The once great Red Arrow mine has fallen into dire straights...

Do not believe a word the news media is printing about the Red Arrow situation. They are only putting out the side of the story that fits their agenda. Reporters have been filled in with the true facts and yet persist on trying to aid in the destruction of this small mining company. Whatever seems sensational is what they want to waste their ink on.



The Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (DRMS) was told that Red Arrow was operating an illegal mill in Mancos, Co. It was not illegal, DRMS rules allow for testing. They had so called “inspectors” view the site and completely get the equipment wrong. Our new Quinn Batch Amalgamator was called a ball mill and the new AMS Continuous Ore Roaster was called a retort. And yes, it did have a wash tub upsidedown as part of the roaster hood to direct the sulfur fumes into a separate scrubber before discharge. This unit only saw about ten hours of use and was abandoned because it was not cost effective to operate in this testing situation. It never saw mercury in it’s use.



We were testing out equipment that would handle our ore and had a pretty good handle on it. As a matter of fact, the test site was just beginning to be dismantled and cleaned up when we were locked out by a court ordered receivership.



The mercury that was used there was totally contained in the system and NONE was discharged. I have read wild newspaper claims that we spewed pounds and pounds of mercury vapor into the atmosphere. Are these people crazy??? Mercury is very expensive and we used the recycled mercury over and over. We seemed to be actually gaining naturally occurring mercury from the ore that we were running. The testing that DRMS ordered took the swab reading that was extremely high directly from the Amalgamator drain spout that had not even been cleaned yet. So all of a sudden there are “ highly dangerous levels of Mercury present”. The news reports could not pass that up! Rumor begat rumors and before you know it, they have their new Three Mile Island.



We are working this through the courts right now, but we believe the truth will prevail and we will be back in good graces with the community.
 

I sincerely hope that is true. No one would like to see the Red Arrow Mine exonerated more than I, but today my Aunt handed me a folder full of newspaper articles stating the opposite. Its hard to know what to believe, and I think they are waiting for environmental samples to be analyzed before any assessment can be concluded.

On a more positive note, among the articles my Aunt Handed me today was one titled "Red Arrow roared during the Great Depression" published by the Cortez Journal. I will post some excerpts from it:

"The Denver Post reported 'Assays taken of the ore showed values running to $2,000 per ton"

"Geologists were amazed to discover the ore was nestled in layers of sandstone 'Iron riddled with native gold'. Gold from the Red Arrow Mine was reportedly so pure it was shipped directly to the Denver Mint."

"Up a stream branching off Mancos Creek, the miners were able to find traces of gold flashes in their pans, but it was 'slim pickens', Ray Starr said in 1965. Then he followed the stream up another 300 feet. That's where he reportedly found a red arrowhead near a chunk of rock with gold attached to it. The Starr clan traced the vein for two weeks, staking out 16 claims to the mine. They reportedly raked in $6,000 in a single day ( over 171 ounces worth over $200,000 today) One nugget was reportedly 5 inches by 5 inches and shaped like the United States. It weighed close to 50 ounces. The largest nugget they found reportedly weighed more than 5 pounds!"
 

liquid mercury is not very dangerous its organomercury compounds. mercury in equipment or a building is not a danger unless its handled unsafely.

The anti mine people use non scientific sampling and tall tails to scare people.

i worked with mercury for many years and was trained to work with mercury. i used the proper equipment in a mercury room and had blood test for mercury that always showed normal.

i always had more mercury at the end of a season then what i started with because of my recovery of native mercury from the ores i worked.
losing mercury means you are losing gold.
 

Thanks Ricker and au - the crap put out by enviros is truly amazing, and reporters have forgotten how to be skeptical. We have the same merc. hysteria in northern mother lode.
 

