Congratulations Baykeeper! US Mine Corporation bails!

Three weeks ago we passed on Baykeeper’s alert on US Mine Corporation’s attempt to secure an “Exclusive Right to Negotiate” for a large portion of the former Evergreen pulp mill in Samoa. We said

“Not since the LNG proposal or the East-West Crazy Train has there been this type of potential threat to our bay.”

Baykeeper and the Examiner encouraged everyone to show up to the Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation, and Conservation District board meeting

That was followed by a standing room only crowd at the meeting, who let the US Mine Corp know of the public’s great concern and skepticism

Now we have great news to report here’s Baykeeper’s press release:


US Mine Corp withdraws gold ore processing proposal


Today, US Mine Corporation withdrew its proposal to pursue development of a gold ore processing plant at the former Evergreen Pulp Mill in Samoa. In a letter to Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation, and Conservation Executive Director Jack Crider, Scott Dockter, President of US Mine Corp, said,

“In our final analysis of the proposal, we determined we could not accept the risk involved with the significant effort and substantial cost it would have taken to receive agency and public approval.”

The proposed Exclusive Right to Negotiate would have given the company 60 days to submit a detailed proposal describing the proposed development, site plans, and funding sources.

Humboldt Baykeeper is relieved that US Mine Corp realized after the standing-room-only public hearing that its proposal was not a good fit for Humboldt Bay. Thanks to everyone who spoke up for a healthy bay, and against industries that would put our bay at risk.

We wish the District success in its search for environmentally-appropriate industries to use the former pulp mill.

For the Bay and coast, Humboldt Baykeeper -Jennifer Kalt, Director and Jasmin Segura, Bay Tours Coordinator



11 thoughts on “Congratulations Baykeeper! US Mine Corporation bails!

  1. The bidnismen will scream bloody murder, and their great-grandchildren will never know that the reason they live in a healthy, prosperous, and beautiful town is the work of Jennifer Kalt and her associates.

    Liked by 3 people

  2. Pingback: Mining Corporation Isn’t Going to Develop Samoa Mill Site | RED HEADED BLACK BELT

  3. We’ll continue to say no based on one word… Cyanide.

    Maybe it was the right decision, maybe not. I don’t know, I was asking for the video for this meeting as the news went out.

    If we are in the business of saying “no” to what we don’t like, all the while saying yes to what we don’t like, mining processing, while saying yes to what we do, gold, we will be destined to the same politics we’ve had for the past 40 years.

    I’ll ask liberals this…where is the processing going? Will their community be better equipped to protect the big picture, to insure environmental and social justice?

    I’ll also ask, without knowing more, are we sure that we are not playing our role in increasing cumulative affects by increasing transportation costs for processing. Business and environmentalists should be on the same page on this… We should be minimizing unneccary spending on transportation.

    Think of it this way. Gold is demand side economics. Until we cease our demand for gold we should be willing to take on our responsibility. While this should not be accepting cyanide or tailings in our bay, we should take a hard look at where we’ve been and how far we’ve come in the past 70 years in Cleaing up our act in Humboldt. Then we need to remind ourselves not to be frightened by a wors like cyanide.

    Let’s get the whole story. If we don’t, then our smart electorate will understand we on the left are being unreasonable and utopian and we’ll lose elections to those who politic on hating government and denying credibility to environmental scientists.


  4. LMOB:

    “Let’s get the whole story.”

    That’s what scared these people away. We demanded to know just exactly what was planned for us and the bay… and they for some reason turned tail and ran.

    They had every opportunity to answer our questions (our reasonable questions in my humble opinion) and chose not to. I can’t help but to think these people thought we were so desperate for jobs that we would not ask questions.

    Oh dear. Our bad.

    My sense is we may have dodged a bullet.

    Liked by 5 people

    • If they were planning on playing us for fools, if that was the strategy, and from at least one quote it seems like they might have been, then I agree with you M.

