The Pebble Blog : Measure 4 results from around Alaska

The Pebble Blog

The gigantic Pebble copper and gold prospect in Southwest Alaska is one of the touchiest topics in Alaska today.

In this blog, I'll track news that is significant or interesting about the Pebble project. I'll also try to generate discussion and information sharing about some of the claims and counterclaims about the project, and mining in general.

Please keep your comments courteous and on topic. If you violate the ADN comment policy, your posts will be deleted.

------------------------------------------------

About Elizabeth Bluemink ebluemink@adn.com

I've been writing about mining in Alaska since 2004 and without a doubt, it is one of the most interesting topics that I cover at the Daily News. I've been a newspaper reporter for the past 10 years. In the Deep South, I specialized in reporting about environmental conflicts and pollution cleanups. For two years, I covered commercial fishing, mining and logging in Southeast Alaska. In my current job as a Daily News business reporter, I write about mining, tourism, Native corporations and other businesses.

Measure 4 results from around Alaska

Posted by pebble_blog

Posted: August 27, 2008 - 2:53 pm

Hi folks:
I'm working on a story today on how rural precincts/districts weighed in on Measure 4.
Here's a sampling of what I've found so far.
The vast majority of Bristol Bay communities weighed in in favor of Measure 4 (with some exceptions, such as King Salmon).
Most of the Northwest Arctic villages, including Kivalina, voted against Measure 4 (with the exception of some places like White Mountain, Elim, Diomede and Savoonga).
Most of Western Alaska voted for Measure 4, including all three precincts in Bethel, the largest community downstream of the Donlin gold prospect.
Interior villages mainly voted against Measure 4, with some exceptions such as Tyonek and Venetie.
It's going to take a few additional calculations to figure out the Southeast Alaska vote.

login or register to post comments

7 January 4, 2009 - 10:43am | alwazer

alwazer

6 October 23, 2008 - 7:26am | ammys

The great grand niece of

The great grand niece of Jesus Christ is enlisted to prevent two angels from reentering Heaven and thus undoing the fabric of the universe. Along the way, she is aided by two prophets, Jay and Silent Bob. With the help of Rufus, the 13th Apostle, they must stop those who stand in their way and prevent the angels from entering Heaven.
dvd movies download

5 October 23, 2008 - 3:39am | anitas

It’s very good

It’s very good article.
scat girls

4 August 28, 2008 - 10:40pm | AKH

Mat Su went No almost 2 -1

Where the Real Alaska begins supported reasonable mining development by over 60%.

I am sure the drafters will clean up the language and there will another vote or two.

Valley voters will keep an open mind but the Anti Pebble folk lost a small bit of credibility with some of their comments and actions.

3 August 27, 2008 - 5:28pm | PuckFebble

Time for the Legislature to act...

Much as I knew they would, the people of BB have stood and made thier negative thoughts on Pebble be known. They did it with HB137, with no action. They have resoundedly said no again to Pebble, again with no government action. Its time for these consistent messages to be heard by the residents who will be directly affected and for Pebble to be put off for a generation or two.

August 27, 2008 - 10:39pm | njalo99

ummmmm NO

the people of Alaska have voted...Your voice has been heard. Now all We have to do is find a compromise that benefits EVERYONE!!!! not just BB or s.w AK or S.E Ak .... we can do this....

August 28, 2008 - 1:22am | PuckFebble

Ummm yeah

You want to argue with me for the sake of argument when in fact we want basically the same thing.

It is quite clear that something needs to be done and that compromise and a thorough look at the reasons and means to develop the project responsibly, the royalty rates, bond assurances, and local revenue sharing and the ability to actually say NO to it through the existing regulation arent there. The only means of actually making some working situation is through the legislature.

August 27, 2008 - 9:46pm | NoBob

uh, more like the person of Bristol Bay . . .

The multimillion dollar ad campaign and propagandizing to Bristol Bay residents going on for years, the threats and intimidation to miners and the legislature, the paid signature gatherers, the phony environmental group RRC, the laundered money to fund an initiative, yes, the whole sheebang. Bob Gillam has spoken. He wants his vacation home pristine. We have cleared a hurdle but we still need to put a stake in the heart of this monster. The legislature and every other Alaskan needs to have the courage to tell him and his money to just stuff it.

