Active Member
You are not a conservation-minded conservative. Let's get that straight right away. No conservation-minded person would for a second consider that this project is a good idea, but you do. There are times, and places, for development. This is, beyond argument, not that place.
You OBVIOUSLY have a reading comprehension problem!!

Suggest you re-read.

Jamie Wilson

Active Member
Jamie, don't be an apologist for those who would strip mine the entire land. Those people always start out by saying, "but you have to compromise, and for the sake of development, allow us half of the land." Then when that's destroyed, they'll come back and say, "You have to compromise and allow us half of what's left." That's a sucker's play. Look at what's left of our forests. Look at the long-term damage it's caused to our rivers caused by overharvesting. That's what the end game is. This "development" doesn't help you or me, it helps those who already have all the money in the world get more.

Time to say "Enough, no more."
I’m not
I just didn’t get the same meaning from the post as you may have
Believe me I’m as apposed to this lame idea as you are

Greg Armstrong

Active Member
@dekartes I feel your pain.

We could just band together and hire the best environmental protection attorneys to fight these types of boondoggles in court....

NRDC.org (Natural Resources Defense Counsel) has successfully beat our own government in court dozens of times over the past 49 years to uphold the environmental protection laws that we already have in place.

It shouldn’t be this way, but sometimes we have to fight in court and win these battles.

Look at NRDC's record.... then hire them to work on your behalf by sending them the needed cash to get the job done.

It's worked lots of times.
Last edited:


Trout Thank Me
when I run instead of a tax credit per kid you will get a tax credit for no kids
I used to say this all the time because i chose not to have kids! I also wanted a big tax break for living two miles from where i work.

A friend of mine was giving me a bit of crap for being a subscriber to Blue Apron delivery because they use quite a bit of packaging and lots of cardboard. I said all of it’s recycle anyway and my carbon footprint is a lot less than hers considering that she had two kids who had two kids and so on and i haven’t put one diaper in the landfills not to mention everything else that goes along with kids. Plus packaging is a problem everywhere, especially Costco.

Edited to add: Thanks for posting @dekartes - and what you said here: “When did the protection of our lands become Republican and Democrat? Does everthing have to be politicised?” ..... YES!
Last edited:


Active Member
For the "overpopulation" types, population growth rates have leveled off, or even declined with rising standards of living. Some countries populations are actually decreasing.

That being said, I think having a tax credit for having no kids isn't a bad idea.

Protection of our lands became a democratic party point when republicans stopped wanting to protect the lands. A republican politician who says "lets not mine that gold" or "lets not cut those trees over there" is not going to win any primary.


Active Member
The population is expected to reach between 8 and 10.5 billion between the years 2040 and 2050. All these folks, as pointed out by FinLuver, will want the same resources that are dwindling at a rapid pace. I believe both of these statements to be factual.

It is my opinion that the demographics are such that the majority are in favor of development to insure that the masses of the future can sustain a certain life style. And yes, some of these developers seem to put profit motivations over humanity's needs.

This preserve VS develop conflict holds out Bristol Bay as sort of a casualty of war. Sad for some VS necessary and profitable for others. The Author of this post and the rules of this forum dictate that we steer clear of politics. So be it, however difficult that might be.


Active Member
Humans are a bit different from other life forms on planet earth. We attempt to become comfortable and being rich makes most of us more comfortable. All life on earth consumes resources, trouble is humans think rare metals like gold and silver make us more comfortable than wood, meat, fish, veggies etc. If the minerals available at the Pebble mine site are not excavated now they will be excavated in the near future. If the mining can be done in a way to impede likely spills and habitat degradation it would be best. Seems everyone assumes the mining company desires to kill the Sockeye populations but I don't think that's true. It is an economic decision, preservation is impossible unless we choose to evolve back to cave dwelling and everything it requires. It's the same argument wrt to global warming. We either choose to live comfortably or otherwise. I'm pretty sure Cro-magnon man thought he lived comfortably or tried to. So do we.

Driftless Dan

Active Member
If the mining can be done in a way to impede likely spills and habitat degradation it would be best. Seems everyone assumes the mining company desires to kill the Sockeye populations but I don't think that's true.
There is your first mistake: Thinking that a corporation gives a damn about those sockeye populations one way or another. There is virtually no penalty if they do destroy the salmon runs, so why should they care?

And it's another right-wing red herring to imply that the cost of saving natural resources involve becoming cave men again. It is simply not a valid argument.


Active Member
I'll just chime in to remind the overpopulation theorists that you, yourselves were once but a twinkle in your own daddy's eye, and had he and your mother not acted on it, you would not be here to write posts implying that other people shouldn't be having kids... But at least your mom would have a few thousand more dollars invested in consumer crap.


Active Member
We didn't have a choice that we were born, but we do have choice on how to live now. Rather you want children or not, I hope we can all agree to live simply and make wise decisions. We are pushed into consumerism as the way to live nowadays, but we all have the choice to dial it back a little bit. Oh ya, the pebble mine is the wrong choice in the wrong place...


Active Member
I just came back from Tikchik Narrows Lodge, and fished the Nush, which was great. For now.
Lots of guests there from the gas development and mining industries, having a jolly old time. I wonder how these bastards reconcile their enjoyment of the splendor of the area whilst working to destroy it!
What was the carbon footprint of your extravagant trip?

How much carbon based fuel was used on your trip? ( plane, your car, fishing lodge)

Did you confront the gas and oil people at your fish lodge and tell them how evil they are?

You can stay local and catch salmon and have a much less negative impact on the environment

I think Europe has the right idea in flight shaming


Latest posts