HomeMy Public PortalAboutDigging for the TruthDigging For The Truth
The Facts Behind the Nez Perce Tribe's
Opposition to the Stibnite Mine
.I Ifltnit 'Taylor J r.
Watershed Division N tanager
Ncz Perce Tribe
Department of Fisheries Resources Management
Reclamation Does Not Equal Restoration
Midas's Promise: "Restore the water quality, landscape, fisheries and natural habitat" of the Stibnite area.
Reclamation* Restoration
• Reclamation = leaving a mine site in a condition that allows for post -mining land use.
• Restoration = returning a mine site to the natural condition it was in before mining began.
Mida's proposed project will affect 800 acres of currently undisturbed wildlife habitat and result in the
deposit of 450 million tons of waste rock and tailings into the headwaters of the East Fork South Fork
Salmon River drainage.
Unfortunately, Midas is not planning to "restore" the Stibnite site and in fact, cannot restore the Stibnite
site under its proposed project. Evidence suggests that the Stibnite site will be just as contaminated after
mining as it is today.
Liners Used to Store New and Reprocessed Mine
Tailings Will Leak and Have Limited Life Spans
Promise: "Restoring the site means improving water quality by cleaning up the millions of tons of waste
rock and tailings that slowly leach metals and send sediment into nearby ground and surface water."
"Midas Gold [...] proposes to reprocess millions of tons of historic railings from former mining
operations and store the remaining imperial In an engineered and state-of-the-art lined facility to keep
metals out of the watershed."
LINERS LEAK: Midas's proposal includes the use of liners (geosynthetic and clay liner) for both the 10
million tons of waste rock currently at the site and the more than 450 million tons of new waste rock
and tailings its mining operations will generate.
Unfortunately, it is common knowledge within the mining industry that all liners leak. Midas is planning
to take advantage of the current degraded water duality at the Stibnite site to establish baseline water
quality standards for their project. This will save Midas from having to actually improve water quality at
the Stibnite site and eliminates the need to address liner leaks.
Cont...
This may be why Midas and its consultants have, thus far, been unable to show the Tribe how they will
comply with current, applicable water quality standards during construction and operation of the mine,
and throughout closure.
THE GEOCOMPOSITE LINERs 11 [ I .1 . I l 11.1.Y 1) l :. ; R .1Dk IN 450) YEARS: What happens when
the geocomposite liner fully degrades in 450 years? Will the day Midas uses fully prevent leaks? Who
will be responsible for addressing the discharge from the tailings pile and its impact on water quality in
450 years?
In short, Midas's plan will not "restore," water quality at the Stibnite site. Water treatment will be
needed at the site, in perpetuity.
Evidence Shows Leaks and Spills Occur at Majority
of Gold Mines
A 2017 report (U.S. Gold Mines Spills e ' Failures Report) on 27 U.S. gold mine operations in 2013 found that:
• All 27 mines had experienced at least one pipeline spill or other accidental release, such as spills of
cyanide solution, mine tailings, diesel fuel, and ore concentrate.
• 20 of the 27 mines failed to capture or control contaminated mine seepage.
• 20 of the 27 mines had water quality impacts to surface and/or groundwater.
o Of the seven mines where there were no impacts to water quality, six had no perennial streams
present in the project area and the groundwater was deep (not the case at Stibnite site).
• Modern environmental laws have nor prevented these issues and the legal requirements contained in
those laws did not result in a clean site at Stibnite when the last mining company left in the 1990s.
A Cautionary Tale: The Thompson Creek Mine
The owners of the Thompson Creek Mine, like Midas Gold, thought their plan would ensure no water
treatment was needed at the site. They were wrong. The Thompson Creek Mine, once an open -pit
molybdenum mine, has serious problems with metal leaching and acid mine drainage (the oxidation of
sulfide minerals), that will have to be dealt with in perpetuity. Although acid mine drainage is not a key issue
at Stibnite, Midas and the public need to acknowledge that they will have
to deal with metal leaching (arsenic and antimony) at the Stibnite
site in perpetuity.
