PICURIS PUEBLO, N.M. - Gerald Nailor pulls up in his
huge pickup truck looking very cool. He removes his Janis Joplin
shades and motions for me to climb in. It is an unseasonably warm
March day and the former tribal governor of the Picuris Pueblo is
taking us to the top of Copper Hill, about an hour south of Taos
and an hour north of Santa Fe. It's where a Canadian copper-mining
company has staked 223 claims.
As we careen up
the rutted road, he points out boundaries: Now we are on Picuris
Pueblo land, now it's a former Hispanic land grant; here the Bureau
of Land Management is in charge, there the Forest Service, and now
back to the Picuris.
Within this triangular
island formed by the Rio Embudo and the Rio Grande, land is hotly
contested but largely undeveloped. The Picuris Pueblo and small
Hispanic towns of Pilar, Dixon and Embudo hug the rivers, where the
ground is relatively flat and can be irrigated, leaving wild much
of the Picuris Mountains, an east-west spur of the Sangre de
Cristos.
This is one reason Nailor returned
home, for the solitude and quiet he knew as a boy hunting elk in
these woods. But he came back, too, because he was ready to sober
up. He'd lived on skid rows, ridden the rails, worked as a cook and
a barber, and gotten drunk a lot, he says.
Once
back, Nailor was elected governor of the 339-member tribe. He
helped write and pass a resolution against Summo USA, the company
seeking to open a mine on these 4,000 acres where the Picuris once
fought off the Spanish.
Nailor sees the mining
company executives as rootless wanderers, much like his former
self. "They are very, very greedy, man. If mining is done in the
right way, it is a good livelihood. This way, the money all goes to
people who don't have grass roots. Nomadic people, wandering
businessmen, don't have a place. They go from country to country.
Greed is a sickness like alcoholism."
We
finally lurch to the summit of Copper Hill, a flat, muddy point
surrounded by snow-covered peaks. Nailor crouches among the newly
green sage to point out coyote and elk tracks in the mud. The
ground is littered with the remains of an old mining operation -
brilliant azure, turquoise and green rocks. Nearby is an old
boxcar, once used to carry ore from underground tunnels, and a
trailer recently spray-painted in dripping gold: "Hayduke lives. F
- - k Summo."
Although I have to explain that
Hayduke is a character in Ed Abbey's The Monkey Wrench Gang, Nailor
loves the graffiti, the drama of
it.
"Hopefully we can do it in
a peaceful manner with Summo," he says, posing for a picture next
to the graffiti. "Northern New Mexico is a rough country. We are
honest people, but when something violates our area, there is a
protective thing we need to do. People don't want to do a
monkey-wrench thing, which I'm sure it would be. We're all OK now.
We know how hard life is in the mountains. We eat chili and beans
together. It is hard, but good."
Hard is an understatement. This is the poorest
part of New Mexico, with the fewest jobs. In Dixon, Pilar and
Embudo - the towns, each with fewer than 1,000 people, that
surround Copper Hill - the yards of the mobile homes are crammed
with car parts, machines, junk, anything to help scratch out a
living.
But while unemployment and poverty are
high in northern New Mexico, ethnic tensions are higher. The
Chicanos, Indians and back-to-the-land Anglos have battled over
boundaries and culture. They have hung each other in effigy,
stormed out of meetings, called each other "racist" and "wise use."
Now the tensions have been submerged in the
face of a greater enemy. While Copper Hill is in Taos County, the
towns surrounding the potential mine site are in Rio Arriba County.
Anger over Summo's copper mine runs through this part of Rio Arriba
County like a flash flood through a dry arroyo. There is a momentum
against this mine, a consensus against it, and a rallying against
it, the way an urban neighborhood roots for a basketball team, as
if the mere fact of having something to fight puts everyone in a
better mood.
In mid-1996, when they heard that
Summo had started exploratory drilling on Copper Hill, members of
the newly united community began meeting. Five months ago, Summo's
chief executive officer and president, Greg Hahn, spoke with them
at the Picuris Pueblo.
