SHARE THIS SHOW:
RELATED CONVERSATIONS:
RECENTLY ON TOL:
TOL Our Town
- A tumblr site dedicated to the people and places that make up Oregon and Southwest Washington.
TAGS:
With gold prices sky high, environmentalists and others are worried about a potential gold rush in southern Oregon. In fact, members of Oregon's Congressional delegation just introduced bills that would make parts of the Chetko river off limits to suction dredge mining. Dave McCracken runs a gold prospecting association in northern California. He says when California put a moratorium on suction mining last year, it left some of his members looking north to the Rogue river. But he adds that, during a recent trip the Rogue, he didn't see anything he would describe as a rush.
Meanwhile, a very different kind of mining operation looks like it's about to get underway near Coos Bay. The Oregon Resources Corporation is poised to become the state's only commercial strip mine — getting chromite, zircon and garnet out of land near the ocean. Though ORC is just one permit away from a green light, some environmentalists and community members remain staunchly opposed.
Have you panned for gold in Oregon's rivers? What questions do you have about modern day gold mining or for the planned strip mine in southern Oregon?
GUESTS:
- Dave McCracken: Founder and president of The New 49'ers Prospecting Association
- Eric Metz: Southern region manager with the Department of State Lands
- Cameron Lafollette: Land use director for the Oregon Coast Alliance
- James Buchal: Attorney with Murphy and Buchal
Tagged as: gold · mining · southern oregon
Photo credit: Lee Webb/U.S. Forest Service
-
Note Readers, The Posters: Kerby Jackson= Au Drugger= Rivarton
ARE ALL ONE MAN IN THE MINING INDUSTRY WITH AN AGENDA AND A SELF PROTECTING FINANCIAL INTEREST. He is an ANTI-ENVIORMENTALIST and and pretty DISRESPECTFUL of the EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH HIM.
He is so insecure that he needs 'others' to carnival shill, self complement and self-agree with himself. Lonely, lonely bitter man. Pity.
-
Back in the 1950's I saw a gold nugget the size of a basketball at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks. And I visted a placer mine where the owner "Camel", for Camel cigarettes, let me hold a flat gold nugget the size of a large mans palm.
I worked in Washington on a core drill prospecting for gold. We'd drill down and bring back up cores to assay. We'd chemically test them ourselves. And we'd test soil samples over plots of ground to try and trace the gold back to it's source veins underground. And I won't tell you where those folks found it, out of respect for them.
And when I worked in that Standard Mine in CO, I was doing what they call "longholing", drilling long holes and bringing back cores so that the mining engineers could decide where to direct the miners to follow the gold and other mineral veins.
Those miners could dissolve a piece of quartz the size of an apple and leave only the small veins of gold that threaded through it, a really interesting and pretty thing to see, natural gold.
A fellow who worked on the Alaska Pipeline told me that he visited one of his fellow workers who used a big gold bar like the US has in Ft Knox, as a doorstop because he figured that nobody would suspect that a doorstop was real gold. Geez, what fun!
Gold is chemically cool, but I've had my fill of it and have no greed for it.
I read a story years ago about a people who got so disgusted with the gold greedy people among them that they melted the gold down and poured it down the greedy peoples throats. I haven't been able to find that story since, but it sure has a lesson in it, doesn't it?
Hmm, and that old search of alchemists for how to turn lead into gold? Physicists have done that in nuclear reactors, back in the 1960's if I recall correctly.
All gold was made in exploding stars. So you're probably wearing stardust on your finger. Ever wanted to reach out touch the stars? Now you have! Or maybe the stars reached out and touched you, now that's an interesting reversal, isn't it? Starcrossed lovers, it's scientifically true.
Oh, and that story about Rumpelstilskin, what a great story.
There's madness in gold and gold in madness.
-
IF Gold is found on your lands, it may be at best a mixed blessing. Resource extraction for Black Gold or Oil in the Gulf of Mexico demonstrate how costly mining and drilling can be in both financial and in long term enviormental costs.
