Next year, developers plan to apply for permits for the construction of America's largest open-pit copper and gold mine, in the heart of Alaska's most valuable salmon runs. It's not too late for us to stop them if we act now. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is currently considering requests from stakeholders to use its power under the Clean Water Act to protect Bristol Bay. FRESH, Parent Earth and Trout Unlimited are combining grassroots forces to take action and I hope you'll join us by signing the petition!
Pebble Mine would cover 20 square miles in the Bristol Bay watershed, and require the construction of the world's largest earthen dam for a 10 square mile waste containment pond. Up to 10 billion tons of toxic mine wastes could be produced. Any release of these wastes could cause irreparable damage to the Bristol Bay salmon runs.
Even worse: while our wild salmon are under threat, genetically modified salmon may be introduced to the market any day. We've brought you exclusive footage with Paul Greenberg, best-selling author of Four Fish. Check it out above! He explains why hybrid Frankensalmon has no place on our tables, especially when we have an abundant, healthy alternative.
Follow Nicole Betancourt on Twitter: www.twitter.com/parentearth
Donald Lenihan: Swimming Upstream Against Government Secrecy
House Moves to Ban Modified Salmon - NYTimes.com
House Votes To Block FDA Approval Of Genetically Modified Salmon
Is Genetically Modified Salmon Safe? : Discovery News
How Safe Would Genetically Modified Salmon Be to Eat? | PBS ...
A giant leap into the unknown: GM salmon that grows and grows ...
The pictures of the beautiful rivers are not accurate in where the Pebble Mine would be located. We get more pollution from China then what the Pebble Mine would produce. In Alaska we have more strict regulations then probably anywhere in the world. That is why we still have some of the best Salmon supply than anywhere else in the world. And last but not least Bristol Bay is only one small fishing ground! They make it sound like it is the only one in Alaska!
So why don't we get our stories straight! Investigate Bob Gillam, a millionaire who owns an elite fishing lodge close to the proposed mine.
1. Other places pollute worse than Pebble Mine, so don't worry about it.
2. Bristol Bay isn't that big anyway, so even if it gets screwed up it isn't a big deal.
Is that about right?
It seems a lot sillier to me to risk natural salmon and then try to make up for their absence with genetically engineered fish that were produced and justified with some very bad and lax science.
For all the talk of salmon fishing being the lifeblood of this region, this is often only true with subsistence fishing. The rarely discussed truth is that commercial salmon fishing in Bristol Bay is just not profitable enough for the Native people of the region. Instead, they fish for deep-sea halibut, which is slightly more profitable.
The anti-Pebble campaign is paternalistic, and would like to see the region locked up in some sort of anti-development "reserve." This does nothing to address poverty and unemployment. Pebble would provide much needed jobs and a cash economy, allowing Native people to work in their region, without being forced to leave for Anchorage or other cities.
Jobs from mining would not include jobs for all of us who fish or process or work in the support industries. Those jobs would go to other people. Right now, thousands of people are employed by the Bristol Bay fisheries industry. Young, old, those who would not qualify for mining. When times are good, and when times are not so good, the fish feed us physically and spiritually.
What I find paternalistic is people who accuse those of us who oppose Pebble as being mere puppets of the environmentalists or of Bob Gillliam. We oppose Pebble because we cannot afford the empty promises reflected in the pro-Pebble ads. Sure, we'd like more money -- who wouldn't. But in the longrun we do not want to gamble this resource away.
thank you
Generally, if an area is depressed financially, I don't see any sense in ruining one aspect of it for some short term benefit. People seem to forget that toxic is toxic and if the salmon are at risk so is everything else.
Low wages or poor conditions should be addressed separately and not as a choice between two evils, both of which destroy either the environment and the health of the people who live there.
There will always be individuals willing to poison the world they live in, whatever their motivation. If what they would have wasn't so harmful to the rest of us and, even more importantly, to subsequent generations of our species and others, we might choose to quietly allow them their insanity. But when what they advocate for is so clearly harmful to the Earth and all of its species, we must do what we can to stop them.
The placement of this huge mining operation in such relative proximity to this incredibly important salmon spawning resource is just such an insanity. If you know anything about the miraculous life cycle of the wild salmon and man's consistently offensive record regarding them, you'll know that this Pebble Mine is a terrible idea. The only things "paternalistic" here are the comments defending the greedy exploitation of an already ruthlessly exploited part of our nation. The Pebble Mine must NOT come to fruition.
2) Gold and copper mines have operated throughout Alaska for over a century. During the days of the Alaska Territory, many of these mines were built without any environmental controls. Yet Alaska's salmon runs are still strong. This year's Kenai salmon run is a record breaker. The greatest danger to salmon runs comes not from mining, but from overfishing.
3) It's premature to discuss features (drainage lakes, dams) and safety controls of a *proposed* mine that is still in the exploratory stage.
4) Even if safety controls did fail, it would certainly not spell the end of Bristol Bay. Even in the worst case scenario, there are dozens of other salmon producing rivers over hundreds of miles that lead to Bristol Bay. Salmon fishing would continue.
Please, take a look at the river system in Bristol Bay -- the destruction that could occur in this area would harm the biggest salmon producing rivers. Maybe Egegik would be exempt from impacts, but what about the Nushugak and the Kvichak?
If not, you can look for the wild Pacific salmon to go the way of the wild Atlantic salmon. Filthy fish farms, antibiotics, sea lice and inferior feed producing inferior fish.
First stop Pebble Mine.
Then stop Factory Trawlers killing salmon as Pollock bycatch.
Then restore the salmon runs.
One step at a time.
Our future depends on it.
Wild salmon is certainly important, but it is not threatened by Pebble. The real threat to wild salmon comes from potential overfishing (not currently a problem in Alaska) and artificially depressed salmon prices caused by fish farms in places like Canada and Chile.
If you want to protect salmon, focus your attention on shutting down fish farms and genetically modified salmon, not Pebble.
California, Oregon and Washington. Those are the runs I'm referring to. I'm not talking about going out with a pole. I'm talking about commercial fishing.
Record breaking? Would that be the Sockeye?
How did the King, Coho, Silver and Pink do this year? Is there still a limit on King of one per day, limit of five?
The bulk of salmon is coming from Alaska because they haven't ruined their runs like the lower 48. But Pebble Mine will catch them up real fast.
More than salmon is threatened by Pebble. When Bristol Bay is poisoned more than salmon will be harmed. That containment pond will leak. Or have we forgotten the failed containment ponds in Kentucky and Tennessee? It's not a matter of will it fail but when.
I would never eat farmed salmon.
I also don't eat pollock because of the factory trawlers that kill salmon as bycatch.
The limited-entry laws in Alaska create a "derby" system of fishing. Under a derby system, all permit holders for a given fishery are given the chance to catch as many fish as possible (using legal gear) within the time limits of an opening. This results in higher than necessary fishing costs. A derby system contains no mechanism for reducing fishing effort to an economically optimal level. The amount of fishing effort isn't determined by what is needed to catch the fish, it's determined by how many people qualify for permits. If 1500 people qualify for permits, there will be 1500 boats trying to catch the fish, even if those same fish could be caught with only 1000 boats. Even worse since the derby system is pretty much a race, it provides those 1500 boats with incentive to increase their fishing costs (higher storage capacity, bigger size, more horsepower, etc.)
Also, the derby system promotes mistreatment of the fish, thereby reducing quality. Fishermen have no incentive to properly handle the fish. The faster they can catch, haul, and unload, the more fish they ultimately end up with (this effects gear selection also).
Continued...