Idaho Mining

[Ithaca 37]

"After learning the hard way about relying on a single industry, Rinaldi wants a diversified economic base for the Silver Valley......"

Yup, it looks like all these towns that thought they could rely on welfare ranching, welfare logging, and welfare mining are learning the hard way.

http://www.idahostatesman.com/News/Idaho/story.asp?ID=45911&S=0

 

[1_pointer]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>wants a diversified economic base <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Sounds like the basis for a stable business. What's the old saying, don't put all your eggs in one basket...

 

[Ten Bears]

IT, I never knew that mining was a welfare industry???

Maybe you could explain how that worked in the Silver Valley. It does show how much "welfare" is required to attempt to recover from loss of a major industry.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> As a result, the Bush administration in July decided the Silver Valley would be one of only 10 places in the nation that would split $49 million for new Superfund projects next year.

At $15 million, it was by far the largest single award.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Greg Siebert of the Idaho Department of Commerce said the state has invested millions to upgrade the Silver Valley infrastructure. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Developers usually need to spend plenty of money to ensure that land is ready for development, Siebert said.

“Here they can be guaranteed environmental clearance on the whole site and guaranteed EPA approval,” Siebert said.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Federal grant will help finish cleanup, rebuild economy <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I wonder what kind of "welfare" industries we'll have next.

 

[Michaelr]

Developers usually need to spend plenty of money to ensure that land is ready for development, Siebert said.

thats a sad statement

 

[Ten Bears]

Not in this case, we gonna have us some "welfare" developers.

 

[Ithaca 37]

Ten, This thread is a good example of why I don't respond to your idiotic posts. Instead of the mining companies cleaning up their mess who got stuck with the bill? Happens all the time. That's not a subsidy? Suppose we start requiring mining companies to put a deposit in the bank sufficient to cover the clean ups after they bug out?

 

[Ten Bears]

IT, your post only shows what an idiot you really are. Many of the mining companies were bankrupted in the process. How many, you tell me? As for putting a deposit in the bank, how large of a deposit would have been sufficient 100 years ago? That is if the fortune tellers would have been right about the "future cleanup".
Here's a history question for you. Who sent federal troops to the Silver Valley to break the unions and protect the scab miners?

Mining is anything but a "welfare" business, but it sure sounds like developement of old mining areas is.

 

[BuzzH]

Ten, your plumb full of crap as usual.

Mining in states like MT and ID have provided temporary jobs for people in those states. It also provides the people that live there with a mess to deal with forever.

But the good thing is, most of those mining companies haul ass back to Canada where the parent companies are located, with their pockets full of cabbage.

Dont worry though, the taxpayer will pick up the tab on the numerous superfund sites. But thats not a subsidy right? Glad to hear it, now try convincing the taxpayers of that.

When are you going to wake up lad?

Dont whine to me about union busters...every time you cast a republican vote you're supporting that. Remember all the good stuff Reagan and Bush did in the 80's for Unions? You want a history in Union breaking, start there.

 

[1_pointer]

To quote a lady I met in Deer Lodge, MT, which happens to be part of the largest SuperFund site with an estimated cost of $1 BILLION.

"We made our money for the last 100yrs by mining copper and producing the pollution, we'll make our money for the next 100yrs cleaning it up."

FWIW, the price tag that was to be paid by British Petroleum (which bought out Anaconda Mining because of oil rights in Northern Alaska) was lowered from close to $1 billion to approximately $25 million by the esteemed G.W. Bush.

 

[BuzzH]

Thats a real shock Dubya would do something like that.

Thats OK though, he'll just let the taxpayers flip more of the bill...or just let the deficit continue to build.

What a dandy!

 

[Bambistew]

Mining practices/regulations of today are MUCH diffrent than even 20 years ago. Mining has some of the strictest laws out there these days. What happend in the Silver Valley and in Butte/Anaconda should never happen again... I'm sure it will but it should be to a much lesser of extent...

Mines are now required to return the land to the same condition it was used for before the mine or better. The mines in the Powder River Basin for example have some great habitat for the deer, elk and lopes, infact due to mining. The mines have returned the land to a more productive land than it was previously.

Mining companies do infact have to put money up front to cover the cost of clean up if the mine goes under in the form of a bond. I calculated two such bonds for a couple of very large mines. One was a 56 million dollar bond and the other was a 25 million. The larger involed moving a LOT of dirt. Around 300 million yards and 500,000 tons of ANFO

The companies are required to recalucalte the bond every year, with the new costs determined by the DEQ/EPA.

I'll tell you the money that they are required is minimal but it would be enough to cover the cost of reclaiming to some what of an asthetic appearenc.

Not all mining is bad, our mining forefathers just screwed the hell out of the system and go away with it for far to long...

