Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Copper Fox -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: CUUallin who wrote (8588)	12/7/2014 3:55:56 PM
From: mudguy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10654

No, you make it sound that way. I said some is worthy of preservation and probably will be in my estimation. The areal extent of known mineral deposits is trivial relative to the region and there is clearly room for both. Parks are one way that environmental, First Nation and community concerns are mollified during negotiation of permits for resource projects. The runoff and salmon issue, particularly with Alaska is likely separate. I don't have particular downstream concerns, but I'm not an Alaska voter. I wonder how important a mine in NW BC would be to the Federal government if the US bundles the issue in the IJC? Alaska gets nothing from SC except the perception of pollution. Sound familiar? Keystone XL for example?