Posted: 8/18/2008 2:25:44 PM EDT
|
I've read and re-read this thing... I guess I'm just a dumb gunner after all. I don't understand what they're trying to get me to vote on. Can some of you smarter voters dumb this thing down for me? Thanks, ~Dg84 |
|
It's confusing as hell. The thing that stands out at me the most is that those in favor are tying to tie this to pebble mine when in reality it covers all mining in Alaska on both public and private land. The problem is they are ignoring how mines progress through the legislature for approval. Alaska already has the strictest EPA guidelines of any US state. When pebble (or any mine for that matter) applies to the legislature to start a mine, at that time the legislature can impose as many restrictions as they want. What this legislation does is take that right away from the legislature and impose a blanket law that covers current and future mines in Alaska with these eco restrictions. I'm not thrilled with some of the things I hear about pebble, but the time to oppose that mine, if that is anyone's desire, is not now with this proposition. That time is during the legislative approval process where people testify before the body and work out all the details. ***or I could be completely wrong 
|
|
+1 on this. Alaska mines have to meet both EPA and DEC standards (plus regulation by more than a dozen other state adn federal agencies). What is at stake here is precedence. Once the greenies (and the rich fishing lodge owners) get this passed, the sky is the limit. There has never been any federal regulation that has not been perverted to be used in a manner that the original writers of the legislation never intended. The Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act, the Endangered Species Act, RICO -- all have been perverted to the point where the original intent of the law is unrecognizable. Find some rare flies in a Los Angeles neighborhood? Shut down highway construction and design a re-route that costs more than a billion buckaroos. Use RICO statutes to prosecute abortion clinic protesters, etc., etc., etc. There's more. I have a good family friend who has been a geological explorer in this state for a generation. He has had contracts cancelled due to this Prop. 4 issue. Foreign and domestic investors are putting their money elsewhere rather than gamble on a mine that could be legislated out of existence due to the ballot initiative process. I'm all for ballot initiatives, but it's generally the well-heeled groups and people with lots of greenbacks that can afford to push for legislation in this manner in order to get what they could not achieve through the usual methods. Pebble, wolf hunting, where else will it all lead? It's my contention that state and federal regulators have a pretty good handle on the standards necessary to keep the water and air safe. Most have been doing it their entire professional lives. It just might be that they know more about safe and clean mining than a group of rich lodge owners. I tend to listen to those who make their living and live in the area. Most, if not all of them, are saying Prop. 4 is a bad idea. So are the regulators. Then again, I might be wrong. 
|
just fyi the bristol bay native association covers the area pebble will be and they are against it they were actually the only native group that broke rank with the rest of AFN IIRC Bristol Bay Native Association myself I honestly don't know what to think and haven't read the actual prop yet to see what it says |
|
My vote will be a resounding "NO" to this. The measure is so poorly written that it will effect all planned and existing mines. They will be forced to all closed down when they finish mining their current tracks. If something a simple as a class of tap water with all of it's contaminants is dumped into the water supply then they will be fored to close down. The Pebble mine is not to only mine in question but rather all mines. Just wait until they come for our shooting ranges for all of the lead?! Who is going to pay for all of that clean up?! |
Well said AB I will be voting NO as well |
Well said AB I will be voting NO as well |
+1. Aviator |
|
I think the precedence was set in 1989 after the largest disaster in Alaskan history that couldnt happen because all State and Federal Regulations had been met. After dragging the legal proceedings on for 20 years and seeing an 80% reduction in their liability Exxon stepped right up to the plate with more legal proceedings as they feel interest is unfair and should be disallowed. We all ready gave them (Corporate America) Prince William Sound, do you want to throw Bristol Bay in also ?  ETA I will vote Yes on 4 |
|
I disagree Rabon. Comparing the actions of a drunken Captain to what might happen IF the current regulation Might met the mine go through in its present state is not a logical argument. That is like you getting your license taken away because I drove drunk. The bill does not state what the restrictions will be, because they restrictions will be decided later on, which makes this bill a blank check to whatever administration or people happen to be in charge at the time. AND it will affect existing mines because it will possibly prohibit the expansion or even upgrade of existing sites. Do you want Red Dog to run another 20 years without upgrades or repair? I am not for pollution, I am against assholes who squatted in mining land and now don't want to let there be any mining done. I am against greentards treating Alaska like their own playland and preventing us from capitalizing on our resources. I am not a big fan of the current plan for pebble. Prop 4 seems like a way to stop the project by nuking the whole industry. |
