Route Guide - iPhone / Android - Partners - Forum - Photos - Deals - What's New - School of Rock
Login with Facebook
 ADVANCED
Oak Flat News
View Latest Posts in This Forum or All Forums
   Page 8 of 13.  <<First   <Prev   6  7  8  9  10   Next>   Last>>
Follow replies to this topic? Notify me at the top of web site.
1

Email me.
 
By Fred AmRhein
Nov 5, 2011

Just an FYI about some highway work going on in QC Canyon as you wend your way to Oak Flat:

Improvement work on US 60 Queen Creek bridge east of Superior begins next week



The Arizona Department of Transportation will be making improvements to the Queen Creek bridge on US 60 just east of Superior next week. The work will require lane closures on approximately one mile of the highway.



Lane restrictions will take place during the following work hours next week:



6:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday (Nov. 7) and Tuesday (Nov. 8)
6:30 a.m. to midnight Wednesday (Nov. 9)
6:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Thursday (Nov. 10)


What to expect during construction:



Crews will alternate eastbound and westbound traffic on one open lane between milepost 227 west of the bridge and milepost 228 east of the Queen Creek tunnel.
The bridge’s new surface will need to cure for 12 hours on Wednesday; therefore the speed limit will be reduced to 5 mph at the approaches to the bridge to reduce vibrations from vehicles.
The speed limit will be reduced to 35 mph through the construction zone on Monday, Tuesday and Thursday.
Motorists should expect delays of up to 15 minutes.
For safety purposes, motorists waiting to follow the pilot car will not be permitted to wait inside of the tunnel.
Crews will work from 6:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday, Tuesday and Thursday, and from 6:30 a.m. to midnight on Wednesday.
Drivers should proceed through the work zone with caution, slow down, and be alert for construction equipment and personnel.

The project schedule is subject to change due to a variety of reasons, including weather, material availability and mechanical difficulties.



For information about the transportation of oversized/overweight loads through the construction zone, please call ADOT Commercial Permits at 602-712-8851 or go to www.azdot.gov/mvd.



ADOT works to inform the public about planned highway restrictions, but there is a possibility that unscheduled closures or restrictions may occur. Weather can also affect a project schedule. To stay up-to-date with the latest highway conditions around the state, visit the ADOT Traveler Information Center at www.az511.gov or call 5-1-1.



For more information about this project, please visit www.azdot.gov/statewide or contact Southern Globe District Senior Community Relations Officer Teresa Guillen at 602.828.8075 or tguillen@azdot.gov. Local media should contact the ADOT Public Information Office at news@azdot.gov or 1.800.949.8057. Visit www.facebook.com/azdot or www.azdot.gov for more information about ADOT. Information about ADOT projects and programs across Arizona are also on the agency's latest blog posts at adotblog.blogspot.com.


Fred


FLAG
By manuel rangel
From Tempe, Arizona
Nov 9, 2011
Trying to redpoint The Ugly 11c; steeper than it looks and the rock is scary in spots but good enough.

Thanks for the useful info Fred.

How's the traffic in the mine area? I hear there is a lot of work going on towards LDC.


FLAG
By Ben Beard
From Superior, AZ
Nov 9, 2011
roo, my only son, the stare that takes down a herd of 'stock

manuel rangel wrote:
Thanks for the useful info Fred. How's the traffic in the mine area? I hear there is a lot of work going on towards LDC.


LDC access was good in low-mid clearance 4wd a week ago. The area got 1 inch of rain on Friday, with more over the weekend and more possibly next weekend. The road may be in tough shape. 4wd as always.


FLAG
By Fred AmRhein
Nov 10, 2011

Ben Beard wrote:
LDC access was good in low-mid clearance 4wd a week ago. The area got 1 inch of rain on Friday, with more over the weekend and more possibly next weekend. The road may be in tough shape. 4wd as always.


Thanks Ben.

