I read T. C. Brown’s article about the Feb. 11 meeting hosted by the local group, Lower San Pedro Watershed Alliance (LSPWA). I was pleased that he mostly presented an unbiased account of the meeting and that he encouraged people to personally research the content presented at the meeting.
I was very disappointed that, in his closing comments, he choose to cite a Gov.tech Emergency Management Blog article about NIMBYs and BANANAS. Selecting this article is a disservice to the significant contribution of this organization to reality based Emergency Management. It’s like picking one word from a book to represent its overall message and purpose.
To those who don’t know, NIMBY stands for “Not In My Backyard.” BANANA, apparently is a new moniker for “Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anyone.” These are phrases most commonly used by narrow economic interests to characterize people opposed to them. In reality, these are people who are concerned about protecting and sustaining a healthy community, yet they are branded as “extremists.”
I strive daily to make Oracle a safe, healthy and economically sustainable community. I am a member of several local groups to achieve those goals. I guess that makes me and those I collaborate with “extremists.”
I empathize with my friends and residents in Mammoth and San Manuel who strive to make their communities safe, healthy and economically viable. I guess that also makes them “extremists.”
It’s easy for someone who is uninformed/misinformed or not facing the threats in their own backyard to toss NIMBY stones. If they faced the potential threats their neighbors do – dry wells, contaminated water, hazardous air quality, decreased property values and possibly unsellable property – they would be offended by being called NIMBY extremists.
We can do better than this. We can treat our neighbors with respect and strive to collectively find the truth.
While I support the need for extraction projects, there is a right place and wrong place for such projects. It is my belief that there is not, nor will there be enough water to support the mining activity and our communities as proposed by the Redhawk investors.
The Redhawk investors may be on legal grounds using outdated water and mining laws to pursue their economic interests, but that does not morally or ethically justify their activities. They have made a grossly misguided investment based on an over optimistic assessment of their economic opportunity. Proposed economic benefits to a small group of people must be weighed against the impact on our communities and ecological resources.
According to Redhawk’s own published reports, any claims about environmental impact and economic benefits are “speculative.”
Wrapping and marketing the investment project in terms of patriotism, national security, extreme need for copper and economic benefits does not change the threat to the safety, health and economic viability of our communities.
Those in Mammoth and San Manuel who will live closest to toxic tailings and a water- guzzling hole in the ground will experience as in past years, air, water and light pollution. They’ll hear a mine that’s running 24/7 and experience the nonstop semi- traffic.
Let’s have the courage to work together to protect our communities and save this unique place of extensive ecological resources. After all, it is our home … where we should be safe and healthy!
/s/ Craig Anderson
Oracle, AZ