Posts Tagged ‘Rosemont Mine’
An opinion piece by former Pima County board of supervisor, Mike Boyd, came out last week in Inside Tucson Business. Mike is pro-Rosemont and apparently on their payroll. The premise of his article was why are all the elected officials so negative about the proposed mine?
Once again this is one of the cases were the comments are better than the actual story. Carroll’s Executive Assistant started it all off. Read oldest to newest. See for yourself.
Chris J Horquilla wrote on Sep 3, 2009 1:32 PM:
” Bottom Line: The Pima County Board of Supervisors had an opportunity to purchase the Rosemont property in early 2005, but decided not to do so because they considered the asking price to be too high.
Considering the amount of the taxpayer’s money the Pima County Board of Supervisors has wasted fighting this proposed Rosemont copper project since 2005, Levy’s offer to sell Rosemont for $4.5 mlllion would have been a bargain. “
” Admit it, NIMBY crybabies; the only reason you oppose Rosemont is because, being lefties and trustfund envirowackos, you are opposed to any kind of development that would benefit the (ugh!) human species. Common sense is not a part of your depleted grey matter. Would you prefer we move the mine somewhere else? World class copper deposits, such as Rosemont are rare as non-marxists in the Obama Administration, and fortunately, whether today, tomorrow, or 10 years from now Rosemont WILL be developed simply because it is there; the economy demands it, and Tucson (and the U.S.) should welcome its economic benefits with open arms.
Also, “MR GREEN”Ray Carroll indignantly opposes Rosemont probably because he’s afraid a new mine near Tucson would tarnish his cronies’ planned bedroom real estate developments. “
” Mike is right on! The vocal minority are a bunch of narcissistic wa-wa babies who do not care about the nation, the state of Arizon, Pima County, or their neighbors. Their only agenda is what they MIGHT see upon the rare occasion they drive along Hwy. 83. They have no FACTS on the water situation, nor do they want them, prefering pseudo-science to science. When China controls most base and precious metal resources in the world and ups the financial ante, you’ll reap your well-deserved punishment by being unable to afford an upgraded iPod. “
” Considering the economic recession and its impact on our community, you would think people would welcome the good paying jobs these projects would bring to our community. Well, the mining industry is working hard to do just that.
Both the Resolution Copper and Rosemont projects have the capacity of pumping massive amounts of capital into our local economies over extended periods of time. They represent the kind of an economic stimulus package that our community not only desperately needs, but desires. And when done in an environmentally responsible manner, it is an economic stimulus package that will not cost the taxpayer a single dime. “
” Water? I thought Augusta has bought 4 years of water from CAP and prestored it in the aquifier. They also have agreed to replenish the water used plus another 5% for 20years. If we keep importing commodities from outside the United states and shipping $700bb out of the country we will be a broken country in 20 or 30 years. these guys are building a state of the art enviromentaly friendly mine. “
” Mike should really get ALL the facts down before making his comments. I know that I am not the only one that hikes in that area. It is a frequented place. I also enjoy the ride along Hwy 83 and the mine would ruin the scenic Hwy. Must I also mention all the water that this mine would use. Mike Boyd is NOT the voice of the community and thank goodness for that. “
” I believe what Mike Boyd fails to take into account in his remarks about “nimbys” is that said “nimby’s are rightfully concerned about the depletion of and pollution of their homes’ drinking water is that which is at the center of concern for most of these said “nimbys”, their family members, and friends that have found this fight worth fighting! Agreeably life is full of “trade offs’” and my vote will always be for survival basics ie;, clean and readily available drinking water–you just can’t drink copper! “
” There is little I can add to the excellent comments that have already been posted before me, except to again say, Mike Boyd does NOT speak for the greater community, he does not try and do what is best for this community — never has, never will — he’s out to get all the public funding he can get for himself and self-interest, as others have shared, and this opinion piece is nothing but false propaganda Augusta Resources has been spreading since they came to town.
Mike Boyd has a horse in the race, as Mr. Egan pointed out (he’s a lobbyist and consultant, which he omitted in his short biop) — Mr. Boyd started with a lie, and never quite from there. He won’t be tarred and feathered, but he should be ashamed he can’t be honest. “
” Above all Mike Boyd is definitely a lobbyist and was a joke as a Pima County Supervisor, and we were all glad when he departed. It’s unfortunate that he has surfaced on the Central Arizona Water Conservation Board. Water is a very precious commodity in the Sonoran Desert and Mike Boyd does not make decisions that are in the best interest of Tucson or Pima County at large. As I previously stated he is first and foremost a lobbyist. “
” Consider the source of this opinion.
