Rosemont mine fight is all about ranting and not about problem solving
By Hugh Holub, Inside Tucson Business
Published on Friday, September 03, 2010
The fight over the proposed Rosemont Copper mine is another example of the polarization of conflict in the region.
Opposition
to the mine in the Santa Ritas (actually the Helvetia Mountains) is dug
in trying to do everything they can to stop the mine from happening.
As part of their campaign, they have seriously distorted some of the facts.
For
example, the amount of water the mine proposes to use is a fraction of
what miner Freeport-McMoRan uses in the area or pecan grower Farmers
Investment Co. (Fico) uses. Rosemont has agreed to mitigate the impact
of its proposed pumping on neighboring privately owned wells.
Also,
Rosemont is trying — but with opposition from Fico — to develop a
recharge project that would use Central Arizona Project (CAP) water to
zero out groundwater impact of the mine’s proposed pumping.
Many
folks in the Green Valley area also think they will see giant tailings
piles in the Santa Rita Mountains if the mine goes forward. They won’t.
The mine is on the
other side - the east side - of the mountains from them.
There
is a major element of this battle that needs attention. Rosemont owns
fee simple the actual copper deposit. They are seeking a U.S. Forest
Service permit to put their tailings piles on.
Under the 1872
federal mining law, the odds are in favor of Rosemont Copper getting a
Forest Service permit to go forward. That mining law is not going to be
changed anytime soon, and chances are getting stronger that elections
across the country will change the political climate in Washington, D.C.
There
is no one from the anti-mine side of the fight willing to talk to the
Rosemont people about mitigating the impacts of the proposed mine. No
one.
Opponents have drawn a line in the sand saying no mine, period. There is no middle ground.
Anyone
who suggests finding a middle ground is attacked by the opposition.
Opponents even attack the media for running Rosemont’s ads.
Rosemont
is not a 19th century mining company. My personal experience with them
in negotiating a well protection program for private well owners near
the mine’s groundwater wells is very positive.
Rather than bet
Pima County’s future on the U.S. Forest Service, people concerned about
the impacts of the proposed mine ought to sit down with Rosemont and
come up with solutions to the many issues that have been raised. Problem
is, the anti-mine side of the fight has gotten so extreme, there is no
environmental group or leader allowed to talk to Rosemont.
What could the accomplished by talking to Rosemont? Here are some ideas:
•
Get Rosemont to buy and donate some important environmentally sensitive
lands to Pima County to offset what lands will be negatively impacted.
I’d bet that the three square miles of Forest Land Rosemont’s mine would
impact are not the most important lands that most people want to save
from development. What about Painted Hills? Or Sopori Ranch?
•
Get a collaborative CAP recharge project going that not only offsets any
of Rosemont’s proposed groundwater pumping, but which also has the
capacity for CAP recharge for Fico and the other mines in the area.
Rosemont is trying to get a CAP recharge project going, and is being
fought by Fico and Pima County.
• Deal with the water-related
impacts in Davidson Canyon. One possibility is with a plant to treat any
process waters to return them to the natural hydrologic system. Put
storage tanks on downstream private wells
Those are just three ideas. The problem is the opposition is so focused on ”why not” it cannot deal with ”what if”.
Personally,
I’d like to see Pima County interests in charge of the deal establish
the mitigation standards and enforce them, not the federal government.
But
it will not happen as long as opposition to the mine screams and throws
tantrums and threatens anyone that disagrees with them.
With
$700 million a year in potential positive impact on Pima County’s
economy, someone or some group needs to take some leadership here and
find a “win-win” path that protects our environment and our economy.
