[Coach_Owens87]

How'd the meetin go? Was it like the one in WV where over 75% of the people there against MTR were young bloods (19-22 years old) who didn't have a clue about anything. One even said, "Uh, uhh, uh man, a uhh, a dude that lives down teh road from me, uhhhh, he uhhhh, he got a brain tumor from surface minin."

The meeting went great, I would say it was probably near 70-75% opposed to the ruling. But there werent really that many people from the age group you metioned. I would say the average age was more around 28-34. There where several people who got up and spoke out against the ruling, but all of those where from the age group I mentioned, or older. The majority of people who oppesed this ruling where from the KFTC group. I cant speak for those in WV, the comment you mentioned may have been spoken, but I think the people who really dont have a clue come from the mining industry. The only thing they see is money, they dont take into effect the attrocities they are causing to the environment.

They had a report on the meeting on WYMT, in which I must admit they made the people who were there in thier "Friends of Coal" hats and t-shirts look very uneducated and out of touch. Almost all of the people there that where for the ruling had the same things to say "Coal has been powering us for 100 years, lets keep on keeping on". Come on, is that really the best they can do. I think thats is the people I would call clueless.

I highly doubt that the young bloods you mention are clueless, since most of the people I know in that age range that are against are very bright, young college students.

[thecavemaster]

How'd the meetin go? Was it like the one in WV where over 75% of the people there against MTR were young bloods (19-22 years old) who didn't have a clue about anything. One even said, "Uh, uhh, uh man, a uhh, a dude that lives down teh road from me, uhhhh, he uhhhh, he got a brain tumor from surface minin."

You ever watch Washington Journal on C-Span? The callers believe in this and believe in that, and a lot of them can't express their views with any eloquence at all. However, if a person who believes that MTR is ecologically damaging cannot
express him or herself well, what does that prove? It proves that one particular person is not well spoken. Redneck: are you the kind of person who looks out the window, sees one white horse, then believes that all horses are white?

[Redneck]

You ever watch Washington Journal on C-Span? The callers believe in this and believe in that, and a lot of them can't express their views with any eloquence at all. However, if a person who believes that MTR is ecologically damaging cannot
express him or herself well, what does that prove? It proves that one particular person is not well spoken. Redneck: are you the kind of person who looks out the window, sees one white horse, then believes that all horses are white?

Yeah man, all horses are white.

The group I was talkin about were all the same, hippie lookin stoners. Well spoken or not, A BRAIN TUMOR from surface minin, come on man. All of them said things that were completely off target and ridiculous.

[Coach_Owens87]

Yeah man, all horses are white.

The group I was talkin about were all the same, hippie lookin stoners. Well spoken or not, A BRAIN TUMOR from surface minin, come on man. All of them said things that were completely off target and ridiculous.

Where you at the meeting in WV?

Ridiculous things are always said from both sides of any argument. Just like the statement you made about hippie looking stoner's! Thats a very stereotypical view, and I highly doubt you where around when "hippies" where a part of the dominant culture, seeming that that movement and terminology died out in the late 60's and early 70's. I know hundreds of of people who oppose MTR, and are members of environmental groups, and none of them are hippie stoner's. Most are well educated, hard working citizens. People like you just like to throw labels on people, and assume everyone who opposes your view is out of touch.

[Redneck]

Where you at the meeting in WV?

Ridiculous things are always said from both sides of any argument. Just like the statement you made about hippie looking stoner's! Thats a very stereotypical view, and I highly doubt you where around when "hippies" where a part of the dominant culture, seeming that that movement and terminology died out in the late 60's and early 70's. I know hundreds of of people who oppose MTR, and are members of environmental groups, and none of them are hippie stoner's. Most are well educated, hard working citizens. People like you just like to throw labels on people, and assume everyone who opposes your view is out of touch.

I tell ya what, why don't you live thru these winter months without electricity then tell us if you feel the same about it all. Why don't we shut down every coal mine in KY for about a month then see how ya feel. You may not like it, but face it, we gotta have it.

[Coach_Owens87]

I tell ya what, why don't you live thru these winter months without electricity then tell us if you feel the same about it all. Why don't we shut down every coal mine in KY for about a month then see how ya feel. You may not like it, but face it, we gotta have it.

lol, is that the best you can do? That's nothing more than a worn out talking point. Next time please try to come up with something intellegient to offer in this debate.

Coal produces around 55% of our nations electricity, so yes if ALL coal mining shut down a lot of people would be without jobs and power, But I never said to completly stop mining. I just believe that MTR is a very destructive form of mining, that is causing irreverasable damages to our enviornment. We have to mine coal in a way that is better for everyone involved untill we have a better, more reliable and renewable source of energy to produce our nations electricity.

[TidesHoss32]

lol, is that the best you can do? That's nothing more than a worn out talking point. Next time please try to come up with something intellegient to offer in this debate.