They surprised Hahn with
their fervor against the mine and their dismissal of the jobs it
would bring. Tonight, March 21, is to be the second meeting with
Summo. This time the meeting will be in Taos, an hour
north.
Where's
Summo?
That night, in a chichi art gallery,
facing a wall of painted horses running into salmon-colored
sunsets, I watch people shuffle through the door. Except for a few
moneyed Taos residents, this does not resemble a gallery-opening
crowd. Picuris Pueblo Indians file into the back row, hugging each
other. A few Chicanos discuss the unusual warm weather and what it
means for their crops. Late-arriving hippies squat behind us on the
floor, as if at a potluck.
The room is packed
and hushed as a 19-year-old tribal leader shyly mumbles his speech
- -we are with the land' - and a Chicano orchardist tells us that
jobs from the mine would sicken the impoverished valley. Then it is
Summo's turn to speak. We wait in our stiff folding chairs, but the
mining company fails to show.
So the crowd turns
on the Bureau of Land Management representative: Does Summo plan to
cut a road through their town? What would happen during a drought
like last year? Does the BLM know this land is
sacred?
Despite the aggressive grilling, Mike
Ford, the BLM's Albuquerque district manager, smiles amiably, as if
unsure what the fuss is about. He makes a single vague, though
startling, statement and then repeats it: "We are operating under
the assumption that there is not going to be a mine."
He quickly adds, "We are not opposed to mining.
We support mining. But mining is not the highest and best use of
the area."
In place of the celebration I
expect, the audience continues to pepper Ford with questions, which
he fends off by repeating the same statement. I don't understand
why the audience isn't pleased. I follow Ford out of the gallery
after the meeting, hoping to learn more. All he will say is: "I am
engaged in personal and private negotiations."
I don't have any better luck with Summo over the next few days. Bob
Prescott, Summo's head engineer, sends me to CEO Hahn, who had made
a name for himself by being open and accessible. No longer. He
apparently has a new game plan, and will say only that Summo has
not yet applied for permits to mine Copper Hill and I can ask my
questions when it does. So I ask him why he didn't show at the Taos
meeting.
"We're not interested
in confrontation," he says.
A new spirit
of resistance
Until recently, a mining company and the federal land management
agency handling a mine's permitting could afford to blow off a
community and the media. The 1872 Mining Law gives mining companies
an almost ironclad right to ore bodies and to the public lands they
need to get at the ore. Mines can be delayed, but if the company
can afford to keep pushing the project through the Forest Service
and Bureau of Land Management bureaucracies, a mine can't be
stopped. Usually the company doesn't have to push very hard; the
agencies are almost always eager to permit a
mine.
But this almost automatic right to mine
has begun to be challenged. Although proposed mines still get full
backing from the agencies, and although most mines still get
constructed, there are examples around the West of opposition
bearing fruit.
Last year, for example, President
Clinton responded to public outcry by promising a mining company
$65 million if it would abandon its New World Mine proposal outside
Yellowstone National Park. In north-central Washington, the Crown
Jewel Mine, which the company and the Forest Service expected to
have in operation three or four years ago, is still mired in
procedural matters and under fierce, informed and steady attack
from local activists and from a nearby Indian reservation with
claims to the land the mine would occupy.
These
are not complete victories for anti-mining forces. One mine was
bought off; one is being delayed. But even that modicum of success
is relatively new. And these are not isolated examples. Everywhere
in the West, both existing and proposed hardrock mines are being
fought, and the fight almost always comes from the local
communities rather than from distant
environmentalists.
One reason for this change is
that stories of disasters at heap-leach mines have become familiar.
While almost everyone has heard about the Summitville cyanide spill
in Colorado (HCN, 1/25/93), many communities have examples closer
to home. The towns near Copper Hill have watched what happened to
Questa, approximately 75 miles to the north, after 25 years'
experience with Molycorp's molybdenum mine: More and more people
have abandoned their farms, and the river running through the town
has been deadened by acid mine drainage.
Because
of the dangers posed by heap-leach mining, and because today's
technology involves the movement of enormous amounts of earth,
rather than tunneling, many communities feel that they can't
coexist with a mine, and therefore must fight any
proposal.
