A federal agency is asserting legal rights to waters that feed the Okefenokee Swamp and its vast wildlife refuge, setting up a new battle with a mining company seeking permits to withdraw more than 1.4 million gallons per day.
I get the sentiment, but that’s not entirely the case (at least in my jurisdiction), especially through the approval process. In my experience, regulators can really hammer mine operators. In most cases, they are required to submit annual activity reports that encompass all environmental disciplines as well as engineering and production components. This is on top of any in person visits from regulators themselves.
My point is that it’s very easy to paint with a broad brush (and we all do it) but there’s often a lot more to it than we think, and it’s on us to check our assumptions/statements if we wish to be accurate.
I’m talking about the age old technique of doing whatever you want and then “going bankrupt”. These companies have no scruples and if you give them an inch they take a mile and always run on the ask forgiveness rather than permission.
For the record. I grew up in Tampa and that swamp covers a good chunk of both states. I have a fondness for swamp and similar habitat.
I very much see this as a win for biodiversity, and it’s cool to see them stick to their guns on this front for a change.
You are absolutely right on the mine abandonment issue. This is why I harp on reclamation security, because it makes it a lot harder for proponents to walk away and provides at least some funds if they go under.
The point I was trying to make is that there are things in place to both protect the environment and allow (responsible) mining.
I get what you are saying and I guess I’ve just seen enough of the corporate bullshit with gov agencies just bending over because they are either paid to or don’t have the resources to enforce anything.
Personally, I’d rather see stuff like this be publicly owned, especially if whatever they are mining will benefit everyone, ie lithium for batteries.
That doesn’t actually mean much these days.
I get the sentiment, but that’s not entirely the case (at least in my jurisdiction), especially through the approval process. In my experience, regulators can really hammer mine operators. In most cases, they are required to submit annual activity reports that encompass all environmental disciplines as well as engineering and production components. This is on top of any in person visits from regulators themselves.
My point is that it’s very easy to paint with a broad brush (and we all do it) but there’s often a lot more to it than we think, and it’s on us to check our assumptions/statements if we wish to be accurate.
I’m talking about the age old technique of doing whatever you want and then “going bankrupt”. These companies have no scruples and if you give them an inch they take a mile and always run on the ask forgiveness rather than permission.
For the record. I grew up in Tampa and that swamp covers a good chunk of both states. I have a fondness for swamp and similar habitat.
I very much see this as a win for biodiversity, and it’s cool to see them stick to their guns on this front for a change.
You are absolutely right on the mine abandonment issue. This is why I harp on reclamation security, because it makes it a lot harder for proponents to walk away and provides at least some funds if they go under.
The point I was trying to make is that there are things in place to both protect the environment and allow (responsible) mining.
I get what you are saying and I guess I’ve just seen enough of the corporate bullshit with gov agencies just bending over because they are either paid to or don’t have the resources to enforce anything.
Personally, I’d rather see stuff like this be publicly owned, especially if whatever they are mining will benefit everyone, ie lithium for batteries.
Public ownership of a lot of things is sorely needed. We’re slaves to capitalism at this point and it’s horseshit