Crown Resources Seeks Distance From BMG’s Crown Jewel

Buckhorn Mountain Project is Denver-based Crown Resources new name for Battle Mountain Gold’s Crown Jewel Project. The strategic move to change the name is based on Crown’s desire to have a less controversial image than BMG. To their credit, Crown Resources has made an effort to open a dialogue with OHA. Unfortunately, Crown, having emerged from bankruptcy in June 2002, has credibility problems.
Project Manager, Walter Hunt presented the new and improved image to the Oroville Chamber of Commerce in mid March. He reminded the members of the area’s long history of mining. He failed to mention that few mines have ever produced much but mining has left many toxic sites.
Hunt expressed his hope that opponents to BMG’s open-pit proposal would be more open to Crown’s underground proposal as expressed in comments during BMG’s permit process. But what was “expressed” is that since it was assumed that under the 1872 mining law, the Forest Service could not say no to the mine, it had the obligation to choose the least damaging alternative which would have been the underground alternative.
Mr. Hunt was quoted in the local newspaper saying “Mother Nature made a way we can mine underground and do so profitably.” Corporate profits have never been OHA’s concern. In general management get paid, stock holders get the shaft and the environment gets polluted. The question is, can large scale mining be done in clean headwaters and not send pollution downstream?

Abandoned Mines Represent Danger

Abandoned mines litter the western landscape. Data from the U.S. Geological Survey indicate there are over 350,000 of these abandoned sites in the western United States. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency identified the water pollution from abandoned mines as one of the most pervasive problems thwarting the clean up of western rivers and streams.

In 1916, three miners who hoped to strike it rich hiked into a glacial valley below Majestic Mountain off what is now the Highway 20, near where Okanogan, Skagit and Whatcom Counties meet, and staked a claim on the bank of Mill Creek. They called it the Azurite Gold Mine. In 1934, the American Smelting and Refining Company (Asarco) leased the mine from the three men and constructed a cyanide precipitation mill, which used sodium cyanide to extract gold from ore. When Asarco closed down its operation in 1940, it left the mountain landscape scarred by four mine shafts and 41,000 tons of oxidized rock refuse (called tailings) strewn over several acres. Tested in 2002, the tailings piles contained arsenic levels up to 190 times higher than that considered safe for humans and animals. Now, over sixty years after the mine closed down, toxic runoff from the tailings continues to pollute the land and water, and Asarco still has not been held accountable.
The Azurite Mine is not unique, but it is a prime example of the problem our state faces: a century of mining has left a legacy of abandoned mine sites scattered throughout the Northwest. There are 3,800 known abandoned mine sites in Washington State, the majority of which are in prime hiking, grazing and recreation areas of the Cascade Range and Okanogan Highlands. Some of these abandoned mines pose significant safety and environmental hazards to the public, watersheds, and ecosystems.
Abandoned mine lands, with their multiple nooks and crannies, tempt hikers, bikers and all-terrain vehicle riders to explore treacherous mine shafts and traverse precarious tailings. Over the past four years, there have been countless injuries and more than 100 known fatalities nationwide resulting from recreational activity on mine lands.
Even more dangerous than the physical hazards is abandoned mines’ potential to contaminate mountains streams and aquifers with arsenic, heavy metals and acidic runoff. Although not all abandoned mines pollute the environment, the ones that do pose a long term threat that is difficult for the public to identify and avoid. For example, in December 2002, the Department of Ecology conducted emergency remedial action to address mining pollution discovered at the Red Shirt Mill near Twisp in Okanogan County. The Department found that sometime after the mine was closed in the 1930s, a family had constructed a house on the site. Mine tailings contaminated with arsenic and lead had been used as backfill for the home’s root cellar.
The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has begun a program to inventory the state’s abandoned mines and assess their environmental impacts. Unfortunately, DNR lacks sufficient funding and has completed only a handful of assessments. Thus, despite the environmental and safety hazards associated with abandoned mines, Washington residents have no way of knowing where many of these sites are, what safety issues they may present, or whether runoff from the mines may be contaminating streams and rivers in their communities.
The Washington Public Interest Research Group (WashPIRG), in conjunction with OHA and other groups, has kicked off a campaign to address the abandoned mine land problem in Washington. The campaign will build a groundswell of public support for identification and clean-up of polluted sites, and will use this support to pressure state and federal agencies to address and prioritize remediation of these sites. If you are concerned about abandoned mine lands in your area and are interested in helping the campaign, please contact Mo McBroom, staff attorney for WashPIRG. Mo can be reached at mo@washpirg.org, or at (206)568-2850.

