Whoa! Check out the Tiffany's ad.

PLEASE ASK YOURSELF

WHY WOULD TIFFANY & CO.

WHOSE LIVELIHOOD DEPENDS ON MINING,

BE CONCERNED ABOUT

THE PEBBLE MINE AND ITS THREAT

TO BRISTOL BAY?

Every now and then there is an issue with long term implications

that rises above all our immediate financial self interests.

One such issue is the proposal to build an enormous gold and copper

mine in the very heart of Alaska’s Bristol Bay watershed, home of

the world’s most productive salmon fishery.

So why has Tiffany & Co. along with other jewelers, announced that it will

not use gold from the proposed Pebble Mine? Despite the best

of intentions, 175 years of experience sourcing gems and precious

metals tells us that there are certain places where mining cannot be

done without forever destroying landscapes, wildlife and communities.

Bristol Bay is one such place.

As you examine your responsibility to source precious metals

ethically and in a sustainable way, please consider that there will

be other sources of gold, to be sure.

But we and our children will never find a more beautiful

and productive place than Bristol Bay.

Go back and reread the first two lines of that ad. Wow.

http://www.themudflats.net/

More social conscience on this than Congress.

It's a start.

I hope they employ similar standards on the locations where their diamonds are procured.

http://www.smurfitschool.ie/aboutsmurfit/news/newsarchive/title,21957,en.html

..."“Tiffany & Co is also a world leader and has a proud record in doing business in a socially and environmentally responsible way,” said Professor Begley. “Among these initiatives are: Tiffany & Co not using any gemstones originating in Burma and playing a leading role in eliminating the trade in conflict or blood diamonds; Tiffany & Co campaigning for the protection of corals and participating in Seaweb’s ‘too precious to wear’ campaign against the use of natural coral in jewellery; Tiffany & Co promoting responsible mining practises with partners such as Oxfam and Earthworks; and the adoption of a social accountability programme which it applies not just to itself but also its suppliers.”

As executive Vice-President of the Tiffany & Co. Foundation, Jim Quinn has overseen many of these initiatives. The Foundation grants money to Seaweb’s ‘too precious to wear’ campaign as well as to other environmental projects in the US and Africa. The Foundation has also endowed a Curatorial Internship in American Decorative Arts at New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art."....

glad to hear it. :hi:

I didn't know about this "too good to wear" coral campaign.

I should pass this on to my wife, who makes jewellery.

This actually doesn't come as a huge shock to me. Tiffany's is the only diamond retailer I know of that actively tries to not sell diamonds that are coated in blood. (There may be others, but Tiffany's is the only one I know of.)

They use recycled metal for the rings and Canadian mined diamonds. www.brilliantearth.com

year. Glad they are refusing to use gold from that mine.

will they tell the difference from gold mined there and gold mined elsewhere? After it is refined and cast into ingots? It seems like the same problem as there is with buying only "american" oil.

Just as they know where diamonds come from. There is a record of it.

Bristol Bay should be kept as natural as possible. It is a gift to the world not a place to dig for bling.

that they don't want to see destroyed or de-valued? Or perhaps a lot of rich folks who bristle at having their pristine wilderness around their luxurious homes can't be destroyed, but mountain top removal in West Virginia is ok?

I hope this is truly a good gesture made from the heart.

but naaaaah...

Hey, I think they might even be REPUBLICANS!

also it could be a great marketing technique to help lure in green folks with money who forgot all about Tiffany's because it was their grandmother's store and not theirs. Tiffany's knows how to market itself and they see trends like the anti-blood diamonds protests and the green trends in marketing and technology. They aren't dumb.

Sorry I work in product development and I have seen how these marketing ideas come about and most times they aren't rooted in doing good but in making money.

...that they shouldn't make money, expand their market, and be an example to their industry by doing the right thing? Do you really believe that people and businesses have a duty to remain silent when they act ethically? I understand your cynicism, but your logic seems to lead to the conclusion that Tiffany's & Co.'s actions are only legitimate if they keep their big mouths shut about them, and I don't buy that.

and from other searches it appears that Tiffany's has historically taken a stance on this issue and other including Burmese stones and dirty mining.

Sadly not everyone can afford to buy their stuff at Tiffany's because they are an high end retailer and can afford that stance. Other jewelry outlets that market to the rest of the market (the middle class) can't. However kudos to them for doing so but they can also afford to do so.

businesses were to do the same thing, this world would be a far better place. I don't see anyone objecting to people making money, but this kind of effort demonastrates that you don't have to destroy people and/or the planet to do so.

So, if it IS a marketing idea, it is a great one and I hope other corporations will take a lesson from them.

But I have a feeling that it is more than that with Tiffany's. It seems this is not a new idea for them, but rather a longtime policy. Either way, it benefits the environment and if it benefits them also, that's a good thing as it will encourage others to try making money without destroying the planet.

