The mining newspaper for Alaska and Canada's North
The mining newspaper for Alaska and Canada's North
Consultant seeks to involve interested parties in a three-stage plan aimed at creating dialogue about developing a mine at Southwest Alaska site
We feel strongly that an informed public is an empowered public," the Keystone Center said in an early September report that attempts to identify the principle issues people have raised in regard to the proposed Pebble mine and to evaluate the desirability and feasibility of a process to discuss and possibly address those issues.
Keystone was hired by the Pebble Partnership to assist it in developing the huge copper-gold-molybdenum Pebble deposit in Southwest Alaska into a mine.
After evaluating the feedback from interested parties, the Colorado-based consultant said it concluded that although creating a productive dialogue among parties interested in developing a sustainable mine at Pebble will be a challenge, it is possible.
Following Thomas Jefferson's example, Keystone developed a three-stage process with the specific goal of helping people make an informed decision about whether they want a mine at Pebble and under what conditions they might consider such a mine.
Key step to Keystone's plan
The first item in the Keystone plan is to assemble a science advisory committee with members from academic institutions, government agencies, and science-based non-government organizations in Alaska and across the nation.
The first task of a science advisory committee would be to guide the selection of individuals to create five independent science panels. One panel to address each of the following topics: Geology and hydrology; water quality; fish, wildlife and vegetation; social and economic dynamics; and sustainable mining practices.
It was suggested that each of the panels consist of four to six independent Alaska-based and independent experts. To integrate traditional ecological knowledge, an expert with this knowledge may be a member on each panel or a sixth panel dedicated to this knowledge may be formed.
The group believes it is important to focus on integrating the knowledge and wisdom that indigenous people of the region have and use in guiding their actions with conventional western science. Keystone is seeking individuals with traditional ecological knowledge and is working with Alaska Natives and the Subsistence Division of the Department of Fish and Game to assist in integrating the knowledge bases.
To eliminate any questions of the independence and impartiality of the members of the independent panel, Keystone is working to identify scientists who are already funded or locate impartial sources of funding for the panels.
Independent panel will examine baseline data
After they have been funded and manned, the science panels' initial task will be to review and assess the credibility of the Pebble Partnership's baseline data. Each panel will examine the data applicable to its area of expertise and then participate in public meetings that will be broadcast to interested parties at hub locations in Dillingham, King Salmon, Iliamna-Newhalen, Anchorage and Kenai via interactive video technology.
This format is designed to help those with a stake in the process to understand and evaluate the baseline data that has been accumulated for the proposed mine at Pebble. This gives the stakeholder the opportunity to determine the credibility of the data and to identify legitimate scientific questions that may have been previously missed.
One of the concerns is that these events, which are scheduled to begin in November and run into 2009, will be poorly attended or attended by professional stakeholders. There is also concern that some interested parties may use the events to either attack or defend the baseline studies, closing the doors on objective, open and educational dialogue.
Keystone representative Todd Bryan told Mining News that the groups who are polarized on the issues surrounding Pebble are not all that interested in the panel discussions. The group between the poles has shown more interest.
The Keystone Group believes that if the challenges can be overcome the independent science panel process can accomplish three important goals:
The most important outcome, according to the group, is that information coming out of the process will create a better informed public.
The information will produce the best information possible for use in decisions to be made regarding the proposed mine.
The process itself will hold the Pebble Partnership and the technical experts working on the projects accountable to the public and to demonstrate the credibility of their work to date. This credibility and the stakeholders' trust in the data will be crucial as the process moves forward.
Finding the facts
Finding answers to the valid scientific questions that emerge from the independent science panels' is the goal of the second-stage of the dialogue plan. The stakeholders' perception of, and trust in, the baseline data after the first-stage of the process will determine the format of this joint fact finding stage.
If baseline data are generally perceived as being credible and trustworthy, interested parties will likely recommend that Pebble scientists gather new data with minimal oversight. If, however, baseline data are generally perceived as being untrustworthy, added involvement and oversight in the collection of new data will likely be recommended.
Regardless of the format, the scientists involved will be collecting data to address missing or incomplete information provided in the baseline study and answer questions concerning the relationship of the baseline data and potential mining risks suggested by the data.
Keystone anticipates that the fact-finding stage will encounter similar challenges as the first stage of the process. It is also considering the possibility that the fact-finding process will be misused. One example of how this could be done is to demand answers to scientific questions that contain inherent uncertainties. While the question raised may be valid, this is a technique used to delay controversial projects pending further study. It will fall on the science advisory committee and independent science panels to determine the most appropriate and effective ways to address these challenges should they arise.
Presenting a preferred plan
The final stage of the plan will provide interested parties the opportunity to engage with the Pebble Partnership in the development of preferred mining scenarios without committing to or supporting any of them.
A project planning collaborative group of 25 to 30 individuals representing the environmental, economic and social/cultural issues surrounding the development of a mine at Pebble will be assembled to facilitate this stage of the process.
Keystone began in September to establish criteria for the composition of the group, and to identify and contact potential members of a project-planning collaborative. In November, a draft process and operating protocols for the collaborative will be developed and the first meeting is anticipated to occur in early 2009. It is anticipated that this group will continue to provide input throughout the permitting process.
Bryan said Keystone would like to discuss its findings and recommendations with stakeholders and will be available for meetings during the week of Oct. 6.
Over his more than 16 years of covering mining and mineral exploration, Shane has become renowned for his ability to report on the sector in a way that is technically sound enough to inform industry insiders while being easy to understand by a wider audience.
Reader Comments(0)