iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Bryce Canyon Utah Strip Mine Opposed By 3 Federal Agencies

Posted: 02/ 6/2012 9:56 am

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — Federal biologists say a strip mine at the backdoor to Utah's storybook Bryce Canyon National Park will wipe out the southernmost population of sage grouse, even as their agency resists a broader effort to protect the bird across the West.

The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service is among three federal agencies that have registered opposition to the lease of 3,500 acres of public range land sought by a coal mine that got its start on 440 acres of private land. The mining is under way about a dozen miles from a corner of Bryce Canyon National Park, a high plateau of southern Utah prized for its clean air, wildlife and sparking night skies.

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management has set the stage for a group of Florida investors known as Alton Coal Development LLC to expand onto the surrounding public range lands. The BLM tentatively approved a lease sale open to all bidders last fall. The project's draft environmental study has drawn opposition in recent weeks from the Fish & Wildlife Service, the National Park Service and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

While the Fish & Wildlife Service doesn't have the staff or money to seek broader protections for the sage grouse, "our goal is to protect existing populations," said Amy Defreese, an agency ecologist based in Salt Lake City. Officials said other candidate species rank higher for protection. That position was upheld Friday by a federal judge who dismissed a lawsuit brought by environmental groups seeking Endangered Species Act protection for the ground-foraging bird.

The National Park Service objects to the dust, nighttime lights and machinery noise of around-the-clock mining in an area so quiet that measuring devices fail to register natural sounds.

The Park Service and BLM have clashed before in Utah, home to five national parks and several monuments. In 2008, the final year of the Bush administration, the Park Service complained it was ignored when the BLM sold oil-and-gas drilling leases near Canyonlands National Park. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar later rescinded those leases and ordered his squabbling agencies to make peace.

"At times we may have different views on a project, and this is one of them," said Denis Davis, the Utah coordinator for the Park Service, who was reluctant to use the word "tension" to describe the agencies' relationship.

"We fully understand the BLM's multiple-use mission," Davis said. "They're going to be involved in a number of projects that impact the parks."

The lights from coal mining around Alton will appear significantly brighter than the planet Venus from Cedar Breaks National Monument, about 25 miles away, the Park Service says in a letter of objection filed recently with the BLM.

The lights will throw off insect-eating bats, officials said, by "altering forage behavior" and displacing bat roosts.

"Blasting operations, as well as some haul truck noise, will likely be audible from Bryce Canyon's south end and possibly other areas of the park," the Park Service said. "The wildlife road kill expected from over a million truck loads over the length of the haul route, especially at dusk and dawn, may be unacceptable."

Arizona's Hopi Indian tribe said it considers 119 archaeological sites in the proposed coal tract part of its heritage and that 81 of them would be partly or completely removed by mining.

The EPA also filed objections, saying the coal mining would muddy local creeks and release methane, a greenhouse gas the EPA says is 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide.

The BLM says a final decision on leasing the coal tract will take months longer.

Utah officials favor the project. Local officials say it will create at least 240 jobs and provide $1.5 billion in economic benefits to Garfield and Kane counties over 30 years.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

Filed by James Gerken  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 45
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
aligatorhardt
Cut on the bias
04:14 PM on 02/08/2012
The Bryce Canyon park has some of the most unique environments on the planet. Damage to this area will never be restored. We cannot allow destruction and pollution of this park. Strip mining is contrary to all other uses of the park.
03:19 PM on 02/07/2012
The BLM is not very good at protecting wildlife and nature, even though this is supposed to be part of the job. So, this is another kind of typical thing that happens, wherein our tax dollars get used in battles pitting one government agency against another--in this case several others. There is no "super agency" to make the final determination, so it often winds up in court where more taxpayer dollars are spent.
I say this with some background in that as one who was in great support of getting the California Desert Protection Act passed into law by Congress (It was--in 1994), one of our "enemies" at the time was BLM.
12:53 PM on 02/07/2012
Somethings that weren't mentioned in the article is that Alton Coal LLC is already delinquent $151,000.00 in property tax to Kane County. And they have been twice warned by the EPA for run off into Kanab Creek. Also an underground coal mine in Carbon County recently closed and laid off 200 miners. The reason was the price of and the demand for coal was way down. If they can't pay their property tax and they can't control their run off, why should we trust that they will after expansion?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PiedType
Old editors never die, they just revert to type
11:25 AM on 02/07/2012
Light and noise pollution are very real threats to what makes Bryce Canyon and many other national parks the special places they are. There's no such thing as infringing "just a little bit." Wilderness either is, or it isn't. The only changes should be those made by nature.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
William Waterway Marks
Water researcher, author, publisher
09:18 AM on 02/07/2012
I have hiked throughout Bryce Canyon National Park - it's beauty was humbling and brought tears to my eyes. It is incomprehensible to me that such a beautiful area is in jeopardy of being mined for coal. How can mining rights to one of our "national parks" be sold off to a private company by BLM?
It is frightening to me, that such a beautiful and rare ecosystem can be "sold" to any mining operation. Such an insult on our land will leave an ugly scar for infinity. Shame on you BLM!
And, shame on you Utah!

