News
Lawsuit Challenges National and Rosemont Use of Mine Claims
Dick Kamp Wick Communications Environmental Liaison
10-20-09
Washington DC--A lawsuit challenging a Bush Administration policy allowing mines on Federal lands to deposit waste on valid mine claims was filed on Tuesday in Federal District Court against the Department of Interior (DOI) overseeing mine claim "manager" Bureau of Land Management, and the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) that oversees the U.S. Forest Service.
The lawsuit was filed by the Western Mining Action Project on behalf of national environmental group Earthworks, Tucson-based Save the Scenic Santa Ritas (SSSR), Native American nonprofit-Western Shoshone Defense Project, and Great Basin Resource Watch (Nevada), and High Country Citizens' Alliance (Colorado).
The suit will be heard by the same judge who sided with some of the same plaintiffs in a 2003 lawsuit challenging those policies. If successful it could impact the Vancouver-based Augusta Resource Rosemont proposed mine based on the use of their mine claims in the Coronado National Forest.
The issue of Rosemont claim validity will be one issue facing USDA Deputy Undersecretary for Natural Resources and the Environment Jay Jensen when he meets with the public in Green Valley and Elgin and with Augusta Resource at their minesite on Saturday, at the request of Representatives Gabrielle Giffords and Raul Grijlavla (D-Az).
Giffords and Grijalva want the USDA to validate claims that Augusta has on Forest Service land, overriding the Coronado refusal to do so, and to consider a "no action" alternative under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) that would halt approval of a mine.
In 2003, the DOI issued a regulation saying that a mine with valid claims on public land could use as many of their claims as they wished to deposit mine tailings and other wastes, even if they could otherwise be mined.
Under the 1872 Mining Act, a mine is allowed 5 acres of waste per claim on what are known as millsite claims---often around 20 acres. Prior to 2003, mine waste had to be dumped on millsite claims contiguous to valid mine claims. Following a challenge to the 2003 ruling the DC Federal district court stated that since Congress had not changed the law, if the DOI wanted to make a new rule regarding mine wastes, it would have to go through a public comment process and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review. DOI implemented their regulation without doing so.
In December 2008 in the closing days of the Bush administration, the DOI reversed a 2003 ruling by the Federal District Court stating that public lands that were used by the mining industry, but that were not valid mine or mill claims had to receive fair market value pricing from a mine.
The court had ordered DOI to promulgate regulations overseeing the compensation, again utilizing NEPA and accompanying environmental impact statements. DOI, however, did the opposite and eliminated any fair market value requirement for mining on public lands without valid mine and mill claims
Plaintiff's attorney Roger Flynn said, "In the case of the proposed Rosemont mine the Forest Service is telling Representatives Grijalva, Giffords and Pima County that they can't say "no" to that mine on the grounds of so-called rights, and furthermore they aren't going to check the validity of those claims because of DOI policy on mining claims. The Rosemont mine is largely on private land and their mining claims would be used largely for wastes. Now, from the Supreme Court on down the precedents are very clear: you do not have a right to mine unless your claim is valid. And you cannot dump mine wastes on a valid claim."
Flynn continued, "Interior's interpretation of the law that was applied in 2003 and 2008 is flat out wrong. Unfortunately the Salazar DOI has said publicly that they are still following Bush administration policy. If they want to talk with us on how to work out a policy based on law, we would welcome that. We hope that both DOI and USDA will take a fresh look and see that Bush policies are illegal."
Interior Secretary Ken Salazar told Wick Communications Tuesday, "This is breaking news. Let me look at the lawsuit before I can comment on our policies."
Jensen's Chief of Staff, Rick Cooksey, said Tuesday, "As far as the lawsuit goes, we have to absorb the details of it, it's too fresh and the undersecretary is travelling".
Regarding Saturday's visit by Jensen, Cook added, "Then there's the situation regarding the Rosemont mine. We initially feel that the EIS isn't done yet and so it's premature for us to say what we should be doing as a result of NEPA."
SSSR spokesperson Gayle Hartmann said, "We think this suit will directly impact Rosemont trying to use 3000-4000 acres of public land as a waste dump. That's one big issue. The other is that even if this mine wouldn't pay royalties unless the 1872 Mining Act is reformed, at least if it succeeds they will have to pay "fair market value" if they want to mine. I don't know what a piece of the Coronado is worth but you'd figure it's some thousands of dollars per acre so at least we would get that. Although it's better that they pay nothing and leave it like it is"
10-20-09
Washington DC--A lawsuit challenging a Bush Administration policy allowing mines on Federal lands to deposit waste on valid mine claims was filed on Tuesday in Federal District Court against the Department of Interior (DOI) overseeing mine claim "manager" Bureau of Land Management, and the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) that oversees the U.S. Forest Service.