:D

but I am happy that they realized the implications before just doing it.

Article says that they all "pledged their support today (2/12/2008) to permanently protect Alaska's Bristol Bay watershed from large-scale metal mining..."

Jewelers oppose Alaska gold mine

diamonds.

This proposed mine has the potential for disaster that drilling in ANWR never dreamed of. I'm so glad it's finally getting some national attention.

Please educate yourselves on this issue. http://www.renewableresourcescoalition.org/index.htm
and if you just have to read the other side: http://www.pebblepartnership.com/

resembles representatives of the people.

Good for them. Truly.

Who'da thought?

I'm impressed.

generally rises.

That's what the cynic in me said when I read that.

The other part of me said that Tiffany's is educating people about this issue in the right way EVEN if it has a financial motive. The more people who know about the danger the mining poses, the better the chances it can be stopped.

I'm giving Tiffany's a THUMBS UP for this.


:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

with Oxfam and Earthworks, and have their own social accountability program that they enforce on their suppliers as well.

Someone else posted more info about it upthread I think

for something special this christmas? ;-)

http://www.themudflats.net/2009/10/01/more-jewelers-boycott-pebble-mines-dirty-gold/

And for those who love the Bristol Bay, forgive my cynicism, what makes the places that these Tiffany will be getting their gold instead better choices?

That was my first reaction to the op. Now, seeing the list of signers, I feel all the more cynical. Walmart signed on. When it comes to business, they really don't seem to do things that don't benefit the bottom line somehow. And they don't really care if we throw off the ecology here or overseas, which was my first concern. So why did these companies sign on? I have a very hard time believing its corporate conscience.

they're actually well known for supporting good mining practices and social accountability.

And am operating mostly from cynicism. But setting Tiffany's aside, why did the others sign on? Does Walmart or Zales have similarly stellar records on mining practices and social accountability?

I doubt they do.

would approve to, I'm sure.

On the dark side by mention of two opposite names.

I particularly like the act because it is anti-Palin. Though she's not Governor, we're pretty sure she's already running for President and mining would be the kind of thing that she would order or sign.

The other dark name is Pat Robertson - how are his mines coming along - 'ol friend of Taylor.

Back to the bright side - though I don't know Bristol Bay it makes me think of sparkling nature - it so fits with what we're talking about - leave the sparkles under the sea for preservation purposes.

All you who can afford it - buy Tiffany to make up for the wealthy oil people who probably won't buy at Tiffany's this year.

Tiffany is blue - light azure blue!!!!! For real.

... about the financial impact of boycotting metals sourced from Bristol Bay weighed against the good public relations and marketing of this ad announcing their decision. I have no idea what their cost/benefit analysis may have concluded, but nevertheless I applaud them for taking action that might avert a very negative impact on an ecological area with a value beyond price.

Tiffany's and other such jewelry companies had no problem dealing with gold and jewels that were not only mined and processed in environmentally horrifying ways (processing gold with arsenic), but mined by virtual slaves in South Africa.

My guess is that they would feel it if the prices on jewelry and precious metals fell.

Tiffany's deals in low volume (comparatively speaking) high quality, high priced items. Something tells me that this mine would adversely affect their bottom line.

if it helps stop the mine.

diamond people? The people who work with the diamond cartel? We are giving them recs? The company who is part of the diamond mines that pay their workers a pittance?

And I am supposed to be nice to them?

right.

Thanks to the Debeers monopoly, brought to you by Cecil Rhodes.

There are lots of beautiful stones that are more interesting and less socially irresponsible.

I have a GIA certificate in Diamond Grading and one in Colored Stone Grading.

Emeralds, amythyst, loads of stones I don't know the names of... striking, amazing colors. Was just introduced to several new ones at a neat shop in Mystic, this summer. Yes, the sparkle in a diamond is amazing. But when we can make things that are just as sparkly, in labs, without horrendous suffering and death... Why not make an alternate choice.

pretty beads from India that are sold at craft stores. Beauty needn't be expensive....right?

It's one thing when a Health Insurer, or Politician, or "Newsman" say something that makes sense, then we must be suspicious. But, Tiffany's hasn't been a bad citizen in my memory. How messed up are we if we can't just say "Hooray Tiffany's, and Good on Ya." Hooray Tiffany's, and Good on Ya!

I admire that they are a for profit company, but say no to profit at any cost.

I know, this OP is about gold, but for those concerned about the environmental and/or humanitarian consequences of mining, read up on moissanite!

This is what my hubby got me for our engagement. It is a mineral grown in the lab, with chemical/optical properties extremely similar to diamond. In fact, the jeweler who set it for us was raving about what a "flawless, stunning diamond" it was! :D

No, I don't have any monetary stake in the moissanite industry, i just think it's super awesome. See http://diamondssuck.com/ for more info.


My ring, I lurves it: