Land Letter, April Reese
Published March 12, 2008
In the eastern foothills of the Santa Rita Mountains, about 30 miles south of Tucson, lies an expanse of oak-studded grasslands that attracts birders, bicyclists, hikers and hunters. But far beneath the tree roots sits a different kind of treasure: copper.
Rosemont Copper, a subsidiary of Canada-based Augusta Resource Corp., hopes to mine an estimated 220 million pounds of copper each year from the Rosemont Ranch. The company believes the area holds one of the largest untapped surface deposits of copper in the country. The ore also contains silver and molybdemum, an alloy metal used to strengthen steel and iron.
Jamie Sturgess, vice president of projects and environment for Rosemont
Copper, said the mine is expected to produce 10 percent of the copper
extracted in the United States over the next 20 years. "This is a
significant project for the nation," he said. The Santa Rita Mountains above the Santa Cruz Valley. Photo by Tom Brennan. Courtesy of the National Park Service.
With copper prices on the rise, this region has witnessed a mining
resurgence. The Safford mine opened last year in southeastern Arizona,
becoming the first new mine in the state in three decades. The Rosemont
Copper mine is one of several currently under consideration in south-central Arizona.
According to the company's plan of operations, submitted to the Forest
Service last summer, about 3,334 acres of the Rosemont Copper Project's
total footprint of 4,415 acres will be on national forest and Bureau of Land Management lands. The mine itself will encompass primarily private lands; federal lands will be used to dispose of tailings and waste rock.
Coronado National Forest officials announced Tuesday that they began work on an environmental impact statement to analyze the effects of the operation. A draft EIS is expected in March of 2009, according to the Forest Service.
Critics say they welcome the full analysis of the proposal, particularly in the wake of a decision by Kaibab National Forest in northern Arizona to conduct a less comprehensive assessment using a "categorical exclusion" for a plan to mine uranium on national forest lands south of Grand Canyon National Park. Three environmental groups -- the Sierra Club, the Grand Canyon Trust and the Center for Biological Diversity -- filed suit over that decision yesterday. The groups say the analysis failed to consider the proposed exploration's proximity to the Grand Canyon and the cumulative impacts of four other potential uranium exploration projects in the area. A 'hole in the ground'
Environmental groups and many local officials are worried that the Rosemont mine would degrade habitat for wildlife that migrate through the area to and from Mexico and ruin its scenic and recreational values.
"It's going to leave a two-and-a-half-mile hole in the ground," said Gayle Hartmann, president of the Save the Scenic Santa Ritas, a local advocacy group formed to fight the mine. "There's going to be a huge amount of environmental damage."
Hartmann said she is also worried about the mine's potential impacts on
streams and groundwater in the arid region. About 65 percent of the nation's copper is mined in Arizona and for many years the state led the nation in production of nonfuel minerals, chiefly because of its large copper reserves. Photo courtesy of the Arizona Geological Survey.
The Forest Service told the company last fall that its plan of operations fell short in explaining possible groundwater impacts.
"There needs to be a description of the potential for mine dewatering,
potential for a post-mining pit lake ... and a water balance plan describing all water sources and uses, including groundwater withdrawals in the area of the mine site itself," Coronado National Forest Supervisor Jeanine Derby said in an Oct. 19, 2007, letter to company officials. The company also needs to set up several monitoring wells to track any changes to groundwater, she added.
Sturgess said the company is now gathering data to respond to the Forest Service's requests for additional information. The company has secured water from the Central Arizona Project to supply the mine and has already stored about three years' worth of water in an aquifer, he said.
Sturgess added that the company is committed to developing a "model mine" that treads lightly on the environment. Rosemont Copper already has a plan in place to re-vegetate disturbed areas, he said.
"We truly have a sustainable approach to mine development," Sturgess said. Critics remain unconvinced. A bill introduced in the House by Reps. Raul Grijalva (D) and Gabrielle Giffords (R), who represent southern Arizona, calls for withdrawing the area from future mining. The legislation would not affect the Rosemont mine, since Augusta Resource Corp. already holds a legal right to mine the area, but would keep companies from filing new claims. Boon or doom?
Copper mining has been a major industry in southern Arizona since the 1800s. But in the past few decades, tourism and recreation dollars have become increasingly important, and the local officials and residents have expressed concern about a new mining boom.
According to Rosemont Copper, the mine will be a boon to the local economy, bringing in more than $487 million to the region every year over the 19-year life of the mine. That is about $100 million more than the Superbowl generated for Glendale, Ariz., in February.
But a study issued last month by the Sonoran Institute found that
maintaining the area's scenic and recreational value would provide greater economic benefits than mining would. Any benefits from the mine would be canceled out by the loss in tourism and recreation income, which brings in about $2.95 billion each year in Pima and Santa Cruz counties, according to the report.
Sturgess refuted the study's conclusions, which he said are based on
inflated assumptions and inaccurate data. Other mining communities in
Arizona, such as Jerome and Green Valley, continue to attract tourists, he said. Time for reform?
The copper mining resurgence in Arizona is reflective of a boom in new
mining activity throughout much of the West. According to a report released Tuesday by the Environmental Working Group, mining interests have staked 16,282 claims within five miles of cities and towns in 12 Western states since 2003 (see related story).
Environmental groups say the spate of new claims and new mines, as well as contamination problems from abandoned mines, point to the need for reform of the 1872 Mining Law.
Under the law, a company has a legal right to develop its mining claim on federal lands. The Forest Service can require mitigation measures to reduce the operation's environmental impacts, but the agency has said it has no authority to prohibit a project under the 1872 law.
This week, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee conducted its second hearing this year on mining reform (see related story). It is expected to produce a reform bill next month. The House passed a reform package last fall that called for giving federal agencies discretionary power over the locations of claims, but a reform bill did not materialize in the Senate.
At a public hearing held by Rep. Grijalva in Tucson last year, more than two-thirds of those voicing comments expressed support for reforming the mining law.
April Reese writes from Santa Fe, N.M.
