collapse

Advertisement


Author Topic: Trumps EPA says NO to Pebble Mine  (Read 2142 times)

Offline nwmein199

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hunter
  • ***
  • Join Date: Oct 2015
  • Posts: 158
  • Location: Wetside
Re: Trumps EPA says NO to Pebble Mine
« Reply #15 on: February 07, 2020, 09:11:17 AM »
More info for those that are interested. Pretty much everyone except for a couple billionaires have said this is a terrible idea and it is still being pushed through.

http://www.savebristolbay.org/


Offline lokidog

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+5)
  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2009
  • Posts: 14200
  • Location: Decatur Island/Sultan
Re: Trumps EPA says NO to Pebble Mine
« Reply #16 on: February 12, 2020, 07:42:27 PM »
Email from sportsmen need to flood their system reminding him that many (most?) of us were his voter base.  >:(

Offline stlusn30-06

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Tracker
  • **
  • Join Date: Jan 2019
  • Posts: 72
  • Location: Hopefully in the woods or on a river
  • Groups: Wildlife Committee of Washington, BHA
Re: Trumps EPA says NO to Pebble Mine
« Reply #17 on: February 13, 2020, 03:23:59 PM »
Email from sportsmen need to flood their system reminding him that many (most?) of us were his voter base.  >:(

Unfortunately they already have. This particular issue has been hard fought for years. There is no illusion across the board where sportsmen stand. The reality and truth of the situation is, this administration could give a long term rats ass about sportsmen, wildlife, and/or habitat. Sure a bone was tossed with the LWCF renewal, but look  at the rollbacks for the environment, public lands, clean water, habitat protection, and on and on. Literally approaching hundreds.

That said, it isn't a surprise. To be clear I will and have voted Republican for the right candidate, but the reality is the planks that make up their platform are not pro wildlife, and are therefore not pro hunter. They want to deregulate environmental protection, privatize/develop public lands, etc....in the name of industry and jobs. On one hand they pretend to be hunter's friends by being the "2A" party, and on the other they want to implement policies that will wreck habitat and limit hunting opportunity. I'm not saying what is right or wrong, and it leaves hunters in a tough spot. If you are for deregulation,  transfer of public lands etc...good for you. But, those stances will and do have an impact on hunting. If you consider hunting to be behind a high fence and a for profit operation, then carry-on.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2020, 12:18:19 PM by stlusn30-06 »
“There are people in my life who sometimes worry about me when I go off into the fields and streams, not realizing that the country is a calm, gracious, forgiving place and that the real dangers are found in the civilization you have to pass through to get there." - Gierach

Offline elkboy

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2010
  • Posts: 1110
  • Location: Whitman County
Re: Trumps EPA says NO to Pebble Mine
« Reply #18 on: February 13, 2020, 03:51:56 PM »
I've written my reps more about this than any other issue. I think McMorris-Rodgers is getting sick of hearing about it, for example...  Guess we have to keep fighting.  Those rivers, those runs of salmon, are already a 'wealth generator'. Ramrodding that damn mine into the headwaters of not one, but two of the last, best salmon rivers is as bad an idea as I can imagine. I have friends who fish those waters both recreationally and commercially, and they are distraught.

Offline OutHouse

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2015
  • Posts: 1067
  • Location: Cowiche WA
  • Department of Foliage, Lifetime Member
Re: Trumps EPA says NO to Pebble Mine
« Reply #19 on: February 13, 2020, 05:20:18 PM »
Email from sportsmen need to flood their system reminding him that many (most?) of us were his voter base.  >:(

Unfortunately they already have. This particular issue has been hard fought for years. There is no illusion across the board where sportsmen stand. The reality and truth of the situation is, this administration could give a long term rats ass about sportsmen, wildlife, and/or habitat. Sure a bone was tossed with the LWCF renewal, but look across the board at the rollbacks for the environment, public lands, clean water, habitat protection, and on and on. Literally approaching hundreds.

That said, it isn't a surprise. To be clear I will and have voted Republican for the right candidate, but the reality is across the board the planks that make up their platform are not pro wildlife. They want to deregulate environmental protection, privatize/develop public lands, etc....in the name of industry and jobs. On one hand they pretend to be hunter's friends by being the "2A" party, and on the other they want to implement policies that will wreck habitat and limit hunting opportunity. I'm not saying what is right or wrong. If you are for deregulation,  transfer of public lands etc...good for you. But, those stances will and do have an impact on hunting. If you consider hunting to be behind a high fence and a for profit operation, then carry-on.

