When I wrote last week's editorial about Alaskans preferring gold over fish, Doug Panagapko of NRCan has this to say: "I have to comment on your choice of wording in the headline. To me, and perhaps other readers, [it] sends a rather negative 'either/or' message that by being supportive of new mining activities, the population is not supporting the fishery, or, even worse, that the mining activity would be somehow harmful to the fishery, which is certainly not a goal of sustainable mining. The headline should read 'Alaska votes for gold AND fishing.' These two parts of the Alaskan economy can and should co-exist, and it is every mining company's objective to see that the existing environment around a proposed new mine is preserved and protected to the greatest extent possible."
Point made, and we appreciate the reminder.
Comments