Anti-Pebble bill takes short step forward
Published Tuesday, February 26, 2008
After nearly a year and 11 separate hearings, the House Special Committee on Fisheries approved on Monday a modified version of HB 134, a controversial bill aimed at stopping the development of a mine at the Pebble deposit in Southwest Alaska.
The bill would apply only to drainages in the Bristol Bay region and would prohibit any disturbance of streams and underground waters in connection with a sulfide mining project. It would levy fines of up to $1 million a day for violators.
The fisheries committee considered details of the bill during a contentious hearing Monday morning that lasted more than two hours.
Some committee members expressed confusion over the process when the committee voted on which version of the bill to work from.
Rep. Bryce Edgmon, a Democrat from Dillingham and the bill’s sponsor, had presented a new version of the bill last year based on concerns that the original bill was too broad, but the new version was never adopted. After field hearings in three Bristol Bay villages last fall, he offered a third version earlier this month that he said addressed concerns raised by area residents.
On Monday, two committee members opposed to the bill in general spoke in favor of going back to the original version. Rep. Kyle Johansen, R-Ketchikan, noted that the newer versions applied only to mines while the original applied to a much broader set of projects.
“Let’s go all out,” he said, “Let’s make sure that the fish are protected.”
Rep. Craig Johnson, R-Anchorage, also spoke in favor of the original version while admitting that he would not support the bill “in any form.”
Johansen and Johnson voted with the majority of committee members not to adopt the intermediate version, and spoke against adopting the newest version.
At that point, things got political. Rep. Gabrielle LeDoux, R-Kodiak, said she was concerned the actions were part of a procedural “gambit” that involved deliberately passing a bad version of the bill out of the committee.
“I don’t even know what ‘procedural gambit’ means,” Johansen said in response. “I’m just a guy who used to drive a truck in Ketchikan. I’m not a practicing attorney.”
Johansen said later he didn’t support the bill but thought the initial version best reflected what local residents wanted.
The committee voted to adopt the newest version, then approved an amendment that removed a provision requiring legislative approval of mining permits in the area and another that modified the definition of “sulfide mining operation” to ensure that any mine at Pebble would be covered.
Johnson offered an amendment that would have gutted the bill, but withdrew the amendment at the request of the committee chair.
The committee then voted 5-2 to move the revised bill.
The bill is only one of a number of efforts to stop the development of a mine at Pebble, which many argue would put Bristol Bay salmon fisheries at risk. Two ballot initiatives, called the “Alaska Clean Water” initiatives, also take aim at the project.
Despite the progress today, HB 134 is unlikely to get far.
The bill was also referred to the House Resources Committee, which Johnson co-chairs.
After the hearing, Johnson said he had “real problems” with the basic concept of the bill and thought it put the state at risk of legal claims involving the illegal taking by the state of rights already granted through leases. He said the bill could also be unconstitutional because it’s specific to mining operations and to a certain area.
Johnson said he still didn’t know whether a mine at Pebble was a good idea but he thought a company should have the right to go through the existing permitting process.
Which means HB 134 probably won’t go anywhere.
“Unless something substantial changes,” Johnson said, “I don’t anticipate this bill being heard in Resources.”
Comments
Why are the environmentalists so committed to keeping jobs out of Southwest Alaska? Why don't they start thinking of the people there, instead of their nature-worshipping agenda? All you have to do is require the mining companies to clean up their output. These are the same people who thought that the original pipeline would hurt all the caribou. No common sense.
Its not just environmentalists but a LOT of local residents who fear a mine will ruin their fishing for subsistence, commerical, and sport and take down the econonmy we have now. Requiring mines to clean up their messes is a lot easier said than done. Poorly run mines or even unfortuante accidents at good mines can do permanent, long term damage that is extremely costly to repair - if it can be repaired at all. Look at Montana where citizens are stuck paying for treating toxic mine waste FOREVER at several closed mines. Better to not allow a mine to be built until they prove they have the proper information and technology.
Fort Knox has some of the best case situations regarding its ore quality. Available data on Pebble suggests a much higher toxic potential. Add to that its location on the divide of 2 great salmon production areas, one the greatest in the world. Ft Knox is on a watershed already trashed by mining in the early 1900's. Far different scales of risk.
If it wasn't for the extreme efforts of environmentalists prior to pipeline construction, there would have been a terrible mess. As originally designed, the pipeline was doomed - I have heard that direct from some engineers who were in on the early design review. Hard for me to admit it but the Sierra Club did Alaska a huge favor - but its true.