Coal produces around 55% of our nations electricity, so yes if ALL coal mining shut down a lot of people would be without jobs and power, But I never said to completly stop mining. I just believe that MTR is a very destructive form of mining, that is causing irreverasable damages to our enviornment. We have to mine coal in a way that is better for everyone involved untill we have a better, more reliable and renewable source of energy to produce our nations electricity.

if your gonna tell someone to come up with something intelligent, at least spell intelligent right..and a passing point to offer. If by some hysterical chance that mining is shut down, 88% of our nations backup power source is coal..I personally dont put any stock in what you people protest, or whatever the heck it is, because we all know that you'll get nowhere with it. You'll talk and talk. And you'll protest and protest. And nothing will ever come out of it. And thankfully so. As screwed up as our country is, at least most of our leaders with sense know not to pay attention to what you people gripe about..And its a good thing those coal operators with the huge dollars have enough money to put your protesting to rest. I, for one, am glad. And many more are too..Instead of protesting about the way our nation is powered, why not go back into your classrooms, with those "bright young college kids (which is laughable, because most of them protesting everything are lazy and have nothing to offer society but telling everybody how bad our government is, and how everybody else should run their lives, basically, fortunate sons and daughters who are nothing more than 21st century hippies)" and come up with those "other energy solutions"..just an idea. Now, Im going to get off of here, put my reflective clothing and steel toe boots on, and go to my coal mining job. And yeah Redneck, your debate IS that simple, and it IS correct..dont listen to these people..

[thecavemaster]

"If you have a job, thank a rich man." (oil baron J. P. Morgan). This is no doubt true, but the corporate barons sit
in the "master's chambers" and carve up the earth with steely
knives. Those who, in a sense, control the economy do not care
which party is in power because they know that they dictate to
politicians and own policy decisions. And, even people who are
exploited by these barons defend them because they put the money
in the bank that enables the workers to live a decent middle class life.

[Coach_Owens87]

if your gonna tell someone to come up with something intelligent, at least spell intelligent right..and a passing point to offer. If by some hysterical chance that mining is shut down, 88% of our nations backup power source is coal..I personally dont put any stock in what you people protest, or whatever the heck it is, because we all know that you'll get nowhere with it. You'll talk and talk. And you'll protest and protest. And nothing will ever come out of it. And thankfully so. As screwed up as our country is, at least most of our leaders with sense know not to pay attention to what you people gripe about..And its a good thing those coal operators with the huge dollars have enough money to put your protesting to rest. I, for one, am glad. And many more are too..Instead of protesting about the way our nation is powered, why not go back into your classrooms, with those "bright young college kids (which is laughable, because most of them protesting everything are lazy and have nothing to offer society but telling everybody how bad our government is, and how everybody else should run their lives, basically, fortunate sons and daughters who are nothing more than 21st century hippies)" and come up with those "other energy solutions"..just an idea. Now, Im going to get off of here, put my reflective clothing and steel toe boots on, and go to my coal mining job. And yeah Redneck, your debate IS that simple, and it IS correct..dont listen to these people..

nice to hear from you TH32. If I recall correctly I thought you stated that you would never reply to any of my comments again? Anyways, thanks for the grammar correction, I guess the spellcheck on this forum didnt catch it.


Im assuming redneck is a pal of yours and you figured it was your duty to step in and say something. I really have to thank you for that, it gives me a chance to rant some more.

You wasted a whole paragraph of typing to prove absoultely nothing besides the point that you disagree with me. And you do the same thing as Redneck, you just throw lables on anyone who disagrees with you. Calling protesters lazy, and saying they have nothing to offer society, or that we are telling people how to live. Your statement and prejedice views are what is laughable.

I guess all the church members who oppose this bill are just lazy, worthless christians right? They're are lazy and superfluous people in all demographics and occupations, so throwing that label on protesters is pointless. Social change is something that must occur and is always occuring, america has a long history of protesting. The Progressive era, the "hippie" movement, Civil Rights movement. The protest against MTR is just another example of people wanting a change in society. And your views are no different than those throughout history, people just throw labels on those who oppose thier views, and try to degrade thier point of view without really offering anything to support what they believe in.

I dont call all east ky coal miners uneducated, or backward hillbillies. I could say that miners are druggies or high school dropouts ( I know a lot of people, not only miners, who fall into that category). I dont say that becuase I know that isnt true, I have many family members who work in the mines who I respect greatly.

This leads to your statement of lacing up your boots and going to work. Am I supposed to be impressed that you have a job? Or be intimidated becuase youre standing up for your occupation? I dont care that you work in the mines, I really could care less where you work, I would still disagree with your views on MTR. I hear views like yours all the time. And from all the views I have heard, my conlusion is that the majority of people who support MTR work in the mines, which is obvious, they're just supporting thier occupation. But a great majority of people who are educated on both sides, (which you call worthless) the subject are opposing MTR.