Looks like archaeology groups are adding their voices to the increasing numbers of people who are taking issue with the proposed privatizaion of Oak Flat.

news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2011/10/breaking-news-arc>>>

Essentially: 'The trade would be "a blatant giveaway of the nation's public land to a single private stakeholder" and would set "a dangerous precedent," '

Just an FYI.

Fred


FLAG
By Lindajft
From maricopa, AZ
Nov 10, 2011
The loaf

Thanks for that article

So many 'gag orders' and propaganda in different areas and media, it's good to see other groups getting a fair chance to voice their concerns.

IMO

• If you read this n find it offensive, please do not 'pm' me.
Post it in pubic or keep it to yourself

Linda


FLAG
By Geir
From Tucson, AZ
Nov 10, 2011
Toofast

Lindajft wrote:
Thanks for that article So many 'gag orders' and propaganda in different areas and media, it's good to see other groups getting a fair chance to voice their concerns. IMO • If you read this n find it offensive, please do not 'pm' me. Post it in pubic or keep it to yourself Linda


Just stick to the facts and please stop your digs on others.

(Edited at the request of a friend in order to keep the peace.)


FLAG
By Chris Bastek
Nov 10, 2011

I personally don't see anything that is not factual or unreasonable about Linda's post seems like a simple request to me.


FLAG
By manuel rangel
From Tempe, Arizona
Nov 11, 2011
Trying to redpoint The Ugly 11c; steeper than it looks and the rock is scary in spots but good enough.

Linda lauded another group's efforts to keep Oak Flat from being destroyed. We need more help from other stakeholders and we want more people rousing the rabble to fight against the current legislation!

I think I'll do a search for old articles about RCM's claim concerning job creation, the focus of the latest land swap legislation. Since I first became involved, at Mike Covington's request, we were told the jobs available at the mine would number a few hundred. Several years later it's up to the thousands! I call that propaganda.


FLAG
By manuel rangel
From Tempe, Arizona
Nov 11, 2011
Trying to redpoint The Ugly 11c; steeper than it looks and the rock is scary in spots but good enough.

From RCM's own newsletter only seven years ago:

"Resolution Copper anticipates employing nearly 1,000
people during construction and about 400 high-quality,
permanent positions."

Now I get info from my congressman that the mine will create 6,000 jobs! Reminds me of how body counts were inflated in Vietnam to boost productivity. We know how well that turned out.

Happy Veterans Day!


FLAG
By BGBingham
Nov 11, 2011
night ice

Geir wrote:
Lame. Just stick to the facts and please stop your unintelligent digs on others.


The proponents in Congress have reduced the public argument to purely one of jobs and economic benefit. They follow a script written by the mining company as demonstrated by the fact that the numbers they use are Rio Tinto's.

Anyone wanting Patent needs to demonstrate the economic viability of a project. The history of mining clean-ups in the last few decades clearly demonstrates that miners of old did not run out their economic assessment far enough and created many waste problems that affect both aquifers and air quality.

RCM is doing the same. On the one hand they get the politicians to recite employment numbers that keep going up and are backed with all sorts of assurances. However, major portions of the mining process are completely unknown to the public or even RCM. Like: Where will the tailings be deposited? How will a huge hole in the ground be remediated? Where will the water come from? How will the aquifer be affected?

Many huge questions remain unanswered, yet the politicians and the media seem to think that this is fine. IMO, RCM needs to present alternative visions of how this project could be operated that takes into account cultural and environmental concerns as well as local tourist and recreational economies.

Just ten miles east of Oak Flat, the Carlota mine is having major technical issues with their ability to produce copper. All the optimism leading up to "approval" seems quite unbalanced to me and the landscape is irretrievably altered. The same could happen at Oak Flat.

RCM meters out information that only presents a positive message which certain politicians seem quite happy about spreading.

Real representatives would be creating viable 21st century Mining Law that would serve everyone well; not creating specific legislation to benefit an individual corporation.