IT would be ideal if gold is found on the earth's surface or on top of a stream bed by casual pedestrians. OR if it could be pinpointed and surgically extracted without permanently altering topsoil or landscape.
But Gold is found in tiny, wispy veins as wide as a hair, buried deep in milions of tons of bedrock. Today in this age of commercial ore extraction, it is mostly done with Hydralic Sluicing, Open Pits, Gravelling and Mountaintop Mining. It is the same processes used in West Virginia to extract coal or in Minnesota to extract copper. In addition, Gold mining is compounded by the extensive use of toxic chemicals like cyanide and sulfuric acid to precipitate the metal.
And it changes mountains, rivers, ecology and soil forever. Other resource extractions like timber, salmon or mushroom picking are by far less devastating.
Finding Gold in Oregon may be more of a Curse than a Blessing. It is better to mine the MIND for Innovation than break up rocks into millions of tiny bits for a nugget. Study Fusion Technology or Biofuels. IMHO, Markets in China are the closests thing to a gold mine today. Make and sell something sustainably to a billion people.
-
You are grossly misinformed or simply attempting to misinform others.
Drilling for oil has NOTHING to do with mining locatable minerals.
Gold is not exclusively found in "wispy veins as wide as hair". In fact, most of the large commercial open pit mines do not focus on veins at all, but so-called "free gold" which can consist of mere microscopic specks in a gangue. For that matter, 90% of the gold recovered in Oregon historically is either placer gold (which has broken free from a deposit) or pocket gold. It's also not buried by "millions of tons of bedrock". In the case of placer gold, it's usually ON top of the bedrock.
Further, the methods used in mining gold are NOT the same as used in coal mining. For starters, sluicing is a method used to separate heavy minerals from the lighter materials. Not only is this method not used for coal, it would actually not even work for coal. Also one method you mentioned, "hydralic (sic) sluicing", has actually not been used for over 100 years. Further "gravelling" and "mountaintop mining" are not mining methods. In fact, "gravelling" is defined as an unconsolidated mixture of rocks and pebbles and is utilized in road construction - not mining.
As for the mining of minds, yours is clearly a poor prospect.
-
The financial analysts have found that historically in a gold rush the only people who actually make money run what the analysts call a "pick and pan" operation, that is they sell picks and pans, they sell supplies to the prospectors. The prospectors just go broke.
If TOL wants some sound bites like poetry for the show, I'd recommend Robert W. Service, his poems about the Klondike, and especially "The Cremation of Sam McGee". Great fun poems.
I've seen and experienced strip mines and they are just about the most horrible thing you can to to a natural environment. And historically they make all kinds of promises about how they'll "restore" the lands, but when the end of mining comes, they just file for bankruptcy, let their mining Corporation die and leave the problems to the public. That's why we're stuck with all the Superfund sites around the nation. So if we're going to allow them to mine, we better set it up at the front end to have them put huge money in escrow at the start, to restore those lands.
-
Tom,
Thanks for the Service suggestion. Here's a link:
http://www.potw.org/archive/potw22.html
-
You're welcome, Dave.
And isn't that a fun poem? I'm sure kids would love that and maybe start into poetry with a good fun attitude about it.
-
Obviously, those financial analysts you refer to are poor researchers. Many miners during the early gold rushes made great fortunes, while an even larger number made "wages". This is not to say that all of them succeeded, as just like any other form of business, a certain percentage of them did fail.
This is just as true today as it was then. I know miners who do very well for themselves, while many more make a living. Still others seem to spend more than they ever make.
That said, contrary to the opinion of many, mining is hard work. Not only is it physically demanding, but it's mentally demanding too. Like anything else, if you don't gain the proper knowledge and then apply it, you are doomed to failure. Most of the miners who fail to make at least wages, either fail to gain the proper knowledge or they gain the knowledge and fail to apply it. This is as true today as it was in 1850, as it should be noted that MOST of the miners who did well in the early rushes actually had prior experience as gold miners in the SE states (namely Georgia), as well as overseas. These men were knowledgeable about their vocation and as a result, not only knew how to recognize mineral deposits, but they also knew how to work them and were willing to do so. If they were not knowledgable about mining, others who were successful, were the ones who turned to those experienced men to learn. This was contrary to those who believed it should be as simple as simply picking up nuggets right off the ground.
