BajaNomad

GOLD!! or life?

tehag - 7-13-2013 at 02:09 PM

http://localsguidetoloreto.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=303&...

tiotomasbcs - 7-13-2013 at 05:30 PM

Good article. Agua Vale mas que Oro is a large, vocal group working against these projects! Check em out. Baja Sur has a very strong, organized opposition fighting these attempts to pollute our watersheds. At first, I thot this was mostly a Gringo thing but actually the Mexicanos picked up the fight from the beginning! Lots of bumper stickers, meetings, and rallys goin on. Agriculture is huge especially with demand for Organics. Thanks. Tio

[Edited on 7-14-2013 by tiotomasbcs]

MMc - 7-13-2013 at 06:22 PM

I read this and think of the Berkeley Pit, Although it is nothing like a mine in Baja. The pit and talus field would be a eyesore. It's not my country, so let the locals decide.:lol:

BajaBlanca - 7-13-2013 at 07:10 PM

Why is there arsenic in the water already? There are not and have not been any mines yet, right?

baja Steve - 7-13-2013 at 07:18 PM

from mining in the past

BajaNews - 7-13-2013 at 07:41 PM

http://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/elist/eListRead...

http://www.salon.com/2013/07/11/in_mexico_2_billion_gold_min...

Skipjack Joe - 7-13-2013 at 11:19 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BajaBlanca
Why is there arsenic in the water already? There are not and have not been any mines yet, right?


I believe the article said that arsenic naturally occurs in areas with gold and is often bound with it. Some leaching occurs naturally but would increase as the gold is unearthed and extracted. That's how I read it.

BajaBlanca - 7-14-2013 at 07:04 AM

I didn't realize arsenic was naturally occurring near gold. And I didn't realize mining had been done in that area already. This is not going to be pretty.

David K - 7-14-2013 at 07:40 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by BajaBlanca
I didn't realize arsenic was naturally occurring near gold. And I didn't realize mining had been done in that area already. This is not going to be pretty.


In the second paragraph from the web link: The mine is great news for the 900 residents of the nearby mining villages of San Antonio and El Triunfo.

They were mining villages dating back 150-250 years... but for silver then. Jack Swords was one of the first Nomads to give us photos of the area mines: http://www.vivabaja.com/swords/
http://www.vivabaja.com/swords/page11.html

monoloco - 7-14-2013 at 08:08 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by David K
Quote:
Originally posted by BajaBlanca
I didn't realize arsenic was naturally occurring near gold. And I didn't realize mining had been done in that area already. This is not going to be pretty.


In the second paragraph from the web link: The mine is great news for the 900 residents of the nearby mining villages of San Antonio and El Triunfo.

They were mining villages dating back 150-250 years... but for silver then. Jack Swords was one of the first Nomads to give us photos of the area mines: http://www.vivabaja.com/swords/
http://www.vivabaja.com/swords/page11.html
Great news for SOME of the 900 residents of El Triunfo and San Antonio but terrible news for the other 300,000 or so residents of the region. The area of the proposed mine has the most surface water and the most rainfall of any place in BCS. Risking an aquifer so important to agriculture and domestic use for so many for the short term gain of so few is grossly irresponsible.

David K - 7-14-2013 at 08:24 AM

Yet, the very toxic mining methods of 150-250 years ago have allowed life to exist to the high degree we see today. Yet you fear modern, environmentally sensitive mining will somehow destroy?

I think the eco-watchdogs and lawyers from both sides will make sure if the gold is mined, the damages will be not nearly what they otherwise could be.

I sure wouldn't want to be the owner of the mining company with all the hoops needed to jump through today! The facts are that gold is needed, and it doesn't grow on trees... If not mined in Baja (as it has been for hundreds of years), then the wealth will not be shared in Baja.

Maybe it will wait for another time, but someday the need for that gold will find a way to get to it, and the Mexican people will decide when that is, not a bunch foreigners, I hope!

monoloco - 7-14-2013 at 08:33 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by David K
Yet, the very toxic mining methods of 150-250 years ago have allowed life to exist to the high degree we see today. Yet you fear modern, environmentally sensitive mining will somehow destroy?