FLAG
By Fred AmRhein
Nov 11, 2011

BGBingham wrote:
IMO, RCM needs to present alternative visions of how this project could be operated that takes into account cultural and environmental concerns as well as local tourist and recreational economies.


Well said! At this point, the politicians are advocating for one stakeholder to get everything at the expense of all the other stakeholders:

From the Tonto NF front page of their website: (See: www.fs.usda.gov/wps/portal/fsinternet/!ut/p/c4/04_SB8K8xLLM9>>>

"As the fifth largest forest in the United States, the Tonto National Forest is one of the most-visited “urban” forests in the U.S. (approximately 5.8 million visitors annually)."

Of course, there is no solid data to parse out how Oak Flat and the surrounding areas play into this number but that's a lot of visitors, many who come no doubt from the growing adjacent "urban" areas of Phoenix and Tucson for visits to enhance their quality of life.

Fred


FLAG
By Hank Caylor
Administrator
From Golden, CO
Nov 11, 2011
Courtesy Denver Police Dept.

anyone else remember when this was blasted at 600 climbers before the Phoenix Bouldering Competition every year at 6:00am??


FLAG
By BGBingham
Nov 11, 2011
night ice

Hank Caylor wrote:
anyone else remember when this was blasted at 600 climbers before the Phoenix Bouldering Competition every year at 6:00am??


I do. Good times! Lots of climbers from all around the country and world. Miss it.


FLAG
By Fred AmRhein
Nov 11, 2011

An interesting article where traditional stakeholders of revered lands are dealing with what at times is an uncomfortable sharing with the extractive industry (hunters and frackers)

www.nytimes.com/2011/11/12/us/pennsylvania-hunting-and-frack>>>

It's heartening to see a case where a land's stakeholders seem to agree to coexist and get at least most of what they want/need instead of one getting it all at the expense of the others. Seems like Balance and Fairness may be winning out in that situation.

Fred


FLAG
By Fred AmRhein
Nov 11, 2011

Interesting unintended consequences of the Oak Flat privatization proposal:

www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/opinions/articles/2011/10/>>>

In a nutshell, private lands along the San Pedro that become public lands (to BLM) via the proposed land swap are feared to no longer be providing revenue opportunities to the local communities (jobs/livelihoods/food and fiber), schools (taxes), etc., according to the letter writer.

Fred


FLAG
By kirra
Nov 11, 2011

BGBingham wrote:
The proponents in Congress have reduced the public argument to purely one of jobs and economic benefit. They follow a script written by the mining company as demonstrated by the fact that the numbers they use are Rio Tinto's.

on the topic of congressional propaganda, here is their latest glossy note pages 7-9:

American Jobs and the Republican Spin

Hank Caylor wrote:
anyone else remember when this was blasted at 600 climbers before the Phoenix Bouldering Competition every year at 6:00am??

good times...
good times <br />Phoenix Bouldering Comp
good times
Phoenix Bouldering Comp


FLAG
By CO_Michael
Nov 12, 2011
Mexico roadside rocks

That is a pretty good link, Kirra.

Shows that the GOB wants to pass a bunch of laws that will rape the West of all material goods.

Under the Resolution Copper section it has reasonable job numbers but says that the life span of the mine will be 50 years.

Sad that all that destruction will be for less than one life time of material.

Mining is known not to be able to clean up after its self but the GOP wants to just look the other way.

Congressional Western Caucus


FLAG
By manuel rangel
From Tempe, Arizona
Nov 12, 2011
Trying to redpoint The Ugly 11c; steeper than it looks and the rock is scary in spots but good enough.

According to the western republican legislators, calling themselves jobs creators (right): "The land the federal government would acquire in the exchange consists of highly-coveted recreational and conservation areas, therefore this land exchange will assist the federal government in its efforts to more efficiently manage existing federal properties and protect natural treasures in the state."

I don't understand how they can keep a straight face saying they want to protect "highly-coveted recreational" and "natural treasures" when the very land they want to give away was set aside as a national treasure!

