More Jewelers Boycott Pebble Mine’s “Dirty Gold”
The world’s most famous jeweler, Tiffany & Co. is leading the charge of jewelers against the Pebble Mine project in southwest Alaska, which threatens to put a huge open pit gold mine smack in the middle of the largest wild salmon fishery in the world. Obviously Tiffany & Co. likes gold, and certainly isn’t opposed to finding more of it, but even they recognize that this gold isn’t worth it. Tiffany & Co. took out an ad in this month’s issue of National Jeweler, urging other jewelers to join them in the boycott.
“Despite the best of intentions, 175 years of experience sourcing gemstones and precious metals tells us that there are certain places where mining cannot be done without forever destroying landscapes, wildlife and communities,” it read. “Bristol Bay is one such place.”
There are now 18 jewelers involved in the boycott, with collective sales totalling $3.7 billion a year. The latest to join are Commemorative Brands, and Herff Jones, both major manufacturers of class rings.
Others already on board with the “No Dirty Gold” campaign include Ben Bridge, Birks & Mayors, Hacker Jewelers, Fortunoff, Helzberg Diamonds, Leber Jewelers, JC Penney, QVC, Sterling Jewelers, Walmart, and Zale Corp.
The opposition to the Pebble project, spearheaded by mining giants Anglo-American, and Northern Dynasty, is growing. Even Captain Sig Hansen of Deadliest Catch came out this summer in opposition to the project.
If there is any jewelry on your Christmas list this year, make sure to support these jewelers. And be sure to tell them exactly why you are buying their product. They deserve a big thank you on behalf of Alaska residents, and all those who enjoy wild fish, and sustainable fisheries. And their project reaches worldwide supporting the rights of people, wild places, and the best interest of the environment.
Over 100,000 people in 100 countries have signed the pledge that they will not support “Dirty Gold.” Click HERE and add your name to this pledge:
“I support the No Dirty Gold campaign to end destructive gold mining practices. I call on retailers and manufacturers of gold jewelry, electronics, and other goods to work to ensure that the gold in their products was not produced at the expense of local communities, workers, and the environment. I demand that the global mining industry provide retailers and consumers an alternative to dirty gold.”
I’m signing. Thanks AKM for keeping everyone aware of this issue. It really is about our earth as much as Alaska. The more we crackdown on earth abuse everywhere, the better for all of us.
Pretty impressive list of jewelers! Nice to know there are corporations with a conscience. Sadly, there is no jewelry in my future, so I guess I won’t have to worry about where it’s not coming from (o;
This is a really impressive campaign. It was probably covered in an earlier story about this but do we know who got it started. I’m guessing Tiffany’s didn’t come up with the idea all on their own. Did a local Alaska organization enlist them and others? My bad for not remembering but it would be good for them to get their well deserved recognition.
Looks to me like a great model to follow for future environmental efforts.
“No Dirty Gold” is a campaign of Earth Works.
http://www.earthworksaction.org/ AKM
just added my name akm. this is good news. me thinks some big dawgs have been reading this little old Alaskan blog and have taking note big time. yes!! also after akm’s debut the other night i got phone calls from my kids and hugs and kisses at home congratulating ME. ME! ” why are you kissing on me?” i asked.” because you are a part of all this and i am so proud of you. and AKM, of course but she ain’t here” he said…..i”ll take it any way i can get it….bubs
Signed up. Whatever their motive, it’s great to see businesses stand up against toxic environmental practices, just like the utilities who resigned from the US Chamber of Commerce to protest its stand on climate change.
Done.
Sure does seem like people/businesses have alot of plans for, Alaska. Do they realize that Alaska really is a state, with living human beings? I still feel like there is/was someone at the top administration selling out, Alaska. However, signed, sealed, delivered….
Done..and as always..NO..to blood diamonds!
good news.
Signed. This is so awesome!
Thanks AKM! Regina has done some awesome posts on Pebble too. Thanks Regina!
Thanks! Will sign directly after this. Good to see that there are jewelers not willing to buy ‘dirty gold’. This Pebble Mine is a horrible idea and another thing we can ‘partly’ thank to the Quitter.
Done! Sign and delivered! Thank you for the information.