I have repeatedly brought up many energy solutions that are being deveolped or being researched at the moment, but no one on here will give the time to research the alternatives so I wont give the time to mention them.

[Old School]

Where you at the meeting in WV?

Ridiculous things are always said from both sides of any argument. Just like the statement you made about hippie looking stoner's! Thats a very stereotypical view, and I highly doubt you where around when "hippies" where a part of the dominant culture, seeming that that movement and terminology died out in the late 60's and early 70's. I know hundreds of of people who oppose MTR, and are members of environmental groups, and none of them are hippie stoner's. Most are well educated, hard working citizens. People like you just like to throw labels on people, and assume everyone who opposes your view is out of touch.

Maybe Redneck wasn't at the meeting in WV, I don't know, but I was and the guy that said mining caused brain tumors, looked and acted like he was stuck in the 60's. Some of the anti-coal group members were like those in the hippie movement of the 60's and 70's, they also had a couple of lawyers to speak a biologist and a few average joes. The anti-coal groups that was there also stated that coal mining caused diabetes, kidney failure, cancer among other illnesses. This one woman spoke of her experiences of working with poor children in the Southern West Virginia coal fields and blamed the coal industry for these children not having a good Christmas. There were also numerous comments made about the length of streams that have been buried, one person started out by saying 1,000 miles, another said 1,200 miles, later on it grew to 2,000 miles and the last anti-coal person to speak said that more that 2,400 miles of streams have been buried by surface mining, even your own can't agree on which misleading qoutes to use. There was one young man about 22 who said that restaurants are alway's looking for help, and that the laid off coal miners could go to work flipping hamburgers.

There was one representative from a local vendors association that representated over 150 members from Southern West Virginia, and they included everything from mechanics, body shops, small stores, to fast food restaurants, to K-Mart, Wal Marts, Krogers, Food Citys, Car dealers and the list goes on and on and they all said the same thing without the coal industry they would have to close.

I would like to comment about one article that was in a Charleston newpaper the day after the meeting, the writer which is very anti-coal said this "An estimated 250 people attended the public hearing last night with over 100 people supporting the coal industry", now here's the ture story an estimated 300 people attended the public hearing, with 240 people supporting the coal industry. I guess there was some truth in what he said, but nevertheless his article was misleading.

Coach you stated that you never said to completely stop mining, if that's true then you need to switch sides, because as I have said several times if coal companies are not allowed to use valley fills and build sediment ponds, then both surface and underground mining are basically finished in Appalachia.

What energy solutions other that wind or solar have you brought up? Tell me more about these alternatives, I'm listening. ecret:

[Coach_Owens87]

Maybe Redneck wasn't at the meeting in WV, I don't know, but I was and the guy that said mining caused brain tumors, looked and acted like he was stuck in the 60's. Some of the anti-coal group members were like those in the hippie movement of the 60's and 70's, they also had a couple of lawyers to speak a biologist and a few average joes. The anti-coal groups that was there also stated that coal mining caused diabetes, kidney failure, cancer among other illnesses. This one woman spoke of her experiences of working with poor children in the Southern West Virginia coal fields and blamed the coal industry for these children not having a good Christmas. There were also numerous comments made about the length of streams that have been buried, one person started out by saying 1,000 miles, another said 1,200 miles, later on it grew to 2,000 miles and the last anti-coal person to speak said that more that 2,400 miles of streams have been buried by surface mining, even your own can't agree on which misleading qoutes to use. There was one young man about 22 who said that restaurants are alway's looking for help, and that the laid off coal miners could go to work flipping hamburgers.

There was one representative from a local vendors association that representated over 150 members from Southern West Virginia, and they included everything from mechanics, body shops, small stores, to fast food restaurants, to K-Mart, Wal Marts, Krogers, Food Citys, Car dealers and the list goes on and on and they all said the same thing without the coal industry they would have to close.

I would like to comment about one article that was in a Charleston newpaper the day after the meeting, the writer which is very anti-coal said this "An estimated 250 people attended the public hearing last night with over 100 people supporting the coal industry", now here's the ture story an estimated 300 people attended the public hearing, with 240 people supporting the coal industry. I guess there was some truth in what he said, but nevertheless his article was misleading.

Coach you stated that you never said to completely stop mining, if that's true then you need to switch sides, because as I have said several times if coal companies are not allowed to use valley fills and build sediment ponds, then both surface and underground mining are basically finished in Appalachia.

What energy solutions other that wind or solar have you brought up? Tell me more about these alternatives, I'm listening. ecret:

I wont doubt at all that some of the people opposed to MTR where some odd characters, I've met many of those myself. Redneck just used that one example to cast a stereotype on an entire group of people, which is completely wrong. They're are people that are completely off base on both sides of this issue, which is common to any situation.