What is wrong with having all of it. RCM can and should explore other options to keep both the surface intact and produce much needed copper. So what if they don't make an extra billion or two. Greed got us into this current economic mess. Why should our legislators continue to bow down before the big money. They need to answer to the people.


FLAG
By BGBingham
Nov 12, 2011
night ice

manuel rangel wrote:
Why should our legislators continue to bow down before the big money. They need to answer to the people.


This is what I don't understand Manuel. Legislators crafting bills that have nothing to do with making law that provides a foundation by which all can look to, build from and count on.

Instead, we get legislation that grants special privileges to corporations that spend quite freely to gain their goals.

We get legislation that grants this exception under these condition during such and such time period and has nothing to do with a big picture, system view, that approaches clarity. A lawyers delight I am sure. Meanwhile cultural and environmental concerns are just obstacles to the process rather than fully of equal status to the almighty economic.


FLAG
By ClimbandMine
Nov 12, 2011

BGBingham wrote:
Anyone wanting Patent needs to demonstrate the economic viability of a project. The history of mining clean-ups in the last few decades clearly demonstrates that miners of old did not run out their economic assessment far enough and created many waste problems that affect both aquifers and air quality. RCM is doing the same.



How many of those clean-ups were on projects that began in the 1960's or later? My guess is most were much much older. The Leadville superfund site began mining in the 1860's. Butte, Montana - 1870's. Virginia City, Nevada (not Superfund, but long term water treatment) - 1850's. Bisbee and others in southern Arizona - late 1800's as well.

Tell me, what environmental regulations were the miners in 1870 supposed to include in their 130 year economics assessments, Brent?

By the way, I'm still waiting for a design of this magical mining method of a subsidence-free block cave.


FLAG
By Fred AmRhein
Nov 13, 2011

Geir wrote:
Just stick to the facts and please stop your digs on others. (Edited at the request of a friend in order to keep the peace.)


Geir,

Here’s just one instance where parties with direct influence on the Oak Flat privatization proposal by Rio Tinto have contractually limited their speech/free opinions on the issue.

On June 19, 2008, David Salisbury, then President of Rio Tinto’s Resolution project and then-Mayor of Superior, Michael Hing who was recalled in an election just this last Tuesday the 8th, signed an agreement that outlined the monetary and real estate deal that was struck between the two organizations (The Town’s Deal). (See this link for details on the vote that ousted Hing: ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Michael_Hing_recall,_Superior>>>

As part of The Town’s Deal, the contract provided for termination based on the behavior of the Mayor and Town Council Members with respect to how they portrayed their view of it to State elected officials.

Here’s an excerpt from the Town's Deal document:

5.2 Conditions Subsequent. The Agreement shall terminate automatically upon the occurrence of the following conditions, upon which this Agreement shall have no further force or effect:

. . .

5.2.2 Provided there has been no Event of Default by RCML, upon any rescission of the Support Letter by the Mayor or any member of the Town Council in their official capacity, or any such person in their official capacity otherwise qualifying their support of the Legislation, the Exchange and/or proposed RCML Operations, or otherwise expressing opposition to the RCML Operations in any communication with any member of the State’s Congressional delegation or the State’s Governor.



The chilling effect of this sort of agreement is obvious to many who keep close tabs on the issue and has created a somewhat suspicious environment that permeates the community. No doubt from the perspective of Rio Tinto, a provision such as that excerpted from the Town's Deal makes sense, after all, they want something in exchange for their largesse (to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year in the case of the Town of Superior, some land, some loans, etc.).

This agreement expired at the end of 2010 and is commonly known to have been replaced by another one of similar impact.

Other groups have had similar agreements, whether written or not, related to this issue, often times they are in the form of a non-disclosure agreement, etc. While the term “gag order” as applied may be imprecise from a strictly legal view, it is quite commonly used when referencing the restricted speech behavior of groups or individuals who have received something in exchange for their support of Rio Tinto and their Resolution project or who may not want to endanger those things that they have been led to believe they will receive in exchange for their silence or support.

