“Until the Natives Are Satisfied”

“Around the world, gold mining is the cause of water shortages, polluted water supplies and land poisoned by toxic waste. Gold mining is one of the world’s dirtiest industries.” [Guardian, UK – February 2007]

“On average, gold mining today produces 70 tons of waste for every ounce of gold.” [www.corpwatch.org]

“Total waste from extraction [of rock and tailings] from gold mining is 99.99%.” [The Environmental Protection Agency]

All over the world gold mining has brought devastation to nearby communities. Just a few examples show why people everywhere are beginning to fight back. According to an article in the Financial Times in 2005, even jewelry companies like Tiffany were calling for mining law reform to ensure environmentally responsible mining practices. Their concern was that people, upset by destructive mining operations, would stop buying their gold jewelry. There is cause for alarm. Mining companies have acted with willful disregard for the people who live around their sites, giving empty reassurances that all will be well, even better.

In Ghana, AngloGold increased environmental problems with accidental spills and discharges. In Alaska, gold mining companies have been uninterested in arguments about water quality and have proposed dumping tailings directly into lakes – allowed by a change to the Clean Water Act by the Bush administration – which even the companies admitted would kill the fish. As part of their “reclaiming” the company said they would restock the lake! In 2010 in Somalia, according to BBC news, animals died from drinking rainwater that washed off leaking cyanide containment ponds at a gold mining site in a heavily populated residential area. In a small town in Peru, a smelter operation produces, among other things, gold bullion bars and silver. 99% of the children in the town were found to have lead poisoning. The owner of the company is U.S.-based. In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, promises were made to the local people who worked for the mining companies about how much the company would give back to the community. But in the end, the wealth left the area when the company left and the waste stayed behind.

While there is more government regulation within the United States than there is in some other countries, the impact of the waste generated by mining the ore and processing it to extract the gold is still enormous. In 2006 in Colorado, the American Indian Movement condemned Newmont Mining Corp. for destroying water, land and air in Nevada and other places around the world. Alaskans, worried about a gold mining project proposal, did some research on the track record of that company, Anglo-American, one of the world’s largest mining companies. They discovered Anglo’s terrible record of negative environmental impact all over the world.

More and more people are beginning to question the mining of gold close to their homes or near environmentally fragile areas. Government regulation cannot solve the problems of gold mining if companies offer incomplete or insincere assessments about things like environmental impact. For, while presentations of mining companies – especially about reclaiming – may sound good, when examined closely it is clear that they cannot live up to the promises even if they are honestly presented. Open pit mining takes down mountains to find gold. You can’t reclaim that.

A battle is currently going on in a trio of small towns in Nevada which comprise the National Historic District called the Comstock. Comstock Mining, Inc. controls about 6,100 acres of land around Virginia City, Gold Hill and Silver City in northwestern Nevada about 25 miles southeast of Reno, the site of the old Comstock Lode Bonanza. A little over 150 years ago the gold and silver dug out from under Virginia City basically built San Francisco and made Virginia City the richest place on earth. The operative word here is “under” since mining done back then was square timber mining which meant digging tunnels deep into the mountain and shoring them up with timber. Now, thanks to “improved” technology, the preferred method is open pit mining which basically means simply removing the mountain itself. Comstock Mining, Inc. promises to “restore” the areas it mines. Is it realistically possible to replace the mountains?

Comstock residents are angry at and skeptical of Comstock Mining, Inc. Remnants of previous modern day mining projects in the area have given them just cause for this attitude. In the late 1970’s into the early 1980’s a mining company armed with promises and permits dug a huge pit at a place called Greiner’s Bend, just into Gold Hill from Virginia City. When they went bankrupt they just walked away with no attempt to make the site look like anything but the open pit it is. Their efforts may have made some people rich, but not the locals.

The previous incarnation of Comstock Mining, Inc. – Plum Mining – left a sour taste in the mouths of local residents after the company spent lots of time digging, destroying landscapes and leaving flattened hilltops around the area. As resident David Toll said in a letter to one of the local newspapers, “We are pro-mining, but surface mining will never be appropriate here.”

Not only will the proposed mining impact the lives of local residents, but the history of the Comstock has made it a tourist destination. How many tourists will want to wait on the road behind mining trucks or have dust blown into their faces or listen to the noise of mining while they try to explore the area for its historic significance? So far, with only exploratory drilling, both noise and dust have been issues. The drilling was starting up at 6am, but after people complained the company agreed to concessions. They changed the starting time to 7am and still kept the 12 hour drilling day.

In its written comments and verbal pronouncements Comstock Mining, Inc. purports to be paying attention to the people of the towns who live right next to their mining claims. For example, they say that the company will do all it can to keep truck traffic to a minimum, re-routing around Silver City. There is, however, only one road through town. There are promises of investment in and improvements for the community. There are promises of jobs, although no specifics on how many or for how long. They did buy a hotel.

Corrado De Gasperis, the CEO of Comstock Mining, Inc. and other key players in the company have close ties to the hotel industry in San Francisco. Doug McQuide, director of marketing for the company, said, “We have had significant discussions about involving the Gold Hill Hotel [the one they bought] and the Comstock in vigorous cross-marketing in the Bay Area.” Will this positively impact the people of the community? Marketing will impact the company’s profits.

An article in our-street.com actually questions the experience of those controlling the company. “Company CEO, Corrado De Gasperis was trained as a CPA and has a varied history in…manufacturing situations, but anyone looking at his resume, would never naturally conclude this was a mining man…Additionally, Mr. De Gasperis lists his directorship on GBS Gold International…[which]…during his tenure…went from being ‘an emerging gold producer…’ (SEDAR, Canada) to having its shares suspended then delisted by Canadian authorities and its assets liquidated…Robert Reseigh and Scott Jolcover, Directors of Comstock Mining, Inc. do bring relevant experience to the board room but, given they were both also part of the previous management team, we must temper our desire to find confidence in the value of their potential contribution to the company’s future success…”

So, when De Gasperis says, “We believe this area has incredible potential for growth and prosperity and we are investing and participating in a meaningful way across the Comstock” (Virginia City News), you have to ask him to define what he means by “growth”, “investing” and “meaningful”. To whose prosperity are they referring?

In another article, our-street points out the substantial opposition to the mining project by residents in the area and says that Comstock Mining didn’t bother to mention at a conference for investors in Vancouver that there are deep objections to the project and that the company has already downsized the size of the drilling area proposed for their permits. Our-street rightly called this a “lack of transparency” thus adding to the mistrust of the company and giving even their own investors something to think about.

Comstock Mining, Inc. and its investors would be mistaken to underestimate the perseverance and the insightfulness of the area’s residents. Despite the recent go-ahead for a special-use permit from the Storey County Planning Commission, a questionable decision when there is so much opposition and so much documentation about the dangers of gold mining near homes, it is clear this battle is not over. This appeared on the investorshub.com [anonymous post] website, “…the biggest concern is reclamation. Easily overcome…just a bit time-consuming. We’ll have to submit a reclamation plan and bond for review…Plenty of other areas to begin operations until the natives are satisfied.” How should Comstock residents feel about those remarks? Given the arrogance with which mining companies often descend upon communities, the answer would be, “ignored”. Given the negative impact of gold mining operations around the world and here in the United States, residents should be relentless in their opposition.