You get from this exactly what you are willing to put in.
-
I grew up in Eastern Oregon and now live in Portland. I understand the urban/rural conflict better than most.
Hunting and fishing are healthy family activities that are unfairly criticized by urban dwellers who have no knowledge of their cultural significance.
Ranching, farming and timber harvest are necessary economic activities but we need to use the best methods so they are sustainable.
Gold mining is different - we do not need more gold except to satiate our greed. We have plenty already for industrial uses (I am an engineer and I am well aware of gold's industrial uses and how little is really needed compared to what is available). There is no justification for the environmental damage done for the entertainment and occasional financial reward if the miners.
The 1879 mining law is a ridiculous "give-away" of public resources. A family friend who was a hobby miner gave me a tour of the old mines in the Sumpter area 30 years ago. At that time most of the mining claims seemed to be excuses to put a private hunting cabin on public land.
But this mis-use of the law for hunting cabins was preferable to the irreparable destruction of the lands and rivers that was being done by the hobbyists who were actually mining. One miner can do an amazing amount of damage. Whole hillsides disappeared into the muddy river as they looked for a few ounces of gold. Hundreds of feet of river bed were sucked up and run through sluice boxes and every living creature in the riverbed was probably killed for no reason other than greed.
I don't buy gold jewelry as presents. I don't buy gold for investments for the same reason I don't buy tobacco stocks.
-
"The 1879 mining law is a ridiculous "give-away" of public resources."
I agree with you on that. It at least ought to be revised so that miners would pay the public a decent royalty for the rescources we Americans own in common, our Commons.
-
You may not buy gold for investing or jewelry, but you did just use it to post your message. As you know, it's in your computer, your car, your TV, your cell phone and just about everything else you use on a daily basis.
As you are against local mining, you are therefore pro-corporate mining, most of which is done by the Chinese utilizing child labor in Africa and YOU are therefore part of the REAL problem.
And by the way, it's 1872, not 1879.
-
As for that "ridiculous give away of public resources" that is the 1866/1872 Mining Acts, the rights to the water which produces YOUR food also originate from that same act.
-
At an Oregon DEQ public forum this spring, attorney James Buchal used profanity and expletives to describe the agency's work product. Miners were belligerent and threatening, and DEQ was forced to call in Oregon state troopers to calm the crowd.
Threatening and intimidating behavior in furtherance of private economic gain should not be tolerated by a modern civil society.
Numerous studies have shown that processing elemental mercury and "flouring" that mercury back into rivers and streams by means of suction dredge gold mining enables it to present very real environmental and public health risks to points downstream.
California has banned this activity, pending the outcome of a thorough environmental analysis of the potential harms associated with it. Oregon should do the same.
-
Common now the State troopers were invited to this meeting and the other meetings held on this subject for commenting, training not crowd control.
There are countless studies that show that any effects with the small suction dredges are diminimis. One of these was done by the US EPA, the US Army Corps of Engineers.
Everyones concerned with Mercury effects but I'm not hearing any concerns with the countless numbers of lead weights that are put into our waters ever year by those of us that fish. When the lead dissolves, it doesn't disappear. It just moves with the water, so that when contaminated water moves in the ground water, the dissolve lead with it ends up in ground water. When the contaminated water is pumped out of the water supply well, the lead ends up in that water supply being provided.
The suction dredgers take out many pounds of lead each year.There is something like 17,000 rivers and streams in Oregon with total miles of 114,823. you put 2000 miners on the rivers
River miles impacted by 2K dredges @ 4 dredges per mile = 500 miles or 1.8%
-
Now really, freshair, you enviros keep dragging out the same false charges and the same propoganda even though time after time, it blows up in your face. Certainly you people can spend more of that corporate grant money to come up with something original and interesting oppoed to just spouting out the same old thing again and again. At least make it interesting, for once.