"Utah officials favor the project. Local officials say it will create at least 240 jobs and provide $1.5 billion in economic benefits to Garfield and Kane counties over 30 years." Can you believe this? Destroying such a beautiful, natural habitat that took billions of years to create -- just for 30 years of jobs. Just for a lousy $1.5 billion? Such greed and myopic, short term thinking by Utah's and the BLM's paid off politicians is criminal! My spirit believes the souls of these perpetrators will be judged by the Highest Court and condemned to do time in a deep black mine for infinity.
08:08 AM on 02/07/2012
I have posted on NUMEROUS occasions that strip mining for the much needed rare earth elements would be opposed - and so it begins.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Wanderland
Generic white guy
02:19 PM on 02/07/2012
There has been opposition to strip mining for many years, Nostradamus.

BTW, since when is coal a rare earth element?
photo
OutAtFirst
Mountain goat, desert rat and sea dog
04:15 PM on 02/07/2012
Or even an element, period?
08:36 PM on 02/07/2012
real environmentalist don't like mines, or cars, or airports, or roads, or pipelines, or electricity, or people. Pretty darn simple really.
photo
blackwind
Relax, nothing is under control
02:36 PM on 02/07/2012
You mean you knew before it even happened that strip mining next to a National Park would generate opposition?
Wow! You must be a psychic!
08:34 PM on 02/07/2012
Clueless as usual.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cody Allison
Conscious Evolution
05:56 AM on 02/07/2012
I wish more people would be paying attention to water technologies. Run your car on water...emissions are water. then there is the last 20 years of cold fusion study. How bout pulling power out of the earth directly? We have so many options and paths to go these days into renewable energy sources we don't NEED coal or oil any more...

And then there's the corporate overlords who don't care and have all the money. I'm sure this'll become a free speech issue to them...since money is speech these days.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
aligatorhardt
Cut on the bias
04:19 PM on 02/08/2012
Speaking of money, the real cost of using coal is $0.34 kwh, when the health damages are added to the price. Death to PV Subsidies | Photovoltaics World Magazine Article
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cody Allison
Conscious Evolution
06:29 PM on 02/08/2012
The real cost to convert my friends van to hybrid gasoline/HHO has approached $75...mind you there are still five or six things to buy...got them all at Ace Hardware cross the street. A contract with the U.S. Military created a hybrid of his own that got 100 miles to about 4 ounces of water. I like 400 miles per $1.08 gallon of water...i really do.

Work smarter, not harder. You're fighting to keep paying your power bill, instead of generating your own power for a one time investment into a rather simple machine. Think in terms of budgeting your bank account. Take your power bill out of your budget cuz you got something the size of a small college refrigerator in the back yard.
04:44 AM on 02/07/2012
And here we go again, raping the environment regardless of consequences. A buck no matter what is destroyed or where.
D-Driller
my micro-bio is empty
01:29 AM on 02/07/2012
This is the second article like this I've read on HuffPo in the last month. Why do we need buffer zones around Natural Parks? What is next, buffer zones around the buffer zones around the Natural Park? Foolishness. The parks were designated because of their natural or historic beauty or significance. I am 100% for that. But that's it - that is the national park boundary. You may not like it, but we can't control what is done outside the parks. We can make the parks bigger, and that is an option, of course, but you can't start telling people what they can do outside of them. Keep in mind, there is already a mine there - they just want to expand it. So what to do? Not mine? Stupid - it's a resource, we need it - mine it. Obviously. Do it right? Minimize the size of the mine? Sure, let's do that. Control the water permits, dust controls, light controls (basic everyday mining regulations) - absolutely. But if we start allowing this type of action, allowing "buffer zones" around more buffer zones, it defeats the purpose of trying to provide raw materials to an already shaky American manufacturing industry. Let's find a balance.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PiedType
Old editors never die, they just revert to type
11:33 AM on 02/07/2012
Irreplaceable parks and wilderness need protection. Their light, air, and water can be affected from beyond their boundaries. Care must be taken that nothing done outside the park boundaries intrudes into the park. If these mining operations are so close to the park that they will create light, noise, and air pollution within the park, they should be prohibited.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:39 AM on 02/07/2012
Our natural resources are being outsourced as manufactured finished products are imported. The name for such a system is mercantilism or colonialism (American as the colony). We are being destroyed for the privilege of predatory capitalists and financiers.
12:00 AM on 02/07/2012
Once the coal is mined, we're left with destroyed environments, loss of more soul soothing nature and no more coal. We need alternative energy sources and energy conservation habits before there's no more land to destroy.
04:45 AM on 02/07/2012
What really is needed is less talk and more action.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Connie Markley Boppre
09:49 PM on 02/06/2012
mining in bryce canyon ? no !
D-Driller
my micro-bio is empty
01:17 AM on 02/07/2012
That's right - they are not mining in Bryce Canyon.
02:30 PM on 02/06/2012
240 jobs? for how long? and are those 240 jobs worth destroying the area, the wildlife, the tourism? when will money stop being the reason we destroy our planet, when will the planet actually matter more? Men do the dumbest things, all for money, power, or sex. disgusting!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
yeti7
don't need no stink'n badges
04:58 PM on 02/06/2012
1.5 billion 30 yrs? DC should just give them money and then they don't need to mine.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
KarlaElisa
The atmosphere is Toxic
01:50 PM on 02/06/2012
BLM appears to be on industries side. Would be better named the Bureau of Corporate Interests.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WESmith
Energy Conservation can save you M-O-N-E-Y!!!!!!!!
02:32 PM on 02/06/2012
BLM are our employees and we profit from everything they sell. We The People usually make more profit than the corporations. We usually tax those same resources and their products, too.
02:58 PM on 02/06/2012
Ok so once again man comes along and wipes out all kinds of species like they have done for hundred of years. Hey us white folks started with the Indians first and then man picks on the ones who can not speak for themselves. We are a selfish breed, we take, and take, and take and then when all the sights of nature are gone we will all stand back and say "how did this happen?" At least the Indians figured out how to get back at us and I applaude them but the bats, birds, butterflies and the beautifal montans will be gone for ever becaus man profits from everthing they sell and distroy. We need a hip check here folks!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Theo White
08:38 PM on 02/06/2012
Leases are comparatively cheap and the taxes generated, if any, do not offset the resulting devastation. Gold mines pay no taxes in their product. Everything is not about money because, once received, you can't take back the ruination at any price. The costs of clean up can be staggering.
photo
niko73
Dem belly full but we hungry
04:37 PM on 02/06/2012
Read their mission statement. It's completely different from the Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, and EPA, by design. FWS and NPS have only preservation mandates. BLM's multiple-use mission is a different ball game.

