Who owns the west?

Summary of Mining Plans of Operation in Washington.

Jump to: Plan/Notice Owners | Claims | Patents | Map

Location:   

Currently on file with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) are 51 mining plans and notices filed by 6 companies and 3 individuals, encompassing a total estimated area of 3,415 acres of BLM-managed public land in Washington. These plans and notices are filed on public land laden with gold, silver, copper and other precious metals and minerals worth billions of dollars. And these operations are only those on BLM lands, not on Forest Service lands, for which mining plans and notices are not entered into the government's LR2000 database that forms the backbone of this site. But whether the mines are on BLM or Forest Service land, none of the corporate revenue is reimbursed to the public. Instead, companies leave behind unfathomable amounts of waste. In 2001 alone, the industry dumped enough mercury nationally to fill a billion thermometers and arsenic in quantities that would pollute all public drinking water supplies for 350 years. In 2001, mines generated 45 percent of all pollution reported in the U.S. while accounting for just 0.36 percent of all industrial facilities.

Quick facts about mining plans on BLM land in Washington

• Acres of U.S. public land (BLM land only) under mining plans and notices, estimated: 3,415

• Foreign-owned corporations among top BLM land mine operators: 3 of 9

• Pollution from all US mining operations, ranking among all U.S. industries: : #1 in total toxic releases

• Pollution from top 89 mines in US: 5 times pollution from entire U.S. chemical industry (3,600 plants)

• Western water polluted by mine waste: 40 percent of Western headwaters

• Proposed mining operations that have been blocked by the Department of Interior because they posed a risk to public health or the environment: None

• Other land uses that supercede rights of mining companies to operate on public lands: None

EWG analysis of data compiled by the Bureau of Land Management.


Top Mining Plan/Notice Companies/Individuals on BLM land in Washington Ranked by Acres Affected

Companies have been consolidated to account for subsidiaries. View this table without consolidation.

 Company/IndividualHeadquartersNumber of Mining Plans & Notices on BLM landEstimated AcreagePlan Date(s)
1 Kinross World HQ in Canada 4 1,700 1988 to 1999
2 Mcclennon Slate Albany, OR 1 1,040 1989
3 Newmont Mining Corp Denver, CO 1 640 1999
4 Noranda Expl Inc World HQ in Canada 1 640 1999
5 Lane Mt Silica Co Seattle, WA 2 260 1990
6 Mountain Minerals Co World HQ in Canada 1 140 1984
7 Robert Sell Northport, WA 1 140 1984
8 Raven Hill Mining Newport, WA 1 60 1989
9 Linda Meyer Chicago, IL 4 0 1987 to 1988
10 Goldengreen Inc World HQ in Canada 3 0 1991
See all plan/notice holders in Washington

 

Counties in Washington Ranked by Acres Affected by Plans and Notices

 CountyNumber of Mining Plans & Notices on BLM landEstimated Acreage  
1 Stevens County 20 1,520 details map
2 Ferry County 8 1,090 details map
3 Okanogan County 14 705 details map
4 Pend Oreille County 4 75 details map
5 Kittitas County 3 15 details map
6 Asotin County 1 5 details map
7 Chelan County 1 5 details map

 

Examples of Mines in Washington

Name of MineLocation of MineMine StatusMetal MinedOwner or Parent Company of Owner
Midnite MineStevens County, WAClosedUraniumNewmont Mining Corp
K-2 Mine SiteFerry County, WAClosedGoldKinross Gold Corporation
Kettle River Mill SiteFerry County, WAClosedGoldKinross Gold Corporation
Crown Jewel / BuckhornOkanogan County, WAProposedGoldCrown Resources
Pend Oreille MinePend Oreille County, WAClosedLead and/or Zinc OreTeck Cominco Limited

Source: EWG analysis.

 

Location:   


Source: EWG analysis of Bureau of Land Management's Land and Mineral Records 2000 (LR2000) data system. For claims, acreages are estimated based on maximum allowable size of claims. For patents, acreages are taken directly from the LR2000 database where available, and are estimated based on maximum allowable size of claim that preceded the patent where acreages are not noted in LR2000. All notices are assumed to be five acres in size, and the size of plans are calculated directly as the size of the land represented by the legal land description in the LR2000 database. The acreages we estimate through these methods would tend to overestimate the actual amount. We welcome corrections here, and would welcome a federal data management system that included the acreages involved in these important federal land transactions.