California has not "banned" anything. It's a moratorium placed on suction mining due to the failure of a state agency to do an EIS which they were ordered to do. Though it shuts down that type of mining (for now), we are talking about nothing more than the sheer incompetence of California Fish and Wildlife.
You also know that no such thing involving OSP went on that DEQ forum and that in reality, OSP were invited.
But let's talk about what DID go on at a recent DEQ public forum held in Medford, where in two members of a "local" (ho ho) enviro group were caught copying the personal information of those in attendence from the sign in sheet, including those of DEQ employees.
The bottom line is, you have no science, only weak propoganda fed to you from your corporate contributors on Wall Street in an effort to violate the property rights and prosperity of people in the Far West. And the worst of it is, most of you know it.
Pathetic.
-
Here is an alternative mining industry that may do some good. Consumer recycling has only occurred since the mid 70's. Before then we just tossed junk into the city dump.
These dumps with time have degraded all the biologic contents. But there is still metal: Iron, Steel, Aluminum,Chrome, Mercury, Lead and even Gold in our Dumps--probably in higher concentrations and more easily removed than in naturally occuring bedrock. There is also glass, petroleum products and even preserved wood and perhaps even a rare Diamond or Ruby.
And there may be an archeological treasures of 100-300 year old artifacts.
Combine Mining with Recycling: Vintage Recycling or ReMining.
Mine and Clean up the City Dumps: It could be a WIN-WIN situation.
-
I should stake a claim on a landfill! Great Idea!
-
I have represented mining companies and exploration geologists since 1980 in land acquisition matters and site permitting.
This is the traditional summer work season for field geologists. The current "popular" plays are in Nevada and Alaska because those states still have reasonably open unexplored lands and regulations that allow for subsistence mining. There is currently a lot of activity in Nevada.
Please note that there are several levals of regulation that a miner needs to work with. It is not unusual to need BLM, State DEQ and state mineral agencies, and county oversight permits, as well as the necessary training and expertise at using heavy equipment.
Today's miners are more likely to look for minerals on dry ground than in rivers because of the water quality issues involved and because most of the best placer or water processing claims are well-known and taken.
Mining is a fundamental industry that is necessary for almost everything you use in daily life. Although gold is still mostly used for jewelry, the other minerals are used for a wide spectrum of industrial uses. You literally cannot point to anything in your immediate environment that is not dependent on mining to produce or use. The old cliche "If it cannot be grown, it must be mined" is true.
-
Macroinvertebrates are the basis of the aquatic food web. I am concernec that suction dredging eliminates these vital organisms at the expense of salmon and other riverine species, such as the endangered lamprey which lives in larval form in bottom sediments for years. The question of mercury-laden tailings is also worrisome. This process should be carefully studied and regulated if necessary.
-
I have seen first hand the mess these dredge miners make in our mountain streams. The idea that one persons hobby can trash the stream bed for others to enjoy and for animals to live in is crazy. Our nation needs metals but to acquire them by digging up natural stream beds is completely unnecessary. The removal of lead fishing gear is the first compelling justification for this activity that I have ever heard. Stop Stream mining!
-
I understand that some divers make a lot of money retrieving fishing gear, the lures and lead, and reselling it. I've sure left a lot of money snagged up on the bottom while trying to catch salmon.
-
Suction mining on streams that provide salmon and steelhead habitat is counterproductive to our fish restoration goals. Many of the places that hold gold are also spawning beds for fish. If you destroy the spawning bed, you're destroying future fish. Allowing a few people to benefit from the gold in a stream at the expense of the fish habitat is socially, biologically and economically irresponsible.
-
I believe that those Halliburton employees are suing for health damage due to hexavalent chromium exposure.
-
There are probably photos of the old Alaska dredge mining tailings on the net somehwere. I've visited them and they devastated the land.
-
This comment, as well as several others that you have posted, have no relevence to the type of minning in question. The tailling piles to which you refer were left by Bucket line dredging (the only commonality is the sluice) When suction dredging the only material taken out of the stream bed is that which is trapped by the riffle system(including over 98% of encounterd elemental mercury), eveything else ends up back in the same hole(within a few feet) that it came from. If the stream system is one that is flood controled(damed) the gravels are loosened as they would be by natural high water events (good for spawning)
-
Ridicule is neither an appropriate way to discuss serious environmental concerns, nor a helpful mode of discourse for "thinking out load" together on OPB.
