The general area where the Pebble orebody is near Bristol Bay/EPA
Unconvinced that copper, gold, and molybdenum can't be mined safely not far from Lake Clark National Park and Preserve in Alaska and within the headwaters of Bristol Bay, the Trump administration has opened the regulatory window for Northern Dynasty Minerals to apply for the necessary permits.
The Obama administration put the brakes on the so-called Pebble Mine project, deciding in 2014 that it posed too much of a threat to the fisheries' rich Bristol Bay waters to permit it. In reviewing the project, President Obama's Environmental Protection Agency pointed to the prospect of miles and miles of lost or blocked streams, thousands of acres of lost wetlands, and biological shudders through the underlying ecosystem.
In studying the project, the EPA at the time said that upwards of 100 miles of streams that might be valuable to "spawning or rearing habitats for Coho salmon, Chinook salmon, Sockeye salmon, rainbow trout, and Dolly Varden (trout)" could be lost or blocked by the Pebble proposal; that more than 4,000 acres of wetlands providing "off-channel habitat" for fish could vanish under the mine's potential footprint, and; that impacts to surface and groundwater flows could harm winter and spring fish habitat.
On Friday, President Trump's EPA reached a different conclusion, deciding that Northern Dynasty should at least be allowed to go through the permitting process.
That process, said EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, “will not guarantee or prejudge a particular outcome, but will provide Pebble a fair process for their permit application and help steer EPA away from costly and time-consuming litigation.”
"... We understand how much the community cares about this issue, with passionate advocates on all sides," he went on. "We are committed to listening to all voices as this process unfolds.”
Some of the landscape near the Pebble deposit/EPA
The decision dissolved a lawsuit the mining company had brought against the EPA after it blocked the mine in 2014 under a provision of the Clean Water Act.
"National Parks Conservation Association is deeply concerned by the EPA’s action to allow the Pebble Mine proposal to advance. In its previous science-backed analysis, the EPA noted the Pebble Mine would ‘cause irreversible damage to one of the world’s last intact salmon ecosystems,'" noted Jim Adams, NPCA's Alaska regional director.
“In the settlement announcement, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt commented that the agency is committed to ‘regulations that are ‘regular’. What is regular about sacrificing the world’s largest sockeye salmon fishery for the benefit of foreign-backed mining corporations?," he added. “Our members of Congress designated Lake Clark National Park and Preserve to protect a portion of the Bristol Bay ecosystem’s health and productivity. However, such protections could be compromised by mining activity upstream and near the park’s boundary. NPCA believes such threats to wild salmon and the people and wildlife who depend on them do not belong in the headwaters of Bristol Bay and upstream of our national park.”
In its review of the project, the Obama administration's EPA found the simple existence of large-scale mining operations could adversely affect the culture of the area.
"Under routine operations with no major accidents or failures, the predicted loss and degradation of salmon, char, and trout habitat in North Fork Koktuli and South Fork Koktuli Rivers and Upper Talarik Creek is expected to have some impact on Alaska Native cultures of the Bristol Bay watershed," it noted in 2014. "Fishing and hunting practices are expected to change in direct response to the stream, wetland, and terrestrial habitats lost due to the footprints of the mine site and the transportation corridor. Additionally, it is also possible that subsistence use of salmon resources could decrease based on the perception of reduced fish or water quality resulting from mining."
The project long has been opposed by Native Americans in the region, salmon fishermen, and environmental organizations.
Officials for Northern Dynasty and the company's wholly owned U.S. subsidiary, Pebble Limited Partnership, said the company would propose a smaller footprint for the operation.
"It will be a busy and exciting year for Pebble and Alaska," said Pebble Partnership CEO Tom Collier. "Not only will we be rolling out a project that is smaller, with demonstrable environmental protections, we will also be announcing a number of new initiatives to ensure our project is more responsive to the priorities and concerns of Alaskans.
"We know the Pebble Project must not only protect the world-class fisheries of Bristol Bay, it must also benefit the people of the region and the state in a meaningful way. It is our intent to demonstrate how we will meet those goals in the period ahead."
Even with the Trump administration's decision, it could take four years before EPA would issue a decision on the company's permit application. And that is barring any legal challenges.
Comments
Rebecca, No, I am not "okay" with the Pebble Mine. I am merely pointing out that any "solution" to growth is far more complex than relocating a mining site. On green energy web pages, we are told that wind and solar are "free" and "clean." Just don't look at how they're built. The drain on natural resources--copper, steel, concrete, etc.--is immense, and the emissions from all of that construction themselves a major contributor to greenhouse gases.
As a writer, I deal in solutions. I proposed one to the readers last week. We need to start with our overly consumptive lifestyle before turning planet earth into a giant power plant. But no. The readers still want their cars, believing that cars can be "cleaner" simply because we switch from gas to electricity. In that case, expect more "solutions" like Pebble Mine. It's the construction of the car--and its infrastructure--that would also radically need to change. That two-ton thing we call a car is about metals, plastics, and rubber. It still needs asphalt and concrete by the billions upon billions of tons. Mine for them "somewhere else?" No, we need to stop needing all of these mines in the first place. Somewhere else is not the solution to growth.
Good comment from Dr Runte.
Hmmm. I noticed you stated that the Inuit are operating the lead mine, but Pebble isn't even US. Might there be different management philosophies?
Al --
Dealing in solutions has to be realistic and do-able. 'Stop being so consumptive, redesign the car to use less resources', and such as a "solution offered" is very much like offering world peace as a solution to our national woes. All that does is allow you to sneer at the hoi polloi for not following your suggestions. How do you propose to get there from here, doable realistic steps. That's why so many people consider academics to be living in an Ivory Tower. I would not pat myself on the back for being a writer who offers solutions that others reject, as anyone can do that. Write solutions what can be and will be done.
EPA chief Scott Pruitt huddles with the CEO of a Canadian mining company, employs an 18-person security detail, spends $25,000 to install a secure phone booth in his office and travels back to Oklahoma on the public dime.
The new EPA boss met with Tom Collier, CEO of the Pebble Limited Partnership, the Canadian firm proposing to develop the mine, on May 1. At 10:36 a.m. that day, acting EPA general counsel Kevin Mitchell informed EPA staff that Pruitt "directed" the agency to withdraw its efforts to protect rivers and wetlands near the proposed project.
The speed and unilateral way by which Pruitt surrendered to the Pebble Partnership has backs up.
The process was "highly unusual and quite extraordinary," said Dennis McLerran, until January the EPA's administrator for Region 10, which includes Washington and Alaska.
"What is particularly distressing," McLerran said, "is that he met with a representative of the mining industry but was not briefed by career EPA staff and scientists who had performed work on the study."
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/politics/article/Connelly-EPA-s-Pruitt-me...
Horrible, and so starkly ugly that the anti-environment & pro-Pebble folks have to just shake their heads and quietly muse, "Damn. I'm glad Pruitt is on our side."
I currently live not far from the Pebble Mine area. While Runte is correct insofar as we need to reduce our levels of consumption, this is not going to occur fast enough to forestall the building of the mine. And the mine is slated to have numerous exceptionally large holding ponds for toxic materials. Plus, it is home to one of Alaska's large salmon runs. Oh, and its beautfy is exceptional. There are many battles with the Trump administration (as well as with Alaska's own government) that need fighting, but the Pebble Mine is a development that never should happen.