The second reason for the change is
the Mineral Policy Center - the first environmental group to
specialize in mining. MPC was formed nine years ago to reform the
1872 Mining Law. After several unsuccessful runs at changing the
law through the Congress, the organization has dug in for the long
haul, which in this case means working with local communities that
want to question, modify or oppose existing or proposed mines.
Although MPC is based in Washington, D.C., it has two field workers
- one in the Southwest and one in the Northern Rockies - whose job
it is to help communities that ask for help.
I
came to New Mexico to see how a mining company starts a mine in
this new environment. I deliberately chose a mine that hadn't
attracted much attention and wasn't likely to. I wasn't looking for
a Yellowstone National Park; I sought an out-of-the-way place where
the 1872 Mining Law would presumably operate in the old way -
smoothly and powerfully. I expected a quick trip, and a quick story
about the permitting of a copper mine.
But then
I ran into Ford's puzzling statement and Summo's silence.
Bound by a common
threat
Baffled, I call Aimee Boulanger, 28, the
Mineral Policy Center's circuit rider for the Southwest, based in
Durango, Colo.
She starts by telling me about
Summo, a mining company that has never run a mine, but that has
been exploring in New Mexico for three to four
years.
Besides Copper Hill, Boulanger says,
Summo has staked claims in Lisbon Valley, Utah, and is exploring
other land in Colorado. Both Copper Hill and Lisbon Valley were
mined earlier this century. Back then, miners tunneled into the
earth to follow ore that had to contain 2 to 3 percent copper to be
economical. When the rich ore played out, the two areas were
abandoned.
Today technologies have changed.
Miners no longer go underground in pursuit of rich veins of ore.
Instead, they dig huge pits. Ore removed from the pits is piled up,
and sulfuric acid is dripped onto the pile. The acid leaches copper
from ore, and then the copper is removed from the liquid. The
process is efficient, allowing companies to mine ore bodies that
contain as little as seven-tenths of 1 percent
copper.
Then we talk about my confusion.
Boulanger says that mining companies never walk away from ore
bodies. If Ford's statement at the meeting means that the BLM has
convinced Summo to give up its claims in New Mexico, she says, it
is because the BLM has given Summo something in
return.
Boulanger is the ultimate networker. She
tracks every mining operation in her Southwest territory, and she
knows about most of the operations elsewhere in the West. It is her
bet, she tells me, that Summo's mine proposals in southern Utah and
in northern New Mexico are somehow bound
together.
The company is low on capital, she
says. If Summo is considering giving up its claims in New Mexico,
it will concentrate on permitting a mine in southern Utah. She
urges me to head to Utah and check out Summo's proposed mine in
Lisbon Valley.
Utah's forgotten
mine
Two weeks later, I am driving toward the
red canyonlands of Moab, Utah. It is early April and the BLM has
just approved Summo's plan to mine Lisbon Valley, located not far
from Moab. I know a few things about Moab and surrounding Grand
County. The main thing I know is that the area has had a long line
of lovers, starting with writer Ed Abbey, who have fought zealously
to protect it.
So I am unprepared for what I
find. The town is silent. It is not just that this is off-season,
and the T-shirt shops are closed. I can't find anyone who knows
anything about the soon-to-be copper mine in nearby San Juan
County.
The outspoken Grand County bi-monthly,
The Canyon Country Zephyr, doesn't mention it. The public radio
station has hardly covered it. The Southern Utah Wilderness
Alliance, the wildly successful regional group dedicated to
preserving 5.7 million acres of Utah wilderness, ignored the
mine.
"There are other battles
we need to fight. This did not make the cut," says SUWA's Kevin
Walker from the group's newly opened Moab office. "I'm embarrassed
to say, I've lost touch with the issue. It hasn't really caused a
lot of stir."
Former Grand County Commissioner
Bill Hedden says what I'm seeing is burnout. "People are worn out
after the (Grand Staircase-Escalante National) Monument," he
says.
But when I head south, to San Juan County,
everyone seems to know about the
mine.