I hope you will not have James Buchal on the show again. Think Out Loud does a fine job of identifying guests, but the system seems to have broken down a bit in this case.
-
Yes, let's just censor anyone who dares to ridicule the environmental agenda.
-
As for the thoughts about an open human experiment, and the comment by James Buchal that "nothing can go wrong," one only needs to look back through the last decade or two at some of the cases of drinking water contamination by hexavalent chromium in this country to realize things are not that simple. Does the name Erin Brockovich ring any bells?
-
Boy, there's nothing like a lawyer to make lawyers look bad, is there. What an arrogant fellow.
Oh well, he never said he was a trained scientist, so his lack of scientific knowledge and Critical Thinking skills is somewhat forgivable.
-
Monday, June 21, 2010 Happy Summer!
Today's program of thinkoutloud has been like going back to the 60's with the arrogant person speaking for gold strip mining the beautiful Chetko River. Just goes to show the type of people who hunger for minerals like gold, chromium or whatever else is in riverbeds, have not developed their minds in the last century.
Seeing the results of strip mining is very depressing. Take a look at the Salmon River headwaters in Idaho. When I saw it in the 1960's it was the turning point in my life as an environmentally aware person. No wonder salmon are close to extinction.
Living downstream from a mining operation in the Oregon Caves area on Sucker Creek (a river) was another disgusting and frightening experience. Every so often releases would come from the mine that turned the water of the river milky white for hours. While my child was swimming in it. Without warning or any published information. All secretive, violent to the Earth, dangerous to area inhabitants' health. Doesn't matter, salmon no longer live in Sucker Creek/River. Nor do suckers, eel like creatures.
And this mining company is one permit away from desecrating another threatened, beautiful river. This is not the right time to allow mines and their killing chemicals and big machinery on the Chetko River.
-
Yes, happy Summer Solstice everybody!
-
If you are referencing Cliff Tracy's operation on the confluence of Gold Dollar and Sucker Creek as "disgusting and frightening", you have some serious problems and should seek some professional help. Either that, or you are lying to further an agenda.
We are talking about a guy who dug a hole with a backhoe and then washed a bunch of dirt off with water into a settling pond. Nothing that man was doing would turn that waterway "milky white". In fact, he wasn't even discharging into a creek and had he been, the most you would have seen was turbid water which would have been no different than a waterway is during the winter.
Further, salmon do spawn in Sucker Creek, but only recently. Prior to being worked with a small bucket line dredge around 1910, Sucker Creek wasn't a very big waterway. Like nearby Althouse still does to this day, Sucker Creek used to dry up until it was reduced mainly to a few puddles. But that all changed after the Doodlebug came up and that mining operation made Sucker Creek the waterway that it is today by deepening and widening its channel. During the early 1930's, the Girl Scouts planted Coho Salmon in the creek and established a migratory salmon population. Those salmon still rerturn annually and yes, they are essentially invaders.
As for the Sucker Fish, they NEVER did live in that waterway. The name Sucker Creek originates from the fact that Philip Althouse and his brothers were the first miners to work that area. The Althouse Brothers came to Oregon in the 1840's from Illinois. In 1852, the brothers discovered gold in what is now known as Althouse Creek. A short time later, they also made a strike in a stream located somewhat east of the Althouse that is now known as Sucker Creek. In those days, the word "Sucker" was a derogatory word used to refer to people from Illinois. That's the source of the name and it has nothing to do with fish.
-
from the guy that wrote The Great Salmon Hoax. Nothing but greed, this guy would probably sell his mother for a buck. I'm always amazed at how quick people are to destroy resources for all to enjoy for a modest economic benefit. Selfishness will ultimately do us all in.
-
First off, this is not a choice of gold mining or salmon. mining has been going on in Oregon since long before there was a commercial Salmon harvest that kills millions of salmon a year.