The meeting at hazard also had a biologist, I don't recall a lawyer speaking, but I didn't stay long. The biologist I heard made some very good and correct points, which where never answered by those from the coal supporters.

As far as the business people coming in, my guess would be that a lot of those business are owned by miners, or mining companies, or have deals with mining companies such as the car dealers. But as I stated, I'm not calling for an end to all mining, just MTR. All they where trying to do is strike up fear in people, just like the misleading videos of the region in the 60's caused many people to have sympathy for Appalachians. Both sources of info are very misleading about the reality of the whole situation.

I will never switch sides on this issue, i'm completely against MTR, and my mind will never change. I believe what we are sacrificing is not worth the reward. The damages caused to this region by MTR will never be repaired. I'm sure coal companies can come up with a way to mine the coal that is safe for the environment, but that wold probably make them think, and spend a little money. MTR is just a cheap way to mine coal, companies don't give a **** what they do to the environment and people of this region because most of them don't live here. It's all about profit, nothing else, but thats the way life is in this capitalistic economy.

The more and more I drive around this region, the more I realize time is quickly running out to save these mountains. I know of at least 7 huge MTR sites that I must look at everyday when I drive from my home to school (The worst one is really a series of jobs that spreads about 7 miles from big branch to Carr Creek lake. It just fuels the fire of hatred I have for MTR.

Here are some energy solutions that I have mentioned before Nuclear, Wind, Solar. Some sources are saying that in 5 years solar power will be cheap enough to compete with carbon generated electricity. One source that is really interesting is artificial photosynthesis. We talked about this in physics today. AP is really the same process plants use. They use sunlight, which produces UV rays, and visible light, (which comes in a form of pure energy called photons), to split water to get carbon and hydrogen, and use the hydrogen to produce clean energy. It's a good idea, but it still early in development.

Bio-diesels and ethanol fuels are becoming very popular, and are gaining a lot of support from companies and countries across the world.

All of these ideas really don't matter, because we all know that politicians have been bought by oil, and coal companies. Profit comes first, while public opinion, and public health come in a distant second. Instead of reliable and renewable future energy sources we get BS ideas like clean coal, or coal to gas. So to be honest it really doesn't matter what energy sources I mention, unless a major change happens in government, they will all mean nothing.

[TidesHoss32]

nice to hear from you TH32. If I recall correctly I thought you stated that you would never reply to any of my comments again? Anyways, thanks for the grammar correction, I guess the spellcheck on this forum didnt catch it.


Im assuming redneck is a pal of yours and you figured it was your duty to step in and say something. I really have to thank you for that, it gives me a chance to rant some more.

You wasted a whole paragraph of typing to prove absoultely nothing besides the point that you disagree with me. And you do the same thing as Redneck, you just throw lables on anyone who disagrees with you. Calling protesters lazy, and saying they have nothing to offer society, or that we are telling people how to live. Your statement and prejedice views are what is laughable.

I guess all the church members who oppose this bill are just lazy, worthless christians right? They're are lazy and superfluous people in all demographics and occupations, so throwing that label on protesters is pointless. Social change is something that must occur and is always occuring, america has a long history of protesting. The Progressive era, the "hippie" movement, Civil Rights movement. The protest against MTR is just another example of people wanting a change in society. And your views are no different than those throughout history, people just throw labels on those who oppose thier views, and try to degrade thier point of view without really offering anything to support what they believe in.

I dont call all east ky coal miners uneducated, or backward hillbillies. I could say that miners are druggies or high school dropouts ( I know a lot of people, not only miners, who fall into that category). I dont say that becuase I know that isnt true, I have many family members who work in the mines who I respect greatly.

This leads to your statement of lacing up your boots and going to work. Am I supposed to be impressed that you have a job? Or be intimidated becuase youre standing up for your occupation? I dont care that you work in the mines, I really could care less where you work, I would still disagree with your views on MTR. I hear views like yours all the time. And from all the views I have heard, my conlusion is that the majority of people who support MTR work in the mines, which is obvious, they're just supporting thier occupation. But a great majority of people who are educated on both sides, (which you call worthless) the subject are opposing MTR.

I have repeatedly brought up many energy solutions that are being deveolped or being researched at the moment, but no one on here will give the time to research the alternatives so I wont give the time to mention them.

just a few quick things Ill point out. Number one, you are absolutely welcome for the grammar lesson. Hey I figured thats the least I could do. And you say that I wasted my time on filling out a paragraph, lol..Im not wasting anymore time than you are by you sitting here telling us about these so called cleaner energies, which you wont bring up..And no I wasnt trying to intimidate you by lacing up my boots, nor was I calling Christians lazy and worthless. I was saying that most of those "bright young college students" (NOT ALL), usually are..And yes, I was standing up for my occupation..just like you are standing up for your views..and you say you respect your family members that work in the mines? I find that the most laughable of all..

