The three paragraphs below are statements by John Wilson, FlyFishingArkansas.com, well known Mountain Home, Arkansas based fishing guide, Federation Master Casting Instructor, former coach of U.S. Youth Fly Fishing Team, and fisherman of the world, who just returned from Alaska:
quote:
For those of you who at some point have an interest in fishing in Alaska you might also have an interest in the fact that some of the best water there is under threat by a "proposed" gold mine. The gold mining company is proposing to "take" two of the salmon rivers for production water. They will then build a 750 foot earthen dam to retain the water from those river to strip mine the drained area. 750 feet is a pretty serious dam. Remember that Bull Shoals is only 300 feet tall.
They are also talking about using a chemical process to strip the gold out of the soil that they remove. It is my understanding that even in "trace" amounts these chemicals are deadly to the fish.
I'll post a map of the proposed area. You will note it is all over the area I just posted a report on. If you give to Trout Unlimited or the Federation of Fly Fishers you might consider supporting these guys. The website fighting this mine is http://www.renewableresou...ion.org/map_resources.htm
The footprint of the Strip Mine near Bristol Bay, Alaska:
Bristol Bay:
Commercial Fishing Zones:
Longer range Bristol Bay map for perspective:
There is an extensive article in the Orvis newsletter that just came in that covers the Bristol Bay topic well. My summery of the article and plan is, this is a really terrible deal for the fish and wildlife of the entire region.
A few facts as well as I can remember them:
1. The company wants to build an earthen dam 4.5 miles long and about 750 feet high to contain one contaminated water lake, but there will be two lakes total, unless they decide they need more.
2. Pumping 2,000,000 gallons of crystal clear, pure and drinkable river water daily through the mine's cleaning process so it can be contaminated with heavy metals sounds like a sure fire way to destroy the entire ecosystem.
3. They are already pumping 150,000 gallons a day. The article quotes people who have been there stating you can already see the damage done. One-hundred fifty thousand gallons is a lot of water. Think of 2,000,000 gallons every single day pumped from the river systems.
4. The company guarantees the operation will not damage the ecosystem...............................but if it does, they will fix it! My thought on that statement are, "Oh yeah, you bet. How do you fix a gigantic fishery you have destroyed?
5. Kiss the salmon, grayling and other species goodby, and say so long to the caribou. They will either die or have to move somewhere else to live their lives. Tough break it was their's for hundreds of thousands of years until these heavy metal miners came along!
I live a long way from Alaska's Bristol Bay, but this Canadian based company and their mining plan on American soil relly Ts me off!!!! Is everything in America for sale to the highest greedy bidder?????
Get your Orvis newsletter and ready the entire article. It is enlightening.
Ray
P.S.
Reference material from the Bristol Bay Alliance and Trout Underground:
I currently work in a field of emmployment where dealing with environmental standards is simply a way of life. And although I don't know what Alaska's specific standards are, just the federal standards alone will prevent anything that even remotely theatens the environment. Any thing that helps us get more of the availble resorces is good for this country and by extension good for the environment. Poor countries have a terrible record on the environment because they can't afford to take care of it as we can. Also, the 750 feet almost certainly is the length and not the height. But either way, the mine operatiors will NOT be allowed to proceed without strick adherance to very rigid environmental regulations.
Posts: 72 | Location: Washington | Registered:: January 18, 2008
Not to be flip, but Phew, good to hear the gub'mit wont take of advantage of the environment for a buck. Here I thought all that pollution and Army Corp of Engineer projects were a BAD thing. Good thing Bush doesnt have a history of wanting to Rape Alaska....oh wait.... hmmmmmm.
Orvis and all the informed folks who have put time and effort into educating us about this problem are just nervous nellies. Why should we listen to them? We need gold, screw the environment.
"If you're after getting the Honey, Then you dont go killing all the bees!" The Mescaleros
Posts: 1577 | Location: Central Jersey + IBSP | Registered:: May 17, 2005
Harold, Good to hear from you. I am going to cut and paste this into a couple of other fishing sites that have plenty of VERY informed and VERY hooked up environmental activists (not the peta kind, but the real environmentalists).
The internets has plenty of things to beware of, but one of the unexpected benefits is spreading important news about things in too vertical a niche. This is one of those times we need to stay together.
If you would rather me not cut and paste, let me know and I will take the posts down.
Its great to see your posts; you feel exactly as I do. Post this message anywhere you want, and maybe with everyone working, we can stop this disaster waiting to happen. This is a Canadian company; the Canadian government has turned down approval on similar projects there because of environmental hazards. Now, Northern Dynasty Mineral, Ltd. wants do in Alaska what they couldn't do in their own country!
quote:
Also, the 750 feet almost certainly is the length and not the height.
The length is 4.3 miles; the height is 740 feet. Not many major dams are only 750 long, at least in Texas. I am reading from the second page of the Orvis Newsleter that came in Friday:
quote:
The open pit itself is projected at 1,500 feet and 2 miles wide with an overall "footprint" of 15 square miles. A 150 mile road would be built. Two toxic tailing lakes would be required, one projected at 6.5 square miles, the other 3.6 square miles. The toxic tailing lakes would be hundreds of feet deep and contained by earthen (that's dirt, folks!) dams. At 4.3 miles long and 740 feet high, the earthen (DIRT) dam for lake #1 would be the largest dam in the world, dwarfing (at 3 times the size) the world's current largest dam-China's "Three Gorges"-as well as The Hoover and grand Coulee dam, all of which are concrete dams.
While Northern Dynasty Mineral, Ltd. (NDM) states it will use a layer of water on top of the tailings lakes to help limit available oxygen (thus the amount of acid and metals created), these earthen (DIRT) dams would be sites in a seismically active region with volatile weather patterns, extreme flooding events, severe winters, and high winds. The dams would also need to contain the tailings (projected at 8 BILLION tons) and would need permanent maintenance, not just for decades, but forever, long after NDM was gone.
Those are the facts according to Orvis and other online sites. Bad News!!
Ray
This message has been edited. Last edited by: Harold Ray,
The dams would also need to contain the tailings (projected at 8 BILLION tons) and would need permanent maintenance, not just for decades, but forever, long after NDM was gone.
I got to thinking about how many pounds that 8,000,000,000 tons of toxic waste actually amounts to: 16,000,000,000,000. I believe that's 16 trillion pounds of toxic waste waiting, in the middle of one of the most easily damaged ecosystems in the world, to thunder into the streams, rivers, lakes and bays of Alaska to kill all of the wildlife and fish that live there now, once that big DIRT dam breaks.
These experts have a lot more faith in DIRT dams than I do. In Texas, DIRT dams usually erode and breach, but of course ours are used only for small stock tanks and ponds that are generally no more than a few acres. Gigantic DIRT dams used to contain 16 trillion pounds of 100% destructive, toxic waste may have a better track record!
Yeah, right!!! How would you like to live downstream?