Signed! Here’s another link for you environmentally-minded mudpuppies (nothing to sign here, just a link to an article in today’s NY Times about the EPA regulating greenhouse gas emissions from large emitters/polluters, like coal-burning power plants — do you even have those in AK?) Here it is:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/01/science/earth/01epa.html
Let’s keep our air, soil, and water clean and well-populated with the critters that belong in them, and leave a planet fit to live on for the generations yet to come. Health and peace.
a very worthy cause, and not just because it’s about Alaska. It’s about ethics. It’s nice to see that some corporations are at the very least, willing to say the right thing. We’ll see if it helps.
Done!
[...and Bubbles? People don' need no reason to wanna be huggin' and kissin' on you! (As IF....!)
]
Signed! This is good news. While I do not have any diamonds, I told my husband that he had to buy Canadian diamonds should the occasion arise – no blood diamonds, and now no dirty gold. Should we get rich, I will get something beautiful to show my appreciation to all those companies who are showing support for our lands and oceans. Just one small gold, sparkly item would do
Kudos to the jewelers. They are heading off a boycott of their own products by standing up and proclaiming that they are NOT supporting dirty gold or Pebble Mine. This will net them sales. Andy jeweler or industrial company for that matter that is found to be buying from Pebble Mine will be boycotted and get really negative publicity.
One of the best ways to head this off is to prevent it from starting. And this is a great way. What’s the point of building a mine when you can’t sell the product? Or can’t sell enough at a price to make a profit. Gold is used by more than jewelers. But if the other gold using industries see what’s happening with Pebble and the jewelers boycott, they’ll void Pebble and look for other sources.
Kudos to Tiffany for leading the pack.
mona lisa…heehee
Signed.
It would have been ideal for the mining interests to recognize the critical environmental issues which preclude that particular location…..But if it takes hitting the “dirty” businessman in their wallets, so be it.
This is great news. These companies also need to build a powerful lobby to go up against the no-doubt huge mining lobbies in DC. With public backing they could make a difference. Boycott, publicize and partner with green groups to build an effective lobby!
AKM …Learn something new everyday here..Thank you.will defintely sign …
McCain talks about Palin’s book !
with the Meet the Press guy
appologize for being off topic…
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032608/vp/33120642#33120642
Jostens needs to join the effort.
Wow! I’m impressed with the list of jewelers! Though they may be jumping on the band wagon to avoid bad press–then they are being business smart and are learning to follow the lead of consumers!
I dislike throwing cold water on all this enthusiasm but as I see it, the only way to confront the affront of the pebble mine is by dealing with reality. In reality there is no way in the world to “boycott” their production of gold.
For one thing let us examine global production. It has declined slightly in the past two years from a peak in 2007 of about 2,500 metric tonnes to about 2,400 predicted for 2009. So the pebble mine’s total annual production would be just a small fraction of that total. Next let’s look at the gold market in a superficial way. India alone consumes appoximately 25% of global gold production per year. That would be in the range of about 600 tonnes per year. So the Pebble mine could easily sell all of its production to India if that was the way the market worked. It isn’t how the market works. A gold producer would normally reduce their production to a product called dore’ which is roughly 96-98% pure. They sell that to a refiner, one of whom worthy of mention in Englehart. The refiner produces both fine gold, 99.995% pure for bullion, and various alloys which are in turn marketed to the consuming industries. Refiners combine gold from many sources to produce their final products. In an ideal world it is possible to fingerprint the source of a particular run of pre-refined gold using such sophisticated analytical techniques as laser ablation ICMS. In the real world not only is such scrutiny too expensive, but it is also rendered ambiguous by the refining process.
The upshot of all this? Well in my humble opinion, it is nothing more than a cynical PR ploy on the part of the jewelers in an attempt to attract a few more customers.
Boycotting the sale of Pebble mine production will have exactly zero effect on the development of the mine. The point of attack to stop this mine if that is the desired goal, should be and has to be the weakness and implausibility of the measures they propose to mitigate environmental risk.
At the risk of my reply sinking so low into the dilution of replies that it goes unnoticed as most of my comments do, I would suggest an analogy to the situation that prevailed at the Drift River terminal earlier this year when the company claimed they had to leave a certain amount of oil in the tanks to assure that they were stable and I simply pointed out that the specific gravity of water is higher than that of oil.
This is a diversion from the real issue, and as such has to be assumed to be a dishonest ploy, the intent of which is to allow the development of the mine because the real issues are subordinated by a red herring claim that Anglo would have any difficulty at all selling their production. Not a chance of that.