[DevilsWin]

This is starting to get personal.

None of you want the companies to disobey the current laws, do you?

This is about a rule change. Do any of you want the rule changes cited in the article that started this whole debate to actually take effect.

If you do why. Don't you think it will have a damaging effect on the areas in which these practices will be taking place?

If you don't believe this change will have an adverse effect on those areas please explain why without rambling on and on about this and that program.

[Beef]

Nothing has gotten too personal but yes, please answer the original question as posted by DW

[Coach_Owens87]

I guess everyone thinks you can't oppose a certain aspect of one occupations but still respect the hard working people of that job. Which is kinda like the whole "If you don't support the war, you don't support our troops". the way I see, Thats just simple thinking from simple minded people. So I really don't care if TH32 thinks my respect for my family is laughable, he don't know me, or my family members.

Back to the original question of the post. I am totally against this proposed rule change, and im glad more people see things my way. A recent poll showed that 88% of people are opposed to the new rule change. I read over the rule change again on the OSM website. From what I read this practice has been happening anyway, as the OSM has no control to stop them. They stated that companies must cause as little damage as possible, and that they could bury a stream (yes a stream old school) as long as they can prove it wont cause any damage to water quality. Mining companies do not have to protect wildlife, although the rules say to "protect to the extent possible". So really are they are saying is get as much coal as possible, as cheap as you can, and try not to kill or harm to much wildlife. Those rules are a joke.



All of our opinions wont matter unless we speak out, and public comment on the new rule change is still open until Nov 23. Here is how the OSM says to comment on the rule change.

http://www.regulations.gov. The proposed rule and DEIS are
listed under the agency name “OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND
ENFORCEMENT.” The proposed rule has been assigned Docket ID: OSM-2007-0007. The
DEIS has been assigned Docket ID: OSM-2007-0008.

For those of you wondering, I sent my comments through two environmental sites, and I also sent one directly through OSM.

[Coach_Owens87]

I was reading a report on the meeting in WV, and I came across something really funny. Old school pointed out something not so well spoken by an "environmentalist" at the meeting. Well I came across something spoken by a miner which sounds just as bad.

Here is the quote from the article.

http://www.wvgazette.com/section/Series/...0251?pt=10

John Harden, an electrician at the Hobet 21 mountaintop removal mine in Boone County, said he and his fellow workers are environmentalists who improve water quality with their mining and leave reclaimed sites in good shape and ready for development.

“We like to hunt and we like to fish,” Harden said.

Harden also recalled seeing the Grand Canyon during a motorcycle tour across country this summer.

“I looked at the Grand Canyon and I said, ‘Wow, that looks like my job,’” Harden said. “And it’s a national historic site.”

So their environmentalist who think dumping waste into streams improves water quality, that wiping out forest is good for the environment, and that Appalachia is beginning to look the the grand canyon?

Also any environmentalist would know that the grand canyon is a national park and a world heritage site, not a national historic park.

And as far as development of the land they leave, well thats a joke also, an estimated 2-5% of the mined land is being developed. That just doesn't seem like a lot to me.

[DevilsWin]

No need to blast a coal miner for not understanding the compexity of this issue.

It's the companies that are convincing the miners that environmentalists want to abandon coal mining.

They do this to garner popular support in the communities. It is nothing more than a bait and switch.

Please refrain from insulting coal miners.

I for 1 am against MTR and unsafe mining practices.

At the same time I respect every coal miner and IMO mining coal wether it be above or below ground is providing a service to their country.

I appreciate and respect what the miner does in the same way that I respect and appreciate U.S. Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines.

Both are making a sacrifice to provide a better life for their families and safety for our country.

[Old School]

This is starting to get personal.

None of you want the companies to disobey the current laws, do you?

This is about a rule change. Do any of you want the rule changes cited in the article that started this whole debate to actually take effect.

If you do why. Don't you think it will have a damaging effect on the areas in which these practices will be taking place?

If you don't believe this change will have an adverse effect on those areas please explain why without rambling on and on about this and that program.

The meaning of the current law is what's being questioned, I consider this more of a clarification of the current law than anything else. Anti-Coal groups want to include Intermittent (streams that do not carry water year round) and Ephermeral (streams that only carry water during a rain or snow event) streams into the buffer zone ruling. The Coal industry believes that these should not be included in the buffer zone because they do not carry water year round.

DW, I hope I didn't ramble to much for you.

[Coach_Owens87]

No need to blast a coal miner for not understanding the compexity of this issue.

It's the companies that are convincing the miners that environmentalists want to abandon coal mining.

They do this to garner popular support in the communities. It is nothing more than a bait and switch.

Please refrain from insulting coal miners.

I for 1 am against MTR and unsafe mining practices.

At the same time I respect every coal miner and IMO mining coal wether it be above or below ground is providing a service to their country.