I think the eco-watchdogs and lawyers from both sides will make sure if the gold is mined, the damages will be not nearly what they otherwise could be.

I sure wouldn't want to be the owner of the mining company with all the hoops needed to jump through today! The facts are that gold is needed, and it doesn't grow on trees... If not mined in Baja (as it has been for hundreds of years), then the wealth will not be shared in Baja.

Maybe it will wait for another time, but someday the need for that gold will find a way to get to it, and the Mexican people will decide when that is, not a bunch foreigners, I hope!
The majority of the Mexican people in this region seem to be very much against the idea of allowing a foreign mining company to come in and exploit their land and water, judging by the number and size of the protests they have organized against it. "The state of Baja California Sur, like much of Mexico, has a long history of mining. The first gold mines in the region were dug 200 years ago. Today, the legacy of those mines is still obvious — about 800,000 tons of mining waste piled up as artificial hills throughout the peninsula. By comparison, the new open pit mine would produce an equal amount of waste every 20 days — for the next 10 years. In other words, the area landscape will be completely transformed."

MMc - 7-14-2013 at 11:19 AM

I am not a eco-watchdog in anyway, shape or form. Some have called me a Luddite however. The locals will decide this for themselves, what I believe has no bearing on what will happen there.

What will happen to the roads in the area? That aquifer is far more valuable then gold will ever be. What will that area look like after they are done in 10 years? 200 years from now we will have a filled in (kinda) hole, water that my be potable and some huge piles of stone?

Just because we did something for 200 years doesn't make it right. The mining that was done up in till now has been hard-rock and dry sluicing mining.Pit mining is nothing like what has been done before.
Here are images of open pit mines;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-pit_mining
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/10/gallery_mines/7/

Rehabilitation is only as good as the mining company and how long they are operating.

Open pit mines are fascinating places, I wouldn't vacation at one or anywhere near it. I am for thoughtful progress. let's hope that the LOCALS decide what is the best way foreword.
Glade I saw it when I did.

rts551 - 7-14-2013 at 11:44 AM

In 2010, the Mexican Geological Service analyzed water samples collected from 80 wells around San Antonio and the adjacent agricultural region of Los Planes. The tests showed that almost half of the wells have arsenic contamination level above the permissible limit for potable water in Mexico, which is 25 parts per billion (ppb). By comparison, the World Health Organization and the US national drinking water standards are 10 ppb. Murillo explains that the major source of these high levels of arsenic is the arsenolite — a highly soluble mineral within the old mining waste that drains along the San Antonio stream and spreads into the Los Planes valley sediments and ground water.

I wonder if David would like to live at this site? or better yet, maybe he could find a job there. Open pit mining areas are not very pretty, but worse, they can be very toxic. Hope you are not down wind from the tailings

ncampion - 7-14-2013 at 11:57 AM

This arguement seems a lot like a hamburger. We all like to eat one (well most of us), but nobody wants to see how the meat is obtained at a slaughterhouse. These minerals have to come from somewhere if our modern life is to continue but nobody wants to acknowledge that somewhere there has to be a mine to produce them.

monoloco - 7-14-2013 at 01:52 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ncampion
This arguement seems a lot like a hamburger. We all like to eat one (well most of us), but nobody wants to see how the meat is obtained at a slaughterhouse. These minerals have to come from somewhere if our modern life is to continue but nobody wants to acknowledge that somewhere there has to be a mine to produce them.
Some areas are more suitable for these activities than others. Most of the locals in BCS seem to feel that it's a bad idea to have an open pit mine and cyanide leaching operation in the watershed for a large portion of the cape region. Water is a precious commodity in this region and in short supply, the protection of it should be the priority.

grizzlyfsh95 - 7-14-2013 at 02:05 PM

You guys are just silly. Of course we know that beef comes from Safeway in little plastic packages. Same with chicken. And gold? I comes from a jewelry store. I certainly don't want someone digging a hole IN MY BACKYARD! But then everybody has a backyard, don't they?
So many mining engineers here on this board, and so much knowledge of modern mining practices. Makes your head explode.
We want economic development for the Mexicans, we want fuel and lubricants in the states, but we certainly don't want to do what must be done to obtain either.
What a joke.

