onpoint
Well-known member
You askin' Mark and Topgun???
Trump administration renews mining leases near Minnesota wilderness area
- Thread starter mfb99
- Start date
Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 8,643
This is where I'm at with mining. I'm a consumer and might not be as skeptical of mining if I could see verifiable cases of proper remediation and reclamation. I might even be a supporter if I could be satisfied that disasters and local communities left suffering the negative effects of mining was the rare exception rather than all too familiar refrain. As a resident of small town rural area, if I'm going to struggle to make a living, I'd at least prefer my water to be uncontaminated.
Not sure if coal meets the criteria folks are looking for, but Bluegrass Fish and Wildlife area is near where I grew up. My father worked most of his career there, mining the coal and doing the reclaim work. I'm not aware of any major environmental issues to the local area.
http://www.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/3099.htm
It is a different quality than some other nearby lands that were strip mined much earlier and never reclaimed. I grew up hunting on some of those places and looking back am very grateful for them. They were the only close public accessible lands.
http://www.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/3099.htm
It is a different quality than some other nearby lands that were strip mined much earlier and never reclaimed. I grew up hunting on some of those places and looking back am very grateful for them. They were the only close public accessible lands.
BigHornRam
Well-known member
I'll take that as a no.
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
That is a great question it would behoove the mining industry to answer in a positive way. For Montanans, Berkeley Pit in Butte stands out as a disaster of enormous magnitude, but also the Pegasus gold mine in the Little Rocky Mountains of north central Montana remains on the forefront. The three hundred good jobs for twenty years now seems a blink of the eye for folks living in the Zortman-Landusky communities. The bankruptcy of Pegasus leaves the reclamation far from complete. The scars left on the face of the Little Rocky Mountains have forever altered that landscape and the continuing water problems leave a very negative attitude toward mining. It will take many successful reclamation efforts to overcome all of that.
Nameless Range
Well-known member
I think 1_Pointer provided a successful example, though I'd wager that strip mining is far easier to reclaim than 1500 foot deep pits and millions of tons of slag.
Here's a photo of the pit near where I live when it was running. Clancy Creek, the road that gave access to public, and the entire mountain that is an active landslide are on the left side of the photo.
And here is a more recent photo taken from a different angle, above where Clancy Creek has been forced into a pipe. The road system and terracing have eroded away, and the mine has quit pumping the water. You can see the fissures in the earth where the mountain has started to slide running across the bottom of the photo.
Now, see the scale of the pit relative to the tailings pond, which is where the bad water is. The pit is in the northwest portion of this photo, the tailings pond and the bad soil surrounded by it are south of the pit, and I would guess are a much larger problem to deal with.
I don't know how they go about reclaiming something like this.
Here's a photo of the pit near where I live when it was running. Clancy Creek, the road that gave access to public, and the entire mountain that is an active landslide are on the left side of the photo.
And here is a more recent photo taken from a different angle, above where Clancy Creek has been forced into a pipe. The road system and terracing have eroded away, and the mine has quit pumping the water. You can see the fissures in the earth where the mountain has started to slide running across the bottom of the photo.
Now, see the scale of the pit relative to the tailings pond, which is where the bad water is. The pit is in the northwest portion of this photo, the tailings pond and the bad soil surrounded by it are south of the pit, and I would guess are a much larger problem to deal with.
I don't know how they go about reclaiming something like this.
Privatize the profit and publicize the risk. It's a solid Corporate American business model, banking, manufacturing and mining. We are all to often willing to bend over and take it no questions asked as long as they promise jobs.
dannyb278
Active member
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2015
- Messages
- 574
Well, no one works there as it hasn't been opened yet. You might want to have some of those simple facts straight. If it does open, the money will flow out of Minnesota and into the hands of Chilean millionaires. You want that? As a Minnesotan, I don't.
Besides using mined materials, most of us in Minnesota also like clean water and air, both of which the BWCA provides. Frankly you argument deserves to be bashed, as it is a weak one based on a false assumption. If that's the best argument you can bring to the table, maybe you're not ready for a seat yet.
Very few people would argue that all mining needs to stop. It is a very needed resource and there is a time and a place for it. Now is not the time, and the BWCA watershed should never be the place.
Last edited:
TheDudeAbides
Well-known member
Man, I just wrote a big post and clicked submit - then poof I have to log in and then it is gone.
Anyway as a miner, I think I should chime in.
The thing about most miners is they only care about two things. Moving a lot of dirt and doing it safely. The highest level of education of most of the working force is High school. Some have trade educations. Some of the non-working force (engineers
) have college degrees. The college educated and the trade educated do have the potential of switching careers if mining goes south. The high school guys that are good at moving dirt with heavy equipment are really only qualified to work at home depot or road construction if the mining goes south. Some of the mining equipment is very impressive. 400 ton haul trucks with 12 foot tall tires that can run over an F350 without feeling more than a little bump in the road. These guys are proud of what they do. There is a comradery in mining, that isn't found in any other work place that I have worked in. A lot of the miners would give you the shirt off of their back. So, when people start attacking them for the destructive activities there really get defensive, because for some it is all they have ever known and for others it is the best place they have ever worked. I also think that a lot of miners do not realize how close they are to being laid off. It is a commodity driven business. If the price drops, then the company is only to have to weather the storm for a while before the layoffs begin.