I regret to report, you are being played by the corporations.
You have to attack them at the roots. It will not be easy, cheap, or quick.
Full disclosure: I am an exploration geologist who has worked on and developed mines of several types all over the world for the past 33 years.
Lookup my prior postings to mudflats for further disclaimers concerning my ability to resond to comments.
Cheers,
Thank you for bringing this issue to our attention. For whatever impact it may or may not have, I am happy to have signed the petition.
To Krubozumo Nyankoye, thank you for your information. Perhaps what we need to do is re-direct our attention to those politicians who have given permission for this mining operation. Perhaps the citizens of Alaska can stop it through political protests or the threat of recall petitions. Perhaps they can exert pressure on the mining corporation itself. They must and we all must not give up because it is not easy, cheap or quick. We must persevere.
Because this issue is new to most of us, it will take publicity to get people riled up enough to stop this. Perhaps there are some environmental lawyers who can devise a strategy to delay, divert or destroy this plan. Perhaps we can start a fund to help them.
What we cannot do is give up – ever. Yeah, change is tough, but if we don’t fight for positive change, it will never happen.
Armed with the knowledge that at least some jewelry designers and retailers are protesting, that there are ways the mining company can still make it profitable, perhaps we can make it unprofitable. Perhaps there are state and federal laws that combined with public outrage can make it very difficult on them to do what they normally do.
I believe in the people of this country. I believe in the law even when it seems bendable to the will of business. I know there are honorable attorneys, lawmakers and judges. We don’t need them all to honorable, only the key ones. We can make them do the honorable thing if we keep our eyes on the process and keep the pressure on to stop this.
I am so grateful for blogs such as themudflats.net because their mere existence gives me hope. That we are discussing this at all gives me hope. We have effected change before and we can again if we just keep working to do so.
Part of fighting the good fight against this insanity is knowing the what the issues are and how the opposition works, so thanks to Krubozumo Nyankoye. Part of this is knowing that there is even anything to change, so thanks to AKMuckraker for alerting us to this issue.
Krubozumo Nyankoye-
I have to say you hit the nail on the head, not that most are going to agree or understand. People do not like to hear they are being played, even if they think it does some good.
Also if not here, where? If people were to take the time and look as to where most mining is done, it displaces, destroys or ruins the enviroment for someone.
Sooooo do we continue to do the NIMBY agruments or instead force the industry to clean up their act??
I would prefer to see Alaska have some of the best, tightest, strongest, enviromental/safety regulations and make it work under those rules.
I would also like to see the state get the compensation from this industry as they do from the oil/gas industry.
Question the science presented by all. Do not allow the state to just accept things without hard questions.
Be a responsible consumer and learn more, ask more, demand more!!!
25 Krubozumo Nyankoye Says:
October 1st, 2009 at 7:10 PM
—————————–
Interesting and no doubt realistic perspective on the Pebble mine and the jewelers’ boycott.
I agree with you that the most successful way to attack Pebble mine “has to be the weakness and implausibility of the measures they propose to mitigate environmental risk.”
BUT…..However cynical the jewelers themselves may be in this boycott, the group “Earth Works” is actually benefiting in exposure and heightened public awareness with the association of these “big-name” jewelers in their boycott campaign…..no mean feat when trying to educate and galvanize the public at large on a relatively obscure (to most people) but important environmental issue.
Furthermore, the weakness and implausibility of the measures to mitigate environmental risk are issues which have to be pushed strenuously in court (or before legislators) by experts in mining (like yourself) and scientists with expertise in biological/ecological systems. Hopefully with heightened public awareness (via groups like Earth Works), the experts’ efforts are backed up with the pressure of overwhelming public support. Sounds like a winning combination to me…
@ Krubozumo Nyankoye and Just Had To Jump In:
I agree, you both are correct. I also think many know the basics of your arguments- not all the technical details, but how the economics of production/supply/demand works. That said, if publicity motivates more people to become educated about environmental risks and they put pressure on government entities to demand extractive industries avoid environmentally sensitive locations- and those entities put in place strict regulations- then we will all be better for it.
The world’s most famous jeweler, Tiffany & Co. is leading the charge of jewelers against the Pebble Mine project in southwest Alaska,
Hard to blieve it really truly true. Awsome.
#’s 26, 27 and 28 are, of course the most important comments. I think any and all approaches need to be taken to say “no to pebble mine” (the only bumper on my car.
