Sounds a little like Portland Metro area parks proposals, buy unique land to save it . . . for future development.

I enjoyed a walk/jog Thursday at a couple close-by Gorge waterfalls. People offer genuine smiles at such places. That is a real limited natural resource.

Posted by: Ron Ledbury at July 28, 2006 02:56 AM

This seems so kneejerk.
If a mine is proposed, it must be opposed.

Why is it necessary to tout Mt St. Helens as threatened?

If it's not at the mountain how will the mountain be harmed?
It won't be harmed at all.

There are strict mining regulations to prohibit mining activity from causing and acid mine drainage, that would leach sulfuric acid and other toxic substances into surrounding water bodies.

The site is actually located about 10 to 12 air miles northeast of Mt. St. Helens. The area near there has been mostly flattened by the blast from the volcanic blast.

The forest service has a large complex in Randle, about 25 miles north and they will likely be there monitoring the operation.

The proposed mine will not adversely impact the environment or Mt. St. Helens.
The price of copper has gone through the roof in recent years.

Posted by: Why not a mine at July 28, 2006 08:26 AM

Hey, good thing we have all those regulations in place! Because we know how happy mining operations are to follow the regulations, and how they actually do. And we also know how eager the federal government is to monitor compliance with the regulations. And we know that the national parks have tons of money to watch closely over the mining operations.

The fact that you can tout this as a reason to have the mine ("The site is actually located about 10 to 12 air miles northeast of Mt. St. Helens. The area near there has been mostly flattened by the blast from the volcanic blast.") shows that you don't really understand the problem.

Posted by: Jud at July 28, 2006 09:11 AM

These funds were intended by Congress to be used to purchase lands for recreation and conservation, not for mining.

Once again, recreation trumps jobs.

Mine development at Goat Mountain could have enormous impacts

Ah yes, the ever present "could have". Not "will have", because there's no evidence for that argument. Nope, "could have" is strong enough for the fear-mongers.

Fish runs of the Green River could be devastated

Oooh! How scary! This could happen, that could happen. Another explosive eruption could happen. An asteroid could fall from the sky.

Developing a mine in the Green River valley would also impact recreation destinations such as hiking trails, popular lakes, and the Green River Horse Camp, a popular destination for backcountry horse enthusiasts.

And now we get to the real issue: putting people to work WOULD impact our recreation.

Not "could" - "would". And that's the bottom line: we don't care about jobs; we want places to go play. Never mind that over 95% of the population never visits these "popular sites". Those are, after all, (in the words of Leona) "the little people".

They happen to be the people who could use good-paying jobs.

Posted by: Max at July 28, 2006 12:00 PM

Max- I invite you to fly over the copper mines of Utah to see how nasty and visibly polluted the area is. And that's in a remote, near-lifeless habitat. Sure, the Washington site is in the blast zone, but it's still in a watershed with plenty of biological life around.

Not saying recreation should trump jobs in some or all cases, but the location is troubling. Could be wrong...

Posted by: TKrueg at July 28, 2006 12:22 PM

Oh goody goody goody, "the forest service will supervise"...isn't that the fox guarding the chickens? The forest service has done such a great job of late supervising the forests...NOT!

Posted by: Anne at July 28, 2006 12:31 PM

In the Valle de San Felix, the purest water in Chile runs from 2 rivers fed by a couple of glaciers. Indigeous farmers use the water and they provide the 2nd largest source of income in the area. There is virtually no unemployment in this area. Under these glaciers, huge deposits of gold and silver have been found. Barrack Gold, a multinational company, one of whose members is GEORGE BUSH SENIOR wants to extract the minerals (SURPRISE). This would involve destroying the glaciers, ultimately destroying a peoples way life. Because of the use of cyanide and sulfuric acid in the extraction process, the rivers will be PERMANENTLY contaminated, rendering it unfit for human and animal consumption.

Posted by: Karin at July 28, 2006 03:57 PM

OOOps. I meant indigenous in the above post.
As an artist that uses a lot of copper, I too am feeling the price increase. The folks at the local hardware store informed me that the price increase is due in part to the cost of the oil used in the machinery to extract it and also China who seems to be buying it up like there is no tomorrow. No doubt that this is for their lovely dam project which will go down in history as one of the most environmentally destructive undertakings ever.

Posted by: Karin at July 28, 2006 09:51 PM

[Posted as indicated; restored later.]