Don’t forget that Mike Boyd, who has a family interest in hockey, tried to use Pima County voters to help subsidize an ice skating rink in the Northwest. I was in attendance when it happened.
Talk about “trade-offs to make every day”
I hope there is no trouble with me speaking the truth, rather than the opinionated ad hominem attacks on the residents of Pima County. “
” When fear is all we have…..Last centuries politicians promised to solve our problems with CAP. Todays ADS says water is drying up. Tucson water reports ground water levels are increasing. Can you guys just shut up and go peddle your fear somewhere else? And eco terrorism,…..I’m sorry, I meant tourism. Who are you kidding? They are polluting. “
” S. Egan – Thank you for your comment on this article …..
YOU ARE SO RIGHT ! ! ! !
Rosemont Mine makes no sense economically or environmentally “
Scott Egan wrote on Aug 28, 2009 3:23 PM:
” Mike Boyd asks is someone would be tarred and feathered if they came out in support of the Rosemont mine. Well he hasn’t been — and he made the motion at the Central Arizona Water Conservation District meeting and provided the vote that allocated a huge portion of our drinking water for the mine: but nowhere does he claim that on his list of “services” as a “consultant and lobbyist.”
The people who oppose the destruction of the Santa Rita Mountains are not the “vocal minority” — which he knows, or would know, if he bothered to attend any of the numerous public meetings where the overwhelming majority of people opposed the mine. And the people of Green Valley, many of whom who have lead the charge against the mine because of their own terrible experieces with mine taliings, are hardly the “radical environmentalists” Mr. Boyd is trying to portray the opponents as.
You should know better Mike — and perhaps you do. Is Rosemont one of your “clients” now? Or have you provided enough service to them by giving up our precious drinking water for the profits they will take with them to Canada after the mine is closed but the air and water pollution is left to the rest of us to deal with?
Mr. Boyd talks about jobs. What about the effect on tourism this mine will have, along Scenic Highway 83, as the trucks roll out and the local business people close down? And how many jobs will there be if you keep giving away all of our water, Mike?
Rosemont Mine makes no sense economically or environmentally, and you should be ashamed of your role in supporting them at CAWCD, rather than writing this nonsense to try to justify your selling out of our community.
Scott D. Egan
Executive Assistant to Ray Carroll
(and a fellow Republican who is neither “politically correct” a “radical environmentalist” or someone with a lot of time on my hands!) “
Arizona Illustrated did a piece on Rosemont mine and Davidson Canyon quarry HERE. All the stops are being pulled out on this one, including getting the Santa Cruz river registered as navigable.
Incidentally the other ‘navigable’ waterway being challenged is the cement river bed in LA used for the chase scenes in the Terminator series. Terminator riverbed clip.
At what point does this insanity stop?
The comment in the AZ Illustrated piece from the Cal Portland representative says it all. Davidson Canyon has been an on and off active quarry for years. Rosemont has been a mine for over 70 years.
It reminds me of the story of the neighbor that called DM Air Force Base to complain about the loud jets flying over head. The base representative reminded the neighbor that the base has been an active facility since the 1940′s and asked when the neighbor moved into the area. The complaining resident stated that he bought the house 3 years ago because he got a great deal on it.
How about a few high paying jobs guys? How about raw materials for cement production closer than New Mexico? Call me crazy.
Twenty-five years back, there were a clutch of prime mantras among the activist set: Growth could be stopped. Cattle-grazing was archaic. Mining was a goner. Developers could be battled to a standstill, and the Pusch Ridge bighorns would tough it out.Today, folks who built below Pusch Ridge adore the foothills wildlife–until it nibbles their bougainvillea. More habitat has vanished from this county than perhaps ever existed in some states. Cows are now seen as bulwarks against bulldozers. As for bighorn sheep, well, somebody figures they might have seen a footprint up beyond those pretty cul-de-sacs sometime back.
Growth has continued at freakish levels, although a crashing real estate market offers some hope. Still, even wayward water supplies haven’t truly threatened this juggernaut; the housing industry, along with local government, still huddles under the Central Arizona Project’s rippling chimera.
Yet time marches on. And some iconic battles from those days–stopping the UA telescopes on Mount Graham, for example, or blocking developer Don Diamond’s Rocking K Ranch exurb–weren’t exactly won, but they weren’t totally lost, either.