Just my view of course.

Fred


FLAG
By Lindajft
From maricopa, AZ
Nov 13, 2011
The loaf

Geir wrote:
Lame. Just stick to the facts and please stop your unintelligent digs on others.



Geir, why the anger? You and I have only met once and for a brief time. Who do you think I'm throwing digs at?


You have responded to both times when I mentioned sellout and gag order. Why are you taking these terms personally?

I'm a little confused by your timely responses.

(I had a long, beautiful post that I was working on and my windows did an update. Bummer. I had footnotes and sources stating a lot information for the public. Maybe I'll get the energy to redo)

IMO
Linda


FLAG
By Lindajft
From maricopa, AZ
Nov 13, 2011
The loaf

I found this document written by Nancy Pelosi to interesting on HR1904
garamendi.house.gov/HR1904TaxpayerGiveawaytoResolutionCopper>>>

  • 'Instead of Providing Royalties to U.S. Taxpayers, Provides for Highly Unusual Appraisal Procedures.
The Resolution Copper company estimates that the value of the copper ore in the land they are acquiring is several billion dollars. And yet the bill does not provide royalty payments to U.S. taxpayers as copper ore is extracted from the land. Instead, the bill requires highly unusual appraisal procedures which fail to guarantee that Resolution Copper will pay a fair price for the copper it stands to receive from the American people.'
  • 'Provides for Transfer Before Analysis of Impact on Area’s Water Supply Is Conducted. Under the bill,
the extent of impacts from the copper mine on water resources and surrounding communities would also not be analyzed until the land transfer has already taken place. The mining operation planned by
Resolution Copper would require 40,000 acre-feet of water per year, the same amount of water used each year by the city of Tempe, Arizona, which has a population of 160,000. Needing that much water a
year would have a major environmental impact on that part of Arizona – and yet no impact analysis will have been done before the transfer.'

Pretty informational, please check it out yourself.


FLAG
By Lindajft
From maricopa, AZ
Nov 13, 2011
The loaf

Mayor Hing of the Town of Superior was recalled
ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Michael_Hing_recall,_Superior>>>
According to this source: 'Grounds for recall included mismanagement of funds, select enforcement of codes, and failure to acknowledge public input, among other reasons.'

I wonder what this means for the agreement of 2008 that Fred posted above.


I also heard of Resolution recently 'buying a tap for cheap' into the Town of Superior's sewer/water. Unfortunately, I cannot find much data on it.

Has anyone else seen anything on this?


FLAG
By Lindajft
From maricopa, AZ
Nov 13, 2011
The loaf

Statement of Defense by Michael Ong Hing
www.pinalcountyaz.gov/Departments/Elections/Documents/Downlo>>>
This is the third attempt to recall me as Mayor of Superior. These claims and accusations are false and unfounded. This recall is driven by a personal agenda to try to discredit my service to this community. I was elected for my third term to be your Mayor and I plan to fulfill that obligation. I will always give 100% to serve this community with the utmost integrity to improve the quality of life for all residents of Superior. This includes dealing with the crime issues, code enforcement and to bring economic development. It has been a slow process and very difficult during this major economic recession. However I can say we are moving forward and are setting the necessary foundation blocks for a great future. I will continue to support the development of the Resolution Copper mining project, because, I believe our partnership only enhances our quality of life in Superior. The project will bring not only great paying jobs but economic opportunity for all. When my Grandfather came to Superior in the early 1920's. He was was committed to make Superior a great place to live and I will continue to carry my Granddad’s same spirit.


Mayor Michael Hing


Good night


FLAG


Follow replies to this topic? Notify me at the top of web site.
1

Email me.
Page 8 of 13.  <<First   <Prev   6  7  8  9  10   Next>   Last>>