken away from them that nobody cares about what you want.

We miners have fought absolute crap science for so long that we really just don't pay attention to the whole "the world is going to end if this goes through" mentality anymore. And before you start spouting off about environmental stuff, I hold a degree in environmental science and can smell crap a mile away. I am also a miner for a day job.

Could Pebble Beach be done? Yea, I think it can. Considering we set a world record here last year for copper produced at 1.9 billion pounds with zero fatalities, zero environmental incidents, and received several environmental awards while being subject to some rather severe weather, even by Arizona standards. And we are right on the edge of critical habitat for several endangered species, yet we get it done and done right.

Pebble Beach should get it's due process and it's day in court. Once all the evidence and research is brought to light, then the chips will tall where they may.

 

[Sockeye1730]

Wow, lmao. Ok then.

 

[Sockeye1730]

It's not a beach btw, lol

 

[Sockeye1730]

And imo there is an enormous difference between wild and hatchey fish.

Hey man, while it seems you don't know much about the issue up here, and we may have very different opinions on things, I've been reading your threads about hard rock mining in interest. If you ever take a cruse up here to j-town hit me up, i know some pretty cool adit s to explore

 

[Sockeye1730]

EeEeg...I can never make posts right ony phone, lol
In response to Mr. Machinist

 

[DizzyDigger]

For those unaware, I live on one of the largest salmon rivers in the
State of Wash., and I've personally watched our salmon fisheries go
from bad to worse to now somewhat non-existent.

It's not just the decline in what I catch on my own beach, but also
the impacts are seen all over Puget Sound. The Skagit used to have
massive runs of King, Chum, Silver (Coho) and Sockeye Salmon,
plus Pink Salmon during odd numbered years, PLUS we are one
of the few rivers remaining with an actual, Native (wild) Steelhead
run.

Most all of these runs are now in very poor shape, with lower returning
numbers each year. We no longer have a Chum season because so few
are returning to spawn; was a time I could stand on my beach any day
during the run and catch 10-20# Chum one after the other until my arms
wore out (usually about 5 fish).

The serious decline of the salmon is for real, and while I support small scale
miners dredging and working the creeks and rivers, a project the size of the
Pebble Mine right in such a critical location is just far to risky. An entire region
would be at risk. Bears, eagles, and dozens of other critters eat salmon as a
primary source of food in their annual diet, not to mention a great many people
that also rely on these fish for their subsistence. We're talking survival here, not
just losing one run of a species of fish.

Still, I would absolutely support any efforts at reducing the heavy-handed authority
of these Federal organizations, and their ridiculous rules and regulations.

 

[winners58]

this has got to stop, just propose to do mineral exploration, doesn't matter if it has a small footprint
they will lock up thousands of acres in a withdrawal before they even apply for a permit.

in Oregon they refused a water permit for the core sample drilling, then proposed a 5 year withdrawal of 101K acres
in the mean time the state designated the streams as outstanding resource waters, separately the water rights were locked up
then they changed the the withdrawal from 5 years to 20 years all "in lieu of legislation" that may never see the light of day...
https://www.fs.usda.gov/projects/rogue-siskiyou/landmanagement/projects

same thing in Idaho look at this map the proposed exploration is the small spot in red the rest is 340K acres "to protect from mining"
USFS plans immediate action to protect Methow Headwaters | Methow Valley News

then there's the 10 million acre withdrawal to protect sage-grouse hunting habitat...
map; ArcGIS Web Application
now they may be banning even hand tools for rockhounders & gem hunters in the sage grouse area's;
Guest column: Rockhounds may lose access in Gem State | Post Register

then there are all the Obama designated monuments
the Monument expansion in Oregon is being disputed as the lands were already designated in the O&C act.
http://nomonument.com/wp-content/up...01_Complaint-Civil-Cover-Sheet-Summons-x5.pdf
from; http://nomonument.com/

what about mining near Yellowstone closed down by Obama administration
DEQ finding of No significant impact;
http://www.publicnewsservice.org/20...ct-from-gold-mining-near-yellowstone/a54449-2

 

[russau]

Yep ! When will it all end? For the wacoenviromentalterriorists its a never ending fight for what ever they want ! Why doesn't our gubermint/ now government go after all these terrorists and charge them with terrorism ?