"We'll do anything we
can to make this mine happen," says San Juan County Commissioner Ty
Lewis, a third-generation Mormon farmer. "We're anxious to see this
happen."
From his cluttered office in the
county courthouse in Monticello, Lewis tries to convince me that
nothing could be better for his county than a copper mine with a
10-year life expectancy that brings 143 jobs during peak
production. Utah's San Juan County is the state's poorest, with the
highest unemployment. Only 15 percent of the county is private land
and most of this land is too arid for agriculture. Only Monticello
and Blanding are surrounded by irrigated fields, Lewis tells me;
his six kids were forced to abandon farming.
In
terms of landscape, San Juan County is blessed. It contains Lake
Powell, some of the Navajo Reservation, and most of Canyonlands
National Park. Nevertheless, this is not a county that courts
tourist dollars.
"The last
thing we want to look like is Moab," says Lewis.
Not a problem, I think. Driving the 56 miles from Moab to
Monticello felt like switching from a technicolor movie to
black-and-white. Every sign in Moab beckons to the tourist;
Monticello ignores newcomers.
Commissioner
Lewis' gripe with tourism, he continues, is that it uses too much
water, provides menial jobs and could wither with any downswing in
the economy. I point out that Summo's mine is also a water hog - it
will use 1,000 gallons of water a minute - and that its life
expectancy is even less than that of a poorly built
motel.
Lewis spells it out: The real problem
with tourism is that it would destroy Monticello's way of life,
which is based on cowboys and irrigated agriculture and mining
booms and busts. Monticello learned to grow and shrink during its
uranium-mining days. The mine, says Lewis, would blend right
in.
As good as it
gets
After talking to Lewis and several other
mine boosters, I drive toward the 229 unpatented mining claims
Summo plans to mine on just over 1,000 acres in Lisbon Valley,
halfway between Moab and Monticello. To the north are the La Sal
Mountains, to the west, Canyonlands National Park. The early spring
brings some green to the rust-colored horizon, but what I can see
is unmajestic - low buttes and shallow canyons. This landscape
might look wild in Kansas. In southern Utah, not far from
Canyonlands and Arches, it looks drab.
At first
glance, this seems like a good place for a hardrock mine. It isn't
anyone's scenic area. No river runs through it. Unlike Copper Hill,
this is not a sacred site. No one even seems to feel much affection
for the spot. Eighty-five of these acres already are covered with
mining rubble. A mine will bring high-paying jobs to an
impoverished region. Why fault SUWA for fighting other
battles?
"If we are going to
have mining on public land, Lisbon Valley is as good as it gets,"
Mike Ford told me before I came. Stepping over corroding machinery,
I see what he means.
But later that day, in the
BLM's Moab office, Associate District Manager Brad Palmer shows me
Summo's mining plan. It doesn't require a long-term bond for water
quality reclamation. And the water-quality work is pitiful. The BLM
permit would allow Summo to mine for five years before it attempts
to determine whether the aquifer that runs under Lisbon Valley is
in danger of acid mine drainage. One of the biggest problems with
hardrock mining is that the disturbed earth can cause acid mine
drainage. Some mines that have been closed for decades are still
discharging highly acidic water into the West's streams and rivers.
Cleaning up such messes is almost impossible.
Palmer says it was a compromise. "There is probably not too much
acid-generating material," he says. "If at the end of five years
there is a problem, the project would stop."
I
ask Palmer who exactly is going to shut down a mine and put 143
miners out of work. "Chances are, no one," he admits. "But we could
get bond money."
Bit by bit over the next week,
this "ideal" mine site begins to look less ideal. Bill Moran, who
recently quit as head geologist for Woodward-Clyde, the company
that wrote Summo's environmental impact statement, says Summo
didn't spend enough money to fully analyze the geology. As a
result, he thinks Summo's groundwater tests don't tell much about
the aquifer's water quality.
The BLM agrees that
the company doesn't know if pure or polluted water now flows under
Lisbon Valley. It also doesn't have a good handle on how mining
might affect the region's water. The three open pits might release
heavy metals into the underlying Navajo Aquifer. That aquifer,
which is on a fault line under the mine site, may be fractured and
go nowhere. Or it might feed those heavy metals into the Dolores
River.
