Page 2 of 4

Re: Ajax rejected

PostPosted: Dec 15th, 2017, 11:00 am
by UhHuhYeahSure
Cactusflower wrote:Mining companies have a sordid history in B.C. since 2001. In just one example, Imperial Metals knew they could get away with bypassing environmental assessments by slipping thousands of dollars into the BC Liberal war chest. They were even allowed to re-open the Mt. Polley mine operation without ever taking any responsibility for the environmentally disastrous results of their tailings pond breach. Guess who's paying for that? The BC taxpayers, that's who.

Now Ajax is surprised that the NDP have rejected another mining disaster in the making? Well, boo :cuss: hoo!


Cactusflower... Do you even know what is mine tailings? A soup of "toxic sludge" as Global TV continued to report months after the spill? Full of poisons that killed fish and birds and antelope in every direction? A scourge that will last for decades and result in 3 eyed frogs for centuries?

Educate yourself. Mine tailings is crushed and pulverized rock. At Mt Poly, it's quartz and feldspar and biotite. It's sand! The minerals that could be considered toxic have been taken out. That's what mines do. Take minerals out of rock and leave...sand. The water quality in the tailings is better than many communities drinking water.

The cost incurred in "cleaning up" the mud was nothing more than government imposed protocol in placating eco-hysteria ignorance and a sense of tidy English Garden wilderness mentality.

Mt Polly was a mud flow...nothing more, nothing less. It's powdered rock. But just because it came from a mine (BTW, that employed over 300 people at wages most people reading this would drool over), it's evil, wicked and nasty. If it had come down a hillside all by itself, well, that's just nature.

And it's only the conservative nature of the mining industry that stops them from taking the media to court to sue their axes off for reporting pure fabricated drama and ignoring the science and the truth.

Mining in BC is sooooo over regulated based on bleatings of the PERCEPTIONS of an ill guided and ignorant population. It takes on average 15 years from the date of discovery to the first metal produced to get a mine into production. All of that time is spent satisfying truckloads of ecological, social and native regulations.

Well...actually it did take 15 years. Serious mining companies have left the province and gone to countries that welcome the technology, ecological research, workplace safety mentality, taxation and training and income it provides their people.

YeahYeahSureSure...go ahead and spew the "pillage and plunder" ignorant rhetoric of investing hundreds of millions of dollars in other countries. If you really believe that, at least just keep buying all the metal products now provided from those countries to keep the mining companies happy.

In the meantime, BC is off to a rosy future of growing and smoking legal pot and returning land to a native population that thinks it can live in the past.

Re: Ajax rejected

PostPosted: Dec 15th, 2017, 11:05 am
by Rwede
Queen K wrote:How are you doing with the Site C go-ahead?


Poorly. The hundreds of millions of dollars in wasted money from Horgan's political delay is something I'll never get over.

Re: Ajax rejected

PostPosted: Dec 15th, 2017, 11:35 am
by JagXKR
maryjane48 wrote:https://www.castanet.net/news/Kamloops/214057/Province-rejects-Ajax-mine

More fall out from being forced to allow site c.sad but i called it .theres going to be more choices. Folks backing the dam wont like

Prove it had nothing to do with it


There is nothing about Site C in the link you posted. The story has nothing to do with Site C. Your supposition is incorrect as the article is about another subject that never talks about Site C.
The proof is in the article. Or should I say what is not in the article.

Re: Ajax rejected

PostPosted: Dec 15th, 2017, 11:37 am
by The Green Barbarian
UhHuhYeahSure wrote:
Cactusflower... Do you even know what is mine tailings? A soup of "toxic sludge" as Global TV continued to report months after the spill? Full of poisons that killed fish and birds and antelope in every direction? A scourge that will last for decades and result in 3 eyed frogs for centuries?

Educate yourself. Mine tailings is crushed and pulverized rock. At Mt Poly, it's quartz and feldspar and biotite. It's sand! The minerals that could be considered toxic have been taken out. That's what mines do. Take minerals out of rock and leave...sand. The water quality in the tailings is better than many communities drinking water.


They know the truth, they just don't care, because it doesn't support the idiotic fear-mongering narrative.

Re: Ajax rejected

PostPosted: Dec 15th, 2017, 12:19 pm
by Queen K
Rwede wrote:
Queen K wrote:How are you doing with the Site C go-ahead?


Poorly. The hundreds of millions of dollars in wasted money from Horgan's political delay is something I'll never get over.


I get that. Carry on.

Re: Ajax rejected

PostPosted: Dec 15th, 2017, 12:31 pm
by alanjh595
maryjane48 wrote:Prove it had nothing to do with it . I said he be doing some tough choices bclibs wont like .


That's not the way things work. You prove that this had something to do with Site C. The link that was supplied by yo had no mention of Site C contained in it, therefore the burden of proof now rests entirely upon the shoulders of the one who made the statement/accusation.

I went through the effort to do a little research to find a 271 page document that the reasons for the rejection was based upon, you and all others can read it together here:
http://ajaxmine.ca/wp-content/themes/wp ... report.pdf

Out of the 271 pages contained in that report, aboriginals got 3 pages dedicated to them.

For your ease of reading, here is what the aboriginals concerns. Complete with Section numbers for those that might have issues with reading such large documents.

3.4 ABORIGINAL INTERESTS
3.4.1 Aboriginal culture and history
3.4.1.1 Description of Issue
Commenters reported that local Aboriginal people are concerned about potential negative effects of
the mine on Jacko Lake and its traditional spring fishery, sacred grounds, heritage and artifacts
within the mine footprint.


It's on page 64.

If you can find something in that report, anywhere in that report, that pertains to Site C, by all means, PLEASE point it out for all of us to read.