August 27, 2008 - 10:53pm | Sockeyemark

He's no monster, it's guys like you that give miners a bad name

I for one am protecting my livelyhood,place where I fish and hunt. You can't fault anyone for that. It's guys like Bob that keep a check on wholesale destruction of our lands and water. We've all got a personal stake from both sides of this debate including Bob.
Glad he's got the bucks to help us out, otherwise from the way this election went I would say they would have already been digging with their D-9's by now.
Your the one with an ugly soul....how much of your money did you stick into this fight? Just as I thought....not a plug nickel....all show and no go

August 28, 2008 - 10:53pm | AKH

Sockeye is there anything other than No Pebble that will ..

make you happy. Is it the thought of an open Pit mine that disgusts
you.

Or can you handle a big hole in the ground if the State of Alaska has adequate safeguards?

Bob Gilliam has stated that he does not want to have to fly over and look at a big open pit mine, no matter how safe it is. He does'nt want his VIP guests to have to look at some ugly mining operations on the way to his Lodge.

What really drives you. Money, are you just a paid hack. Or do you really want to keep the area natural. If so, be honest and be proud of what you believe in instead of hiding behind phony Prop 4s.

August 29, 2008 - 10:58am | rfn

Gotta wonder

how many "VIP guests", of the political variety, will be flying over when The FBI has completed its' work.

August 28, 2008 - 9:06am | NoBob

I can fault you for your ignorance

For years we have listened to Bob Gillam's paid noise machine spewing out lies and misleading statements about Pebble. Now we have just finished an initiative where he promised he was going to grind the industry into the ground unless they threw Pebble overboard. We listened to Gillam's hacks saying that the state had no water quality regs for mines. We listened to them saying Murkowski repealed them. Lies. We had fake law reviews, we had hidden financing--all sorts of dirty stuff. You need to look at the basis of your opinion Mark. When you dig down, I think you will find it is based on Gillam's lies.

What the miners are saying is we can make this thing work so that we have both fish and the mine. If we can't, it won't be built. That ought to work for the fishermen, but it will never work for Gillam. He doesn't give a damn about Bistol Bay sockeye. All he cares about is his lodge. There will be no persuading him no matter how clean and safe a mine can be proposed.

Take a look Mark. I think you might see that it's the miners that are on the sensible middle ground and you are on the extreme--and, thanks to Gillam, a corrupt extreme at that.

August 30, 2008 - 10:12pm | Sockeyemark

Not the Bob Gillam I know,

I think miners are sensible; it's just that Pebble makes no sense. The footprint alone of Pebble Mine removes one salmon producing lake and the water source for to salmon producing rivers. No one wants to put the one and only 50 million fish sockeye run at risk.
We will not stand for the destruction of an area that supports this fishery. All the gold in the world will not justify this.
Miners are sensible people, and Pebble makes no sense.

August 31, 2008 - 10:33am | rfn

Unfortunately,

the poorly written, disingenuous measure drafted to protect the view from "the lodge" would have shut down mining in Alaska entirely. Not the first day; just as permits needed renewal.

August 27, 2008 - 6:59pm | jokeener

negative thoughts

make for a poisoned soul.

August 27, 2008 - 7:40pm | PuckFebble

thanks...

for adding nothing to the discussion. If thats all you got, dont even bother next time.

Despite the outcome of yesterdays vote, it doesnt change the fact that there is still a massive development looming that is continuing full speed ahead and the outspoken majority of those impacted locally want it to stop.

August 28, 2008 - 6:23am | jokeener

You know what I said is true

and you know how your negative thoughts have poisoned you and those you attempt to influence. If you were a thoughtful person who wanted to do good, you would be organizing a Bristol Bay Borough and incorporating the Pebble area (and Bob Gillam's private Idaho), thereby guaranteeing direct revenue to the region and regulatory oversight. Sticking your fingers in your ears and shutting your eyes while yelling "NO, NO, NO!" is a tantrum that exposes your immature mind.

BTW, if you are actually motivated to do something real and organize a borough, you will find out how "loyal" Mr. Gillam is to the local concerns.

