by David Safier
A commenter on my post this morning about Rosemont Mine's problems brought up the "Rosemont will create jobs" meme. "Tucson Native" tore the jobs argument to shreds in the next comment, which you can read below.
If Rosemont gets approved the only positive economic impact will be for the company headquartered in Vancouver and China who will process the copper and sell it back to us at a high price in consumer goods.
There may be a small amount of people hired locally to work in the mine for a limited duration. There may be work for the well drillers who have to deepen all the private wells that become useless because Rosemont’s water use drops the water table 100 feet. There may be work for the highway construction workers (paid for with tax dollars) to keep SR 83 usable. Scenic SR 83 was not designed for continuous heavy truck traffic and will be pounded to death. The employment opportunities will be limited and the devastation left behind will be forever.
With the latest revelations about the Rosemont's financial status what guarantee is there that the mine will be in continuous operation after it starts up? As copper fluctuates in price these mines start and stop operations based on demand. Who handles the social costs of the layoffs which will become a recurring event?
The finances of Rosemont (save the salaries of the executives) looks pretty shaky currently. There is no assurance that they will be around with enough money to clean up their mess when they are done. Arizona will be left footing the bill with taxpayers money for remediation of the damage done to the environment
Ever wonder why all these Canadian companies love to mine in the US? The reason is their OWN COUNTRY is much more restrictive about destroying the environment and requires royalty payments for valuable ore extracted from public lands.
Discover more from Blog for Arizona
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Well said. The area is unique and 7 generations forward deserve to have access to it. The current use can be sustainable, and as more and more unique areas fall to short-sighted short-term gains, this area will become even more valuable. . . for tourism and jobs and as a piece of paradise that didn’t fall for the $ake of a buck.
We are stewards of our land; we should be looking to the long term, not a short term quick fix that leaves an IRREVSIBLE unsightly pit several miles wide and toxic tailings in a place of outstanding natural beauty.
This land is unique and should be preserved for our children, not raped and pillaged by foreign investment companies whose precedent seems to be to file for bankruptcy to avoid cleanup after they leave.
The negative impact of this mine is almost unfathomable. Aside from the aesthetics, there are concerns for the water table, toxic waste, air and noise pollution, taxpayer’s money being used to fund repairs for Hwy 83, Hwy 83 safety, destruction of threatened wild life habitat and loss of local tourism jobs to name a few.
For the few local jobs the mine may provide there will be many jobs lost in the Sonoita, Elgin and Patagonia area. People whose livelihood depends on tourism and farming. Wineries, B & B’s and restaurants (all growing industries) will suffer loss of business because the one road into Sonoita will be choked up with mine traffic. (1 truck every 7 minutes is the number I heard) The water table will be effected and this in turn will have an effect on the vineyards and other farming in the area.
Tourism brings in over 2 billion a year to southern Arizona and is a fast growing SUSTAINABLE industry. This is where we should be investing for the long term.
I think Grace Wystrach, a Sonoita business owner says it very well in her video below http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtE_du7s4n8&feature=player_embedded
If one or perhaps two people choose to believe that Tucson Native has shredded my assertion to shreds that is certainly their personal due.
TN seems to make the assertion that because the actual jobs involved _may_ not continue that those jobs should be dismissed out of hand as so much litter on the highway. I don’t know who employs TN but it is my impression that in today’s society that unless you work for the government (and sometimes not even then) that all it takes is a change in the prevailing economic or political winds and your job may be gone next month if not next week. I seem to recall some solar cell plant in Fremont, CA that was closed recently with not one day of notice to the employees as large. No business (none whatsoever) can guarantee continued operation year to year. Saab of Sweden has been making cars since 1949 (rather innovative and efficient cars if I may say so) but 2 years from now there is no guarantee they will still be offering vehicles for sale at all. The same fact applies to every mining company.
In the face of that fact I say, “So what.” For the days or weeks or years or decades any job lasts that job is often near and dear to the man or women who toils at any given task.
TN additionally complains that Rosemont will tear minerals from the earth and then complains that that same company will do all it can to sell those minerals for top dollar. Is he oblivious to the fact that is what every single cotton-picking company in America does that as a matter of course? Buy as low as you can, sell as dear as possible. Does Cadillac (or Toyota) offer discounts on their cars when it feels all soft about the American car buying public? No it does not if there is any other possible alternative.
If the mine uses too much ground water the problem there is that the price of consuming ground water is set far too low and needs to be raised.
Further if the US and Arizona governments combined aren’t already imposing a royalty on mineral extraction then I say go ahead and sue all the current and former officials of Arizona and the United States for incompetence and malfeasance. I don’t really think lack of government mineral royalties is any horrible condition considering what the US and Arizona governments use their revenues to fund (bombing and caging humans wholesale).
As for the allegedly shaky finances of the Rosemont enterprise that is exactly the reason why no government should be in the business of underwriting any business (I’ll call this the Solyndra rule). The shakiness of the Rosement enterprise shouldn’t be part of any discussion here unless there is some rule, law or regulation that requires a mining company to have $x many dollars in the bank as insurance against possible torts.
As for seasonal or cyclical layoffs I guarantee you that the government department responsible for unemployment insurance fees has pages upon pages of tables that presumably allocate payroll taxes sufficient to keep a reserve in just such a situation.
In sum the arguments put forward to TN are, in my opinion, the same that Mother Earth fanatics have been trying to sell to society at large for 100+ years now. The Earth Mother is fragile and that people (and especially businessmen) are evil and ill intentioned. Nearly every argument put forward presumes an incompetence of the government not an insoluble problem with the task of copper mining for profit.
If the good and industrious people of America are to remain unemployed and underemployed because some armchair doomsayer exclaims “Heavens to murgatroid Matilda, whatever will we do if one (or 50) copper laden tractor-trailer traverses SR 83?” then I predict that the economy of Southern Arizona will continue to soldier on. Lost opportunities do not advertise on highway billboards (sadly enough). That doesn’t mean that the opportunities lost weren’t real.
On this mortal plane there is no risk free option offered save death. TN advocates that one more lawful and productive mining enterprise be aborted. I’d rather have people who are willing to put their OWN time, their OWN energy and their OWN money be permitted to engage in lawful business.