 

[spaghettigold]

The tactic used by those who want to deny the access and use of natural resources has long been one of projecting a potential risk: (projected fear). "MAY CAUSE" an adverse impact, or "MIGHT CAUSE" are typical buzz phrases to initiate the process of denying utilization of natural resources. Once the hypothetical concept is proposed it is then an endless process of contriving anything and everything to justify the concept of: "may or might harm".

In science this is not an acceptable method of reaching an outcome. In science one must prove that the hypothesis is factually true before any consideration is given for a determined outcome! Within the political arena today the politicians are subject to decision making based on human emotions as opposed to actual scientific data. One can identify potential risks and if valid they can be mitigated or in many cases made to be moot issues. There is nothing wrong with identifying that which may be true but science demands proof that facts support any outcome. Unfortunately we see that politics is guided by the emotions of voters...and voters are what determines a politicians security.

Bejay

It would be interesting if someone could go to the roots of the"may,could,might"-problem same as for the withdrawals.Do this politics go back to the Agenda 21 tactics that where signed by the us too?
For the "may could,might"problem it should be this;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle
As far for the pebble mine should be simple.If it,s doable without threatening salmon etc.it should be permitted together with the responsability that if enything goes wrong they have to fully restore it to theyre expence.
If we take the "could,may,might"approach and applied it on human history we could,might,may stil be living in a cave with a average life expectance of 30 years.

 

[ratled]

spaghettigold while I have my own ideas about agenda 21 I'll keep this to just gold mining.

According the laws over here, there is no "might, may or could" in the regulations. Its has to be actual and this is why it is so out of control. So whether it's a big outfit such as Pebble or a little guy sampling with a 4" dredge it doesn't matter. Now there can be conditions to minimize actual impact such as no dredging into fish egg redds. Just because there might be redds at some point somewhere on the river doesn't give the agencies the authority to shut it down cold. THIS is the issue here.

ratled

 

[Jeff95531]

It would be interesting if someone could go to the roots of the"may,could,might"-problem same as for the withdrawals.Do this politics go back to the Agenda 21 tactics that where signed by the us too?
For the "may could,might"problem it should be this;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle
As far for the pebble mine should be simple.If it,s doable without threatening salmon etc.it should be permitted together with the responsability that if enything goes wrong they have to fully restore it to theyre expence.
If we take the "could,may,might"approach and applied it on human history we could,might,may stil be living in a cave with a average life expectance of 30 years.

Did I read this right?

"From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The precautionary principle (or precautionary approach) to risk management states that if an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm to the public, or to the environment, in the absence of scientific consensus (that the action or policy is not harmful),." the burden of proof that it is not harmful falls on those taking that action."

Guilty until proven innocent? And the Government uses all these "scientific facts" as supplied by the Sierra Fund (etal) to supply scientific proof? And we have to respond with what we can get our hands on?

Sounds normal to me and precisely why we are in the position we are in. A better way would be using civil law, with the required 51% or more proof? Seems to me miners are held to "criminal" law standards with beyond a reasonable doubt on something that might happen. Will happen? Sure, stop it.

Am I gettin it

 

[Bejay]

"In the absence of scientific evidence". So dwells the error of decision making today. Science is not the means of application in todays world, but rather the emotional concoctions that gain political advantage (votes).

This lack of scientific peer reviewed evidential logic is exactly what frustrates the mining community today.

Bejay

 

[Capt Nemo]

Let them do a small scale mine testbed first and do the testing. If it's a problem, then shut it down before it becomes a REAL problem.

 

[spaghettigold]

spaghettigold while I have my own ideas about agenda 21 I'll keep this to just gold mining.

According the laws over here, there is no "might, may or could" in the regulations. Its has to be actual and this is why it is so out of control. So whether it's a big outfit such as Pebble or a little guy sampling with a 4" dredge it doesn't matter. Now there can be conditions to minimize actual impact such as no dredging into fish egg redds. Just because there might be redds at some point somewhere on the river doesn't give the agencies the authority to shut it down cold. THIS is the issue here.

ratled

yes but aren't the regulations based on the outcome of the"scientific studies"that ouf course can never exclude something can,t happen 100% for sure.Leaving the one who wants to take action always in the weak position.

