EARTHWORKS

1872 Mining Law Backs US Forest Service Into Corner, Again

Pete Dronkers's avatar
By Pete Dronkers

December 16, 2013

image

Credit: Photo by Tom Vezo/Save the Scenic Santa Ritas via Earth Island Journal

On Thursday, Augusta Resources -- the backer of the widely opposed Rosemont Mine in southern Arizona -- announced it has received a key permit from the Coronado National Forest needed to build the mile wide, half mile deep open pit copper mine southeast of Tucson. 

Despite grave concerns about the mine proposal, the Forest Service is essentially mandated by the 1872 Mining Law to grant the permit. The Mining Law declares hardrock mining to be the highest and best use of most federal lands. 

Due to the Mining Law, the Forest Service permitted Rosemont even though

This archaic law, which governs hardrock mining (e.g. gold, copper, silver, uranium) the same way since 1872, continues to divide communities while placing corporate interests (in this case foreign interests) above everything else.  Democracy doesn't apply. 

For years, people who live near the mine's footprint have been telling the Forest Service to deny the permit. Biologists and even other agencies have cried out about the impacts, yet it makes no difference.  Forest Service staff -- many of whom may be opposed to the project -- are shackled by the law, unable to protect the land and people who live on it.

But it's not a done deal yet; the US Environmental Protection Agency has the ability to deny the mine's Clean Water Act permit, and isn't necessarily bound by the Mining Law.  Fortunately, they've already indicated they may do so.  

Take action: tell your Representatives to reform the 1872 Mining Law and save folks from being bullied into a corner by this ridiculously antiquated law.

Tagged with: santa ritas, rosemont, mining, augusta resources

comments powered by Disqus

On Twitter

Bare-Knuckled Advice From Veteran Lobbyist: ‘Win Ugly or Lose Pretty’ -- Energy Industry Talk Secretly Taped nyti.ms/1wOx2Fq
Denton #fracking ban: reasonable regulation or property rights violation? | @DallasBizNews bit.ly/1wJTOfp

On Facebook