I appreciate and respect what the miner does in the same way that I respect and appreciate U.S. Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines.

Both are making a sacrifice to provide a better life for their families and safety for our country.

DW, I wasn't trying to blast anyone who is a miner, although my post could have easily been taking that way.

I was just trying to show that people are misinformed on both sides of the issue, and that both sides sometimes say things that can make either side look bad.

[Old School]

This is starting to get personal.

None of you want the companies to disobey the current laws, do you?

This is about a rule change. Do any of you want the rule changes cited in the article that started this whole debate to actually take effect.

If you do why. Don't you think it will have a damaging effect on the areas in which these practices will be taking place?

If you don't believe this change will have an adverse effect on those areas please explain why without rambling on and on about this and that program.

As I stated earlier, I think this is a clarification issue, not a rule change, prior to the last ruling by Judge Chambers mining was conducted in the same manner since the Buffer Zone ruling was enacted. Anti-Coal groups want the public to believe that this would open up a new world to surface mining, the truth is that it won't, it only will enable the coal industry to operate as it has in the past. Anti-Coal groups also want the public to believe that they are only targeting MTR or Surface Mining which is also misleading, underground coal mines rely on valley fills to place excess overburden form the face-up area, which is normally about 2 acres in size, they also use valley fills to place the refuse once coal has been processed through the preparation plant. So if anyone tells you that this won't affect underground mines just ask them where will the refuse go if there's not any valley fills.

During the process of surface mining new drainge structures (same as Ephemeral Streams) are constructed, for example valley fills have Rip-Rap (rock) drainage ditches built down both sides of the valley fills next to the original ground line, or may have one built down the center of the valley fill, other ditches are built near the original ground line at the outcrop of the coal seam to divert the water to these valley fills, on bench ponds are also built to help control water run-off. After mining has been completed more Ephemeral streams have been created than was removed during the mining process.

Here's a question for everyone. If Judge Chambers ruling stands and valley fills are ruled illegal then why will this rule only pertain to the coal mining industry? The Federal and State governments will still be able to build roads, dams, lakes etc. Gas and Oil Companies will still be able to build roads, lay gas and oil pipelines thourgh these same streams, anyone and everyone can do whatever they want to around the streams except for the coal industry. if these Ephemeral streams are so vital to our ecosystem then shouldn't the environmentalist be raising a ruckus over any and all distrubance of these streams?

[TidesHoss32]

No need to blast a coal miner for not understanding the compexity of this issue.

It's the companies that are convincing the miners that environmentalists want to abandon coal mining.

They do this to garner popular support in the communities. It is nothing more than a bait and switch.

Please refrain from insulting coal miners.

I for 1 am against MTR and unsafe mining practices.

At the same time I respect every coal miner and IMO mining coal wether it be above or below ground is providing a service to their country.

I appreciate and respect what the miner does in the same way that I respect and appreciate U.S. Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines.

Both are making a sacrifice to provide a better life for their families and safety for our country.

Although I support MTR, I have to say that this is one of the classiest posts Ive read in awhile..good work DW..and the respect is mutual (from me anyways)..

[DevilsWin]

As I stated earlier, I think this is a clarification issue, not a rule change, prior to the last ruling by Judge Chambers mining was conducted in the same manner since the Buffer Zone ruling was enacted. Anti-Coal groups want the public to believe that this would open up a new world to surface mining, the truth is that it won't, it only will enable the coal industry to operate as it has in the past.
During the process of surface mining new drainge structures (same as Ephemeral Streams) are constructed, for example valley fills have Rip-Rap (rock) drainage ditches built down both sides of the valley fills next to the original ground line, or may have one built down the center of the valley fill, other ditches are built near the original ground line at the outcrop of the coal seam to divert the water to these valley fills, on bench ponds are also built to help control water run-off. After mining has been completed more Ephemeral streams have been created than was removed during the mining process.

Are you saying that coal companies have been operating outside the current laws and that they are simply lobbying to get the law changed so they won't be in violation any longer?

[Old School]

Are you saying that coal companies have been operating outside the current laws and that they are simply lobbying to get the law changed so they won't be in violation any longer?

No I'm not saying that at all! The Buffer Zone law was never intended to include Intermittion or Ephemeral streams, when Judge Chambers made his ruling, which is the reason behind the clarification issue with the buffer zone. The coal industry does not feel that they are in violation of the law, because these streams are not included in the buffer zone law.

[Coach_Owens87]

No I'm not saying that at all! The Buffer Zone law was never intended to include Intermittion or Ephemeral streams, when Judge Chambers made his ruling, which is the reason behind the clarification issue with the buffer zone. The coal industry does not feel that they are in violation of the law, because these streams are not included in the buffer zone law.