This is a pic some elk at one of the mines...

http://www.wma-minelife.com/coal/JRREC2/Jrrec0B6.JPG

Ivan

 

[1_pointer]

I agree Bambi. Things are better than when the worst was done. In fact, I would have a tough time finding a place to hunt back in IN if it wasn't for all the state lands, which are old coal strip pit land that was mined in the '20's and 30's.

 

[Ten Bears]

My point LAD, is that mining itself is NOT a welfare business. The cleanup and distribution of century old mining areas IS.

What were the laws regulating mining 100 years ago? How has MINING become a welfare business now? How is the gubbermint subsidizing mining?

BUZZ, you really don't have a clue about much, do you? All that edumacation was for NOT. Book learnt, but without an ounce of common sense.

 

[1_pointer]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> What were the laws regulating mining 100 years ago? How has MINING become a welfare business now? How is the gubbermint subsidizing mining?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
The laws 100yrs ago have no effect because if the damage/pollution can be traced to a given company, that company or any who have bought said company are responsible to pay for the damage. That is why British Petroleum is responsible for footing the bill for cleanup near Butte.

Beings that substantial portion of mining is now regulated by the BLM, I'm sure there are subsidies to the benefit of the mining companies. For the most part, the government does not charge 'market value' for resources.

This is my limited understanding of the issues being discussed.

 

[BuzzH]

Ten, maybe you ought to try getting yourself some education...then you wouldnt lose every single debate you start. Just like the way you're about to lose your sorry ass on this one.

Really, though, it isnt fair pickin' on you, its way too easy.

Would you mind refreshing my memory again on when the Canadian Mining company at Landusky went bankrupt...after producing $300 million in profits? I dont think it was 100 years ago, do you?

The good thing though, when they went bankrupt in 1998, they did forfeit their 30 million dollar bond, which will cover less than half the cost of the cleanup.

Heres the puddin':

Zortman-Landusky Gold Mine, USA

The Zortman—Landusky gold mine, owned and operated by Zortman Mining Inc., a fully owned subsidiary of Pegasus Gold Inc., is located in north-central Montana’s Little Rocky Mountains between the towns of Zortman and Landusky. It borders the Ft. Belknap Indian Reservation. In 1982, 780 gallons of cyanide-tainted solution leaked from a containment pond when a section of piping used in the mine’s cyanide sprinkling system ruptured and released 52,000 gallons of cyanide solution onto lands and into creeks. Testing of the tap water revealed that there was a cyanide concentration of 3.2 milligrams per liter (mg/L), well above the drinking water standards and cyanide levels in the creek measures as high as 22mg/l.2 The community’s local water system was shutdown. Over the next two years, eight separate cyanide spills occurred. To find out more go to zortman.pdf.

Heres a little more, learn to research before you make wild-assed claims, dippy. Looks like my education paid of better than you having flunked out of 4th grade, at least I know how to read and comprehend.

Friday, May 3, 2002

U.S., state OK mine cleanup plan
$33.5 million needed for Zortman-Landusky within next two years
By JENNIFER PEREZ and KAREN IVANOVA s
The Tribune


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HELENA -- State and federal authorities announced a final reclamation plan Thursday for the contaminated Zortman and Landusky gold mines in northcentral Montana.
But the agencies must come up with $33.5 million to carry out the cleanup, and an attorney for the Fort Belknap Tribes -- the mine's neighbor -- called the plan disappointing and confusing.

Andrew Huff, of the Indian Law Resource Center in Helena, said he's concerned that the agencies won't find the money and the abandoned cyanide heap-leach mines will get second-rate treatment.

The plan calls for a less complete reclamation if the $33.5 million isn't secured within two years. The backup plan would leave more pit and bench areas exposed, said Wayne Jepson of the Department of Environmental Quality, which signed off on the plan with the Bureau of Land Management.

"We've given it an initial review. We're disappointed because, No. 1, it is designed to have backup options," Huff said. "We think that's problematic because to us it seems to indicate that they'll probably end up going to the (backup plan). I think the tribes will have to decide whether or not to appeal the decision or pursue their litigation in state court."

Pegasus Gold Corp. operated the mines for nearly 20 years, producing about $300 million in gold, before the Canadian company went bankrupt in 1998. At that time, Pegasus forfeited $30 million in reclamation bonds, only roughly half the cost of cleaning up the open-pit gold mine.

During a two-year environmental impact study, the DEQ and the BLM considered six different reclamation plans for each of the two mine sites in the Little Rocky Mountains, from trying to rebuild the scarred mountainsides to their original appearance to partial backfilling of pits and recontouring of waste piles.

"I'm completely satisfied with this plan," Jepson said. "We've spent years working through the different options and advantages."

The plan will require an additional $5 million of work at the Zortman site and $17.5 million at Landusky.