Let the same process work in SW Alaska. We'll all be better off.
"No person shall be involuntarily divested of his right to the use of waters, his interest in lands, or improvements affecting either, except for a superior beneficial use of public purpose and then only with JUST COMPENSATION and by operation of law" Article 8, Paragraph 16, The Constitution of the State of Alaska. So, if we were so stupid as to actually pass such legislation or to vote for the "Clean Water Initiative", we could all be on the hook for Northern Dynasty's 'interest in lands' that currently is running in the ball park of over four hundred billion dollars. That's billions with a "B" folks.
I can not for the life of me understand why we would want to do such a thing just so one, old, fat, filthy-rich man (Boob Gillam) can continue to sleep peacefully in his private fishing lodge in the middle of the Lake Clark Wilderness Preserve?
Somebody please, engage your brain and stop this madness!
Why can't Alaskans take control of their own resources?
Instead, outside corporations have always used Alaska with a Rape&Run attitude.
Anglo&Dynasty have yet to show me a blueprint for their mining plan that is better than my blueprint.
They're still Stuck on Stupid wanting to do a huge 200year open-pit operation in a potentially risky earthquake and heavy precip area..
Yes, I think Pebble should be mined, but by Alaskans who will from day-1 have the attitude that it's an environmental clean-up operation that is profitable, and only looks like a genius operated mine operation.
The Key to Pebble is......
...make thousands of megawatts from the nearby geothermal first, DO-NOT build heavy-haul roads in the area for moving dusty-soluble ore, and use my method for processing the trillions of tons of ore without being visible from orbiting satellites [just low flying aircraft]...
all chemical elements exported from the mine-site will be in their most highly refined state, including the sulfide compounds..
everything will be lifted from the ground and processed & purified separating all of the toxic elements from the ore-body and leaving the remaining clean-sandy tailings in their original location...
all done with less financial & eviromental risk.
The Fort Knox fresh water dam (down stream from their tailings dam and over "a watershed already trashed by mining in the early 1900's" is now the number one recruitment local for Actic Grayling in the entire Chena River drainage.
Score one for mining.
The exact same water quality standards would apply to Pebble as it does to Fort Knox. There effluent would be of a higher quality than what your paying for from the City of Fairbanks.
Score two.
Implying mining mistakes from the past are reason enough to prevent it now makes as much sense as banning modern autos because once they came without seat belts. Modern mines are far safer and better designed
score three.
I welcome environmental input to the concerns around Pebble but an outright ban by proposed legislation or passage of the "Clean Water Initiative" is punitive not only to Northern Dynasty but to every other Alaskan as well.
"Why can't Alaskans take control of their own resources"? Because Northern Dynasty staked the claims and not you. Go read our Constitution please.
Joe Vogler was right,
parts of the State Constitution contradict Common Sense..
monetarizing everything in the territory will turn it into a big failed garbage dump.
I'm always happy to let others practice their mining skills on my claims..
the friendship and continuing education is always worth more than dreaming of being a godzillionaire with my own private army to launch an artillery barrage at anyone who casts a shadow of sanity on my folly.
Opps, sorry. I just read the article about Northern Dynasty's drilling results. I would like to change the amount we could be on the hook for. Now, it's five hundred billion dollars.
Anyone what to rethink their position on banning mining in Bristol Bay? I just can't fathom handing the keys to the State to Northern Dynasty in litigation is a "Good" idea.
Thank you Bood Gillam. Thank you for putting us in such an impossible predictament.
At the current rate of mining in Alaska, it would take all of human history to dig it up. But, with our current Wild Land Fire policy it would take only one life time to burn it all to the ground (summers of 04 and 05). So, excuse me, mining is not the problem. Godzillianairs like Boot Gilliam are the problem. If I'm not mistaken it is he who is waging war on Alaska and Alaskans. A war being fought with his bottomless pit of money, miss-information,lying by ommission, and outside environmental interests.
The trubble with all of this type of litigation and legislation is that it's practiced by individuals with a limited scope of experience in Real Life..
[almost everybody dies too young before they get the hang of it]
It's always fun to watch a Lawyer try to get a gallon of milk from a Cow.
That's why Lawyers and Doctors open a PRACTICE.
..almost everybody practices fraud to a certain degree, that's how capitalists make bigger profits than they should, and economists are always struggling with controlling inflation.