25 Krubozumo Nyankoye: Your comments are not ignored or diluted; quite the contrary. They are enjoyed and envied. You provide so much insight with regard to many of the resource challenges in Alaska, and we appreciate your expertise. I agree with the last several posters, however, in that we can do more than one thing to try and obviate the opening of Pebble Mine: encourage jewelers to boycott (no matter that it’s symbolic only, it brings publicity to the issue), encourage/empower the local citizens to defend their land and livelihood, promote legislation to protect these fragile environments, etc.
And thanks AKM for continuing to bring these issues to light.
#26 sounds sorta rational, until one considers that the major worldwide use of gold is for jewelry. And jewelers worldwide don’t have to rely on mined gold – most of it, of course, is recycled. Sure, once mined gold enters the melt chain it’s unidentifiable – but jewelers can get around that by relying on recycled metal rather than mine production, which can indeed be sourced and tracked.
I.e., a jeweler who’s affronted by the spectre of destruction from the Pebble mine can easily turn to other resources, and is in no way forced to choose mine production. It is indeed possible to source recycled and “green” gold from responsible miners – ethical choices can be made, in other words.
For example, see this statement from one of the US’s major gold refiners:
http://www.hooverandstrong.com/category/Environmental+Responsibility/
Gold is a superfluous metal nowadays, unless one views the jewelry desires of India and Asia as a strategic concern.
#33 Really? What percentage of jewelery gold is actually recycled? Can you cite a source? I don’t know of one that is why I ask.
You seem though to have missed my point, there is market enough for the gold the Pebble mine will produce whether Tiffany’s claims not to buy it or not, they could easily sell their entire production to India.
Also gold is not entirely superfluous, it does have industrial uses.
I am not at all sure where the strategic concern aspect comes in, gold is generally not considered to be a strategic element to the best of my knowledge, why did you mention it?
Thansk to those who seem to understand my point, now discuss it and think about how to take action that really affects the mine’s ultimate disposition, especially if you ive in Alaska.
Cheers,
25 Krubozumo Nyankoye: I always find your comments to be thoughtful, inspiring and sensible. Sometime the PR element helps as we found when trying to beat back BHP Billiton from putting a floating LNG terminal near the Channel Islands National Park. It wasn’t until the actor Pierce Brosnan and his wife got involved that the media started reporting it more widely. Hans Laetz did a lot of reporting for the Malibu paper, and although it was a team effort, the tide turned when there was a publicity stunt of surfers forming the “Ghostbusters” sign over LNG which was filmed from the air. It called greater attention to the plan which the State Lands Commission turned down. Even though our Governator was for it. So keep working on all fronts and don’t let up. We had to do a lot more than sign petitions and it took years, but we defeated the idiotic plan. Now, the price of Nat gas has dropped so the market need also looks like it was manipulated.
Personally, I don’t wear jewelry, not even my wedding ring.
However, I do believe that Dennis Zaki had a video on his site for a very long time (not there now) that properly demonstrated the environmental commitment and technical know-how of the powers-that-be behind the Pebble Mine. He should put that video back up.
krubozuma nyankoye*** please never think that what you say to us here goes unappreciated or ignored. the thing is, your comments can’t be answered right away because in order to respond i have go away for a bit to think about what you said. krobozuma you have expertise in disciplines that most of us don’t. the problem with you is that you hit and run. so no way for rest of us to get to know you and be comfortable asking questions and sharpening our minds with a person who has much to teach…i love to learn but i don’t like snark or to be condescended to and i don’t think anyone else here does either…bubs
We engage in conversation, and it is being done..with..civility.. bowing down..to thinking..people. ..and..one never really answers a question/situation..only collects new information..that..displays the concern..differently..in a more ..relevant manner.
Thanks to all who replied.
Since it is an onerous burden to expect you all to reference my prior explanations of how I am constrained in responding I will do so again here.
My access to the net is very slow and limited by a satellite uplink that times out more often than not. I am in a time zone that is 5 hrs. later than Ak. I work 7 days a week. ?When I am “in the field” I have no Internet access at all often for two or three weeks at a time. That is why I appear to be hit and run.
Even though I have some influence over my schedule, I am often compelled to go off into the bush with virtually no notice. My oppotunity to participate in this discussion is limited to late at night. Fair enough?