"This may or may not be
a problem," says Palmer.
Utah's state deputy BLM
Director in Salt Lake City, Robert Lopez, had been concerned. On
March 6, he wrote a letter to Moab district director Kate Kitchell
saying that without this baseline data, Summo must post a long-term
reclamation bond for groundwater clean up.
Lopez's suggestion was ignored. On March 26, the Utah state BLM
gave Summo permission to mine in Lisbon Valley. Since the company
already has its state water permits, it was ready to dig. But
before work could begin, the Boulder office of the National
Wildlife Federation and the Western Mining Action Project appealed
the BLM's issuance of a permit to Summo on behalf of the Mineral
Policy Center and two Moab residents (see story on page 11). The
appeal criticizes the BLM for "not looking before it leaps' - for
approving a mine without a long-term groundwater reclamation bond
and without adequate understanding of the
groundwater.
A quiet
month
The May 2 appeal worries Summo. The
Interior Board of Land Appeals has 45 days to make a decision, but
Greg Hahn asks the board to rule as quickly as possible, before
Summo's financial backers back out. "This ... would make it
extremely difficult for Summo to recover," says Hahn. "Thus the
entire future and viability of the company rides on an expeditious
decision."
Summo doesn't get its wish. In fact,
in mid-June the board grants a stay of execution. The company
cannot construct open pits until the board rules on the
appeal.
Meanwhile, life goes on. Dixon farmers
plant their corn seeds. River rafters escort their first clients
down the Rio Grande from Pilar to Embudo. And I start to write an
article about two impoverished areas facing similar
mines.
The story might have gone like this: When
it comes to protecting the landscape, southern Utah's activists and
national supporters are so organized that they dragged President
Bill Clinton to the rim of the Grand Canyon in October 1996 to
announce a new national monument. By comparison, northern New
Mexico is made up of warring ethnic and political entities which
clearly could never cooperate. So when Summo staked mining claims
in both areas, the New Mexico mine should have been permitted and
the Utah mine should have died under fierce, withering fire.
Instead, Summo whizzed through the permitting
process in southern Utah and decided to abandon its New Mexico
claims. Why?
Patenting is
the secret ingredient
On May 15, a New Mexican
activist leaks me a fax that sheds some light on the story. The
memo from Mike Ford to the acting BLM director in Washington, D.C.,
reveals that Ford has had a busy winter and spring. Back in
December, he relates in his memo, he asked Summo what would induce
it to relinquish its claims on Copper Hill.
Summo's Karen Melfi replied that the company would forfeit its 223
claims in New Mexico if it got title to its 229 unpatented claims
in Lisbon Valley. Summo also asked to be compensated up to $400,000
for the costs of holding, acquiring and exploring its Copper Hill
claims. Ford writes in the memo that if Summo abandoned its New
Mexico claims, he would then use his administrative discretion to
permanently withdraw Copper Hill from mining.
It
sounds less like a deal than a recognition of reality. In New
Mexico, Summo faces a long fight - one it may not have the pockets
for. In Utah, it is a shoo-in. Ford's deal gives everyone what they
want: the New Mexico communities defeat their mine; San Juan
County, Utah, gets its mine; and Summo gets $400,000 and patented
mining claims. The company could mine under a permit from the BLM,
but patenting gives it freedom from BLM
oversight.
But on closer examination, the
proposal reaches far beyond the two mine sites. Interior Secretary
Bruce Babbitt isn't fond of the 1872 Mining Law, but he is
especially unhappy with the provision that allows mining companies
to buy, or patent, public land for as little as $2.50 an acre.
Babbitt delights in posing for photos holding checks that represent
the immense value of ore bodies Canadian companies patent for a few
thousand dollars. Babbitt and his photos have helped convince
Congress to keep a moratorium on patents, thus
far.
The proposed swap Ford has brokered is
possible only if both Interior Secretary Babbitt and Congress agree
to break the patent moratorium.
Because of these
obstacles, Ford hadn't wanted his memo to become public, but once I
ask him about it, his pleasure in the solution he has worked out
overwhelms his reservation. He clutters his rapid speech with
phrases like "win-win situation" and "innovative alternatives."
