What’s next for the proposed Smith River copper mine?
Despite serious flaws, the Montana DEQ still plans to release its final environmental impact statement on the Black Butte copper project early this fall.
Now that the public comment period has closed on a draft study of the environmental impacts of a proposed copper mine in the headwaters of Montana’s Smith River, a lot of folks have asked us – what’s next?
Before answering that question, let’s recap what the Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) heard from the public during the 60-day comment period that ended on May 10. A total of 12,600 people submitted comments to the Montana DEQ, at least 90 percent of whom opposed construction of the controversial mine. The state initially reported receiving only 2,500 comments, however recently it was discovered that another 10,000 comments submitted through third-party websites got stuck in its spam filter.
So on that front, we crushed it. Thanks to each and every one of you who sent in comments.
That said, the public comment period wasn’t a popularity contest, as mine proponents and state regulators like to remind us. If it was, the mine proponent, Sandfire Resources America, would have folded up its tent and headed home to Perth, Australia, and the Smith River would stay just the way it is – not perfect, but damn near.
The biggest news to come out of the public comment period was that the proposed Black Butte copper mine was exposed for what it is – a risky experiment built on false assurances.
How do we know this? Because American Rivers and our conservation partners hired a team of top-notch mining and natural resource experts who examined the draft environmental impact statement with a magnifying glass. Here are a few things they discovered:
- Despite Sandfire’s claim that the mine tailings would be rendered non-flowable by mixing them with a cement paste and therefore not pose a threat to surface or groundwater, the cement would start dissolving in acid in a matter of weeks.
- The DEQ’s conclusion that the mine wouldn’t pose a threat to water quality or fisheries in Sheep Creek and the Smith River was based in part on the flawed assumption that the double liner underneath the mine tailings would never tear and never leak. The fact is, ALL liners eventually leak.
- The DEQ’s conclusion that the mine wouldn’t dewater Sheep Creek (the Smith River’s most important rainbow trout spawning tributary) was based on a flawed model that underestimated how much water would have to be pumped from the mine.
- The DEQ didn’t address the fact that Sandfire holds 525 mining claims on 10,000 acres of adjacent federal lands. Consequently, it didn’t assess the cumulative impacts that dramatically expanded mining operations would have.
Despite these serious flaws, the Montana DEQ still plans to release its final environmental impact statement on the Black Butte copper project early this fall. Once that happens, the DEQ can then issue a Record of Decision (ROD) that approves the application as submitted, approves the application with modifications, or denies the application if it doesn’t comply with Montana’s laws, specifically those pertaining to water quality.
While we are hoping that the thousands of comments Smith River advocates submitted and the technical comments our team of consultants submitted convince the DEQ to deny Sandfire the permit it needs to build the mine, we are prepared to carry on this fight if the state abrogates its responsibility to uphold Montana’s environmental laws.
When we say the Smith River is too precious to risk, we mean it.
Whatever the outcome, you can rest assured that Sandfire will not start building its proposed copper mine in 2019, as it is telling its investors. This fight was always going to be a marathon, not a sprint.
9 responses to “What’s next for the proposed Smith River copper mine?”
Oppose and stop this nonsense mine. Constructing the mine will cause irreversible damage to the Smith River and thus the Mighty Missouri River.
I would like to know who the “top notch” mining and natural resource experts are that you hired.
Sandfire Resources Aus has 260 million in cash and deposits. no debt. It’s budget for exploration is $30 million per annum. It has won Australian environmental awards for minimg in Western Australia. Judge them on correct checks.
The smith river is too important to risk losing! Let’s do what is right to protect it for the next generation
And I only say thins because no one has actually covered that story.
The mine will go ahead but the company is broke. Maybe you should write an article about that and hope that their stock crashes and investors run away… Just look at their last quarterly results – they mentioned they have no more money to continue operations.
We know that American Rivers members submitted 4,612 comments opposing the mine, Earthworks members submitted 4,617 comments opposing the mine, and Montana Environmental Information Center members submitted 1,800 comments opposing the mine. Given these numbers, we believe the total number of public comments submitted to the Montana DEQ is in the range of 14,000, of which at least 13,729 were in opposition to the mine. Assuming that’s the case, at least 98 percent of all the comments received were in opposition to the mine.
“At least 90% of whom opposed the mine” – can you provide proof of this? Thanks.
Wow, way to spin a narrative.