Saturday, July 11, 2020

From the Archive: NYCO Mine Amendment

Peter Bauer’s critique this week about the state’s role in the 2013 NYCO mine amendment stirred up some long-standing resentments.

A search for “NYCO” in the Almanack archive brings up 100 past articles. Here’s a sampling, in case you wanted to read up on the the history of this controversial amendment:

Leading up the vote: Pete Nelson presented his position on a “no” vote:

From 2013: Former Explorer editor Phil Brown breaks down the reasons why the amendment passed:

Also from 2013: Chris Amato looks at the “Facts and Fiction” surrounding the amendment:

From 2014: Brown reports on the attempts to stop drilling from going forward:

From 2018: The Explorer reports on the amendment and lack of progress on the mine holding up its part of the deal:


Related Stories

Melissa is a journalist with experience as a reporter and editor with the Burlington Free Press, Ithaca Journal and Fairbanks Daily News-Miner. She worked as a communications specialist for the Adirondack North Country Association and is currently digital editor for Adirondack Explorer, overseeing both the Explorer's website and its community forum the Adirondack Almanack. She enjoys hiking, camping and other outdoors activities, and spending time with her husband, their twin daughters, and rescue animals -- two dogs and two cats.

One Response

  1. David Gibson says:

    Adirondack Wild strongly opposed this 2013 amendment. It passed the public very narrowly because of efforts by our group, Protect, Sierra Club and others to show how it primarily benefited what turned out to be huge, international mining concern at the expense of the forever wild Forest Preserve classified as Wilderness. Since then, we have repeatedly asked DEC and the state legislature to set timelines for NYCO (Imerys, its parent company) to complete and submit data from the mineral testing, data that the law and constitution demand must be submitted for a proper appraisal, for the company to decide (finally) one way or the other to proceed with a land exchange and for the legislature to decide if that exchange delivers the prescribed net benefit to the Forest Preserve. DEC set some pre-coronavirus deadlines for the company to meet in 2018. The company failed to meet those deadlines in 2019 and still has not met them.

Wait! Before you go:

Catch up on all your Adirondack
news, delivered weekly to your inbox