      I would like to help the left focus on the “growth” in “smart growth” b/c it has to happen. I really, really don’t want to be the movement of “no”.

      The reason being is it’s not sustainable. If we as a movement do not allow for the economic development and force it to other communities, then those other communities will vote in leaders like Jim Inhofe and we will never regain the political sea change necessary to make the gains possible we speak about in TE climate change threads.

      It’s about balance. Inasmuch as this company may not have been right for us, I’m more than ready to accept that as fact, b/c at this point it’s moot anyway.

      Let’s just be really careful of what we wish for. Are we going to be a bay that trades over-logging and over-fishing for over-Weed Inc.-ing and over-oystering? Like a good portfolio, let’s diversify our investments.

      Because, if we want our bay to be Lake Tahoe, as in a tourist destination only, then we have to also be in favor of all that comes with that, like wealth in the hands of few and a non-existent middle-class.

      That is not sustainable. Imho it’s elitist and selfish.

      As long as there is a demand for gold or ____, let us not shirk our shared, or “collective” responsibility as a member of a community of communities.


      • LMOB:

        You seem to be operating under the assumption that the vast majority of progressives were categorically against this project.

        I guess I can really only speak for myself but from the comments I read it seemed to me the vast majority of “to the left” thinkers had questions but not opposition.

        There is nothing wrong with having and voicing questions. And I refuse to believe us “lefties” are responsible for this company going elsewhere.

        As far as I am concerned they “went elsewhere” because they knew their operation would not stand up to scrutiny.

        Perhaps some “lefties”are against developing the bay, or any other economic development. But for the most part, I think that is a rightist stereotype I do not choose to buy into.

        Most of the commenters of the left that I saw simply asked reasonable questions. If a company planning a project here can’t stand that sort of treatment then good riddance.

        This isn’t Louisiana after all.

        Liked by 2 people

  5. Can’t wait to hear Rex’s take and words of wisdom on this. who worked for the Chineese Co at the pulp mill Rex or Virginia.


  6. I think that is a fair assessment M. What I’m speaking about mainly is the headlines which is much of what the rest of the county sees of us.

    I’m OK with Jen^2 of BayKeeper and NEC playing the cyanide card. I’m afraid of the consequences if that is taken to be the view of the left.

    We need to focus on growth for essentially leftist reasons. For the middle class, for sustainability and most of all b/c of reality. We know our friends on the right aren’t fans of reality.

    That’s really the essence of my complaint on this. I was literally in the process of finding ways of watching the proceedings of the meeting when the news the company withdrew hit loco. (see my comment on samoasoftball which I swear was before next going to LoCO to read the news).

    What I’ve seen of the power of the left from getting on board of GPU matters after 6/3/13 is the power of the left on things like trails and viewscapes – not necessarily the heavy lifting we need to do. So I saw that right-wing characterization first hand. The folks were there in large numbers for the trails, only a few biologists and NEC’s Dan E. and BayKeeper’s Jen Kault and Mad River’s Scott Greacen. And there was a noticeable difference in trails vs salmon. Not even trails and/or viewscaptes vs. smoke-stack or waste-producing industry.

    If I was to characterize this politics, it’s the politics of I’ve got mine, I want to spread the beauty of my back yard to the envions around my back yard. This concerns me b/c it isn’t a viable political or economic vision.

    So where you are right and I’m wrong, I applaud the left (us). I also, again, want to applaud Jen^2 on this for the work they do.

    In these conversations between us on the left, we do have to start talking about alternatives. I for one do not want to be a tourist destination without working-class jobs. Arcata and Trinidad can manage this b/c of HSU and viewscapes, the rest us in HumCo can’t.

    That’s all. In short, trails and rails, salmon and logging, urban and rural. Ore processing, at least for 2015, in Oroville and thousands of other, less protected ecosystems near and far.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Pingback: Mining Corporation Isn't Going to Develop Samoa Mill Site | Red Headed Black Belt

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s