Claiming that the language Renzi put in the bill is due to negotiations with the AF and FoQC is a real stretch.

....The bill was dropped in congress the same day Jason Keith was to have a meeting with the AZ representatives to put more pressure on them. The bill was presented, maybe not so coincidentally, BEFORE those meetings with Jason making them irrelevant. Apparently Jason didn't have much pull.

Somebody said something about this being a precedent for Congressional land swaps. Its not. Not even for mining in Arizona. Phelps Dodge used a land swap with the BLM for the Safford property (which is currently under development). Its nothing new.

Everyone keeps deluding themselves that a non-caving method could be used to mine this deposit. The economics just don't work. To mine a massive porphyry copper deposit at depth using a stope and fill method, you need so much more development and so much more equipment to achieve the same production rate, that the rate of return just can't compete with block caving. A quick analysis I did shows you might make a profit, but its doubtful. And its miniscule compare to block caving. Caving gives you the economies of scale and requires a lot less development per ton of ore. You have to remember, business is about economics. Curt implies in some of his post that money is evil.

And by the way, I am a mining engineer, and I do work at a block cave operation.

One other thing - the map on FOQC assumes a 60 degree subsidence angle and 45 degree angle for safety sake. At our operation the glory hole highwall is 75-80 degrees, and the shallowest we assume for safety is 60 degrees. Rock mechanics and geology would determine the ultimate highwall, but 45 degrees is waaaay conservative, I think.

OK, so its the first time a land swap has been used at oak flat. that's a precedent. wording.

So the map was drawn by someone not associated with Resolution? More reason to question it - RCC has local rock mechanics data, they don't. I think he's overly conservative.

You made the point that you are a mining engineer. I merely pointed out that the person who generated the map you are commenting on has the same qualifications you do. RCC has not published any data concerning the potential block-cave subsidence area. So, all we have here is your opinion and the opinion of our mining engineer--and neither of you, presumably, possess the local rock mechanics data you mention.

It seems to me that we see the true use for “federal protection” in this case…saving the land from private ownership until it proves to have value for an extraction (mining or oil) industry.
If no valuable resources are found, then the public is free to use the area, until some raptors fly in and they kick the climbers out, or until they find some ancient grafitti and kick the climbers out, or until they find an endangered strain of moss and kick the climbers out….etc.

Why are climbers so concerned about the “federal protection” of an area when that has never guaranteed our access in the past

Most people would rather see the land saved for raptors, anicent grafitti or moss than being level by some mining company for short term gains.

It makes no difference to me if we are not allowed to climb there.

It also seems a bit hypocritical to sit in a house or office (all wired with copper) on your computer (wired with copper) using electricity (supplied through copper wires) to talk about the "evils" of a proposed copper mine.

Without copper, curt would have to manually open and close the gate to his exclusive Scottsdale community.

I am not being hyporcritical at all. I think the the world-wide copper market will survive just fine without this mine.

Where Curt lives has nothing to do with this issue. He is also not the one getting $5,000 dollars a month from the mining company.

Curious how you know the exact amount?

bobd1953 wrote:

I am not being hyporcritical at all. I think the the world-wide copper market will survive just fine without this mine.


I'm sure you have little or no knowledge of where to find or mine copper. I would think that RCC knows a bit more than you on this subject.

bobd1953 wrote:
Where Curt lives has nothing to do with this issue. He is also not the one getting $5,000 dollars a month from the mining company.


rockitjeff wrote:
Curious how you know the exact amount?


actually bob knows very little about the subject, however we all value his OPINION.

This issue is not about finding cooper, it is about saving a resource. Stay on subject. Also anwser if this mine is critical to the supply of copper to the world market.

I know that where Curt lives has nothing to do with issue. I also know that the way he (Curt) has rebuked your opinions/facts that you seem to know less than me on the subject.

Maybe you tell us how much both John and Jim are getting for the services that they are providing to the mining company. I think my numbers are quite close.

"A mediocre area with unplesent and poor quality rock." From the climbing "elite" the opinion that I hear over and over again is that the QC and the surrounding area is a chosspile.

"That is the #1 reason why the people who should know better are willing to give it up for the promise of a better, less chossy pile, hubristically "established" by one or two guys with financial incentive.

How about this: Where will WE we be, when that next chosspile gets traded out? Where will WE be without those open spaces to get radical and rugged in, running around like a bunch of wolves, tearing flesh from our hands, falling off cliffs? I'll tell you: WE'LL be in our f*ing SUVs enjoying our f*ing copper, whining, as usual.

the turtle wrote: I have climbed at Queen Creek and find it to be a mediocre area with unplesent and poor quality rock.
I have also just returned from AZ, where I was assisting John Sherman in locating and evaluating climbing areas. (yes, for RCC)

Unfortunately, Resolution Copper company has one agenda--and one agenda only, and that is gaining ownership of the Oak Flat area and the exclusion of climbers from Oak Flat--so they can mine there. Anyone they are paying, they are obviously paying to help them advance that agenda.

Resolution will now be able to claim (with John's unwitting help) that the climbing community is not united in their opposition--and that there are indeed other suitable places where we can go and climb, if Oak Flat access is lost.

Resolution Copper company is also currently trying to "buy" other high profile local climbers to further splinter our position.

However, I also think that you might ask yourself why a company would spend tens of $$$millions on a land exchange, if they did not think it was critical to their contribution to the world's copper supply.

Secondly, I can pretty much guarantee that I know much more about the subject, than you. I have climbed at Queen Creek and find it to be a mediocre area with unplesent and poor quality rock. I have also just returned from AZ, where I was assisting John Sherman in locating and evaluating climbing areas. (yes, for RCC)

Many climbers feel that the alternatives that RCC has offered climbers is quite reasonable, especially given the fact that if getting nothing from them at all is the other choice and if FOQC wins all we get is Queen Creek. RCC has made a very real commitment to locating and accessing climbing for all AZ climbers. Hopefully this will all be proven in the next few months.

Personally I would feel more sympathy for the AF and FOQC if they had not based their campaign on exaggerating the facts and slandering other climbers.

Let's not assume that RCC's motivation is some ideal associated with supplying copper. It's simple macro economics - supply and demand. They're paying the money because they can make more not because it's a matter of principle or contribution. Please don't skew this more than you have.

I don't think you'll convince any of us by letting us know that you're biased against the area. Moreover, we as climbers don't feel represented by you or John knowing that you look down your nose at the place.

Many climbers feel that the alternatives that RCC has offered climbers is quite reasonable, especially given the fact that if getting nothing from them at all is the other choice and if FOQC wins all we get is Queen Creek. RCC has made a very real commitment to locating and accessing climbing for all AZ climbers. Hopefully this will all be proven in the next few months.

Personally I would feel more sympathy for the AF and FOQC if they had not based their campaign on exaggerating the facts and slandering other climbers.

Let's not over-propagandize this people - let's talk, communicate, and find a way to work together.