Inspector General sees-no-evil in Interior Ties to Glamis

In a see-no-evil response to Senator Barbara Boxer’s 2002 inquiry about potential conflicts of interest in Gail Norton’s Department of Interior office involving the permitting of the Glamis Imperial Gold Mine, that flies in the face of common sense and the facts, the Interior Inspector General (IG), found that close ties to Glamis mining company notwithstanding, there was no conflict of interest in the vacation of the mine denial.
Senator Boxer reviewed the Inspector General's report and issued the following analysis.
1. All of the senior Bush Administration officials involved in these decisions have their roots in the mining industry.
p . 6, "We were able to verify the associations you identified in your letter...we have also identified associations not mentioned in your letter."
2. The Bush Administration officials inappropriately failed to recuse themselves from decisions involving their friends, family members, former associates, and companies in which they have an interest.
p. 7, "When we interviewed the ADS (Acting Deputy Solicitor), he stated that he had the legal authority to issue this waiver (to Ann Klee). However, our investigation found that he was not authorized to issue a waiver for Klee...We brought this to the attention of the DOI (Department of the Interior) Ethics Office, and as a result in March 2003 they issued a memorandum to Klee that was appropriately signed by the DAEO (Designated Agency Ethics Official)."
3. The Bush Administration officials gave Glamis and its attorneys lavish access to the Department of the Interior (DOI).
p. 1, "The investigation identified a total of nine meetings that took place between senior DOI officials and Glamis representatives during this time period.
A number of other communications, such as correspondence and telephone calls, also occurred during these dates. In addition, several meetings that occurred prior to this time period were identified."
4. Rather than preserving public lands for uses other than extraction, protecting the tribes' interest, or defending the public interest against a lawsuit by Glamis Gold Ltd., the DOI simply reversed the earlier decision.
p.2, "Shortly after his arrival in July 2001, present-Solicitor William Myers III learned that five lawsuits were pending against DOI based on the December 1999 Leshy opinion and the resulting changes to DOI's hard rock mining regulations...Myers issued a new opinion on October 23, 2001."
p. 27, quoting Office of Solicitor official Karen Hawbecker, "We know the outcome. BLM is concluding that all claims, except for a portion of one mill site, are valid."
p.28, quoting an email from a BLM officials stating that "he had just returned from a meeting with Watson and Morrison. They would like us to expedite the review of the Glamis report."
6. The Office of the Inspector General has failed to understand both the original Record of Decision on Glamis and Senator Boxer's original request to examine any inappropriate actions involved in its reversal.
In the Senator's October 4 letter to the Inspector General, she stated, "I seek an assessment of whether Interior took inappropriate steps to better position Glamis Gold Ltd. in subsequent legal action the company might bring against the federal government relating to this mine proposal."
7. This report only emphasizes the need to for Congress to pass comprehensive sacred sites legislation. Other native American tribes and the public should not be subject to the whims of an Administration that favors corporate special interests like Glamis Gold Ltd. over the public interest and our sacred environmental heritage.
"In light of these findings, it is hard to understand the conclusion of the Inspector General that the decision was objective," said Senator Boxer. "On the contrary, I believe this report proves that biased and harmful actions have been taken by this Administration."

1872 Mining Law

Bad News
The 131 year old 1872 Mining Law still governs mining for precious minerals such as gold and copper on public lands. Signed into law by President Ulysses S. Grant and designed to facilitate the settlement of the western United States, the 1872 Mining Law allows mining companies to stake claims on public land and take whatever minerals they find without royalties to the American public who owns these resources.
The legacy of the 1872 Mining Law is pervasive, threatening the well being of our western communities, and the scarce drinking water upon which they depend. For example, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, hardrock mining has polluted 40 percent of the stream reaches of the West’s headwaters. Hardrock mining releases arsenic, mercury and lead into our communities’ air and waters. In fact, the EPA’s 2000 Toxics Release Inventory showed that the hardrock industry released more toxic chemicals than any other industry in the U.S. More than half a million hazardous abandoned mines around the country persist – which will cost U.S. Taxpayers at least $32 billion to clean up.
The outdated law that lacks any measures to protect water or other natural resources, ignores cleanup requirements, fails to provide a fair return to taxpayers and treats mining as the “highest and best use” of public lands.
Not only does the 1872 Mining Law imperil drinking water supplies in the drought-ridden west, its cost to taxpayers is enormous. Since 1872, hardrock mining companies have taken more than $245 billion worth of minerals from public land, without paying a dime in royalties to taxpayers. It is the only extractive industry in the nation to receive such preferential treatment, and benefit from such federal largess. The 1872 Mining Law also allows mining companies to buy, or “patent” public lands for $2.50 to $5.00 an acre. This price in no way reflects the fair market value of either the land surface or underlying mineral wealth. Furthermore, patenting enables mining companies to remove land from the public trust, which undermines the principle of multiple use that should apply to federal lands.