August 28, 2008 - 7:40am | PuckFebble

Your ignorance is profound...

the above statement is proof you have little idea about the situation on the ground in Bristol Bay and your just another example of someone from afar telling people elsewhere what is good for them.
You need not worry about my soul. It is safe, and hasnt been sold to mega-conglomerations and upstart foreign corporations who have only thier self interest at heart. It is your soul who needs saving.
Lastly, and my favorite statements by you concerns your total lack of knowledge of the local government on the ground. The Bristol Bay Borough already exsits, it sits inside the poorly thought out lines of the L&P borough. Includes Naknek, King Salmon and South Naknek. Bob Gillams lodge falls within the L&P borough as does Pebble.
Gillam has been paying more than his fair share of taxes to local government for the last few decades.
Lastly, I have been working on a local to create a borough that would border L&P. But being from wherever you are, you wouldnt know that because it is really easy to push development in an area you dont know.
There are a few issues that are putting it on hold, but the big difference between now and previous attempts at forming a borough on the west side of the bay is that there is unity amongst the locals to oppose Pebble, or begin to maximize its return if Pebble gets shoved down our throats regardless.

August 28, 2008 - 9:26am | jokeener

I concede

You've educated me about the local boroughs and their boundaries. Keep working on this. I suppose this a fair trade as I've schooled you on economic geology, mining law, and inorganic chemistry.

August 27, 2008 - 7:39pm | rfn

The past tense

might make for greater believability.

August 27, 2008 - 5:39pm | Sockeyemark

It will take a lot of money, but it can be done

Exxon was able to put it off for twenty years, why not Pebble?

August 27, 2008 - 10:42pm | njalo99

lol

as an oilfield worker Mark....you got any suggestions on How we could keep this up for 20 years???????

2 August 27, 2008 - 4:14pm | CingRed

hmmm...

"Interior villages mainly voted against Measure 4, with some exceptions such as Tyonek and Venetie" Maybe I'm missing something but when did Tyonek become an Interior village?

August 27, 2008 - 4:21pm | pebble_blog

sorry

for some reason tyonek is grouped for election purposes w/ villages that are mainly (but not all) in the Interior.

August 27, 2008 - 4:27pm | CingRed

No biggie...

but i find it interesting that Tyonek is located in the heart of the Chuitna Coal project and yet they voted NO on Prop 4.

Just an observation...

August 27, 2008 - 4:35pm | ebluemink

tyonek

voted YES on 4 (unofficial results from earlier today at 26-12, but that # might have shifted). either way the village's vote is interesting....

August 27, 2008 - 4:53pm | CingRed

Tyonek is a small village...

That will be the final result plus or minus a few votes.

Here we go again, round 2 starts tomorrow ;-)

1 August 27, 2008 - 3:48pm | demorgan33

Not surprising

The villages affected by mining voted to protect themselves and their resources, while those that stand to benefit without risk voted against protection. I think that is called being self serving or maybe even greedy.

August 27, 2008 - 3:55pm | jokeener

or jealousy

... those villages that voted against their self-interest and voted yes will also benefit from mining, whether it is the metal they use everyday, the sharing in 7i revenue (Donlin & Red Dog), or the alternative to near destitute poverty they currently endure.

August 27, 2008 - 4:11pm | Sockeyemark

Destitute and poverty! You must be the one who thought

up the "Mining Shutdown" phrase also. They've ENDURED for thousands of years, I think they'll get by for another thousand without Pebble.
If it pleases you they could go back to fish wheels, and miners could go back to digging by hand and hauling it out on their backs ( and don't eat any salmon from the streams according to rfn).
The people of Bristol Bay said No to Pebble, plain and simple. It may still get jammed down their throats.

August 27, 2008 - 5:00pm | jokeener

Latest census data

shows that the Bristol Bay region has the second lowest retention rate (after lower Yukon) of young adults. Fully, 30% leave to go somewhere else to seek their fortune.

Why is this?

August 27, 2008 - 4:25pm | rfn

The Great Alaskan

Mining Shutdown is behind us.

Now it's incumbent upon us all to ensure that the appropriate rules and regulations are applied and followed to ensure there is no damage. Well, none beyond that caused by pollution from power boats and incidental unsanitary personal practices. It seems to be acceptable else there wouldn't be an exception to existing federal Clean Water regulations to allow it to continue unabated.

August 27, 2008 - 7:03pm | Victor67

Yes on clean water

Right on! Your first sentance sums it up. Existing regulations will be applied without a doubt.

And I really don't want to have anything flushed into Bristol Bay or any other water body!

Later then.

August 27, 2008 - 5:06pm | jokeener

Hear, hear RFN

There's still a lot of work ahead of us. We can take pride in knowing that the future is bright for Alaska. At least this ill-conceived hijacking of our regulations is over. For now. Them lawyers never sleep.

Search Jobs | Place an employment ad

The Pebble Blog

Archive

Measure 4 results from around Alaska