No on 4 |
I am with you guys. I will be voting no as well. |
Im really surprised the pro 4 guys havent played this up The anti exxon tide right now could really swing the vote |
|
The Pros have been working this pretty hard. Advertising has picked up, but personal appearances from this shadowy organization have not materialized in public venues or on the radio talk shows. I've been called twice in the last week with polls commissioned by the AK Democrat Party and another group that would not cough up a name (safe to ass-u-me it was the Prop. 4 folks. Last I heard, the polling numbers indicate a big victory for Prop. 4, but It's been a couple (few?) weeks since I last saw a printed report. ALL the greenwigs are voting for it, which is a significant number in urban centers such as Anchorage/Wasilla and Juneau. In addition to Prop. 4, I'm concerned about the aerial wolf hunting initiative. I'm all for the initiative process (the company I work for would not have the presence it does had it not been for a ballot initiative), but putting science-related issues on the ballot is a little scary. The Mob does not always understand the issues, being that they're spoon fed information by advocacy groups whose information the media is only too glad to regurgitate as fact without any balancing information whatsoever. Imagine if some sort of global warming (oops, now Climate Change) initiative were to hit the ballot . . . |
That Exxon mishap pumped so many dollars into our State that I think of it as a good thing. Flame Me. 
|
|
I don't have a voters pamphlet. I only know what I hear on the TV/Radio. I know about 2 and 4 and a little about the Gambling one but not even the number or what a yes or no means. Could someone please post more information about this. A New thread about what we can and are voting on would be nice. ~R |
|
Unless I am missing something this measure imposes 2 water quality standards on "new" "Large scale" (640 acres or more) mineral mining operations in Alaska. First does not allow such a mining operation to release a toxic pollutant into the water which will adversely affect Human health or the life cycle of Salmon. Second does not allow such a mining operation to store mining wastes and tailings that could release sulfuric acid, other acids, dissolved metals or other toxic pollutants that could adversely affect water that is used by Humans or by Salmon. As far as the effects on existing operations they will not get permits for any expansions which cannot comply with the 2 standards. I see this whole measure as compliance with 2 standards am I missing something ? The Bottom Line If the Pebble Mine cannot meet these 2 standards do you want them above Bristol Bay? 
|
| There is a lot more to it then that. But lets put it this way; did you see anything about pebble in that piece of legislation? Pebble will go through its own vetting process just like every other mine. The point for me isn't weather or not I want pebble there, it's the fact that it's adding just another un-necessary hurdle that is already covered in the State Constitution. |
|
These restrictions would shutdown any new mine big or small. This is a play by the greens that want every mining operation never to happen. not a this is what is best for the Salmon. There is no compromise with these people. Once you learn this then you can move forward. |
What he said. Very wise man. I learned this while fighting for mining in OR. The Greenies wanted to shut down "Mining" in one of the national forests. The "Mining" they were talking about was guys like me with a gold pan and small suction dredge. In the commercials while they talked about how mining was destroying the land, they had images of open pit strip mines in NV or something. They were totally giving the impression they were trying to pass a law to ban strip mining when all it was was a few hundred of us with gold pans and shovels. Aviator ETA It would also very likely shut down any current mines as well. From what I understand, it would give them the ability to make lots of new "regulations" in the future that would very likely put any current mining operations out of business |
|
New laws are bad laws if they just repeat excisting laws. Are we saying that the State and Federal raglutary agentsees are unable or unwilling to do their jobs? Are all the laws on the books not working? Has Pebble even started mining yet? How much contaminents are coming from all of the excisting fishing boats and all of their support network in Bristal Bay? What we are saying is that the powers to be think that they should be able to bypass already excisting laws even before they have an opertunity to be applied. This ballot measure might as well be written to prevent all enviromentalests from entering Alaska without taking a bath. Or how about a ballot measure enacting a law directing all working Alaskans to stop working and start excepting their welfare checks. This ballot messure does effect most if not all mines in Alaska, this ballet messure will start a wave towards restricting many more of the things we do and rights we have. If you can not see what your future or Alaskas will be if we allow this kind of messure to pass than you are blind. 