The Mount Graham mountaintop telescopes are nearly due for review by the Coronado National Forest, and UA astronomers may lack the political muscle of yesteryear. Diamond did toss a few acreage bones to Saguaro National Park East, and bankrolled the Rincon Institute to cope with what his avarice had wrought.
Meanwhile, some things have actually improved. Though our fair city has plumped beyond reason, one recent UA analysis reveals that Arizona’s population grew by a measly 1.6 percent in the last year, the lowest rate since the blistering recession in the 1990s.
And although we’ve had decades to ponder the mine tailings south of Tucson (“Manmade Mountains!” one real estate brochure enthused), citizens are tightly organized against a new mine proposed for Rosemont Valley in the Santa Rita Mountains.
So there is reason to hope. Indeed, tempered optimism is raison d’ètre among most conservationists. Among them is Carolyn Campbell, executive director of the Coalition for Sonoran Desert Protection. Campbell’s coalition has been knee-deep in prodding Pima County’s Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan (one true victory-in-progress) down the road to reality.
Since its late 1990s inception as a wildlife-protection blueprint, the project has spent roughly $120 million from a voter-approved bond to purchase or lease more than 160,000 acres.
To Campbell, that 2004 bond–when citizens earmarked nearly $175 million to buy open space–was a turning point. “In Pima County, people have always been working on protecting open space,” she says, “and we’ve had open-space bonds for the last 20 years. But the big difference is the planning and scientific effort that went into this endangered-species project. The open space we targeted was key habitat for particular species, along with connectivity between some of the already preserved areas. So there was a little bit of method to the madness.
“It’s why there’s still a lot of support from the conservation community, and, I believe, the community at large,” Campbell says. “We’ve had the best available science behind the plan, and not politics. But what is different now is that we have the political will among citizens. Before, it was like beating our heads against the wall.”
Gayle Hartmann has also been in the trenches for eons, including a stint on the Pima County Planning and Zoning Commission. She now heads Save the Scenic Santa Ritas, a group fighting the proposed Rosemont mine. Hartmann heralds the addition of Sharon Bronson and Ray Carroll to the Pima County Board of Supervisors. Bronson was elected to the board in 1996, representing District 3; Carroll was appointed to represent District 4 a year later, and formally elected in 1998. Finally, says Hartmann, “there was a majority on the board that was really interested in conservation.”
Both supervisors championed open-space preservation, and Carroll has fought the proposed Rosemont mine with a notable vengeance. In 2007, he garnered the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Outstanding Achievement award.
Equally notable is a shift among Green Valley constituents in District 4 who support him. “Twenty years ago, Green Valley was always against any type of open space,” says Hartmann, “and that’s completely changed. I don’t know if it’s because there are more people there, or if the people there are somewhat different. But his district–although they may be politically conservative in some ways–now seems very concerned about environmental issues.”
That concern has been critical in efforts to limit Santa Cruz Valley growth, including the vastly scaled-down Canoa Ranch development. Many Green Valley dwellers have also been bare-knuckle opponents of the Augusta mine.
Another positive change, says Hartmann, “is that we don’t have quite as nasty a war between the pro-growth and no-growth sides. To some degree, I guess the pro-growthers won. But at the same time, I think there’s a much better understanding of the need to do preservation and see that we have enough water.”
Roger Featherstone, a longtime anti-mining activist, has likewise been in the fray for years. Today, he relishes the heat generated against Canadian-owned Augusta Resource Corp., the mining company hoping to gut Rosemont Valley. He’s also guardedly cheered about legislation sifting through Congress to reform the despised 1872 Mining Act. This antiquated law gives mining companies such as Augusta near carte blanche in laying claim to public lands.
“Tucson has become a lot more conservation-minded in the last 20 years,” Featherstone says, “and I think that really shows in the Rosemont fight. You now have to look long and hard to find anybody who’s in favor of that mine.
“People understand,” he says, “that Tucson has different values now when it comes to raping and pillaging the land than they did 20 years ago.”
Despite that positive shift, says Featherstone, conservationists now face an unexpected foe: themselves. “Twenty-five years ago, when we were all here fighting, we worked really hard, and we had some successes and some real disappointments. But the pace wasn’t nearly so frenetic. We had time to sit on a porch at night with buddies and drink beer.
“But now we’ve really gotten into this ‘Alice in Wonderland’ syndrome, where we’re running twice as fast, and we’re still falling behind. I think the conservation community has to take a serious look at the fact that they’re working twice as hard and getting a lot less done–with a lot more stress and a lot more unhappiness.