One thing that most people do not realize about mining that are not in mining is that they actually have environmental departments. These departments are full of highly stressed engineers. If you mess up on the verbiage of the permits, then not only are you going to be canned; but everyone else in the operation could be without a job. Some of the permitting process is rightfully strict and other parts of the process is wrongfully strict. Right now, it is almost impossible to permit a new roaster (converts sulfide into oxide ore). The new roaster would have better tech and capacity to help with the environmental impacts, but it is unable to be permitted - thus modifications to the old equipment must be made or the ore must be transported to another locations (truck, rail, etc). There is a storm water protection plans, which are put into place to catch all of the storm water to prevent it from contaminating the environment. Gutters, dikes, etc are used to funnel the water into containment areas or ponds. The groundwater is tested below the containments to ensure there is not contamination into the ground water. The containment ponds are ground monitored to catch problems early, so they can be fixed promptly. There are also areas in mines that are set aside for animals. When I was in Arizona they had an area for bighorns and in Nevada they made a road to water for elk to keep them away from the haul trucks. Killing animals other than mice on mine sites is illegal and is reported, this includes ranchers livestock that wonder onto the property. Ponds have bird balls or catch fowl in air bonds to release them back into the wild. Air Quality is another permit. Mines are only allowed to generate a certain amount and if they go over, then they are fined. MSHA the Department of Labor representatives for mines only has a baby carrot to whack you with when compared to the stick of the EPA. Mixing concrete on most sites is prohibited without a permitted batch plant in the air quality permit. Some sites recycle their off gas to help with the permitting. Most mine sites are large quantity generators of waste and have plans to carry that waste from the cradle to the grave. This is not cheap, but it done by mines (mostly, because it is required by the gov). Spilling waste often requires digging up the effected area and disposing of the contaminated soil properly. Mines also take out large bonds (billions) to ensure they reclaim the land after the mining activity ceases. Some mines stay open with a maintenance crew, because they do not have the money to reclaim the land to close the mine. Others reclaim all the land that was mined. It really depends on the operator.
As far as this mine goes, I do not think it is a good idea; because without the prices going up they will not be able to compete with Arizona, Kennecott (No one competes with Kennecott), and Nevada in the US. I think the dewatering efforts along with the environmental engineering controls make this a bad idea. However, if the price of copper goes up it may make it an interesting proposition.
Anyway as a miner, I think I should chime in.
The thing about most miners is they only care about two things. Moving a lot of dirt and doing it safely. The highest level of education of most of the working force is High school. Some have trade educations. Some of the non-working force (engineers
) have college degrees. The college educated and the trade educated do have the potential of switching careers if mining goes south. The high school guys that are good at moving dirt with heavy equipment are really only qualified to work at home depot or road construction if the mining goes south. Some of the mining equipment is very impressive. 400 ton haul trucks with 12 foot tall tires that can run over an F350 without feeling more than a little bump in the road. These guys are proud of what they do. There is a comradery in mining, that isn't found in any other work place that I have worked in. A lot of the miners would give you the shirt off of their back. So, when people start attacking them for the destructive activities there really get defensive, because for some it is all they have ever known and for others it is the best place they have ever worked. I also think that a lot of miners do not realize how close they are to being laid off. It is a commodity driven business. If the price drops, then the company is only to have to weather the storm for a while before the layoffs begin. One thing that most people do not realize about mining that are not in mining is that they actually have environmental departments. These departments are full of highly stressed engineers. If you mess up on the verbiage of the permits, then not only are you going to be canned; but everyone else in the operation could be without a job. Some of the permitting process is rightfully strict and other parts of the process is wrongfully strict. Right now, it is almost impossible to permit a new roaster (converts sulfide into oxide ore). The new roaster would have better tech and capacity to help with the environmental impacts, but it is unable to be permitted - thus modifications to the old equipment must be made or the ore must be transported to another locations (truck, rail, etc). There is a storm water protection plans, which are put into place to catch all of the storm water to prevent it from contaminating the environment. Gutters, dikes, etc are used to funnel the water into containment areas or ponds. The groundwater is tested below the containments to ensure there is not contamination into the ground water. The containment ponds are ground monitored to catch problems early, so they can be fixed promptly. There are also areas in mines that are set aside for animals. When I was in Arizona they had an area for bighorns and in Nevada they made a road to water for elk to keep them away from the haul trucks. Killing animals other than mice on mine sites is illegal and is reported, this includes ranchers livestock that wonder onto the property. Ponds have bird balls or catch fowl in air bonds to release them back into the wild. Air Quality is another permit. Mines are only allowed to generate a certain amount and if they go over, then they are fined. MSHA the Department of Labor representatives for mines only has a baby carrot to whack you with when compared to the stick of the EPA. Mixing concrete on most sites is prohibited without a permitted batch plant in the air quality permit. Some sites recycle their off gas to help with the permitting. Most mine sites are large quantity generators of waste and have plans to carry that waste from the cradle to the grave. This is not cheap, but it done by mines (mostly, because it is required by the gov). Spilling waste often requires digging up the effected area and disposing of the contaminated soil properly. Mines also take out large bonds (billions) to ensure they reclaim the land after the mining activity ceases. Some mines stay open with a maintenance crew, because they do not have the money to reclaim the land to close the mine. Others reclaim all the land that was mined. It really depends on the operator.