Re: Ajax rejected

PostPosted: Dec 15th, 2017, 12:35 pm
by alanjh595
I might add that report was written in February 2017. Long before the NDP came into power.

Re: Ajax rejected

PostPosted: Dec 15th, 2017, 1:34 pm
by Ka-El
Queen K wrote: Ajax mine was simply too close to the public domain, infrastructure, buildings, including schools.

Indeed. Absolutely nothing to do with Site "C"

Re: Ajax rejected

PostPosted: Dec 15th, 2017, 4:00 pm
by Queen K
AND, everything to do with this as well as close to infrastructure:

"The Ajax Mine Project in its proposed location at Pípsell (Jacko Lake and area) is in opposition to the Stk'emlupsemc Te Secwepemc Nation's (SSN) land use objective for this culturally important and historically significant keystone site which significance is fundamental and undiminished said a statement from the SSN.

Kukpi7 Wayne Christian and Secwepemc leaders, communities and members stand in solidarity with SSN in their Pípsell Decision. In June 2017, together with the Secwepemc Nation, the Pípsell area was declared a Secwepemc Cultural Heritage Site signifying the importance of this area’s connection to Secwepemc Law.

“These decisions showcase the importance of standing up our families and traditional Secwepemc laws in our territories. When we govern our lands from a place that respects both our ancestral knowledge and western science the best decisions can be made for us all. This is really about standing our ancestors voices back up again, breathing life into the UN declaration and protecting Mother Earth for future generations,” said Christian."


So, before everyone freaks about the ^^ above, think about this for a moment: Before Interior Health Officials have a meeting what is supposed to be said is a "thank you to First Nations for the Unceded Land that IH is now allowed to carry on their activity on."

Yes, this really is a "thing."

Re: Ajax rejected

PostPosted: Dec 15th, 2017, 4:14 pm
by Jflem1983
Guess they wanted even more money.

Re: Ajax rejected

PostPosted: Dec 15th, 2017, 4:16 pm
by Cactusflower
UhHuhYeahSure wrote:
Cactusflower wrote:Mining companies have a sordid history in B.C. since 2001. In just one example, Imperial Metals knew they could get away with bypassing environmental assessments by slipping thousands of dollars into the BC Liberal war chest. They were even allowed to re-open the Mt. Polley mine operation without ever taking any responsibility for the environmentally disastrous results of their tailings pond breach. Guess who's paying for that? The BC taxpayers, that's who.

Now Ajax is surprised that the NDP have rejected another mining disaster in the making? Well, boo :cuss: hoo!


Cactusflower... Do you even know what is mine tailings? A soup of "toxic sludge" as Global TV continued to report months after the spill? Full of poisons that killed fish and birds and antelope in every direction? A scourge that will last for decades and result in 3 eyed frogs for centuries?

Educate yourself. Mine tailings is crushed and pulverized rock. At Mt Poly, it's quartz and feldspar and biotite. It's sand! The minerals that could be considered toxic have been taken out. That's what mines do. Take minerals out of rock and leave...sand. The water quality in the tailings is better than many communities drinking water.

The cost incurred in "cleaning up" the mud was nothing more than government imposed protocol in placating eco-hysteria ignorance and a sense of tidy English Garden wilderness mentality.

Mt Polly was a mud flow...nothing more, nothing less. It's powdered rock. But just because it came from a mine (BTW, that employed over 300 people at wages most people reading this would drool over), it's evil, wicked and nasty. If it had come down a hillside all by itself, well, that's just nature.

And it's only the conservative nature of the mining industry that stops them from taking the media to court to sue their axes off for reporting pure fabricated drama and ignoring the science and the truth.

Mining in BC is sooooo over regulated based on bleatings of the PERCEPTIONS of an ill guided and ignorant population. It takes on average 15 years from the date of discovery to the first metal produced to get a mine into production. All of that time is spent satisfying truckloads of ecological, social and native regulations.

Well...actually it did take 15 years. Serious mining companies have left the province and gone to countries that welcome the technology, ecological research, workplace safety mentality, taxation and training and income it provides their people.

YeahYeahSureSure...go ahead and spew the "pillage and plunder" ignorant rhetoric of investing hundreds of millions of dollars in other countries. If you really believe that, at least just keep buying all the metal products now provided from those countries to keep the mining companies happy.

In the meantime, BC is off to a rosy future of growing and smoking legal pot and returning land to a native population that thinks it can live in the past.


I've heard that old mining corporation promise before...."You won't play ball my way so I'm taking my bat and ball and leaving!" They never do, though. They have very deep pockets and don't mind spending years in litigation.

How's that Fish Lake mine (what's it called again?) coming along, BTW? :biggrin:

Re: Ajax rejected

PostPosted: Dec 15th, 2017, 4:27 pm
by Queen K
Maybe it wasn't about the money this time. :D

Re: Ajax rejected

PostPosted: Dec 15th, 2017, 4:35 pm
by Walking Wounded
maryjane48 wrote:Prove it had nothing to do with it . I said he be doing some tough choices bclibs wont like .

Your the one making ridiculous statements so it is up to you to prove it had anything to do with site c. *removed*

Re: Ajax rejected

PostPosted: Dec 15th, 2017, 4:52 pm
by christopher
I've heard that old mining corporation promise before...."You won't play ball my way so I'm taking my bat and ball and leaving!" They never do, though. They have very deep pockets and don't mind spending years in litigation.

Is that not what you said about the LNG people.

Re: Ajax rejected

PostPosted: Dec 15th, 2017, 5:45 pm
by alanjh595
christopher wrote:I've heard that old mining corporation promise before...."You won't play ball my way so I'm taking my bat and ball and leaving!" They never do, though. They have very deep pockets and don't mind spending years in litigation.

Is that not what you said about the LNG people.


We all know how that went.