There is not one single case where anyone can produce one single bit of evidence that a suction dredge gold miner has ever killed a single fish, and that says a lot since suction dredge mining has been a mining technique used on Oregon rivers since the sixties.
If you want to whine about dredging, which almost every single person writing here is doing, then give some science to back up your claims of harm. There have been over a dozen unbiased scientific studies that have all reached the same conclusion, dredging has an impact on the environment that is so small it can barely be measured.
In California, the Klamath river is one of the most intensely dredged rivers in the state, yet it has the healthiest salmon returns. The Sacramento river has very little dredging yet it's returns are almost completely non existent.
Erik Metz, stated in this broadcast that as regulated by their permit, suction dredgers who obtain their permit are not causing any harm to the salmon. He said it is individuals who don't buy permits who cause harm. The Oregon State Police stated that they only cited "less than a handfull" of illegal suction dredgers last year in the entire state. The reason why there were only "less than a handfull" of citations issued by Oregon State Police last year, is because typical suction dredgers are conservationist who have had an active life in the outdoors and have a very high respect of the environment and our laws. Quit trying to label miners as a bunch of greedy people who don't give a *^#@ about any possible harm they may cause. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
I dare any one of you to give any scientific proof of any harm being done by suction dredging right now as it is currently regulated.
If you think the 1872 mining law is outdated, then I guess you really must think the Constitution and bill of rights must be outdated also.
All the corporations you blast for mining our resources and paying nothing for those resources, in fact put thousands of Americans to work and do indeed pay very high taxes. Only an imbecile who has absolutely no understanding of economics could believe such garbage.
-
The study that Cameron Lafolette qouted in the broadcast would never pass peer review because it was not conducted using proper scientific study methods. in fact it is not even a scientific study but a report that is written by a biologist who has made observations and wrote a report of his opinions. The other issue is why do these environmental groups love to quote opinions from scientists or biologists who have never participated in a proper scientific study on this subject or even reviewed all the available studies that have already been done on this subject. Just because you can find a biologists who has a predetermined negative view of dredging to write reports that in his/her opinion, without any properly conducted scientific studies performed to back up that opinion, they believe that dredging is causing harm, should surprise nobody. But to try and use his opinion which goes against the unbiased scientific studies that have already been done that conclude dredging produces an impact so small it can barely be measured, is hypocritical and wrong.
In the opinion of the biologist in the above quoted report, he stated that in his opinion, dredging tailings are unstable and are a hazard to spawning salmon.
Funny that the Fish and Game agencies of Washington, California, and our Federal government and the EPA believe that suction dredge tailings in fact make excellent spawning gravel for salmonoids and trout. Another overlooked fact is that many streams have been suction dredged by fish and game agencies to improve the gravel conditions so the returning fish can in fact have better gravels to spawn in.
A biologist's professional opinion that has not had a scientific study performed using proper scientific method to prove or disprove that opinion is actually called a hypothesis. It means nothing. Do you know how many hypothesis are disproved for every one that is proved? Hundreds upon hundreds.
Quit quoting reports written by biased biologists expressing nothing more than opinion, as the proof that you believe shows dredging is causing harm to any protected species of fish. -
I also would like to mention to the commentor who stated that dredging harms the the bethnic community in a stream. There is not one, and I repeat not one unbiased scientific study that would pass peer review that you can provide to back up your statement.
On the other hand, the EPA had a two year study performed on the fourty mile river in Alaska that addressed the specific issue you are talking about. That study was performed by a nuetral third party, the University of Idaho, and they specifically performed very specialized studies on the bethnic community and micro organisms.
The title of the study is; Impact of suction dredging on water quality, benthic habitat, and biota in the Fortymile River, Resurrection Creek, and Chatanika River, Alaska, and was performed in 1999.
That study as published and accepted, states that the effects of suction dredging are in fact beneficial, contrary to your opinion of harm.
Specifically, a particular part of the study was about a stream with a very active club, and the study was centered on those areas where there was a large number of dredgers and quote" is to be considered the worst case scenario as far as the number of dredges in a small area".