MMc - 7-14-2013 at 02:35 PM

Please, can tell me where a open pit mine has improved the area? Yes, not in my back yard is here. This is about a place that I love and believe in protecting. I do have a say in what is going to happen? Not at all. The first salvo is always environmental, real or not, the next is lawyers and paperwork, third is public outcry. I hope the locals play the long game.

So grizzlyfsh95 how do feel about long-lines and 4" gill nets in the East Cape, are they a joke?

grizzlyfsh95 - 7-14-2013 at 04:56 PM

Well, let's see. Most of the fish sold in the States is caught by long line. There are limits and areas for fishing, along with licenses and seasons. Most gill netting in the lower 48 (other than on the reservations) is illegal. I believe that gill netting in the SOC is also illegal, except for some ijido families who have been grandfathered in with permits. I'm not crazy about that, but it is the law, and they do it right in front of my home. (And I am a law-abiding Mexican citizen)
Would you prefer that mining be done traditionally in underground mines? It is inefficient and dangerous. If you do not like the look of an open pit mine...uh...don't look at it.

ligui - 7-14-2013 at 05:06 PM

The land looks just great the way it is ....:bounce:

David K - 7-14-2013 at 05:39 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ligui
The land looks just great the way it is ....:bounce:


I can agree with that!

:light:

rts551 - 7-14-2013 at 06:43 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by grizzlyfsh95
If you do not like the look of an open pit mine...uh...don't look at it.


I am sorry, but with attitudes like this there would be nothing left worth looking at.

Skipjack Joe - 7-14-2013 at 10:49 PM

That's very true.

SFandH - 7-15-2013 at 03:00 AM

I've been doing a little reading about gold and gold mining. It's estimated that around 70 - 80% of the gold mined to date is used for jewelry, coin, or bullion. In other words, it's not used for much useful. But it sure is shiny. Dentistry is the next biggest use. A small amount is used in electronic gizmos, ICBM guidance systems for example. You don't want the system that puts the bomb on target to get rusty.

Considering all the bullion and coins sitting in vaults around the world, I can't see how gold NEEDS to be mined. You can crown a lot of molars, porcelain covered of course, with one bar of gold.

Mining enough gold for an 18 karat wedding band leaves behind 20 tons of ore and waste rock. It takes quite a bit of energy (diesel, gasoline) to move that much stuff around.

A snippet from NY Times article:

"Gold tailing ponds and piles are chock-full of contaminants such as arsenic, antimony, residual cyanide and mercury, and so must be carefully managed to avoid generating runoff or coming into contact with wildlife. These tailings can stay toxic for centuries, so proper post-closure plans are crucial."

A few folks will get rich, 100s, maybe 1000s will have hard, dirty, low paying jobs for a while, until the price per ounce drops. There will be more shiny trinkets, and one big toxic mess left behind.

[Edited on 7-15-2013 by SFandH]

DianaT - 7-15-2013 at 06:29 AM

Gold is pretty, but as pointed out, not real necessary, except I have a lot of it on my teeth.

While Canadians have a great reputation in many areas, their mining companies do not have a very good reputation for their mining operations in foreign countries. (Don't know about this particular company)

When a foreign company comes in, the profits mainly flow out of the country. And if the water supply is polluted, well that problem is left behind.

The people of Baja California Sur won the battle against the salt mining in San Ignacio, may they also win this battle.

:yes::yes:

monoloco - 7-15-2013 at 06:59 AM

If you look at the history of mining operations, they have a long record of declaring bankruptcy when faced with remediating the environmental effects of their operations.

wessongroup - 7-15-2013 at 07:27 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by monoloco
If you look at the history of mining operations, they have a long record of declaring bankruptcy when faced with remediating the environmental effects of their operations.


Chemical Industry too ......... :biggrin:

[Edited on 7-15-2013 by wessongroup]

monoloco - 7-15-2013 at 08:05 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by wessongroup
Quote:
Originally posted by monoloco
If you look at the history of mining operations, they have a long record of declaring bankruptcy when faced with remediating the environmental effects of their operations.


Chemical Industry too ......... :biggrin:

[Edited on 7-15-2013 by wessongroup]
Think, Bhopal.