Talk:Rosemont Copper

Editorializing removed
This dead, non-archived link removed, along with editorializing. Some of this might be usable in the body of the article. --Pete Tillman (talk) 19:45, 21 July 2017 (UTC)


 * How the EPA Sticks Miners With a Motherlode of Regulation: The years-long wait for mining permits in the U.S. is the worst in the world. Op-ed at Wall Street Journal, Jan. 3, 2014. Article notes Rosemont Copper got its operating permit from the U.S. Forest Service Dec.13, 2013 -- but now must get permits from the Environmental Protection Agency, the "most formidable governmental hurdle." The permitting process for Rosemont has taken 7.5 years so far; the average time to get a mine permitted in the U.S. is a worst-in-the-world seven-to-10 years.

Status?
Is this proposal still active? Since I retired and left the Tucson area, I don't keep up with the AZ copper scene as much. --Pete Tillman (talk) 15:32, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I was just about to add this citation Jaguar Fettlemap (talk) 15:53, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Purge Permits?
There is a long list of permits for the Rosemont mine which could be deleted now that the Forest Service's permissions to use land are invalidated. The permit applications referenced may be of interest from an historical perspective, but the references linked to the Forest Service EIS website are no longer available. Detrital (talk) 22:23, 15 July 2023 (UTC)


 * No need to be hasty as these may help with understanding future plans by this company and others given their statement in May 2023, "the company has indicated it is currently only focusing on mining on privately owned lands in the area. The Hudbay spokesperson said the Wednesday decision could help with future approvals if it decides to explore mining on federal lands again." Things are still evolving. 〜  Adflatuss  •  talk  00:23, 16 July 2023 (UTC)