The many laws on the books (Taylor Grazing Act, Mineral Leasing Act, FLPMA, etc) direct them to make the public land available for sustainable development. They're doing what Congress has asked them. If you don't like that, you should be lobbying Congress, not the agency.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
KarlaElisa
The atmosphere is Toxic
11:56 PM on 02/06/2012
sustainable means renewable means you don't destoy it. tell me this won't destoy it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
KarlaElisa
The atmosphere is Toxic
11:56 PM on 02/06/2012
sorry...having an 'r' problem
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BeckyJustice
Stop the frickin Fracking. NOW!
12:30 PM on 02/06/2012
Sometime we have to get over the notion that we must extract every last ounce of carbon fuels from the ground before we switch to renewables.

They say it would be too expensive to do an all out switch. Really? It's going to get cheaper to do so? What cold day in hades would that be the case? Like everything else, it is only going to get more expensive, the longer we put it off.

Anyone here that was around in the late 1930's and early 40's remember the Republicans screaming that building the Dams would be far too expensive? Who would have thought that all the electricty they afforded would take nearly the whole country out of the 'kerosene lamp' stage? FDR.

How about the highways? Too expensive? Had the Republican's had their way, we would still be driving on what are today called 'backroads.' Of course today they are fighting aginst any innovation in transportation at all, so we sit back and watch China take the lead, thanks to our own IBM?

http://asmarterplanet.com/blog/2009/06/new-rail-innovation-center.html

Just look around you. China leads the world in Green Energy Investment. While we spend our money on ill begotten wars, China has left us in the dark ages in terms of green energy production. But then isn't that right where the Republicans want us to be?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14201939
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WESmith
Energy Conservation can save you M-O-N-E-Y!!!!!!!!
02:44 PM on 02/06/2012
Remember the 1970s? We were so proud of ourselves. We were going to be foreign oil free by the end of the century. We had electric cars. We had alternative fuel vehicles. We had hybrids. We had Gasohol. We had solar and wind power. There would be no need for gasoline-powered vehicles by 2010. We knew how damaging they were to the environment. Good riddance gasoline. OOPS! In 1985, we got drunk on cheap gasoline, Democrats and Republicans and everyone else, and haven't sobered up yet. We still buy close to a million gasoline-powered pollution-mobiles a month.

I had several companies wanting to hire me to sell the word "Green" after I retired. Big business, selling the word "Green." A real feel good product with no affect. We just need to learn to quit wasting half of the energy we purchase. One doesn't pay for energy one doesn't use (waste). Energy efficiency and energy conservation is the future.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BeckyJustice
Stop the frickin Fracking. NOW!
03:46 PM on 02/06/2012
A pretty good indication that it was Republicans that were Anti, Green Energy.
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=120981757941085&ref=ts

Just like today. Republicans are fighting tooth and nail for the Keystone Pipeline, despite the fact that the same Company that wants to build it has already had 12 major spills in it's first year from it's first, "safest Pipeline ever." http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2011/08/17/297576/oil-spills-transcanada-keystone-xl-pipeline/?mobile=nc

Very interesting before and afte pictures. 11 pages worth.
https://www.google.com/search?q=Alberta+tar+sands,+before+and+after+pictures&hl=en&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENUS284&prmd=imvns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=9jowT6T7NYn9iQLkv8nCAw&sqi=2&ved=0CCEQsAQ&biw=1152&bih=586