But the agencies' first priority is securing an additional $11 million for long-term operation of pumps that treat contaminated water at the site. The pumps could be needed for as long as 80 years, Jepson said.

The BLM has requested money for the earth-moving work through its normal budget process. But the sum will likely exceed the agency's annual budget for Montana, Jepson said.

The state will pursue grants and work with the Fort Belknap Tribes on getting a congressional appropriation.

But Jepson acknowledged the agencies may have to resort to their backup plan.

"There is a considerable chance given Congress' funding priorities," he said.

Huff and his co-council Heather Brinton, of the Western Environmental Law Center in Oregon will discuss their next step today with the Fort Belknap Indian Community Council and tribal environmental officials.

"So, I think the ball is in our court," Huff said.

If the money is secured, one of the first projects, after establishing the fund for the pumps, will be a $5 million earth-moving effort at the Zortman site.

Workers will remove the top half of the waste rock dump and use it to refill the open pit near the top of the mountain. Barrier covers, much like the liners at the bottom of a landfill, will then be installed to seal off the waste on the mountainside and the remaining material at the waste rock dump site.

In the meantime, the agencies are working at the mine sites with the original bond money.

Some $3 million is left for Zortman and $11 million for Landusky.

Within six weeks, the agencies will issue a $3 million to $4 million-bid package to re-grade a large portion of a leach pad at Landusky and to do backfill work at the pit, Jepson said.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 08-08-2003 14:14: Message edited by: BuzzH ]</font>

 

[BuzzH]

Ten, another article for you...Hopefully you'll understand these, just trying to help with your dumbassedness you seem so proud of.


New rules aimed at curbing hardrock mining in the West





By: Michael Grunwald
THE WASHINGTON POST

ZORTMAN, Mont., Jan. 15 - There was gold in them thar hills, but it's gone now. So are a lot of the hills. And so is the bankrupt company that tore them down and drenched them in cyanide. All that's left today is a scarred landscape and an equally ugly cleanup bill. The mining industry is suing to stop the new rules. But it is also counting on President-elect Bush's administration to be far less antagonistic to land uses such as logging, drilling and mining.

THE ZORTMAN-LANDUSKY MINE ushered in the modern era of mineral exploration when it opened here in the Little Rocky Mountains in 1979, using a newfangled cyanide-based process to extract about a pickup truck full of gold from about 200 million tons of rock. The hardrock mining industry has expanded tenfold since then, leaching billions of dollars worth of precious metals out of previously useless low-grade ore, transforming wide swaths of the western landscape in the process. According to federal statistics, it has also become America's most prolific polluter, responsible for nearly half the nation's toxic emissions.

Now, Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt is using his final days in office to strike back, taking some aggressive parting shots at an industry he battled throughout his eight-year tenure. He is pushing through sweeping new metal-mining regulations designed to prevent future Zortman-Landuskys, rules that will take effect on the last day of the Clinton administration. And this week he plans to reject an application for a gold mine on sacred Indian land in California, something no federal official has ever tried to do.

The mining industry is suing to stop the new rules. But it is also counting on President-elect Bush's administration to be far less antagonistic to land uses such as logging, drilling and mining. In the last election, mining interests donated a record $5 million to mostly Republican candidates; Bush was by far the top recipient. His pick for Babbitt's job, former Colorado attorney general Gale A. Norton, has been an outspoken supporter of the western "property rights" movement that has crusaded against many environmental regulations.

For Babbitt, though, the last-minute mining rules have personal as well as environmental significance. He isn't supposed to say so, but he can't stand the mining industry. "That industry thinks it has an absolute right to grind up mountains and poison streams and wreck the landscape," he fumes. "Then these companies just disappear and leave the public holding the bag for the cleanup. Are you getting the sense that I have strong opinions about this?"

 

[Ten Bears]

And you've proven my point, dumbass. Cleanup and development of defunct mine sites and smelters is a "welfare" operation.

Yet, you still haven't shown were mining itself is a "welfare" operation. It has only been in the last 20-30 years that these clean ups and bonds have come about. What say you to the miners from the Sunshine Mine that lost their retirement funds to the clean up when the parent company went bankrupt?

BTW BUZZ, your gubbermint job is a form of welfare.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 08-08-2003 15:56: Message edited by: Ten Bears ]</font>

 

[Ithaca 37]

Ten, You're one of the SI posters who's way too dumb to try debating with Buzz! He sure blew your ignorant ass outta the saddle on this one!

 

[Ten Bears]

IT, the problem with you and BUZZ is you guys bait way to easy.

You two run around like little bears hot on a donut pile.

 

[Ten Bears]

BTW IT, you still haven't shown how mining is a "welfare" industry. BUZZ has shown that cleanup and development is a welfare occupation. There are those that are making a killing at it too, even some gubbermint employees.