“If I could start a new environmental trend,” he half-chuckles, “it would be modeled on the slow-food movement.”
So does long and languid dining offer any tantalizing hints for Tucson’s environmental future? We’ll pop a beer, gnaw a few pretzels and get back to you on that in about 25 years.
The Santa Cruz river’s recent ruling as navigable brings a whole slew of federal regulations down upon the government and building community. The Santa Cruz which starts in the San Fernando Valley west of Seirra Vista travels down to Sonora Mexico then back up to the west Tucson area. The river looses steam north of Tubac and is re-fed water using the Pima County sewer systems effluent fed waste water discharge.
There was a move under foot to classify it at a ‘navigable water way’ which puts a number of federal requirements around anyone looking to build over, near or around the federal designated water way. The practical applications of the Santa Cruz river being navigable are laughable. Click HERE to see an AZ Star’s reporter, Tony Davis’ attempt to canoe down the ‘river’.
Some have eluded that the navigable designation is an end around way to limit the possibility of Rosemont Copper Mine of ever opening. The unintended consequence may be additional cost put on the taxpayers of Pima County to build bridges to cross over the navigable water way. Maybe draw bridges will become a part of our desert landscape.
Erica Meltzer ran a story HERE explaining the ramifications of the ruling.
Home-builder organizations fought hard against treating streams with intermittent flows, like the Santa Cruz, as navigable waters. Reached Thursday, representatives of the Southern Arizona Home Builders Association and the National Association of Home Builders said they were unaware of the decision.SAHBA Vice President Roger Yohem said his organization could not comment until its lawyers reviewed the decision.Environmentalists and some elected officials believe Pima County also lobbied against the designation to prevent a drawn-out permitting process from slowing down county construction projects.That feeling eased only after the Board of Supervisors in August passed a resolution supporting the designation. County Administrator Chuck Huckelberry said county staff only wanted timely decisions on permits, and he cleared staff of any inappropriate actions.Huckelberry said Thursday the decision is “fine and what we asked for.”Supervisor Richard Elías, who pushed for the county to support the designation, said he was pleased but the county needs to keep pushing for the entire river to be protected.
Carolyn Campbell, executive director of the Coalition for Sonoran Desert Protection, lobbied for the designation and wants the entire Santa Cruz eventually to be protected.“This was really good news to have back the protections that we lost when the Corps rescinded the designation,” Campbell said. “I see this as an important interim step while they study whether the rest of the river should have this protection. I’m very hopeful for the whole river to get the traditional navigable waterway, but with this, all the tributaries should be protected because they all eventually touch these two portions.”
10. Comment by wit w. (Wit) — December 5,2008 @ 6:04AMRatings: -15 +33
‘navigability’ clouds the issue here. What matters is that our ground water recharge comes mostly from these river beds. Rivers here rarely carry pollutants out to the ocean, unlike most rivers in the world. Instead, the pollutants sink into the soil and then we may drink them.
The Rosemont mine must be stopped for this reason alone. Polluted runoff from the mine would drain right into the Pontano Wash, Rillito River, and then the Santa Cruz.
Navigable Timeline from the Star:
• June 2006: The U.S. Supreme Court limits the scope of Clean Water Act protection for isolated rivers, streams and wetlands. Justice Anthony Kennedy writes that they must have a significant connection to “a navigable waterway, in the traditional sense,” to be legally entitled to federal protection.
• May 2008: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers decides that 54 miles of the Santa Cruz River north and south of Tucson deserve classification as a traditional navigable waterway, and, thus, regulation under the Clean Water Act.
• July 2008: The Corps suspends the river’s navigable determination for at least 60 days as part of a broader, national review of navigability.
• July 2008: The Pima County Board of Supervisors votes to conduct an audit of its own staff because memos show some staffers opposed the navigability status without telling the board.
• August 2008: Two U.S. House committee chairmen vote to investigate the Corps’ handling of the Santa Cruz decision, at the request of Rep. Raúl Grijalva of Tucson.
• August 2008: The Board of Supervisors supports navigability for a much longer stretch of the Santa Cruz, from the Mexican border to the Pinal County line. The Environmental Protection Agency moves to take over handling of the navigability issue from the Corps.
DID YOU KNOW
In the 1940s, the population boom — driven by military growth and availability of air conditioning — began along the Santa Cruz, especially in Tucson, which depended on groundwater. The ongoing depletion of the aquifer is a major reason the Santa Cruz dried out except after storms.
We stepped into the canoe. It sank into sand. We couldn’t move …
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- April 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008