As far as this mine goes, I do not think it is a good idea; because without the prices going up they will not be able to compete with Arizona, Kennecott (No one competes with Kennecott), and Nevada in the US. I think the dewatering efforts along with the environmental engineering controls make this a bad idea. However, if the price of copper goes up it may make it an interesting proposition.
TheDudeAbides
Well-known member
There are two ways.
Either fill it back full of dirt or fill it full of water.
Barth Pit in Nevada is a fishable lake that used to be an open pit mine.
For the tailing ponds (because they are lined to prevent leaching) you pile dirt on it and then re-establish vegetation on the dirt.
elkduds
Well-known member
How long do the liners last before releasing toxic content into groundwater? How often to the liners or caps fail, and what causes failure? Who pays victims of groundwater contamination when these fail? How often are at-fault mines held accountable for disease, degradation of water quality, habitat and species loss, compared to those costs borne by taxpayers, and compared to reclamation that never happens?
Those are the ways the real costs of mining/drilling get passed to federal landowners, after the profits are taken by the extractors. I see timber, grazing, extraction as viable uses of public land, if the industry paid those costs rather than dumping the unpaid bills and environmental losses/costs on whoever is left after the rigs and blasters leave.
TheDudeAbides
Well-known member
How long the liners last depends on the material of the liner. Some liners can last many lifetimes or even forever if not disturbed. It will also depend on the depth of the ground water (can be 0 -1,200 ft below the surface). There are a lot of variables that go into liners, which is probably a question better suited for an environmental engineer.
How often do the liners fail? Not very often, but if one happens it is sure to be in the news. If they are caught to be failing then, the material has to be moved and dug up to replace the liner.
How often are at fault mines held accountable for disease, degradation of water quality, habitat and species loss? Disease passed from mining activities to humans falls under the CDC and wildlife is under the EPA. If it is proven that the mine owner is the one that caused the epidemic, then the mine will pay. Degradation of water quality, this is a permit and a mine that violates the permit has to deal with the EPA (which has huge fines). If you are really worried about water quality, then I wouldn't drink Coors or any water other than spring water. Some places recycle human waste into drinking water and as long as it meets the requirements it is good to go. In facilities that have to discharge water there are certain requirements for levels of some elements that have to be met. Environmental engineering is a vast field, but their job is to come up with solutions for these issues. As far as habitat loss, this is the purpose of doing reclamation. Part of some mining companies PR efforts are to show reclaimed land. As far as species loss, I am not aware that a mining activity that has caused a species to become extinct. As far as reclamation projects that never happen, there are a few things. One being it might reopen again. One a company runs out of money, which would put burden on the tax payers - however this is a reason for the bond that is set forth.
One of the issues that have happened in the past have been from shady mining activities, but with modern technology and the field of environmental engineering the future of mining and environmental impact looks a lot better. It still probably has work to go moving forward, but it is not what it was. There is a lot of things that the bigger mining companies do right now that will help in the future. The smaller outfits like in the Gold Rush show are very poor examples of miners and of mining in general (One of the reasons, why they no longer operate in the states)
onpoint
Well-known member
Another internet misunderstanding, BHR. Where in there did I ever say I dintgitmyelk
elkduds
Well-known member
Thanks for the thorough reply. What EPA?
onpoint
Well-known member
Hmm, the issue is complex. Nailed it, Elkduds.
Hey, Hey, easy now!
T
tjones
Guest
Nameless Range
Well-known member
Thanks for the responses DudeAbides. I suppose I could imagine it being filled with water, but I'd also guess they will have to wait for the giant landslide to occur, to see how that shakes out. That would be a deep lake. If they decide this mine is played out, it would be quite a thing, and maybe an economic boost to the county in the form of temporary jobs, to see it reclaimed.
I think a big reason folks are skeptical of mining is we have a rich history in Montana of many different mining company's environmental impact predictions being way off. 30 miles south of this mine is the Golden Sunlight Mine, which has a history of cyanide spills. That was 20+ years ago, and theoretically they've fixed that.
The regulations are good and I am sure as you say some are too strict, but the mine near my house is currently not paying its bonding payments, and is suffering no consequences. They are currently not spraying down their tailings piles, with no consequences. We(the public) lost access to upper Clancy Creek and nothing has been done. Maybe that is the fault of government, but if Tunnels declares bankruptcy the public will foot the bill anyway. In cases like Zortman-Landusky, and a few others I can think of off the top of my head, the bonding wasn't enough to pay for reclamation. I suppose a lot of these things could have been prevented through systems of requirement, as opposed to an outright opposition to mines in general.
I understand the apprehension when it comes to a mine near BWCA.
noharleyyet
Well-known member
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