Blaming this "clarification" ruling on Judge Chambers is absurd. The bush administration has been trying to change this ruling since 2003. That year they changed the meaning of "fill" material to allow mining waste to be dumped into streams. This is what caused the later ruling by judge chambers, all he was doing was obeying the laws.

The bush administration hasn't been enforcing the buffer zone rule since they've been in office, which has lead to an estimated 500 miles of streams being destroyed, so this so called "clarification" is really just making their actions legal.

[Coach_Owens87]

just a few quick things Ill point out. Number one, you are absolutely welcome for the grammar lesson. Hey I figured thats the least I could do. And you say that I wasted my time on filling out a paragraph, lol..Im not wasting anymore time than you are by you sitting here telling us about these so called cleaner energies, which you wont bring up..And no I wasnt trying to intimidate you by lacing up my boots, nor was I calling Christians lazy and worthless. I was saying that most of those "bright young college students" (NOT ALL), usually are..And yes, I was standing up for my occupation..just like you are standing up for your views..and you say you respect your family members that work in the mines? I find that the most laughable of all..

If you would have read the post directly above this one you would have seen that I mentioned many future energy sources. Read them and get back to me.

[TidesHoss32]

If you would have read the post directly above this one you would have seen that I mentioned many future energy sources. Read them and get back to me.

I have...and you mention that in five years that solar power will be cheap enough to compete with carbon generated electricity. Thats super! Which brings up my argument..how are people going to afford it until then? You do realize that we live in one of the poorest regions in the United States, right?? Ive read your other energy solutions, and none of them will ever see the light of day in this area.

[Old School]

Blaming this "clarification" ruling on Judge Chambers is absurd. The bush administration has been trying to change this ruling since 2003. That year they changed the meaning of "fill" material to allow mining waste to be dumped into streams. This is what caused the later ruling by judge chambers, all he was doing was obeying the laws.

The bush administration hasn't been enforcing the buffer zone rule since they've been in office, which has lead to an estimated 500 miles of streams being destroyed, so this so called "clarification" is really just making their actions legal.

You can believe what ever you want to, but the fact is, it's still a "clarification" issue. Anti-Coal groups want to classify anything that has water running through it as a stream, even if its only has water running through it after a rain or snow event. The 100 foot buffer zone ruling is for perennial streams which carry water continuously year round.

The Buffer Zone was inacted in the early 80's, so if it was intended to include Ephemeral, Intermittent and Perennial streams, wouldn't that mean that no administration has enforced this policy including Clinton and Gore.

[Old School]

I was reading a report on the meeting in WV, and I came across something really funny. Old school pointed out something not so well spoken by an "environmentalist" at the meeting. Well I came across something spoken by a miner which sounds just as bad.

Here is the quote from the article.

http://www.wvgazette.com/section/Series/...0251?pt=10

John Harden, an electrician at the Hobet 21 mountaintop removal mine in Boone County, said he and his fellow workers are environmentalists who improve water quality with their mining and leave reclaimed sites in good shape and ready for development.

“We like to hunt and we like to fish,” Harden said.

Harden also recalled seeing the Grand Canyon during a motorcycle tour across country this summer.

“I looked at the Grand Canyon and I said, ‘Wow, that looks like my job,’” Harden said. “And it’s a national historic site.”

So their environmentalist who think dumping waste into streams improves water quality, that wiping out forest is good for the environment, and that Appalachia is beginning to look the the grand canyon?

Also any environmentalist would know that the grand canyon is a national park and a world heritage site, not a national historic park.

And as far as development of the land they leave, well thats a joke also, an estimated 2-5% of the mined land is being developed. That just doesn't seem like a lot to me.

As Paul Harvey says Here's the rest of the story. If you have ever read any of Ken Wards stories you will notice that they are all one sided, he is anti-coal and this one is no different, Ward only gave a few quotes from Mr. Harden. He is some background on Mr. Harden, John is a minister, and pastor of a church located within site of Hobets Job 21, he is also a longtime resident of this community, he has a degree in Mechincal Engineering, and is very close to having a degree in Electrical Engineering. John talked about how much better the water quaility is now than before the mining started, he also talked about the reclaimation on Hobet's Job 21, the awards they have won, the numerous wetlands created, the hardwood trees that are growing on these reclaimed sites, yet Mr. Ward failed to mention these comments and others, only quoting comments that he could try to put a spin on. As for his comment on the Grand Canyon, he was referring to an active mine site and not a reclaimed site. In case you've never been to an active mine site you can go to any Anti-Coal site they have hundreds of pictures of active sites they claimed to be reclaimed sites, or a active mine site will look similar to a major highway under construction.

Again, the development, if any of land after mining has been completed falls on the land owner and not the coal company.

Good Day

[Old School]

I wont doubt at all that some of the people opposed to MTR where some odd characters, I've met many of those myself. Redneck just used that one example to cast a stereotype on an entire group of people, which is completely wrong. They're are people that are completely off base on both sides of this issue, which is common to any situation.