Good News
People from across the country have rallied to endorse an important bill by Representative Nick Rahall called the “Mineral Exploration and Development Act of 2003”. The bill if enacted would correct many of the environmental and taxpayer inequities promoted by the outdated 1872 Mining Law. Specifically, the bill would:
- Protect water resources and habitats by establishing strong environmental and cleanup standards specific to mining
- Provide a fair return to taxpayers, by providing for a reasonable 8% royalty on the value of the precious minerals mining companies take from public lands;
- Defend local communities and special places from irresponsible mining, by giving land managers the ability to balance mining with other uses of the public’s lands;
- Abolish the giveaway of public lands to private mining interests; and
- Establish an Abandoned Mine Land Fund to address the long-standing hazards of abandoned mines to drinking water, fish and wildlife habitat, and the well being of local communities.

The strong public participation, agency oversight and enforcement provisions of the Mineral Exploration and Development Act of 2003 would translate into real improvements on the ground.
The real challenge will be to ensure that mining on public lands takes place in a manner that protects: crucial drinking water supplies and other natural resources, special places, taxpayers, fish and wildlife habitat, and the health and well being of our communities.

TeckCominco's Pend Oreille Mine
Cominco is proceeding with a full scale test of the sulfur reducing bacteria that they hope to use to help reduce the contaminants in the ground water that gets pumped out of the mine shafts of the lead & zinc mine into the Pend Orelle River near Metaline Falls, WA. Currently the discharged water is chronic and acute to fish at the point of discharge.
According to the Department of Ecology, Cominco has agreed to do a new analysis of AKART (all known and reasonable technology). The previous AKART allowed the waste water discharge because it concluded that the radio active element in the waste would require special handling and be too expensive. A draft NPDES (pollution discharge) permit is expected in June. The company would like to begin production in early 2004. The ore is processed at Trail, BC.

California requires mining companies to refill new open-pit metal mines

The Gold Rush state adopted the nation's toughest restrictions on open-pit metallic mining. The regulations approved by the California State Mining and Geology Board require mining companies to refill new open-pit metal mines and flatten mine waste piles back to nearly the natural landscape. Several high-profile mines stand to lose, including one near a sacred Indian site and one proposed within view of Death Valley National Park.
Courtney Ann Coyle, an attorney for the Quechan Indian Tribe, applauded the regulations. The tribe has waged an eight-year battle against Glamis Gold Ltd.'s proposal to mine federal land near the tribe's Fort Yuma Reservation near Winterhaven, on part of the tribe's sacred "Trail of Dreams." The mine would leave an open pit 4,700 feet by 2,700 feet, and 800 feet deep, along with piles of waste rock a mile long and up to 300 feet high.
Glamis has thus far seen little interest from the federal government in a buy-out of its property to end the clash between its plans and the tribe's cultural sites, said company attorney and Senior Vice President Charles Jeannes. The company is considering a legal challenge arguing that California's attempts to regulate mining on federal land are preempted by federal law. It also could seek state reimbursement for the lost value of its property, Jeannes said. The company has spent $15 million seeking to develop the site, and its claim was valued by the government at "tens of millions of dollars," he said.
The Quechan tribe thought it had won when the Clinton administration blocked mine plans that would leave a huge open pit along with mountains of waste rock. But the Bush administration reversed the decision in 2001. Another setback came last fall when Gov. Later Gray Davis vetoed a bill to protect sacred Indian lands from mining and other activities. Later, Davis signed a more specific law aimed squarely at Reno, Nev.-based Glamis' plans. He dispatched Resources Secretary Mary Nichols to lobby for the backfill regulations before the mining board he appointed, which had approved similar emergency regulations in December.
Also affected by the new regulations would be Canyon Resources Briggs Corp., which mines on the border of Death Valley National Park in the Panamint Mountains. The company is seeking permission to explore mining federal land five miles north of its current mine, a move opposed by the Timbisha Shoshone tribe and environmental groups.