Maybe this Mr.Gilliam you're grouchy about would be better off buying one of these things, rather than squandering his money on lawyers who don't give a hoot about anything but running their clock?
http://www.innovxsys.com/
If you take the total value of the Bristol Bay Sockeye in 1999 and divide it into the present value of the Pebble prospect, this is what happens. five hundred billion dollars divided by twenty five million dollars per year equals twenty thousand years.
I'm no expert on history. That I'll admit. But, I'm guessing there were no sockeye in Bristol Bay 20,000 years ago because it was probably all covered in glaciers.
Not that I don't think salmon are important. They're right up there in my book with potatoes and dill. But, for Pete's sakes folks, $500,000,000,000.00 isn't worth Fool Gilliam's private fishing lodge.
Forget this legislation, forget the "Clean Water Initiative" and let the existing laws, we already have, that will not bankrupt us for all eternity, handle the problem.
DNR doesn't regulate mining. It's a free for all and ND will be given a blank check to do as they wish. Plus the impacts from the road. Why the rush to Californicate SW Ak? This is the worst place in the state for a mine like this. We should send these carpet bagger miners packing.
If you don't know who Goul Gilliam is and what he's doing to us, you don't know the first thing about Pebble, the insanity of the Renewable Resource Coalition and the "Clean Water Initiative".
Pass the clean water initiative and I'll eat my hat if Northern Dynasty doesn't get a blank check.
Mining in Alaska has a very successful record in regards to the environment. You don't know what you talking about.
Somebody is drinking the ND koolaid.
Anybody have anything even remotely intellegent to say?
Consider this. While we wring our hands over the issues of Pebble and ponder the fate of Bristol Bay's salmon, the pollock industry is already wasting, through by-catch, half of the entire Yukon River escapmenton a yearly basis and increasing every year.
If protecting salmon is the concern, shouldn't we ban stupid fishing practices first?
Consider this, At Statehood the State of Alaska was supposed to get title to all those acres of land? Since then alot has happened and now we have Federal Land, Oceans of Parks, Mental Health Land, and Native Lands. The State of Alaska, Mental Health and the Native Corporations have all over selected what they're intitled to and a fair portion was selected based on it's mineral potential. Now, thanks to NIMBY Gillam & Co. we might be fooled into outlawing mining and suddenly all these issues of who gets what, an answer we've been waiting nearly 50 years for, could go up in smoke. Opps!
What a nice can of worms the "Clean Water Initiative" opens for us.
Five hundred billion dollars in one dollar bills staked on top of each other would be 25,000 miles tall.
Yes, please, by all means, lets pass the "Clean Water Initiative" and hand over twenty five thousand miles of money to lawyers and Northern Dynasty.
Gosh, and to think I was going to put my kids through college with help from the Permanent Fund. Guess I'll have to go commercial fishing in Bristol Bay instead. Opps, I forgot, I can't get a commercial fishing liscense in Bristol Bay!
So, has anyone learned anything, or are you going to the voting booth in a zombie like state chanting, 'Clean water, good. Clean water, good'?
$500,000,000,000.00 divided by the population of Alaska (500,000) is one million dollars per man woman and child. If we have to pay Northern Dynasty for the 'taking' the 'Clean Water Initiative' is with the Permanent Fund? Well, I think you see the picture.
If the concept of the Pebble Mine is so abhorent to you and dangerous to salmon, then why is the land-fill here in Fairbanks, which is coincidently, approximately 1 square mile in area, "perfectly safe" for salmon and doesn't attract any attention at all?
The zombies chant on, 'Clean water, good. Clean water, good.' And, suddenly they remember, 'I forgot to take out the trash'! Then on the go, 'Clean water, good. Clean water, good'.
Come on back sometime and I'll give you another whooping just like I did today.
I live in Dillingham. I'm grateful for Gillam's contribution to protect our area and salmon. I don't care about the value of the rocks in the ground. For me it does not outweigh the value to be able to take my boys out and net salmon for our freezer or my neighbors' ability to fish commercially, and my other neighbor's ability to sell sport fishing trips to visitors.
As far as "takings" or depriving companies of ownership or other rights, there aresome conservative, highly knowledgeable national attorneys who dispute the initiative would be a "takings". Others say it would be a taking. I'm no lawyer but the issue isn't as cut and dried as a lot of pro-mine people would have you believe.
Wisconsin citizens wisely put very stringent limits on sulfide mines in their state, I wish Alaska would wake up and do the same soon. Please support the Clean Water Initiative.
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.