The meeting at hazard also had a biologist, I don't recall a lawyer speaking, but I didn't stay long. The biologist I heard made some very good and correct points, which where never answered by those from the coal supporters.

As far as the business people coming in, my guess would be that a lot of those business are owned by miners, or mining companies, or have deals with mining companies such as the car dealers. But as I stated, I'm not calling for an end to all mining, just MTR. All they where trying to do is strike up fear in people, just like the misleading videos of the region in the 60's caused many people to have sympathy for Appalachians. Both sources of info are very misleading about the reality of the whole situation.

I will never switch sides on this issue, i'm completely against MTR, and my mind will never change. I believe what we are sacrificing is not worth the reward. The damages caused to this region by MTR will never be repaired. I'm sure coal companies can come up with a way to mine the coal that is safe for the environment, but that wold probably make them think, and spend a little money. MTR is just a cheap way to mine coal, companies don't give a **** what they do to the environment and people of this region because most of them don't live here. It's all about profit, nothing else, but thats the way life is in this capitalistic economy.

The more and more I drive around this region, the more I realize time is quickly running out to save these mountains. I know of at least 7 huge MTR sites that I must look at everyday when I drive from my home to school (The worst one is really a series of jobs that spreads about 7 miles from big branch to Carr Creek lake. It just fuels the fire of hatred I have for MTR.

Here are some energy solutions that I have mentioned before Nuclear, Wind, Solar. Some sources are saying that in 5 years solar power will be cheap enough to compete with carbon generated electricity. One source that is really interesting is artificial photosynthesis. We talked about this in physics today. AP is really the same process plants use. They use sunlight, which produces UV rays, and visible light, (which comes in a form of pure energy called photons), to split water to get carbon and hydrogen, and use the hydrogen to produce clean energy. It's a good idea, but it still early in development.

Bio-diesels and ethanol fuels are becoming very popular, and are gaining a lot of support from companies and countries across the world.

All of these ideas really don't matter, because we all know that politicians have been bought by oil, and coal companies. Profit comes first, while public opinion, and public health come in a distant second. Instead of reliable and renewable future energy sources we get BS ideas like clean coal, or coal to gas. So to be honest it really doesn't matter what energy sources I mention, unless a major change happens in government, they will all mean nothing.

Coach, I ran across this article about Ethanol Fuel, earlier today and thought you may want to check it out.

http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacob...ST0207.pdf

[Coach_Owens87]

As Paul Harvey says Here's the rest of the story. If you have ever read any of Ken Wards stories you will notice that they are all one sided, he is anti-coal and this one is no different, Ward only gave a few quotes from Mr. Harden. He is some background on Mr. Harden, John is a minister, and pastor of a church located within site of Hobets Job 21, he is also a longtime resident of this community, he has a degree in Mechincal Engineering, and is very close to having a degree in Electrical Engineering. John talked about how much better the water quaility is now than before the mining started, he also talked about the reclaimation on Hobet's Job 21, the awards they have won, the numerous wetlands created, the hardwood trees that are growing on these reclaimed sites, yet Mr. Ward failed to mention these comments and others, only quoting comments that he could try to put a spin on. As for his comment on the Grand Canyon, he was referring to an active mine site and not a reclaimed site. In case you've never been to an active mine site you can go to any Anti-Coal site they have hundreds of pictures of active sites they claimed to be reclaimed sites, or a active mine site will look similar to a major highway under construction.

Again, the development, if any of land after mining has been completed falls on the land owner and not the coal company.

Good Day

Every issue will have articles released that are very one sided or misleading, I wont disagree there. And im sure that the article I read

Im sure that Mr. Harden is a great person, and it's great that he has accomplished the things he has done is his life. But where not debating his life, were debating MTR. I'm glad he believes the water quality has improved in his community, but that doesn't happen very often. There are hundreds of cases of wells drying up orbeing polluted, and it has been proven that water downstream from mine sites typically have high levels of toxins, and decreased aquatic life.

Winning awards for reclamation doesn't mean much to me. The awards are given from mine companies, there is no way they can put the land back to the state is was before mining, so such awards are meaningless to me.
Destroying thousands of acres of mixed mesophytic forest, and then putting in a small wetlands area, and planting a couple hundred trees does not offset the damage caused during mining, and does not impress me, or change my mind on MTR.

I have been to many active mine sites, I actually visited one today. I had to take photos for a humanities course I am taking.

I oppose the methods used for creating roads in this region, becuase as you already stated it uses the same methods as MTR, although roads don't cause near as much damage as MTR sites. They're re-routing a section of KY 15 in Breathitt county just outside of Jackson, the new route is going to be 4 lanes, and cuts off about 1 mile from the previous route. I dont think this new road was really necessary, and it's a really big eye soar, which makes me hate driving that route when I go to Lex.