Existing Pollutants and Magnitude of Mine Footprint
Will Permanently Alter and Damage River and Land,
Not Restore It
Promise: "Restoring the site means I...I helping fish migrate to the upper stretches of the river for the first time in 80
years." "The biggest threat facing, the river is inaction."
The Nez Perce Tribe has a more expansive definition of restoration for the for the Fast Fork South Fork Salmon River
than simple fish passage. The 'Tribe's definition includes dramatically reducing the pollutants that the Stibnite site is
currently contributing to the River. i\s we just stated, we don't think Midas's plan does this.
In addition, Midas's plans for the F,l'Sl'SR are dwarfed by the scale of disturbance the proposed mine will create at the
Site and its impact on wildlife, Fish, water, and cultural resources. The project will leave:
• Two additional, Glory Hole -type pit lakes at the site in perpetuity ---larger than the current Glory Hole.
• Store 450 million tons of waste rock/tailings in "facilities" which are drainages and valleys at the project site. It will:
o Fill in the Fiddle (;reek, \Vest knd, and [Langer flats drainages with waste rock.
o At Hangar Flats it will create a 400 foot tall tailings dam and reroute Meadow Creek over the top.
Proposed Mine Features and
Disturbance at Year Seven of
Operations
New Road Construction will Damage the
Landscape and is Not Environmentally Sound
P►min se: The Burntlog Road "will move traffic away from ma or waterways, reducing potential interactions with
the environment and reducing potential impacts on local residents along the currently available routes."
26 ft wide (highway width) including shoulders
34 bridges/culverts
Snow removal
Impacts 3 Inventoried Roadless Areas
a v .l is
Cwb.l IwerevWa Ease
Guam Ilal
As Necessary
Comluctal
i71 FUdu�J.nu-�l
Moan. Sala
I51I 1V
.. •*. �^
Ili SUI.'Iln
•
I i. ,A.. c C I I i 1011' 01 J 419',j7110 L•. "N; I I r M)12 W I.
" 0
1 . 4 4
1 2 4
o c c u r e d a t S t i b n i t e
r
4 . 4
- =
r - f
3 - 4
a )
O
U
O
O
" r e c l a m a t i o n "
0
Q . )
b A
r l j
4 - 1
0
s . a
O
C r ,
"
r d
S a C
t i
r . ,
"
"
7 . 4
7 4
4 - 4
c r
i
0
C l )
C t
C L I
"
0
t h e h o l e i n t h e
4
4 - 4 U
U . ��
U
C g
J
U
There Are Better Alternatives to Fix the Stibnite Site
Promise: "Although some groups seem opposed to the Stibnite Gold Project, without it, there is no
immediate solution to the ongoing legacy mining impacts."
The Tribe simply disagrees.
The immediate solution is to clean up the Stibnite site without re -mining it.
The Tribe supports reconsidering the Stibnite site for Superfund designation.
The Tribe believes the community should come together and insist that the Stibnite site be cleaned up.
If Midas believes so deeply in the poetic justice of the mining industry cleaning up the Stibnite site, it
should encourage its investor, Barrick, one of the largest gold mining companies in the world, to contribute
to the Superfund program.
Tribe's Other Concerns
Midas only shows you two pictures ---the existing site and sire after its "restored." They don't show what
it will look like with massive disturbance on the landscape. Also, they don't highlight just how different
the landscape will look once Hangar Flats, Fiddle Creek, and \West End arc filled in with waste rock and
tailings and the fact that they plan to leave the waste rock and tailing facilities and two additional mining
pits on the landscape in perpetuity.
Moreover, most mines, once opened, expand; expansion is likely given Stibnite's geology. The
Stibnite Gold Mine could go from a large mine, at the initial permitting phase, to a mega -mine involving
additional deposits and drainages, with corresponding additional impacts on the environment.
The Tribe believes this is too big a risk to the wildlife and cultural resources within the project area and
along the Burntlog Road and to the East Fork South 11ork Salmon River.