 

[ratled]

Only if one uses "scientific studies" based on established tried and true scientific practices and not cherry picked methods, partial methods, and then cherry pick the data to meet predetermined outcomes. A prime example of the California draft dredge EIR that stated there is no impact to fish (and actual indicated the 2007 regulations were fine). The final EIR then determined that there "maybe" impact and there is "potential" for harm which result in the 2012 regulations. No no studies were completed, no new data presented but simply a determination of the desired outcome based on the same EIR.

ratled

 

[spaghettigold]

ok,for a pebble mine size operation the scientific approach is more understandable, with all the variables and the size of possible consequences.Also such a big ops can more likely afford this process.
As far as dredging is concerned, i am not anti science but as i stated in earlier ,the scientific result is one thing and can be read in many ways.Quote TouluommneTodd" 2% drinker or 100% drinker."

It has to be put in a big picture and common sense should apply .
In my maybe unhumble opinion it should be illegal to even apply this whole armageddon of regulation and science to such small scale activities,otherwise,where do we draw the line ?scientific studies for sluicing,then panning ,then walking next to the river.What would be the outcome of a scientific studie about the impact of your mere existence??-correct,you cannot win this case,you should be dead,thats the secret conclusion every radical greenie has come too. We cannot have zero impacts regardless of which sector of life we talk about.Thats why i really can,t believe in ONLY science as final authority without including the other factors like common sense, freedom,propertyrights, etc.
For me the mechanics are wrong and i,m trying to understand how this mechanics came into play so strong in the last decades,and the links to the un agenda..sorry if i derailed a bit

 

[DizzyDigger]

As far for the pebble mine should be simple.If it,s doable without threatening salmon etc.
it should be permitted together with the responsibility that if anything goes wrong they have
to fully restore it to their expense.

That's the issue with wild salmon runs...once you destroy the run, the fish don't
come back. There's no fish going upriver to spawn, therefore no fish returning.

A wild run of any salmon species is unique to that particular river. Consider why
everyone wants to buy the Copper River salmon each year..it's because that
particular group of fish are the best eating. They're unique, and even within
a river system there are returning fish not just to the river, but to the exact
area where they first hatched. Other runs up the same river might be spawning
in small feeder rivers flowing into the main river. Each group is unique.

End result is, once they're unable to spawn, you can't restore it.

p.s.: Just as a clarification, I am generally among the crowd that wants to
tell the gov't they can kiss my rosy red arse, and given youth again I'd be
out there digging somewhere.

As for the gov't, the agencies aren't just hurting us, they're hurting every
traditional outdoor activity. Hunting, fishing, trapping, etc. is all under fire
from "those who think they know better - but haven't got a clue".

I'm all for science and common sense, and the Pebble just isn't good common
sense when the full risk is considered.

 

[spaghettigold]

That's the issue with wild salmon runs...once you destroy the run, the fish don't
come back. There's no fish going upriver to spawn, therefore no fish returning.

A wild run of any salmon species is unique that particular river. Consider why
everyone wants to buy the Copper River salmon each year..it's because that
particular group of fish are the best eating. They're unique, and even within
a river system there are returning fish not just to the river, but to the exact
area where they first hatched. Other runs up the same river might be spawning
in small feeder rivers flowing into the main river. Each group is unique.

End result is, once they're unable to spawn, you can't restore it.

p.s.: Just as a clarification, I am generally among the crowd that wants to
tell the gov't they can kiss my rosy red arse, and given youth again I'd be
out there digging somewhere.

As for the gov't, the agencies aren't just hurting us, they're hurting every
traditional outdoor activity. Hunting, fishing, trapping, etc. is all under fire
from "those who think they know better - but haven't got a clue".

I'm all for science and common sense, and the Pebble just isn't good common
sense when the full risk is considered.

i get your concerns dizzy and i know you are a digger
However to not derail too much the topic this seems to be about due process beeing denied.

Myself i don't know enough about the plan of operation of this project.
For example; Isn't it really possible to isolate the copper extraction process from the river runs?With all the technical possibilities and such a big ore body paying for it?