Alexco, come clean on Keno

Alexco, come clean on Keno Open letter to Alexco Resources Corp., Silver Wheaton (its financial backer) and all their shareholders: This letter is about Alexco painting a nice picture, spiced with half-truths, to present its proposal for Keno production

Open letter to Alexco Resources Corp., Silver Wheaton (its financial backer) and all their shareholders:

This letter is about Alexco painting a nice picture, spiced with half-truths, to present its proposal for Keno production in the most favourable light.

1) My biggest concern and criticism is that Alexco – while evaluating, planning and writing a proposal for mine production – didn’t once come to us Keno folks to consult or involve us or discuss their plans. Keno residents requested all the meetings.

We are the only affected community; we sit right in the middle. The most amazing fact is that Alexco evaluated a possible nine mill sites before the first meeting with us. One of the criteria for site selection was “community acceptance.”

How did these figures get into the column?

Alexco obviously dared to decide how Keno residents will accept the location of a noisy plant. How ignorant and arrogant can one be?

What would you say if I represented your opinion in a document about an issue severely affecting you – and in which you had no input at all? Would you accept that I speak for you?

Who dares to speak for me about issues that will significantly impact my quality of life, environment and business?

2) Alexco is presenting a proposal for mining that, at this point, only focuses on one mine. The evaluation and computing of, for example, noise levels in Keno City, generated from a crusher/mill at the boundary of our town,

is based on just this one mine.

In every Alexco public presentation, the company stresses more mines in our area will be brought onstream as fast as possible. We are fully aware that Alexco requires a new Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board proposal for each additional minesite. However, does anyone believe that Alexco will be denied the use of the currently proposed mill site once it is established?

That means the crusher/mill will actually handle twice, or more, rock than the current proposal. And thus Alexco’s “socio-economic mitigation paper for Keno City” is meaningless.

I demand Alexco come out of the closet and state the true volumes and figures for this crusher/mill site, basing the calculations on reality – the worst scenario –

instead of the best scenario.

We have to live with the consequences, not the CEO of Alexco, Silver Wheaton or their shareholders.

Readers can see Alexco’s proposal in YESSA # 2009-0030.

Insa Schultenkotter

Keno City