This year we have no less than three clean water initiatives that could end up on the ballot, and one bill along the same lines in the Legislature.

A reading of each of these measures reveals that they are less about safe water than stopping construction of new mines by severely limiting what can be done with tailings and water discharges. In some cases they raise the bar so high that compliance is impossible.

Mining used to be a dirty business.

When flying a small plane around the farthest reaches of Alaska, it’s common to spot tailing piles, old gold dredges and other evidence of mining activity where one would think no person had been before. When the miners left, they walked away leaving scars in the hills and creek bottoms, and derelict mining equipment that is still visible today. I’ve walked around abandoned cinnabar (mercury ore) mines in western Alaska where tiny specks of silver–probably free mercury–could be still seen in the tailings pile.

Between the gold rush of 1898 and the cessation of gold mining during World War II there was a lot of mining activity in Alaska. Few laws governed mine operation during that era. Large scale mines used gold dredges that could move tons of dirt, allowed sediment to run downstream. They commonly used mercury and other chemicals to extract the metals from their ore.

But the early mines, dirty as they were, didn’t permanently damage our robust fisheries. We still have a healthy salmon industry. And today we have cleaner mines.

Cleaner Mines

In the U.S. today, the mining industry is heavily regulated. A mine needs comply with federal environmental laws: the Clean Water Act, the National Environmental Policy Act and state laws along the same lines. A mine needs scores of permits and has to work with the U.S. Corps of Engineers, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Department of Natural Resources, and Environmental Conservation–just to name a few agencies.

Even so, they can count on lawsuit after lawsuit from rabid environmentalists who have decided the “only good mine is a dead mine.”

As a result, mining no longer ravages the environment as it once did. In today’s story in the Cordova Times, “Advocates, Regulators see ‘greening’ of mine operations,” Alaska Department of Natural Resources mining coordinator Tom Crafford explains that there has been a huge shift in mining company responsibilities, science, mining technology, and legal requirements for mine owners. Operators are now required to have response plans in case they create an environmental problem, and a remediation plan for when the mine closes. There are safeguards to protect fisheries, including salmon.

Clean Water Initiatives

With soaring metal prices, mines are gearing up to reap the profits. And Alaska stands to profit as well with taxes for the state and more jobs and income for residents.

For the environmentalists, however, no mine is ever clean enough. Thus the flurry of activity to get “clean water” initiatives on the state ballot. Presently the constitutionality of these initiatives is being challenged in court, and we should have a decision sometime next week.

If one of these “clean water” initiatives ends up on the ballot Alaskans need to recognize it for what it is…an anti-mining ploy.

A “yes” vote is a vote for clean water–and against mining.
A “no” vote will also result in clean water–and clean mines.

I’m voting “no.” We have enough regulations to protect our water already.