Community Perspective
Alaskans can disagree without name-calling
Published Sunday, April 27, 2008
Digg
delicious
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!It is important to be respectful in the process of public discourse. It is equally important to show respect for the facts by checking them carefully when one is putting forward a public argument.
Mary Nordale failed miserably on both counts in her April 20 Community Perspective regarding the Clean Water Initiative and the Pebble Mine debate.
There is no anti-mining initiative threatening the livelihoods of Alaskans, although she repeatedly refers to one. There is, however, a Clean Water Initiative which simply strengthens standards protecting water quality where salmon spawn.
The Clean Water Initiative, which will be on the August 26 Primary ballot, does not put Fort Knox or Pogo employees out of work and turn them into Fairbanks street-people. It contains no language that would shut down any existing mine, stop any mine from starting or hinder the operation of mom-and-pop mines. And it in no way stops recreational miners from seeking the pleasure of profit from the current high price of gold. It does ensure that when Ms. Nordale, and the rest of us, seek a reasonably priced wild salmon dinner, that one will be available for us, and for all Americans, to enjoy.
One has to but look at the mind-boggling crash of the once great Fraser River salmon run and now the salmon fishing shutdown from Oregon through California to see how important Alaska’s wild salmon are. Eighty percent of the wild salmon consumed comes from Alaska, and Bristol Bay’s clean waters are the spawning grounds for the largest salmon run left on Earth. Alaska’s commercial, subsistence and sport fishing families are all impacted by the quality of these waters. That is what makes the Clean Water Initiative so important — the protection of existing jobs.
But what disturbs me more than Ms. Nordale’s mining mischaracterizations is her disrespect of two honorable Alaskans who have contributed greatly to good public policy in Alaska.
Rep. Jay Ramras is a strong pro-mining advocate. I have had enough conversations with him to attest to that. He is also a responsible public servant and as such takes seriously his charge to promote the maximum benefit to Alaskans from resource development. I have met most Alaskan politicians over the past 30-plus years, and few are as principled and incorruptible as Mr. Ramras. He never hesitates to apply reason, ask tough questions and grow his decision-making along with the facts.
Bob Gillam, another child of Fairbanks, heads a company of more than 100 employees, which has become a well-known global asset manager. It is the only Alaska firm managing Permanent Fund investments. While Ms. Nordale insinuates that this is some sort of travesty that Alaskans should decry, public records show that Mr. Gillam’s firm returned almost $160,000,000 in earnings for the Permanent Fund last year, thereby fattening every Alaskan’s Permanent Fund Dividend check.
His firm’s rate of return for us was more than 24 percent, while the S&P 500 did no more than 7 percent. We should all be saying “thanks, Bob.”
It should disturb all readers for Ms. Nordale to question Mr. Gillam’s right of free speech in opposing current plans related to the development of Pebble Mine. She might be interested to know that 72 percent of Fairbanks voters happen to concur with Mr. Gillam’s assessment, which grew out of years of scientific studies. The fact is, no large sulfide mine like Pebble has ever been developed without heavy metal and acid run-off contaminating surrounding streams.
The problem lies with where Pebble is located, since the surrounding streams of Bristol Bay feed the largest wild salmon fishery on Earth. One thousand square miles around Pebble are in the wings to be developed the minute Pebble gets permitted. For carefully studying and pointing this out, Mr. Gillam apparently should be disqualified from managing Permanent Fund investments?
That is highly offensive reasoning.
Let us hope that the issue of Pebble Mine can continue without the impugning of the character of good Alaskans who have a different point of view. At the end of the day, I believe that most Alaskans will prove that we can be pro-mining and also pro-clean water and wild Alaska salmon; That we can be for ANWR, and against Pebble. It’s called good stewardship.
Arthur Hackney is the co-owner of Hackney & Hackney, Inc., a media communications firm located in Anchorage. He was born in Alaska and graduated from Lathrop High School.
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
Art-
My question is, are we not allowed to disagree? I notice you fail to mention the Attorney General's opinion that, in fact, states that the initiative(s) will impact existing mining operations. So in addition to being a political consultant being PAID to manage the initiative campaign, you've now become a natural resource attorney? Where do you find the time. Thank you, so much for setting all us ignorant hicks straight.
"Alaskans can disagree without name calling"....err no we can't.
Whoever wrote this is a poop head.
what a horrible article!!
I read the article, and I didn't think she really name-called at all. It's as if Art is saying "If you disagree with me, then you're being mean." The only way to avoid the accusation of ad hominem attacks is to completely acquiesce.
Frankly I find the whole article rather silly.
I had a miner come up to me and express to me all the reasons I should vote with the miners on this initiative as it will close down all the mines and prevent any others from starting... putting thousands of alaskan's out of work and on unemployment. Unfortuneatly, I have not had the time or the opportunity to read this initiative. Does anyone have a link to the literature of the initiatie so I can make an educated decision on this?!? I think that might answer a lot of questions for those of us who are still unsure.
Twin-
Here's a link to the group opposed to the initiative: http://www.againsttheshutdown.com/
He forgot to mention he also works for the circus he must ....he is a clown!
Casey-
I would encourage you to look at the Alaska Dept. of Labor's statistics on wages in Alaska. Mining has either the first or second highest average wage in the state.
However it is plainly apparent that you are a committed preservationist that will try to make the "facts" fit your perspective.
I get so tired of hearing "If you don't like it leave!" As if Alaska has no room for improvement! Jobs are a necessary thing to survive here, unless you have inherited millions. It is expensive to live here, and yet people do, why because they love this State. The people that have chosen to make it home, including the people born here, are most conscientious of the issues, needs, and beauty of this place that I have seen, they do all that they can to protect it, including wildlife, vegetation, land mass, air quality, and waters...So even suggesting that "If you don't like it leave!", is an insult to many that have changed things for the better because they didn't like it!
Don't be a sheep, READ THE INITIATIVE: http://www.renewableresourcescoalition.o...
It's TWO pages (and poorly written).
it CLEARLY bans almost all rock mining in alaska (via chemical extraction). It grandfathers existing permits, but come renewal time, BAM. Game over.
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.