"This is such a good deal, so positive," he
says.
Without it, he says, Summo could sell its
New Mexico claims to a larger company - one with money to fight its
way through the permitting process. With the proposed deal, the
mine threat will never reappear.
But the Mineral
Policy Center's Boulanger doesn't think the proposal is "so
positive." In fact, Boulanger says it smacks of "a New World Mine
deal." To many anti-mining activists, the $65 million deal between
the federal government and Crown Butte Mining Company at
Yellowstone has reached mythical status; a "New World Mine deal"
now symbolizes the power that mining companies hold and the massive
amounts of money it takes to compensate
them.
"Summo hasn't invested
much into that property and (the BLM is) giving them free and clear
title to over 1,000 acres of public land," says Boulanger. "In my
eyes, it comes pretty close (to a New World Mine deal)."
Ford dreads this response. Unlike the New World
Mine swap, he explains, Summo is not asking to be compensated for
the value of the minerals in the ground, a figure that would be in
the millions. "My fear is that people will take it out of context
and call it another deal, another giveaway," he says. "I didn't
want someone to say: You're trying to sacrifice Utah for New
Mexico."
But that, of course, is what people
are saying.
It is not clear that the proposed
swap influenced the Moab BLM to approve a faulty environmental
impact statement for Lisbon Valley. But in a recent letter to the
appeals board, the National Wildlife Federation and the Western
Mining Action Project say that one thing is certain: Between
January and April, Summo's wishes carried a lot of clout with the
Utah BLM. "BLM and Summo's clandestine dealings and secrecy
concerning the land swap call BLM's objectivity concerning the
Lisbon Valley ROD (record of decision) into question," they write.
"Approval of the Lisbon Valley project is central to the land
swap's success."
In his March 6 letter, Utah
deputy BLM director Lopez said the BLM shouldn't permit the mine
without at least a $6 million long-term reclamation
bond.
On March 9, Summo wrote a letter to
Kitchell and the Utah BLM state director: "We think monitoring and
bonding for 25 years after mining ends is unnecessary and
unreasonable ... Requiring them before we have any indication that
they will be needed may well put an end to an otherwise viable
project. We think the project has already been seriously damaged by
these recommendations in the EIS, and we urge you not to include
them."
Two weeks later, just a month after
Babbitt announced new and tougher bonding requirements, Utah state
BLM Director Bill Lamb approved the mine without any long-term bond
for groundwater clean-up.
Ford says that his
negotiations with Summo had no bearing on the Lisbon Valley mine's
permitting process. Although he met with his Utah counterpart, Moab
district manager Kitchell, in January, he says she told him she
couldn't comment on the proposal until the BLM made a separate and
independent decision on the Lisbon Valley environmental impact
statement.
But to Roger Flynn of the Western
Mining Action Project, everything is a little too neat. The way
Flynn adds it up, Summo has been losing money for three years and
needs investors badly. Mineral investors are always skittish, he
says, especially of companies that have never mined and that need
lots of capital to get into mining. To woo investors, Summo needs
speedy permits.
Flynn continues, "(Summo) needs
cash; they need Lisbon Valley fast," he says. "We shouldn't be
permitting mines to help out financially strapped companies."
Flynn also thinks the Utah BLM had a second
motive for permitting Lisbon Valley - a motive that had nothing to
do with Ford's New Mexico-Utah solution. He thinks the Utah BLM,
fearing cleanup liability in Lisbon Valley, was eager to get rid of
that wasteland. He says, "The BLM was given an opportunity to get
the heck out of Dodge, and they took it."
Making national decisions
locally
When Mike Ford told the art gallery
crowd, "mining is not the highest and best use of this land," he
made a startling statement, for according to the 1872 Mining Law,
mining is the highest and best use of BLM land, and the agency has
always claimed it doesn't have the power to act
otherwise.