Starting with the replies to my post @ #27
You are of course correct in what you say and I think as evinced by the nature of my post that a key element of fighting this project is knowing more about how the system itself works. Be assured that Anglo and their partners have a well organized staff working full time on pushing forward on all fronts. Given that a grassroots organization will never have the resources to block all their efforts strategic choices must be made. The first such choice to my mind is that the opposition should organize themselves in order to make maximum use of limited resources and to focus cleanly and clearly on the greatest vulnerabilities. All this is in accord with what you said, I only regret that from my remote location I can’t be very helpful in furthering that goal.
#28
We are all in this together, you are quite right, if the gold does not come from Alaska, it will come from somewhere else. From my limited knowledge of economics and financial systems the problem we face is that we as users (I dislike the term consumers), are myriad but diffuse while those who determine how actual events play out are few and highly concentrated. Moreover, they share a common interest that is far simpler than the common interest of the myriad of users and hence can agree upon a course of action much more readily.
Perhaps the ultimate answer is not NIMBY, but YIMBYATMR, yes in my back yard, but according to my rules. What it somes down to unfortunately is the “hidden” costs of industrial development. If a gold mine can somehow avert the actual costs of their activities in terms of the destruction of a fishery, then that ultimately translates into an increased profit. If they cannot avert it, they will go somewhere else where they can. The problem with this approach is of course that the earth is finite. We are just beginning to realize this obvious fact in terms of climate. If you think Alaska is endangered I would advise taking a vacation in the jungles of Ecuador.
#29
Point well taken. It does indeed accrue to the benefit of the overall public awareness of such issues if organized groups obtain some traction from seemingly significant reversals of philosophy on the part of corps. It should be noted, however, that large corporations almost never act against their own interests, and particularly in terms of profits. So I would allude to the dustup over so-called “Conflict diamonds” that occured a few years ago to point out that the end result was a near perfect stangle hold hold on the rough diamond market by none other than De Beers. Not to say this is a simple case history, it isn’t.
#30
You are quite correct, publicity is one of the key ingredients of any successful campaign to stop or delay an environmental atrocity. The regrettable fact is that the publicity usually comes when the disaster has already happened, and tails off from there. Prince William Sound is a perfect example. Not even your esteemed Governor was aware that after years of litigation the SCOTUS handed their corporate patrons a free pass on liability for the damage they caused.
I am going to post this message now because it takes me so long to write these replys. I will reply to messages greater than #30 in my next post.
Cheers,
Responding further…
#33
While I implicitly agree that a multi pronged response is in order, as stated in my earlier reply I think it must be coordinated to some degree, and further I think that one must view the participation of jewelry manufacturers with a bit of skepticism. For example, Tiffany has great brand recognition, but in fact their actual sales to the overall market are probably much less than WalMart.
That is why I say they are cynically playing a participatin card.
#34 Mo
I already resonded to you earlier. I don’t want to be overly argumentative, but the simple fact is that the gold market is so vast that Anglo can easily sell all of their production whether the entire US market boycotts them or not. And I feel it is important to point out that you have the fingerprinting of gold from specific sources just exactly backwards. Once it is refined no such fingerprinting is possible. Only mine run gold has unique characteristics in the form of trace elements. Refined gold by definition is almost devoid of such characters. Since all recycled gold is also refined, it would also be untraceable.
#36
In this instance the PR element is being put forward by membes of the industry, that is to say jewelers. I think there may be an opportunity in this on the part of the opposition to the mine to point out how “big brands” are trying to dvantage themselves through superficial participation in a strawman boycott. As I stated in my post, India alone accounts for 25% of world gold production, Tiffany? Nothing even close. There are mass marketers of gold in the US of course, I don’t recall their names at the moment but I can probably look them up, their overall volume is an order of magnitude greater than any high end brand. I am just saying that we should not take this news at face value…
#38
If you can find a link to that I would be most interested in seeing it.
Thank you for the input.
#39
Well, thank you for the praise and the kudos, it is encouraging. I have tried to explain why I am sporadic in my participation here. See my previous post of more details. I wish I could be more interactive, but my circumstances more or less prevent that.
To all who have reacted to my point of view, I would say this, my intent is to inform and to offer a perspective that pertains to this particular issue. Just as with respect to the Drift river terminal, those things about which I have some knowledge, I feel compelled to speak to.
I am gratified to know that some of the mudflatters here have considered my contributions worthwhile.
Cheers,