That study of that high impact area stated that the minimal effects of dredging would only persist for about one month after the dredging season, and the dredged areas one year later in fact had a healthier population of micro invertebrates than the non dredged areas.
Contrary to what the opponents of dredging would have you believe, there have been numerous unbiased scientific studies performed and where it was shown there was a potential of harm being done, regulations were crafted to prevent that harm.
That is why there is such a short dredging season.
I wonder how many of these commentors actually listened to the broadcast.
What right do you alarmists have to restrict or ban an activity that you have no proof of any harm being done, especially when the scientific studies done to date conclude otherwise?
I bet all of you anti suction dredgers are sitting at your computer filled with gold, and it is plugged into a wall outlet using electricity, and you are drinking bottled water in a plastic bottle that you drove your polluting car to the store to buy.
Hypocrites. -
We are not talking about strip mining for gold in rivers here. It was a mistake for the hosts to polute the suction dredging topic with the othert topic of strip mining for chromium on the beach. It has nothing to do with suction dredge mining. Also quit comparing bucket line dredging and hydraulic mining with suction dredging. These three mining techniques have nothing in common other than they all are mining techniques. Bucket line dredging and hydraulic mining techniques have been outlawed because studies showed those mining techniques were causeing harm.
Another point to be made here is the reason that the California legislature passed a moratorium on suction dredging has nothing to do with any scientific proof of any harm being done against an endangered species. It was passed because it was a topic that special interest groups pushed with huge amounts of money being donated by those groups to the Democratic party, it is no suprise that the California Democratic legislature passed such a partisian bill that is in direct violation of federal law.
-
[QUOTE]
Note Readers, The Posters: Kerby Jackson= Au Drugger= Rivarton
ARE ALL ONE MAN IN THE MINING INDUSTRY WITH AN AGENDA AND A SELF PROTECTING FINANCIAL INTEREST. He is an ANTI-ENVIORMENTALIST and and pretty DISRESPECTFUL of the EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH HIM.
He is so insecure that he needs 'others' to carnival shill, self complement and self-agree with himself. Lonely, lonely bitter man. Pity.
jacob — Sat July 10th 8:57a.m.[/QUOTE]
For the record I don't even know AUdregger
-
And for the record, to my knowledge, I know neither Rivraton, nor AUDregger. But nice try, Jacob. Your attempt to make it appear that everyone fighting your cause is ONE person, is textbook, even if poorly executed.
That said, do I have a financial interest in mining? I'm a miner and therefore, am guilty as charged and I am proud of it. That said, I am hardly within the "industry". The fact is, we have no local mining "industry", kind of like we have no local timber "industry" and no local agricultural "industry". Pat yourself on the back for that.
I have watched your ilk DESTROY livlihoods, DESTROY families and STEAL private property in the valley in which I was born, all in the name of spotted owls, fish and whatever other little creature or plant you decide is "endangered". I have watched people lose their jobs and ultimately their homes, forcing them to move away from the place where they had lived for generations. I know people who worked in the timber industry who were killed or injured by tree spikes. I have watched your ilk assist your like-minded pals in the varying federal agencies to actually prosecute people for the "crime" of trying to earn a living in the same way that their ancestors did or for protecting their property rights.
Am I anti-environmentalist? Absolutely.
I know the source of the environmental movement's funding and the intentions of your agenda, simply by studying the writings of your own leaders and the fact that I had quite a few childhood friends who went on to become environmentalists. And for a time, I was even a member of the Pacific Green Party in the days before it was taken over by the extreme wing of the environmental movement. Your cause is not grass roots, but corporate. Your cause is not about the environment. There is a war out there over the resources of this region and it is mostly bloodless. It is about control and the theft of private and public resources, especially the water, for the benefit of the corporate elite who wish to collect on debts which were incurred by this country in the past.
People are waking up to this fact and you're not going to win.
-
Comments are now closed.
Well, for what it's worth, I have worked in The Standard Mine in Silverton Colorado, and I have fished for and eaten wild salmon and I value those fish more than I do gold.