Ford's Albuquerque office could find
only one example of a BLM district office refusing to allow a
hardrock mining company to mine once it had written an EIS, and
that was a claim staked in a wilderness study area. Perhaps to
avoid getting to the EIS process, Ford stepped out of the normal
role of a BLM bureaucrat, which is to play helpful midwife to new
mines.
Although he has been with the agency for
23 years, starting after college and leaving only for a brief stint
as New Mexico Republican Sen. Pete Domenici's aide on a BLM
fellowship, Ford seems more daring than most bureaucrats. He is
polished, he smiles and makes eye contact. And he is as determined
as any elected official could be to please his Rio Arriba County
constituents.
Taking on the role of negotiator
may be the only option Ford has to protect this area, since he is
working within a power vacuum. Congress remains unwilling to change
the 1872 Mining Law, and since January, the BLM has lacked a
national director to guide the regional
directors.
"Mike is deeply
committed as a land resources professional," says Abe Jacobson of
the Santa Fe Sierra Club. "But given the political system as it is,
Mike can't do a whole lot."
What Ford can do is
possible partly because he had the communities on his side. He
could not have negotiated with Summo if northern New Mexico had not
united against mining on Copper Hill, and if people in southern
Utah had not been either courting or ignoring the Lisbon Valley
mine.
The problem for those who take a larger
view of mining is that local attitudes seem to be the sole factor
determining where a mine will go. Mining activists like Jacobson
say this kind of policy-making has its
shortcomings.
"We need to look
at more than these two mines and their NIMBY (Not-In-My-Back-Yard)
interests." As a federal agency with broad responsibilities,
Jacobson says, "The BLM is a total joke. We have to look with a
more national vision of where we allocate mines and where we site
them."
Those who want to see the 1872 Mining
Law reformed have struggled with the kinds of "suitability
standards' that might be incorporated into a revised law. For
example, the standards might forbid mining where acid mine drainage
could be a problem, or where a local aquifer would be disrupted, or
where a mine might mar the view of a well-known scenic
area.
Mining companies say such suitability
standards would destroy their industry. Geologist and mineral
engineer Charles Park explained the industry's attitude in 1971, in
John McPhee's Encounters with the
Archdruid:
"Minerals are where
you find them. The quantities are finite. It's criminal to waste
minerals when the standard of living of your people depends upon
them. A mine cannot move. It is fixed by nature. So it has to take
precedence over any other use."
Saying no to self-interest
A
few days after Ford's internal memo circulates among New Mexican
activists, a strange thing happens. Representatives of the Picuris
tribal council, some Dixon locals, and the Sierra Club's Jacobson
get on the phone with Utah activist Kay Howe and Aimee Boulanger.
Hours later, the New Mexicans agree to go against their apparent
self-interest.
They oppose Ford's proposed
swap.
"We realized we had a
wider environmental responsibility," says Michael Wildgoose of the
Taos-Rio Arriba Mining Reform Alliance. It would create a bad
precedent to pay Summo to leave Copper Hill and allow it to own
land in Utah without BLM oversight, he adds. "Then the floodgates
will be open and all the other mining lawyers will get their own
companies' exemptions (to the patent moratorium) through acts of
Congress."
"Summo had already
been almost run out of town. Here we are giving them something on
their way out the door," says Ernie Atencio of the Taos-based
Amigos Bravos. "We can fight this mine on its own merits. We can
fight them off, although that will take a lot longer and be a lot
more expensive."
The mine's opponents also tell
me that they're not giving up much - that Ford's proposal probably
won't make it through the Beltway. Babbitt, they believe, would
never willingly break the moratorium. But they are also wistful.
Some part of them would like to sign on with Ford and protect the
land.
Elizabeth Winter, who has spent the past
year sending almost daily e-mail alerts about Summo's threat to
Copper Hill, opposes the deal. But she has found a way to feel
victorious.
The BLM brokered that deal because
of "what we did," says Winter. "Real power doesn't come in lawsuits
and deals. It comes from our public groundswell."
Heather Abel covers mining
issues in the West for High Country News.
On the trail of mining's corporate nomads
Document Actions
- Email this
- Write Editor
- Feeds
- Discuss
- Font Size: A A A
del.icio.us
Digg
StumbleUpon