Hell yea, man. I agree completely. This coming from a once republican, once democrat and for a while now an independent who votes both ways.

Offline lokidog

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+5)
  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2009
  • Posts: 14200
  • Location: Decatur Island/Sultan
Re: Trumps EPA says NO to Pebble Mine
« Reply #20 on: February 14, 2020, 10:02:45 AM »
Email from sportsmen need to flood their system reminding him that many (most?) of us were his voter base.  >:(

Unfortunately they already have. This particular issue has been hard fought for years. There is no illusion across the board where sportsmen stand. The reality and truth of the situation is, this administration could give a long term rats ass about sportsmen, wildlife, and/or habitat. Sure a bone was tossed with the LWCF renewal, but look across the board at the rollbacks for the environment, public lands, clean water, habitat protection, and on and on. Literally approaching hundreds.

That said, it isn't a surprise. To be clear I will and have voted Republican for the right candidate, but the reality is across the board the planks that make up their platform are not pro wildlife. They want to deregulate environmental protection, privatize/develop public lands, etc....in the name of industry and jobs. On one hand they pretend to be hunter's friends by being the "2A" party, and on the other they want to implement policies that will wreck habitat and limit hunting opportunity. I'm not saying what is right or wrong. If you are for deregulation,  transfer of public lands etc...good for you. But, those stances will and do have an impact on hunting. If you consider hunting to be behind a high fence and a for profit operation, then carry-on.

Unfortunately this is true. All parties need to be pro environment which can include being pro business.

Offline Cougartail

  • Political Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2012
  • Posts: 1052
  • Location: Eastern Washington
Re: Trumps EPA says NO to Pebble Mine
« Reply #21 on: February 14, 2020, 10:47:06 AM »
I know many miners in Alaska and not one support Pebble Mine. Those big storage ponds in an earthquake zone is plain stupid to them. Also the fact that they will never be reclaimed unless by the government is a big loser for them.
All illegal immigrants should be deported with a liberal under each arm.

Offline nwmein199

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hunter
  • ***
  • Join Date: Oct 2015
  • Posts: 158
  • Location: Wetside
Re: Trumps EPA says NO to Pebble Mine
« Reply #22 on: February 17, 2020, 11:26:21 AM »

Offline Skillet

  • Business Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (+37)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jun 2009
  • Posts: 4361
  • Location: Sitka / Everett
Re: Trumps EPA says NO to Pebble Mine
« Reply #23 on: February 17, 2020, 11:38:29 AM »
I am ALL ABOUT the feds staying in their lane and out of the way when it comes to regulation. I feel like I'm among the most regulated, most inspected, most scrutinized by those beaurueacratic nit pickers out there.  I don't wish it on anybody else.  However, I also think a total accounting of the risks and rewards of a project like this is impossible, and the likely potential environmental impact is severe.  The tax payers will be left holding the bag on the environmental cleanup and disaster mitigation for the fishery that will be impacted.  It is not a matter of if, but when.

I am reminded of BNSF's push to install a high-speed refueling station over the Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer, Spokane sole source of drinking water.  It won't leak, they said. Trust us, they said.  That place was leaking diesel into the aquifer before it even opened.   :bash:
KABOOM Count - 1

"The ocean is calling, and I must go."

Offline OutHouse

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2015
  • Posts: 1067
  • Location: Cowiche WA
  • Department of Foliage, Lifetime Member
Re: Trumps EPA says NO to Pebble Mine
« Reply #24 on: February 18, 2020, 12:00:02 PM »
It keeps getting worse, corruption does no good for our environment. If this mine is put in, essentially a mine can be put anywhere in the US; scary.

https://www.ktuu.com/content/news/US-Army-Corps-of-Engineers-completes-preliminary-EIS-for-proposed-Alaska-Pebble-Mine-project-567770511.html

https://www.nrdc.org/experts/taryn-kiekow-heimer/pebble-mine-army-corps-rushes-out-another-flawed-review

Agreed. There was talk of a copper mine to be started near the southern border of Chewuch Unit (218) that seemed to fizzle out but now I am worried that is going to happen. Open pit mine I think

 


* Advertisement