The lawsuit was filed by the Western Mining Action Project on behalf of national environmental group Earthworks, Tucson-based Save the Scenic Santa Ritas (SSSR), Native American nonprofit-Western Shoshone Defense Project, and Great Basin Resource Watch (Nevada), and High Country Citizens' Alliance (Colorado).
The suit will be heard by the same judge who sided with some of the same plaintiffs in a 2003 lawsuit challenging those policies. If successful it could impact the Vancouver-based Augusta Resource Rosemont proposed mine based on the use of their mine claims in the Coronado National Forest.
The issue of Rosemont claim validity will be one issue facing USDA Deputy Undersecretary for Natural Resources and the Environment Jay Jensen when he meets with the public in Green Valley and Elgin and with Augusta Resource at their minesite on Saturday, at the request of Representatives Gabrielle Giffords and Raul Grijlavla (D-Az).
Giffords and Grijalva want the USDA to validate claims that Augusta has on Forest Service land, overriding the Coronado refusal to do so, and to consider a "no action" alternative under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) that would halt approval of a mine.
In 2003, the DOI issued a regulation saying that a mine with valid claims on public land could use as many of their claims as they wished to deposit mine tailings and other wastes, even if they could otherwise be mined.
Under the 1872 Mining Act, a mine is allowed 5 acres of waste per claim on what are known as millsite claims---often around 20 acres. Prior to 2003, mine waste had to be dumped on millsite claims contiguous to valid mine claims. Following a challenge to the 2003 ruling the DC Federal district court stated that since Congress had not changed the law, if the DOI wanted to make a new rule regarding mine wastes, it would have to go through a public comment process and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review. DOI implemented their regulation without doing so.
In December 2008 in the closing days of the Bush administration, the DOI reversed a 2003 ruling by the Federal District Court stating that public lands that were used by the mining industry, but that were not valid mine or mill claims had to receive fair market value pricing from a mine.
The court had ordered DOI to promulgate regulations overseeing the compensation, again utilizing NEPA and accompanying environmental impact statements. DOI, however, did the opposite and eliminated any fair market value requirement for mining on public lands without valid mine and mill claims
Plaintiff's attorney Roger Flynn said, "In the case of the proposed Rosemont mine the Forest Service is telling Representatives Grijalva, Giffords and Pima County that they can't say "no" to that mine on the grounds of so-called rights, and furthermore they aren't going to check the validity of those claims because of DOI policy on mining claims. The Rosemont mine is largely on private land and their mining claims would be used largely for wastes. Now, from the Supreme Court on down the precedents are very clear: you do not have a right to mine unless your claim is valid. And you cannot dump mine wastes on a valid claim."
Flynn continued, "Interior's interpretation of the law that was applied in 2003 and 2008 is flat out wrong. Unfortunately the Salazar DOI has said publicly that they are still following Bush administration policy. If they want to talk with us on how to work out a policy based on law, we would welcome that. We hope that both DOI and USDA will take a fresh look and see that Bush policies are illegal."
Interior Secretary Ken Salazar told Wick Communications Tuesday, "This is breaking news. Let me look at the lawsuit before I can comment on our policies."
Jensen's Chief of Staff, Rick Cooksey, said Tuesday, "As far as the lawsuit goes, we have to absorb the details of it, it's too fresh and the undersecretary is travelling".
Regarding Saturday's visit by Jensen, Cook added, "Then there's the situation regarding the Rosemont mine. We initially feel that the EIS isn't done yet and so it's premature for us to say what we should be doing as a result of NEPA."
SSSR spokesperson Gayle Hartmann said, "We think this suit will directly impact Rosemont trying to use 3000-4000 acres of public land as a waste dump. That's one big issue. The other is that even if this mine wouldn't pay royalties unless the 1872 Mining Act is reformed, at least if it succeeds they will have to pay "fair market value" if they want to mine. I don't know what a piece of the Coronado is worth but you'd figure it's some thousands of dollars per acre so at least we would get that. Although it's better that they pay nothing and leave it like it is"
Copyright © 2010 - Arizona Range News