I knew there must be some sane people on this board!! Red Arrow maintained an impeccable inspection record with all authorities and went beyond regulation in most instances. What we see here is a big push by enviro zealots that are out of control and a media that has a very specific agenda. An EPA official that came during this mess said," There is nothing here we are concerned with." It is the Colorado DRMS that is wanting justify their existence by making a big deal over nothing. At a hearing pertaining to this our expert witness was told that they did not want to hear what he had to say, then stated in the minutes of the hearing that red Arrow did not even bother to show up!!!
Believe me when I say this: The outcome of this fiasco being pounded down on Red Arrow will more than likely have far reaching consequences for all miners and prospectors. They will see a win by them as a mandate to go after other operations with fervor. They see us as the "ENEMY" and destroyers of all that is good. But, we are going to fight them in court with every penny we can lay our hands on. The receiver action against us started as soon as we started showing photos of our smelted gold.( I don't believe in coincidences) That froze all of our assets and what little funds we had, but we will figure something out. Government gone wild has to be addressed.
 

I am anxious to see the evidence offered by either side in this to prove their claims. The idea that there were simply no problems with how ore was being processed in Mancos is questionable. Lot of people in the area are pro-mining, so I doubt this is some kind of "enviro" witch hunt. Its my understanding that samples are being processed from the site and surrounding homes, so we should know soon enough what the facts are here...
 

UncleMatt - let me save you the trouble of waiting for "the facts". They will find elevated levels beyond the EPA guidelines in some samples. They will confuse
you and others with Parts per million (ppms) mumbo-jumbo. Then they will trot out the standard propaganda about POTENTIAL harms to pregnant women and children under a certain age. If questioned, they will reference mercury spill data from Japan in 1960s and other non-relevant studies. Its up to you to swallow this BS or inform yourself of the real danger, or lack of danger in this event. Good Luck.
 

Fullpan, it sounds like you may have been to this squaredance before. That is exactly what happened at some of the hearings on this matter. There was 'expert' testimony by someone from an environmental citizens group and directly from the Division about all the damages that mercury and arsenic can do. They relayed horrific storylines and, you are spot-on, talked and talked about PPM's in the gazillions and how it reeked havoc in third world countries.
The "elevated" levels of arsenic at the Red Arrow test mill is naturally occurring arsenic which is prevalent in that area. Arsenic was not used at all in the testing. And like I said before, the extremely high mercury reading was from the equipment spout that had visible droplets on it. The equipment had not been cleaned yet because the Sheriff's department locked us out because of the receivership action. The system was a total gravity circuit and the vats of liquid they thought might be hazardous was just settlement tanks with water in them. The vent to the outside, which, by the way was not swabbed for testing, was above the ore roaster, not a mercury retort discharge. If they were worried about " vaporized mercury" why would they not test the possible discharge point?? .........Sorry to get so ramped up, but this whole thing is maddening.
 

Ricker - couple years ago, when I was naïve enough to think truth would make a difference, I got into a debate in the newspaper with the enviros. I was trying
to point out the benefit of stream dredging the elemental hg, explaining that 98% recovery was pretty good. The head enviro was quoted as saying "dredgers
lose more merc. than they recover" while simultaneously asking the state of calif. for 9 million in tax money for "dredging the Combie reservoir has proven to be an effective method of merc. remediation" Lessened learned, they say anything to further their agenda. And agencies follow right behind them, and news reporters don't ask questions.

There are a precious few anti-enviro law firms, and organizations fighting this trend, but truth is they are swamped with stories
like yours.
 

Last edited:
Thank you Fullpan for posting that, very interesting read that I had not seen yet.:thumbsup:

the Ricker
 

The ricker, it's seems to me as tho you and the surrounding community have an equally important class action suit that needs to be filed against the hedge fund and "receiver"who locked your operation up in an unsafe, and irresponsible manner by not securing the processing equipment or hazardous toxic materials present. Needlessly subjecting the community to a possible hazmat release and your company to an endless list of potential lawsuits and cleanup costs. Based on what you said about previous inspections of your operations you can easily show a positive history of due diligence on your part, and a clean bill of health in the hazmat department. It may sound like I'm joking but I'm not. Force them to answer why they left your place in an unchecked unsafe condition. I'd be willing to bet that after further investigation your operation won't be nearly as bad as first suspected.
 

