JUNEAU — A Superior Court judge has sided with the state in a legal battle over the Pebble Mine project.
Judge Eric Aarseth, in a written ruling issued Monday, found that the state was not required to give public notice before issuing exploratory permits for the project site. He also found the state didn’t need to study the potential impacts of the activity first.
The plaintiffs, who include a coalition of Alaska Native village corporations, are considering an appeal to the state Supreme Court. Attorney General John J. Burns and the Pebble Limited Partnership, which is pursuing development of the world-class gold and copper prospect, lauded Aarseth’s decision. Pebble was an intervener in the case, supporting the state.
The case dates to 2009, with the coalition Nunamta Aulukestai and several individuals alleging that the state Department of Natural Resources violated provisions of Alaska’s Constitution by allowing for exploration to occur over 20 years without public notice or advance study of the potential impacts of the work. They claimed there had been damage to the resources in the region due to the activity.
“No amount of compensation will restore the land, the wildlife and the waters at the Pebble Project area to what they were before mining exploration started,” plaintiff Ricky Delkittie Sr. said in a statement.
But Aarseth, in a 154-page opinion, said the plaintiffs failed to prove their case. He said the permits in question did not trigger constitutional requirements for public notice or analyses by the state prior to their issuance. He said based on evidence at trial, it is more likely than not that the exploration-related activities “did not cause any significant impact or long-term harm to concurrent uses.”
Aarseth found that exploration activity hasn’t excluded hunting guides and that drilling and discharges haven’t affected water quality to the detriment of fish.
A statement released by Pebble’s spokesman said the company intends “to continue conducting a careful, responsible study program as we proceed to design a project that will create enormous opportunity for Alaskans, especially for the residents of Southwest Alaska.”
The project has been at the center of an intense PR battle, with supporters saying it has the potential to create good jobs and opponents worried it could fundamentally alter the landscape and disrupt, if not destroy, a way of life in rural Alaska. The prospect is near the headwaters of Bristol Bay, a premier commercial sockeye salmon fishery.
Comments (13)
Add commentWow. This is a foreign
Sean Parnell as Governor has turned a deaf ear to the voices of Alaskans
Why dont "we" get it? The US
Why dont "we" get it? The US paves over the most fertile farmland in the world and puts malls on top, clearcuts old growth forests, and places the worlds largest open pit mine at the headwaters of one of the most prolific salmon streams in the Pacific.
@Foltoper
Read the article, and pay particular attention to the third paragraph.
"The case dates to 2009, with the coalition Nunamta Aulukestai and several individuals alleging that the state Department of Natural Resources violated provisions of Alaska’s Constitution by allowing for exploration to occur over 20 years......"
Sarah Palin resigned in 2009. Parnell took over as Governor then.
Many people in this forum blame Parnell for just about everything. Some arguments may have some merit, while others clearly don't. This is one of the latter.
By your logic, you may as well blame Parnell for the Exxon Valdez disaster - around 20 years ago.
I have no position, pro or con, on our Governor or the Pebble mine, but I wish people would think before they blame him for everything.
The exploration is to occur
The exploration is to occur over 20 years without public notice or advance study of the potential impacts of the work and Alaskans have no right to have a say in it?
Deception
I am fairly pro-mining --- Green's Creek, Kensington --- I have no problem with them.
But Pebble Mine will NOT help more than a few Alaskans. The high-paying jobs will go to people coming from the Lower 48. There is LITTLE benefit to Alaskans and the potential for DISASTER. It is a mistake.
"The juice ain't worth the squeeze," as the saying goes.
MickeyToo -Have you been
MickeyToo -
Have you been following this?
In April, a group of concerned Bristol Bay citizens filed a petition with the Lake and Peninsula Borough. The Save our Salmon initiative, designed to give locals "a voice" in decisions about large-scale industrial development..
and owners of the Pebble mine, filed a suit against an employee at the borough for certifying the initiative. In the lawsuit, the prayer for relief asks the court to take away the initiative rights of the local people. The judge heard the case and said it would stay on the ballot. The Pebble Partnership, then filed with our court system to take the case to the Alaska Supreme Court and said it was an emergency. and this is when
Sean Parnell filed an amicus brief siding with the foreign owned Pebble Partnership trying to stop the ALASKANS from voting in their own borough.
History tells us that our
History tells us that our forefathers fought the British to birth a country that could VOTE, and how siding with the British to take away the right of Americans to vote should be called treason...
Little benefit
The thing I don't like is its a foreign firm that will build/run the mine and all the raw materials will go to China, probably for the manufacturing of batteries. The profits will go to the corporations and what will residents get? An influx of people needing schools, hospitals, law enforcement, social services, etc. Who foots this bill? Alaskan taxpayers.
2014 Vote Parnell out of our
2014 Vote Parnell out of our Governors house!
Alaskans we need to take our state back from Parnell.
Mining
I am also pro-mining, but not this one for many reasons:
1. Owned by foreign entities.
2. WAY too big.
3. WAY too big of a threat for the salmon headwaters.
4. Little accountability to the foreign owners should a disaster occur. They could duck tail and run.
Wrong mine, wrong place.
How many Natives work for Bob Gilliam?
How many Natives work for Bob Gilliam? How long before Bob tries to turn everything into a park that could exclude natives not unlike Glacier Bay? How many Natives does BBNC employ? I worked for them on a job and there were two natives , me and one other, both from Juneau Laborers 942. Is the Russian Orthodox Church going to fly fuel into the villages in Bristol Bay area this winter? Have they ever? How about groceries, who is flying the groceries out to the villages in the Bristol Bay area Bob, Russian Church, whom?
I am pro development, but
I am pro development, but this thing is starting to stink pretty bad!
Now let's gut the permitting process
The Gov. has now ordered a review of the process of state permitting with a look to "streamline" it. I am not sure one goes about streamlining the protection of nature; shorter stream studies, less baseline data, etc. but the first meeting for DNR to hold public meetings on this (apparently not necessary if this was just an exploratory action) in Juneau is on October 12 at Centennial Hall Ball room #3. Fish and Game and DEC will be next on the list.
The reason not to require an environmental study prior to exploration is so that no baseline data will be collected, therefore there can be no measurement of harm can be determined once it occurs.