|
|
From the Alaska DNR web site... www.dnr.state.ak.us/opmp/mining/mining_initiatives.htm OVERVIEW * There are existing federal and state laws that prohibit discharges and other activities that would adversely affect salmon and human health. State water quality standards specifically prohibit discharges and other activities that could cause adverse effects on aquatic life, including salmon. The standards also protect water quality for drinking water use. * In the event that new science suggests that water quality standards need to be changed to fully protect salmon, human health, or other uses, the standards must be modified so that they are fully protective. State water quality standards must be reviewed at least every three years to ensure they stay current. * The Ballot Measure’s language is general and less precise than language used in current federal and state law. For example, it uses but does not define terms such as “releases” or “discharges.” In contrast, these terms are specifically defined within the existing body of water quality law. The initiative’s imprecise terminology leaves room for differing interpretations that will likely have to be resolved by the courts. The Alaska Supreme Court has already had to rule that the initiative’s use of the term “effect” should be interpreted as meaning “adversely affect.” * Unlike existing laws and regulations, the Ballot Measure does not address matters such as how the law is to be applied or the penalties for violating the law. * The Ballot Measure appears to exempt existing large-scale metallic mines that have all their permits. However, existing mines will likely need changes to their permits to accommodate future changes in their operations. All future changes in facilities or operations at existing mines would fall under the initiative. * This Ballot Measure would apply to all new large-scale metallic mines (disturbing over 640 acres), not just the proposed Pebble mine. |
 But from what I hear hippie chicks are easy
|
I know why you didn't say, Young College Chicks. PS. You scored a keeper. |
I actually did myself too. Just celebrated 3 years a few months ago. Trying to find a non-hippy, same (well all women are insane but the most sane) hetero sexual female in that place is like being at the Russian and trying to spot that one silver coming through all the other fish. Only analogy i could think of. |
|
Just got a call at about 9:10 from some douche bag wanting me to vote no on 4. Son of a bitch woke my daughter (10 month old who has been running fever >100 for about 36 hours now even on meds) up. Needless to say he probably wasnt too impressed when I cut him off and told him to never fucking call my house again. Come on, its bullshit that they call that late. Both of my kids go to bed early, even when one of them isnt sick. My 5 yo has to get up at 6:30 AM for school. God I was pissed |
I fucking HATE that shit! All my friends now know that calls after 9pm and between 3-5pm are a no-go. I chewed serious ass when my daughter was first born (2y/o). |
Fucking ADN...
What you don't like the braless saggy 60's that live down there
|
| What worse is when there vegans. Makes them age even faster. There like "im the most healthy feeling i have been in my life". Ok, eat some meat or dairy and see how fucking sick you will get. Not to mention what your doing to your body. But hey, more meat for me. |
I was at the state fair on Saturday wearing my mining company jacket and my Anglo American hat, talking up the Yes on 4 booth. They did not spot me for a spy  , collecting all the free stuff they had, until that longhair spotted my Anglo hat.The Anglo hats are pretty subdued, saying "AngloGold" with a stylized lion on the front. The longhair knew what he was looking at, and spun up from mild to "in my face" in no time flat. The ultimate in evil corporations. They were Polluters, corrupt, Evil, and Human Rights Abusers. The works. They, THEY, were going to come to Alaska to dish out more of the same! Too bad I got the hat about 6 years ago up here. The guy did not have any problems with Exxon, BTW. |