Last edited:
So if they took swabs samples from people's homes in the area, and they indicate mercury contamination is present within those homes, that must be someone manipulating the situation? Or is it also possible the data is accurate? I am certainly hopeful there has been no wrongdoing and subsequently no mercury contamination was caused by the Red Arrow Mine! But the idea that any evidence collected that shows contamination must be falsified and/or manipulated seems a little questionable, doesn't it?
 

I have been part of a team for an expert witness in legal cases. Typically the plaintiff will have his expert and the defendant will have an expert to contradict the plaintiffs evidence. This process is VERY expensive considering the amount of time it takes to prepare exact undeniable evidence using proven industry standards. However the burden of proof is on the plaintiff and making their methods of collecting evidence questionable ( cross contamination etc. ) is easer than gathering evidence for yourself. If you chose to sue or are expecting to be sued I would find a published expert on the subject of mercury and retain his services. Once retained he cannot work for the other side.
 

I didn't take it that he was saying the swabs were falsified. I believe he said the swab came from the Amalgamators drain spout, in a containment area. Exactly where one would expect to find some residual mercury in a mining operation. He also said they were gaining mercury from the ore they were processing. If this is true, sounds like there may have already been a local exposure problem. If it were my family and I was concerned exposure to a harmful toxic substance I wouldn't wait for a bunch of lawyers to file for a court ordered blood test.
 

UncleMatt said:
So if they took swabs samples from people's homes in the area, and they indicate mercury contamination is present within those homes, that must be someone manipulating the situation? Or is it also possible the data is accurate? I am certainly hopeful there has been no wrongdoing and subsequently no mercury contamination was caused by the Red Arrow Mine! But the idea that any evidence collected that shows contamination must be falsified and/or manipulated seems a little questionable, doesn't it?
Click to expand...

Are you saying that swabs have been taken at local residences and have tested positive for the presence of highly elevated mercury??? Or are you just throwing a "what if" out there? On the second half of your statement, I did not say that the State falsified test results. What I did say was that the swabs that tested so very high were taken directly in physical mercury that was present. They then used those numbers to scare the pants off the locals and fed the information on to the 'eager for a hot story' newshound.

the Ricker
 

fowledup said:
He also said they were gaining mercury from the ore they were processing. If this is true, sounds like there may have already been a local exposure problem..
Click to expand...

Miniscule amount gained, but gained non-the-less. I doubt the native mercury and arsenic in the local rock and dirt would have any affect on people.


the Ricker
 

It is clear the inmates are running the asylum re:government agency's. the poor collection of data regarding the external exhaust hood is exactly where an industry expert can refute all other evidence and I'll bet there is an industry standard stating samples taken after a prescribed period of time is invalid because of contamination or degradation. Internal residue doesn't equate to external contamination. I am curious about something though, because of the temporary or test nature of this mill did you have documented plans and permits for a permanent mill?
 

We had run into problems with clay in the ore early on. That was the supposed use of the roaster that did very little for all the effort involved. Wrong choice. Adding Simple Green was the best method in the water/gravity. This was the purpose of settlement tanks, we recycled all the water that we could. The amount of ore processed at that site was very small, but we felt we had a good idea of what to put in our submitted plan for the larger mill up on the permitted mill/mine site where we did have longstanding permits. Addendums would of course have been applied for and I'm sure more bonding would have been involved. This test equipment was all bolted and screwed together so that it could be easily broken down and eventually transported to a more permanent home. Even at that, it was to be on a much larger scale in new buildings. Which brings to mind the news reports...they showed photos of a collection of old broken down and rusted equipment we were storing behind the building. They did not bother to show any pictures of the state-of-the-art, brand new equipment inside the building that I would eat off of because it was kept so clean.
the Ricker
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

The SerenityRenee 4

⬅️ Previous Thread

Quiet Mini Ball mill, OHH soo Quiet and total cost to me was 5$

Next Thread ➡️

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)

Latest Discussions

Back
Top